Hemi vs Hurricrane

[ramffml]

Hopefully my PW is the last truck I'll ever own anyway...View attachment 530773

I really love everything about your truck; the capability of course, but also the color, the rims, brush guard, boards; about the only thing I'd change is trying to remove the power wagon sticker down the side.

What color is that? Is that army green or just a gray that looks different due to picture?

 

[Bearcatrp]

Anyone know of the power specs of the Cummins gas engine? If it have more torque than my 6.4, I’d jump on it.

 

[crash68]

The motor shouldn't be any heavier than the 6.7 diesel that is already in Ram pickups. So why wouldn't Dodge use it since the Hemi is going away and they clearly are making the move to inline 6 cylinder engines?

The 6.7 cummins is already in the 2500 and 3500. No reason a gas version of it couldn't go in there.

Go read any of the diesel vs gas towing threads, pay particular attention to the payload police. Losing almost 1000 lbs of payload and without reaping the benefits of a diesel torque curve and fuel efficiency isn't attractive to a pickup buyer. Then there is the matter of cost, adding an extra $9K to the price tag? Considering both Ford and GM have developed BGE that are competitors of the 6.4 Hemi, a revamp of the engine is more likely (it's the 5.7 Hemi that's on the chopping block to go away).
A Cummins has is possible option for buyers of 4500 and heavier trucks where the extra weight isn't as much of a bite into the the GVWR. Keep in mind that the Cummins in the 4500/5500 are tuned different from the 2500/3500 versions, the Hemi still has same specs across the board.

 

[06 Dodge]

Anyone know of the power specs of the Cummins gas engine? If it have more torque than my 6.4, I’d jump on it.

Per the Cummins web site: ( The power numbers thrown around put the top-end HP at around 320 with 660 lb.-ft of torque. Again, these are pre-series numbers and are subject to change. )

 

[HEMIMANN]

Go read any of the diesel vs gas towing threads, pay particular attention to the payload police. Losing almost 1000 lbs of payload and without reaping the benefits of a diesel torque curve and fuel efficiency isn't attractive to a pickup buyer. Then there is the matter of cost, adding an extra $9K to the price tag? Considering both Ford and GM have developed BGE that are competitors of the 6.4 Hemi, a revamp of the engine is more likely (it's the 5.7 Hemi that's on the chopping block to go away).
A Cummins has is possible option for buyers of 4500 and heavier trucks where the extra weight isn't as much of a bite into the the GVWR. Keep in mind that the Cummins in the 4500/5500 are tuned different from the 2500/3500 versions, the Hemi still has same specs across the board.

Cummins Natural Gas Engine Co. out of Clovis, NM makes them. These are industrial variants used on pipelines and generators.

The issue is you're paying extra for a diesel engine whose capability isn't be used, then modifying it for gas which costs even more. It doesn't pay for itself. We canceled it after a couple of years for generators, and just used big blocks spark engines and hardened them for gas.

https://www.cummins.com/engines/natural-gas

 

[IDSandman]

If 5hpx5tq and reliable I’ll give the i6 a rip. I’ll sure as heck miss the growl of the hemi tho!

 

[ThunderMug95]

As long as MMX is in business there will be no 6cyl full size trucks in my future. If this 5.7 dies tomorrow, I’d spend $10-15k on a motor from them.
Unless I start towing heavy, then it would be a 6cyl Cummins lol.

 

[Fatbob Frank]

I really love everything about your truck; the capability of course, but also the color, the rims, brush guard, boards; about the only thing I'd change is trying to remove the power wagon sticker down the side.

What color is that? Is that army green or just a gray that looks different due to picture?

Olive Green Pearl...

 

[Dusty]

Is Dodge Preparing Gas Chargers and Challengers After All? - DodgeForum.com

This chassis appears ready for a gas drivetrain, something to thrill the Mopar petrol head upset of an EV-only Dodge future.

dodgeforum.com

Regards,
Dusty
2019 Ram 1500 Billet Silver Laramie Quad Cab 2WD, 5.7 Hemi, 8HP75, 3.21 axle, 33-gallon fuel tank, 18” wheels. Build Date: 3 June 2018. Now at 10140 miles.

 

[Docwagon1776]

Is Dodge Preparing Gas Chargers and Challengers After All? - DodgeForum.com

This chassis appears ready for a gas drivetrain, something to thrill the Mopar petrol head upset of an EV-only Dodge future.

dodgeforum.com

Regards,
Dusty
2019 Ram 1500 Billet Silver Laramie Quad Cab 2WD, 5.7 Hemi, 8HP75, 3.21 axle, 33-gallon fuel tank, 18” wheels. Build Date: 3 June 2018. Now at 10140 miles.

