Started By
Message

re: Ram 3.0L diesel

Posted on 6/9/14 at 10:16 am to
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 10:16 am to
I think the opposite is true. Vehicles are lasting much longer than in the past. Seeing a 10 year old truck with 150k+ miles is not uncommon now. People fully expect 100k miles of nothing but oil changes these days and just a few years ago a new motor at 100k wasn't a surprise.
Posted by lsuCJ5
Holly Springs, NC
Member since Nov 2012
962 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 10:23 am to
quote:

But like i said will the truck they build today still be a quality truck down the road. I think they will be only time will tell.


I'll take my gamble on a ford. Dodge has a long history they would have to overcome before I considered on of their products.
Posted by TexasTiger
Katy TX
Member since Sep 2003
5324 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 10:30 am to
quote:

Seeing a 10 year old truck with 150k+ miles is not uncommon now.


Drive train you are right...I am talking more along the lines of all cool little things everybody loves in trucks now a days.

Hell no one has a 10 year old computer in their home.
This post was edited on 6/9/14 at 10:31 am
Posted by jordan21210
Member since Apr 2009
13382 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 11:22 am to
quote:

Drive train you are right...I am talking more along the lines of all cool little things everybody loves in trucks now a days.


x 2

Drive trains are better than ever...it's all the other crap you have to worry about.
Posted by Ice Cream Sammich
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2010
10111 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 12:08 pm to
quote:

half the fuel milage


Oh come on now. The GM 6.2 gets 21 mpg hwy. The 3.0 gets 28 hwy. That's not quite half. Plus, the 6.2 makes 40ftlbs more Tq.

Let's add the huge initial cost of the 3.0, the extra cost of diesel fuel, urea (cheap but still), and high dollar oil changes. Now are you so sure that the diesel is a great deal?

What about the fact that the 3.5 and both 6.2s are rated to tow more weight?
Posted by TexasTiger
Katy TX
Member since Sep 2003
5324 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 12:20 pm to
quote:

Oh come on now. The GM 6.2 gets 21 mpg hwy


Now I am a chevy guy but I haven't heard of a 6.2 getting this kind of mileage....hell the 5.3 doesn't even get that kind of mileage...
Posted by Ice Cream Sammich
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2010
10111 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 12:30 pm to
Unless I am thinking wrong, which is very likely, that's what the new 6.2 is rated for. The new 5.3 is rated at 22 hwy.
Posted by jordan21210
Member since Apr 2009
13382 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 1:44 pm to
quote:

Oh come on now. The GM 6.2 gets 21 mpg hwy. The 3.0 gets 28 hwy. That's not quite half. Plus, the 6.2 makes 40ftlbs more Tq. Let's add the huge initial cost of the 3.0, the extra cost of diesel fuel, urea (cheap but still), and high dollar oil changes. Now are you so sure that the diesel is a great deal? What about the fact that the 3.5 and both 6.2s are rated to tow more weight?


21 out of the 6.2 seems a bit exaggerated, doubt real world will reflect that number. The Ecoboost is rated at 22. Also what does the 6.2 get in the city? Like 10 or 12? The 3.0 diesel is rated at 20 city and 28 hwy, and I've seen some media testers reporting 30 hwy.

Huge initial cost of the 3.0? So you don't think there is a premium to pay on the 6.2 GM or the Ecoboost? Or Fords new ecoboost when it comes out? Or any brand's all new diesel when they go that route? You're comparing a premium engine to other premium engines, so arguing over a premium price for one is a moot point.

The tow rating has more to do with the suspension than it does the motor, you know that. The payloads are close enough to where I don't view that as a huge deal breaker either...if you need to tow any more than 8000-9000 pounds and you are in a half ton, then you bought the wrong truck.

It's funny bc I bet if this exact 3.0 diesel motor was under the hood of a Ford you'd probably be singing it's praises.
This post was edited on 6/9/14 at 1:48 pm
Posted by Ice Cream Sammich
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2010
10111 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 2:01 pm to
I do not remember what my 6.2 cost but I paid it. I know that it was more than the 3.5 which is only a $1300 upgrade. In hindsight, I should have gotten the 3.5.

What is the up charge for the 3.0?

