Thubs, you have to remember they produce pickups (if you can call them that anymore) for the mass market. They make them for all the mom's driving the kids to sporting events that dont want to get out and get their fingers dirty just to turn a little ****. I've honestly gotten use to just flipping the switch on the dash.

 

there is usually a thread on this every ~6 months,
a few guys have went to hubs and free axles, a few just pop the front DS off,
not much difference, and the cost is significant.

like $1500 for .5 mpg gain?

 

Don't know if you have been in the back of a MegaCab yet, but, well, uhhhhh............they didn't focus on cupholders either!!

 

Hey I have a question for you guys. My ole 92 has a wheel base of about 132 inches. How do you these quad cabs turn? When haulin fifthwheel campers into state parks are they manuverable in close places. I need an 8' bed also. Will this thing be just to darn long for backin a fifthwheel into state park campsites?

thanks

 

Thumbs, you are correct about the live axles. It would seem that todays Auto Manufactures have taken a few steps back in time. The live Axles in these trucks are similiar to the old live Axles in the mid 70's GM four wheel drive trucks with the New Process 283 Transfer Case. These trucks would gobble gas, so a lot of the owners would swap out the locked hub to a locking hub. This helped some, but not enough. It was not until mid 80's when fuel injection came standard did the trucks actually see an increase in fuel mileage. However, by then GM changed the body style and went back to a touchless axle which they still use today. 04ctd is correct about the hub conversion and the small increase in mileage, but that is only part of the answer.

We need to remember that these trucks also have new emission standards. The current emission equipment on these truck are restrictive enough that we burn more fuel at the same horsepower and torque rating as non-emission controled vehicle. This is supposed to help with the green house gases, smog, the ozone layer and to reduce our dependace our non renewable fuels. How do they do that, you ask? By cleaning-up our fuel. Cleaning-up our fuel reduces the BTU content of the same amount or ounce of fuel that is required to reach a certain horsepower rating. The end result is then (more HP = more fuel burn). In a sense it defeats our purpose of reduction of fossil fuels. Guess you got absolute proof of third rule of Thermal Dynamics.

Our trucks gearing is also lower compared to older trucks with 3:54 or higher gear ratio (Higher the number the lower the gear ratio). Which is to help keep the drivetrain from grenading on us evertime we smash the go pedal. Otherwise we are going to need a bigger diffenential or one similiar to over the road tractors to handle the torque that goes through the powertrain.

And the list goes on and on.

As for the turn radius of these newer model trucks. I find that they can turn more sharply then my old straight axle GM K-1500. This is what makes me tend to over steer when backing up. However, if you slow down and take your time you will so feel like the big boys with the long trailers backing up your fifth wheel or flat beds.

Shawn

 

The 02-07 Quad Cabs with 8' beds have a wheel base of 160 inches.
The Mega Cab has the same wheel base of 160 inches, but a small box.
The 02-07 Quad Cabs with 6' beds have a wheel base around 142 inches.

I think it depends on how comfortable you are backing up. I tend to over steer a little bit since I am always in a rush or running behind. I say they have a better turn ratio then my old straight axle 86 GM K-1500 even in four wheel drive, but that is just me.

Shawn

 

Thanks guys

Yeah my wheel base now is 132". If I go with the quad I think it's up about 157 or better. When backin a fifth wheel in some of the state parks in Florida man it can be a bit tight. I also realize that the steering geometry may have changed since my ole 92 and they very well may turn better, Idono. This is a big deal for me. I really don't have a big problem backin my fifthwheel now but no matter how good you are if the truck is to big it just won't turn.

I realize Dodge tried to cut costs by goin from the reg cab to the quad but for guys like me they went from it would be nice for a little more room to man this thing is way to big. I hate to say it and thought I never would but they are forcing me to look at the GMC extended cab. I have to find out the difference in the turning rad of the quad and the GMC extended. Oh, GMC still used the free wheelin system also. It kills me to even consider giving up the Cummins because they don't build the truck I need. In fact I just may keep the ole Dodge for another five years or so.

