Ram down....uggh

[briangcc]

So...7/25 I did an emergency drop off for my 21 Ram hemi e-torque as there was something squealing under the hood. Sounded like it had a bad super charger or my neighbor's Ford SUV which is slowly returning to the earth. Was told by the stealership that they wouldn't be able to touch it for 48-72 hours.

Get a call 7/30 saying low and behold the e-torque module, pulley, and I think the belt (couldn't really tell as I was in vacation land with crappy cell service) which would be 5-7 days on parts.

Called last weekend and depending on the story, parts either arrived earlier in the week or on 7/10 and they would get to it "next week".

Called this week and found out that the service writer that had my work order quit...or was fired...either way doesn't work there any more and would bump me to the head of the line to get me my truck in a day or two. Been calling today to find out what's going on and ending up in a phone loop. Going to have to go over there this evening after work to find out wth...

I hate stealerships but its under factory warranty so an independent shop isn't financially smart.

And to top it all off...my lease is up so I either have to buy this one out which is about 8k over on mileage OR get a new lease...in a few weeks...and I despise new car shopping. The new '25 Ram 1500's dropped the hemi so I'm sol there unless I opt for a hurricane engine or jump to a 2500 which I really don't need.

End rant...

 

[alldodge]

I feel your pain, still waiting to get my boat back

Friend here in town has a 2024 Chevy 1500 and the speedometer sensor went out on way home. The truck went into limp more and then shut down. Dealer had truck for 1.5 months, and got it back last week and it went back out for same issue yesterday

 

[racerone]

If they would only build a tough simple truck without all the electronic wizardry !-----Electronic gadgets are CHEAP to manufacture and install at the factory.-----Expensive to replace / repair for the consumer.

 

[briangcc]

Got it back Friday. Thankfully the seasoned service writer recognized my work shirt (his dad worked on our shop floor and retired a few years back) and comp'd me the pulley so only got charged for the oil change. Not shabby.

**Warranty bill being submitted to Stelantis is over $2400. MGU was the main culprit for the bill. It's covered as part of the 8/80k powertrain warranty.

It sat there for about a month not being started. So...I took it on a long trip Saturday...6 hours round trip, mostly highway speeds 65/75mph. Started out at 13.7 volts on the batt. By the time I got home it was 12.7v. Figured battery was shot as its 3 years old and that's about the length of warranty on these things these days so replace it with a DieHard AGM through Advanced Auto.

Swapped it out and 14v with motor running. Great, right where it needed to be. Stayed there all through the city, about a 10 min drive, while I returned the old batt. Drive out to my parent's house about 30 minutes away. Warm, humid, and 12.9v when I pull in. Wonderful....

Got up this morning and drove in cool weather all the way to work, varying speeds...13.8V when I pull into the parking lot.

Going to monitor for a few days as its supposed to get warm again by end of week. I'm hoping it was just some crap in the MGU that needed to work out with a bit more run time and figuring out it had a new battery to play with.

Couldn't bring myself to look to trade it in on a '25 Hurricane powered Ram. Nobody ever said..."Let me start my truck so you can hear my awesome V6"!

 

[Lou C]

Stellantis really put off their traditional customers who want Hemis in Rams and Chargers/Challengers
I predict a big drop in sales, for the traditional motor head customers
If I were buying now I'd look at Ford for a pickup or muscle car, at least you can still get a V8. I am not convinced that a 3.0 twin turbo inline 6 is going to be as long lived as a V8. Time will tell but repairs on those will be so expensive that when the trucks are out of warrantee no one will want them.
That, or get the last of the Toyota Tundra 5.7s.
I could say why this is happening but that will get the thread locked, so I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

 

[matt167]

Idk the GM 2.7 4cyl sells pretty good and they run okay. Very few problems with them unlike the V8s which have camshaft issues related to the AFM and usually require a new engine.

 

[Lou C]

True the AFM damn near ruined the GM V8 we all knew and loved, and the VVT on the Hemi seemed to cause plenty of problems itself, prior to the introduction of VVT the Hemis didn't really have lifter/cam problems. In fact that's one reason why I kept my old Pre-Eagle 2007 Jeep Hemi, no VVT, no cam and lifter problems.