My main objection (I am sorry if I got sidetracked and this was forgotten) is that this diesel engine does not blow away the competition. For the extra price it cost to buy and run, it should be an Ecoboost killer.

I could give two shits about what engine ford runs too. I like power. I got the Ford 6.2 because it was the big boy. Toyota and Nissan are headed in the direction Ram should have with a 5.0 Cummins.

I like diesels in trucks but I think Ram pissed on their toes with the 3.0.

Bickering aside, when is the next Gen Ram coming? I drove a Longhorn the other day but want to see the next Gen ford and ram before pulling the trigger.
Posted by Scrowe
Louisiana
Member since Mar 2010
2926 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 2:12 pm to
quote:

urea (cheap but still)


An all around gigantic pain in the arse. Especially whenever it shuts your vehicle down when you either run out or the sensor goes out.
Posted by Ice Cream Sammich
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2010
10111 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 3:21 pm to
Meh. You're correct but there's more to worry about.

I'd love to see a breakdown of price per mile with diesel fuel included. If it ever breaks even (even being around 20 mpg, that's where the competition is making more power), how long does it take to pay for the upcharge?
Posted by Ice Cream Sammich
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2010
10111 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 5:01 pm to
Bump in hopes that Jordan sees this and knows when the 5th Gen ram is coming.
Posted by jordan21210
Member since Apr 2009
13382 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 5:04 pm to
quote:

What is the up charge for the 3.0?



I will admit, it isn't cheap...but it seems about on par with some other premium motors. I think as of now it's an additional $2000 over the hemi. Demand is strong right now, they can't keep them on the lots...but that is quite a markup. Will be interesting to see if they can sustain sales.

quote:

My main objection (I am sorry if I got sidetracked and this was forgotten) is that this diesel engine does not blow away the competition. For the extra price it cost to buy and run, it should be an Ecoboost killer.



Have to define killer. It makes the same torque, similar tow ratings, better mpgs. Eco may be a tad cheaper initially and in the long run...but an equally equipped Ford also stickers for more than an equally equipped Ram. So some of the premium paid on the 3.0 diesel is diminished due to Ford being a generally more expensive truck. Eco also has more HP...so again, it just depends. May not be a killer, but it's competitive.

quote:

I could give two shits about what engine ford runs too. I like power. I got the Ford 6.2 because it was the big boy. Toyota and Nissan are headed in the direction Ram should have with a 5.0 Cummins.



Neither Toyota or Nissan have a 3/4 ton or 1 ton truck, and both have made it clear they don't want to enter that market. So they can get away with having a powerful 5.0 diesel as an option. Ford, Ram , and GM cannot bc it would cannibalize HD sales.

quote:

I like diesels in trucks but I think Ram pissed on their toes with the 3.0.



They need to get the price down. So far it is a success, only time will tell.

quote:

Bickering aside, when is the next Gen Ram coming? I drove a Longhorn the other day but want to see the next Gen ford and ram before pulling the trigger.



Minor update in 2015 and major update in 2017 according to their 5 year outlook.
Posted by Ice Cream Sammich
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2010
10111 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 5:41 pm to
A 2000 upcharge isn't too bad. Real world dollars will be less. The Ecoboost is only 750 real world money.

Killer is objective. However, a motor that cost more, tows less, cost more to operate, and is slower is not a killer. You keep mentioning better mpg but will not acknowledge the higher cost of diesel. Does the 6-7 mpg pay for the higher fuel cost? What about the oil changes?

The big three will move into larger diesels in the 1/2 ton market. The 3.0 was a soft entry and they will only get bolder from here. The novelty of a big diesel is wearing off and a big diesel in a small truck will be the next fun thing. This is all my opinion and based on zero facts.

I was hoping they did a redesign before then. I love the interior but never fell for the exterior.
Posted by jordan21210
Member since Apr 2009
13382 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 7:31 pm to
quote:

Killer is objective. However, a motor that cost more, tows less, cost more to operate, and is slower is not a killer. You keep mentioning better mpg but will not acknowledge the higher cost of diesel. Does the 6-7 mpg pay for the higher fuel cost? What about the oil changes?


