Fiat Chrysler Isn't in a Hurry to Update the Ram Heavy Duty: Report

by Steph Willems

Published: December 12th, 2016

fiat chrysler isn t in a hurry to update the ram heavy duty report

Another week, another pushed-back launch date for a next-generation Fiat Chrysler Automobiles product.

Last week, supplier sources claimed the range-topping Jeep Grand Wagoneer SUV was on hold, but this morning brings news of a delay for the next-generation Ram Heavy Duty truck line.

According to Automotive News, sources claim the Ram 2500/3500 and its chassis cab offspring won’t land on an all-new platform in 2018. Instead, the heavy-duty models should soldier on with their current DS platform and gain a minor refresh.

If true, it’s just the latest decision to scramble FCA’s long-term product plans. Just this year, FCA delayed the execution of the Dodge Grand Caravan and gave the current-generation Ram 1500 a new lease on life, even as a new 1500 bows in 2018. A similar pushback might keep the automaker’s rear-drive cars on the same platform for years to come.

Ram’s heavy-duty truck lineup was expected to drop its old bones in favor of FCA’s new DT platform sometime in 2018, bowing as 2019 models. The automaker hasn’t commented on the report.

If the delay is indeed factual, it’s hard not to see money — and FCA’s need to dole it out in limited doses — being behind the decision. Already, the automaker is scrambling to get the next-gen Jeep Wrangler and Ram 1500 out on time, and both of those products require expensive plant retooling. The Ram brand, along with Jeep, is FCA’s cash cow. Switching to an all-new heavy-duty truck would mean a temporary drop in production volume, as well as sales.

Demand for the existing Ram 2500/3500 remains healthy, so keeping a generation born in 2010 alive a little longer could make sense — even if it means selling the oldest heavy-duty pickup on the market.

[Image: Fiat Chrysler Automobiles]

#Fca #FiatChryslerAutomobiles #Heavy-dutyTrucks #Platforms #ProductPlanning #Trucks

Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments

Join the conversation

13 of 43 comments

Corey Lewis on Dec 12, 2016

How are the Cummins engines on competitiveness these days against the other two HD choices?

Like Reply
- See 7 previous
- Adam Tonge on Dec 12, 2016
  
  Very competitive. The Cummins engine/Aisin transmission combo are pretty awesome.
  
  Like
- MrIcky on Dec 12, 2016
  
  They're competitive. The HP is lower on the Cummins but the Torques about the same (900 Dodge vs 910 Chevy vs 925 Ford) and the torque is the only thing that matters. Ford and Chevy both want v8s that feel and sound a little less diesely and more like their gas counterparts because some people don't like all that diesel clatter. The Cummins engine has a better reputation for durability and is very 'diesely'. They sound like a mini-bigrig.
  
  Like
- JimZ on Dec 12, 2016
  
  @MrIcky "torque is the only thing that matters." bull. horsepower is the only thing which tells you how much actual work the engine can do. Torque (and the curve) tell you what gearing you need. "They sound like a mini-bigrig." not any more; the latest ones are pretty quiet too.
  
  Like
- Mason on Dec 12, 2016
  
  @JimZ Which is why Ford and GM have always won the pointless drag races they insist on running with these trucks. The V8s have consistently been 30-40 hp above the I6 regardless of peak torque numbers. Shorter stroked, higher revving (compared to the I6). Conversely Cummins has had the fuel economy edge, which combined with reliability and engine braking are the only performance tests anybody that actually uses these trucks are even worried about.
  
  Like
- DC Bruce on Dec 12, 2016
  
  @MrIcky Having test-driven them all, I would say that the Ford and GM engines -- once at operating temperature -- are a little quieter. I guess because they operate at slightly higher rpm than the Cummins and have less displacement per cylinder. The Cummins has a thump-thump-thump sound that is definitely truck-like, and it's audible in the cab with the windows up. The clatter from any of the engines is not. The Cummins seems like a much easier engine to service than either of the V-8s, which are a rat's nest of plumbing of all types, partly because they use a single turbocharger. Supposedly, on the Ford, you have to lift the cab off to do much work on the engine. I'm not sure if this is correct or not, nor am I sure that this difference is reflected in repair costs.
  
