transamz9

Lawrenceburg Ky

Senior Member

Joined: 07/27/2010

View Profile

Offline
|
The Mad Norsky wrote: One last thought from me.
As I mentioned before, I have the 385/Aisin Cummins in my 14 Ram. 3:73 rear axle ratio. I have NOT towed my fifth wheel with this rig yet, as I have just been way too busy hauling my truck camper around the country.
Now there are posters here who claim their Ram never shifts out of sixth gear.
Mine does, and in fact, at certain speeds, it goes gear hunting.
It does this mostly in the low 60 to say about 64 MPH speed range. I've used the plus/minus button on the gear shift to display gears, and I can see it going from sixth to fifth then back and forth. Mostly with a good head wind, and on hills. But it gets to the point where I just lock out sixth gear.
Now I can get it to go away from this by increasing speed to say 67 MPH, which seems to be the sweet spot with this gear ratio (the 3:73).
Tow haul mode does not allow the shift to sixth gear until just about at 60 MPH, so I do see the gear hunting as a result of just not being enough RPM'S or speed into sixth gear to allow it to stay there.
So perhaps the 4:10 may have been a better choice for speeds in the upper 50's to low 60's speed ranges.
My 13 Aisin with 3.42 won't go to 6th until 65 with the TH mode on. It won't go to 5th until 55. TH off those speeds drop around 10 MPH.
2016 Ram 3500 Mega Cab Limited/2013 Ram 3500 SRW Cummins(sold)/2005 RAM 2500 Cummins/2011 Sandpiper 345 RET (sold) 2015 Sanibel 3601/2008 Nitro Z9 Mercury 250 PRO XS the best motor made.
|
Bedlam

PNW

Moderator

Joined: 06/13/2012

View Profile


|
My chassis cab has the 4.44 gears with the Aisin in Tow/Haul mode and still downshifts to fifth with only 22K lb GCW on some rolling hills when traveling 55-65 mph. Most mountain passes have been crossed in fourth except where I have to slow for other traffic and then I will be in third.
The Aisin does have a low first gear - When I put the truck in 4wd low, it has no trouble idling at a crawl up and down dirt roads when fully loaded without me having to apply throttle or brake.
Chevy Sonic 1.8-Honda Passport C70B-Host Mammoth 11.5-Interstate Car Carrier 20-Joyner SandViper 250-Kawasaki Concours ZG1000-Paros 8' flatbed-Pelican Decker DLX 8.75-Ram 5500 HD
|
Cummins12V98

on the road

Senior Member

Joined: 06/03/2012

View Profile

Offline
|
Sport45 wrote: Whoever set those gears up did a good job. Nice contact pattern in both directions.
I wouldn't use it a poster pic for Amsoil though. I've seen plenty of clean diffs with just as many hard miles running store-brand oil. The cleanest are the ones with no limited slip clutches, but the 3.73 LS in my F-250 was pretty nice looking running the O'Reilly's synthetic lube with their friction modifier.
The worst looking diffs are the ones that get water in them because the vent tube gets pulled off for some reason or another...
I know that is not enough miles to prove anything but I was showing the people that said I would ruin my running gear towing that heavy with the 3:42's. I wish I had a pic of my 98 with 300K using AMZ/OIL the gears looked very nice!
Closer pic. I still think it looks pretty darn good Fish!
2015 RAM LongHorn 3500 Dually CrewCab 4X4 CUMMINS/AISIN RearAir 385HP/865TQ 4:10's
37,800# GCVWR "Towing Beast"
"HeavyWeight" B&W RVK3600
2016 MobileSuites 39TKSB3 highly "Elited" In the stable
2007.5 Mobile Suites 36 SB3 29,000# Combined SOLD
|
FishOnOne

The Great State of Texas

Senior Member

Joined: 02/12/2011

View Profile

Offline
|
Cummins12V98 wrote: Sport45 wrote: Whoever set those gears up did a good job. Nice contact pattern in both directions.
I wouldn't use it a poster pic for Amsoil though. I've seen plenty of clean diffs with just as many hard miles running store-brand oil. The cleanest are the ones with no limited slip clutches, but the 3.73 LS in my F-250 was pretty nice looking running the O'Reilly's synthetic lube with their friction modifier.
The worst looking diffs are the ones that get water in them because the vent tube gets pulled off for some reason or another...
I know that is not enough miles to prove anything but I was showing the people that said I would ruin my running gear towing that heavy with the 3:42's. I wish I had a pic of my 98 with 300K using AMZ/OIL the gears looked very nice!
Closer pic. I still think it looks pretty darn good Fish!
![[image]](http://i.imgur.com/y7jFXpel.jpg)
Looks good to me... I bet the factory oil would have produced the same results.
'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs "270k Miles"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"
|
FishOnOne

