5.7 e-torque or regular hemi?

[Twoamen]

Regular.

 

[JJRamTX]

I love my e-Torque and have over 17,000 Miles now on the truck. I would say it has probably given me a boost of 1.4-1.6 MPG just by itself so it is well worth it and even more benefits as fuel prices have been creeping up over the past few months. Also there is not a starter to replace so it isn't all just added parts that could break since it removes one....

 

[Willwork4truck]

I love my e-Torque and have over 17,000 Miles now on the truck. I would say it has probably given me a boost of 1.4-1.6 MPG just by itself so it is well worth it and even more benefits as fuel prices have been creeping up over the past few months. Also there is not an alternator to replace so it isn't all just added parts that could break since it removes one....

Glad you like it, I dont really have an axe to grind in this (well someone thinks so). If you bought it for a specific reason and are happy then thats just fine. Same as other options, people want them and defend their choices. I’m certainly not but hurt over the issue. I hope that the mild hybrid gives everyone a million miles of trouble-free service and a 5 mpg increase. Great advertising for RAM.

 

[Raylan GIvens]

Ok, “I don’t like it”.
Time will tell, I’m basing my opinion on the many threads that discussed problems and poor mileage. All those buyers didn’t seem thrilled. I’m also not thinking that my opinions are “invalid”, they are as valid as yours. Its a fact that it is an expensive system that few other than a dealer could repair. It gives marginal returns. Its costly. Its primary benefit was stated to be towing with a small mpg. Buyers, especially the Pentstar ones, are forced to get it. For a while it seemed that dealers were stocking them with the hemi, hoping the public would buy. Was it pressure from FCA just like Ford has been force-feeding the ecoboost onto their dealers? Is it just a CAFE ploy, or sound marketing. Being that the chairman of FCA didn’t call me to consult about it, I only know what I read here on the forum about owners experiences.

I could care less, I don’t have one and avoided them. If you or anyone else likes it, great. Hope the extended warranty takes good care of it.

I have not once seen it advertised as an option for towing, in fact the extra weight reduces the towing and payload. The poor mileage is across the board for the hemi, so it is not strictly on the eTorque. Its primary benefit was the 2 mpg combined over the standard hemi. None of that is opinion and I have fully acknowledged the potential repair cost. The only widespread complaints so far have been the inability to hit the fuel economy numbers on the sticker, which is most likely because Ram certified a base model with 3.21 gearing. Obviously the fully loaded Rebel with 3.92 is going to get a few mpg less.

 

[SpeedyV]

...I’m basing my opinion on the many threads that discussed problems and poor mileage.

Hold on, there. You said you could care less, but you’ve provided a strong opinion of your own. Please point us to the “many threads” on eTorque problems. There have been a FEW reported problems - definitely not “many”.

There are several threads and MANY posts about fuel economy missing expectations, both with and without eTorque. It would be fair to say that when it comes to mileage, eTorque isn’t the problem...but it may not necessarily be the solution, either So many factors come into play, as has been discussed exhaustively on the aforementioned threads.

I was one of the earliest members here, and I still check the new posts daily. Opinions are fine, and I appreciate the concerns that have been expressed. But let’s not position our opinions as fact.

For the record, I ordered my truck with eTorque last year, and I think it’s great. But I also purchased a lifetime warranty, as I felt I was “asking for it” with a loaded 1st-year truck. I guess you could say I’m hedging my bets.

 

[Willwork4truck]

Hold on, there. You said you could care less, but you’ve provided a strong opinion of your own. Please point us to the “many threads” on eTorque problems. There have been a FEW reported problems - definitely not “many”.

There are several threads and MANY posts about fuel economy missing expectations, both with and without eTorque. It would be fair to say that when it comes to mileage, eTorque isn’t the problem...but it may not necessarily be the solution, either So many factors come into play, as has been discussed exhaustively on the aforementioned threads.

I was one of the earliest members here, and I still check the new posts daily. Opinions are fine, and I appreciate the concerns that have been expressed. But let’s not position our opinions as fact.

For the record, I ordered my truck with eTorque last year, and I think it’s great. But I also purchased a lifetime warranty, as I felt I was “asking for it” with a loaded 1st-year truck. I guess you could say I’m hedging my bets.