 

When I switched from a '92 Club Cab to a 2004.5 Quad Cab a couple of years ago, I remember being pretty surprised at how much tighter the turning radius was the first time I made a U-turn on a local highway with a trailer. It's also easier to back up my trailer next to my house from the small street I live on. It's a rack & pinion set-up now.

 

Not to bust your bubble, but the Dodge Heavy Duty Trucks still have the recicular ball type steering. Not a rack and pinion. The rack and pinion steering can be found on 2wd light duty trucks (not sure of the heavy duty), unless you are talking about GM trucks. Most over the road class "8" trucks still use the swing arm steering box due to their weight and mass that they have to move.

Shawn

 

CatDiesel,

Unfortunately, you are incorrect, sort of. Backing up my visual observation is this link at Allpar.com:

http://www.allpar.com/model/ram/ram-heavy-duty.html

The paragraph below is a little before 1/2-way down the page in the "chassis and suspension" section.

"Two-wheel drive Dodge Ram Heavy Duty trucks feature a new rack and pinion-type steering system that delivers a combination of effort, feel and response tuned to give the driver precise control and positive feedback."

But it's followed by:

"Four-wheel drive Dodge Ram Heavy Duty trucks have a redesigned recirculating ball system made to more exacting tolerances than their predecessors. The new system improves on-center steering feel through lower internal friction, with responsiveness enhanced by a quicker ratio. The 13.4:1 overall steering ratio and 2.75 turns lock-to-lock are especially effective when making tight turns or maneuvering a trailer in close quarters. The system also provides a steady helm for highway cruising, with little of the wander and imprecision normally associated with heavy-duty truck steering."

So I didn't realize that 4WD models still have the recirculating ball system. But my 2WD does have a rack. So it depends what thumbs is in the market for. But I would think that the new steering systems are superior to the old.


I'm at work so that's all I can come up with at the moment.

(I think I need coffee this morning, and I don't drink coffee!)

 

Yeah I was readin in the broch from Dodge and it did say there were two types. I gotta have 4wd.

I've been burnin the midnight oil tryin to figure this stuff out but it is starting to look like I'm gonna keep the ole 92 a few years more. She still runs and looks great and the thing is set up the way I want it. Todays trucks don't offer what I really want. I know there will come a day when I will have to put her to rest but not for a while(I hope). I guess for now Dodge lost a sale with not offering the extended cab. I am probably in the vast minority but as they kinda say in the Army (I'm a minority of one) LOL

Hey if ya see on ole Red Dodge pullin a fiver headed south again this winter flash your lights. It may be the oldest snowbird truck on the road. LOL

 

My 05 weighs 30% more than my 91 did, but only uses 10% more fuel. Having twice the power is great, especially when towing. And as far as ride quality goes, there's just no comparison.

 

Come on admit it. We are both correct.
I did say I was unsure if the 3rd Gen HD Dodge 2wd Trucks had a rack and pinion. I tend to assume everyone is driving a 4wd truck.

Yes, It is up to thumb and what he wants. However, I am glad I bought my 05 when I did. Now I do not have to worry about the new emission control particulate trap, EGR return gasses, and the need to find a ULSD fuel pump every time I fill up. If I were Thumbs I would wait a few years and see what problems the new emission trucks have before purchasing a late model truck. That way the all the lastest and greatest bugs get worked out. When buying used I would look for a 03-05 in the third gen group. I would avoid the 06 because of all the electrical gremlins they tend to have. As for the 2nd Gen anything between a 94 and 97 since they had some really durable engines and transmissions.

Your not the only one needing coffee. I finding tons of grammer mistakes in a lot of my previous post. I used to love coffee, until one night with a few pals and 20 pots later.

Shawn

 

Ok. we're both correct!

 

why do newer Dodges get less mpgs ??
my present '03 305/555 HO gets better mpgs than my '96 or '01 and has a whole lot more power. This truck gets 22+ average mpgs on a 600 mile a week commute. The '01 averaged 19.5 to 20 on the same commute. The '96 averaged 20-21 on that same commute. All pencil figures. All my trucks are stock as I need all the mpg I can get.
JIM