Ultimate Three-Quarter-Ton HD Challenge: Eisenhower Pass

IMG_8625ba II

We don't think there is any more extreme test for a pickup truck to have to endure than taking it where the air is thin and the roads are steep, and that's what the Eisenhower Pass grade is all about. We tested on a 7.2-mile stretch of Interstate Highway 70 in Colorado, from the valley exit at Dillon to the entrance at the summit of the Eisenhower and Johnson tunnels. This stretch climbs more than 2,000 feet and is the worry of every eastbound big-rig trucker.

This stretch of the I-70 is famous for its hair-raising emergency truck runoffs (there were three on our test stretch) and the punishingly steep hill climbs that bring trucks' cooling systems to their knees as engine temperatures reach redlines they've never seen before.

 

HD_GasIkeFINAL

The Ford F-250's 6.2-liter V-8 did the best job of getting the truck and trailer up the hill in the shortest amount of time. Both the Chevrolet Silverado 2500 and Ram 2500 seemed capable of doing the job but not with nearly the control and power of the Ford. It almost seemed like the gross combined weight ratings for the Ram and Chevy were a bit too high in relation to how their engines and transmissions performed. Yes, all these trucks were pulling the same loads, but the Ford was the only one that pulled to the limits with confidence. We'd like to have a little more cushion or "just-in-case" buffer in the numbers.

The Ford attacked the hill at a steady and easy pace, running the 7.2-mile stretch in 9 minutes and 40 seconds, while the Chevy ran almost 30 seconds behind the Ford, and the Ram lagged more than 2 minutes behind the Chevy. In fact, for most of the climb up the hill the Ram downshifted to 1st gear, spinning the engine at 4,500 rpm, marching along at less than 30 mph.

Although we didn't call out and score three-quarter-ton braking testing on the Eisenhower grade, we did experiment with how well each truck controlled its weight on the way down. Many drivers forget that a towing truck's ability to stop its load is more important than how well it can pull that same load up the hill.

We exited the tunnels at the summit of our route aiming for a 45-mph speed limit with our testing range between 35 and 55 (below 35 and we'd speed up, and anything above 55 meant we'd check our speed down). We adjusted the sensitivity of integrated brake controllers on each pickup to a gain of 7.0, knowing that there would likely be some variation. All three trucks have some variation of grade braking available from the transmissions, but we found they are not equal.

IMG_8478a II

During the Ram brake-testing runs, we had to touch the brakes down to 45 mph 10 times to stay within our range, getting the gearing to drop into and stay in 2nd gear. At the bottom of the hill the front disc brake rotors hit 530 degrees. Our F-250, driven in the same manner with the same target speed parameters, required us to touch the brakes on the down grade eight times, with the front brake rotors registering 265 degrees at the bottom of the hill. Finally, our Chevy required us to use the brake nine times (it toggled back and forth between 2nd and 3rd — and when it jumped to 3rd, we always had to brake it back into 2nd) with the front disc recording 333 degrees at the bottom of the hill.

Given the weights involved and how willing each truck was to use gearing to help slow the pickup and trailer combination, the Ford F-250 was the truck that seemed to offer the most controlled downhill run.

How We Did the Testing

We knew we wanted to do something special here, so we opted to run each truck as close to its manufacturer-stated GCWR — meaning all it can carry and tow. Simply put, we wanted to see how well or poorly they performed at their limits. We know most people aren't likely to do this kind of towing (and if they did, they'd probably buy a one-ton dualie turbo-diesel), but how well a pickup does near its limits is likely to say a lot about how well it will do when things aren't so tough.

Our trailer for this event, when empty weighs, about 6,000 pounds but we had two 330-gallon water tanks (each weighing 2,800 pounds) wedged inside, bringing the total weight close to 12,000 pounds, near but not over each truck's stated maximum conventional tow ratings.

The F-250's GCWR is 19,000 pounds; the Chevy's is just more than 20,000 pounds, and the Ram 2500's is just more than 22,000 pounds. We attempted to adjust each max trailer weight by dumping a certain amount of water from each truck or trailer, getting as close as possible to 90 percent of the vehicle's GCWR number.

Cars.com photos by Evan Sears

 

IMG_8352a II

 

Overview | Milan Dragway | Fuel Economy | Milford Hill Climb | Braking | Davis Dam | Eisenhower Pass | Results

Comments

Looks like Ford's been working on that braking....

