Dodge Ram

You don't need 4x4 to drive down a dirt road faggot.

I'd like to see her try to dodge my ram.

>I refuse to buy a v6 or whatever with a turbo.
not that I would ever push someone away from the Coyote or LS, but if you're not going to be towing or anything strenuous why focus against the Ferd 2.7 or 3.5?
also
>needing 4x4
it's a pretty big price jump for it, so keep in mind that more than likely, a locking diff and caution will help you the most. But you know where you live and where you go, so at least keep the price increase in mind. occasional snow 4WD necessity.

So has the Dodge marketing machine infiltrated auto publications or what? All I read is how great the Ram is, but when you ask some people or seek out problem posts online, it's nothing but trash talk.

What gives?

OP. before I give you my thought just remember. look at actual facts and do research other than on a Taiwanese stamp collecting board.

I have owned all 3 of the big bad Detroit triplets.

Ram: 5.7 Is a solid solid engine platform. this is my vote. when paired with the 8 speed trans it's a nice combo especially for towing/hauling. the 5.7 had no weird gimmicks or tricks on it. no more hemispherical combustion chambers. and it used to be plagued with the dreaded 'Hemi tick' that was caused by weak faulty valve Springs and overheat the engine. however the 2006 model year made huge changes to the engine and it's durability.

chebby: assuming your going with the 5.3 and not the 6.2 since the 6.2 suffers from the GM premium trim Tax. the 5.3 is a hugely reliable engine but my 2011 5.3 had a bad problem with lifters and they gave out about at 100k miles. not a pretty fix. also I have experienced first hand some transmission problems on the older models but I think they have left that in the past. also heard they had problems burning oil but I've never seen it myself.

ferd: E C O B O O S T. no seriously. you said you want a v8. I don't know much about their 5.0 anymore. but their 3.5l ECOBOOST is one hell of an engine. although I question the aluminum body. not because of the strength but because of any body work you might have to do. might be a big bill coming your way.

remember. make legitimate research that isn't on this website before you buy

most "best vehicle" awards are very obviously bought by manufacturers who hate money.

With the Ram's ad campaign, you'd think it was gaining 1000000% sales each year and it was literally the best thing ever. they're serviceable, but like said, compared to other modern trucks it's very apparent they haven't caught up. These things are ignored by certain journalists and award outlets like JDPower.

Also keep in mind that the trim makes a huge difference. a mid-to-low grade Ram is a very unfortunate place to sit. the shifter dial is plastic instead of nice-feeling aluminum, and things are not fitted into place. the headliner flops a bit and the dash depresses when you push buttons. On the Laramie trim, a lot of these things are improved. You still see things like button blanks, flimsy dash panels, and misaligned trim, but on a much smaller scale. You also, in the Ram, get things like coil rear suspension. But since auto reviewers only get the highest everything-including-the-kitchen-sink models which cost 65k they only discuss those models, and the more base practically-priced models get ignored.

Cant help you OP but i myself want an F150 CrewCab 4x4 with the 6.5ft bed in Red.
Trying to decide between it and a new Tundra in the same configuration as above.

I want a new DD.

I agree with the trim point. quality control over the years has gotten better and better and even more so with higher trim levels.

Get the ram OP, just picked up a 2014 Laramie half ton with 22k miles. It rides like a dream and hauls my trailer + snow machines with ease

>You also, in the Ram, get things like coil rear suspension
Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

I'd get a Laramie if I went dodge. LT or LS or whatever if Chevy. LSE if GMC. Lariat or XLT if Ford.

Debatable by certain people. But the coil suspension improves control and stability. People apparently like it... it's a premium option.

As far as your comparisons, the Laramie is probably a head up from the LT or XLT of the Chevy/Ford. Keep that in mind, the Laramie is going to be priced higher. I think the SLT is more comparable.

They're pretty easy to test drive. I recommend taking a day to plan out a trip to the big 3 dealerships, looking through their inventory beforehand for one you're realistically looking at (no premiums, longhorns, etc), and then try to test drive something similar. Don't let the salesman bring out a high trim model, and certainly don't drive the wrong engine, suspension, or transmission. You'll go through all 3 in a day, and you will likely have an answer you're more comfortable with yourself.