 

[briangcc]

Stellantis really put off their traditional customers who want Hemis in Rams and Chargers/Challengers
I predict a big drop in sales, for the traditional motor head customers
If I were buying now I'd look at Ford for a pickup or muscle car, at least you can still get a V8. I am not convinced that a 3.0 twin turbo inline 6 is going to be as long lived as a V8. Time will tell but repairs on those will be so expensive that when the trucks are out of warrantee no one will want them.
That, or get the last of the Toyota Tundra 5.7s.
I could say why this is happening but that will get the thread locked, so I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

Having towed my current boat with (2) different v6's - '19 Ram 1500 3.6L VVT vs '17 Toyota 4Runner 4.0L V6 - I will say, flat out, the 4Runner towed it better. Reason..that extra .4L of grunt. The old addage holds true where there is no replacement for displacement.

Our Durango towed our boat fine, again with a 3.6L VVT, BUT I was beat to high heck after the 4 hour trip to vacation land. Shorter and narrower wheelbase than the Ram makes a difference. Although its rated to tow more weight, this is the max I'd feel comfortable with on a single axle trailer. Tandem...could probably tow max without too much effort.

I was actually looking at the Ram 2500 series, which is severe overkill for what I need, to replace my 1500 to keep the Hemi V8. That's where the 1500 segment is being pushed at the moment.

That or the Nissan Titan which is still V8 powered...but they treat those things as if they're made out of gold as Nissan refuses to deal on them.

 

[Lou C]

I still think if you’d consider used it’s hard to go wrong with the last few years of a Toyota Tundra 5.7.
Right now I’m debating getting a used 4Runner vs a Grand Cherokee or Wrangler….
Or, find the last of the Ram 1500s with the Hemi but no Etorque.

 

[briangcc]

Mileage is horrendous on the Tundras. I know, I owned 3...2 Double Cabs and 1 Crew Cab. During the summer months, the best I could muster was 17mpg mixed driving in my 2016 Crew Cab (leased, new). It dropped as low as 13 during the winter months.

4Runner isn't horrible with the 4.0...I got 19.2mpg to/from work. Radio went and the steering wheel had to be replaced as the covering was shredding. Was a 2017 and we traded it in on the 2022 Durango we ordered.

In the Ram, I was getting 21-22mpg cruising down I-90 & I-79. With 87 octane, I get around 19mpg to/from work. If I put super in, that goes up to 22 mpg.

In my previous v6 Ram (classic body, non-etorque) I could get almost 24mpg to/from work on 87 octane. I got rid of it as the ergonomics of that truck's interior were hideous....that and the small radio with no steering wheel controls.

Having had Grand Cherokee's as loaners...I wouldn't touch one. They drive like tanks, not in a good way. Ride like them too. Personal opinion, I know they have a cult following.

 

[Scott06]

Mileage is horrendous on the Tundras. I know, I owned 3...2 Double Cabs and 1 Crew Cab. During the summer months, the best I could muster was 17mpg mixed driving in my 2016 Crew Cab (leased, new). It dropped as low as 13 during the winter months.

4Runner isn't horrible with the 4.0...I got 19.2mpg to/from work. Radio went and the steering wheel had to be replaced as the covering was shredding. Was a 2017 and we traded it in on the 2022 Durango we ordered.

In the Ram, I was getting 21-22mpg cruising down I-90 & I-79. With 87 octane, I get around 19mpg to/from work. If I put super in, that goes up to 22 mpg.

In my previous v6 Ram (classic body, non-etorque) I could get almost 24mpg to/from work on 87 octane. I got rid of it as the ergonomics of that truck's interior were hideous....that and the small radio with no steering wheel controls.

Having had Grand Cherokee's as loaners...I wouldn't touch one. They drive like tanks, not in a good way. Ride like them too. Personal opinion, I know they have a cult following.

Agreed only two issues you hear with tundras is horrible fuel economy and the older ones had frame rot , tacomas too.

