It was bound to happen. 1000 ftlbs of the torques!

Keith Tanner said:

logdog said:

Jpbrienp said:

They also did away with the manual transmission....

Not enough people bought them.  The manual had a lower output engine.  The dealer I bought my truck from a few years ago had one that sat and sat looking for a buyer.

My 2010 Cummins is a stick. It was the only one on the lot when I bought it new, IIRC. It was in for service recently and the service advisor was surprised to see it. And yes, even then it was limited to only 600 lbs while the auto had 650. I'm surprised the manuals stuck around this long.

I chose the stick because I didn't like the way the autos shifted and I was concerned about transmission durability. On the highway, the manual does great. Around town, an auto would be preferable just because I occasionally have to abuse the clutch more than I'd like. It's worth noting that if it was a 3500 with a higher load rating, I'd have to get a permit to tow through AZ.

At least with the 6.7s, it's worth looking at dyno charts. The higher peak numbers are clearly just more boosts, so they're stronger up top but the shape of the curve is changing. Mine has never suffered from an inability to do a particular job due to a weedy engine, but who doesn't want more power? Yes, I said power and not torque.

For those that say trucks are expensive - I paid about $42k for mine. According to KBB, it's now worth about $34k. That's some decent resale. 

This is GRM. Stop with the Jalopnik-style brodozer comments or commuting comments. We're better than that. People do indeed use trucks for work. My truck has about 75k on it now, and 80% of that has been with a loaded two-car trailer on the back. Right now, it only has a single car trailer hooked up so it's just loafing around as I do a house remodel.

I paid 44 for mine, 3 years and 50k later kbb says it’s worth 39.  Sticker was 56.  Few non exotic vehicles hold value like a cummins ram.

Keith Tanner said:

logdog said:

Jpbrienp said:

They also did away with the manual transmission....

Not enough people bought them.  The manual had a lower output engine.  The dealer I bought my truck from a few years ago had one that sat and sat looking for a buyer.

 

At least with the 6.7s, it's worth looking at dyno charts. The higher peak numbers are clearly just more boosts, so they're stronger up top but the shape of the curve is changing. Mine has never suffered from an inability to do a particular job due to a weedy engine, but who doesn't want more power? Yes, I said power and not torque.

 

I suspect it’s a simple marketing game and the few extra numbers to put it over 1000 mean precious little.

If you’ve seen TFL Truck on YouTube it’s interesting that when they attach their heavy trailer and time it up their “Ike Gauntlet” (I-70 west of Denver I believe) the truck with the most impressive numbers doesn’t always make the best time.  If I remember correctly, the Duramax won the last pull off with the least impressive numbers of the three.

Well, I didn't want to use the term "dyno queen", but...

The reason we bought our truck new was because, with the fleet discount available to us, it cost the same as a used one with about 30k miles on it. The resale is ridiculous. 9 years and 75k of use and it's lost $8k in value? Nuts. 

1000 ft lbs is neat, but not something that really concerns me.  I'm more saddened by the loss of the manual transmission.  I can understand why, but it doesn't mean I'll like it.  But I also accept being part of the problem since I can't afford to buy one new.  I wish I could as I stumbled across a guy in Oregon who builds custom truck-based RVs which has me thinking about commissioning one based on a Ram 3500 Cummins 6 spd. 

I'm always amazed by the versatility of American pickup trucks. You can get a Ram that is little more than a box with an engine, all the way up to something with enough power to pull a house, and with more luxuries than many homes. It makes complete sense to me why so many people daily these, if they haul loads or not. Few other vehicles are as affordable to the budget minded consumer, yet so customizable for someone who can afford to go all out.

Torque was always limited by everything behind the engine. Damn bean counters.

In reply to Ranger50 :

Yes and no.  When I worked for cummins the rotating assembly was life limited around 750-800... Looks like they've either changed the rotating assembly or just accepted that the million mile unwritten warranty is no longer valid.

Fueled by Caffeine said:

In reply to Ranger50 :

Yes and no.  When I worked for cummins the rotating assembly was life limited around 750-800... Looks like they've either changed the rotating assembly or just accepted that the million mile unwritten warranty is no longer valid.

What timeframe was that? I know they've been testing for this 1000 ft-lbs for several years now and from what I heard (they were pretty hush-hush about it) that they weren't having an issue with getting to that much torque. My buddy worked with the turbo team during some testing and they tested with what was at the time a production turbo and they worked that thing pretty hard over it's 'limits' and it just took the abuse.

Meh. It’s all cool, but it’s still going to get lousy mileage pulling trailers in stock form.

My ‘08 2500 Duramax SRW and my buddies ‘14 RAM 3500 DRW got pretty much the same mileage and his truck had way more power and torque than mine did, and this is pulling equal trailers. Realize too, he had DEF, DPF, and about 3000 extra lbs.

