Search results

Promising that we finally see some more on the street. Rear shock mounts seam pretty low, evidence of some high amounts of suspension travel. The rear exhaust resonators are pretty noticeable, almost worse than the 2500 gas. Would need to spray paint those black or remove. Wasn't there an...

I've owned quite a few more vehicles than my sig suggests, including motorcycles. I can say confidently that my 2015 Ram is the first vehicle i've ever purchased that I have not experienced at least some buyers remorse. And i bought used with 100k miles. Absolutely love this truck. And the 5th...

To the OP. Welcome. If you were getting 21.9 combined hand calculated I"m going to assume you have the 2.7 EB. That is about 20% increase over the average 2.7 EB per Fuelly.com. Using that info as a guide you could guestimate that you'll get 20% increase over the 5.7 ram on Fuelly, which would...

Stop the presses.... TFL used 91 for the 6.2 only, and 87 for the Ram and Ford. Post #42 https://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f12/2019-ford-3-5-vs-gmc-6-2-vs-ram-5-7et-most-efficient-towing-truck-america-292285/index3.html That makes the Ram look even better in this comparison, the clear...

2018 trucktrend pickup truck of the year comparison had a 5.0 vs 5.7 if you're interested. I also would opt for the 5.0 if I was to get an F150.

For the 6.2 I believe the book calls for 93 for best performance, but they will all run on 87. If i owned one, I'd run 91. Yes it is funny how puffed up folks get about MPG, when they all pretty much perform within 10% of each other real world. If i was to get 10% better MPG, i would save a...

GMC 6.2 10 speed Max tow package (3.42 gears) = 9.8 on 91 octane Ram 5.7e 8 speed ORG w/ air (392 gears) = 9.2 on 87 octane F150 3.5eb 10 speed (3.31 gears) = 8.7 on 87 octane This is relatively consistent with The Car Guide (canada) results, where the Ram won in towing MPG (possibly due to the...

How quick is very quick? Anything other than the following year would not be "very quick" IMO. So early 2020 release as a 2021 or will we see this before the end of 2019?

http://www.trucktrend.com/truck-reviews/1902-first-drive-2019-ram-heavy-duty/ https://www.motortrend.com/cars/ram/3500/2019/2019-ram-hd-first-test-review/...

Welcome to the forum. I would encourage you to read the etorque operating parameters so you can better understand what and when FE improvements can be expected from the system. In common real world scenarios, no more than 10% improvement should be expected IMO despite the 13% city improvement...

It is normal for eco to turn off with very slight throttle when traveling over 55. Especially with even minor cross winds or head winds. At 65, with 0 wind, my eco doesn't turn on unless going flat or downhill. I typically drive with MDS/eco disabled though, because i hate how it sounds/feels...

I actually think most people report a higher number than they are actually getting, due to going off the computer instead of hand calculating. That said, I agree there are a few real world results showing Ram 5.7 4wd is capable of 20+ MPG so it is possible. Would be hard with a rebel. I also...

https://www.motortrend.com/news/ford-investigating-possible-issue-fuel-economy-testing/ Ford is reportedly reviewing how it calculates "road load" which is apparently derived from coastdown testing. This is important because that calculation would directly be used during the dynamometer MPG...

The supplemental test is not part of the highway rating apparently: You can see the 10 mile distance corresponds with the distance in the EPA Highway Fuel Economy Test chart EDIT: Apparently EPA hasn't properly updated part of their site. This link provides different information on how they...

Right...that's a supplemental driving schedule. That is not the test schedule they use to create the highway EPA number. The one i provided, is titled Highway Fuel Economy Test. The US06 is also an average speed of 48, with vastly varying speeds, so etorque would have a slight positive impact...

Not according to this, unless their site is out of date: https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-fuel-emissions-testing/dynamometer-drive-schedules

Reference post #568. Speeds are varied in the EPA test, avg speed is 48, max speed is 60. EPA hwy rating only goes up by 1 MPG, which in reality may only be a few tenths difference with rounding involved.

I believe TFL was trying to "duplicate" the C&D test (which was at 75 MPG i think with some wind) because it resulted in some negative press for GM, so they wanted to see how the new 2.7 would do on their loop. The fact that they included a Rebel on the same test was optics, since the trucks are...

But it does say otherwise on the sticker. "Actual results will vary for many reasons". TFL is among my favorite truck publications. I think you guys do great work. In this instance, my opinion would be that simply stating some facts of why the Rebel returns lower MPG than the EPA rating would...

You may want to become more familiar with the content of your videos At about 4:24 speaker mentions lack of asterisk....as if there should be one...and since there is not....ram is misleading customers. I never said the sticker is wrong, I am saying the rating on the sticker of your rebel...