Notices
Ford vs The Competition Technical discussion and comparison ONLY. Trolls will not be tolerated.

Ram outsells Chevy in Qtr 1, 2019

 
  #1  
Old 04-02-2019, 09:54 AM
jschira's Avatar
jschira
jschira is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Arlington, TX USA
Posts: 4,058
jschira has a good reputation on FTE.jschira has a good reputation on FTE.jschira has a good reputation on FTE.
Ram outsells Chevy in Qtr 1, 2019

120k units to 114k.

Proof again that the "tough truck" message does not resonate with today's pickup buyers. They want Rolls-Royce quality interiors and features.

GM still selling $70k trucks with interiors made by Rubbermaid.
 
  #2  
Old 04-06-2019, 09:50 PM
stephen.osborne1's Avatar
stephen.osborne1
stephen.osborne1 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Idaho
Posts: 1,458
stephen.osborne1 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.stephen.osborne1 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Bwahahaha chivvy. To be fair, the new chevy really is hideous.
 
  #3  
Old 04-27-2019, 05:45 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is online now
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 29,405
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
The new GM 2.7L GTDI 4 banger is featured in a recent C&D article. GM rates the 1500 series equipped with this engine at a combined 22 and 17 and 20 combined or close to that. C&D experienced 16 combined in their 200 mile test.

Apparently GM didn't pay attention to Ford with the ecoboost engines and decided to trek down this path anyway. The 2.7L has plenty of grunt and the ability to move the truck along pretty nice but she's thirsty when she's pushed just like any other GTDI engine.
 
  #4  
Old 04-27-2019, 05:53 AM
jschira's Avatar
jschira
jschira is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Arlington, TX USA
Posts: 4,058
jschira has a good reputation on FTE.jschira has a good reputation on FTE.jschira has a good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
The new GM 2.7L GTDI 4 banger is featured in a recent C&D article. GM rates the 1500 series equipped with this engine at a combined 22 and 17 and 20 combined or close to that. C&D experienced 16 combined in their 200 mile test.

Apparently GM didn't pay attention to Ford with the ecoboost engines and decided to trek down this path anyway. The 2.7L has plenty of grunt and the ability to move the truck along pretty nice but she's thirsty when she's pushed just like any other GTDI engine.
The other dirty secret about GTDI engines is that the power ratings and some of the EPA numbers are achieved using 93 octane gas.

Achieving 10% better fuel economy using fuel that costs 20% more must be that new math. Using the math that I learned in the 1960s, that's no $$$ savings.

Also, 93 octane is not even available everywhere.
 
  #5  
Old 05-05-2019, 07:40 PM
KCJackson1
KCJackson1 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Mount Arlington, NJ
Posts: 277
KCJackson1 is starting off with a positive reputation.
It's time proven that engines that don't have to work as hard are usually more efficient. This was something the bus industry learned in the 1980s, when the stalwart was the Detroit 6V92TA... used in both city buses and long-distance motorcoaches. It was supposed to replace the normally-aspirated 8V71, but in the real world, companies were not seeing the savings. Then they started hitting on something... motorcoach operators began going for the 8V92TA, 33% larger in displacement, and up to 40% more power and torque. To their surprise, they started seeing the efficiency gains, which brought them to the conclusion the smaller engine was working too hard. Then overdrive gears were added to those heavy-class automatics, and now these things were not only getting great mpg, but had far better acceleration. To this day, virtually every coach sold in US and Canada is running a 12-to-13 liter engine.

The same is happening with pickup engines, both gas and diesel. Chrysler was able to drop the 4.7L V8 because the 5.7L got better mileage with the extra power. I expect the new Ford 7.3L V8 to do better than the veteran 6.8L V10 it's replacing.

As for the OP of Ram outselling Silverado for the first quarter... This is not a surprise. Chevy got it wrong with the exterior styling, and I expect both the 1500 ad HDs are already in the design studio getting new front clips as qucckly as possible. Ram's two-pronged attack with the old and new 1500s sold together allows them to get the more expensive trucks out to those who want the latest-and-greatest, while the older version still offers less expensive and more commercial-friendly configurations. Chevy and GMC also lost points with the more-upright, appliance-like dash. I wouldn't mind it, as it reminds me a lot of the dash in my 96 Ram, it's just not up to what you'll find in Ram's/Ford's top trim levels. In particualr, Ram started with their top trim and worked backwards to what the base Tradesman gets, while it seems Chevy/GMC seems to have done the reverse.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.