6.4 2500- A different perspective

[68PowerWagon]

Back to my original topic....

Godd luck with that.

 

[MANual_puller]

IMO the only engine in a 2500 that makes sense is the 5.7L hemi. To take full advantage of the extra money spent to upgrade to either the 6.4L or CTD you really should be getting a 3500. I also fail to understand how upgrading to the 6.4L in a 2500 gives more payload and towing capacity.....there's more to towing than just the go side of things. You also have to control sway and stop the load, neither of which the 6.4L helps accomplish. IMO payload and towing capacities should be based fully on chassis and not factor in drivetrain. Even though the government says they can't I guarantee that a 5.7L and a 6.4L in a 2500 are capable of doing the same exact things, likely at slightly different paces but the job will get done pretty timely with either.

Since you guys want to talk hp and torque and transmissions, Ram really needs to offer the G56 manual transmission behind the hemis in HD trucks again. With a G56 there wouldn't be anything on the market even comparable in terms of getting power to the ground. Gears don't slip, clutch packs and torque convertors do. An auto trans is a parasite plain and simple.

 

[SouthTexan]

RAM 2500 Reg Cab SLT 4x4 5.7 3.92 payload 2505lbs, towing 13500

Did you mean 4.10? There is no 3.92 in a 2500 and those ratings are too high for the 5.7L 3.73.

These 1/2 trucks aren't designed for towing and hauling at the same time or really even towing the max. Unless you only haul aBBQ and a bike in the back while towing. But, the numbers look good on paper and sell trucks.

I would have to disagree here. I towed the max tow rating (10,000 lbs +) of my old half ton 4-5 times a year for four years, and even up and over the Rockies a few times at close to max load and never had one issue. The guy who has it now , who I see pulling his 8,000 lbs RV with it to our BBQ cook offs a few times a year, hasn't had an issue either since the last time we talked a few months back. And no, it wasn't a Tundra because I wouldn't have had enough payload to tow what I needed to if it were.

 

[drittal]

Did you watch the 2016 Power Wagon video? On the downhill they only had to apply the brakes 2 times with 9500lbs total cargo and trailer. They commented about how well it engine braked.

 

[theviking]

IMO the only engine in a 2500 that makes sense is the 5.7L hemi. To take full advantage of the extra money spent to upgrade to either the 6.4L or CTD you really should be getting a 3500. I also fail to understand how upgrading to the 6.4L in a 2500 gives more payload and towing capacity.....there's more to towing than just the go side of things. You also have to control sway and stop the load, neither of which the 6.4L helps accomplish. IMO payload and towing capacities should be based fully on chassis and not factor in drivetrain. Even though the government says they can't I guarantee that a 5.7L and a 6.4L in a 2500 are capable of doing the same exact things, likely at slightly different paces but the job will get done pretty timely with either.

Since you guys want to talk hp and torque and transmissions, Ram really needs to offer the G56 manual transmission behind the hemis in HD trucks again. With a G56 there wouldn't be anything on the market even comparable in terms of getting power to the ground. Gears don't slip, clutch packs and torque convertors do. An auto trans is a parasite plain and simple.

Having owned a 5.7 prior I would disagree somewhat here. While they are both like to rev when towing the 6.4 has considerably more meat under the curve. This definitely helps makes towing a little easier as opposed to the 5.7 4k and above or nothing curve when under heavy load. It's also built quite a bit better according to the specs, which helps (I hope) with longevity. But agree, for some the 3500 capacities give considerably more breathing room.

As for a manual, will never happen. Just no demand for it anymore.

 

[SouthTexan]

Well not to drag him back into this but this was the post where the 6.2 Ford was brought into it.

It might put out good numbers but driving that 6.2 in the 3/4 ton it sure doed not feel like it.

You are correct! I am sorry for saying it was your post that started it.

 

[SouthTexan]

Having owned a 5.7 prior I would disagree somewhat here. While they are both like to rev when towing the 6.4 has considerably more meat under the curve. This definitely helps makes towing a little easier as opposed to the 5.7 4k and above or nothing curve when under heavy load.

True, and that is the major reason why people upgrade to a 6.4L or a 6.7L. for more pulling power and to make towing a little easier. Some people think it is worth paying for that extra power or towing ease and some people don't.

But agree, for some the 3500 capacities give considerably more breathing room.

Some don't get the 3500 because the taxes and registration fees for anything over 10,000 GVWR are outrageous.