Trash made by spics

Ive owned chevy ford and currently in a 4th gen 1500 and quality control is shit get the fucking ford and dont look back, stay away from shitcoboost

10/10

Bumping

7.3 powerstroke. fuck off.

Coincidentally, I just got back from test driving half tons today. I originally went to this Dodge dealership because they had a '14 Titan Pro-4X crew cab in stock, but after driving it and determining it to be hot garbage (a/c didn't work, weird vibration that I don't think was the wheels). It's too bad, the old Titan is the best looking half ton (IMO), and the ground clearance on the Pro-4X is fantastic and the presence of a rear locker is appreciated. I ended up trying out a '14 Ram 1500 (5.7L, 8A, shorter crew cab version, 4wd, Tradesman trim I think). pretty basic inside as expected. I really liked the powertrain and transmission pairing, the ride was smooth. My biggest qualms with Ram trucks are the weenie transfer case that they put on the new ones (no hard mechanical lock supposedly, always through a viscous coupling), and in general the low hanging painted plastic bumper and fragile looking chrome wheels make them less useful for my purposes.

As to why they are so cheap, it's because Chrysler has a well deserved reputation of their stuff falling apart much quicker than the other domestics on both their cars and trucks. Things like suspension components failing sooner, random electrical issues, etc. On the flip side, the Rams are cheap to buy, especially used. As long as you know what you're getting into and/or can work on it yourself, you can get a good deal.

I also tried out a '11 Supercrew F150 in Limited trim (4wd, EB 3.5, short bed) and this I think struck the sweet spot for me in overall utility (good clearance without the lower lip), features, and comfort. Although I'm not sold on the EB motor, I thought I felt it stumble a bit at idle, and overall the response from the Ram's hemi+ 8spd was my favorite.

I'm going to look at Tundras next, I'd driven a '14 SR5 Crewmax a few years ago and remember really liking it. It's pretty solid on the ground clearance front, and I've never heard of anything even somewhat serious going wrong with them.

Thank you for that post. I'm not heartset on the Ram it's just an observation that they are much cheaper for what you get. I plan on owning it beyond it being paid off and driving it for as long as possible, eventually having it as a second vehicle. Given this is the case, should I worry about the somewhat drastic depreciation the Ram seems to enjoy? Do the Ford or GM half tons suffer the same tremendous depreciation. It's wierd how expensive trucks are these days. Why is it so?

one other note, with the trucks I drove, I had read all the reviews panning the Titan's ancient interior and how outdated it was, how hard and cheap the plastics were, etc. Honestly, all three (Nissan, Ram, F150) had similar hard grained plastic everywhere, the F150 had really bizzaro fake light wood plastic pieces in the interior that looked good from like 10 feet away but up close are pretty laughable. Maybe in more high-end trim the interiors are very different, but the low end Ram interior was every bit as plasticky as the Nissan which was every bit as plasticky as the somewhat dressed up Ford. I actually preferred the Nissan seats for comfort. It rode the stiffest thanks to the Pro-4X suspension, and was the loudest as well in part from the General Grabber AT2s, and I'm sure in part due to less insulation. Motor was the loudest as well.

Long story short, if I could get the Titan's body+ clearance, with the Ram's powertrain, with the Ford's heated/cooled perforated leather seats, I'd be all set.

I'm hoping the Tundra proves to be the Goldilocks variant that I'm looking for with a responsive and reliable V8, decent ride while having good clearance, and having an acceptable interior. The problem with Tundras is how they retain their value. Not Tacoma good, but better than any other half ton from what I've seen.

I've shied away from GMs because they're simply too low to the ground for what I need a truck for, the GM's bumper would get ripped off in short order. That and they build all their crewcabs in Mexico.

cause dodge doesnt have fuckin ecoboost
no but seriously, seems like youre on a budget, so why not get something with a little less gas guzzling?

I'll just say that between my brother and his fellow indie-shop owning buddies, Chrysler vehicles including Rams are easily the ones they rip on the most as far as what goes wrong with them, the quality of the OEM parts, and even stuff like the factory documenting their own wiring diagrams wrong. Take that for what it's worth.