The Great State of Texas

Senior Member

Joined: 02/12/2011

View Profile

Offline
|
Cummins12V98 wrote: FishOnOne wrote: Cummins12V98 wrote: FishOnOne wrote: I recall a while back "I'm Rick James" reported he could not notice any performance difference between the 68 and the Aisin tranny. It's interesting that the defenders of the 68 opted for the Aisin and I think we all know why!
Good luck...
With the Aisin there is for sure a difference it's called the lower starting gears and they really help get the load rolling with ease.
Chryslers Head West Coast Warranty Rep said when he was asked how well the Aisin trans is holding up he said "they don't break".
My 68RFE was flawless towing a combined load of 29K even with the too high 3:42 gears.
Pan with 50K on the AMZ/OIL.
![[image]](http://i.imgur.com/BF5Kgasl.jpg)
I wouldn't put Amzoil in my lawnmower tranny... BTW I hate those small oil pans!
I assume you are joking about the transmission pan being small. If you did not know that is a MagHytec aftermarket Aircraft Aluminum "deep" pan. But I am sure you heard of one of your neighbor having a negative experience with one of those also.
Also I am sure you have heard of negative experiences with AMZ/OIL also.
65K on the rear diff towing a combined 29K. AMZ/OIL Severe Gear.
![[image]](http://i.imgur.com/NqaPQFVl.jpg)
I noticed you had a after market oil pan... That's why I made the comment directed at the factory oil pan.
|
|
FishOnOne

The Great State of Texas

Senior Member

Joined: 02/12/2011

View Profile

Offline
|
I'm Rick James wrote: FishOnOne wrote: 45Ricochet wrote: FishOnOne wrote: I recall a while back "I'm Rick James" reported he could not notice any performance difference between the 68 and the Aisin tranny. It's interesting that the defenders of the 68 opted for the Aisin and I think we all know why!
Good luck...
You know it's kind of funny this Ford lover, Ram hater would jump into yet another Ram thread. I seem to remember THIS Ford thread and no Ram guys jumped in with cheap remarks. Usual hear say from Troy I might add.
Just calling a spade... a spade! The above statement I made is undeniable facts but spin it however you like rick.
Perhaps Rick James can chime in as well since he's one of the few straight shooters here that I've read.
Yes, I've had both the 68RFE and Aisin in a '12 and '14 respectively. Unloaded I cannot tell a difference between the two and when towing my toy hauler the Aisin simply seems to shift faster and firmer than the 68RFE but nothing dramatic. The 5R100 I had in my '08 Ford beats both of the Ram offerings IMO.
Thanks for your report!
|
Slowmover

Fort Worth, TX

Senior Member

Joined: 11/14/2003

View Profile

Offline
|
I'd get the AW if for no other reason than resale. Having driven them in the 5500 series I was sold years ago. Medium duty engine and medium duty trans in a light duty truck. Sounds just right for long life.
1990 35' SILVER STREAK Sterling, 9k GVWR
2004 DODGE RAM 2WD 305/555 ISB, QC SRW LB NV-5600, 9k GVWR
Hensley Arrow; 11-cpm solo, 17-cpm towing fuel cost
|
Ron3rd

Upland, CA USA

Senior Member

Joined: 03/22/2004

View Profile


Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
FishOnOne wrote: 45Ricochet wrote: FishOnOne wrote: I recall a while back "I'm Rick James" reported he could not notice any performance difference between the 68 and the Aisin tranny. It's interesting that the defenders of the 68 opted for the Aisin and I think we all know why!
Good luck...
You know it's kind of funny this Ford lover, Ram hater would jump into yet another Ram thread. I seem to remember THIS Ford thread and no Ram guys jumped in with cheap remarks. Usual hear say from Troy I might add.
Just calling a spade... a spade! The above statement I made is undeniable facts but spin it however you like rick.
Perhaps Rick James can chime in as well since he's one of the few straight shooters here that I've read.
I think the reason a lot of folks go with the 68 is it's cheaper and if you like the truck and the overall package, the 68 is fine. I'm gonna be in the market for a new CTD (probably Tradsman trim) and all the local ones I've seen have the 68 so that's what I'll go with. Maybe if I was fulltiming with a 5er I would consider the Aisin.
2016 6.7 CTD 2500 BIG HORN MEGA CAB
2013 Forest River 3001W Windjammer
Equilizer Hitch
Honda EU2000
"I have this plan to live forever; so far my plan is working"
|
IdaD

