Quote:

Originally Posted by CMA

My 2007 Hemi QC (1500) is in the body shop due to hitting a deer.

The 4th does not sit lower, same ground clearance. Keeping in mind if you have 20s on your 07 and was driving a 09 with 17s that would not be the case. It is the cab which is shorter, but not 3". Just over 1". I had 2 3rds, my 05 Hemi and the SRT. I took measurements from my SRT and could see the cab size difference. The other thing you note is the drivers seat has several adjustments, including up and down. If the seat is up (for shorter people) the height of the roof would seem even less, crank it down and you can have that 10" gap you are use to (Minus a little over 1").

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMA

*Interior Layout: The new truck uses better materials, but the dash is more "car like", is rounded and not as bold. I like the 2007 layout better, but the 2009's materials are nicer. Truck doesnt add any features, just strangely relocates the controls for various things. Puts radio controls on steering wheel instead of cruise. Puts rear sliding window on overhead instead of center console. Stock radio looks much nicer than odd shaped 3rd gen radio, but not quite as nice as nav system in laramie trim installed in my truck.

The interior does offer several things the 3rd Gen does not. You would need to compare like models. The controls on the wheel where the cruise was is NOT radio. That is still on the back where yours are. The front ones are for the EVIC (Electronic Vehicle Information Center). This is one of the things that the 4th Gen has that the 3rd does not, hense the confusion. Yes, I know, you have a compass/temp, gas and DTE on the roof, but the EVIC has many more features than that, which is why those controls are there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMA

*Looks: I think the 3rd gen RAM wins hands down. The front is smaller, less bold. Overall design has a squarish look and trades the ram signature looks, the bulging lines, for something that looks a bit like a silverado. The squarish roof, while no doubt better in the wind tunnel, does not look as nice.

Looks are all subjective. I find the front more bold with the angled grill. I would agree the sides are less bold. The rear, the 4th stands out with the intregrated wing and optional dual exhaust.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMA

*Engine: Cant compare. This truck has the base engine. Feels strong, but does not have as much torque and shifts more frequently. Wouldnt want to tow anything big with this motor.

Comparing your Hemi to the 4.7 in a 09, yea, I would agree it would not feel as good. Comparing the Hemi to Hemi, that is a different story. I had a Hemi in my 05, it does not compare to the 09. The power as well as the MPG is much improved over my old 05. I am comparing two VERY similar trucks. Both were RC, both had/have 3.92 gears. The MPG improvement is a result of the Hemi improvement, the body changes (not just the roof but look at the lack of gaps on the truck) and MDS, which the 05 did not have. The 09 has the same tranny as the 3rd Gen. My 3rd never did this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ5XE5A9ad8


Obviously all the above that I noted are things I like about the 4th. What do I not like? Do not like the extra indent on each spoke of the 20" clads. Do not like the lack of a coin holder on a center console equiped truck (that was a funny over look, I am sure 10 will have it). I put the grill in the like and not like category, why? I like the looks and the fact it is solid. I miss it going up with the hood, makes it easier to work on it. EVIC can not be adjusted to show MPG and DTE at the same time.

 

Only if you have the fancy seats. The normal seats only have forward/back and recline adjustments.

 

The five link rear coil spring setup is actually far superior to the more traditional leaf spring setup for numerous resons.

Axle Locating - The links in the coil spring setup, particularly the panhard bar, has the sole purpose of keeping the axle centered and square. The leaf spring setup often does not any kind of panhard bar so the spring are pulling double duty in maintaining the location of the axle.

Axle wrap - Again, the links are specifically designed to minimize the amount of axle wrap that occurs. This prevents wheel hop from occuring while under a load, especially over loose terrain. Leaf springs have trouble preventing this because the purpose of the spring (any spring for that matter) is to deform under a load, even if that load is a radial torque about the axle that cause spring wrap and wheel hop.

Binding - The coil spring allows for a much more natural arc motion through loading and unloading the springs. Also the heim joint/ bushings provide less friction during axle movement allowing for a smoother, quicker axle motion. LEaf spring have inherently more friction during axle travel which is the largest contributor to that uneven and less precise feeling, especailly over rough terrain, that most people would call "riding like a truck."

