6.4L

[silver billet]

Not every truck buyer cares about getting to the next stoplight. I care about pulling power, and how well an engine can tow a trailer. I don't know much about the Ford engines, but we're not talking Ford here; the 6.4 is a heavy duty engine, the 5.7 is not. Durability is important to me, and the 1500 at 7000 - 8000 pounds would do better with a 6.4 than the 5.7, IMO. Especially for the amount of towing I hope to do.

So basically I just want a bigger/beefier engine, without moving up to a 2500, for several reasons; I don't like the larger 2500 (it's physcially larger, you cannot get a short box), it rides worse, has a worse/smaller cab etc.

 

[jdefoe0424]

I think that gas engine selection is one area where RAM is lacking. I could be wrong here but...Ford has 4/5 options, GM has 4 and RAM only has 2. While the 5.7 is beat by both the 6.2 and 3.5 ecoboost in HP/TQ they still maintain tow performance that is satisfactory for what most sane people do with a 1/2 ton truck.
So in some ways yes, it would be nice if they brought a higher powered option to the RAM. But let's be real, the 5.7 is decently efficient in terms of power/cu in but it seems it is the least efficient in terms of MPG. The next family of engines that goes into the RAM needs to be brought into the 21st century, and I don't mean necessarily with turbos (though that is the speculation) but it could definitely benefit from direct injection and maybe there's some other things the engineers can do.

The upside to all of this is, we are able to get a more upscale interior with a truck that's just as capable for the same price, or less upscale for cheaper, than the competition because the drivetrains have already been paid for and haven't changed in a while.

Not every truck buyer cares about getting to the next stoplight. I care about pulling power, and how well an engine can tow a trailer. I don't know much about the Ford engines, but we're not talking Ford here; the 6.4 is a heavy duty engine, the 5.7 is not. Durability is important to me, and the 1500 at 7000 - 8000 pounds would do better with a 6.4 than the 5.7, IMO. Especially for the amount of towing I hope to do.

So basically I just want a bigger/beefier engine, without moving up to a 2500, for several reasons; I don't like the larger 2500 (it's physcially larger, you cannot get a short box), it rides worse, has a worse/smaller cab etc.

I certainly understand where you're coming from, and it would be nice. 1/2 tons nowadays are more limited by the chassis and desired registration class (GVWR/GCWR etc.) than by the powertrains.
I believe that all engines that are put into 1/2 ton trucks will never match the durability level of an engine in a 3/4+ ton truck, they flat out have different design criteria.

 

[SD Rebel]

I think that gas engine selection is one area where RAM is lacking. I could be wrong here but...Ford has 4/5 options, GM has 4 and RAM only has 2. While the 5.7 is beat by both the 6.2 and 3.5 ecoboost in HP/TQ they still maintain tow performance that is satisfactory for what most sane people do with a 1/2 ton truck.
So in some ways yes, it would be nice if they brought a higher powered option to the RAM. But let's be real, the 5.7 is decently efficient in terms of power/cu in but it seems it is the least efficient in terms of MPG. The next family of engines that goes into the RAM needs to be brought into the 21st century, and I don't mean necessarily with turbos (though that is the speculation) but it could definitely benefit from direct injection and maybe there's some other things the engineers can do.

The upside to all of this is, we are able to get a more upscale interior with a truck that's just as capable for the same price, or less upscale for cheaper, than the competition because the drivetrains have already been paid for and haven't changed in a while.


I certainly understand where you're coming from, and it would be nice. 1/2 tons nowadays are more limited by the chassis and desired registration class (GVWR/GCWR etc.) than by the powertrains.
I believe that all engines that are put into 1/2 ton trucks will never match the durability level of an engine in a 3/4+ ton truck, they flat out have different design criteria.

The next Tundra is going V6 turbo only & likely will have hybrid technology. Ford has been doing V6 turbos in it's most expensive trucks and now has a real hybrid & working on full EV soon. GM has a 4-banger turbo in a full size and will show a plug-in hybrid/electric next month at CES. RAM has a (very mild) "hybrid" in the 3.6L and zero on the horizon except the CEO mentioning they are looking to do hybrid/EV in a few years.

I think FCA is probably a good 2-4 years behind everyone at this point. They will get there, but they are definitely playing catch-up in regards to advanced engine tech. I love my Hemi, but I know it's days are numbered and will miss that old school V8 sound on future products, but looking forward to what they come up with.

 

[Moparian]

Last I heard there is an I-6 turbo gas engine coming that will eventually replace the 5.7. Those plans may have been scrapped or put on hold as I would have expected those to show up in the new Grand Wagoneer/Grand Cherokee L.

 

[SD Rebel]

The new Grand Cherokee has complete carryover powertrain, freaking 10 years in the making and it has shown also no major powertrain updates. They can't keep shoving HC motors into low production models and leaving everything else the same forever.

 

[Fatherof3]

A 225 slant 6 would be an awesome option , those engines couldn’t be killed in my experience anyway.

 

[jdefoe0424]

Yes, it seems like the Wagoneer/Grand Cherokee L would've been the perfect platform to debut the new engines...
We'll just have to wait and see what happens there though. No doubt they're behind, I feel like they always have been in one thing or another...just look at the 3 speeds they still used into the 2000s!

I saw about the yota turbo v6. I've also heard about the line of straight 6 engines to be used in chrysler vehicles.

 

[Nails]

Swap oil pan, front timing cover and send it!!!

 

[V509]

From tfltruck.com: “The big Ram comes with FCA’s tried and true 410 hp 6.4-liter HEMI V8 that makes 429 lbs-feet of torque.”

Our 5.7 hemi is 395 horsepower; 410 lb.ft. of torque so a bit more but not really enough difference unless the 6.4’s torque is generated at a lower rpm. I didn’t research that.

See the article entitled “Chrysler 6.4L Hemi 392 Engine Review” from website motorreviewer.com for a good description and summary of the 6.4.

Those numbers are too similar to worry about any difference, I am sure the fuel economy difference is much more noticeable

 

[silver billet]

Those numbers are too similar to worry about any difference, I am sure the fuel economy difference is much more noticeable

Those are just PEAK numbers. Taken at one specific point in time. HP/Torque ratings are always missinterpreted. The 6.4 is much stronger than the 5.7, even though the peak numbers suggest they are close.

 

[Willwork4truck]

Those are just PEAK numbers. Taken at one specific point in time. HP/Torque ratings are always missinterpreted. The 6.4 is much stronger than the 5.7, even though the peak numbers suggest they are close.

Yep, every maker reports peak, and not so many comment on the available hp/tq at different rpm’s. That’s the diesel advantage, big torque at low rpm’s, as opposed to say the GM 5.3 that liked higher rpm’s to develop its power numbers. A lot of owners don’t like it when the motor is revving above 4000 rpm’s in order to make good power, (the 5.3 typically developed 310 hp at 5200 rpm. Not many of us would be cruising down the highway at that rpm for long).
See www.carthrottle.com, an article from 2017 discussing high rpm designed engines:

Engineering Explained: Why Some Engines Rev High And Their Benefits​