If you're planning on buying and holding, then take advantage of the depreciation by buying a low mile used one (maybe even one that has a warranty or is certified), and if you plan to keep it for a very long time then depreciation is not much of a big deal I suppose. But the Toyotas just floor me, even if you do hold onto one of them for 10+ years, when it comes time to sell it's a pleasant surprise just how much they're still worth.

I don't want a turbo and I don't care how much gas the vehicle consumes. Crew cab v8 4x4 with non shit tier trim is what im after. That's it.

What's your budget anyhow?

I'd like to spend under 40 all in. Have a trade that's worth like 18 kbb and I owe 13.

That gives out enormous options, both new and used. I gotta ask, why a 3/4 ton at all if you're just using it for getting around some rough property and hauling some stuff but it didn't sound like heavy towing.

I'd say you just need to get out to the dealerships and drive all of the options back to back. It really comes down to weird little quirks that add up and make a certain person like one option and not another. Capability wise I think anything on the market today would honestly fit your needs, including the half-ton options.

I think for long term ownership, the Dodge's somewhat questionable long term reliability is something to keep in mind. If you just want a headache free truck, perhaps a Tundra 5.7 really is the way to go. Not the most efficient, doesn't have as many bells and whistles overall, but just a solid package all around IMO. Then again I might just be projecting because I'm hopeful that it'll be everything I'm hoping it will be when I go test drive one.

Ram 2500 with a memeshift. I think it only comes as a diesel

this

U really love some ass.

>redpill
>collection of pornographic images on hard drive
>shopping for truck
>likely has a micro dick
>undoubtedly a virgin
OP I think it's time to kill yourself

all these flat asses

That's a fucking man's ass.

Dodge is not known to be reliable, but they're cheap. I'd go with an f150

>That's a fucking man's ass.

um no.

>manly hands
>hairy asscheeks

man or nasty women

>Dodge is not known to be reliable, but they're cheap. I'd go with an f150

Fleet truck buyers tend to go with Ford and Chevrolet because a reliability = more profit. So do I. They also have better aftermarket support, useful if you keep a truck for many years which I do.

>That's a fucking man's ass.
looks like he's laying down

What do you have now?

Look at that shaved hair

Mfw he probably capped to a man's ass and didn't realize

I really, really like women
t. OP

>That's a fucking man's ass.
naw, man ass isn't that round, it's definitely female, just most girls shave is all

sure buddy :^)

senpai, you are just plain wrong.
>muscular ass
>hand definitely belonging to man
>literally covered with hair
>you can see hair on his wrists and going down his legs

sry you jacked it to a mans ass 100%

>implying girls don't have hair on/around their ass

Seen plenty of asian chicks in porn with ass hairs. some a little too hairy... hairier than mine actually. in a way it looked kinda hot. vagina and tits seemed real enough so doubtful they were male.

Bumping again.

Also, do women have no shame?

girls they just want to get fugged

>balls clearly visible
Yeah, it's definitely not a man ass.

I'd look for a Silverado with the 6.0 they are terrific motors

simple, dont

>lolcanttow
>shit the bed by 150k miles

I'm with this guy. Don't buy a 3/4 ton unless you have plans to tow a 3-axle trailer. Otherwise it's just throwing your money away so you can have a heavier, slower truck.
>b-but it tows better!
It's just the weight. throw a half-ton of sandbags in the bed of a 1500 and it will drive exactly the same as a 2500.

Spent 1000 hours in MS Paint cutting and pasting pages from Consumer Reports reliability rankings to make this comparison chart.

To my memory, Chebby historically has had the more reliable trucks out of the big 3, but it looks like they've been slipping over the past few years, and haven't quite got a handle on the new design. It's typical for the first couple of years after a redesign/refresh to have shit build quality/reliability. Interestingly, Ford seems to have bucked that trend with their most recent generation, somehow. Meanwhile dodge/ram, who used to consistently be the worst option, has been gaining. And Toyota is doing what Toyota does, if you're ever willing to pay the Toyota tax.

CR only ranks 1/2 ton trucks, because they're far more popular than the heavier trucks. No ratings for the Titan yet, because they don't sell enough to matter.

I don't know what 7.3's you been around but I've owned one and towed a 5th wheel 75% of the time with 265k on the clock