2017 f 250 6.2 towing, possible trade Ram 6.4 for Ford

[GearHd6]

It's a throttle game, you can't just mat the throttle. The engine has plenty of torque to pull through that situation.

[BigH]

Originally Posted by GearHd6

It's a throttle game, you can't just mat the throttle. The engine has plenty of torque to pull through that situation.

I don't understand your opinion. You think the truck is in 1st gear? And letting off the throttle to allow an upshift into second gear will gain speed? We are talking about the 6.4 gas motor...right?

[GearHd6]

Yes, there's a safety built in that won't let it go over 4k in first if the throttle is matted. Let off the throttle and it'll shift to second and all will be well, the engine torque will keep pulling and building speed.

[BigH]

Originally Posted by GearHd6

Yes, there's a safety built in that won't let it go over 4k in first if the throttle is matted. Let of the throttle and it'll shift to second and all will be well, the engine torque will keep pulling and building speed.

Your telling me a heavy duty truck will not allow rpms over 4k in first? I don't believe it. Nor do I believe that Ram truck has a first gear ratio that will be at 4k rpms at 30 mph.

The truck in the video is in second gear and has no gear to go to at that speed. An upshift will kill it and a downshift is near redline.

[GearHd6]

Google search it. The info is out there.

[BigH]

Originally Posted by GearHd6

Google search it. The info is out there.

Link it please.

[aircommuter]

They seem to think you mean let completely off the the throttle, it’s only a slight lift of the pedal that allows the shift to take place while full fuel is still available.
Note I said available, most modern computer controlled vehicles defuel the engine slightly upon upship so the transmission doesn’t have to engage the clutches under full power. This technique along with better steel, electronic control of clutches allowing for less complex valve bodies, and sometimes the use of Ravingneaux planetaries has allowed the makers to put more speeds into the transmissions today without them getting too big and heavy.

[BigH]

If it is true that Ram will not let the rpms above 4k in first when under full throttle I can't believe an upshift at that point is going to help anything...the truck shifted down into whichever gear from the one above it because it couldn't pull the load in that gear...slight lift of the throttle or whatever.

[GearHd6]

If you mat anything it kicks down.

It's like my old Cummins Ram with the 47RE auto, if you matted it, it would unlock the converter and just wind out and not make power, lift just slightly off the floor and the converter locks, then it'll pull a house again.

[aircommuter]

The upshift would allow the vehicle speed to increase. How else can you go faster without doing that? The use of the throttle to the floor takes off the converter lockup clutch as well, the purpose is to prevent overheating on extreme pulls. It’s in the owners manual and has been for years.

[BigH]

Originally Posted by aircommuter

The upshift would allow the vehicle speed to increase. How else can you go faster without doing that? The use of the throttle to the floor takes off the converter lockup clutch as well, the purpose is to prevent overheating on extreme pulls. It’s in the owners manual and has been for years.

The truck downshifted because it couldn't pull the load in the higher gear...

So you would roll off/slightly lift/whatever the throttle from 4000rpms to allow an upshift which will bring the rpms to about 2500rpms...and you're telling me this will allow you to increase speed pulling a trailer up a big grade with the 6,4 hemi? There is no chance you will convince me of this...

[GearHd6]

So you're a Chevy guy? We get it. We won't convince you.

[BigH]

Originally Posted by GearHd6

So you're a Chevy guy? We get it. We won't convince you.

I'm not loyal to any brand...I've had a Dodge/Ram/Chevy/Nissan/Ford. I drive what suits my needs. I drove a 6.4 Hemi with 4:10s when shopping for my last truck and a Ford and the new Nissan...My 2011 Ram was a great truck.

If you can convince yourself that pulling that load, from whatever gear, from 2500rpms will get you gaining speed up that grade...you win.

[GearHd6]

Just don't jam your foot to the floor and everything works fine. I don't know how else to explain it. Those idiots in that video just stuck their foot to the floor. I don't need to be convinced because I know how it works. I don't think I've ever just jammed my foot to the floor pulling anything with a light truck.

[aircommuter]

I don’t think the rpm drop would be that high, have you done any calculations to verify that? Don’t forget the torque converter ratio.
Bottom line is these comparisons mean nothing, they are just rigged up to whoever pays them, and no 2 drivers would drive alike anyway. I have driven numerous vehicles also and I have had a class1 CDL for 45 years. I have built performance engines and transmissions for trucks and cars in my shop and still do in my home retirement shop.

[ronheater70]

In that video, the ram was in failsafe i think. I recall something about that.
I know the ram destroyed the chevy (and I believe was slightly better than the ford) in most other areas. I drove the Chevy, the Ford and dodge, but they were 2014-2016 models, and at that time I felt the Ram to have the superior motor (still do for that matter) and tows what i need. Now I know Ford updated their 6.2 in 2017 to have torque similar to the 6.4, but still not as much HP. So what I am trying to get a bearing on, is will the new ford motor make me want it. IMHO I'm not interested in the Chevy..I'm only wanting to compare between the Ford and Ram. Not that I hate Chevy, and I feel they make a solid truck.
I'm not trying to get in a pissing match with anyone about their favorites here.
I like my truck, it is however having some (what I feel is) warranty issues that I feel should be addressed by Dealer, that aren't getting addressed.. As such I am thinking of a different mAnufacturer that I had positive experiences with in the past.. thats all folks!

