3500 6.4 3.73 or 4.10

[Rampant]

Goes both ways, if you've never tried the 4.10, 3.73 feels just fine. I've towed with both, the 3.73 (father in laws) and my 4.10. Yes they both get the job done well. the 4.10 just feels a lot better doing it. but if you've never tried both, you probably wouldn't really miss the 4.10.

You're right. I've towed both as well. My neighbor (and good buddy) has the same year and model truck but a Tradesman with 4.10 and rear air suspension. We've hooked up my race trailer and his 5th wheel toy hauler to both and have both agreed that there is literally NO difference in performance. Was kind of a "grudge match". He was very surprised because everyone on the forums and everyone he talked to were so against the 3.73, but there was no discernible difference at all in real-world towing. It's a gasser. If you're that concerned, get a/stay with a Cummins.

 

[reek]

You're right. I've towed both as well. My neighbor (and good buddy) has the same year and model truck but a Tradesman with 4.10 and rear air suspension. We've hooked up my race trailer and his 5th wheel toy hauler to both and have both agreed that there is literally NO difference in performance. Was kind of a "grudge match". He was very surprised because everyone on the forums and everyone he talked to were so against the 3.73, but there was no discernible difference at all in real-world towing. It's a gasser. If you're that concerned, get a/stay with a Cummins.

my post was actually to express some agreement with you. They're very close and both did well with the load we were hauling, approx. 10,000 lbs on a flat trailer. to me, there was a noticeable difference at take off and a little at mid speed/45 mph acceleration. But both did well. so if you never drove a 4.10, as I posted, you wouldn't miss it, the 3.73 would be fine. in no way is adding a 4.10 bringing the 6.4 significantly closer to a Cummins level performance. My OPINION is that the 6.4 felt nicer with 4.10s in the rear when hooked to 10,000 lbs. for a few hundred bucks, its worth the upgrade to optimize a 'gasser' - has nothing to do with Cummins envy. Like swollenmonkey16 said, get the 4.10 over the 3.73 if it's on the lot. and not every critique of the 6.4 or the 3.73 has to default to "get a Cummins".

 

[reek]

I actually like the 3.42 ratio with the gears of the 68RFE. Since both 5th and 6th gears are overdrive gears, I use 6th as an overdrive unloaded or towing light and 5th as overdrive when towing heavy. Pulls my 14k(loaded) 5th wheel 70 mph at 1,900 rpm in 5th gear and just stays there for the most part unless the road gets really really steep. Pulling with a 3.42 rear end in 5th actually has greater torque multiplication than a 3.73 pulling in 6th, and the rpm's pulling a 3.73 in 5th at the speeds I tow (usually 70 mph) would be screaming for a diesel.

That's helpful. I was actually looking at the CTD but with the manual trans for my next truck, but you lose a chunk of torque not going with the auto. So I guess my mindset was based on getting more gears/leverage. But the more I hear, auto CTD owners seem pretty happy overall, starting get swayed away from the manual.

OP, sorry for the slight thread derailment.

 

[GsRAM]

You're right. I've towed both as well. My neighbor (and good buddy) has the same year and model truck but a Tradesman with 4.10 and rear air suspension. We've hooked up my race trailer and his 5th wheel toy hauler to both and have both agreed that there is literally NO difference in performance. Was kind of a "grudge match". He was very surprised because everyone on the forums and everyone he talked to were so against the 3.73, but there was no discernible difference at all in real-world towing. It's a gasser. If you're that concerned, get a/stay with a Cummins.

Thanks for these posts guys, this confirms exactly what i suspected, in that, to make a noticeable difference I'd go straight to a 4.30 or 4.44 Mopar gear set. There's just not enough difference between 3.73 and 4.10 to make the change.

I'd suspect that if you lined my truck up agsinst an identical truck in the quarter, but with 4.10s, the 4.10 geared truck would only be a tenth or two quicker, maybe not even.

 

[markchief]

Thanks for these posts guys, this confirms exactly what i suspected, in that, to make a noticeable difference I'd go straight to a 4.30 or 4.44 Mopar gear set. There's just not enough difference between 3.73 and 4.10 to make the change.

I'd suspect that if you lined my truck up agsinst an identical truck in the quarter, but with 4.10s, the 4.10 geared truck would only be a tenth or two quicker, maybe not even.

6.4 is fine if you stay out of the mountains. It shifts more often than older models cause it is a 6 speed instead if a 4 speed tranny. Definately want the 4.10 if you drive in steep hilly country. New 6.4 greats great hwy mileage when empty, almost as good as the diesel and +/- $10k cheaper. I get about 17 with high quality regular if I stay around 65mph. It runs on 4 cylinders if its not under strain. Air-bag rear-end is supposed to smooth out the ride. I didn't bother, I plow and don't go far. Tow farm equipment 20-300 miles in New England, mostly less than 100mi. Get 6-8 with a full load (below 10k now). At 67 w/pacemaket, no more CDL. Driving 2017 Big Horn w/ 3.73 rear. Supposedly mileage is .25mpg difference between rear ends and $150 in CT. The custom package rear $ varies a bit more than that from my readings.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[markchief]

my post was actually to express some agreement with you. They're very close and both did well with the load we were hauling, approx. 10,000 lbs on a flat trailer. to me, there was a noticeable difference at take off and a little at mid speed/45 mph acceleration. But both did well. so if you never drove a 4.10, as I posted, you wouldn't miss it, the 3.73 would be fine. in no way is adding a 4.10 bringing the 6.4 significantly closer to a Cummins level performance. My OPINION is that the 6.4 felt nicer with 4.10s in the rear when hooked to 10,000 lbs. for a few hundred bucks, its worth the upgrade to optimize a 'gasser' - has nothing to do with Cummins envy. Like swollenmonkey16 said, get the 4.10 over the 3.73 if it's on the lot. and not every critique of the 6.4 or the 3.73 has to default to "get a Cummins".

