RAM BS Article.
01-15-2015, 09:30 AM
#31
Senior Member
Thread Starter
01-15-2015, 09:39 AM
#32
Senior Member
i said it before and I'll say it again, I test drove the ram and loved it. Heck, my friend thinks im crazy for buying the f150, but the f150 is just that much more capable work wise.
The ram is great for light truck stuff, I regularly put 2000 LBS in my truck of slatwall or other items. The ram would never handle that. Also, where I live it gets really cold this time of year. I heard the air suspension messes up in really cold weather, go figure.
Their beloved ecodiesel is an old fiat designed engine that they shipped over to north america to say they have a diesel in their 1500, but it's not enough hp to move it well. I will give it to those italians, they made the interior of those chryslers really nice. What can I say, we have good taste LoL. Ford did step up on their interiors for 2015 and that's what made me pull the trigger. If it would have had a cheap interior like the previous model, I would have gone for the ram and a trailer.
The ram is great for light truck stuff, I regularly put 2000 LBS in my truck of slatwall or other items. The ram would never handle that. Also, where I live it gets really cold this time of year. I heard the air suspension messes up in really cold weather, go figure.
Their beloved ecodiesel is an old fiat designed engine that they shipped over to north america to say they have a diesel in their 1500, but it's not enough hp to move it well. I will give it to those italians, they made the interior of those chryslers really nice. What can I say, we have good taste LoL. Ford did step up on their interiors for 2015 and that's what made me pull the trigger. If it would have had a cheap interior like the previous model, I would have gone for the ram and a trailer.
That being said, I prefer the 2015 F150 interior, and exterior design. And yes, they payload doesn't even compare. The RAM is still a very nice truck though.
01-15-2015, 10:30 AM
#33
Senior Member
01-15-2015, 11:37 AM
#35
Senior Member
The simple fact is that you will never recoup the initial cost of the EcoDiesel unless you drive a s*** ton of miles.
Here is a prime example. Going off off Fueleconomy.gov numbers (personalized to 30% stop and go).
Using the 2015 2.7 EB 4wd vs the 2015 3.0 ED 4wd. Over 10 years of ownership at 20k miles a year you get the following numbers.
Ford 21mpg + $3.25 per us gallon of gas (converted from my hometown price of $0.859 per liter) = $30,952 life time fuel cost
Ram 24mpg + $4.26 per us gallon of diesel (converted from my hometown price of $1.10 per liter) = $35,500 life time fuel cost
In Canada (according to ramtruck.ca) the ED is a $4500 cost over the Hemi. Now look at the numbers
35,500-30952+4500= $9048 in additional cost over ten years to own the EcoDiesel. Add to that increased maintenance costs and the difference is even more.
Even the Hemi at 18mpg carries a cost of $36,111. The EcoDiesel will still cost $5111 more before maintenance.
People get sooooo caught up with who has the best mpg they never stop and run the numbers. Its very black and white. The Ecodiesel has 135 hp less than the 2.7 EB and 155 hp less than the hemi. It will cost the owner thousands more over the life of the truck. Financially its a poor choice in my mind. And it only pulls 500lb more than the 2.7 EB and 1000lb less than the Hemi! Seriously why is this thing so damn popular with auto journalists....I don't get it.
Here is a prime example. Going off off Fueleconomy.gov numbers (personalized to 30% stop and go).
Using the 2015 2.7 EB 4wd vs the 2015 3.0 ED 4wd. Over 10 years of ownership at 20k miles a year you get the following numbers.
Ford 21mpg + $3.25 per us gallon of gas (converted from my hometown price of $0.859 per liter) = $30,952 life time fuel cost
Ram 24mpg + $4.26 per us gallon of diesel (converted from my hometown price of $1.10 per liter) = $35,500 life time fuel cost
In Canada (according to ramtruck.ca) the ED is a $4500 cost over the Hemi. Now look at the numbers
35,500-30952+4500= $9048 in additional cost over ten years to own the EcoDiesel. Add to that increased maintenance costs and the difference is even more.
Even the Hemi at 18mpg carries a cost of $36,111. The EcoDiesel will still cost $5111 more before maintenance.
People get sooooo caught up with who has the best mpg they never stop and run the numbers. Its very black and white. The Ecodiesel has 135 hp less than the 2.7 EB and 155 hp less than the hemi. It will cost the owner thousands more over the life of the truck. Financially its a poor choice in my mind. And it only pulls 500lb more than the 2.7 EB and 1000lb less than the Hemi! Seriously why is this thing so damn popular with auto journalists....I don't get it.
The following users liked this post:
RainDesert (01-17-2015)
01-15-2015, 12:13 PM
#36
Auto journalists don't pay for their vehicles OR their fuel. Or the maintenance for that matter. 
It's a curiosity for them, and it's easy for them to decide how to spend YOUR money.
It's a curiosity for them, and it's easy for them to decide how to spend YOUR money.
01-15-2015, 12:20 PM
#37
One thing with the math @ 21mpg on the ford... real world is not always going to see it. check this forum as well as explorer, escape etc on the eco... advertised estimated mpg is with no turbos kicking in. unless you drive like grandma, it aint never gonna happen.... then the problem is when you don't use the turbos.. they get all gummed up with carbon and have other issues
01-15-2015, 12:54 PM
#38
Senior Member
One thing with the math @ 21mpg on the ford... real world is not always going to see it. check this forum as well as explorer, escape etc on the eco... advertised estimated mpg is with no turbos kicking in. unless you drive like grandma, it aint never gonna happen.... then the problem is when you don't use the turbos.. they get all gummed up with carbon and have other issues
01-15-2015, 12:59 PM
#39
Senior Member
This why I've said there is no way I'd buy a diesel 1/2 ton. It also convinced me to to buy a Jetta diesel work car. While the MPG is attractive (and the low end torque great!), the math just doesn't work out good enough on a diesel compared to a similarly sized 4 cylinder car.
01-15-2015, 01:05 PM
#40
Senior Member
One thing with the math @ 21mpg on the ford... real world is not always going to see it. check this forum as well as explorer, escape etc on the eco... advertised estimated mpg is with no turbos kicking in. unless you drive like grandma, it aint never gonna happen.... then the problem is when you don't use the turbos.. they get all gummed up with carbon and have other issues