V6 or V8?

Jeepwalker · Apr 14, 2023

Of course the most important thing might be Stopping Rust pro-actively.

2015 ..makes it almost 8yrs old ...Ohio... yer square in the rust belt. That means you are at a point where you can probably still do something to keep it looking nice. Or let nature (salt) take it's course. Now is the time to make a rust mediation plan. These trucks do rust out, don't want to wait till it's at stage 3. You could literally add years to the 'looks' of your truck by being pro-active.

1) At the minimum, squirt some oil above the rear box wheel openings ..from the inside. You can get at the area from the front side of the tire. It won't be as effective as #2 though. And front/rear of box/door bottoms/tailgate, etc.

2) Best situation is Clean out Wheel housing & other trouble spots: The best would be to get your younger nephew's young arm up there on the inside of the wheel housing, and pay him $40 (or more if he's older), to work all the rocks, stones, sand & gunk out with a thin 18ga tool (the one below is welded at an angle). It's a lot of work to reach up there and work them all out. Unless it's pretty clean, which I doubt it is. Rocks get lodged hard in there and the need to be worked out. Not easy. It's not just rocks: small stones, sand and dirt get thrown up there and accumulate. They have no way to get out. They collect dust/dirt ...and hold moisture between the outer sheet metal and the inner well house (outlined in green). There's no drain hole in the 'center' (thank's chrysler). The gap is a 1/8" wide. If you take your tk to a rust proof shop, they're not going to remove any of that (it's real work!) and just spray their 'oily dr good' (which doesn't deal with moist stuff already up there).

The Ideal situation would be to remove the wheel/tire, remove the plastic rear inner wheel liners, put the tire back on and get up there and remove the debris. Then wash out that narrow crack with a garden hose (not pressure washer) from the taillight area.

3) Allow a couple days to dry, then squirt oil up there and the other trouble spots. Or take it to a rust-proofer. I prefer oil b/c it will run down and seep into small cracks of the sealer Dodge and get inside the wheel lip crimped and welded area. (fluid film 'hangs' doesn't run or 'seep'). Also don't forget about the rear of the box below the taillights, and front corners of the box collect debris too. And 'treat' the rockers, lower doors, tailgate. Go to your nearest HVAC store in your area and get a $3 Zoom Spout bottle of oil and use up your doors & rockers if you need to.

Or, like I say, after you get the rear wheel wells and other areas cleaned ...take it to a rust-proofing shop. Might be the best $250 you spend. The key is to do *something* soon while your truck is still in decent shape, not wait 3 years when rust has started and it's too late (it probably already has, but not too seriously -- hopefully). Then it'll look great that much longer and you'll love it longer.

THIS LINK HERE should scare you straight

. I've seen a several 4th gens around here like this, and a buddy's 2013 is starting to look like that too. Just trying to help. But it does illustrate where the problem areas are. You southern guys don't have to deal with this fun! Ha ha...

Post a picture of your new pickup when you get a chance! We'd Love to see it.

ppine · Apr 14, 2023

FLFBSManiac · Apr 14, 2023

Thanks, most of those things are on my to do list.
I did that to my ‘11 Avenger when I bought it in 2015 with ~50K miles. It’s now at 170K and still looking good except bottoms of the rear doors.
Waiting for access to a lift so I can do most of it standing up.

mdc1990zr1 · Apr 14, 2023

Jeepwalker said:
Of course the most important thing might be Stopping Rust pro-actively.

2015 ..makes it almost 8yrs old ...Ohio... yer square in the rust belt. That means you are at a point where you can probably still do something to keep it looking nice. Or let nature (salt) take it's course. Now is the time to make a rust mediation plan. These trucks do rust out, don't want to wait till it's at stage 3. You could literally add years to the 'looks' of your truck by being pro-active.

1) At the minimum, squirt some oil above the rear box wheel openings ..from the inside. You can get at the area from the front side of the tire. It won't be as effective as #2 though. And front/rear of box/door bottoms/tailgate, etc.