I totally agree on hybrid technology, I have a 2011 Prius, bought new. GM tried a hybrid truck and it didn’t sell well. I’d much rather have seen FCA be a real groundbreaker and put a better designed and more aggressive hybrid in the truck. Perhaps they were asking too much for a total redesign to also come up with a stong hybrid. Look at the time and testing Ford went through for the ecoboost and they still had lots of growing pains.

I say it again, I don’t wish FCA any bad press over the etorque, nor do I want a single member to suffer for having bought one. I just am not thinking that it produces much of a benefit for its cost, complexity and probable/eventual 48V battery replacement cost. Its true there’s no alternator but then they don’t fail very often.

How about this. Its like arguing gas vs diesel. Both sides have their pros and their cons. Neither side will admit to much other than their own powertrain’s superiority. And with diesel, last I checked in the 2500 series, Cummins was a $9700 option so they have a lot more skin in the game than a measly $1400 over a standard hemi.

If you like it great. I was looking at trucks around the December-January timeframe and back then it seemed like all the higher trims I saw were E Torque. At first the technology sounded good but then I started reading forum posts, here and on another Ram forum, where people were not getting the claimed mpg’s and were having some random component failures. So I backed off.

Since I’m not invested in defending the ownership of one, and having survived the many ecoboost vs V8 wars on the F150 forums, I’ll just pass on further giving of my thoughts.

You win, E Torque is the greatest innovation since sliced bread and any doubters should be banned. No reason to offer an opposing view and be argumentative.
I’m out of this thread. Long live E Torque.

 

[SpeedyV]

I totally agree on hybrid technology, I have a 2011 Prius, bought new. GM tried a hybrid truck and it didn’t sell well. I’d much rather have seen FCA be a real groundbreaker and put a better designed and more aggressive hybrid in the truck. Perhaps they were asking too much for a total redesign to also come up with a stong hybrid. Look at the time and testing Ford went through for the ecoboost and they still had lots of growing pains.

I say it again, I don’t wish FCA any bad press over the etorque, nor do I want a single member to suffer for having bought one. I just am not thinking that it produces much of a benefit for its cost, complexity and probable/eventual 48V battery replacement cost. Its true there’s no alternator but then they don’t fail very often.

How about this. Its like arguing gas vs diesel. Both sides have their pros and their cons. Neither side will admit to much other than their own powertrain’s superiority. And with diesel, last I checked in the 2500 series, Cummins was a $9700 option so they have a lot more skin in the game than a measly $1400 over a standard hemi.

If you like it great. I was looking at trucks around the December-January timeframe and back then it seemed like all the higher trims I saw were E Torque. At first the technology sounded good but then I started reading forum posts, here and on another Ram forum, where people were not getting the claimed mpg’s and were having some random component failures. So I backed off.

Since I’m not invested in defending the ownership of one, and having survived the many ecoboost vs V8 wars on the F150 forums, I’ll just pass on further giving of my thoughts.

You win, E Torque is the greatest innovation since sliced bread and any doubters should be banned. No reason to offer an opposing view and be argumentative.
I’m out of this thread. Long live E Torque.

Well, shoot...I was agreeing with you until those last two paragraphs. So I’ll ignore those and say thanks for your perspective.

 

[JJRamTX]

I have not once seen it advertised as an option for towing, in fact the extra weight reduces the towing and payload. The poor mileage is across the board for the hemi, so it is not strictly on the eTorque. Its primary benefit was the 2 mpg combined over the standard hemi. None of that is opinion and I have fully acknowledged the potential repair cost. The only widespread complaints so far have been the inability to hit the fuel economy numbers on the sticker, which is most likely because Ram certified a base model with 3.21 gearing. Obviously the fully loaded Rebel with 3.92 is going to get a few mpg less.

The reason I think it has been referenced for assisting with towing is because of the increase of Torque off the line at low RPMs. I notice that when I am pulling about 7,000 lbs it gets the truck and trailer rolling much quicker up to speed than my non-etorque 3.92 Hemi did.