The 4.10 is slightly more in the option list but ever dealer in my area (150mile radius did not have one in stock). Bought a Big Horn off the lot from one dealer 50mi away. With rebates and dealer discount and 2 trades the total deal beat ever other dealers best price by $11-15k. The only factory detractor was ****** all-season stock tires. Putting on goodyear ultragrips tomorrow @ $1,200 for plowing gravel drive. Super on the icepack.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[markchief]

6.4 is fine if you stay out of the mountains. It shifts more often than older models cause it is a 6 speed instead if a 4 speed tranny. Definately want the 4.10 if you drive in steep hilly country. New 6.4 greats great hwy mileage when empty, almost as good as the diesel and +/- $10k cheaper. I get about 17 with high quality regular if I stay around 65mph. It runs on 4 cylinders if its not under strain. Air-bag rear-end is supposed to smooth out the ride. I didn't bother, I plow and don't go far. Tow farm equipment 20-300 miles in New England, mostly less than 100mi. Get 6-8 with a full load (below 10k now). At 67 w/pacemaket, no more CDL. Driving 2017 Big Horn w/ 3.73 rear. Supposedly mileage is .25mpg difference between rear ends and $150 in CT. The custom package rear $ varies a bit more than that from my readings.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Printed weird spacing. That was 1/4 mpg diff, not . 25mpg. Sorry. Lol.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[HS-LD]

I say 4.10s also. You might regret not getting them but you definitely wont regret getting them. I wish Ram still offered a 4.56. Would be great on this truck.

4.56 gets BRUTAL gas mileage. My 2012 Power Wagon averaged 12.3 hand calculated over 13,000 miles. I remember getting 4 mpg towing my 3500 pound 16 foot camp trailer. It was disgusting. Why I sold the rig actually.

I am much happier with the 4.10's and the 6.4L. I am getting around 14.5 average over 12,000 miles, and have not seen single digit mpgs towing yet. Just my experience. But I'm not towing 11,500 pounds either, so who knows. Mpgs might not be an issues at all under those conditions.

 

[Shield134]

Well I took the plunge...ordered the truck on Saturday. I ordered a crew cab 3500 bighorn 6.4 with the 4.10’s. I appreciate the responses y’all gave!

 

[HS-LD]

Well I took the plunge...ordered the truck on Saturday. I ordered a crew cab 3500 bighorn 6.4 with the 4.10’s. I appreciate the responses y’all gave!

I didn't want the Cummins, the EPA emissions BS has ruined them and I don't tow much. My HD is really just my daily driver and I do go off road for firewood etc. I picked up the 4x4 with off road package and really really like the 6.4L with the 4.10 gears. But, I figured if I'm going to get 14mpgs anyway and never plan to tow more than 10K pounds might as well get a Power Wagon... the wife went for it.

 

[GsRAM]

Good stuff guys! Congrats! Glad to hear it. Op, good stuff! Good choice on the 6.4\4.10\3500 Options. I'm sure you'll be well pleased.

 

[mohemipar]

4.56 gets BRUTAL gas mileage. My 2012 Power Wagon averaged 12.3 hand calculated over 13,000 miles. I remember getting 4 mpg towing my 3500 pound 16 foot camp trailer. It was disgusting. Why I sold the rig actually.

I am much happier with the 4.10's and the 6.4L. I am getting around 14.5 average over 12,000 miles, and have not seen single digit mpgs towing yet. Just my experience. But I'm not towing 11,500 pounds either, so who knows. Mpgs might not be an issues at all under those conditions.

Most likely the MPG would be abysmal lol, but it would be interesting to see how the 6.4 did with 4.56 gears. There are a few guys on here who have done the swap. Honestly if I ever did a swap I would probably just do 4.88s. I think that is the perfect gearing for this engine/tans's power band. Dont know if I would still daily drive it lol, but sure would be a fun monster. If the next gen HD doesnt do enough to warrant a trade in, I will probably just do 4.88s and keep this truck until the EPA puts a bounty out on me. I have a feeling the next gen HD will be great under the skin but looks wise it might be a let down.

 

[NewBlackDak]

Most likely the MPG would be abysmal lol, but it would be interesting to see how the 6.4 did with 4.56 gears. There are a few guys on here who have done the swap. Honestly if I ever did a swap I would probably just do 4.88s. I think that is the perfect gearing for this engine/tans's power band. Dont know if I would still daily drive it lol, but sure would be a fun monster. If the next gen HD doesnt do enough to warrant a trade in, I will probably just do 4.88s and keep this truck until the EPA puts a bounty out on me. I have a feeling the next gen HD will be great under the skin but looks wise it might be a let down.

If it looks like the spy pics I saw of the 1500 test mule, this will be my last Ram.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[reek]

If it looks like the spy pics I saw of the 1500 test mule, this will be my last Ram.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm waiting on the next gen HD as well. For me, as long as the guts work well and the price doesn't jump up, I'll probably be sticking with ram. Considering the styling trend among full size trucks all seem to be heading in a similar direction, I think outward appearance won't be a major factor. that is, soon it won't be just the F150 and tundra that look similar, so will GM and Ram. The only stand out will be the Titan. No that's a funky lookin truck.

 

[mohemipar]

Good thing for us is the current HD looks like a beast, and its a design that will age well. I would have no problem keeping this truck for 10+ years from a visual stand point.

I saw this on TFL's site..
2020 Ram HD 2500 or 3500 Spied Testing in Colorado (Spied) - The Fast Lane Truck

Visually this looks exactly as the current model to me. Definitely not the next gen truck.