Dodge Ram Pickup - which one??

canadacraig

I KNOW that I'd like to own a RAM 1500 with the 5.7 litre Hemi engine AND I KNOW it must have the 5-speed automatic, the premium cloth seats [with the 8-way power drivers seat] and the leather wrapped steering wheel. But beyond that - I'm not so sure. I can't make up my mind as to what 'body' to get - the regular cab or the Quad Cab. OR if I should get the 2wd version or the 4wd. Have any of you bought the new Ram and WISH you ordered a different model?? [or wish you ordered more options - or wish you DIDN'T order some options??] For instance - is it worth getting those 20" wheels?? Is the Infinity stereo impressive enough to spend the extra money?? [etc., etc.]

I'd love to know what you think.

Thanks,
Craig

loncray

Well, I bought a 2003 2500 Diesel - got it as loaded as I could (and still missed out on the heated seats - perils of ordering too early). 20" wheels aren't available on the 2500, but I think they look okay on the 1500. I think the decisions on 4x4 vs 4x2 and Quad Cab vs Regular Cab come down to what you want to do with the truck and how you drive. I got the Quad to carry around a lot of people, the Short Bed 'cause the long bed was a LOT of vehicle to park, and 4x4 because I plan to take my family camping off the beaten path next summer. Both the QC and the 4wd make it more expensive - you probably don't want them unless you're going to use them. Whatever you get, I think you'll enjoy your new Ram!

canadacraig

Thanks - loncray - for responding to my question.

I prefer the LOOK of the regular-cab but the dealer I go to told me that IT [in fact - any 'regular-cab' pickup] loses considerably more [resale value wise] than a Quad [or 'extra'] cab. Is that true - do you think?? Assuming that's true - the better resale value and the extra interior room afforded by the QuadCab might be the 'way' to go. I'd probably appreciate [in the long run] having room to having a 'sportier' look. I don't NEED 4wd so that could save me about $3000 CDN.

As for the SIZE of your RAM... do you often have to avoid underground parking lots [because the trucks too high] or anything like that?? Is it easy enough to manuever around town. I ask this because I would be trading in a Jeep TJ [aka 'Wrangler'] which is a bit like driving the Mad-Hatter's tea cup. [almost as long as it is wide - or so it seems]

Thanks again,
Craig

dahuber

As someone who's owned both, I can tell you that I would never go back to a regular cab pickup. Even if you don't haul people, you just get a lot more space to use for everyday trips hauling stuff that you don't want to throw in the bed (e.g. groceries, valuables, small stuff).

With all the incentives today, the price wouldn't be much different.Get the quad cab-you won't regret it.

Dave Huber

dustyk

...........of the resale value element in discussing cars and trucks, especially when talking to a salesman. (Remember, he's motivated to sell you as much vehicle as possible!) One must define what "resale value" is in any dialog.

The value of a used vehicle is dependent on a number of things, ie.: condition, miles, equipment, geographical location, and local market conditions, to name a few.

All other things considered being equal, a vehicle's value at any given time must be subtracted from the list price or the actual price paid when new. The RAM Quad may in fact be worth more at term than a conventional cab version of the same truck (miles, equipment, etc. the same), but the Quad will cost more. The more practical way to determine used value is to calculate the difference between list price and current market value of the two different vehicles.

And there are some things that cannot always be foreseen in resale value. For example, the used car market around here (Rochester, NY) has been full of Ford Explorers, either from program, lease, or private owners putting them on the used market. The selection is good, from a used car buyers perspective, and so is the price because there are so many around that the market is near or above saturation for these vehicles.

My point here is, today a truck like a quad (4-door) is very popular new, but a war in the middle east or some other such reason could drive fuel prices up. When this happens vehicles of this type may not be so attractive to used car buyers. Also, heavily leased vehicles, like my Ford Explorer example, make used prices drop as these 2, 3, and 4 year leases expire putting them increasingly on the used market.

Good luck on your decision.

