drittal
Senior Member
How dare you?!!
I assume you also referred to it glowingly and with high regard.
I assume you also referred to it glowingly and with high regard.
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
How dare you?!!
I assume you also referred to it glowingly and with high regard.
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.
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.
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.
Anyone notice how the 6.4 discussions dominate the heavy duty section?
But with the 5.7 in the 2500 RAM drops the GVWR to 9000.
Tranny, ya, I'd like a stick as well. But "wish in one hand..."
The 6.4 really isn't a "big gas engine" it's only a 392. Not THAT much more power than the 5.7 but it makes hp at tq 1000 rpms lower and RAM says they did things for longevity and call it a "medium duty" truck engine. Time will tell if it pans out that way.
Also, the only difference between the 2500 and 3500 srw's is rear springs and price. Frame, axles, etc. are the same now. If a gy want the CTD then the 3500 is a no brainer since you lose payload in the 2500.
Not talking about "old half tons" whatever that means. I'm merely pointing out RAM's numbers and that if a guys goes by them, that's what you've got. Max trailer weight in 1/2 ton ram puts you OVER max payload. Add some options like ram boxes, a couple more doors, high end packaged, etc. and you lose payload quick.
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.
That's likely because most Cummins owners hang out on the Cummins forums. And everything regarding the 5.7 has already been beaten to death over the last 13 years.
But just a guess.
I think the best drivetrain they could build would be a CTD backed by a spicer or some other mid duty manual trans.
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?
And the 6.4 is getting beat to death as well.....
Dana/Spicer has not built a medium duty on highway trans since they split with Eaton in 2012.
Eaton would fall into the "some other mfg" category
MANual_puller; Chrysler always did build good engines so I have faith that the 6.4L will pan out said:IMO Chrysler hasn't had a good transmission since the old 727 Torque Flight. I remember back in high school some bowtie boys dared this kid to take his old beater with a 383 & 727TF down the highway at 55mph & slam it into reverse. The idiot did it... it locked up the tires & they were hoping so much it shook off years of dirt from the under carriage but the tranny held together. This bone head thought it was funny & proceeded to do it 3 or 4 more times. Surprising to all of us it held together & he drove that thing around for at least a couple more years. Ahh the things we did to prove a point at 16.
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