2) Best situation is Clean out Wheel housing & other trouble spots: The best would be to get your younger nephew's young arm up there on the inside of the wheel housing, and pay him $40 (or more if he's older), to work all the rocks, stones, sand & gunk out with a thin 18ga tool (the one below is welded at an angle). It's a lot of work to reach up there and work them all out. Unless it's pretty clean, which I doubt it is. Rocks get lodged hard in there and the need to be worked out. Not easy. It's not just rocks: small stones, sand and dirt get thrown up there and accumulate. They have no way to get out. They collect dust/dirt ...and hold moisture between the outer sheet metal and the inner well house (outlined in green). There's no drain hole in the 'center' (thank's chrysler). The gap is a 1/8" wide. If you take your tk to a rust proof shop, they're not going to remove any of that (it's real work!) and just spray their 'oily dr good' (which doesn't deal with moist stuff already up there).
View attachment 518753
The Ideal situation would be to remove the wheel/tire, remove the plastic rear inner wheel liners, put the tire back on and get up there and remove the debris. Then wash out that narrow crack with a garden hose (not pressure washer) from the taillight area.

3) Allow a couple days to dry, then squirt oil up there and the other trouble spots. Or take it to a rust-proofer. I prefer oil b/c it will run down and seep into small cracks of the sealer Dodge and get inside the wheel lip crimped and welded area. (fluid film 'hangs' doesn't run or 'seep'). Also don't forget about the rear of the box below the taillights, and front corners of the box collect debris too. And 'treat' the rockers, lower doors, tailgate. Go to your nearest HVAC store in your area and get a $3 Zoom Spout bottle of oil and use up your doors & rockers if you need to.

Or, like I say, after you get the rear wheel wells and other areas cleaned ...take it to a rust-proofing shop. Might be the best $250 you spend. The key is to do *something* soon while your truck is still in decent shape, not wait 3 years when rust has started and it's too late (it probably already has, but not too seriously -- hopefully). Then it'll look great that much longer and you'll love it longer.

THIS LINK HERE should scare you straight . I've seen a several 4th gens around here like this, and a buddy's 2013 is starting to look like that too. Just trying to help. But it does illustrate where the problem areas are. You southern guys don't have to deal with this fun! Ha ha...

Post a picture of your new pickup when you get a chance! We'd Love to see it.

I have a 2016 and i'v had it fluid filmed a few times. When it gets hot out, that fluid film runs down the panels and on the ground. Thank God it's not on a concrete slab that i'd have to clean up. It might not flow as good as oil, but it certainly runs when it gets warm.

Jeepwalker · Apr 15, 2023

Here is the inner wheel housing. The lip in the area marked in red spot welds to the wheel lip of the outer box side. There's about a 1/8" thick gap between the inner and outer panels, which can/does fill up with debris. There are no drainage holes for sand, dirt, rocks to escape unless they happen to fall out on a real bumpy road. The wheel lip itself on mine is seam sealed. Hope it helps.

I don't want to present this as a Ram-weakness in design. It's pretty much how all trucks have been constructed for 50 years. IDT the Ram box sides rust out any quicker than any of the others. I'm just putting the picture up to show guys where to target their energy.

Sherman Bird · Apr 15, 2023

ramffml said:
Try the v6 first. If you like how it drives, it should work well for your needs.

If I was in your position I'd also give the GM twins a look, with the 2.7 turbo. It will keep up with the hemi for daily driving and feel much stronger than the v6 in the Ram. It's built like a tank too (overkill) so don't worry about the 4 cylinder part of that. It's one of two engines GM tried to kill in their testing, but couldn't. Might be a little more money than what you want to spend though.

Ford tried to kill their twin turbo Eco Boost truck engines, too.... that was all dandy and good until REAL consumers in the REAL world got a hold of them.

ramffml · Apr 15, 2023

Sherman Bird said:
Ford tried to kill their twin turbo Eco Boost truck engines, too.... that was all dandy and good until REAL consumers in the REAL world got a hold of them.

I think the point is that the 2.7 is overbuilt, it's stronger than their v8's.

Sherman Bird · Apr 15, 2023

ramffml said:
I think the point is that the 2.7 is overbuilt, it's stronger than their v8's.

Yeah, the press said as much about the so-called "bullet proof" Ford Ecoboost v-6 when the press was made privvy to the beta testing of this "New, Revolutionary" engine. All the Hoop-La and giddy pre production up-chatter had that engine as the next thing to a spacecraft worthy of trips to Mars.

