New Ram Quad cab 4x4 with V6...anyone got one???

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: ms21043
lol...In that article C&D wrote: "the 2013 Ram 1500 proved one of the most versatile and trouble-free vehicles we’ve ever subjected to a 40,000-mile evaluation"

In reading the article the impression is that C&D liked the truck. Some on the other hand pick out a jump start and become drama queens.

Next he'll tell you how superior his Fords are. Great brand loyalty.

Anyone who reads C&D will tell you that when you spend 40k miles with dozens of different people whipping the vehicle from coast to coast, it's a TOUGH test! They did extensive towing as well with that little V6.

It's a great truck, despite the Ford fans...

 

[hattaresguy]

All trucks are about the same really.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
All trucks are about the same really.


Indeed, I would agree that they all make nice trucks.

Right now, as someone who will buy one in the next 6 months or so, it's Ford who needs to up their warranty to compare with GM and Dodge, IMO...

 

[SwampSurvivor]

The current generation of Ford F150 has been having a problem where the computer won't shut down the gauge cluster and if it sits for a few days, it will have a dead battery.

I'd get a V6 over a v8 in a pickup. Even for towing my Jeep around, a V6 would do the job.

Probably would get worse mileage than a V8 when towing, but since they usually aren't dedicated to towing, they don't need to be the most powerful thing on the planet.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: ms21043
Some on the other hand pick out a jump start and become drama queens.

Brand new vehicle that can't crank on a typical winter morning?

I could wave this away, by saying it was a fluke battery. Stuff happens. But people generally trade out of vehicles very quick when they decide to randomly not start. I could accept this if the dealer replaced the battery under warranty, but not if this was "typical" expected behavior. Maybe even accept that it was built with an undersized battery, and that the owner would be advised to upgrade if they lived in a cold climate. But why did it need a jumpstart?

I find it kinda ironic that "we" can hate JD Powers, Consumer Reports etc for rating a dislike of MySync, trim falling off and catastrophic engine failure as same in fail points--yet wave away a no-start on a new vehicle.

 

[UNC017]

Magazine truck shared by many drivers. Who knows what got left on or plugged in the full-time power outlet. Not at all likely to be related to the vehicle itself. User or maybe battery. Otherwise it would not have been a one-time problem. And yes, I'd say that even if it were a Tundra and not a Ram.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: ms21043

In reading the article the impression is that C&D liked the truck. Some on the other hand pick out a jump start and become drama queens.

Next he'll tell you how superior his Fords are. Great brand loyalty.


Nope, I'd be yelling same if it were a Ford or a GM or a Toyota. In 2013 there should not be an issue with starting in cold temps. Doesn't surprise me - Chrysler has been building subpar vehicles since, well, forever.

Oh, and Yes I know that the 2013 F150's have issues with dead batteries. It is quite pathetic that Ford cannot or will not find this issue and get it fixed ASAP. It certainly should gain more traction to get them to fix it. That too shouldn't happen in 2013 or 2014.

So yeah I have some brand loyalty but I also have no issues calling them out when they mess up.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

They have been looking into it - have it narrowed down to the gauge cluster. Farther than that ...

They are probably putting people off until the vehicles are out of warranty.

 

[UNC017]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Doesn't surprise me - Chrysler has been building subpar vehicles since, well, forever.


Credibility.... drops to zero.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Doesn't surprise me - Chrysler has been building subpar vehicles since, well, forever.


Credibility.... drops to zero.



They did make a lot of pretty horrible products during the Daimler and Cerberus era. Can't argue that one.

70s, 80s Mopar product, sure! Even early 90s. Mid 90s- late 00s ... Nope.

I'm not quite sure what, exactly, Daimler was doing ... but Cerberus just buys companies, runs them into the ground while taking whatever they can, then spits them out. That's exactly what one would expect Cerberus to do.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Doesn't surprise me - Chrysler has been building subpar vehicles since, well, forever.


Credibility.... drops to zero.


And then some. But at least he's consistent!

 

[UNC017]

Quote:
They did make a lot of pretty horrible products during the Daimler and Cerberus era. Can't argue that one.

70s, 80s Mopar product, sure! Even early 90s. Mid 90s- late 00s ... Nope.

I'm not quite sure what, exactly, Daimler was doing ... but Cerberus just buys companies, runs them into the ground while taking whatever they can, then spits them out. That's exactly what one would expect Cerberus to do.


Exactly. A few bad years here and there every few decades. Just like everyone else. Not "since, well, forever." And even at the worst, there were good products. My 08 Ram was built at the absolute low point, but has been flawless.

Daimler was taking modern CAD methods, cash, and learning to build a good consumer-grade 4x4 for less than M-wagon prices (ref: Jeep engineers packed off to Alabama to fix the abomination that was the first M-class). Once they got that, they spit out the husk.

.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Doesn't surprise me - Chrysler has been building subpar vehicles since, well, forever.


Credibility.... drops to zero.



Says the guy who loves his Chryslers. So your credibility drops to... Zero.... I'm sure the guy that loves Yugos thinks they are all perfect too.

Objectively Chrysler has been making subpar cars for a long, long time. Reliability was not there, styling was OK, but the price was CHEAP!

Sorry, the facts speak that Chrysler should have been gone in the 80's the first time Iacocca was begging the gov't for $$!

Every year we hear how Chrysler will finally get their quality and dependability up. Ever year they are the same bottom of the barrel ratings.

 

[UNC017]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Doesn't surprise me - Chrysler has been building subpar vehicles since, well, forever.


Credibility.... drops to zero.



Says the guy who loves his Chryslers. So your credibility drops to... Zero.... I'm sure the guy that loves Yugos thinks they are all perfect too.



Not at all. I can tell you exactly what years and models have had design and/or QA problems and why I'd never own them. But its not "all of them," they've never been "consistently sub-par." In fact, its not even ANY of them for the last 3 years.

If they were as bad as you say, I certainly wouldn't have put a million miles on them over the years. Its fine if you don't like them... don't buy them just like I don't buy Toyotas. But don't try to pass it off as objective assessment, either.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
A few bad years here and there every few decades. Just like everyone else. Not "since, well, forever." And even at the worst, there were good products. My 08 Ram was built at the absolute low point, but has been flawless.


My car now has just shy of 100k miles. Tires and brakes, one motor mount lost to the 200 passes at Bradenton. Still tight and right, and going to the track this year AGAIN.

Yep, those Chryslers really stink up the place, yes they do.

Those with real car experience know that ALL MFGRS MAKE BAD CARS. Every single one. Buy enough of them and you will get a bad one.

As an example, Google Ford Taurus problems and see the voluminous list of complaints. Heck, pick any brand and you'll still get a long list!

Credibility, what a concept...

 

[supton]

http://www.ramtrucks.com/assets/towing_guide/pdf/2013-RAM.1500.Towing.Specs.pdf see Page 5

Looks like only 3.21: or 3.55:1 rear gears are allowed. For quad cab with 6'4" box, 4x4 model, looks like 6,800lb GVWR. Curb is slightly different between the models SLT/Outdoorsman/Bighorn/Lone Star-Rambox and ST/Tradesman/Express-Rambox, with the latter having 40-50lb better numbers. Roughly 4,000lb max trailer with 3.21's and 5,700lb with 3.55's; GCWR's of 9,500 and 11,200 respectively. Payload of about 1,500lb. Curbs of 5,290.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Car and Driver's long term tester weighed in at 5601 pounds, payload was 1490 and tow rating was a respectable 5700 pounds.

They averaged 17 mpg across 40k miles that included a LOT of towing a car on a trailer. For a 3.55 rear gear, that's pretty darn good.

This test proves that the 8 speed is a real player, significantly improving the Ram...

 

[UNC017]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

This test proves that the 8 speed is a real player, significantly improving the Ram...


On paper, those extra gears should be a HUGE help for the normally aspirated, smallish Pentastar. Ford took the approach of giving a v6 the torque curve of a V8 (Ecoboost), and Chrysler kept the engine normally aspirated and let the gearbox get complicated (8 speeds vs 6).

It'll be interesting to check the relative merits in about 10 years. It could honestly go either way. No question the Ford Ecoboost can actually *do* more- its flat out got a more usable power curve, but then its intended as a true V8 replacement and the Pentastar isn't. On the other hand, the Pentastar is apt to be in its most efficient RPM range more of the time without hauling around two turbos, intercoolers, and plumbing when its not working hard, which for most buyers of that particular drivetrain will be most of the time. I like them both.

 

[hattaresguy]

It all comes back to what you need, modern motors are so powerful today's V6's put out just as much as the v8's of a decade ago.

Unless your doing a lot of towing I really don't see how a 300hp V6 would fall short in any area with a 1/2 ton truck.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: 440Magnum

Not at all. I can tell you exactly what years and models have had design and/or QA problems and why I'd never own them. But its not "all of them," they've never been "consistently sub-par." In fact, its not even ANY of them for the last 3 years.


Really? Where are Chrysler vehicles (Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram) on JD Powers' dependibility survey? Hint: It ain't near the middle....

http://autos.jdpower.com/ratings/2014-Vehicle-Dependability-Study-Press-Release.htm
http://autos.jdpower.com/content/press-release/bTiXte5/2013-u-s-vehicle-dependability-study.htm
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2012/02/jd-power-releases-2012-dependability-study.html
(OUCH on 2012 - the bottom are all Chrysler vehicles!)

Care to continue?

Don't like JD Power? Consumer Reports echos the same!!!

Sorry, Chrysler vehicles have been subpar for years. Some may have great experiences but as a whole they are subpar. You may not like or agree with the results but they are what they are.