I think the turbo v 6 they replaced the 5.7 with has issues currently but Susie t they will
Work through it in a year or two. The two 3.5 V6s I have had are absolutely bullet proof. In last 21 years except for a Volvo 940(RWD) had nothing but Toyotas and all have been extremely durable and easy on wallet.

 

[Pmt133]

My dodge experience wasn't great, truck actually didn't even make it off the lot without dying. The happiest day of my ownership was when I got rid of it. We have a bunch of different trucks in the fleet at work. It's basically russian roulette. They all suck about the same. Sadly I have to roll toyota into that lot too. The 5.7 is a gas hog, but about as bullet proof as a small block chevy in most cases.

And as far as the 2.7, they sell because GM pushes them for CAFE. It's not a bad engine but is better suited to the midsize in my opinion after driving one for a bit. It works was how I walked away after driving it in a full size....

 

[matt167]

Well the 2.7L is the replacement for the 4.3L. To get a 5.3L, it’ll run $1,500 more on the sticker. When trucks are $50k to start, and the ratings are close that’s why. It’s an interesting engine. It is a little anemic until the turbo spools up. It’s a lot less responsive than the 2.3 in my Ranger but it works

 

[Pmt133]

Well the 2.7L is the replacement for the 4.3L. To get a 5.3L, it’ll run $1,500 more on the sticker. When trucks are $50k to start, and the ratings are close that’s why. It’s an interesting engine. It is a little anemic until the turbo spools up. It’s a lot less responsive than the 2.3 in my Ranger but it works

It wouldn't surprise me if the 5.3 is phased out in the next gen truck. Especially considering most people buying the thing couldn't even tell you what engine was in it anyway....

I give ford a lot of credit, their stock tuning on all their vehicles is probably in the top end of all OEMs. GM leaves a lot to be desired and is probably a decent amount of why the 2.7 feels like it does (and the rest of the engines...) on top of big turbo and boost and small engine. It's refinement level reminded me of my 3.0l in my boat... very little lol. But it works. And they seem to be pretty reliable so far which is what you want.

 

[briangcc]

Think the MGU they replaced is defective. It runs fine without any load - batt indicates 13.7-14v which is normal. If its warm, so the AC is running or night where the lights and fogs are on, it'll dip down into 12.6v running.

I know its not right but proving that to the stealership is going to take some doing I'm afraid. Can't swing a $2400+ bill at an independent shop to troubleshoot/replace parts using the good old parts cannon.

 

[Pmt133]

Does it not have a smart charging system? That voltage, if it does, doesn't really seem out of line to me if it's been running a bit...

 

[briangcc]

Before the mgu swap, it was a consistent 13.7v all day long.

 

[dolluper]

Bad current flow sensor ?

 

[briangcc]

You would think it'd do it all the time then. But it's really intermittent. I can go days with it working right and then boom...drops like a brick.

Just trying to figure out the variable that triggers it before I go back into the dealer. No rhyme or reason right now. Not temp as its done it warm and cold. Not load as its done it during daytime with only the AC running and night with lights/fogs.

 

[FLATHEAD]

Mileage is horrendous on the Tundras. I know, I owned 3...2 Double Cabs and 1 Crew Cab. During the summer months, the best I could muster was 17mpg mixed driving in my 2016 Crew Cab (leased, new). It dropped as low as 13 during the winter months.

4Runner isn't horrible with the 4.0...I got 19.2mpg to/from work. Radio went and the steering wheel had to be replaced as the covering was shredding. Was a 2017 and we traded it in on the 2022 Durango we ordered.

In the Ram, I was getting 21-22mpg cruising down I-90 & I-79. With 87 octane, I get around 19mpg to/from work. If I put super in, that goes up to 22 mpg.

In my previous v6 Ram (classic body, non-etorque) I could get almost 24mpg to/from work on 87 octane. I got rid of it as the ergonomics of that truck's interior were hideous....that and the small radio with no steering wheel controls.

Having had Grand Cherokee's as loaners...I wouldn't touch one. They drive like tanks, not in a good way. Ride like them too. Personal opinion, I know they have a cult following.

I have a 2022 grand Cherokee and it has its share of faults but driving like a tank sure isn’t one of them. Now interior controls layout is the worst I’ve ever had.