Amazing that the Ford can dominate in this test yet lose in all others?

Amazing that the Ford can dominate in this test yet lose in all others?
Posted by: Toycrusher | Aug 11, 2014 10:14:32 AM

To be fair... the Ford SD was pulling 1000 lbs less than the Chevy and 3000 less than the Dodge. So it can be expected. The Ford had the second deepest final drive of the bunch and was carrying the lightest payload up the Ike Pass.

Not really sure what they were trying to accomplish this other than maybe the realeased preliminary results and their masters at the Blue Oval told them to find a way to make their truck look relevant.

I expected this, but not that it would be so obvious.

What is wrong here?
If the Dodge is making enough power @9500 feet elevation, to wind out 2nd gear to 66.5mph, that means it should hold the grade in 2nd gear @ 50mph / 4000rpm (peak torque of 429ft-lbs) using the long intake runner setting.

Ford should be able to tackle the grade in 2nd gear @ 50mph/4500rpm
Same with Chevrolet, 2nd gear, 50mph, 5200rpm

So something is wrong with PUTC testing methodology/analysis if they think it is correct that the most powerful truck has to resort to 1st gear, and stay there.

@George_C

Go back and read the boneheaded testing criteria they used for this test and all of your questions will make sense to you... instead of running each truck with the same load/conditions like they did for every other test in this shootout, they maxed out the listed GCWR for the trucks as delivered so the Ram(GCWR 22,000) was pulling 2000 lbs more up the hill than the Chevy(GCWR 20,000( and 3000 lbs more up the hill than the Ford (GCWR 19,000).

So the ram has the worst final drive ratio of all the trucks and yet was pulling the heaviest load by a huge margin (it was pulling what the Ford pulled plus the weight small hatchback car on top of that), meanwhile the ford had the second lowest final drive and second highest HP Torque rating yet the lightest load.

@devilsadvocate
And that still doesn't answer the question of why it doesn't just zing all the way to the redline in 1st gear, and upshift. 40mph ~ 5600rpm, even by de-rating by 30%, you still have 287hp. (and an even 300hp at the start of the grade)

@50mph, the Chevrolet makes 347 sea level HP, so de-rate that by 30%, you are 243hp.
The Ford also makes 347 sea level HP, -30% 243hp.
The Dodge, makes 327 sea level HP, so -30% and you have 229hp.
Okay, so even with an absurd towing metric [they should have just made the GCWR 15,000 for all gasoline trucks] the Ram should have held 45mph to the others 50mph.

This one was surprising seeing how far ahead Ford was of the other two, especially after reading the other tests. Then I read that the GCWR was used, and then it wasn't as surprising. Since the Ram's is J2807 compliant, where do the other two fall short that their ratings aren't higher? It is interesting to see what happens at GCWR, but it would have also been interesting to see what happened at the same weight. I know there's limited time to do these tests, just curiosity typing.

@MarkWilliams
It'd be nice to see a graph of speed vs. grade for this test. Reason being it would give the viewers a chance to see where each truck struggled the most. The RAM had a final speed slightly over 66 mph, the FORD 65, and CHEVY 62. Where did the RAM come on strong pulling 3000# more than the FORD to finish with a higher speed?

Wow, that was alot closer than I expected it would be. The biggest surprise was the Eisenhower pass and the Ford Ripped it up even with a 3.73.

The Ram didn't run away with anything like I figured it would. In most cases they were within a couple seconds of each other and when your talking about 1/4 mile runs you'd really need a stop watch to realize the difference. These truck are close.

IMO, the scariest part of the whole test was the Rams brakes. For me that alone would have kept it out of 1st place.

Read more closely guys before you comment. Each truck didn't carry the same weight for this test. Dodge carried the most weight followed by the Chevy and the Ford carried the lightest load. This is a dumb way to conduct testing.

Considering the Ram had to carry the heaviest load by 3,000 pound over the Ford it is no wonder the brakes were hotter.

Drop off the 3,000 pound and I bet the brakes would have been much cooler.

Seems to me that Ford was sucking hind tit.

@ Ram Big Horn

Well not really. This just means that the Ram is overrated. If it can't handle the extra weight then it should be rated for less.

