They shaved a whopping 80 lbs off the weight of a 3 ton vehicle! After a good dump I’ve probably lightened the scales more percentage-wise.

That should help Dodge keep Toyota off its tail, since Dodge is not going for the top towing capacity like Ford, Toyota and GM, Dodge needed a hook for customers.

So it now gets 16MPG instead of 15? Still a pig. 5% better fuel economy is nothing.

My body just got 2008 few months back. He gets 20 mpg on highway, due to cylinder deactivation. About 14-15 around town. For a big truck it is respectable. With very expensive hybrid transmission Chevy masters only 5% better mileage on paper. Not to mention that it was Ram that pioneered “in your face look” and that sweet Cummins diesel.

who cares about the 2009 ram… what is 20% of 8mpg anyway.
I drove the New 2009 Ford f-150 and it is miles ahead of the competion.
5 years ago Ford raised the bar for trucks. With the 2009 it is raised again. Just watch the competition scramble to catch up again.

I tried to drive a ‘09 F-150, but couldn’t due to a wicked case of projectile vomiting upon sight.
Someday the 5.4 will outtow a 5.3 GM, or a 4.7 Tundra. I’m still waiting for my bud to move get my horse trailer back here.
I own the trailer, but he’s the horse’s ass.
I tried to warn him.
DrFill

What’s the big deal, you ask?

If Dodge improves the Ram’s average combined mpg by 1 to 16mpg, and sells 350,000 of the improved Rams, it’ll net over 23.5 million fewer gallons used per year.

Toyota would have to improve Prius fuel economy from 45mpg to 80mpg, selling at the current rate of 150k.

Nissan would have to improve Sentra fuel economy from 27mpg to 37mpg, selling them at the current rate of 150k.

Honda would have to improve Civic fuel economy from 30mpg to 35mpg, selling 300k.

Improving the least fuel efficient vehicles first, even a little bit, will net the most gains for their owners at the pump, and reduce our fossil fuel dependence faster.

Dodge and GM improving the fuel efficiency of their bestselling and least efficient vehicles is the less glorious, but more effective, route toward real fuel savings.

Thing is, Toyota, Nissan, et al, are only getting worse with their trucks. Luckily they don’t sell in the volume the American vehicles do, or GM and Chrysler’s gains would be offset.

Actually RaineMan, it gets 23 on the highway, maybe you need to re-take math.

Dodge announced today that its redesigned 2009 Ram 1500 will be 20% more fuel efficient than the 2008 model it replaces. The new Ram’s reduced appetite for fossil fuels can largely be attributed to the truck’s new, more aerodynamic styling and a diet that results in 80 lbs. less of truck to haul around. More important, however, is the newly revised 5.7L HEMI V8, which gets a big boost in power from 345 hp to 380 hp and 375 ft-lbs. of torque to 404. Despite the strength training, Dodge engineers still expect up to a 20% gain in highway fuel economy. For instance, the 2008 Ram Quad Cab Laramie with the old 5.7L gets 15 city / 19 highway, while the 2009 model will get 23 mpg on the interstate, so says Dodge. We should point out that these gains will only be achieved while highway cruising, so we expect the 2009 model to remain in the mid-teens around the city where aerodynamics are largely irrelevant and stop-and-go driving leads to low miles per gallon. Still, what gains in fuel economy there are to be had are still impressive considering the HEMI’s big bump, which was needed in power to keep the Ram competitive with its Detroit rivals and the Toyota Tundra. With sales of profitable full-size trucks falling fast on account of high gas prices, we bet every truck manufacturer will be touting their own fuel economy improvements, however small, in the coming year.

people get happy when gas goes down 10 cents—even 5 cents. but when a ‘dodge’ achieves 20% better fuel economy people say it aint good enough? you morons. Kudos to Chrysler, any achievement is a good one especially for them these days, plus whatever there engineers are doing to there V8’s to save gas will probably be applied across the board. cheers bitches.

johnnycanuck: what you need to keep in mind is that they’ve reduced a considerable amount of weight without compromising the structural integrity of the vehicle. This is a great accomplishment and I’m hopeful that they’ll offer a worthy Diesel powerplant in the near future.

1c3d0g, they will, they are working with Cummins on a 5.9 liter V8 and possible V6 diesels for the Ram

1c3d0g, I love the look of the truck, but johnny is right: for 4500-5000 lbs truck 80 lbs is like a dump to the owner. Chrysler could make sign forbidding obese assholes from buying the truck and kept 80 lbs, they actually could add another 40.

Think about it it is amazing: it is not a hybrid! Dodge managed to get better mileage then GM without super expensive hybrid transmission. Now they have access to that transmission and could plug it in, but cost would jump.

They will do a hybrid Ram to sell along side the regular gas and the diesel versions, byt the way autonut, the Silverado with the 5.3 liter gets 21 on the highway without hyrbid tech.

noname,inline6,bolex,1c3dog,autonut-
go to the head of the class on this one. everyone else…it’s a f*cking pick-up, not a kia. stop pissing, this is good news for my inlaws and my business.

yeah and the smart fortwo is the freakin fastest 3 cylinder car on the market

And that has to do with what?

