cancel
Showing results forย 
Search instead forย 
Did you mean:ย 

Ram 2500 CTD and GM 2500 Dmax up the Ike.

ShinerBock
Explorer
Explorer
Pretty much a nonevent for both. I wish they would start towing 11-14k 5th wheels up the Ike in these tests. The wind resistance on those would make these trucks struggle a lot more.


Ram 2500 HD Cummins vs Chevy Silverado HD Duramax vs Ike

11K trailer

Up the Hill
GM: 8:00 (perfect run)
Ram: 8:00 (perfect run)

Brake Applications
GM: 1
Ram: 0

Fuel Mileage(computer)
GM: 8.1 mpg
Ram: 8.9 mpg

Fuel Mileage(calculated)
GM: 8.2 mpg
Ram: 9.0 mpg
2014 Ram 2500 6.7L CTD
2016 BMW 2.0L diesel (work and back car)
2023 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 3.0L Ecodiesel

Highland Ridge Silverstar 378RBS
24 REPLIES 24

wintersun
Explorer
Explorer
Not a good test at all by these fellows. Far better are the ones done by mrtrailer.com where all aspects are evaluated. A key reason for paying for a diesel engine is the availability of the exhaust brake and how effective and easy this key feature is depends on the manufacturer.

Good example of a good testing evaluation is this one from 2011
https://mrtrailer.com/puchurtlocker2.htm

There are also differences under the skin that the approach of these guys ignores completely. For example the frame of the 2500/3500 Chevy trucks was made much stronger for their 2011 and later trucks but Ram did not do this until 2013 for their 3500 trucks and not until 2014 for their 2500 trucks. Ford did not increase the strength of their heavy duty truck frames until 2016.

Engine reliability also varies from make to make and from year to year and who wants the "best" truck in a test when later they find that it is requiring frequent or very expensive repairs to keep it on the road.

Also towing features are changing greatly year to year including special modes for backing up a trailer, trailier TPMS, and multiple cameras and crash avoidance with coverage of the lanes on the sides of the trailer in addition to that of the truck. Ford appears to be ahead as of 2020 but no telling what will be available in the 2022 models from the big three pickup manufacturers.

Factory trailer brake controllers vary from one make to the next and some are great and others are not purchased as their owners prefer third party ones.

BackOfThePack
Explorer
Explorer
Faster in the quarter-mile than my โ€˜04?

Higher โ€œAverage MPGโ€ than against same?

Faster braking 60-0 than against same?

3rd Gen trucks were grossing combined-rig 32K-lb in oilfield hotshot loads for 300k mile service (lease roads more than just โ€œdifficult), so todayโ€™s arenโ€™t really towing more.

OTOH, a MY-2022 semi tractor gets significantly better MPG & HP from an engine of the same displacement than the MY-2005 version. Software, tires and aero have all improved. Tractor isnโ€™t lighter, has genuine comfort improvements.

โ€” Higher pickup sales price with no significant compensatory improvements in 17-years.

โ€” Per-mile average diesel pickup ownership/operational costs (CPM) went thru the roof over this period.

โ€” Doesnโ€™t do more work in total โ€” nor does the same at a lower cost.

But it matters a trivially stupid grade ascent speed test?


.
2004 555 CTD QC LB NV-5600
1990 35โ€™ Silver Streak

Cummins12V98
Explorer III
Explorer III
Groover wrote:
14-3" high?!

My motorhome is 17" shorter and I have to dodge things with it on back roads fairly often. And that is a LOT of air drag. I don't understand why they don't make low side pickup beds for 5ers so that the front room can be lowered. Every inch counts when you are that high.


Oops dang dyslexic tendencies. 13'-4"
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

Groover
Explorer II
Explorer II
4x4ord wrote:
Bionic Man wrote:
If the standard output Cummins was able to maintain speed, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that the HO Cummins would use a similar amount of fuel, as it would not need to make more power to do the same speed?

Honestly I'm surprised these trucks are able to do those speeds up the hill. My 350/800 Cummins won't pull my 12,000 pound 5er eastbound to the tunnel at the speed limit. I'm somewhere between 35-40 MPH at the very top. My best friend's 2013 PSD pulling a very similar trailer is the exact same. Does the higher profile of the RV really make that much of a difference?


At 40 mph the added wind drag that might be on a 12000 lb high profile fiver is negligible compared to a 12000 lb equipment trailer. At 75 mph the difference in drag might be a factor. When youโ€™re foot to the floor doing 35 - 40 mph your using all the power your engine can make and yet the power required to overcome drag at that speed is going to fall between 30 and 40 hp no matter what kind of trailer your pulling.


That does seem to be awfully slow. I went through the pass a few years ago in my motorhome equipped with 300/600 detuned Cummins and running about 28,000lbs GCWR. I may not have been doing the speed limit but I don't remember being particularly slow either.

4x4ord
Explorer III
Explorer III
Bionic Man wrote:
If the standard output Cummins was able to maintain speed, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that the HO Cummins would use a similar amount of fuel, as it would not need to make more power to do the same speed?

Honestly I'm surprised these trucks are able to do those speeds up the hill. My 350/800 Cummins won't pull my 12,000 pound 5er eastbound to the tunnel at the speed limit. I'm somewhere between 35-40 MPH at the very top. My best friend's 2013 PSD pulling a very similar trailer is the exact same. Does the higher profile of the RV really make that much of a difference?


