e-Torque, an interesting article

[mikeru]

Ram 6.4/8A. There is no current production half ton I have any interest in...and I'm honestly not interested in a current production HD since I don't want the onboard driver monitoring BS. Midsize, I would buy a Ranger Raptor if Ford wasn't hip deep in driver monitoring, but they are, so that's out. I'm not sure where Nissan stands on Big Brother riding with you, but they are at least a NA V6 that's pretty solid and I think their current 9 speed is supposed to be reasonably robust.

I think the Jeep Gladiator is my default, I think it's still Big Bro free?

No new vehicle is “big bro free”.

 

[Docwagon1776]

No new vehicle is “big bro free”.

What's the Big Bro on the Gladiator? It's not hands free capable yet and doesn't have the driver monitoring camera in the cab. OTA updates are still not linked to drivetrain as best I can tell.

If you just mean hooked to the cell network, meh, IDGAF about that. I just don't want a car that can be updated to shut off if it thinks I'm sleepy or drunk or whatever the computer decides based on my eyelid twitch...

 

[mikeru]

What's the Big Bro on the Gladiator? It's not hands free capable yet and doesn't have the driver monitoring camera in the cab. OTA updates are still not linked to drivetrain as best I can tell.

If you just mean hooked to the cell network, meh, IDGAF about that. I just don't want a car that can be updated to shut off if it thinks I'm sleepy or drunk or whatever the computer decides based on my eyelid twitch...

You’re the one who said “big bro free” so you might want to define what you meant by that lol. If you want a vehicle without all of the stuff you mentioned you better buy something quick. By the end of the year all new vehicles will have all of that stuff. Search on H.R.3684 - Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

​

 

[Docwagon1776]

You’re the one who said “big bro free” so you might want to define what you meant by that lol. If you want a vehicle without all of the stuff you mentioned you better buy something quick. By the end of the year all new vehicles will have all of that stuff. Search on H.R.3684 - Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

​

Big Brother = driver monitoring that I was discussing earlier. Big Brother in 1984 watched people through their televisions, etc. to monitor what they were doing in private spaces. He also took corrective action based on what he saw. The scene I remember from the book was mandatory exercise times and calling out people in real time that Big Brother thought were not exercising energetically enough.

As far as the legal mandate, people haven't been paying attention as this has been building for awhile. I've been posting about the driver monitoring requirements since at least 2023. Example: https://www.ramforum.com/threads/go...ng-estimated-travel-time.204688/#post-2852278

Same information applies today as I said then: the mandate was for a *study* for the technology. Unless there's new information, there is no mandate for any technology to be implemented in 2026. You can read it yourself.

https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW-117publ58.pdf

Then search 24220.

 

[madtrucker2016]

I had two 5th-gen Rams with E- Torque, and the gas mileage was horrendous, and I could not get answers to my questions about it. I would never get another one with E-Torque again. My dream is for them to go back to the old school 8 cyl Hemi with no stop-start and all the crap the engineers can think of. So now I have a 6 cyl 3.0 Hurracane Laramie Night Edition, my first 6 cyl engine after having 8 Ram pickup trucks. But this is my opioion and someone will go off on me for something . But it is my money paying for the trucks, not yours.

 

[2019_RPX_LTD]

I had two 5th-gen Rams with E- Torque, and the gas mileage was horrendous, and I could not get answers to my questions about it. I would never get another one with E-Torque again. My dream is for them to go back to the old school 8 cyl Hemi with no stop-start and all the crap the engineers can think of. So now I have a 6 cyl 3.0 Hurracane Laramie Night Edition, my first 6 cyl engine after having 8 Ram pickup trucks. But this is my opioion and someone will go off on me for something . But it is my money paying for the trucks, not yours.

Can you define what your "horrendous gas mileage" was?

 

[Docwagon1776]

My dream is for them to go back to the old school 8 cyl Hemi with no stop-start and all the crap the engineers can think of.

That was part of the reason I went to the 2500. The 6.4L has MDS, but otherwise is as old school as you'd want and has proven itself very robust in BGE configuration. I don't think there's a better engine and transmission combo out there than the 6.4L hemi and ZF 8 speed transmission.