 

[MANual_puller]

Having owned a 5.7 prior I would disagree somewhat here. While they are both like to rev when towing the 6.4 has considerably more meat under the curve. This definitely helps makes towing a little easier as opposed to the 5.7 4k and above or nothing curve when under heavy load. It's also built quite a bit better according to the specs, which helps (I hope) with longevity. But agree, for some the 3500 capacities give considerably more breathing room.

As for a manual, will never happen. Just no demand for it anymore.

Oh yeah, there's definitely more power from a 6.4L, no question about it. It still sits in the same frame using the same brakes, suspension and tires. Far as I can tell the engine doesn't control or support the load so why should it factor into load capacities? It should just be understood that less power is slower. Towing and payload rating charts are flawed at best and should not be gospel IMO.

My '11 is going to get a manual swap when the auto dies. Too much hassle headache and maintenance with an auto. Clutches are way cheaper and easier to fix than an auto trans rebuild. With the long-term cost savings of a manual I don't understand why there isn't a market for them. I guess people like shelling out cash to the fix-it guy instead of pushing a pedal and moving a lever a few times lol

 

[68PowerWagon]

Since you guys want to talk hp and torque and transmissions, Ram really needs to offer the G56 manual transmission behind the hemis in HD trucks again. With a G56 there wouldn't be anything on the market even comparable in terms of getting power to the ground. Gears don't slip, clutch packs and torque convertors do. An auto trans is a parasite plain and simple.

I really don't think this is true anymore. I think the way clutch packs & convertors are designed now you can tow more with them over manuals, & shifts are more consistant allowing for better fuel economy. I would guess a 1/3 of big trucks on the road are automatics now. Another 20 years manuals will be a thing of the past. Now before ya get all on me let me say I often miss having a manual. I felt like I had more control over the vehicle with a manual. I always had manuals years ago. They were cheaper off the lot, better fuel economy, & gave 4 bangers more pep.

 

[MANual_puller]

I really don't think this is true anymore. I think the way clutch packs & converters are designed now you can tow more with them over manuals, & shifts are more consistent allowing for better fuel economy. I would guess a 1/3 of big trucks on the road are automatics now. Another 20 years manuals will be a thing of the past. Now before ya get all on me let me say I often miss having a manual. I felt like I had more control over the vehicle with a manual. I always had manuals years ago. They were cheaper off the lot, better fuel economy, & gave 4 bangers more pep.

Oh, idk, there's a couple new threads of people having issues with the new 8 speed in half tons, we all know what the 545RFE is and that you cannot do WOT downshifts without cooking it. Clutch packs and converters are designed to slip sometimes. Anything that slips will wear out eventually. There are things you can do to prolong the inevitable but towing is definitely not one of them. A new clutch for the '06 i recently sold would have been $450ish but I never did manage to wear it out......believe me, I tried.

https://www.facebook.com/matthew.turnis/videos/10150770675355158/?l=4623048503800550605

 

[tjfdesmo]

I would guess a 1/3 of big trucks on the road are automatics now.

Don't confuse the Eaton Auto-Shift(or equivalent)with an automatic. Not the same at all. Class 8 trucks with Allisons are pretty few and far between.

 

[69GWC]

Oh, idk, there's a couple new threads of people having issues with the new 8 speed in half tons, we all know what the 545RFE is and that you cannot do WOT downshifts without cooking it. Clutch packs and converters are designed to slip sometimes. Anything that slips will wear out eventually. There are things you can do to prolong the inevitable but towing is definitely not one of them. A new clutch for the '06 i recently sold would have been $450ish but I never did manage to wear it out......believe me, I tried.

https://www.facebook.com/matthew.turnis/videos/10150770675355158/?l=4623048503800550605

So are you saying if i am driving down the road and floor it to pass someone its going to burn up the 8sp transmission?

 

[theviking]

So are you saying if i am driving down the road and floor it to pass someone its going to burn up the 8sp transmission?

Think he was just referring to the 5/6 speed auto used since 2003. It's a well known issue when going full throttle without coming out of OD first. I cooked one trans probably due to unknowingly doing this back in the day. Fortunately it was rebuilt under warranty and I since learned to be more careful. If the 8 speed has the same issue I hadn't heard it.

 

[68PowerWagon]

Don't confuse the Eaton Auto-Shift(or equivalent)with an automatic. Not the same at all. Class 8 trucks with Allisons ar pretty few and far between.

The last one I drove was a three pedal Eaton Auto but the rest in the fleet you put the shifter in "D" & drive away. Thats not considered an automatic?