At 40 mph the added wind drag that might be on a 12000 lb high profile fiver is negligible compared to a 12000 lb equipment trailer. At 75 mph the difference in drag might be a factor. When youโ€™re foot to the floor doing 35 - 40 mph your using all the power your engine can make and yet the power required to overcome drag at that speed is going to fall between 30 and 40 hp no matter what kind of trailer your pulling.
2023 F350 SRW Platinum short box 4x4.
B&W Companion
2008 Citation Platinum XL 34.5

Groover
Explorer II
Explorer II
14-3" high?!

My motorhome is 17" shorter and I have to dodge things with it on back roads fairly often. And that is a LOT of air drag. I don't understand why they don't make low side pickup beds for 5ers so that the front room can be lowered. Every inch counts when you are that high.

Cummins12V98
Explorer III
Explorer III
14โ€™-3โ€ high and 102โ€ wide. Yup lots of resistance.
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

ShinerBock
Explorer
Explorer
Bionic Man wrote:
If the standard output Cummins was able to maintain speed, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that the HO Cummins would use a similar amount of fuel, as it would not need to make more power to do the same speed?

Honestly I'm surprised these trucks are able to do those speeds up the hill. My 350/800 Cummins won't pull my 12,000 pound 5er eastbound to the tunnel at the speed limit. I'm somewhere between 35-40 MPH at the very top. My best friend's 2013 PSD pulling a very similar trailer is the exact same. Does the higher profile of the RV really make that much of a difference?


The standard output Cummins has a 17% higher compression ratio than the high output Cummins which should correlate to greater efficiency. And yes, the wind resistance of the higher profile does make that much of a difference which is why said they should start towing 5vers up the Ike instead to make these trucks really work hard.
2014 Ram 2500 6.7L CTD
2016 BMW 2.0L diesel (work and back car)
2023 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 3.0L Ecodiesel

Highland Ridge Silverstar 378RBS

Bionic_Man
Explorer
Explorer
If the standard output Cummins was able to maintain speed, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that the HO Cummins would use a similar amount of fuel, as it would not need to make more power to do the same speed?

Honestly I'm surprised these trucks are able to do those speeds up the hill. My 350/800 Cummins won't pull my 12,000 pound 5er eastbound to the tunnel at the speed limit. I'm somewhere between 35-40 MPH at the very top. My best friend's 2013 PSD pulling a very similar trailer is the exact same. Does the higher profile of the RV really make that much of a difference?
2012 RAM 3500 Laramie Longhorn DRW CC 4x4 Max Tow, Cummins HO, 60 gallon RDS aux fuel tank, Reese 18k Elite hitch
2003 Dodge Ram 3500 QC SB 4x4 Cummins HO NV5600 with Smarty JR, Jacobs EB (sold)
2002 Gulf Stream Sea Hawk 29FRB with Honda EV6010

ShinerBock
Explorer
Explorer
Cummins12V98 wrote:
Why didnโ€™t they include a Ford??? Stupid not to include.


Because they are limited on what trucks they can get and when like all vehicle review sites. They did a video about this and the whole process of attaining review vehicles on their car site.
2014 Ram 2500 6.7L CTD
2016 BMW 2.0L diesel (work and back car)
2023 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 3.0L Ecodiesel

Highland Ridge Silverstar 378RBS

ShinerBock
Explorer
Explorer
FishOnOne wrote:


Fuel economy difference is pretty significant. Flat land towing fuel economy would be interesting.

I suspect the HO cummins fuel economy in the 3500 is probably more on par with the Duramax.


Possibly. I know if I were going with a new 3500 SRW or DRW, I would go with the standard output version and just do an emissions intact tune on it. Best of both worlds, the higher compression ratio for efficiency and more power from the tune. Not to mention a tunable and faster shifting transmission.
2014 Ram 2500 6.7L CTD
2016 BMW 2.0L diesel (work and back car)
2023 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 3.0L Ecodiesel

Highland Ridge Silverstar 378RBS

Cummins12V98
Explorer III
Explorer III
4x4ord wrote:
Cummins12V98 wrote:
Why didnโ€™t they include a Ford??? Stupid not to include.


Ford is in a different league.:)


That could be taken a couple different ways. :B
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

4x4ord
Explorer III
Explorer III
Cummins12V98 wrote:
Why didnโ€™t they include a Ford??? Stupid not to include.


Ford is in a different league.:)
2023 F350 SRW Platinum short box 4x4.
B&W Companion
2008 Citation Platinum XL 34.5

FishOnOne
Explorer III
Explorer III
ShinerBock wrote:
Pretty much a nonevent for both. I wish they would start towing 11-14k 5th wheels up the Ike in these tests. The wind resistance on those would make these trucks struggle a lot more.


Ram 2500 HD Cummins vs Chevy Silverado HD Duramax vs Ike

11K trailer

Up the Hill
GM: 8:00 (perfect run)
Ram: 8:00 (perfect run)

Brake Applications
GM: 1
Ram: 0

Fuel Mileage(computer)
GM: 8.1 mpg
Ram: 8.9 mpg

Fuel Mileage(calculated)
GM: 8.2 mpg
Ram: 9.0 mpg


Fuel economy difference is pretty significant. Flat land towing fuel economy would be interesting.

I suspect the HO cummins fuel economy in the 3500 is probably more on par with the Duramax.
'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs "270k Miles"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"