DODGE RAM FORUM banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
It seems that fuel mileage in a 4x4 2500 6.4 is better than the mileage in a Power Wagon 6.4 - by a large margin if some reports are to be believed.

Some owners even estimate that performance and mileage in a 2500 4x4 would be better with 4.10 or 4.30 gears vs 3.73's. The 6.4 PW has 4.10's.

Am I missing something with engine tuning, etc. between the two models? As far as I understand, a short box 2500 4x4 with 4.10 gears is essentially the same truck as the Power Wagon, minus the slight lift, suspension, winch, and tire size.

Am I believing too much internet manure or are there differences I'm unaware of that hurt or add to mileage efficiencies between the two models?
 

·
Dodge Ram Forum Senior Member
Joined
·
3,201 Posts
It seems that fuel mileage in a 4x4 2500 6.4 is better than the mileage in a Power Wagon 6.4 - by a large margin if some reports are to be believed.

Some owners even estimate that performance and mileage in a 2500 4x4 would be better with 4.10 or 4.30 gears vs 3.73's. The 6.4 PW has 4.10's.

Am I missing something with engine tuning, etc. between the two models? As far as I understand, a short box 2500 4x4 with 4.10 gears is essentially the same truck as the Power Wagon, minus the slight lift, suspension, winch, and tire size.

Am I believing too much internet manure or are there differences I'm unaware of that hurt or add to mileage efficiencies between the two models?
How large of a margin are you seeing? All things equal from a power train perspective, tires can really affect mpg. The larger tires on the Power Wagon could be the difference of 1-2 mpg I'd think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I don't own either truck. I have a Ram 2500 4x4 diesel, 2002 vintage. I have been considering purchasing a new truck with a 6.4 instead of the diesel option.

I don't know anyone with either vehicle I previously described with a 6.4, so the "reliable" internet is my only source of info for mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
2015 PW, all stock. 15 mpg for mostly suburban driving, 16.5 on highway.

BTW that's with 87 Octane, have never tried 89.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
I get 14 with a mix of town and highway driving. On a 200 mile trip recently that was 50% 55 MPH highway with some small towns and 50% freeway my EVIC reported 20 mpg. Hand calculated I got slightly over 17 MPG. I was pretty excited about the 20 MPG reading but it just wasn't accurate. I'm on stock tires 3.73 gears.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
343 Posts
I can see the difference happening. I had a 13' Longhorn and got low 20's in mpg. I leveled front end and got high teens, then I went from stock road tires to AT and went to mid teens in mpg. As you said, PW has more aggressive tires, higher suspension, heavier front end with winch, and solid axles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
My new to me 15 PW gets about 9 around town and I can see 13-14 on hwy with a light foot. But in all reality, my right foot isn't that light! If I set cruise at 65-70, the evic will read 16-17 on level ground. By the time I use a whole tank, I'm back to 13-14 manually calculated. Looking forward to exhaust, tune and cai for improvements in mileage, but then the right foot will come into play again.
Oh well, I do love this truck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
It appears that the "prospector" Rams have a water snorkel.
You may want to look into them, plenty of pix online!
These look like they'll raise your water fording level, depending on underhood waterproofing of course.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
My 2015 PW gets 16 - 16.5 mpg running 60-74 MPH on the hwy. Once I get to the Texas border, the speed limit goes up to 75 (so driving ~80 to keep up with traffic) and lots of fluctuation at every town along the way, so lots of decel/accelerate betwee 45 and 80. Under those conditions mpg drops to 14.5 - 15. Around town it's somewhere around 10 - 12, depending on how much beltway driving vs using side streets. Stock engine, original tires at 55-60 psi, and not very aggressive driving and coasting to stops instead of waiting until the last minute and wearing out the brakes....


The mpg difference between 70 mph and 80 mph is about 2mpg. Probably due to the greater impact of aerodynamic drag at higher speeds and higher rpm.



My $.02.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
731 Posts
Well, the PW has 2" more suspension and another ~2 of tire. That's a lot of drag regardless the gears. That also translates to gear searching with bigger tires or pulling a load.

You can subscribe me to the theory of these trucks needing deeper gears. The transmission gearing is right for a Cummins, but it's all wrong for a gas burner. That's why the 6.0L GM always seems to do better in towing challenges on TFL Truck etc. You're looking a a transmission that's suited to a gas burner. 4.03 Vs. 32.23 for the first gear is a significant difference. With 4.10 ring gear in the ram you get. 13.24:1 and with 3.73 ring gear in a GM you get 15.03:1. So you need 4.65xxxxxx to make the 3.23 work as well.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
About this Discussion
30 Replies
20 Participants
Thunderhorse
DODGE RAM FORUM
We’re the ultimate Dodge RAM forum to talk about the RAM 1500, 2500 and 3500 including the Cummins powered models.
Full Forum Listing
Top