From the ways it sounds GM and Ram shot themselves in the foot with thier own GCVW rating. In this case Ford was more realistic with thier numbers.

jack, put 3 thousand more on the ford and 2K on the chevy. Oh wait they arent rated for that. They should have tested them all with the same weight. Funny how they changed it to help Ford and GM and Ram still took 1st.

Weight may be one thing, but it may be the large air dam of the Ford & Chevrolet are leading to better brake cooling.
If you are generating high pressure on the inside of the wheel, and have newfound lower pressure air (from the air pushing air laterally around the front of the truck) on the outside of the wheel, you have enhanced cooling of the front rotors.

Plus, the temperature of the rear rotors should be listed. We want to know if the brake system balance is correct.

and another plus, in the body of text "Yes, all these trucks were pulling the same loads," that kind of contradicts the testing regime.

@wyo2track, 'top speed' is not the speed at the top of the grade. It is the peak speed, before the air thins out at over 10,000 feet altitude, and the grade increases.

I've driven the pass many times and there is a spot about a mile from the dillon on ramp where its pretty flat. My guess is that is where the top speed was found. Its actually even more impressive that the ram had the highest top speed considering it was carrying 3k more lbs of weight.

I am so very disappointed that Pickuptrucks.com did not use the same weights. These are simple and easy things to do. I understand taking into account their respective manufacturer ratings, but it was an obviously erroneous judgment of values to not keep the test equal while allowing the vehicles to be the variable. Also, they did not note the temperatures of the transmissions and engines.

I am grateful for the test here, but I am losing faith in pickuptrucks.com and paying more attention to TFLtruck.com and Trucktrend.com who do much better work and serve the reader.

Especially after pickuptrucks.com published an article a couple of months ago instructing pickup truck owners to put new tires on the front of their vehicle. DANGEROUS and wrong. Many readers commented and alarmed the public, but pickuptrucks.com still did not retract the article and publish a correction. It is still on the web!

ALWAYS PUT YOUR BETTER TIRES ON THE REAR SO YOU DON'T FLIP OR SPIN YOUR VEHICLE WHILE BRAKING. MORE GRIPP ON THE REAR KEEPS YOUR VEHICLE STABLE AND KEEPS IT POINTING FORWARD. Especially on pickups. Just feel sad to see such bad journalism. The information here can be found on other websites who do it better. I wouldn’t say much if it was just a case of laziness, but it has got DANGEROUS to report so irresponsibly.

PUTC should of run this test with the same load AND 90% GCWR.

The problem with taking water out of the tank to drop weight is that the sloshing around of fluid will affect handling dynamics.

There's a manual gear selector available in the chev. It's meant for exactly this situation.

Rear end ratios only matter when compared to the same transmission.

This test isn't accurate if you're hauling different weight.

Well not really. This just means that the Ram is overrated. If it can't handle the extra weight then it should be rated for less.

From the ways it sounds GM and Ram shot themselves in the foot with thier own GCVW rating. In this case Ford was more realistic with thier numbers.


Posted by: Jack | Aug 11, 2014 2:36:01 PM

How do you figure it is over rated, the Ram completed the run without failing.

The more weight you have the more friction it takes to slow or stop that weight. Friction equals heat.

The Ford was 3,000 pounds under the weight then the Ram had to carry.

Looks to me like Ford is way behind.

PUTC should of run this test with the same load AND 90% GCWR.

The problem with taking water out of the tank to drop weight is that the sloshing around of fluid will affect handling dynamics.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Aug 11, 2014 5:21:31 PM

Still makes the Ford the wimp of the bunch.

I thought all you Ford fans bragged about how much the Fords could haul over the coil spring Rams?

Ford sagged the worst, towed less weight and is just plain the worst truck.

The Ram is rated to tow more yet in actual practice it really struggled to tow that amount. Meanwhile the GM and the Ford were easily able to tow for what they are rated for. I have a hunch that the Chevy and Ford could haul the Ram's payload better.

@Tom,

Put another 3,000 pounds on that Ford and lets how well it does. Here is a hint, it will struggle worse than the Chevy or the Ram and the brakes would be far above 265 degrees.

These trucks should have been tested at the maximum of the truck with the lowest load rating.

The Chevy and the Ram would have mopped the floor with the Ford. Then retest at the Chevy and Rams max rating.

Admit it, Ford is way behind.

@rammedbybighorn
I thought ram calculated there row rates correctly, I thought they were ready for the standards. Guess what if you say you can tow X weight your dang well better back it up. Ram failed when out counted again. Ford had plenty of room above its rating.