Touché. I honestly have no concrete numbers...I read one publication that said the diesel would save at least $550 annually over the hemi or the ecoboost (can't remember which). I don't have squat to do tonight, so I may try to scrounge up some numbers for the diesel vs my 2011 hemi just for s's & g's, plus I think it'd make for interesting conversation. Just need to get a hold of the ecodiesel maintenance schedule and fluid capacities.
This post was edited on 6/9/14 at 7:32 pm
Posted by Ice Cream Sammich
Baton Rouge
Member since Apr 2010
10111 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 8:28 pm to


Other problem, maybe. How much power can that 8 speed handle? Diesels are fun because they are tunable beyond belief. Can we get another 100HP out of the 3.0 and if so, can the trans contain it?

I would love a medium duty diesel in a 1/2 ton. I want to play in the diesel world but refuse to drive a 3/4 ton daily.
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 10:00 pm to
After driving one, I kinda like the 8 speed.

Fuk that shift dial though
Posted by jordan21210
Member since Apr 2009
13382 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 10:20 pm to
quote:

Other problem, maybe. How much power can that 8 speed handle? Diesels are fun because they are tunable beyond belief. Can we get another 100HP out of the 3.0 and if so, can the trans contain it?



Since Chrysler is now putting the 8 speed behind it's SRT line up, including the new supercharged 6.2 Hellcat, I don't see why not. That's assuming it's the same trans and trans control module though.

So here is a breakdown...tried to be as rational as possible. This is based on an estimated 15,000 miles per year driven and searching prices online and rounding here and there for simplicity. I found an Ecodiesel owners manual...so capacities and intervals should be correct.

National avg. gasoline as of 6/9 = $3.674

I average about 15 mpgs combined city and hwy and have a 32 gal. tank. So my range is 480 miles. Assuming I drive 15,000 miles per year, I'd pump 32 gallons of gas 31.25 times per year.

32 gal. x $3.674/gal. x 31.25 = $3,674.00 in gasoline per year

I change oil and filter every 5000 miles.
7 qts full syn. + filter = $55.00 x 3 = $165.00

Air filter every 10,000 miles = $15.00

So, I figure my 5.7l V8 costs me $3,854 per year.




Now, most articles I've read on the ecodiesel have reported combined city/hwy mileage of 20-23, so I'll just use 21 mpgs.

Assuming the same 32 gal. tank, the same 15,000 miles per year, and a 21 mpg avg you get a range of 672 miles. Which means I'd pump 32 gal. of gas 22.32 times per year.

So, 32 gal. x $3.892/gal. x 22.32 = $2779.82 in diesel per year.

Oil change interval for the 3.0 diesel says not to exceed 10,000 miles...I'll assume 7,500 mile interval just for simplicity. So two changes per year.

10.5 qts full syn + filter = $145.00 x 2 = $290.00

8 qts (2 gal.) DEF x $8.00/gal. = $16.00 x 2 = $32.00

Air filter every 10,000 miles = $30.00

So an Ecodiesel will cost you approx. $3,131.82 per year.

Now, it is definitely worth noting that most of my numbers are approximations based on searching parts on the internet...and obviously you don't fill a tank completely each time you fill up...so the fuel numbers are slightly exaggerated. But it still gives a decent idea as to how much it costs to run a big V8 vs. the smaller diesel. Despite the approximations and estimates, still pretty solid savings. I know there are some holes in my assumptions, so everyone feel free to point them out

ETA: Solid savings, but probably still not quite enough to justify paying a $2000 - $3000 premium for the diesel. Just for fun though, I did go on Ram's website and built a 4x2 Laramie Longhorn Ecodiesel, fully loaded, MSRP came out to $54,000ish IIRC.
This post was edited on 6/9/14 at 10:27 pm
Posted by DownshiftAndFloorIt
Here
Member since Jan 2011
66763 posts
Posted on 6/9/14 at 10:42 pm to
$54k for any truck is stupid. For a 4x2 half ton it's worthy of being put in a home.
Posted by jordan21210
Member since Apr 2009
13382 posts
Posted on 6/10/14 at 6:18 am to
Yep...just the way the market is now though. A fully loaded 4x2 King Ranch cost the same...and I'm sure the Chevy/GM and even the Tundra 1792 (?) is the same.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram