2019 Ram WHAT? - Page 3

2019 Ram WHAT?

This is a discussion on 2019 Ram WHAT? within the F150 Ecoboost vs The Competition forums, part of the F150 Ecoboost Forum category; Iíve always thought of Ram trucks as the cheap skate way for a wanna be to get into a truck. Old motors, cheap metal, plastic ...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
Like Tree4Likes

Thread: 2019 Ram WHAT?

  1. #21
    Ecoboost Sr Member adkhunter1590's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    51
    Member #
    17945
    Liked
    12 times
    Iíve always thought of Ram trucks as the cheap skate way for a wanna be to get into a truck. Old motors, cheap metal, plastic interiors and for Godís sake, who the hell thought rear coil springs were a good idea!? Ya sure the ride is smooth but if I canít haul a ton of cargo, itís not a truck anymore!

  2. #22
    Ecoboost Regular gregsfc's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Cookeville, TN
    Posts
    125
    Member #
    13505
    Liked
    41 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Lambo View Post
    It's simply a matter of economics. Chrysler has been struggling to stay in business for decades, Jeep/Ram have been the only profit center for more than a decade. And Jeep/Ram have been on the auction block almost as long. They simply cannot pour a billion or two into R&D every 3-4 years to keep abreast of GM and Ford. That means focusing on your target market and keeping them coming back. Ram buyers frequently don't look at other brands, they like their trucks, from the huge chrome front end to the whole "Hemi" thing. Their closer competition is Toyota and Nissan, not Ford and Chevy/GMC. And I just don't see any viable buyers of Jeep/Ram, I think it's more likely that Chrysler folds it's auto divisions and tries to soldier on as a truck/SUV brand only. Car and Driver has recently done an excellent article on what an albatross Jeep has been over the past 50 years. Jeep has driven every company that bought it into bankruptcy.
    I don't disagree with those statements in general, but as for Ram trucks, I don't agree that their competition is Tundra and Titan trucks; those trucks don't even matter by comparison to Ram, F-Series, or Silverado. You might say the Asian brands compete with GMC, but the domestics absolutely blow them away otherwise. Not only has Ram series trucks been #3 the last few years in vehicle sales; last year they actually beat out Silverado a couple different months, and they actually picked up market share last year, and so while I do agree that they probably can't keep up with the Big 2 in R&D, engineering and such, and that the drag that especially Dodge puts on them really hurts them as a company; I absolutely disagree that Ram pickup trucks is losing their way. And if they give up the regular cab, they'll be conceding market share at least on the fleet end. I work for the Feds, and the Feds buy a lot of Rams; I see them in contractor and plumbing trucks as well, although not as much as the afore-mentioned Fastenall and gov't vehicles. But also, if they give up some fleet sales, this could bring up margin and resale value. So I'm not so sure it's a bad move for them, but bad for the American consumer; at least those who'd like to see the truck configuration that started it all stay around.

    I don't know what it's like everywhere else, but people around where I live have gone Jeep crazy. Personally, I wouldn't consider one ever, but they're all the rage around here; especially the Wrangler and it's variants; new and old!
    Last edited by gregsfc; 02-17-2018 at 06:45 AM.
    2015 Gem Green Regular Cab, Short Bed, 2WD with 2.7, regular 3.31 rear axle; cruise, power glass and doors, rear camera, remote Fob (basic), MyKey, rear mirror auto dim, and day-time running lights. Almost work truck.

  3. #23
    Ecoboost Regular gregsfc's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Cookeville, TN
    Posts
    125
    Member #
    13505
    Liked
    41 times
    Quote Originally Posted by adkhunter1590 View Post
    Iíve always thought of Ram trucks as the cheap skate way for a wanna be to get into a truck. Old motors, cheap metal, plastic interiors and for Godís sake, who the hell thought rear coil springs were a good idea!? Ya sure the ride is smooth but if I canít haul a ton of cargo, itís not a truck anymore!
    But their 2019 Ram is touted with very good payload and tow numbers; not quite reaching the level of the maxed-out F150 for either number, but not too far away from either of Ford's max tower or hauler. Especially for payload, Ford has a huge advantage, as they've cut more weight, and now they will have a standard cab long and short bed that Ram will not have with their new truck, and therefore, the F150 can be configured even lighter by comparison and can reach more payload before reaching up to that magic 8500 GVWR number, yet Ram is still advertising pretty close to F150s best payload number. Add to that, if Ram has actually made the coil+air suspension strong enough and durable enough to hold up to the new numbers they're advertising; then they've got added benefits. Besides a better claimed ride, they're saying that the body can be dropped down for loading and unloading the bed floor more easily; and that the body will drop 1/2" above 35 mph for lower drag coefficient. The front facia will drop 2" during highway travel. These features will truly be industry firsts. Whether or not these things are important or worthy or may or may not cause problems down the road are a matter of debate, much like the turbo or naturally-aspired debate / aluminum versus steel debate; but the fact that they will have these features, and no one else will, is not debatable.

    I'm with you 100% on the "old motors" part of your comment. Here they are with a chance to make a really bold statement in a new truck with power train options, and the only thing they can manage is a mild hybrid-type system that's been around since the start of the millennium. These systems have always been promoted as adding torque, but I've got one, and if you call adding just a touch of torque below 10 mph useful, then I guess added torque means something. But that little bit of torque doesn't do a lot in the real world and it quickly goes away at any kind of speed. I'm highly skeptical that it would be useful as a boat and trailer puller from out of a ramp or a tree stump puller from my experience with this system, but I may be wrong. It could be better than the 2007 version; although it's described exactly the same way. The only two good things I can see with a mild hybrid is that it is a very seamless and reliable start-stop system; much quicker and seamless than Ford's traditional system; and the regenerative braking comes in handy controlling speeds down steep hills and coming to a stop without wearing out brakes. But for mpg, I can't tell it does a thing; maybe actually hurts mpg due to the added weight and engine braking. Downsizing and turbo charging or next-generation cylinder deactivation are much more useful technologies for empty bed commuting mpg improvement than any mild hybrid system in my opinion.

    My F150 XL is pretty cheap plastic inside, and I love it. It's durable stuff. Made for work and life. I noticed though that a comparable 2018 Ram at work has black screws holding the inside steel door panels to the outside panels that's visible when one opens the door. It's a white truck with black steel screws visible. That's like making something cheap for no good reason and sort of flaunting it. Doesn't look right. Looks like it was mom and pop'd built. But my F150 has it's share of shadiness as well. The glove box doesn't line up straight with the piece above it when closed. The bed is offset to the drivers side a good inch; meaning when I look down the passenger's side on the outside, from rear to front, the body is pretty much lined up. But when I look on the driver's side, the cab sticks out to the left of the bed. I first noticed it looking in the driver's side mirror. I could see that the cab stuck out wider than the bed, and at first I assumed that the cab was simply just wider than the bed. But then one day I was waxing the truck and looked on the passenger's side. It was near perfect. I went back to the driver's side to confirm, and sure enough, the cab sticks out a good inch beyond the bed. I looked at my son's 2013 Ram regular cab, and it's offset the opposite way, but only barely; not nearly to the level that mine does. This is not due to being on a cant or anything. I notice this all the time when driving. The cab is always stuck out beyond the bed on the driver's side. Don't know if it's only a standard cab thing or only my truck thing, but it is absolutely mounted more to the left than the right of the vehicle.
    Last edited by gregsfc; 02-17-2018 at 07:01 AM.
    2015 Gem Green Regular Cab, Short Bed, 2WD with 2.7, regular 3.31 rear axle; cruise, power glass and doors, rear camera, remote Fob (basic), MyKey, rear mirror auto dim, and day-time running lights. Almost work truck.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    F150EcoBoost.net
    Advertisements

  5. #24
    Ecoboost Sr Member adkhunter1590's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    51
    Member #
    17945
    Liked
    12 times
    Quote Originally Posted by gregsfc View Post
    But their 2019 Ram is touted with very good payload and tow numbers; not quite reaching the level of the maxed-out F150 for either number, but not too far away from either of Ford's max tower or hauler. Especially for payload, Ford has a huge advantage, as they've cut more weight, and now they will have a standard cab long and short bed that Ram will not have with their new truck, and therefore, the F150 can be configured even lighter by comparison and can reach more payload before reaching up to that magic 8500 GVWR number, yet Ram is still advertising pretty close to F150s best payload number. Add to that, if Ram has actually made the coil+air suspension strong enough and durable enough to hold up to the new numbers they're advertising; then they've got added benefits. Besides a better claimed ride, they're saying that the body can be dropped down for loading and unloading the bed floor more easily; and that the body will drop 1/2" above 35 mph for lower drag coefficient. The front facia will drop 2" during highway travel. These features will truly be industry firsts. Whether or not these things are important or worthy or may or may not cause problems down the road are a matter of debate, much like the turbo or naturally-aspired debate / aluminum versus steel debate; but the fact that they will have these features, and no one else will, is not debatable.

    I'm with you 100% on the "old motors" part of your comment. Here they are with a chance to make a really bold statement in a new truck with power train options, and the only thing they can manage is a mild hybrid-type system that's been around since the start of the millennium. These systems have always been promoted as adding torque, but I've got one, and if you call adding just a touch of torque below 10 mph useful, then I guess added torque means something. But that little bit of torque doesn't do a lot in the real world and it quickly goes away at any kind of speed. I'm highly skeptical that it would be useful as a boat and trailer puller from out of a ramp or a tree stump puller from my experience with this system, but I may be wrong. It could be better than the 2007 version; although it's described exactly the same way. The only two good things I can see with a mild hybrid is that it is a very seamless and reliable start-stop system; much quicker and seamless than Ford's traditional system; and the regenerative braking comes in handy controlling speeds down steep hills and coming to a stop without wearing out brakes. But for mpg, I can't tell it does a thing; maybe actually hurts mpg due to the added weight and engine braking. Downsizing and turbo charging or next-generation cylinder deactivation are much more useful technologies for empty bed commuting mpg improvement than any mild hybrid system in my opinion.

    My F150 XL is pretty cheap plastic inside, and I love it. It's durable stuff. Made for work and life. I noticed though that a comparable 2018 Ram at work has black screws holding the inside steel door panels to the outside panels that's visible when one opens the door. It's a white truck with black steel screws visible. That's like making something cheap for no good reason and sort of flaunting it. Doesn't look right. Looks like it was mom and pop'd built. But my F150 has it's share of shadiness as well. The glove box doesn't line up straight with the piece above it when closed. The bed is offset to the drivers side a good inch; meaning when I look down the passenger's side on the outside, from rear to front, the body is pretty much lined up. But when I look on the driver's side, the cab sticks out to the left of the bed. I first noticed it looking in the driver's side mirror. I could see that the cab stuck out wider than the bed, and at first I assumed that the cab was simply just wider than the bed. But then one day I was waxing the truck and looked on the passenger's side. It was near perfect. I went back to the driver's side to confirm, and sure enough, the cab sticks out a good inch beyond the bed. I looked at my son's 2013 Ram regular cab, and it's offset the opposite way, but only barely; not nearly to the level that mine does. This is not due to being on a cant or anything. I notice this all the time when driving. The cab is always stuck out beyond the bed on the driver's side. Don't know if it's only a standard cab thing or only my truck thing, but it is absolutely mounted more to the left than the right of the vehicle.

    Well it only took RAM how long to get close to Fords payload? Regardless of what the payload sticker says, I overload the hell out of my F150 hauling corn to the farm. Thereís no way a ram would put up with the kind of overloading I do on a regular basis with there coil spring setup.
    The body drop feature is creative Iíll give them that. But Iíve also heard that when loading more than 500-700 pounds in the bed, your no longer able to put it in ďoff roadĒ mode to raise the body up. Idk about you guys but that is a huge problem right there.
    Iíll agree that the F150 has its fair share of plastic. But it feels much thicker and rugged than RAMs. I had a 2010 ram 2500 Cummins, so I have first hand experience on their interiors. My 2011 interior is perfectly straight in every way, no seat rips, no broken anything. And thatís with 146k hard miles. The back seat probably takes the most abuse from my 2 young boys riding back there making messes all the dang time haha. When I had my Cummins, I put 85k on it in a year and a half before trading it for the ecoboost. That interior looked nothing like brand new already, I can only imagine what it would have looked like by now had I kept it.

    Honestly I havenít looked that closely at my bed alignment. But if it was bad, Iíd notice it. The only thing Iím having a problem with right now is rust. Lower bed sides and cab corners and rockers are all rotting out at a good clip this winter. Wifeís taking it down to her relatives body shop next week to get a quote on having it all fixed. I thought about getting rid of it, but it runs great and the interior is still great, suspension and everything still tight, might as well fix the body up and run it till the wheels fall off. Will probably be buying a new F150 anyways for my wife within a year or so anyways. But we will keep my 2011 around for farm duty and hunting.

  6. #25
    Eco-Beast mass-hole's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    UT
    Posts
    3,048
    Member #
    8316
    Liked
    1078 times
    I would bet that the ram with Hemi and etorque will have approx the same payload as they do now. They didnít change the gvwr(6900 lbs) on the 2019 so they are 100% relying on weight savings for increased payload. With the weight of that motor and the batteries they must nearly cancel out the weight savings.
    2014 Lariat Screw, 157", Max Tow, 502A - Gearhead Tuned, AFE Intercooler, RX Catch Can, Bilstein 5100(.8" level), AirLift RideControl bags, 275/60R20 Wrangler Duratracs

    2006 Jeep Liberty CRD(diesel) - GDE Tune, Straight piped, AFE filter, 2.5" Lift, ARB bumper

  7. #26
    Ecoboost Regular gregsfc's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Cookeville, TN
    Posts
    125
    Member #
    13505
    Liked
    41 times
    Quote Originally Posted by mass-hole View Post
    I would bet that the ram with Hemi and etorque will have approx the same payload as they do now. They didnít change the gvwr(6900 lbs) on the 2019 so they are 100% relying on weight savings for increased payload. With the weight of that motor and the batteries they must nearly cancel out the weight savings.
    Yeah (as all the brands do) the listed weight reduction is in the most advantageous configuration and power train choice. I would suspect that for Ram, since the only major weight savings is in high strength steel frame; that most savings is with respect to the biggest cab/bed combination, which is crew cab and 6'4" bed; and with the Hemi that does not have the optional 100 lb eTorque system. And even in that set up; it's only 225 lb reduction; F150 was up to 700 lb reduction, although it was probably heavier than Ram's thin tin can before Ford made their reduction.

    The max advertised payload is 2300 that Ram is proclaiming for the all-new truck. The highest I see from their site on the 2018 (current) Ram is 1880; so, considering that the new truck will not be available in regular cab, it's a far tougher truck from a payload standpoint than the current truck, but way behind Ford. However, comparing their new truck to the F150 on payload, it is not apples to apples due to the fact that the new truck has no regular cab configuration. The way to compare it would be to build the highest payload quad cab versus F150 highest payload quad cab, short bed; or do the same thing with any particular crew cab. But for an absolute max 1/2 ton truck F150 has up to 3200 +900 over Ram's latest and greatest; and F150 is with the 5.0L, which is lighter than the 3.5 EB, and more powerful than the 2.7; and just a tad heavier than the 2.7 (they're almost the same if you look at the minimum curb weight for each; and they're both available from the smallest configuration and 2WD). My guess is, but haven't spec'd it out, that the very highest payload for the F150 is one or both of the regular cabs with the heavy payload package in 2WD; and since Ram is not going to offer their new truck in a regular cab (at least not for now); plus their weight reduction was about 1/3 what Ford did; and about 1/2 what GM is going to do; they'll be way behind both Ford and Chevy by years end; even with the new truck.
    2015 Gem Green Regular Cab, Short Bed, 2WD with 2.7, regular 3.31 rear axle; cruise, power glass and doors, rear camera, remote Fob (basic), MyKey, rear mirror auto dim, and day-time running lights. Almost work truck.

  8. #27
    Ecoboost Regular gregsfc's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Cookeville, TN
    Posts
    125
    Member #
    13505
    Liked
    41 times
    Next-Gen 2019 Silverado: Pickup Truck | Chevrolet Picture of all-new Chevy regular cab work truck link; then click on WT tab.

    The statements Chevy spokespersons have made regarding the regular cab choice for the all-new Chevy have been somewhat confusing, but I recently found a picture of a regular cab that is absolutely the new design, so Chevy is not going to abandon that customer as Ram plans on doing (at least for the short term). If I understand right, the new truck will be built at Fort Wane IN and somewhere in Mexico. The old truck may or may not being built at Ft Wayne, but I have been able to figure out that at least the heavy duties are built at Flint and Ontario, Canada and maybe 1/2-tons are built there now as well, but for the future truck they won't be. They're going to do some really odd procedures to try and keep from losing too much production when they switch over to the new truck; as Ford lost up to 90,000 production capacity during their switchover. GM is going to try to limit the loss to around 60,00 units. The best way I can understand it is that they will continue to build the current truck at a Flint plant and at an Ontario plant; and they will partly assemble one of the new trucks at some plant somewhere that has an unused assembly line and then ship that partially-assembled truck to Ft Wayne. In the end, they will build extra cabs and crew cabs at both plants and the regular cab at only one of those two plants.

    Ram, on the other hand, will build old-designed trucks at the existing plants that build the heavy-duty Rams and they'll build the new truck at a plant that had not been producing trucks; Sterling Heights. Ram spokespersons will not say how long they will continue to build the old truck or if they will ever offer the new truck in regular cab. My personal thought is that Ram is going to maybe bring on a new 1/2-ton regular cab only when they update the heavy-duty Ram, because it looks as if the production for regular cab 1/2-tons is going to now be part of heavy duty trucks, and that for the future, the 1/2-ton quads and clubs will be their own line of trucks.

    It's hard for me to understand how some people think that Ram will have modernized their truck much more than Chevy will have, but I've read that comment. I think a lot of people are focused on styling and little gadgets and interior looks than mean very little in the whole scheme of things and are not looking at real automotive innovation, because in that area, if one is able to look at things in an unbiased and objective manner; GM will have gone much, much further than Ram. Six power trains versus three; advancement in engine technologies versus same engines with the same performance outputs; 450 lb weight reduction versus 225; an all-new, just-now-being designed, I6 diesel versus a banned diesel that's beginning to age; most all cab/bed choices being carried over to the new design, versus no new regular cab; 7" wider interior bed, versus some bed advancements; all-new ten speed tranny versus a retweaked 8 speed. Aerodynamic improvements are probably about on par; and then the only advancements that Ram may have GM beat on, and that is debatable, is in the area of suspension systems; because this air suspension seems to be something any of them can provide, but Ford and GM have decided their customers would prefer them to stick with traditional suspension. Even Ram's mild hybrid, I don't think in the end will be ahead of GM on the electrification front. GM already offers a similar system in the current truck with the 5.3 V8, called eAssist, that is sold in very limited configurations and trims, but if GM expands that system to mate with other engines and combine with their DSF cylinder deactivation system; or if any of their three power trains left to announce are down sized gas-powered or diesel powered turbos, then they'll be way ahead on that front as well. Ram has just done nothing in the way of power trains. GM has already announced a great deal of advancements, and they've said that there will be three more.

    If I were a GMC or Chevy loyalist, my biggest complaint about their strategy would be that they do not offer their most advanced power train choices to enough customers. The 2.8 Duramax in the Colorado and Canyon available in only high trims and only two cab/bed combinations and both of them are crew cab; 6.2L V8 available only in LT and up; and in crew cab; starting at $44,300; 5.3L Ecotec3 w/eAssist available only in LT and up and in crew cab, starting at or about $44K. Ford and Ram have a history of offering more power trains to more customers. GM has stated that their customers want more choice. Let's see if they actually follow through or just keep offering their best products to only the rich and famous.
    Last edited by gregsfc; 02-22-2018 at 05:55 AM.
    2015 Gem Green Regular Cab, Short Bed, 2WD with 2.7, regular 3.31 rear axle; cruise, power glass and doors, rear camera, remote Fob (basic), MyKey, rear mirror auto dim, and day-time running lights. Almost work truck.

  9. #28
    Eco-Beast mass-hole's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    UT
    Posts
    3,048
    Member #
    8316
    Liked
    1078 times
    Quote Originally Posted by gregsfc View Post
    Yeah (as all the brands do) the listed weight reduction is in the most advantageous configuration and power train choice. I would suspect that for Ram, since the only major weight savings is in high strength steel frame; that most savings is with respect to the biggest cab/bed combination, which is crew cab and 6'4" bed; and with the Hemi that does not have the optional 100 lb eTorque system. And even in that set up; it's only 225 lb reduction; F150 was up to 700 lb reduction, although it was probably heavier than Ram's thin tin can before Ford made their reduction.

    The max advertised payload is 2300 that Ram is proclaiming for the all-new truck. The highest I see from their site on the 2018 (current) Ram is 1880; so, considering that the new truck will not be available in regular cab, it's a far tougher truck from a payload standpoint than the current truck, but way behind Ford. However, comparing their new truck to the F150 on payload, it is not apples to apples due to the fact that the new truck has no regular cab configuration. The way to compare it would be to build the highest payload quad cab versus F150 highest payload quad cab, short bed; or do the same thing with any particular crew cab. But for an absolute max 1/2 ton truck F150 has up to 3200 +900 over Ram's latest and greatest; and F150 is with the 5.0L, which is lighter than the 3.5 EB, and more powerful than the 2.7; and just a tad heavier than the 2.7 (they're almost the same if you look at the minimum curb weight for each; and they're both available from the smallest configuration and 2WD). My guess is, but haven't spec'd it out, that the very highest payload for the F150 is one or both of the regular cabs with the heavy payload package in 2WD; and since Ram is not going to offer their new truck in a regular cab (at least not for now); plus their weight reduction was about 1/3 what Ford did; and about 1/2 what GM is going to do; they'll be way behind both Ford and Chevy by years end; even with the new truck.
    I actually misstated. The 2019 build and price only showed a 6900 lb GVWR but it looks like it is actually 7100 lbs.

    Rams 2019 maximum stated payload of 2320lbs is on a quad cab 2x4 with a 3.6L V6. They did something that ford doesnt do and put the highest GVWR on the lighest truck config. 7100 lbs. The stupid thing is it looks like the same truck in 4x4 is only going to have a 6800 lb GVWR for 2019. So right there they added probably 250lbs of 4x4 equipment and lost 300 lbs of GVWR so a 4x4 quad cab v6 will had like a 1750 lb payload.

    So basically they fudged the numbers to give them a competitive "maximum" payload while they will likely still be several hundred lbs behind Ford on pretty much any other configuration. If ford had put their maximum GVWR of 7050 on a 3.3L V6 supercab 2x4 it would have almost 2500 lbs of payload, but they dont.
    2014 Lariat Screw, 157", Max Tow, 502A - Gearhead Tuned, AFE Intercooler, RX Catch Can, Bilstein 5100(.8" level), AirLift RideControl bags, 275/60R20 Wrangler Duratracs

    2006 Jeep Liberty CRD(diesel) - GDE Tune, Straight piped, AFE filter, 2.5" Lift, ARB bumper

  10. #29
    Ecoboost Regular gregsfc's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Cookeville, TN
    Posts
    125
    Member #
    13505
    Liked
    41 times
    Quote Originally Posted by mass-hole View Post
    I actually misstated. The 2019 build and price only showed a 6900 lb GVWR but it looks like it is actually 7100 lbs.



    So basically they fudged the numbers to give them a competitive "maximum" payload while they will likely still be several hundred lbs behind Ford on pretty much any other configuration. If ford had put their maximum GVWR of 7050 on a 3.3L V6 supercab 2x4 it would have almost 2500 lbs of payload, but they dont.
    I looked up the spec's for all F150 bed/cab configurations, and jotted down the max payload for each. As shown below, according to the specs at their website, F150 has much higher payload availability in every cab/bed combination than is possible with any Ram 1500; new or old. Towing is much closer. It should be noted also that with respect to max payload, although each of these configurations max out with the 5.0L and 2WD, that the 3.5L Ecoboost is very, very close. The difference in max for each engine is certainly even less than the difference in curb weight.

