Chrysler flooded with over 8,000 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel orders in 3 days

[Jeff Kleb]

Diesel Truck


I applaud Chrysler for trying to fill a niche in the light truck market, but I am very skeptical of the MPG numbers they are claiming. Also, as mentioned above, it is not so easy to 'bypass' or delete that emissions equipment - especially if you have state-mandated exhaust inspections or your truck needs warranty work & your computer rats you out.

I drive an International with a HUGE 11 or 12L Cummins ISM diesel engine in it (2006 - the last without a DPF); which now as 472,000 miles on it. The engine runs as strong as ever (for having just 350 hp & 1650 lbs/ft of torque), but the rest of the truck is falling apart rapidly.

We have some newer Sterlings (Freightliner's junk line that ceased production in 2010) and Freightliners with the Cummins ISC (8.3L) and the emissions crap gives us NOTHING BUT PROBLEMS! They spend more time in the shop than on the road, it seems. The mechanic is not able to 'bypass' the emissions stuff and the dealership (expensive) always has to "reflash" the computer system and remove the DPF for cleaning -- even with our trucks doing more than enough highway driving day in and day out.

I would be VERY LEERY of purchasing anything with a diesel engine - at least until manufacturers get the bugs worked out. It is tough for them to make a 'clean' diesel engine - and they use a lot more fuel on the ULSD fuel than did the trucks with the older engines that ran on LSD fuel.

 

[-JD-]

^Most journalist reviews have reported similar or better economy than the EPA ratings. I've seen a few that have averaged as high as 32MPG on the highway.

 

[Jeff Kleb]

Epa


Typically, MOST diesel trucks never have EPA mileage estimates done because they are over 7,500 pounds gross vehicle weight and are exempt. The Ram 2500, Sierra/Silverado 2500HD and the F-Series Super Duty fall into this group.

Since many are used for work purposes, they generally do a lot of idling - which earns zero miles per gallon.

I hope it is true that the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel will exceed expectations and provide years of reliable service to those who purchase them.

 

[rinkman07]

The "ECO" part would keep my from even contemplating one. As other users mentioned all those emissions parts are complicated and expensive. Removing them isn't so simple anymore either. The tuners that allow you to run without that stuff for the 6.7 Powerstroke are all 1K+ just for the electronics alone. The EPA has cracked down and "deleting" all that fun stuff from your modern diesel gets pricey quick.


- Jeff

I sold my 2011 duramax because of problems with emissions.

Some things that I think...

1. DEF is the "way of the future"

2. If I needed it, I would still buy the Ram diesel 1500, but not the first year it comes out. Let them sort out all the issues for a year or two.

3. Delete software will always be available for different/multiple platforms however it will become harder and harder to crack ECM's for tuning purposes, increasing the price for these "tunes" steadily.

4. There are clean diesel tunes that still run with the emissions equipment that are putting down serious horsepower gains.

5. You can tune MOST any newer diesel without emissions equipment to run very clean without blowing hardly any "black smoke".

6. The big fad for a handful of diesel enthusiasts over the years was to run these "smoke tunes" giving the entire diesel community a bad rap overall. (Just part of the reason I think the EPA is cracking down)

7. I don't think automakers had enough time to engineer the emissions equipment for their vehicles and instead just "slapped something on there" without enough testing.

 

[gm350reratliff]

I sold my 2011 duramax because of problems with emissions.

Some things that I think...

1. DEF is the "way of the future"

2. If I needed it, I would still buy the Ram diesel 1500, but not the first year it comes out. Let them sort out all the issues for a year or two.

3. Delete software will always be available for different/multiple platforms however it will become harder and harder to crack ECM's for tuning purposes, increasing the price for these "tunes" steadily.

4. There are clean diesel tunes that still run with the emissions equipment that are putting down serious horsepower gains.

5. You can tune MOST any newer diesel without emissions equipment to run very clean without blowing hardly any "black smoke".

6. The big fad for a handful of diesel enthusiasts over the years was to run these "smoke tunes" giving the entire diesel community a bad rap overall. (Just part of the reason I think the EPA is cracking down)

7. I don't think automakers had enough time to engineer the emissions equipment for their vehicles and instead just "slapped something on there" without enough testing.

I agree with all your points, especially #2 and #7.

I do think the OEMs tested but on their course and not real world conditions. Should be interesting once Nissan and Toyota show up to the party.

 

[Jeff614]

Agreed on all points.

Those that intentionally tune their newer diesels to blow smoke only adds to people having the wrong perception of diesels.

I took a look at some of the "DPF-on" tunes for the 6.7 Powerstroke, some seem happy running them, but with more power comes, more emissions, and more regens/shortened DPF life.