 

[Billy James]

These are the kinds of questions where everyone speaks up and tries to defend their position. I have a 3.92, no etorque, 5.7. I tow a boat, I tow some other trailers, I drive in start and stop traffic every day, I do a little easy off road every now and then....but mostly I just drive and enjoy the comfort of my truck. My average MPG is around 16.5. On the highway with a tail wind I can get as high as 19.8; headwind as low as 17. I like my truck and enjoy driving it. I never thought about e torque because I found a truck with my must have options and bought it (it just didn't happen to have e torque). The only thing that I don't have but wish I had is a 33 gallon fuel tank. My truck is comfortable, has plenty or power, handles well, tows well, looks good, and suits me just fine. I have learned how to drive my truck in a manner which optimizes MDS; so I'm satisfied with fuel economy. It is a big, heavy truck afterall. When I worry about fuel consumption I drive my wife's Malibu and get 36 MPG city and 42 MPG highway.....but its not as nice or fun to drive as my RAM.

 

[RedRocketZ28]

The reason I think it has been referenced for assisting with towing is because of the increase of Torque off the line at low RPMs. I notice that when I am pulling about 7,000 lbs it gets the truck and trailer rolling much quicker up to speed than my non-etorque 3.92 Hemi did.

Your old 2007 Ram had less HP/TQ and wasn't an 8-speed either. You can't compare MPG or how it tows to your 2019.

 

[JJRamTX]

Your old 2007 Ram had less HP/TQ and wasn't an 8-speed either. You can't compare MPG or how it tows to your 2019.

I would completely disagree. The whole point is to compare this truck to it's predecessors and competitors to see how much improvement or contrast there is. Otherwise your logic says you can't compare a Ram to any other vehicle except one with the same engine, tranny, weight, frame, gears, tires and wheels, gearing and options.

 

[RedRocketZ28]

I would completely disagree. The whole point is to compare this truck to it's predecessors and competitors to see how much improvement or contrast there is. Otherwise your logic says you can't compare a Ram to any other vehicle except one with the same engine, tranny, weight, frame, gears, tires and wheels, gearing and options.

You're trying to say that the E-torque helps your new truck achieve 1.4-1.6 more mpg and helps accelerate faster than your old truck. Well no kidding, it should achieve better mpg figures and accelerate faster as it's 12 years newer with more HP/TQ and a much better transmission. Not a fair comparison at all.

Also, this thread is comparing the current 5th gen Hemi with E-torque to one without E-torque.

 

[Raylan GIvens]

The reason I think it has been referenced for assisting with towing is because of the increase of Torque off the line at low RPMs. I notice that when I am pulling about 7,000 lbs it gets the truck and trailer rolling much quicker up to speed than my non-etorque 3.92 Hemi did.

The ETorque doesn't really provide more torque. It starts on electric power and quickly switches to the gas engine. It makes your gas engine do less work, which is why there is a fuel savings. It probably makes towing a little smoother on take off, I would have to tow with both to validate that assumption.

 

[DraKhen99]

The ETorque doesn't really provide more torque. It starts on electric power and quickly switches to the gas engine. It makes your gas engine do less work, which is why there is a fuel savings. It probably makes towing a little smoother on take off, I would have to tow with both to validate that assumption.

You're right, eTorque doesn't provide MORE torque, adding torque to the peak power figures of the truck, but it DOES fill in torque at low RPMs when the gas engine doesn't make much torque. It's mostly semantics at this point, but by making it so the gas engine doesn't have to work so hard, it adds torque... just filling in, not adding to the peak figures.

You're right though, the fuel savings comes from auto stop/start and the electric assist at low gas engine RPMs.

-John

 

[JJRamTX]

You're trying to say that the E-torque helps your new truck achieve 1.4-1.6 more mpg and helps accelerate faster than your old truck. Well no kidding, it should achieve better mpg figures and accelerate faster as it's 12 years newer with more HP/TQ and a much better transmission. Not a fair comparison at all.

Also, this thread is comparing the current 5th gen Hemi with E-torque to one without E-torque.

I stand coreccted as this thread is about 2019 Rams with or without e-Torque. You are correct.