 

[mikeru]

Big Brother = driver monitoring that I was discussing earlier. Big Brother in 1984 watched people through their televisions, etc. to monitor what they were doing in private spaces. He also took corrective action based on what he saw. The scene I remember from the book was mandatory exercise times and calling out people in real time that Big Brother thought were not exercising energetically enough.

As far as the legal mandate, people haven't been paying attention as this has been building for awhile. I've been posting about the driver monitoring requirements since at least 2023. Example: https://www.ramforum.com/threads/go...ng-estimated-travel-time.204688/#post-2852278

Same information applies today as I said then: the mandate was for a *study* for the technology. Unless there's new information, there is no mandate for any technology to be implemented in 2026. You can read it yourself.

https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW-117publ58.pdf

Then search 24220.

I’ve read a couple articles in the past couple of weeks which do say this technology is mandated to be implemented in 2026, but I don’t have the links to these right now, and even if I did they were on conservative websites and some here may think they would infringe on the no politics rule here. Believe me, I hope those articles I’m referring to were wrong.

I will say my 2025 Audi has some of those “features”, which I am able to disable, for now at least. I don’t see car companies going to the expense of adding them if they are required to do so. I wasn’t aware the car even had them when I bought it new in August of last year. If at some point in the future I can no longer turn them off I’ll be getting rid of this car for something older that doesn’t have that tech.

 

[Docwagon1776]

I’ve read a couple articles in the past couple of weeks which do say this technology is mandated to be implemented in 2026,

I'm open to source documents. If they are correct, than legislation would be easy to link to by the authors of those articles. I think what you'll find is they are not correct, and I'll link a few more primary sources to show why.

First off, just read the legislation I posted. It's in plain language, no lawyers required. It includes a timeline once the rule is made:

"To allow sufficient time for manufacturer compliance, the compliance date of the rule issued under subsection(c) shall be not earlier than 2 years and not more than 3 years after the date on which that rule is issued."

So the rule would have been published in 2023 if it has to go into effect in 2026.

What actually happened in 2023 was the *start* of the process of rule making: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-01-05/pdf/2023-27665.pdf

This document initiates rulemaking that would gather the information necessary to develop performance requirements and require that new passenger motor vehicles be equipped with advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology through a new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS

Now, there's a lot of reading there so let's cut to the important bit. The technology did not yet exist in 2023 (and still doesn't, which we'll get to).

Assuming an accurate detection technology is fully developed (including a standardized method for testing),NHTSA would have to consider the overall effectiveness of the intervention strategy and the overall cost (economic, societal, etc.). Some considerations would, among other things, include: consumer acceptance; defeat strategies; unintended consequences of immobilizing a vehicle; need for an emergency override; and time between disablement and re-enablement. NHTSA is seeking feedback on the following questions.

How do we know the technology doesn't yet exist? Well, Congress said so 4 months ago and wants to step up getting the technology to work by offering cash to inventors:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6704/text

To direct the Secretary of Transportation to establish a competition to accelerate vehicle integration of passive, anti-drunk driving technology, with a cash prize awarded to an entity that demonstrates technology that is ready for integration into passenger motor vehicles, and for other purposes.

Bottom line: There is no mandate in the legislation in 2021 other than to study the feasibility of the technology and make a recommendation in pursuit of an eventual rule. The threat is real, but not on the timeline of by the end of this year. The only "penalty" for DoT not making a rule right now is the necessity for an annual report as to why there's no rule. There's no rule because no technology yet meets the requirement. Once a rule is met, manufacturers will have 2-3 years to comply unless new legislation alters that.

 

[mikeru]

I appreciate the effort you went to to try and clear that up. Maybe I need to adjust my tin foil hat a bit, but your response brings up a question for me. This bill became law in November of 2021. That means they have had about four years to develop the technology. If the technology doesn’t exist yet, then how did my car tell me to stop and rest when I was on a long drive last fall? I was actually looking down at my phone (I know, not advised) and my car interpreted my looking down at my phone as me being tired. I’ve never owned a vehicle that does that before this Audi. It’s concerning to me because with just a few software tweaks they could turn that warning into something more intrusive like putting the car into limp mode, or worse. And they could also easily make it so it can’t be disabled. I’m sure Audi isn’t the only car maker who has developed this type of tech.