DEF does seem here to stay and overall seems like a good system. Still another part to break however. The heater on my tank failed to the tune of an $800 repair bill.

It's great to see OEM's offering diesel engines in vehicles other than mainly 3/4 and up trucks (I know there's been a few exceptions like VW). I'm sure it would be even better for those manufacturers if emissions requirements stayed the same long enough for them to work out the bugs.

Obama only just recently announced the next tier of emissions standards for class 8 trucks. No idea if/when lower class OEM's will also be required to meet similar standards but I'm sure it's difficult for them to work out the bugs in a system that is constantly changing.


- Jeff

 

[LittleCaesar]

I spoke to my buddy again who woks at a Texas Ram dealership and he said while all their pre orders are filled by customers, many dealerships have made the orders in hopes customers will come to buy, which I think they initially will. How long buyers come to Ram dealerships for the 1/2 ton diesel to buy is what counts.

I then asked him about the lack of payload capacity. He tone of voice went from being my friend to spewing out sales embellishment that his salesmen would use. Blah, blah, blah jargon. Through all his verbal muck I got that Ram seemed concerned enough that if the payload capacity of the Ecodiesel was even remotely close to that of the 3/4 ton, that certain buyers (contractors, farmers, etc.) might opt for the Ecodiesel with it being cheaper and not choose the Cummins, which would eat into Chrysler's bottom line.hwell:

 

[WillK]

Either way, this is all win//win for the consumer whether you buy a half-ton truck or not. Next it will be diesel SUV's (I know there's a few now, but ones people can afford), then diesel cars.

Yes, diesel is more expensive to produce and does cost more at the pump, but if a vehicle is getting 30-40% better fuel economy,less trips to the pump.

And all of this be done without sacrificing power or performance,towing or otherwise.

As for gas mileage claims, back in 2007, I caravaned with a few Dodge Ram 2500 Quad Cab owners who had the Cummins inline 6. We traveled to and from NC they were getting over 24-25 mpg in their tuned Cummins, which were fairly loaded with people and cargo, while I was getting 19 in my gas truck. (My truck still looked better tho...:thumb
I wouldn't worry about the emissions, I'm sure the mileage will be there.
People have to remember that if the mileage isn't there, the trucks won't sell and all these companies are making a huge investment in the diesel half-ton market, investments they'd like to see a return on.

 

[WillK]

On a side note and just a question....

Has anyone really seen or heard (besides internet sources) that Toyota is actually partnering with Cummins as well??

If that is actually true and not speculation, that will be huge for Toyota.

 

[LittleCaesar]

On a side note and just a question....

Has anyone really seen or heard (besides internet sources) that Toyota is actually partnering with Cummins as well??

If that is actually true and not speculation, that will be huge for Toyota.

I think that is more fact than fiction: no definitive PR from Toyo stating such. I would imagine that Nissan would be peeved to put it mildly if the Tundra had the same engine as the Titan.

I would also think that it would be fiscally more viable for Toyota to have Hino build them a diesel or shoe one in the Tundra that is already built.

 

[02SE]

If a Cummins in a Toyota comes to pass, I think a big factor for Toyota choosing a Cummins engine over one of their own Diesel engines, (the Diesel engine from the 200 series Landcruiser sold in other markets would make a great Tundra engine) would be the instant cachet the name carries with the sometimes fiercely loyal truck buying segment.

 

[rinkman07]

Agreed on all points.

Those that intentionally tune their newer diesels to blow smoke only adds to people having the wrong perception of diesels.

I took a look at some of the "DPF-on" tunes for the 6.7 Powerstroke, some seem happy running them, but with more power comes, more emissions, and more regens/shortened DPF life.

DEF does seem here to stay and overall seems like a good system. Still another part to break however. The heater on my tank failed to the tune of an $800 repair bill.

It's great to see OEM's offering diesel engines in vehicles other than mainly 3/4 and up trucks (I know there's been a few exceptions like VW). I'm sure it would be even better for those manufacturers if emissions requirements stayed the same long enough for them to work out the bugs.

Obama only just recently announced the next tier of emissions standards for class 8 trucks. No idea if/when lower class OEM's will also be required to meet similar standards but I'm sure it's difficult for them to work out the bugs in a system that is constantly changing.


- Jeff

I had a 100,000 mile power-train warranty on my 2011 but the emissions warranty only last until 50,000 miles. Explain that to me?

I had my DEF tank dropped and replaced multiple times. Multiple sensors replaced multiple times. I was told many times to use ONLY the DEF the dealer provided (AC Delco) and not use any other like Blu-DEF. Explain that to me? If DEF fluid stays on the shelf too long or isn't in a temperature controlled atmosphere it goes bad. Many in more northern climates have had their DEF tanks freeze over (to my knowledge GM issued a recall and installed tank heaters in some vehicles) Is that what you had problems with?