 

[RedRocketZ28]

I stand coreccted as this thread is about 2019 Rams with or without e-Torque. You are correct.

No worries!

 

[DraKhen99]

I stand coreccted as this thread is about 2019 Rams with or without e-Torque. You are correct.

No no no! You simply CANNOT admit a mistake and expect everyone to move on! We have to belabor this issue ad nauseum, until a moderator steps in and threatens using his or her ban hammer!

J/K, this forum is a breath of fresh air compared to a lot of the other forums I'm on.

-John

 

[Slashhero]

I'm a little late to the game here, but would like to give my opinion - don't get eTorque. There are some things I do like, but the negative things aren't worth the benifit.

I have the 5.7 eTorque and I wish I didn't... I didn't have a 'choice' if you will. My truck had a $46,000 sticker price and I got it for $36,000, over 10k off sticker price - it was an ad truck, meaning they only had one for that price, take it or leave it... For the price it's a steal, happy with the truck overall, but if I had the money to pay full price, I'd choose no eTorque.

The biggest reason why I don't like eTorque is the regenerative braking. When you brake the truck starts generating electricity to recharge the battery, so most of the braking under 'light braking' is done by the system generating electricity. However, each time the truck downshifts the RPMs increase and the amount of regenerative braking increases, so it surges to a stop - similar to stopping a vehicle with a manual trasmission using only the gears. I like slow smooth stops, I like the stopping rate to be proportional to how hard I press the brake pedal - it's not with eTorque and it DRIVES ME NUTS!

The second thing I dislike is the extra torque when starting out - bear with me here... Because of the extra torque off the line (and my 3.92 ratio), if you even look at the gas pedal the truck jumps leaps forward SOME of the time, but not all of the time...

Annoyingly these problems are inconsistant... When the truck is cold it's a bear to drive, bad surging when stopping and massive leaps off the line. However once the truck (and the drive train) are warmed up, it's not too bad - though it takes 4-5 miles to warm up (35-45 miles per hour).

However, There are some good things!

First is MPG, one of my trip computers has over 1,400 miles on it and my MPG is 18.1 (preminum fuel from Costco). I'd classify my self as more of a grandma driver than speedy *******, but not by much.

Second is the stop and start, not only for fuel savings, but the noise is fricking awesome! As you probably know, eTorque uses the 48v generator/motor to roll the truck forward, effectivly push starting the truck, instead of cranking it with a starter (which is annoying as hell). When it does this, the truck growls back to life, like a large animal that was resting and you prodded it to get up and start moving.

Third, the low end torque boost makes low RPM acceleration feel more like a diesel than gas.

Sadly, those benifits aren't enough to make up for the annoying surge while braking.

HOWEVER (again), if you're more of a speedy driver, 'all gas pedal all brake pedal' (like my wife...), you won't notice much of a problem. When I need to brake quickly there is little to no braking surge, and if you always jump off the line then you won't notice most of the negative things from eTorque.

I hope I helped.

 

[Raylan GIvens]

I'm a little late to the game here, but would like to give my opinion - don't get eTorque. There are some things I do like, but the negative things aren't worth the benifit.

I have the 5.7 eTorque and I wish I didn't... I didn't have a 'choice' if you will. My truck had a $46,000 sticker price and I got it for $36,000, over 10k off sticker price - it was an ad truck, meaning they only had one for that price, take it or leave it... For the price it's a steal, happy with the truck overall, but if I had the money to pay full price, I'd choose no eTorque.

The biggest reason why I don't like eTorque is the regenerative braking. When you brake the truck starts generating electricity to recharge the battery, so most of the braking under 'light braking' is done by the system generating electricity. However, each time the truck downshifts the RPMs increase and the amount of regenerative braking increases, so it surges to a stop - similar to stopping a vehicle with a manual trasmission using only the gears. I like slow smooth stops, I like the stopping rate to be proportional to how hard I press the brake pedal - it's not with eTorque and it DRIVES ME NUTS!

The second thing I dislike is the extra torque when starting out - bear with me here... Because of the extra torque off the line (and my 3.92 ratio), if you even look at the gas pedal the truck jumps leaps forward SOME of the time, but not all of the time...

