IS IT TIME 5.7 TO GET DROPPED ???

[Farmer Fran]

Isn't the main trick to the 6.4 SRT the blower? I mean anybody can add a blower and get instant hp, at risk of blowing it up.

A paco said it is the 6.2 that has the SC. The 6.4 is not a boost friendly engine for multiple reasons. Compression, ring location, parts etc...

 

[pacofortacos]

It was something, I will see if I can find it. Cannot remember if it was the intake, exhaust, electric steering. It was something prohibitive and they said it was not worth it. My guess is the HC motor was the plan so no need to mess with the 6.4 in a dying powertrain lineup.

It isn't physical, it's the CAFE mpg requirement hit. The 2500 isn't subjected to the CAFE requirements.
But I bet with the etorque, larger battery, 8 speed trans and a 3.21 gear, tune tweaking, it could make cafe numbers that would be needed.

Look how few people opt for the 3.6 now. A decent amount of people would forsake the 5.7 for the 6.4 if it was a reasonably priced option. I definitely would have gone 6.4 w/3.21 or lower vs. my 5.7 w/3.92's. - both 8 speed of course

 

[pacofortacos]

I think the 3.92 tow increase is due to the stronger gears and less stress on the trans due to the steeper ratio.

 

[Farmer Fran]

But now you're moving the goalposts. You said "the SRT 6.4 would make a terrible tow vehicle". It wouldn't, you obviously find the 5.7 sufficient in power so adding more power with the 6.4 by definition cannot be terrible.

I agree that tow rating is such a BS metric. It's why I've saying the 3.92 doesn't get you 3000 pounds extra of towing over the 3.21 even though the spec seems to suggest just that.

But the SRT's HP and torque increase is real. You'll notice that everywhere.

Towing is not all about maximum power, it is about power and efficiency. The 5.7 is hard to beat in both categories towing in the 1500

 

[MikeysCars]

You mentioned the Ford 5.0, before, I had a 2018 Ford F150 and the 5.0 has an oil consumption problem, Fords fix was to change the dipstick and reprogram the PCM, obviously that fix didn't work. They have a class action lawsuit now pending on that engine. I traded that crap in for my 2020 Ram, and I'm very happy with it so far. I know in my case, the 5.0 is crap!

My son bought a 2018 F-150 with the 5.0 and it was crap also. Rattled like a 7.3l diesel and used oil, he traded it at 40,000 miles for a Tundra. Now he's about ready to get back to a Ram!

 

[Jimmy07]

FCA did work on a 6 cylinder forced induction replacement with the project name of "Tornado". Rumor mill was it would be roughly 3 liters and over 500hp. But for whatever reason it was cancelled. I suspect to focus on hybrid powertrains/EVs but that's just a guess.

The straight 6 can't pass the emissions requirements which is the reason the Big Three done away with them.

Both of these statements would seem to be false, seeing as the GME T6 is going into the Wagoneers next year, and in the challengers and chargers for 2024.

 

[HAL9001]

What do you all think ? here is my take on this, I have owned bunch of those hemis over the years and I think the hemi is a good engine but I think Chrysler need to drop it from production the engine is getting old is not that efficient and begin to be underpowered , I would love to see a 4.0 L straight 6 turbo or smaller displacement dual over head cam v8 turbo in our trucks, I dont think this this will happened but I would love to see it in a near future , I think its time, CHRYSLER ARE YOU LISTENING ?

Only a fraction of RAM buyers care to read online forums or technical engine articles. You guys are discussing the technical aspects of these engines because many of you take the time to become well-informed. The average truck buyer may not care so much about the technicalities. So, you also have to carefully consider the marketing of these trucks to the typical buyer.

A typical buyer in 2021/22 still expects a V8 engine offering in a full-size truck. Even if there is a sophisticated 6 cylinder high-output turbo capable of outperforming it, it would be risky marketing-wise for a truck manufacturer to drop a V8 engine option in their full-size truck lineup. Some truck manufacturers can only economically produce so many engine options, so if they have to choose between a high-tech turbo 6 vs a less sophisticated NA V8, marketing will dictate the V8 even with a performance and gas mileage penalty.

Look at Ford. They have considerably deeper R&D pockets than RAM. They currently offer five six-cylinder gas engine options in the F150:
3.3L V6 PFDI NA - 290 hp and 265 lb.-ft. of torque
2.7L V6 EcoBoost Turbo - 400 hp and 410 lb.-ft. of torque
3.5L PowerBoost Full Hybrid V6 - 430 hp and 570 lb.-ft. of torque
3.5L V6 EcoBoost Turbo - 400 hp and 510 lb.-ft. of torque
3.5L V6 EcoBoost Turbo HO - 450 hp and 510 lb.-ft. of torque

So it's quite obvious that they're really trying to convince their customers to consider a 6 cylinder engine. They've even gone so far as to make a turbo 6 the only engine option in some of their top-tier models such as the Tremor, Raptor, and Limited. That's bold.