It's nice to see the rams have a DEF fluid level gauge from what I can see mine didn't have that.

 

[rinkman07]

Yes, diesel is more expensive to produce and does cost more at the pump, but if a vehicle is getting 30-40% better fuel economy,less trips to the pump.

Sorry I don't know how to double quote, but I was always under the impressions just from hear-say that diesel was a less refined fuel and cheaper to produce?

 

[LandCruiser]

Sorry I don't know how to double quote, but I was always under the impressions just from hear-say that diesel was a less refined fuel and cheaper to produce?

The high sulfur off road crap is cheap.

The ultra low sulfur highway diesel that is REQUIRED for all road going vehicles, otherwise Obama and the EPA will kick your ass, is more expensive to produce.

 

[blizz86]

I think that is more fact than fiction: no definitive PR from Toyo stating such. I would imagine that Nissan would be peeved to put it mildly if the Tundra had the same engine as the Titan.

I would also think that it would be fiscally more viable for Toyota to have Hino build them a diesel or shoe one in the Tundra that is already built.

According to reports ive read, toyota was in talks with Hino for a US diesel option for the tundra. But with the recession in 2008, talks dissolved.

Reps for toyota reporting to media about a cummins tundra in 2016 are saying that he cummins is a substitute for the HINO engine and its a placeholder. We'll see how it goes.

 

[Jeff614]

I had a 100,000 mile power-train warranty on my 2011 but the emissions warranty only last until 50,000 miles. Explain that to me?

I had my DEF tank dropped and replaced multiple times. Multiple sensors replaced multiple times. I was told many times to use ONLY the DEF the dealer provided (AC Delco) and not use any other like Blu-DEF. Explain that to me? If DEF fluid stays on the shelf too long or isn't in a temperature controlled atmosphere it goes bad. Many in more northern climates have had their DEF tanks freeze over (to my knowledge GM issued a recall and installed tank heaters in some vehicles) Is that what you had problems with?

It's nice to see the rams have a DEF fluid level gauge from what I can see mine didn't have that.

Sounds like you and I are on the same page when it comes to the emission systems in the new heavy-duty trucks!

I asked the same question about the the DEF tank being under the then expired emissions warranty and not the engine warranty when, doesn't the engine require the DEF system to function???

Feel you on the "only use the dealer's brand" too, when I took mine in and the tank had to be replaced they of course had to dump all that fluid and charge me back for a refill with their own.

It's nice to see Ram's have an actual level gauge. The Ford's only say whether you are "less than 1/2 full" and then another warning when you are close to running out. The dealer mentioned numerous times that overfilling the tank (besides that stuff being bad for your paint) wreaks havoc with the sensors in the top of the tank.

The issue with my truck in particular was the heater inside the tank went bad. On the Ford's, the tank, heater, and pump are all one assembly. If there's a problem anywhere in there that can't be remedied with programming they replace the entire tank assembly.

It was certainly frustrating after replacing a radiator not long before that and then this happening right before I began the process of selling the truck.

Overall I still feel if the OEM's can keep to meeting this tier of emissions standards with this type of equipment the kinks will eventually work themselves out, and looking back I was very happy with my 6.7. The emissions/DPF process was far smoother than the 6.4.

In the end I suppose it's one of those "pay to play" scenarios. I no longer needed to own such a vehicle so it only made sense not to be stuck with the big bills any longer. I certainly miss it though. Cleaner running vehicles (diesels, gassers, hybrids, etc...) are undoubtedly the future, hopefully they can reach a compromise between mileage and durability when it comes to the diesels. The evolution of those motors since the days of the 12valve Cummins and 7.3 Powerstroke 10-15 yrs. ago is crazy.


- Jeff

 

[Blacksunshyne]

The high sulfur off road crap is cheap.

The ultra low sulfur highway diesel that is REQUIRED for all road going vehicles, otherwise Obama and the EPA will kick your ass, is more expensive to produce.

There is no high sulfur diesel available in the US. In 2011 it was mandated that all diesel fuels in the US be ULSD. Both fuels are the same except for a red dye is added to the off road diesel. That is to mark it for easy identification as it is not taxed. If they catch you running red dyed off road diesel in on road trucks the fines are very serious.

That is the reason for the off road diesel being cheaper than on road diesel, it does not have all the taxes attached to it. There is no difference in the refining or production of the product.

 

[WillK]

Sorry I don't know how to double quote, but I was always under the impressions just from hear-say that diesel was a less refined fuel and cheaper to produce?