He later got a subtle tune and delete, then he had way better mileage than I ever got. 

I just hope FCA has figured out their QC issues. I talk to a lot of RAM owners in my industry, and I hear a lot about electrical gremlins, turbo issues, and Aisin transmission issues. 

mazdeuce - Seth said:

I'm just as impressed with the twin alternators, tons of usb and 110V outlets, cameras for all the views including a trailer harness which will connect to a camera on the back of the trailer so you can see behind you and tire pressure sensors that will read the truck as well as up to 12 tires on the trailer. If I hauled stuff for money, all of that would be nice. 

My old 02 Silverado dually had the optional factory dual alternators.  It’s definitely a nice option and one I wish my 2013 had.

That's a lot of grunt.

I've moved 20K pounds down the interstate at 75 mph with 295 hp and 395 lb-ft torque. It wasn't straining too hard and that was with a gas engine. 

I have to wonder just how fast they want to cross the top of the next hill. 

In reply to Toyman01 :

I think the idea is to be able to set the cruise at 75 and have it stay there even on the steepest hill in the country.  Preferably without having to rev all the way into the powerband so it doesn't seem like it's working hard. 

Its amazing the power they are getting out of engines these days, kinda alarming that plenty of older sports cars have similiar hp to like....a new accord

rslifkin said:

In reply to Toyman01 :

I think the idea is to be able to set the cruise at 75 and have it stay there even on the steepest hill in the country.  Preferably without having to rev all the way into the powerband so it doesn't seem like it's working hard. 

Problem is the cooling system. You can’t do 75 pulling 20k up a 7% grade in 90 degree weather and keep your engine cool. Even guys with the new diesel trucks have to slow down to 50-55 and drop it into third or fourth gear to keep that fan sucking as much air as possible. 

BTDT 

Toyman01 said:

That's a lot of grunt.

I've moved 20K pounds down the interstate at 75 mph with 295 hp and 395 lb-ft torque. It wasn't straining too hard and that was with a gas engine. 

I have to wonder just how fast they want to cross the top of the next hill. 

Come to Colorado As you climb, your power drops. It's pretty fun.

All I know is I was pulling my s600 from San Diego to Tucson on interstate 8 in my stock 7.3 excursion. The first 45min or so was uphill at about 7% up to 4000ft I believe. My truck would not go over 55mph flooring the pedal lol temps were fine weather was like 55 degrees. There were a few new diesel HD trucks going by me as if it was nothing. 250 horsepower and 525 torques what my truck was rated at 228k miles ago. It tows well but I wonder how nice it be to tow 44 hours round trip in one of those new 3/4 ton trucks with all their features, power, comfort, and quietness.

I for one am glad 1000 torques will be the standard. And you can dd it in comfort with all the bells and whistles. One day I'll live that life lol 

Patrick said:

Keith Tanner said:

 

My 2010 Cummins is a stick. It was the only one on the lot when I bought it new, IIRC. It was in for service recently and the service advisor was surprised to see it. And yes, even then it was limited to only 600 lbs while the auto had 650. I'm surprised the manuals stuck around this long.

I chose the stick because I didn't like the way the autos shifted and I was concerned about transmission durability. On the highway, the manual does great. Around town, an auto would be preferable just because I occasionally have to abuse the clutch more than I'd like. It's worth noting that if it was a 3500 with a higher load rating, I'd have to get a permit to tow through AZ.

At least with the 6.7s, it's worth looking at dyno charts. The higher peak numbers are clearly just more boosts, so they're stronger up top but the shape of the curve is changing. Mine has never suffered from an inability to do a particular job due to a weedy engine, but who doesn't want more power? Yes, I said power and not torque.

For those that say trucks are expensive - I paid about $42k for mine. According to KBB, it's now worth about $34k. That's some decent resale. 

This is GRM. Stop with the Jalopnik-style brodozer comments or commuting comments. We're better than that. People do indeed use trucks for work. My truck has about 75k on it now, and 80% of that has been with a loaded two-car trailer on the back. Right now, it only has a single car trailer hooked up so it's just loafing around as I do a house remodel.

I paid 44 for mine, 3 years and 50k later kbb says it’s worth 39.  Sticker was 56.  Few non exotic vehicles hold value like a cummins ram.

This got me thinking so I took a look at ours.  Going off memory (Im a few hundred miles away from the paperwork) our 2015 had a sticker in the 40ish range and a sale price around 32k.  We special ordered it because nobody had what we wanted (A crew cab, long bed, Tradesman with the 6.4 gasser and no white paint.  We also added the spray in bed liner, the "convenience package" and some side steps). 