Four of their 6's offer as much or more performance than their V8. So they certainly have the technology down. Yet they don't dare yet drop their older-tech 5.0-Liter V8 NA option with 400 hp and 410 lb.-ft. of torque. That would be a marketing problem. You can offer all the high-performance 6's you want but you better have that V8 option, at least for now. The day might soon come when V8's will be considered old tech and obsolete especially with powerful, electric motors on the horizon, but we're not quite there yet. Right now, a V8 option is still a must.

So why doesn't RAM just offer the 6.4 V8 on both the 1500 and the 2500?

The 5.7 and 6.4 are manufactured using mostly the same tooling so it's economical enough to produce both. Apart from fleet gas mileage considerations, if RAM offered the 6.4 for the 1500, that would interfere with their sales of the 2500 because convincing buyers to move up to the 2500 requires offering a more powerful engine to entice them. Again, this is a marketing decision, not a technical or practical one.

You always have to consider marketing as well as the technical and practical aspects.

 

[ramffml]

Towing is not all about maximum power, it is about power and efficiency. The 5.7 is hard to beat in both categories towing in the 1500

Power first, mpg second. And both the Ford and gm have more powerful trucks available for towing, us ram owners have nowhere left to go if we want more power. Nobody in those trucks are regretting their purchase (if they truly need it for towing).

I'm not saying the srt is the best possible solution, just that it's a good one; it has the power, and it's a proven drive train in other fca trucks, all they need to do is drop it in.

 

[ramffml]

I think the 3.92 tow increase is due to the stronger gears and less stress on the trans due to the steeper ratio.

Nope, that's not how the standard works. It's all about measured performance; cooling, 0 to 60, stopping power, managing under/oversteer etc.

The zf can easily handle the trx so durability is not an issue.

 

[ramffml]

Only a fraction of RAM buyers care to read online forums or technical engine articles. You guys are discussing the technical aspects of these engines because many of you take the time to become well-informed. The average truck buyer may not care so much about the technicalities. So, you also have to carefully consider the marketing of these trucks to the typical buyer.

A typical buyer in 2021/22 still expects a V8 engine offering in a full-size truck. Even if there is a sophisticated 6 cylinder high-output turbo capable of outperforming it, it would be risky marketing-wise for a truck manufacturer to drop a V8 engine option in their full-size truck lineup. Some truck manufacturers can only economically produce so many engine options, so if they have to choose between a high-tech turbo 6 vs a less sophisticated NA V8, marketing will dictate the V8 even with a performance and gas mileage penalty.

Look at Ford. They have considerably deeper R&D pockets than RAM. They currently offer five six-cylinder gas engine options in the F150:
3.3L V6 PFDI NA - 290 hp and 265 lb.-ft. of torque
2.7L V6 EcoBoost Turbo - 400 hp and 410 lb.-ft. of torque
3.5L PowerBoost Full Hybrid V6 - 430 hp and 570 lb.-ft. of torque
3.5L V6 EcoBoost Turbo - 400 hp and 510 lb.-ft. of torque
3.5L V6 EcoBoost Turbo HO - 450 hp and 510 lb.-ft. of torque

So it's quite obvious that they're really trying to convince their customers to consider a 6 cylinder engine. They've even gone so far as to make a turbo 6 the only engine option in some of their top-tier models such as the Tremor, Raptor, and Limited. That's bold.

Four of their 6's offer as much or more performance than their V8. So they certainly have the technology down. Yet they don't dare yet drop their older-tech 5.0-Liter V8 NA option with 400 hp and 410 lb.-ft. of torque. That would be a marketing problem. You can offer all the high-performance 6's you want but you better have that V8 option, at least for now. The day might soon come when V8's will be considered old tech and obsolete especially with powerful, electric motors on the horizon, but we're not quite there yet. Right now, a V8 option is still a must.

So why doesn't RAM just offer the 6.4 V8 on both the 1500 and the 2500?

The 5.7 and 6.4 are manufactured using mostly the same tooling so it's economical enough to produce both. Apart from fleet gas mileage considerations, if RAM offered the 6.4 for the 1500, that would interfere with their sales of the 2500 because convincing buyers to move up to the 2500 requires offering a more powerful engine to entice them. Again, this is a marketing decision, not a technical or practical one.

You always have to consider marketing as well as the technical and practical aspects.

Well somebody ought to tell their marketing dept that they're losing sales to gm and ford because the 5.7 is too week for them.

Also the srt would make more sense here too with your argument because the bge in the 2500 is clearly the more durable option, so work buyer's would still want the 2500 if the srt was offered in the 1500. I definitely would.

Again, gm and ford have more powerful gas motors available in their half tons than they do as a base engine in their 2500. Ram needs to step up.

This might be my last ram I'd they don't have something better than the 5.7 when I buy next. I don't want to race, but I would love more towing power on the highway and on onramps.

 

[turkeybird56]

It's usually emissions, and fuel efficiency compliance that obsoletes a vehicle engine. Sounds like a turbocharged I-6 is already in the pipeline as a Hemi replacement.