Fleet sales open 4th quarter 2024 for gas Chargers. They *never* said this was the end of ICE Chargers, they very carefully said "this it the end of Hemi Chargers", played it up for sales, and people *assumed* it was also the end of ICE. I've pointed this out several times, but only recently learned for sure about the fleet sales order window. A 6 cylinder of some sort will be available for sure, but what that is I don't know. Could be the current 6, could be the Hurricane, though in fleet I highly highly doubt we order them even if available.

 

[Dusty]

Fleet sales open 4th quarter 2024 for gas Chargers. They *never* said this was the end of ICE Chargers, they very carefully said "this it the end of Hemi Chargers", played it up for sales, and people *assumed* it was also the end of ICE. I've pointed this out several times, but only recently learned for sure about the fleet sales order window. A 6 cylinder of some sort will be available for sure, but what that is I don't know. Could be the current 6, could be the Hurricane, though in fleet I highly highly doubt we order them even if available.

I, too, was suspicious since (at least) the Charger has a significant presence in law enforcement where I don't think an EV would be much of an alternative solution. I can't see Chrysler giving up that large of a fleet market. In this area the New York State police are all Chargers and Durangos, as well as the adjacent counties.

Regards,
Dusty
2019 Ram 1500 Billet Silver Laramie Quad Cab 2WD, 5.7 Hemi, 8HP75, 3.21 axle, 33-gallon fuel tank, 18” wheels. Build Date: 3 June 2018. Now at 10140 miles.

 

[KKBB]

Go read any of the diesel vs gas towing threads, pay particular attention to the payload police. Losing almost 1000 lbs of payload and without reaping the benefits of a diesel torque curve and fuel efficiency isn't attractive to a pickup buyer. Then there is the matter of cost, adding an extra $9K to the price tag? Considering both Ford and GM have developed BGE that are competitors of the 6.4 Hemi, a revamp of the engine is more likely (it's the 5.7 Hemi that's on the chopping block to go away).
A Cummins has is possible option for buyers of 4500 and heavier trucks where the extra weight isn't as much of a bite into the the GVWR. Keep in mind that the Cummins in the 4500/5500 are tuned different from the 2500/3500 versions, the Hemi still has same specs across the board.

I agree with what you are saying. If the cost is similar to the Cummins diesel option, but without the Cummins diesel power and torque, I would be out. In my mind, when we are talking gas, I assumed it would be similarly priced to a gas engine already on the market. If not, there is no reason for it...IMO. Unless it is gonna still have a turbo like the Cummins diesel, and make a boat load of power, then I would consider it. It won't matter anyway as I will be long gone before any of it happens anyway.

 

[TestPilot57]

I don't think ram really wants the v6...

The Hurricane is a straight 6, FWIW.

 

[IAFleetRamGuy]

The Hurricane will be an awesome platform to see in the big trucks in the future. EV is not the answer, efficiency is.

 

[TestPilot57]

I don't care if it has 2 cylinders, as long as it makes the power I need and gets the job done.

Power on paper* and power to the road are often very different. While I agree in principle, I'd have to drive your 2-cylinder juggernaut before I believed it.

*most often the only thing published is peak power at RPM. This alone is almost meaningless. I wish someone could come up with a "power under the curve" formula that would give a more meaningful number. I became aware of this phenomenon the first time I had the opportunity to drive a Ferrari. I stalled the thing umpteen times because it was more gutless than a 6-year-old girl* at what seemed to me to be normal take-off RPMs. And it was. Because the torque curve was more like the HP curve of a "normal" American Iron engine. Fact is, the engine was founded on a race situation, where you are always within 1000 RPM or so of max HP. Not the way normal people drive on the street.

I realize this kind of representative number would be complicated by the power band, min/max RPM etc, but I can imagine a rating that would have 2 parts - power band width as a percentage of max RPM and power under the curve. Probably a lot more complicated that it seems at face value or someone a lot smarter than me would have already come up with it but it's one thing I constantly think of when I see max power/HP readings.

Oh, but give me a V8 any day. Or a V12 if I can afford it (not yet). Call me shallow but sound means a lot to me. The only 6 that sounds good is a Flat six, like the one in my Porsche. But that's the totally wrong configuration for a front engine truck. Maybe it could fit under the bed, hmmmm...

 

[Riccochet]

Power on paper* and power to the road are often very different. While I agree in principle, I'd have to drive your 2-cylinder juggernaut before I believed it.