Loading (Towing ability) - This is probably the big area that most people think of when they discount the idea of using a coil-link setup on trucks. Well the coil spring setup is actually superior. The amount of weight either setup can handle is relative. In either setup you can just use a beefier spring to decrease sagging during loading (i.e. Semi-trucks have been using coil spring setups for decades). What makes the coil setup superior is the predictability of the axle motion during cycling. The motions of the axle are fully defined and restrained by the links. This means no axle hop, no squirrely rear end over unusual terrain, and much better trailer control. The better trailor control is because there is less side to side motion of the truck relative to the axle (and by extension the trailor) due to the highly controlled motions of the axle.

Weight - Because the leaf spring have so many duties to perform they must be made especially beefy. The coil-link setup in contrast is lighter because its components are specialized. In the '09 i believe the wieght saving are approximetaly 20-30 lbs.

In all the coil-link setup is far superior to the leaf spring, except in the area of simplicity (although the coil link setup is still fairly simple). The coil-links simply outperform leafs in pretty much every category truck owners are looking for in a good suspension system.

 

[QUOTE=SubRammer;1757815]The five link rear coil spring setup is actually far superior to the more traditional leaf spring setup for numerous resons.



Couldnt agree with you more, my 09 out handles and out tows my 04 hands down.

 

I also have a 2003 SLT Quad Hemi 4X2 with 20" wheels and my 2009 is a lot taller to get into and the roof is maybe 1' taller overall. It is a closer fit in the already tight garage door. The entry is so much taller that I will be putting on step bars very soon. The 2009 blows the doors off the 2003 which was no slouch. I will likely run my 2009 at the Mopar Nationals this upcoming weekend.

The 2009 does ride better, but handles much more poorly. The 2003 rails corners that leaves the 2009 far behind. Some of this may be the tires, both had Goodyear tires but the 2009 has the Wrangler tires and while I got 70,000 miles out of the Eagle LS on the 2003 the Wranglers will likely not get much past 30,000. I am kind of thankful for that. Them tires start whining when they see the corner coming!

The 2009 feels much more refined and is more comfortable to drive. But if I have to get somewhere in a hurry and the road is twisty I am taking the 2003.

That's my $0.02 worth.

 

The quad cab on the 4th gens seem smaller than the 3rd but if you're worrying about cab size you would be looking at a crew cab anyway which is much larger than your 3rd gen QC. I'm 6'9" 230 lbs, far from a small guy, and i fit great in my CC front or back seats. This was a big selling point for me. I get alot of remarks on how much room is in the truck as most my friends are over 6'.

Side by side the body of the 4th gen looks larger to me and i've seen measurements on here that seem to support this. Not to mention there's people on here getting over 20mpg on their Hemi.... Now thats an accomplishment

 

Ride height was my biggest complaint too. i liked how dodge used to sit higher than the competition off the line. now ford holds that title hands down

 

Hate to say it but CMA in my view = Troll or at least his post has Troll written all over it.

 

The 3rd gen styling was pretty awesome when it launched. I absolutely hated the 'bug eyes' look they went with when they changed the headlamps to look more like the Durango (or Dur-ugly-o as some people call it). I think the 4th gen styling wins hands down no matter what 3rd gen design you compare it to.

 

Well, i'm not sure what CMA was expecting coming into a 4th gen forum and saying the 3rd gen is better. But obviously looks aside the design is better and its safer, which exactly what usually happens when a newer model is released. Now back to looks, and I say looks aside because this is going to vary but, in my opinion the 4th gen looks much better, which is why I bought one. I think many people here are previous 3rd gen owners (myself) included and it seems most prefer the 4th gen by far, otherwise I would have bought a left over 3rd for next to nothing. In addition CMA is comparing two different trim level trucks, does that even make sense. I test drove a 4.7 and 5.7 and the smoothness and power is night and day. Now I went with the 4.7 because of $$ and since I don't tow i can live without a Hemi. As far as the interior goes there is no competition between the two.