3rd Generation Ram - Non Drivetrain - All Years Talk about the 2003 and up Dodge Ram here. PLEASE, NO ENGINE OR DRIVETRAIN DISCUSSION!.

Changes from year to year

Old Apr 14, 2012 | 02:36 PM
  #1  
horsinaround's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Changes from year to year

I am thinking about selling my 03 and getting a newer dually for more towing capacity. I tow a pretty big trailer often.
What are the changes from year to year in the body. I am looking specifically for when/what models have a bigger back seat. Is it offered in a dually?

I am sure there is a post here that summarizes the changes and options, but ? can't find it... can someone help?

Is it worth getthing the 6.7? My 5.9 24V. has been fantastic. Somehow I think that I have to go pretty new to get a big back seat... I think that means the 6.7 and associated emisions stuff.
Reply
Old Apr 14, 2012 | 02:53 PM
  #2  
RamGazer's Avatar
Registered User
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 437
Likes: 2
From: Wolfforth, Tx.
I had no luck w/ the 6.7 and the mpg's were killing my wallet. 8mpg in the city. I'd stick with a 5.9 24v as better mpg's, no EGR to mess with (you would want to a delete). Sorry I can't give you more info but I know others will chime in.
Reply
Old Apr 14, 2012 | 04:24 PM
  #3  
Shorts's Avatar
There is no G. There is no G. Repeat after me, THERE IS NO G!
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 4
From: Texas
Originally Posted by RamGazer
I had no luck w/ the 6.7 and the mpg's were killing my wallet. 8mpg in the city. I'd stick with a 5.9 24v as better mpg's, no EGR to mess with (you would want to a delete). Sorry I can't give you more info but I know others will chime in.

Actually your post is exactly what I was thinking. I have no experience behind the wheel of a 6.7L except for a test drive. Lately I have been spending time on the 6.7L forums. The deletes look to be required to have mpg on par with the 5.9L.

A 5.9 will cost you a bit less to buy. I know the 6.7L is touted for bigger muscle than the 5.9 but the 5.9 ain't no slouch.

If you're looking for room, look for a Mega. They started in '06. Megas only come in short bed from the factory. If you need a long bed you'll need to do an aftermarket conversion. I think the cost of that is around $5k-$6k.

If you stay with a 5.9L, I would look for an '06-07.5 5.9L. You can still find them young enough that you can enjoy the early mileage life and wear it in like you want. I think that you might take a slight hit in the MPG department though. Seems like '03s have a better mpg across the board of the 3rd gen trucks. In '06 is when the truck's front end got a little face lift from 03-05 styling. The interior got a slight change. The '06 5.9 is rated at 325hp/610ftlbs.

Hope this helps.
Reply
Old Apr 14, 2012 | 06:33 PM
  #4  
RamGazer's Avatar
Registered User
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 437
Likes: 2
From: Wolfforth, Tx.
I know a co-worker who had the dwr flatbad w/ the 5.9 12v and he got a lot higher mpg than I'll ever see. B.T.W. his was all stock w/ over 700,000 miles on it.
Reply
Old Apr 14, 2012 | 06:35 PM
  #5  
Shorts's Avatar
There is no G. There is no G. Repeat after me, THERE IS NO G!
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 4
From: Texas
Originally Posted by RamGazer
I know a co-worker who had the dwr flatbad w/ the 5.9 12v and he got a lot higher mpg than I'll ever see. B.T.W. his was all stock w/ over 700,000 miles on it.
Yeah, 12v are hard to beat for mpg. I was speaking of the 5.9 in regards to the 3rd gen CR applications.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
trophystock
12 Valve Engine and Drivetrain
4
Jul 16, 2006 11:00 AM
jason88
2nd Gen. Dodge Ram - No Drivetrain
5
Jan 26, 2006 11:37 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 PM.