*most often the only thing published is peak power at RPM. This alone is almost meaningless. I wish someone could come up with a "power under the curve" formula that would give a more meaningful number. I became aware of this phenomenon the first time I had the opportunity to drive a Ferrari. I stalled the thing umpteen times because it was more gutless than a 6-year-old girl* at what seemed to me to be normal take-off RPMs. And it was. Because the torque curve was more like the HP curve of a "normal" American Iron engine. Fact is, the engine was founded on a race situation, where you are always within 1000 RPM or so of max HP. Not the way normal people drive on the street.

I realize this kind of representative number would be complicated by the power band, min/max RPM etc, but I can imagine a rating that would have 2 parts - power band width as a percentage of max RPM and power under the curve. Probably a lot more complicated that it seems at face value or someone a lot smarter than me would have already come up with it but it's one thing I constantly think of when I see max power/HP readings.

Oh, but give me a V8 any day. Or a V12 if I can afford it (not yet). Call me shallow but sound means a lot to me. The only 6 that sounds good is a Flat six, like the one in my Porsche. But that's the totally wrong configuration for a front engine truck. Maybe it could fit under the bed, hmmmm...

Power at the crank and power at the wheels are very different. If an engine is rated for 400 HP you are not getting 400 HP at the wheels since you lose about 30% to the driveline and accessories. And different engines rated for 400 HP can feel very different when it comes to driving experience, all depending on the torque and power curves.

At the end of the day 400 HP is 400 HP. You might see it at 3000 RPM or 5500 RPM depending on the engine.

For a truck I'd rather have considerably more torque. Give me 500 ft/lbs down low and 300-400 HP is plenty.

 

[Docwagon1776]

I, too, was suspicious since (at least) the Charger has a significant presence in law enforcement where I don't think an EV would be much of an alternative solution. I can't see Chrysler giving up that large of a fleet market. In this area the New York State police are all Chargers and Durangos, as well as the adjacent counties.

Regards,
Dusty
2019 Ram 1500 Billet Silver Laramie Quad Cab 2WD, 5.7 Hemi, 8HP75, 3.21 axle, 33-gallon fuel tank, 18” wheels. Build Date: 3 June 2018. Now at 10140 miles.

We ordered 800 Chargers last order window, and I think we've taken delivery of maybe 600 of those so far. Our current fleet still has a lot of Interceptors, but they are being rotated out.

 

[TestPilot57]

Power at the crank and power at the wheels are very different.

Yeah for sure. I was not referring to that in any way. It was this:

And different engines rated for 400 HP can feel very different when it comes to driving experience, all depending on the torque and power curves.

Which is why I wish there were a better number to refer to than max HP or torque.

We had a medium duty (26k GVWR) truck and it had a 230 HP rated diesel NA 6. My 1500 with a 400 HP engine couldn't touch it!

 

[Riccochet]

Yeah for sure. I was not referring to that in any way. It was this:

Which is why I wish there were a better number to refer to than max HP or torque.

We had a medium duty (26k GVWR) truck and it had a 230 HP rated diesel NA 6. My 1500 with a 400 HP engine couldn't touch it!

That's because most of our driving is torque dependent. Stop light to stop light is all torque. You can run high gears on a high torque engine and get tons of speed. Like the old big block V8's that had like 350 HP but 500 ft/lbs. Tire roasters.

Really, horsepower is just a calculation based on torque and acceleration over time.

Give me all the torque, and give it to me at lower RPM's where I spend 99% of my time driving.

 

[chopperdog45]

Power on paper* and power to the road are often very different. While I agree in principle, I'd have to drive your 2-cylinder juggernaut before I believed it.

*most often the only thing published is peak power at RPM. This alone is almost meaningless. I wish someone could come up with a "power under the curve" formula that would give a more meaningful number. I became aware of this phenomenon the first time I had the opportunity to drive a Ferrari. I stalled the thing umpteen times because it was more gutless than a 6-year-old girl* at what seemed to me to be normal take-off RPMs. And it was. Because the torque curve was more like the HP curve of a "normal" American Iron engine. Fact is, the engine was founded on a race situation, where you are always within 1000 RPM or so of max HP. Not the way normal people drive on the street.

I realize this kind of representative number would be complicated by the power band, min/max RPM etc, but I can imagine a rating that would have 2 parts - power band width as a percentage of max RPM and power under the curve. Probably a lot more complicated that it seems at face value or someone a lot smarter than me would have already come up with it but it's one thing I constantly think of when I see max power/HP readings.

Oh, but give me a V8 any day. Or a V12 if I can afford it (not yet). Call me shallow but sound means a lot to me. The only 6 that sounds good is a Flat six, like the one in my Porsche. But that's the totally wrong configuration for a front engine truck. Maybe it could fit under the bed, hmmmm...

I have a 2 cylinder in my bike that makes pretty decent torque, and it sound fantastic to boot...