    The big, big factor I think; and what makes all this possible for Ford is their bold decision to go 100% aluminum on the body. It gives them much more flexibility and an advantage going forward to the other brands from a capability and mpg standpoint; especially for payload. So basically, even as GM and Ram will have most-certainly employed newer technologies in some areas as what is available in the F150; as long as Ford has aluminum throughout, and the competition continues to use steel beds and other panels, Ford will be able to keep leap frogging the competition; and then during the down cycle, remain very close. As these cycles go, we are going to enter a period of time when F150 should be trailing #2 and #3 in so far as an advanced 1/2-ton pickups, but Ford was able to get so far out ahead in 2015, that even the competitions' next-generation trucks aren't very far ahead. And when we count the Asian brand manufacturers, they're sort of going to be antiques very soon by comparison and I wonder why anyone would choose one of them. Especially by the end of 2018.

    F150 Regular cab long bed 2WD 3270 (5.0L) 3230 (3.5L) Max Ram 1500 1880 (not available in the new design)

    F150 Super Cab long bed 2WD 2980 (5.0L) 2950 (3.5L) Max Ram 1500 2300 (not available in what Ford and GM call long bed; Ram calls it long bed but is only 6'4" bed which is comparable to the competitions' short bed).

    F150 Super Crew long bed 2WD 2870 (5.0L) 2870 (3.5L) Max Ram 1500 >2300

    One other point...If we ever get to the point where a diesel can be made 50-state emission compliant more cheaply and more simple by virtue of new technologies that could make this happen, Ford is much, much more likely to be able to add a larger diesel engine option and still keep such a truck as a half-ton truck; whereas as what we saw with Nissan Titan when they installed a 5.0 V8 Cummins, it came in as a 3/4 ton even though it is still pretty much their half ton truck. The same can be said for electrification and the battery weight that would come from that. One big problem with a larger diesel in a half ton is, that even if they can pack in all that extra weight and frame strength and keep GVWR under the limit even with peak torque over 550 ft-lbs, and have good stability and center of gravity, the payload number may come in very meek just to stay w/i those parameters; but with GM saving up to 450 pounds; and Ford saving up to 700 pounds by virtue of aluminum bodies and other weight savers, these two companies will have an advantage in everything that happens in the near future with respect to advanced power trains; especially Ford. Remember what Ford spokespersons stated in late 2014, and I'm paraphrasing... Once the hard work of designing, tooling and building an all-aluminum-bodied F150 is done to manufacture 900,000 units per year, the hard part will be over; we'll be able to keep moving forward and staying ahead much more easily.
    Last edited by gregsfc; 02-24-2018 at 05:34 AM.
    2015 Gem Green Regular Cab, Short Bed, 2WD with 2.7, regular 3.31 rear axle; cruise, power glass and doors, rear camera, remote Fob (basic), MyKey, rear mirror auto dim, and day-time running lights. Almost work truck.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-08-2018, 07:38 AM
  2. Looks like 2019 Ford Edge gets some SVT treatment
    By TX-Ripper in forum F150 Ecoboost Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-29-2018, 06:21 AM
  3. Ram & GM Reveal Engine Strategy 2019
    By gregsfc in forum F150 Ecoboost vs The Competition
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-19-2018, 11:24 AM
  4. 2019 Ford Ranger Gets 2.3L EcoBoost Engine, 10-Speed Transmission
    By AutoGuide.com in forum F150 Ecoboost News
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-18-2018, 04:40 AM
  5. 2019 Silverado 1500 Trailboss Revealed
    By mass-hole in forum F150 Ecoboost vs The Competition
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-13-2018, 07:52 PM

Search tags for this page

2019 f150 vs ram 1500 forum

,

2019 ram 1500 vs f150 ecoboost

,

ram 2019 vs f150 forum

Click on a term to search for related topics.
Connect with us: F150 Ecoboost Forum on Twitter F150 Ecoboost Forum on Facebook F150 Ecoboost Forum RSS Feed
Find us on Google+