I was typing up a post asking about the NV5600 versus the G56 (which was the better to get), and during all that, I went ahead and made the decision myself based on what I had found here on DTR.

I got a second-half 2005 Dodge RAM 3500 QC 4x4 DRW 6sp (G56) 3.73, with 46k miles, for $28k. NADA on this truck is $33,850 (retail) and $29,700 (trade-in), so I think I did pretty good. I'll be flying out in about ten days to pick it up and drive it home.

My last truck was a red 2003 3500 DRW Sport QC 4x4 48RE with 4.10s that I ended up hating because of the automatic and the 4.10s. It got crap for mileage, and after various computer and tranny problems at around 50k miles, I got rid of it. The 03 was a Laramie with leather and all the goodies. This one is an SLT (non-Sport) with cloth, which I'm looking forward to since I hate how hot leather gets in the Summer. I'll just have to install my own seat heaters before next Winter.

I had the choice of two trucks that were nearly identical except for transmission and miles... the other one had 94k miles and the NV5600. The one I'm getting still has warranty on it, plus I'm going to add a Chrysler extended warranty to keep the cover bumper-to-bumper up to 100k. I was able to get 72 mos on the financing with this truck because of the lower miles.

I was waffling over the transmission, but decided ultimately as long as I had a good warranty, I was probably fine with the G56. I really wanted a better-shifting tranny than the NV5600, which I had two trucks ago in my 2001 3500 QC 4x4... heck that was the reason I got the auto when I bought the 03 -- I hated how poorly it shifted!!!

So anyway, barring anything strange happening, I think I finally got a truck!!

Rob

 

Did towing cause your 48re problems? I think you'll like the g56 - guys say they shift better than the nv5600 but don't like the close OD. It should be better with the 3.73 than the 4.10. My nv5600 shifts all right but a little stiff. The biggest problem is R next to 5th - the g56 doesn't have that problem. The origonal owner of my truck ground R clear down from hitting it instead of 5th. DC got to rebuild my 6sp. The nice thing about my 4.10 is, I can go from 2nd to 4th to 6th if I feel lazy. I've tried that with a 3.73 and the gears are too far apart. Craig

 

Towing with the 48RE was actually pretty decent. I managed to roast the 47RH or 46RH or whatever was in my '96 in less than 5000 miles, but the 48RE has held up to a GCWR of around 20k lbs for the whole time I owned the truck (50k miles). I was impressed in that regard.

What I hated was everything most people hate about automatics.... sluggish, not nearly the mileage of a stick, a huge gap between 3rd and 4th gear, and in my case, a computer problem that would prevent the truck from starting, and then later, wouldn't allow the tranny to lockup the TC. With 4.10s that kinda limits you to around 60 mph at redline. It took FIVE computer replacements by the local idiot dealer to get it working right, but the end result was another 25% dive in my already pathetic fuel economy to make me say enough is enough.

The truck never got better than 16 mpg unloaded, even on the highway at 65-70 mph... and towing anything... whether it was my little 4000 lb. Haulmark enclosed snowmobile trailer, or my Lance camper, or both, it got 10 mpg period. Trailer only, 10 mpg. Lance only, 10 mpg. Trailer + Lance, 10 mpg. Again, 65-70 mph max. This was all hand-verified with a calculator and the odometer and GPS, not the trip computer.

My 2001 before it would get 17 unloaded, 11 with the same Lance (towing or not), and 9.5 mpg with the Lance and a big 24' enclosed car trailer weighing about 9000 lbs. Not great, but not as bad as the 2003. Oh and I had a US Gear Overdrive on that one, but it made NO difference in fuel economy. Oh and this one was modded up too -- DD3 injectors, HX40 turbo, DD UPM fuel box, 4" exhaust. The 2003 was 100% stock.

My 1996 got the best mileage, being 2wd and a 12-valve. BUT, that was short-lived too. A local friend in California at the time tweaked my pump by sliding the TST #3 plate forward a bit, but didn't tighten the bolts down all the way. This was right before a trip from California to Colorado with my Lance and a car on an open trailer. Most of the screws came out and pumped most of the oil out through the top of the pump. I caught it about 250 miles later and put two gallons of oil in and replaced the screws, but from that point on, my mileage got steadily worse at each fill-up. It went from 14 to 12 to 10 to 8 to eventually 6-7. And by the time the trip was over (5000 miles total), the transmission was toast (despite a BD valvebody and Suncoast converter). That's when it got traded on the 2001.

As for the NV5600, I never minded R being where it was. Back when I had my 2001, I also had a '98 Camaro Z28 6-speed, and reverse was in the very same place, so it was actually really nice.

So there ya have it... far more info than you probably wanted to know.

Rob