That engine was put into race cars, Baja cars, Drag racers, enduro racers, agricultural equipment, Santa's Sleigh (kidding on this one), You name it.... but ALL those tests were done under engineer team supervision. They ran the pee-waddle out of them and tore them down and reported how durable and tough they were base upon bearing wear. One problem is... too damned much plastic on these engines. ANY idiot knows that a plastic water jacket or intake manifold is destined to an early death compared to metal (Cast iron or aluminum).

GM will tell you that real-world consumers do pretty well at baring a car's low spots by using them on the day-to-day tarmac trips to and from work and running errands on week-ends.

In 2002, there was a movement where a lot of people sought out 70's - 90's cars and trucks to up fix them up, because of how undependable the then new cars were. Recently I've become aware of a resurgence to that activity.

Anytime one squeezes 3 pounds of poop from a one pound pump, laws of physics will prevail. 2.7 Liter putting out as much power as a much bigger V-8? Maybe, but not for long without that physics law doing it's thing. But GM, et. al. know that folks are easily mesmerized.... and many live in and are willing to define long periods of their lives in a moment of "Ooh! Aah!".

Think in terms of the Tortoise and the Hare.

Jim welsh · Apr 15, 2023

6 cylinder penstar

ramffml · Apr 15, 2023

Sherman Bird said:
Yeah, the press said as much about the so-called "bullet proof" Ford Ecoboost v-6 when the press was made privvy to the beta testing of this "New, Revolutionary" engine. All the Hoop-La and giddy pre production up-chatter had that engine as the next thing to a spacecraft worthy of trips to Mars.

That engine was put into race cars, Baja cars, Drag racers, enduro racers, agricultural equipment, Santa's Sleigh (kidding on this one), You name it.... but ALL those tests were done under engineer team supervision. They ran the pee-waddle out of them and tore them down and reported how durable and tough they were base upon bearing wear. One problem is... too damned much plastic on these engines. ANY idiot knows that a plastic water jacket or intake manifold is destined to an early death compared to metal (Cast iron or aluminum).

GM will tell you that real-world consumers do pretty well at baring a car's low spots by using them on the day-to-day tarmac trips to and from work and running errands on week-ends.

In 2002, there was a movement where a lot of people sought out 70's - 90's cars and trucks to up fix them up, because of how undependable the then new cars were. Recently I've become aware of a resurgence to that activity.

Anytime one squeezes 3 pounds of poop from a one pound pump, laws of physics will prevail. 2.7 Liter putting out as much power as a much bigger V-8? Maybe, but not for long without that physics law doing it's thing. But GM, et. al. know that folks are easily mesmerized.... and many live in and are willing to define long periods of their lives in a moment of "Ooh! Aah!".

Think in terms of the Tortoise and the Hare.

What Ford did is irrelevant. GM's testing proves it's one of their most reliable and tough engines, beating out the v8s. Not sure what's so hard for you to follow on this.

It IS possible to engineer a robust turbo charged engine. The problem traditionally has been that "small and turbo = cheap". This engine was engineered right from the start to be a turbo charged 4 cylinder for use in their half tons.

Context is key here. I wouldn't pay to upgrade to this engine. But if I was looking for a cheap work truck this engine destroys the equivalent base engine offerings from Ram and Ford.

Sherman Bird · Apr 15, 2023

ramffml said:
What Ford did is irrelevant. GM's testing proves it's one of their most reliable and tough engines, beating out the v8s. Not sure what's so hard for you to follow on this.

It IS possible to engineer a robust turbo charged engine. The problem traditionally has been that "small and turbo = cheap". This engine was engineered right from the start to be a turbo charged 4 cylinder for use in their half tons.

Context is key here. I wouldn't pay to upgrade to this engine. But if I was looking for a cheap work truck this engine destroys the equivalent base engine offerings from Ram and Ford.

We will see about the 2.7L engine. The venerable 2.3 Liter Ford Turbo engine which was in the stupid fast Mustang SVO (1984) was a slightly beefed up version of the NA Pinto/ Ranger engine. THOSE engines were forged in Brazil and used Nodular Cast Iron blocks and heads, forged pistons, crank, and forged rods.... so, they were designed from the get go, like you allude to for this new GM engine, and fuel mileage was phenomenal. Although you might think I lack perspicuity on the subject; I realize that in this modern world of 40 years after the SVO Mustang, things are VASTLY different.