Ford and Chevy Owners can cry over this one:

2005 Dodge Ram 3500 4×4 Cummins, currently 22.2 MPG
Better than most larger rice-burning SUV’s

NoName, the first half of your post was essentially a rewrite of the feed. Just sayin’

Its a good improvement. 1c3d0g is right, its an accomplishment.

Did not get it from the feed Deanster, but thanks.

With these trucks and other vehicles with displacement on demand (I’m going to assume the new Ram will have this), it’s always about highway fuel economy. That being the ideal situation for the engine to shutoff half of its cylinders. They should make it so you can choose what mode it’s in. If you’re creeping around the city, why not be able to keep it in 4 cylinder mode?

Most people in America spend most of their time on the highway, not doing city driving.

I think a lot of vehicles have really improved over the past two to three years. Especially domestic vehicles, in both Europe and America, and while the Japanese have obviously improved, they’ve become more interested in endeavors with more niche related vehicles, rather than quality and mainstream ones (take a look at their small sized crossovers and other vehicles, Ridgeline, Tundra, Sequoia, Venza, etc.).

But I don’t really see improvement in the new Ram. Sure, it’s “redesigned”, but it looks the same inside and out. The new engine sounds fair and all, but 80 pounds? They could have done much better, I’d say if they really wanted to put some effort into it, 150 pounds sounds ideal. Ford has gotten a near 15% increase in fuel efficiency just by adding some aerodynamic devices and a slightly different CPU to their full size pick-ups, same with Chevrolets offerings. The new suspension sounds great, but I’m curious what improvements in comfort and ride can really be offered or welcomed in a full size pick-up. Why not offer the storage compartments on other cabs, aside from the mega cab? How about seriously improving that 3.7 liter, because it sure is a horrible and underpowered engine. Even in the Dakota the engine is underpowered, slow to respond and lacks any sort of lust aside a quick note of the engine on start up. Trim pieces, simple things such as the grill, don’t have to have plastic sticking out of every corner; I’m not sure about the new model, but it looks a lot better in that respect.

Most people who but trucks go for the V8 for towing and hauling, that is why they left the 3.7 liter alone, that and the fact that they are busy developing the Phoenix V6 family of engines, so don’t whine. Considering that most vehicles GAIN weight when they get a new version, the fact that Dodge reduced weight and improved the aerdynamics and made the V8 to become to most fuel efficient choice is great.

Yeah, but when do they plan on releasing the Phoenix V-6 family? If it’s a petrol engine, I’m curious if they’ll base it off the current magnum or V-6 designs, like Chrysler has done for nearly the past 50 years with many of their engines. But if your talking about the small diesel engines, then all the better, but there are still those who would prefer a petrol engine. There will still be their SUV’s and smaller pick-ups that will use the 3.7 liter. If Chryslers going to wait off updating the 3.7 liter, then they might as well put the new Nitro, Liberty, Grand Cherokee, Durango and obviously the Commander as already stated on the chopping block. The 4.0 has been on the market and is derived from an engine that has had few updates since 1990, and all the just mentioned vehicles have had a slew of reliability problems and fuel economy concerns that a (first time) investment into Chrysler engines may do some good.

The thing that I don’t understand about Chrysler is they just let their products fall. PT Cruiser, great vehicle when it came out and sold like hotcakes, and is now selling in much smaller numbers with virtually no updates. Almost all of Chryslers engines are based off of past designs that have been around for nearly 20 years. The only thing I have seen a major investment in the past 10 years for was the Pacifica for a very, very short period, PT Cruiser for an even shorter period, and the Chrysler Minivans, Jeep Grand Cherokee and Wrangler have been steadfast.

And btw, I could care less what the rest of the competition is doing. It’s time we stop comparing and contrasting auto manufacturers and other groups, and dividing things up. The question is, what can Chrysler do for me to get my money. Do you consider 80 pounds in a nearly three ton pick-up truly a long term investment when gas prices are inflated where they are and in our economic condition? I think Chrysler could have done much better, with ALL their products.

The Phoenix V6 family of engines is being co-developed with Mercedes and Hyundai, under project Trident. Also under development by Chrysler for the US market is DSG style automatics, being worked on with Getrag. And since everyone always cross shops vehicles in the same class it is fair to compare this Dodge to other offerings on the market, so we have a Dodge that is lighter and more fuel efficient and more areodynamic then the pug nosed Toyota Tundra, the overly creased 2009 Ford F-150, the Chevy and GMC trucks are decent, just need to ditch their 4 speed like everyone else is doing, and the Nissan will be built on this platform but with unique sheetmetal and suspension tuning.

Plus much of the focus on this Ram, other then the aerodynamics and weight loss, was to improve the interior to match the compeition and judging from what I have seen, they did an excellent job.

Nicely put inline6, muito smart.
.
Just for a moment lets also consider the environmental impact of spending a fraction of the purchase price of 350k new trucks on keeping 350k old ones on the road, and not building any new ones this year. How would the savings in manufacturing emissions (think all the way through from materials extraction to shipping, manufacturing, waste products etc.) measure up against the emissions savings made by replacing trucks with more efficient ones?
.
Not to knock Dodge’s achievements, but if buyers are deciding to replace their current vehicles with more efficient ones for the good of the planet, they may end up doing more harm than they realise.

LLN, where did my post go?