I built a 2018 on the website as close as I could (some of the option grouping changed a little bit like the trailer brake is no longer standard) and it looks like the equivalent sticker would be a hair over 44k.  Sounds about the right increase for a few years newer.

So I looked up trade in on KBB.  Using "very good", I got a number in the ballpark of what we paid.  Seems hard to believe. ALMOST makes me what to truck shop and see what the real world offers are. 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I doubt I will ever tow anything in Colorado or any of the Rocky Mountain states, not enough trees for me.

I've towed through a fair amount of the Blue Ridge Mountains with gas and diesels and never really felt the need for more power. Then again, I'm not getting paid by the mile and if it drops 10-15 mph climbing a hill it doesn't bother me.

Ian F said:

1000 ft lbs is neat, but not something that really concerns me.  I'm more saddened by the loss of the manual transmission. 

My first three diesel trucks were manual trans, 2 Ford 7.3s and a Dodge 5.9.  I always preferred a manual for pulling.

My '17 Dodge has the Aisin 6sp auto, and I don't really care to ever have a manual truck for towing again.  It's that good, and the reduction in driver workload means I can go further in a day of driving, or arrive with a lot less fatigue.   

In reply to Rodan :

To put it simply, I do not trust the long-term reliability of modern automatics. Especially ones used by Chrysler.

Toyman01 said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I doubt I will ever tow anything in Colorado or any of the Rocky Mountain states, not enough trees for me.

I've towed through a fair amount of the Blue Ridge Mountains with gas and diesels and never really felt the need for more power. Then again, I'm not getting paid by the mile and if it drops 10-15 mph climbing a hill it doesn't bother me.

Not enough trees? We have lots! You can escape them if you want, though :) Maybe that’s the difference, they’re optional.

And no offense to the Blue Ridge Mountains, but that’s the altitude at which I start climbing. Altitude power loss is a real thing here, and turbos are the solution. I’ve also towed a one-car trailer from Colorado to Newfoundland and back as well as the same trip with my diesel and a two car, and that gas truck was working a lot harder to do it. Even a modern Tundra from GJ to Vegas (which includes a lot of high altitude running and climbing) felt far more stressed than my diesel on the same route. At the end of the day, you arrive more rested. 

I don’t get paid by the hour, but I do have to follow HOS rules and if I can’t cover distance, I can’t get where I’m going.  

For bombing around town and towing occasionally, the gas trucks get the job done. For mostly working hard with the occasional day off, you want the turbo diesel. Horses for courses. 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

It's all about the proper tool for the job. We just don't need the same tool. 

Since this is GRM, and we care about the technicals, I read that in order to get the block strong enough to withstand the output they were gunning for, they switched to compacted graphite iron.  This not only gave greater strength, but dropped something like 60 lbs from the block.  As always, it's the metallurgy that's the unsung hero here.

Some folks here have mentioned the hp/ torque curves.  I was talking with someone the other day about my tow pig- a K3500 with the old non-Vortec 454.  It's rated around 230HP/ 390 lb-ft.  Pretty mundane for over 7 liters of N/A displacement.  A modern 5-ish liter mill can put down those sorts of numbers easily.  But, the 454 makes all that torque at 1800 RPM, and the power at roughly 3000 RPM.  Those are diesel-like curves.  And it drives like a diesel.  More importantly, it tows like a diesel.  Sure, it gets 10-11 mpg, but gas is also cheaper than diesel. 

It's not all about who has the biggest number.  

I also read the Cummins pushes about 33 psi of boost to make that number.  How the rings, bearings, head fasteners, etc. deal with that over the lifetime of the engine will be interesting.  Curious what the real world fuel consumption of the thing will be, too.  

Finally...despite what the HP/TQ numbers are saying, it seems like we're still very much in the "malaise" era for diesels.  Obviously not because of the power, but in my industry, where we're just switching to high pressure common rail diesels, with DEF, SCR, and all that entails, reliability is a big question mark.  

Ian F said:

1000 ft lbs is neat, but not something that really concerns me.  I'm more saddened by the loss of the manual transmission.  I can understand why, but it doesn't mean I'll like it.  But I also accept being part of the problem since I can't afford to buy one new.  I wish I could as I stumbled across a guy in Oregon who builds custom truck-based RVs which has me thinking about commissioning one based on a Ram 3500 Cummins 6 spd. 

In Oregon?  What's the shop name?  I know of a guy on NorCal who does it. I'd be interested to know who you're talking about. 

In reply to volvoclearinghouse :

The HP / torque curve thing is an interesting one for towing.  HP is what really matters for getting up a hill at speed, but a wide curve is good for not needing a ton of gears to stay in the powerband and lots of low end power is good for not needing to rev the crap out of it (which isn't really a problem but can make the drive seem more stressful).