Given the avarice with which manufacturers operate upon these "New Millennium" climes, they do not seem to make muster in long term game. Time will tell if you're correct on this new 2.7L GM engine. Meanwhile, my indices are the Hemi issues, 3.6L issues for FCA, Ford's EcoBoost engines, and GM's line of "EcoTech" powerplants. Even Toyota fell down and scraped their knee, so to speak with piston designs woefully inadequately vented behind the oil control rings, thus leading to oil drinking engines. We as an engineering society have had MANY decades to get it right. Yet the high number of junk engine problems continue.

In the early 90's the GM engineers were lamenting how difficult it was to meet CAFE from one arm of the Feds (DOT), and meet ever more stringent demands from EPA for emissions, while being forced to comply with IIHS and NHTSA safety compliance.
They said that the high cost of the cars bore out these "New Developments". Fine. A new truck back then was an the low to mid 20 thousands for the fancy ones as they were available then. Today, they're upwards of 4 times that amount. IMHO, the manufacturers don't deserve to have their cake AND eat it.

If they could make them robust in those days, and they've failed miserably recently, then My skepticism is well placed. I do hope these new twinky power plants placed in 6,000 pound trucks can rise to the occasion, then Bully for them finally getting it correct in the context of someone spending so much, and expecting so much. I'll wrap this up with this: When the ads show on TV, or elsewhere, and the car companies tout their products as "Ram Tough" or "Like A Rock" or Texas Tough", "Ford Tough", etc, then a person is LED to a certain expectation of long term dependability and serviceability.
When these manufacturers bloviate about all these awards from J.D. Powers, Motor Trend, Car & Driver... and so on, They evoke certain expectations. And I haven't even begun on crappy warranty service.

Well, 'nuff said! Peace!

indept · Apr 15, 2023

ramffml said:
What Ford did is irrelevant. GM's testing proves it's one of their most reliable and tough engines, beating out the v8s. Not sure what's so hard for you to follow on this.

It IS possible to engineer a robust turbo charged engine. The problem traditionally has been that "small and turbo = cheap". This engine was engineered right from the start to be a turbo charged 4 cylinder for use in their half tons.

Context is key here. I wouldn't pay to upgrade to this engine. But if I was looking for a cheap work truck this engine destroys the equivalent base engine offerings from Ram and Ford.

True GMs 4 turbo is probably better than their V8's which isn't saying much. A coworker had a 2014 or 15 Chevy Silverado v8 from new and it burned almost 2 qts between changes. He was told by Chevy that is was normal. So yes, anything is better than their V8's.

Jeepwalker · Apr 15, 2023

I wouldn't judge all chevy engines based on one co-worker's account. The chevy engine'd vehicles I've had (many over the yrs) ran practically forever with no inherent issues. Of course ...YMMV

crash68 · Apr 15, 2023

Jeepwalker said:
I wouldn't judge all chevy engines based on one co-worker's account.

indept said:
A coworker had a 2014 or 15 Chevy Silverado v8 from new and it burned almost 2 qts between changes. He was told by Chevy that is was normal.

Had a Saturn that burned 2 quarts of oil in 3K miles, also told by the dealership that was normal. Know a few other GM vehicles that would do the similar.

ramffml · Apr 15, 2023

Sherman Bird said:
We will see about the 2.7L engine. The venerable 2.3 Liter Ford Turbo engine which was in the stupid fast Mustang SVO (1984) was a slightly beefed up version of the NA Pinto/ Ranger engine. THOSE engines were forged in Brazil and used Nodular Cast Iron blocks and heads, forged pistons, crank, and forged rods.... so, they were designed from the get go, like you allude to for this new GM engine, and fuel mileage was phenomenal. Although you might think I lack perspicuity on the subject; I realize that in this modern world of 40 years after the SVO Mustang, things are VASTLY different.