 

[69GWC]

I see thanks for thr info.

 

[tjfdesmo]

The last one I drove was a three pedal Eaton Auto but the rest in the fleet you put the shifter in "D" & drive away. Thats not considered an automatic?

To me, if it has a torque converter, then I would consider it an "automatic", whereas if it is an "automated manual" it is an autoshift. I guess(hope)they have made improvements. Most drivers and fleet operators I have quizzed on the autoshifts said they had terrible reliability issues with the computer getting confused and leaving the truck sitting in the middle of an intersection, and they were a real handful to dock with, where it would bang-bang-bang-bang off of the dock bumpers.

BTW, it was not my intention to create a controversy. The average person has no clue what makes heavy trucks tick. Obviously, you do.

 

[MANual_puller]

So are you saying if i am driving down the road and floor it to pass someone its going to burn up the 8sp transmission?

Eventually, yeah. It likely won't happen the first time or the 10th but eventually it will with any auto. The 545RFE is particularly susceptible. The 8-speed issues that have come up so far are mostly codes and limp mode issues, most of which seem to "go away" on their own......For those that don't like shifting there is a technology out there, optional in some jeeps, that has a lot of promise. Infinitely variable transmissions are a really cool technology and they seem to hold up better than automatics. Massey Ferguson has been installing them in tractors for several years and John Deere has developed one too. You won't see a transmission anywhere that takes more abuse than that of a farm tractor. You also don't see a transmission that operates like our truck automatics do in a farm tractor. Automatic transmissions are literally designed to eventually fail.

The point of most of my posts is that I don't see the reasoning of upgrading the engine to the 6.4 when automatic transmissions are crap and also our only option. The lower powered engine should let the trans live longer but to take away towing and payload for having the lower powered engine is flawed. For frequent light towing and occasional moderate towing the 5.7L is the best bang for the buck. There isn't any room between the 5.7L and the CTD. If they move to disband the 5.7L and shift towards the 6.4L that's fine but do we really need 2 different gas V8 engines to choose from? I can stick the $1500 for the 6.4L option into the 5.7L and have more power. If they want a big gas engine in HD trucks they should make it worth the upgrade and at least give it 2 more cylinders. And enough with the fuel mileage discussion. Don't buy a truck if you want fuel mileage. That's fantasy land. Anyone that knows physics knows that it takes a certain amount of energy(gas) to move heavy things with poor aerodynamics. You can't overcome physics.

 

[River19]

IT WAS ME......I BROUGHT UP THE FORD 6.2L.......although I thought it came up before me.....but who cares.

Did I miss a rule about not talking about the 6.2L? If so I apologize I brought up that thing.......

Any other engines we can't talk about besides the previously mentioned soft blue oval engine of which we shall not speak? lol

 

[MANual_puller]

IT WAS ME......I BROUGHT UP THE FORD 6.2L.......although I thought it came up before me.....but who cares.

Did I miss a rule about not talking about the 6.2L? If so I apologize I brought up that thing.......

Any other engines we can't talk about besides the previously mentioned soft blue oval engine of which we shall not speak? lol

It wasn't the fact it was brought up that annoyed me. It was the worship and defense of it while citing a single source that seemed a lot like clutter to me. Feel free to disagree, I was just making a joke about it lol

 

[68PowerWagon]

To me, if it has a torque converter, then I would consider it an "automatic", whereas if it is an "automated manual" it is an autoshift. I guess(hope)they have made improvements. Most drivers and fleet operators I have quizzed on the autoshifts said they had terrible reliability issues with the computer getting confused and leaving the truck sitting in the middle of an intersection, and they were a real handful to dock with, where it would bang-bang-bang-bang off of the dock bumpers.

BTW, it was not my intention to create a controversy. The average person has no clue what makes heavy trucks tick. Obviously, you do.

I guess I consider it an auto if I don't have to float the gears going down the road. I actually am somewhat ignorant about big trucks. Know just enough to get er down the road for 3,000mi./wk. Drove large straight trucks most of my life but tractor trailer for only about five years. LOVED It! Was making great money but just wasn't getting to see the family enough.
My little 12L Volvo had about 670,000 on it when I left with no probs with the tranny. Most of mine were piddley problems like heating & cooling in the bunk but no major engine or tranny issues. Hauled a lot of grain by products so i'd say we ran 77-80,000lbs. 90% of the time. No gravy 25,000lb loads with that company.