sweet baby jesus!
#21
#22
That would make the diesel's cost-per-mile even worse. And BTW, 13 mpg is 'bout the right average for a Quad Cab Hemi. Anyone claiming significantly better is severely deluded.
#23
#24
Ram is claiming 30 MPG out of the new engine with the truck. They're probably going to mate it with either a 6 speed or the 8 speed
#25
https://dodgeforum.com/articles/2013...this-year.html
Looks to be 8 spd but if the cheroke 2wd is getting 30, I suspect a truck might be 1 or 2 less than that. 4x4 probably closer to 25 than 30. Anyway, it should be at least a couple more than the comparable V6/8spd combo but with way more low end torque. Who knows what real world numbers will be like. With the new EPA regs, the big diesels aren't getting anywhere near what they should so I wouldn't jump on the 30mpg band wagon anytime soon.
Looks to be 8 spd but if the cheroke 2wd is getting 30, I suspect a truck might be 1 or 2 less than that. 4x4 probably closer to 25 than 30. Anyway, it should be at least a couple more than the comparable V6/8spd combo but with way more low end torque. Who knows what real world numbers will be like. With the new EPA regs, the big diesels aren't getting anywhere near what they should so I wouldn't jump on the 30mpg band wagon anytime soon.
#26
Wrong. The diesel will get substantially better than 17, mark my words. Will it get 30? Maybe not, but I bet it gets pretty close
#27
I don't own a diesel (never will - I have no need), but I've been on the forums for a while now. I don't recall anyone demonstrating better than 18-19. Lotsa claims of better from people who rely on the computer to replace simple math, but calculated correctly over time, no vehicle gets what the manufacturer (or the EPA) says it does.
#28
I think Dodge just plain missed the mark seeking MPG out of a half ton truck. The Pentastar might get 25 MPG in a 2WD but has so little torque it can't pull half what a Ford Ecoboost can. Why didn't Dodge turbo the Penastar, then they might have something!
If you never plan to haul much I guess it's an OK thing to go with a V-6. My bud's Ecoboost gets 17-20 MPG and has tons of power. I LOVE the low end grunt it has as we know our HEMi's have very little of that.
At least with a diesel the low end torque would be there and with the help of the aftermarket the pontential for more power without having the bolt on expensive parts. Time will tell. I just wonder how much more $$ vs. gas.
If you never plan to haul much I guess it's an OK thing to go with a V-6. My bud's Ecoboost gets 17-20 MPG and has tons of power. I LOVE the low end grunt it has as we know our HEMi's have very little of that.
At least with a diesel the low end torque would be there and with the help of the aftermarket the pontential for more power without having the bolt on expensive parts. Time will tell. I just wonder how much more $$ vs. gas.
#29
You're believing the hype. Take a look at the "Fuelly" site. The running average is under 16 for the past 8 years.
I don't own a diesel (never will - I have no need), but I've been on the forums for a while now. I don't recall anyone demonstrating better than 18-19. Lotsa claims of better from people who rely on the computer to replace simple math, but calculated correctly over time, no vehicle gets what the manufacturer (or the EPA) says it does.
I don't own a diesel (never will - I have no need), but I've been on the forums for a while now. I don't recall anyone demonstrating better than 18-19. Lotsa claims of better from people who rely on the computer to replace simple math, but calculated correctly over time, no vehicle gets what the manufacturer (or the EPA) says it does.
I'm not buying into any hype, I know exactly what a diesel acts like; show me a gasser in a 1 ton pickup that puts down over 500hp at the tires and still gets 20mpg on the highway, and I'll show you a unicorn.
A smaller engine in a much lighter vehicle, with better gear splits, should get a good deal more than my truck does.