CAFE regulations and emissions just about killing Diesel now. They R being regulated into obsolescence, IMHO. I just cannot imagine getting in a K-w o p p e r (Kenworth for the uninformed), Truck and driving cross country on batteries, guess I am just old.

 

[ramffml]

Also when comparing the wagooneer's MPG with the SRT - EPA says 15 combined, the 6.2 escalade is 1 mpg better at 16, and the lincoln navigator with turbo charged nonsense is 1 mpg better again at 17.

Abysmal MPG is par for the course in heavy, loaded SUV's. The SRT is a bigger engine, not surprised it does 1 mpg worse.

What we really need to compare is the 5.7 MPG in the wagoneer vs the 6.4, but I don't believe the ratings are out yet for the 5.7 in that suv.

 

[Jimmy07]

What we really need to compare is the 5.7 MPG in the wagoneer vs the 6.4, but I don't believe the ratings are out yet for the 5.7 in that suv.

You mean, like this?

 

[zeus2120]

The only thing Ram should be developing is the best possible EV Truck. It's where the future is going and perhaps if they can lock down the EV HD Truck market with a 500+ mile range -- they can take back some market share from Ford that they're inevitably going to lose in the next two years to the Lightning.

 

[Farmer Fran]

You mean, like this?
View attachment 479599
View attachment 479598

LMAO ... look at the price differential. That GW costs as much as my RAM Limited and Scat Pack together!

 

[Octane]

The only thing Ram should be developing is the best possible EV Truck. It's where the future is going and perhaps if they can lock down the EV HD Truck market with a 500+ mile range -- they can take back some market share from Ford that they're inevitably going to lose in the next two years to the Lightning.

Yeah! And maybe we can rejuice the truck at the same time we're on the cellphone and without bursting into flames from fumes.
Maybe we can carry extra batteries in the towed vehicle for more range while traveling.

 

[zeus2120]

Yeah! And maybe we can rejuice the truck at the same time we're on the cellphone and without bursting into flames from fumes.
Maybe we can carry extra batteries in the towed vehicle for more range while traveling.

I don't own an EV and have no plans to. Love my 2014 Big Horn. But...like it or not the change is coming. The Hemi isn't going anywhere. My point to the OP is that batteries will be the only thing replacing the Hemi engine (one day).

 

[HAL9001]

Well somebody ought to tell their marketing dept that they're losing sales to gm and ford because the 5.7 is too week for them.

Also the srt would make more sense here too with your argument because the bge in the 2500 is clearly the more durable option, so work buyer's would still want the 2500 if the srt was offered in the 1500. I definitely would.

Again, gm and ford have more powerful gas motors available in their half tons than they do as a base engine in their 2500. Ram needs to step up.

This might be my last ram I'd they don't have something better than the 5.7 when I buy next. I don't want to race, but I would love more towing power on the highway and on onramps.

RAM is not in the same league as Ford and GM economically. Ford is the fourth largest automaker worldwide and has very deep pockets. GM is next at number 5. Stellantis is distant 9, but that also includes all their many other auto divisions, not just RAM. I'm amazed RAM, with its much more limited budget, competes as well with Ford and GM as they do.

They can probably only economically offer one V8 option for the 1500 (special edition TRX excluded). Given the choices, the 5.7 makes sense. It's a good compromise of power, torque, and efficiency and it doesn't interfere with the 2500 sales. It would be great if they also offered the SRT or the 2500's 6.4, but that's not going to happen. I don't think they could justify it and they would probably lose money doing it. Besides, the marketing team figures that if someone really wants more towing capability, they'll just choose the 2500. They simply can't practically give you all the engine options that Ford or GM can. Look at Ford, their F150 option list is insane.

You can question RAM's marketing strategy, but for a relatively small truck division with limited resources, they're doing incredibly well against the big boys who have far more money to throw around. Car and Driver rates the 2022 RAM 1500 the best full-sized pickup. I can't imagine how much that ****** off Ford and GM with all the massive $$$$ they've invested, while RAM bests them on a much more limited budget.

 

[Dusty]

"It isn't physical, it's the CAFE mpg requirement hit. The 2500 isn't subjected to the CAFE requirements."

I was wondering when someone was going to make this point. Since the 5.7 Eagle engine has been in production, Chrysler has had to buy expensive CAFE points from other manufacturers. Offering a larger engine in a 1500 would only exacerbate the issue.

Regards,
Dusty
2019 Ram 1500 Billet Silver Laramie Quad Cab 2WD, 5.7 Hemi, 8HP75, 3.21 axle, 33 gallon fuel tank, factory dual exhaust, 18” wheels. Build date: 03 June 2018. Now at: 062731 miles.

 

[turkeybird56]

You mean, like this?
View attachment 479599
View attachment 479598

THOSE prices R just friggin ridiculous. HECK, FOR those prices, get a TRX, all IMHO... DANG Grand Wagoneer almost the value of my house and property, last time I looked no wheels unda house, LMAO.