[GearHd6]

I understand that Ron and I hope you find the truck that makes you happy. I will tell you though, and I'm sure you know this, all dealers now a days absolutely SUCK. It's rare that you ever find one that actually does something the way it should be done. To me, unless you know someone closely at a dealership you're going to get less than superior service. I'm not a Ram fan by any stretch it just happens to fit my needs for the amount of money I felt like spending.

[BigH]

I know the ram destroyed the chevy (and I believe was slightly better than the ford) in most other areas. I drove the Chevy, the Ford and dodge, but they were 2014-2016 models, ...

Destroyed the Chevy and slightly better than the Ford? … Let me sum it up for you: The first time they tried to test the Ford it broke down. Ram 12 brake applications downhill...Chevy 13. The Ram was way behind on the climb. That's why they gave the win to the Chevy in the years you mention. When they got the Ford back from being fixed it had a 3.73 rear end so it reached max CGVW before it could get the same weight the Chevy and Ram tested with but it isn't hard to see there isn't a nanny restricting the Ford by the performance it gave going up the grade and it had 12 brake applications.

Originally Posted by ronheater70

In that video, the ram was in failsafe i think. I recall something about that.

TFLT have at least two videos of 6.4 Rams with the same result. Anyway, buy what you want and drive what you want with whatever level of understanding suits you. I answered your thread to alleviate any worry about the Ford not being able to perform and then questioned responses to my post...

It isn't about favorites for me. I went back to buy the 6.4 Ram I drove but it sold while I was still shopping and stock was so limited due to the end of the year they couldn't find another one equipped like I needed. I Wanted the Ford SD but my 2016 was such a pile and Ford sucked so bad dealing with the lemon that I couldn't live with myself if I did buy it. The next time I'm in the market I will read/test everything that will perform the task I need to make my decision. It doesn't sound like your Ram is working out all that well...I hope you get something that works for you.

I really would like to know what weakness Ram needs to protect with their crippling nanny...

[ronheater70]

Originally Posted by BigH

Destroyed the Chevy and slightly better than the Ford? … Let me sum it up for you: The first time they tried to test the Ford it broke down. Ram 12 brake applications downhill...Chevy 13. The Ram was way behind on the climb. That's why they gave the win to the Chevy in the years you mention. When they got the Ford back from being fixed it had a 3.73 rear end so it reached max CGVW before it could get the same weight the Chevy and Ram tested with but it isn't hard to see there isn't a nanny restricting the Ford by the performance it gave going up the grade and it had 12 brake applications.


TFLT have at least two videos of 6.4 Rams with the same result. Anyway, buy what you want and drive what you want with whatever level of understanding suits you. I answered your thread to alleviate any worry about the Ford not being able to perform and then questioned responses to my post...

It isn't about favorites for me. I went back to buy the 6.4 Ram I drove but it sold while I was still shopping and stock was so limited due to the end of the year they couldn't find another one equipped like I needed. I Wanted the Ford SD but my 2016 was such a pile and Ford sucked so bad dealing with the lemon that I couldn't live with myself if I did buy it. The next time I'm in the market I will read/test everything that will perform the task I need to make my decision. It doesn't sound like your Ram is working out all that well...I hope you get something that works for you.

I really would like to know what weakness Ram needs to protect with their crippling nanny...

The weight on the ram was nearly 3K more than the chevy and ford, they based the weight on 90% of the towing limits.So they were not towing the same weights. HOWEVER it should still tow within its limit so it still problem. It did have faster times on the lower section. These trucks have a horrible 1st to 2nd gap, whoever decide to put a transmission thats normally payed to a 900 ft lb torque truck into one with 1/2 that should be shot. Im looking at he ford pretty much based on the fact that I had an eco boost prior to the ram and had good luck and dealer service with it So I have a good dealer and experience with Ford, and not so Much with ram. The chevy dear for me is a bit far away, well really not to far, Bu a lot of traffic I have to deal with to get to it.

[BigH]

Originally Posted by ronheater70

The weight on the ram was nearly 3K more than the chevy and ford, they based the weight on 90% of the towing limits.So they were not towing the same weights. HOWEVER it should still tow within its limit so it still problem. It did have faster times on the lower section. These trucks have a horrible 1st to 2nd gap, whoever decide to put a transmission thats normally payed to a 900 ft lb torque truck into one with 1/2 that should be shot. Im looking at he ford pretty much based on the fact that I had an eco boost prior to the ram and had good luck and dealer service with it So I have a good dealer and experience with Ford, and not so Much with ram. The chevy dear for me is a bit far away, well really not to far, Bu a lot of traffic I have to deal with to get to it.

I totally agree about the transmission but you are incorrect on the towing numbers.

Last test comparing the vehicles in question: Ram had 11,900lbs trailer and 2500lbs payload. The Chevy had a 13,500lbs trailer.
The other time the test was performed the weights were within 100lbs of each other with the same results.

The recent test with the Ford gasser had the same weight trailer as the Ram but it had a 3.73 rear end.

Edit: in the last test the Ram was reg cab 2wd...the Chevy was a 4door 4x4. I'd be willing to bet the combined gvw was very close.