Given the avarice with which manufacturers operate upon these "New Millennium" climes, they do not seem to make muster in long term game. Time will tell if you're correct on this new 2.7L GM engine. Meanwhile, my indices are the Hemi issues, 3.6L issues for FCA, Ford's EcoBoost engines, and GM's line of "EcoTech" powerplants. Even Toyota fell down and scraped their knee, so to speak with piston designs woefully inadequately vented behind the oil control rings, thus leading to oil drinking engines. We as an engineering society have had MANY decades to get it right. Yet the high number of junk engine problems continue.

In the early 90's the GM engineers were lamenting how difficult it was to meet CAFE from one arm of the Feds (DOT), and meet ever more stringent demands from EPA for emissions, while being forced to comply with IIHS and NHTSA safety compliance.
They said that the high cost of the cars bore out these "New Developments". Fine. A new truck back then was an the low to mid 20 thousands for the fancy ones as they were available then. Today, they're upwards of 4 times that amount. IMHO, the manufacturers don't deserve to have their cake AND eat it.

If they could make them robust in those days, and they've failed miserably recently, then My skepticism is well placed. I do hope these new twinky power plants placed in 6,000 pound trucks can rise to the occasion, then Bully for them finally getting it correct in the context of someone spending so much, and expecting so much. I'll wrap this up with this: When the ads show on TV, or elsewhere, and the car companies tout their products as "Ram Tough" or "Like A Rock" or Texas Tough", "Ford Tough", etc, then a person is LED to a certain expectation of long term dependability and serviceability.
When these manufacturers bloviate about all these awards from J.D. Powers, Motor Trend, Car & Driver... and so on, They evoke certain expectations. And I haven't even begun on crappy warranty service.

Well, 'nuff said! Peace!

Words fail me here Sherman. I'm just going to move on.

Nicholas Cove · Apr 16, 2023

I wouldn't have bought a ram without a hemi.

NightmareRCSB · Apr 16, 2023

ramffml said:
Words fail me here Sherman. I'm just going to move on.

just like the GM 2.7L's timing chains and headgaskets, for an "over engineered" motor we see 2-3 of them weekly for warranty work, we've actually got 2 thats been waiting on new engines for almost 2 weeks now cause GM is trying their hardest not to honor the warranty

ramffml · Apr 16, 2023

NightmareRCSB said:
just like the GM 2.7L's timing chains and headgaskets, for an "over engineered" motor we see 2-3 of them weekly for warranty work, we've actually got 2 thats been waiting on new engines for almost 2 weeks now cause GM is trying their hardest not to honor the warranty

I'm sure you do lol.

Sherman Bird · Apr 16, 2023

NightmareRCSB said:
just like the GM 2.7L's timing chains and headgaskets, for an "over engineered" motor we see 2-3 of them weekly for warranty work, we've actually got 2 thats been waiting on new engines for almost 2 weeks now cause GM is trying their hardest not to honor the warranty

I left GM for Ford for the second time, late in 1999. (I'd worked at a Ford dealer in the late 70's.... ahh! The Fairmonts, Pintos, and Granadas! GM was in deep poo by the end of the 90's, and deservedly so. They had brought their President of GM Europe over to the U.S. to fix North American operations. VW snatched him away with a fat money offer, so there went THAT idea! They (GM) had really deteriorated in service department and after sale customer care.... then had the nuts to send out survey cards for CSI (Customer Satisfaction Index). They held employee meetings weekly where we technicians were chastised for THEIR super high warranty expenses. I repeatedly told them to build better products, and they wouldn't be in such dire straights.

My main goal for jumping ship was so I could make a living paycheck. GM kept cutting warranty labor rate clock time to the point that a competent tech couldn't make an honest living. Although Ford was much better, they were heading down the same path. So, I started my own shop and haven't looked back.

indept · Apr 16, 2023

Jeepwalker said:
I wouldn't judge all chevy engines based on one co-worker's account. The chevy engine'd vehicles I've had (many over the yrs) ran practically forever with no inherent issues. Of course ...YMMV

That was the worst, I knew a few others with Chevy/ gmc trucks that had similar issues just not as bad (1 qt in 3000 miles from new). Not to mention the style tires you had to buy

V6 or V8?

Senior Member

Forester

Junior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

ACME product engineer

Senior Member

Senior Member

Junior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Forum statistics

Share this page