I thought the refining of diesel was a more expensive or took more oil to refine then regular gas (?). Again, I'm not 100% sure on that.

On a side note, I'm from STL originally, what part do you live in? (Or where did you go to high school)?

 

[-JD-]

Here's a good explanation of why diesel costs more than gasoline:

WHY DIESEL COSTS MORE THAN GASOLINE

Diesel fuel had traditionally been less expensive than gasoline, since it was easier to refine from crude oil. However, beginning in 2004, retail diesel fuel prices have consistently been higher than retail gasoline prices. There are several reasons why.

Seasonality is one factor that had always affected diesel fuel prices. Diesel fuel, also known as number 2 distillate, is essentially the same as home heating oil (the major difference is that diesel fuel contains less sulfur). In colder winters when home heating oil is in more demand, diesel prices typically climbed faster than those for gasoline.

Also, beginning in September, gas demand declines, but diesel fuel demand increases as more diesel fuel is required for the machinery to harvest and transport crops.

(There are some differences between the more common distillate fuels. Off-road diesel, intended for farm machinery and other non-transportation purposes, is dyed red to distinguish it from on-road diesel, which has both state and federal transportation taxes. Home heating oil is very similar to both diesel fuels but contains more particulates, which would damage a sensitive diesel engine if used in a vehicle.)

While seasonality has long played a role in demand, the more recent change in market dynamics, where diesel fuel is consistently more than gasoline, is a function of several broad factors.


Strong Diesel Fuel Demand in Other Countries

The United States is a gasoline-dominant motor fuels market. Approximately 98% of passenger vehicles in the United States are powered by gasoline, with fewer than 2% powered by diesel fuel. Consequently, the refining infrastructure is designed for optimum efficiency in producing gasoline. From a typical 42-gallon barrel of oil, the refining process delivers around 18 to 21 gallons of gasoline and 10 to 12 gallons of distillate, plus some other refined products. Refinery yields can somewhat be tweaked, but to produce significantly more distillate, they would need to undergo significant upgrades costing billions of dollars.

While the U.S. remains predominantly reliant on gasoline, other countries throughout the world are more heavily reliant on diesel fuel. Diesel fuel is used in the majority of new passenger vehicles in Europe. Strong international demand for diesel fuel €" for both passenger vehicles and for industrial machinery in the rapidly growing developing countries like China and India €" has placed a premium on diesel fuel imports.

U.S. Diesel Demand Increasing While Gasoline Demand Decreases
While U.S. gasoline demand has decreased since peaking in 2007, demand for diesel fuel has remained strong. Diesel fuel powers most of the country's buses, trucks, trains and farm equipment. It also powers an increasing number of passenger vehicles. U.S. clean diesel vehicle sales increased 25.6% in 2012, almost double the overall auto market's increase.

More diesel-powered vehicles mean more demand for diesel fuel. Comparing October 2010 demand to that of October 2012, demand for gasoline has decreased 3.4% while demand for on-road diesel fuel has increased 11.8%.


Introduction of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD)

ULSD is a clean-burning diesel fuel that is defined by the Environmental Protection Agency to have a maximum sulfur content of 15 parts per million (ppm). It was gradually phased into the market between 2006 and 2010, replacing the on-highway diesel fuel, known as Low Sulfur Diesel (LSD), which can have as much as 500 ppm sulfur content. In 2010, on-highway diesel fuel was 100 percent ULSD. ULSD is required for use in model year 2007 and later vehicles, which are equipped with advanced emissions control systems.

There are enormous environmental benefits to ULSD, but there are also logistical challenges. Special care was required when transporting both types of diesel fuel during the transition. This included pipelines, bulk terminals and tankers. A batch of ULSD that has even slight contamination with LSD could lead to significant fines if the batch of ULSD exceeded a certain level. In addition, to produce ULSD the refining industry had to invest approximately $8 billion in infrastructure upgrades and the daily production costs for ULSD are higher than LSD, since the fuel requires more refining. This influences the cost of all diesel and results in a premium for ULSD, which is estimated to add about 10 cents per gallon to the cost of diesel fuel.


Taxes

The final factor in why diesel fuel prices are higher is taxes. The federal tax on diesel fuel is 6 cents more than gasoline per gallon (24.4 cents vs. 18.4 cents). The last increase in the federal tax was in the early 1990s, back when diesel fuel was usually less expensive than gasoline. Taxes do not factor into why diesel fuel prices are higher than gasoline today €" strong demand and USLD are the causes €" but taxes are a factor in overall prices.

Why Diesel Costs More Than Gasoline | NACS Online ? Your Business ? NACS Retail Fuels Reports ? 2013 NACS Retail Fuels Report

 

[rinkman07]

Good read! Thanks for posting that.