@Ramadan little Horn 1500 - If one looks at empirical data i.e. measurable test data the Ford did well.

These trucks were close and which one someone buys will most likely hinge on personal preference.

I look at this data and see how it rates against my own personal score card.

Most of the time when I use a truck as a truck these sorts of tests are irrelevant because I spend a lot of time on gravel roads. The problem is better ride on the road does not necessarily translate to better ride off road.

The first thing I look at is durability data.
Then I look at my priority list.
Then price.

Until Ram consistently scores 1st on durability, I am not going to buy one.
If I had to buy a new 2500 gasser, I'd be most inclined to go with the Chevy. It has superior durability to the Ram and has a more up to date frame and suspension.

The 6.0 is down on power but it works.

It is funny how "getting Rammed by a Big Horn" says Ford is lying about their towing numbers and will fail when put to the test. Well, this is just about the most extreme test you can get and it looks to me that the F250 6.2L did very well towing the numbers Ford has given it. Not only in power, but also in braking and towing confidence.

Looks to me Ford is more realistic in the numbers it has given this truck. In the words of PUTC " It almost seemed like the gross combined weight ratings for the Ram and Chevy were a bit too high in relation to how their engines and transmissions performed. Yes, all these trucks were pulling the same loads, but the Ford was the only one that pulled to the limits with confidence." Sounds to me like the other brand failed at towing the numbers it's manufacturer has given it, and said manufacturer should probably lower it's rating because I doubt customers would like to be going up this mountain road at 35 mph in 1st gear at 4,500 rpm when towing the weight they have given it.

This is also the most realistic of all the tests and the one people that tow are most concerned about. Tests like these tell me more about how a truck will react more than 0-60 mph or 1/4 mile tests. I want to know how a truck feels when towing. Is it a confidence feel or does it have that uneasy back end bounce? Does it have enough power to get me up the hill at a reasonable speed and time or is it too underpowered to tow the rated weight it is given to even go faster than 40 mph the whole way? Does the engine braking and brakes work well when going down a mountain road or should I be concerned with too much excessive heat from tapping the brakes all the time because the engine brake does not work well. Those that tow are more concerned about tests like these, the braking test, and the mileage drive than all the other short distance tests.

I will have to give my hat off to Ram for winning the all around shootout. It performed as expected and how I stated it would in the quick speed test. However, in the long distance real world tests that are most important for my needs and wants out of a truck, the Ford performed the best in my opinion.

Agreed. Anyone still think Ford's ratings are unchecked, and Ram's numbers are more "trustworthy" because they are claiming J2807 protocols?

Under J2807 you're not supposed to dip under 40 mph at grade, the Ram was going less than 30 mph for most of the way.

If this is indeed the protocol, PUTC needs to do a special article and call out Ram on this like PUTC has been calling out Ford for its calculations.

Even the Ford friendly putc staff can't deny Ram the victory, but they sure tried. The bias against Ram is pretty evident.

LOL, don't you just love how the Ford fan boys always love to point out when the Ram has a lower rating and claim that it is not capable.

Now we have Ford with lower ratings and all of the sudden the Ford fan boys tune changes to well Ford is not overrating their trucks.

Once again the Ford fan boys are trying to play both sides of the same coin.

Here is an idea, how about all the trucks have to carry the maximum load of the truck with the highest pay load.

Time them on the way up just like they do now. Those trucks that can't handle the maximum pay load have to make two trips and the time keeps running until they can get the load completed.

Put that extra 3,000 pounds on that wimpy ass Ford and it will struggle.

You can't have it both ways Ford fan boys, either you are all about that maximum pay load/towing load or your not.

Less than 30 mph? This leads crededence to those who say J2807 is a sham. Ram's J2807 ratings need to be checked, not Ford's own ratings.

J2807 testing is done at Davis Dam, not Eisenhower Pass moron.

By the way Ram kicked Fords ass at Davis Dam in the tests.

Also the Ram had to carry 3,000 more pounds than did the Ford in the Eisenhower Pass test, but don't let things like facts get in the way of your Ram bashing.

Funny in past tests Ford got bonus points for being rated higher than the other trucks yet in this test the Ram was rated 3,000 pounds more than the wimpy Ford F250 and 2000 pounds more than the new Chevy.

