6.4L gear hold "feature"

Just curious who, if anyone besides me, has encountered the gear hold "feature"?

“Ram Truck ‘invented’ the first gear hold feature – and calibrated it – to avoid gear hunting and driving at excessively high rpm’s. Ike Gauntlet is a variable grade and we worked hard to develop a calibration that appropriately manages torque on this run and other grades. We don’t want the truck to rev high for extended periods of time and purposely hold 4,200 rpm.”

Click to expand...

Looking at the numbers the "feature" costs about 2-3 minutes compared to the other gassers in the segment.

For all the ado about this, I have only read of one other who encountered it, and it was on the IKE.

Not me. My 6.4 pulls my 9000lbs up IKE at a comfortable 55-65mph depending on traffic. If I do encounter it, it won't be a big deal. I'm fine with a negligible loss of time to let the truck take care of itself. Keeps me from staring at temp gauges the whole time. I figure if I don't encounter it then I must be fine right?

The Ike test was full blown retard. Ram wins every test except the one it was towing 3k lbs more than the Ford and 2k more than the GM. Utter fail in my book. But no, I pull 15-16k and actually hit 5th gear doing it. It's a GREAT power plant!

6.4 dude said:

The Ike test was full blown retard. Ram wins every test except the one it was towing 3k lbs more than the Ford and 2k more than the GM. Utter fail in my book.

Click to expand...

I think the GM actually had more weight.


2015 Chevy 2500 HD 6.0L SRW
13,000 lbs

2014 Ram 2500 HD 6.4L SRW
12,500lbs


TFLtruck - Hall of Ike Gauntlet - Truck News, Views and Real World Reviews

SouthTexan said:

I think the GM actually had more weight.


2015 Chevy 2500 HD 6.0L SRW
13,000 lbs

2014 Ram 2500 HD 6.4L SRW
12,500lbs


TFLtruck - Hall of Ike Gauntlet - Truck News, Views and Real World Reviews

Click to expand...

The PickupTrucks.Com test loaded each to 90% of their rated capacity.

"The F-250's GCWR is 19,000 pounds; the Chevy's is just more than 20,000 pounds, and the Ram 2500's is just more than 22,000 pounds. We attempted to adjust each max trailer weight by dumping a certain amount of water from each truck or trailer, getting as close as possible to 90 percent of the vehicle's GCWR number."

The TFLtruck.Com test comparison had them within 100lbs...

"We had the same load behind both trucks. We adjusted the bed weight to compensate for the absence of Emme Hall, and the final weigh-in showed that the Ram and Chevy were within 100 pounds of each other for the Gross Combined Vehicle Weight (GCVW)."

"The Ram 6.4L HEMI got a better 2.8 MPG on the uphill climb with close to 20,500 lbs of total truck and trailer (GCVW)."

Goes to show those guys at TFLTRUCK.COM are really not very consistent. Numbers are all over the place.

I was referencing pickuptrucks.com testing. It appears they and tfl are one and the same? But yea, testing and numbers are all over the place. No consistency.

The problem with TFL and their so called "IKE Gauntlet" test is that it is not a closed course test. It is them with a stopwatch and having to deal with other traffic during their runs. They also do not correct for temperature.

About as scientific as a Ouija board.

Look at tfl' times thru all vehicles tested. The ram 1500 beat the 3.7 eco but lost to the 2.7 eco which in turn was beaten by the Lincoln Navigator. Then they threw an extra 2800 lbs on the 3.7 and it got faster?!

6.4 dude said:

Look at tfl' times thru all vehicles tested. The ram 1500 beat the 3.7 eco but lost to the 2.7 eco which in turn was beaten by the Lincoln Navigator. Then they threw an extra 2800 lbs on the 3.7 and it got faster?!

Click to expand...

Yeah, tfl is about as worthless as the 0's and 1's they occupy. This "crippling" issue has never really crossed my mind since I live in pretty much the flattest place on the planet

Sent from my SM-G925W8 using Tapatalk

drittal said:

The TFLtruck.Com test comparison had them within 100lbs...

"We had the same load behind both trucks. We adjusted the bed weight to compensate for the absence of Emme Hall, and the final weigh-in showed that the Ram and Chevy were within 100 pounds of each other for the Gross Combined Vehicle Weight (GCVW)."

Click to expand...