 

[Docwagon1776]

I appreciate the effort you went to to try and clear that up. Maybe I need to adjust my tin foil hat a bit, but your response brings up a question for me. This bill became law in November of 2021. That means they have had about four years to develop the technology. If the technology doesn’t exist yet, then how did my car tell me to stop and rest when I was on a long drive last fall? I was actually looking down at my phone (I know, not advised) and my car interpreted my looking down at my phone as me being tired.

You partially answered your own question. The technology was wrong in assessing the situation.

Now imagine how much harder it is to determine your level of impairment, and if that equates to a BAC that's legally above that at which you are allowed to drive. Now consider the stakes once it's a law vs an optional feature. Once you have gov't intrusion vs just the manufacturer deciding to include it, constitutional questions come up at both state and federal level. Is the gov't intrusion reasonable and proportionate to the illegal action taking place? Stopping you from driving is much more of an intrusion than telling you that you may be sleepy. Did your car know "how sleepy" you were and what BAC that equates to? Or just you may be sleepy?

Now imagine how that technology would deal with purposeful attempts to fool it or work around it.

You can read the criteria the technology is required to meet in the govinfo link I posted if you care to get into the weeds. Pg 836 talks about drowsiness monitoring. Note the complexity and all the different measurements and how your false positive would not occur if that system were actually in place.

If you really want to know what's happening, just read the links. They are the legislation and the DoT's official documents. It's admittedly dry reading compared to the rage-bait media, but you'll 100% know what the legislation says.

 

[turkeybird56]

I had two 5th-gen Rams with E- Torque, and the gas mileage was horrendous, and I could not get answers to my questions about it. I would never get another one with E-Torque again. My dream is for them to go back to the old school 8 cyl Hemi with no stop-start and all the crap the engineers can think of. So now I have a 6 cyl 3.0 Hurracane Laramie Night Edition, my first 6 cyl engine after having 8 Ram pickup trucks. But this is my opioion and someone will go off on me for something . But it is my money paying for the trucks, not yours.

Hey, U do what works for U. Yer wallet. If you happy with that DI Turbo Inline 6, I say go Gunga Din. I wouldn't, but than my 2019 is a Driveway Princess. The inline 6 would work for me, but I do not need any more nanny boo boo stuff, besides, paid off is great. But that is my circumstance. (FTR, no E junkola here).

 

[Bighorn_Brown]

Thanks for the info!!! Saved the article in the event I may need it in the future.

 

[madtrucker2016]

Can you define what your "horrendous gas mileage" was?

12 mpg city

 

[madtrucker2016]

That was part of the reason I went to the 2500. The 6.4L has MDS, but otherwise is as old school as you'd want and has proven itself very robust in BGE configuration. I don't think there's a better engine and transmission combo out there than the 6.4L hemi and ZF 8 speed transmission.

yeah would love the 6.4, but I could not fiquare what my gas bill would be at the end of the month.

 

[madtrucker2016]

Can you define what your "horrendous gas mileage" was?

12 MPG city with E-Torque that is supposed to save you money at the pump. All of it is bull crap; it is a carbon write-off for the manufacturer that they get credit for every E-Torque they make from the Federal Government at the end of the year.

 

[Docwagon1776]

yeah would love the 6.4, but I could not fiquare what my gas bill would be at the end of the month.

If you're concerned about your gas bill, wishing for an "old school Hemi V8" isn't going to do you any favors.

 

[madtrucker2016]

If you're concerned about your gas bill, wishing for an "old school Hemi V8" isn't going to do you any favors.

I had nine Ram trucks, all different years so far, and yes, I had Hemi 8 cyl before, and the gas was way better than the E-Torque 5th Gen does.

 

[DanAR]

12 mpg! My 23 Hemi eTorque with 3.92 got in the 14s towing a trailer and car. On average I get around 17.5 around town, 19+ on State highways.

 

[suicideking]

The E-torque issues do make me nervous. I bought my '23 new 2 years ago. So thinking about if I should try to trade it in before the 3rd year is up? Or is that covered in the 5 year? I haven't had any major problems, but in 16K miles, I've had to take it to the dealer 4 times. Last one was a check engine light that turned out to be an E-torque issue. I didn't see any problems, but they said it needed a flash update causing the check engine. I pressed for more info, but didn't get much. Just sounds sketchy.