Why did the Ram not get those same bonus points this time for being top dog? This smells of Mike Levine involvement.

Thank you for this test. At least now I know when it comes to purchase a new tow vehicle for our work trailers the Ford will lower my trailer weight the most. I'm sorry to say it but what a useless test. When is this site going to realize that the trailer/payload should never change from model to model. I want to know which one does a specific work task the faster/most efficient and if one happens to have a higher limit then it is an added bonus or higher margin for safety. This is just about as bad as the 2012 Midsize Shootout when every truck had different loads. Next Monday if I read more of these types of tests in the 1ton comparison this site will be deleted off my bookmarks list as it too has become a source of pointless information like so many before it. The only reasoning I can see doing this is the manufactures have placed restriction or requirements upon certain tests in order to provide equipment for the testing.

I love all the RAM boys, if if if! I'll give you an if then. IF Ford had the 4.30 rear end in it, it would've beaten the RAM in a lot more contests! Definitely all of the 0 to 60 runs! Then you all would've been crying about how it wasn't fair that it had 4.30's in it vs Rams 4.10's! RAM and Chevy put their max towing and hauling trucks up against Ford's non max trailering truck and you're bragging about it! Typical RAM fans! BTW, this Ram isn't J2807 compliant! The fact that it couldn't keep 40 mph proves it! Please stop with the if if it's. The fact that Ford provided the wrong truck and PUTC didn't use the same weight in the Eisenhower pass run ,we'll never know the actual results apples to apples!

Guys - thoughts welcomed here. While the RAM had to move 3k more up the hill, it was almost 3 minutes behind the Ford. That's a lifetime slower. Granted the Ford had 3k less, but does that translate into almost 3 minutes slower for the RAM? To me this test result suggests the RAM struggled up the Eisenhower Pass with this near max GCWR load as if to suggest that if it DIDN'T have the extra 3k it still would not have come out on top. I would suggest the RAM transmission gearing was the weak link - 2nd gear too tall for the load/hill combo. Hopefully RAM gets the 8 speed into the truck soon. I rented a 2014 2500 6.4 last month and loved the truck - save for the gear spacing especially 2nd and 3rd gear that drop off significantly compared to the Ford and GM.

I think all 3 trucks did very well. But this extreme test does show that the RAMs tow capacity should be reduce to more accuretly represent its actual ability safely tow its GCVW.

The society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has sought for the past half-decade to bring clarity to the situation, and now automakers are getting on board, too. The SAE standard, “Performance Requirements for Determining Tow-Vehicle Gross Combination Weight Rating and Trailer Weight Rating,” is known as J2807, and a big piece of it is how a laden truck climbs a grade such as the Colorado River’s Davis Dam.

The Davis Dam grade test site is on U.S. Highway 68, just outside Bullhead City, Ariz. We started our run at the intersection of Highway 68 and McCormick Boulevard, the same place that J2807 specifies. The top of the grade is about 12 miles from the starting point. We measured 11.17 miles (59,000 feet) from start to finish, just past the Union Pass marker at the summit. The incline is a steady 5 percent for nearly its entire length.

Eisenhower Pass is 7% grade @ over 11,000 ft. Why didn't PUTC test the Ram with 90% rated load? They had the chance. Here is what they said about the Davis Dam test.

"The new Ram 2500 chassis and powertrain had a strong run up the desert mountain, clocking in at 46.35 seconds at a top speed of 79.4 mph. The 6.4-liter Hemi is impressive in this type of test, launching off the line with a slight hesitation then ramping up power smoothly and forcefully. The Ram was only a hair faster than the Ford F-250, which had 3.73:1 gears and the 6.2-liter V-8 engine. The Chevrolet Silverado 2500 (with its 4.10:1 gears) came in several seconds later with a half-mile time of 53.19 seconds and top speed of 77.7 mph."

What difference does it make? Ford lost. Chevy lost. Head to head weight for weight. Ford lost. Ram wins again. Just be thankful the Ford or Chevy for that matter didn't catch Fire and burn to the ground like so often they do. Even if. If Ram did not out perform both Ford and Chevy until the Fire recalls stop I won't be buying either one. Chevy is new to the Fire recall danger. Ford on the other hand Fire recalls are common and a part of the companies D.N.A.