So they were pulling the same weight, but the the weight they were hauling was more in the GM to compensate for the Ram being almost 300 lbs heavier. I know they stated in the GM test that it was at 20,360 GCVW. I wish they would have stated the GCVW of the Ram

However, either way they did pull the same weight it seems and they did get the weights a lot closer than the PUTC test. I don't put too much emphasis on the times that are really close since I know these are not closed loop runs and are more real world runs. Getting slowed by a car even for a brief second can ruin your momentum and cause you to be 10 seconds off. They are like 0-60 runs in trucks to me, yeah good to know but in all my years I have never needed or wanted to flat out floor it from a stop towing 10,000 lbs. Huge gaps in time do say something though.

The main thing I take away from the videos is how each truck handles the load going up hills like this. I think things like how well a vehicle keeps speed, handles the load, and fuel mileage are probably more important to those that tow then loaded 0-60 times. Is it extreme? Yes, but at least you can take away knowing that if the truck can do well here then it can do well just about anywhere. It is like the stress tests we used to run on engines back at Cummins. No customer will ever do what we did to those engines, but the philosophy behind it was that if it can handle what we did to it then it can handle what anyone will throw at it staying within stock parameters. Correct these tests aren't "scientific" down to the millisecond, but who else is pulling the same loads up the same hill to compare trucks and letting us watch along the way? No one that I know of. So I will take what I can get and not ***** to much about it even if the Ford Powerstroke pulled a better time than the Cummins by 25 second pulling 21,600 lbs. It is what it is and it ain't what it ain't.

I wish they would monitor things like oil, coolant, transmission, and EGT temps, as well as state the ambient temp. What good is pulling a hill really fast if you are cooking the transmission oil or your turbo in the process?

It would also be nice if they actually hand calculated MPG numbers for the entire run instead of relying on EVIC.

They also need to standardize the trailer and weights to get apples to apples comparisons.

Pull 8-9k behind all half ton. Pull 12k behind all gas 3/4t, etc... or pick a GCVW for each class.

I bet the hill going out of Lewiston, ID to Spokane on 95 would trigger it. Averages 7% over 5.2 miles.

Hootbro said:

The problem with TFL and their so called "IKE Gauntlet" test is that it is not a closed course test. It is them with a stopwatch and having to deal with other traffic during their runs. They also do not correct for temperature.

About as scientific as a Ouija board.

Click to expand...

do not correct or temperature? oh geeze.

...give me a break

drittal said:

I bet the hill going out of Lewiston, ID to Spokane on 95 would trigger it. Averages 7% over 5.2 miles.

Click to expand...

Is it 5 miles? I thought it was closer to 3?

I went to school 30 miles north of Lewiston in Moscow, ID. Made that trip many times in my 1/2 silverado. We used to joke about the fact that I was getting 3mpg unloaded up that hill.

Jvbronco said:

Is it 5 miles? I thought it was closer to 3?

I went to school 30 miles north of Lewiston in Moscow, ID. Made that trip many times in my 1/2 silverado. We used to joke about the fact that I was getting 3mpg unloaded up that hill.

Click to expand...

According to www.onthegomap.com...

drittal said:

According to How far did I run? - Create running maps with On The Go Map...

Click to expand...

makes sense. maybe the 3 stuck in my head was just my gas mileage

Interesting fact, Lewiston is the home of the farthest inland seaport in the country.

Jvbronco said:

do not correct or temperature? oh geeze.

...give me a break

Click to expand...

Geeze, I guess you do not understand horsepower in relation to air density that is determined by temperature and humidity.

When you are comparing vehicles against one another that have been tested at various time and weather condition different from each other, it matters.

Point being, TFL's tests and data derived from their uncontrolled conditions or compensations for said conditions, are just a grabastic data points with little meaning to derive true comparisons.

Hootbro said:

Geeze, I guess you do not understand horsepower in relation to air density that is determined by temperature and humidity.

When you are comparing vehicles against one another that have been tested at various time and weather condition different from each other, it matters.

Point being, TFL's tests and data derived from their uncontrolled conditions or compensations for said conditions, are just a grabastic data points with little meaning to derive true comparisons.

Click to expand...

dude, get over yourself. they are doing us all a favor by putting trucks to work up a steep grade, at high elevation, close to max capacity. This gives us the opportunity to see these things really being worked. They're not the bill nye science guy channel.

you should donate to them so they can conduct research to your standards. Maybe they can apply for a research grant. You can review and, if their methods are up to your standards, you can fund them to conduct research that will allow you to make your decision on a truck.

People have been buying trucks for years with MUCH less data than they are providing, free of charge.... again, get over yourself.

My truck can get 3 mpg difference just on ambient temperature variations.