Idaho

Senior Member

Joined: 08/06/2014

View Profile

|
Ron3rd wrote: FishOnOne wrote: 45Ricochet wrote: FishOnOne wrote: I recall a while back "I'm Rick James" reported he could not notice any performance difference between the 68 and the Aisin tranny. It's interesting that the defenders of the 68 opted for the Aisin and I think we all know why!
Good luck...
You know it's kind of funny this Ford lover, Ram hater would jump into yet another Ram thread. I seem to remember THIS Ford thread and no Ram guys jumped in with cheap remarks. Usual hear say from Troy I might add.
Just calling a spade... a spade! The above statement I made is undeniable facts but spin it however you like rick.
Perhaps Rick James can chime in as well since he's one of the few straight shooters here that I've read.
I think the reason a lot of folks go with the 68 is it's cheaper and if you like the truck and the overall package, the 68 is fine. I'm gonna be in the market for a new CTD (probably Tradsman trim) and all the local ones I've seen have the 68 so that's what I'll go with. Maybe if I was fulltiming with a 5er I would consider the Aisin.
I'm the poster child for this. I could have eeked by with a heavy half ton but a 3/4 ton is just a lot better solution for me, and it really doesn't cost much more than the heavy half once you add HD Payload and Max Tow. I paid $39k and literally couldn't find an F150 on any lot for less than that equipped with those two packages. So, why not opt for the heavier duty truck with all the heavy duty components? I really didn't see any downsides to stepping up a level.
I've been real pleased with the 68 so far and in my case I didn't think it was worth the extra money for the Aisin. This truck is my daily driver and weekend tow vehicle and I figured the 68 would be fine for that workload.
2015 Cummins Ram 4wd CC/SB
|
I'm Rick James

Reno, NV, USA

Senior Member

Joined: 10/18/2004

View Profile

|
IdaD wrote: Ron3rd wrote: FishOnOne wrote: 45Ricochet wrote: FishOnOne wrote: I recall a while back "I'm Rick James" reported he could not notice any performance difference between the 68 and the Aisin tranny. It's interesting that the defenders of the 68 opted for the Aisin and I think we all know why!
Good luck...
You know it's kind of funny this Ford lover, Ram hater would jump into yet another Ram thread. I seem to remember THIS Ford thread and no Ram guys jumped in with cheap remarks. Usual hear say from Troy I might add.
Just calling a spade... a spade! The above statement I made is undeniable facts but spin it however you like rick.
Perhaps Rick James can chime in as well since he's one of the few straight shooters here that I've read.
I think the reason a lot of folks go with the 68 is it's cheaper and if you like the truck and the overall package, the 68 is fine. I'm gonna be in the market for a new CTD (probably Tradsman trim) and all the local ones I've seen have the 68 so that's what I'll go with. Maybe if I was fulltiming with a 5er I would consider the Aisin.
I'm the poster child for this. I could have eeked by with a heavy half ton but a 3/4 ton is just a lot better solution for me, and it really doesn't cost much more than the heavy half once you add HD Payload and Max Tow. I paid $39k and literally couldn't find an F150 on any lot for less than that equipped with those two packages. So, why not opt for the heavier duty truck with all the heavy duty components? I really didn't see any downsides to stepping up a level.
I've been real pleased with the 68 so far and in my case I didn't think it was worth the extra money for the Aisin. This truck is my daily driver and weekend tow vehicle and I figured the 68 would be fine for that workload.
Well, the good news for you is that the Aisin wasn't an option for your configuration.
I'm sure the 68RE is an adequate transmission, as is the Aisin. There are those that preach the "MDT" moniker for the Aisin but that usually devolves into semantics. Bottom line is that they are all (regardless of brand) fairly decent transmissions that none of us will be able to quantify their strengths or weaknesses.
|
|