Annoyingly these problems are inconsistant... When the truck is cold it's a bear to drive, bad surging when stopping and massive leaps off the line. However once the truck (and the drive train) are warmed up, it's not too bad - though it takes 4-5 miles to warm up (35-45 miles per hour).

However, There are some good things!

First is MPG, one of my trip computers has over 1,400 miles on it and my MPG is 18.1 (preminum fuel from Costco). I'd classify my self as more of a grandma driver than speedy *******, but not by much.

Second is the stop and start, not only for fuel savings, but the noise is fricking awesome! As you probably know, eTorque uses the 48v generator/motor to roll the truck forward, effectivly push starting the truck, instead of cranking it with a starter (which is annoying as hell). When it does this, the truck growls back to life, like a large animal that was resting and you prodded it to get up and start moving.

Third, the low end torque boost makes low RPM acceleration feel more like a diesel than gas.

Sadly, those benifits aren't enough to make up for the annoying surge while braking.

HOWEVER (again), if you're more of a speedy driver, 'all gas pedal all brake pedal' (like my wife...), you won't notice much of a problem. When I need to brake quickly there is little to no braking surge, and if you always jump off the line then you won't notice most of the negative things from eTorque.

I hope I helped.

I don't experience any of the problems you listed.

 

[JJRamTX]

I'm a little late to the game here, but would like to give my opinion - don't get eTorque. There are some things I do like, but the negative things aren't worth the benifit.

I have the 5.7 eTorque and I wish I didn't... I didn't have a 'choice' if you will. My truck had a $46,000 sticker price and I got it for $36,000, over 10k off sticker price - it was an ad truck, meaning they only had one for that price, take it or leave it... For the price it's a steal, happy with the truck overall, but if I had the money to pay full price, I'd choose no eTorque.

The biggest reason why I don't like eTorque is the regenerative braking. When you brake the truck starts generating electricity to recharge the battery, so most of the braking under 'light braking' is done by the system generating electricity. However, each time the truck downshifts the RPMs increase and the amount of regenerative braking increases, so it surges to a stop - similar to stopping a vehicle with a manual trasmission using only the gears. I like slow smooth stops, I like the stopping rate to be proportional to how hard I press the brake pedal - it's not with eTorque and it DRIVES ME NUTS!

The second thing I dislike is the extra torque when starting out - bear with me here... Because of the extra torque off the line (and my 3.92 ratio), if you even look at the gas pedal the truck jumps leaps forward SOME of the time, but not all of the time...

Annoyingly these problems are inconsistant... When the truck is cold it's a bear to drive, bad surging when stopping and massive leaps off the line. However once the truck (and the drive train) are warmed up, it's not too bad - though it takes 4-5 miles to warm up (35-45 miles per hour).

However, There are some good things!

First is MPG, one of my trip computers has over 1,400 miles on it and my MPG is 18.1 (preminum fuel from Costco). I'd classify my self as more of a grandma driver than speedy *******, but not by much.

Second is the stop and start, not only for fuel savings, but the noise is fricking awesome! As you probably know, eTorque uses the 48v generator/motor to roll the truck forward, effectivly push starting the truck, instead of cranking it with a starter (which is annoying as hell). When it does this, the truck growls back to life, like a large animal that was resting and you prodded it to get up and start moving.

Third, the low end torque boost makes low RPM acceleration feel more like a diesel than gas.

Sadly, those benifits aren't enough to make up for the annoying surge while braking.

HOWEVER (again), if you're more of a speedy driver, 'all gas pedal all brake pedal' (like my wife...), you won't notice much of a problem. When I need to brake quickly there is little to no braking surge, and if you always jump off the line then you won't notice most of the negative things from eTorque.

I hope I helped.

I can say that I have only noticed one small bit of what you are saying. When I make a turn at a stop sign, one of my wheels (the inside one to the turn direction) always peels out a little bit due to the Torque increase at a take off. I can almost never get it to stop squealing a small bit in a turn from take off no matter how hard I try due to the increase in 0 RPM torque (130 Ft Lbs). It doesn't do this in a straight line take off unless I turn off the enhanced safety features.