Re: Defending 3.9L (Was "Found 3 mpg")

From: Josh Battles (jbattles@bankfinancial.com)
Date: Thu Apr 29 2004 - 10:25:35 EDT


My family has a '96 360 ram. It's an extended cab short box, with a camper
shell on the back. On her return trip from Marshall, IL to Chicago, my mom
told me that she got just under 22mpg. I didn't believe her so she gave me
all the numbers and I worked it out myself. I was pretty amazed, this truck
is 100% stock with a very hard 90k miles on the clock.

-- 
- Josh
Lowered 2000 Dakota CC 3.9L
www.geocities.com/lenny187/dakota.html
www.omg-stfu.com

""Zachary Burcham"" <roadking_dakota@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:BAY17-F14BkcJjFBnTe00054dc0@hotmail.com... > > The weight can vary from 400-800 lbs more than a ram depending on the truck. > A RC Ram 2WD would be around 100 lbs more but i don't know how many 5.9L > 2WD RCs there are running around. so you're looking at maybe 500 lbs more > on average. And you've gotta think that a ram is a lot bigger in the air > than a durango which while it may be close on weight, it's not on actual > size. The weight of a durango R/T is just under 5000 lbs, with the rams > typically running around 5500. And you're not really thinking it all the > way through. I have somewhat over sized tires (Not 35s by any means) but I > went from the stock 195 radials to 235/75 AT tires, and my mileage in town > went down, but my highway mileage actually went up. Because the bigger > tires gave me a taller final drive ratio. I was pulling 20 mpg solid on the > highway with the speedometer off by a few mph over 300+ mile runs. > > I'm really kinda curious as to why everyone is acting like I'm bashing on a > vehicle's mileage. I just want to know how this guy's ram gets such GOOD > mileage. All the R/T guys I know, a buddy with a 3/4 ton ram and a lot of > the guys I've talked to on the internet have never mentioned getting mid 20s > in a ram before with a 5.9L. And on here we've got one guy pulling 20 with > some mpg saving mods and a smaller more aerodynamic vehicle. Once again, i > love my 3.9L, but I simply don't believe that a Ram could pull mid 20s with > a 5.9L with out some selective modding. > > > > ate: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 20:22:54 -0500 > From: "Bill Day" <billday@consolidated.net> > Subject: DML: Re: RE: Defending 3.9L (WAS "Found 3 mpg") > > Well whats so heavy about a ram vs a durango? The durango does have more > body then the ram, and you must remember that passenger vehicles are geared > more for driving then the way trucks are geared for pulling heavier loads. > It all reverts back to what they put in the gearing and what the final tire > diameter is of the vehicle being tested. Just because you run 35's, doesnt > mean you have to get 5 mpg, there is always something to help you, change > the gears to 5.xx and at least go back to double digits maybe high teens.. > Its all in what you want... If you run 35's and keep the stock gears you > will eat gas, whether you have a 4 banger ina zuki or v10 in a ram.... > > Bill Day > billday@consolidated.net > http://users.consolidated.net/billday/ > > A rich man isn't always wealthy, he just has all the love he wants and can > give.. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get rid of annoying pop-up ads with the new MSN Toolbar - FREE! > http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200414ave/direct/01/ >



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 01 2004 - 12:00:18 EDT