So far 250/2500

Ram: 9
Ford:3
Chevy:3


I love all the RAM boys, if if if! I'll give you an if then. IF Ford had the 4.30 rear end in it, it would've beaten the RAM in a lot more contests! Definitely all of the 0 to 60 runs! Then you all would've been crying about how it wasn't fair that it had 4.30's in it vs Rams 4.10's! RAM and Chevy put their max towing and hauling trucks up against Ford's non max trailering truck and you're bragging about it! Typical RAM fans! BTW, this Ram isn't J2807 compliant! The fact that it couldn't keep 40 mph proves it! Please stop with the if if it's. The fact that Ford provided the wrong truck and PUTC didn't use the same weight in the Eisenhower pass run ,we'll never know the actual results apples to apples!

Posted by: jim | Aug 12, 2014 4:08:22 PM

Once again SAE J2807 testing is done at Davis Dam not Eisenhower Pass.

I find it hard to believe that the testers could only get 1st gear in the Ram in this test. This stinks of Mike Levine involvement.

Why is everyone saying the Ram had 3000# more weight? Its actually 3500#. Check the numbers. The Rams GCWR with 4.10 gears is 22500#, not 22000#. Thats 3500# over the Ford and 2000# more than the Chevy. In their very poorly worded description, putc says "over 22000#" for Ram. This test isn't very well described at all. Pretty poor work by the writer.

It seems to me that all this test proves is that RAM was a little aggressive in its GCVWR, as compared to the other two. It would have been more useful to me to see how these three trucks did when hauling the same amount of weight -- as somene else suggested, use the lowest max trailer weight of the 3 trucks tested as the number.

Not saying that would have improved the RAM's results -- the problem is apparent when you look at the gear ratios for first and second gear -- they're much higher than the other two vehicles'. What's up with that? I gotta' add that the cylinder deactivation -- unique to the RAM, I believe -- didn't produce any dramatic increase in empty fuel economy as compared to the other trucks, under circumstances (light load) when it should have been active.

All this shows is that horsepower isn't everything when pulling a long hill with a heavy load. The transmission has to be right as well. Just look at TFLT test of the Chevy 1500 with the 6.2 liter V-8 pulling 10,000 lbs. up this grade. It got its butt kicked by the Ford ecoboost with 60 less horsepower, mostly because the Chevy kept shifting up at 4,200 rpm dropping the engine out of its powerband to about 3500 rpm in the next gear. Given that the engine's max torque is at 4100 rpm, under full load conditions in tow/haul mode, the tranny should not be shifting up just a couple hundred rpm above that.

Remind everyone NOT to order the RAM with the standard 3.73 rear. Performance would certainly be terrible with that combination, if you're carrying a reasonably big load.

As owner of a Ram 2500 6.4 Hemi, I don't see how its possible to get the top speed, yet the slowest time. It must be driver letting up at some point, or traffic. I know from experience that if let off on a grade, it is hard to gain momentum again. I'm not sure the 3500# would explain it all.

Pickuptrucks.com
Thank you for performing these tests, I enjoyed the reading however it was Very disappointing to find out that the trucks were not loaded the same on the Ike Gauntlet run. IMO you should have taken the lowest rating of the group and set that as the weight for all three.

As it is, the results for this particular test don't tell me anything.
In the future please keep things as consistent as possible.

This test doesn't help me decide which truck to buy. As mentioned above if all 3 trucks had 15000 #'s GCWR it would allow some conclusions to be drawn. This test is ridiculous, I can't believe they decided to test in this manner. What a complete waste of time.

Also it appears they are using the exact same test trucks from Chevy and RAM as they used for IKE so if there is indeed an issue with the RAM (other than it carrying more weight than the others in this test) we won't know since another truck was not tested.

Real world testing, time keeps going till they all get 22k to the top, and back down haha that's 4 trips for the ford and chevy! They all run pretty close but come on, how much time did these guys waste transferring water to the ram? Should do two runs 1 at same weight 1 at max, I know they are kind of winging it out there and it's still a good test but they had to know how it would look not making it even (fair I should say). If the ford had 6k more pounds 3k more than the ram you know they'd be whining! As they should!

Ram is more powerful than the Chevy but is also heavier.

By my math HP per pound and TQ per pound are nearly identical between the Ram and Chevy. Combine this with the better chosen transmission ratios in the Chevy and it makes sense.

Oh and don't forget the extra weight that the Ram was towing LOL. Worst test ever.



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In