  Like
- MrIcky on Dec 12, 2016
  
  JimZ, no, not at all on a tow rig. I've got a 3500 diesel (it's an older manual but I've driven the new ones too). You rarely get a diesel over 2300 rpm. Your torque peaks between 1500 and 1900 on ALL the 3500s. The HP peak isnt until 2800 or 2900 and then it practically cuts out at 3000-3500 depending on model. I spend my entire time towing on that rig trying to keep it as close to 1800 as I can. In sixth gear at 70mph I'm turning 2000 rpm and you can comfortably tow 13k pounds at that speed all day up and down hills. If you are towing with a new 3500 automatic set in tow mode, unless you are absolutely flooring it, it will try to shift at around 2300-2400 to keep you around that peak torque curve. You basically never see your HP peak unless you are trying to. Towing a 13000 trailer btw. I also have a 1500 and it's a completely different animal and I sometimes tow a 7500 trailer behind it and I'm running in the 4500-5000 range up hills pretty frequently.
  
  Like
- Mason on Dec 12, 2016
  
  @MrIcky If peak torque comes on at 1600 and peak horsepower comes on at 2800rpm, which rpm will be easier to maintain that 13k lb load up say a 6% grade? You basically just proved that horsepower does matter.
  
  Like
- Mason on Dec 12, 2016
  
  Mricky, there is a reason Cummins rates their vocational ISB's to run constant @ 2800 rpm. It is far easier on an engine to run at rated rpm under load than it is to run at whatever rpm it just so happens to make peak torque. That's a good way to put a hole in a piston.
  
  Like
Vulpine on Dec 12, 2016

I'd rather FCA delayed something to get it right than to push something out that isn't ready.

Like Reply
- See 2 previous
- Art Vandelay on Dec 12, 2016
  
  They will do both.
  
  Like
- Lou_BC on Dec 12, 2016
  
  "I’d rather FCA delayed something to get it right than to push something out that isn’t ready." Um............ Why would FCA start that sort of practice now?
  
  Like
- Manta9527 on Apr 11, 2017
  
  Vulpine, I wouldn't mind that myself. FCA, like the original Chrysler, has an apparent habit of rushing their vehicles to market before all the bugs are worked out. That's one reason why their vehicles have quality issues in the first place.
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Olivehead The Honda Civic wins on looks and interior material quality and style. The Civic looks like a scaled down "real" car (i.e., midsize) while the Corolla never lets you forget what it is-a compact car, harkening back to the Tercel, etc. No comparision either in the interior materials of the Civic (a notch below Acura level) and general layout. There too, the Corolla comes off as a compact runabout. The Civic hatchback is especially cool.
Mike Beranek While the product may appear to be "better", only time will tell. The American automotive environment can chew a car up and spit it out. Will these Chinese EVs survive like a quarter-century old Cavalier, or will they turn out like VinFast's "cars"?
Mike Beranek This police vehicle will be perfect for when the State of Florida starts tracking every pregnancy.
Dave M. The Highlander hybrid, a larger, heavier vehicle, gets better mpgs. Why? Also, missed opportunity - if Toyota had made this a hatchback, they could have scooped up the "want a Tesla S but not ready for a full EV" crowd, however small or large they may be....
TheMrFreeze Difficult call...the more the mainstream automakers discontinue their more affordable models and only sell crazy overpriced EVs and trucks, the more appealing the idea of letting in cheap imported cars becomes with the buying public. If the government is going to impose tariffs on Chinese vehicles, at the same time they need to be getting with the Big 3 and telling them to fill the void with affordable models and not use the tariff as an excuse to simply raise prices. Otherwise, public pressure could see the tariffs withdrawn.I seem to recall the last administration put a 25% tariff on Chinese steel, at which point the US manufacturers immediately used the opportunity to raise their prices 25%...that needs to not happen.