Go Back   iRV2 Forums > TRAVEL TRAILER, 5th WHEEL & TRUCK CAMPER FORUMS > Trailer Towing and Tow Vehicles Discussion
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-26-2013, 10:15 AM   #15
Moderator Emeritus
 
RustyJC's Avatar


 
Texas Boomers Club
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Cypress, Texas USA
Posts: 8,854
I believe Ram's marketing strategy, as I mentioned on another thread, is to offer a towing rating close to the 5.7L Hemi while offering equivalent or better fuel mileage than the 25 MPG EPA highway rating of the 3.6L Pentastar V6. Ram's marketing philosophy if that if you want to tow heavy, they offer Cummins-powered 2500 and 3500 trucks for that purpose.

Rusty
__________________

__________________
2016 Ram Longhorn 3500 Dually 4x4 CCLB, 385/900 Cummins, Aisin AS69RC, 4.10
2014.5 DRV Mobile Suites 38RSSA #6972
Come join us on a TEXAS BOOMERS rally!
RustyJC is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 09-26-2013, 10:47 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Arch Hoagland's Avatar
 
Monaco Owners Club
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Clovis, CA, USA
Posts: 5,908
What kind of prices are they showing?

Seems to me the price of pickups is WAY too high. Especially for a retired guy.
__________________

__________________
2004 Monaco La Palma 36DBD, W22, 8.1, 7.1 MPG
2000 LEXUS RX300 FWD 22MPG 4020 LBS
Arch Hoagland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2013, 05:34 PM   #17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyWren View Post
Well, maybe not a new Ford, but back in the day Ford had a 5.7L engine (350 cc). L'il Bro had a '92 F-150 with 5.7L engine. Gas hog, but reliable. Just nit-picking...
It is actually a 5.8L 351. Chevy had the 5.7L 350.
__________________
jamesrxx951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2013, 05:38 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 288
OF all the diesel announcements that have me excited the Cummins/Titan should be interesting to watch.

UD
__________________
Uncle Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2013, 09:55 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
wingnut60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wherever the Suites is
Posts: 2,982
Hey, Smokey--
Back in the day they hadn't invented litres in the US--it was all cubic inches. And I thought the engines that size were 351s in the 150s and 350s in work trucks. Same engine, but different designations depending on what chassis they were in? Not nit-picking, just wondering if I was dreaming...
Joe
__________________
'15 38RSSA Mobile Suites
'05 36TK3 Mobile Suites--retired but not forgotten
'17 F450--trying one more Ford
'09 F450--died, replaced with '10--retired
wingnut60 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2013, 10:07 PM   #20
Member
 
H-Rambler25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 71
Hey they missed the Tundra with a 5.7L-V8.
__________________
H-Rambler25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2013, 10:11 PM   #21
Member
 
DougL3NC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: China Grove, NC
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyWren View Post
Well, maybe not a new Ford, but back in the day Ford had a 5.7L engine (350 cc). L'il Bro had a '92 F-150 with 5.7L engine. Gas hog, but reliable. Just nit-picking...
5.8L and it was 351ci.
__________________
DougL3NC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 10:30 AM   #22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by wingnut60 View Post
Hey, Smokey--
Back in the day they hadn't invented litres in the US--it was all cubic inches. And I thought the engines that size were 351s in the 150s and 350s in work trucks. Same engine, but different designations depending on what chassis they were in? Not nit-picking, just wondering if I was dreaming...
Joe
350CI was a GM engine. Ford makes a F350 chassis though.
__________________
jamesrxx951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 10:48 AM   #23
Moderator Emeritus
 
RustyJC's Avatar


 
Texas Boomers Club
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Cypress, Texas USA
Posts: 8,854
If you REALLY want to confuse yourself, the Windsor block 351 Ford had a 4.000" bore and a 3.500" stroke. Ford also built an FE-series engine that had the same 4.000" bore and 3.500" stroke, but they called it a 352. Go figure.....

Rusty
__________________
2016 Ram Longhorn 3500 Dually 4x4 CCLB, 385/900 Cummins, Aisin AS69RC, 4.10
2014.5 DRV Mobile Suites 38RSSA #6972
Come join us on a TEXAS BOOMERS rally!
RustyJC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 10:50 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Dave View Post
OF all the diesel announcements that have me excited the Cummins/Titan should be interesting to watch.

UD
Unless they rebuild the Titan into something stronger then the Cummins is a waste of time. The Cummins won't deliver the mpg's that the VM will, that's why Ram went with the VM. Of course it's an in house motor too, so that helps. But I read an article from a Ram spokesman and his main comment was that the Cummins didn't take the Ram 1500 in the direction they were headed.
I still don't see the appeal of a Titan/Cummins combo. The Titan is the worst selling full size truck on the market.
__________________
Cumminsfan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2013, 01:25 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cumminsfan View Post
Unless they rebuild the Titan into something stronger then the Cummins is a waste of time. The Cummins won't deliver the mpg's that the VM will, that's why Ram went with the VM. Of course it's an in house motor too, so that helps. But I read an article from a Ram spokesman and his main comment was that the Cummins didn't take the Ram 1500 in the direction they were headed.
I still don't see the appeal of a Titan/Cummins combo. The Titan is the worst selling full size truck on the market.
When the Titan debuted it brought many many firsts to the market and was the clear winner in 04 outpulling, out-featuring, and out comforting the domestics

Its hard to get trucks today "optioned" as well as the titan was in 04.

It took a long time for the domestics to catch it's feature set and equal its performance.

Titan suffers from simply being old now.

The cummins will outperform the VM, and...its a cummins.

Uncle Dave
__________________
Uncle Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2013, 09:11 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
wingnut60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wherever the Suites is
Posts: 2,982
Rusty,
The FE series was what I was thinking about, not the Windsors. FE was the Y-block design and seem to remember that it had 1 cu in difference in terminology depending on if it was in a truck or a car??
Getting too old to accurately remember what I worked on as a teenager...
Joe
__________________
'15 38RSSA Mobile Suites
'05 36TK3 Mobile Suites--retired but not forgotten
'17 F450--trying one more Ford
'09 F450--died, replaced with '10--retired
wingnut60 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2013, 10:48 PM   #27
Moderator Emeritus
 
RustyJC's Avatar


 
Texas Boomers Club
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Cypress, Texas USA
Posts: 8,854
The FE displacements were 332, 352, 361 (truck engine), 390, 406, 410 (Mercury engine), 427 and 428 cubic inches. The FE was a deep skirt block like the smaller Y-block 239, 256 (Mercury engine), 272, 292 and 312 cubic inch engines which was the engine with the Y-8 (Y-block) fender emblems.

Rusty
__________________

__________________
2016 Ram Longhorn 3500 Dually 4x4 CCLB, 385/900 Cummins, Aisin AS69RC, 4.10
2014.5 DRV Mobile Suites 38RSSA #6972
Come join us on a TEXAS BOOMERS rally!
RustyJC is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.