Dusty

bc01cls

Well, after owning my 2002 RAM 1500 quadcab for just about a year I can truly say I love it. In fact I have done the longest one day stint ever in the truck, and this while pulling a U-Haul. I logged 1,050 miles in a day and it was very comfortable. The 4 doors are great and the truck turns very tight--much more than my extended cab Dakota in fact. It is large and heavy but with the 4.7 I get very decent mileage. On the highway to NY with cruise on 73, computer pegged me at 19.4 mpg in 1,000 miles. Around town I get 14.5 to 15.5 depending on my right foot.....all in all not bad. I would never go back to a regular cab. Too bad Dodge doesn't offer a club cab anymore, but I love the 4 doors. Oh, forgot to mention I just got the 2wd with posi since I can get through anything I need to without the added weight and loss of economy in a 4wd.

dustyk

As I read your post it appears that you are refering to the fuel mileage as indicated by the computer. There are a number of subtle reasons why this may not be accurate.

Did you compute the actual miles driven divided by the number of gallons used? (The old fashioned way.)

Be interested in how that compares.

Regards,
Dusty

dahuber

I've checked the mileage in my 2001 Ram several times between computer and manual calculation using the trip meter. The Dodge computer is almost dead-on every time. If you do this test, make sure that you buy your gas at the same station.

Dave Huber

hersbird

The 4x4 or the Quad made have a higher resale percentage but no way will you lose less actual dollars. The 4x4 costs $3,400 more on two otherwise identical Rams, and the quad cab adds $3,300. Even if those were worth $3000 more each in 3 years (doubtful) you still lost money. Also worth considering is how nice it would have been to have those options if they really only cost $300-500 each over the 3 year period. As far as options go, those ones hold their value better then almost any other (just see how much those power seats and leather steering wheel are worth in 3 years!) Personally I'm considering getting a rather basic ST, regular cab, 2wd with the hemi for only $18,700 and then making it my own (custom 20" wheels and grill, painted bumpers, and hopefully that SRT-10 hood will be available in the aftermarket.) Then again I currently get by with a two seat Dakota regular cab 2wd so even the RC Ram will feel spacious compared to what I have now.

ChrisCraft

Considering purchase of a 2002. Not tow equipped. Checking vehicle, I find it has two auxillary coolers located in front of the radiator. Would this be a trans-oil cooler and also additional cooling for the radiator? Thanks

indydriver

BC: thanks for the endorsement of 2wd w/posi...that's what I was thinking based on my needs. How's it do in the snow? Do you have 17" wheels?

CC: Critical point in choosing QC--Are you a golfer? If yes, you'll want the interior storage space.

bc01cls

dustyk..............I've used both methods and the computer is pretty spot on. Surprised me as well given that it's "Chrysler electronics".

venturagal

Hi, I have read many bad reviews regarding the gas performance and balance issues of the 3.9L engine in the Dakotas. However, I am leaning toward this engine because it is completely made of iron (block & head). I was also planning on the regular cab. My Datsun '76, Toyota '86, and the current Chevy '95 have all blown their head gaskets. (The Chevy twice..) I have heard that if the block and head are made of the same materials, there is less chance of thermal expansion leading to blown head gasket problems. I usually try to keep my autos for a long time, so reliability is key. Also, on a personal note, I prefer to have a manual transmission. If anyone out there has recommendations, I would love to read your opinions. Thank you

dustyk

>>I have heard that if the block and head are made of the same materials, there is less chance of thermal expansion leading to blown head gasket problems. <<

Venturagal,

In a good design the material difference between the head and the block should not be a factor. There are some aircraft engines that do this and a lot of race car motors, too. And this arrangement usually works well, again, in a good design. I agree that there are some designs that seem to have a higher incidence of head gasket failure than others and I would say that many of them are in fact aluminum head/cast iron block. However, some designs don't, like the Nissan GA16 motor or any of the Honda engines. And some iron head/iron block motors have had more head gasket failures than others.

Many, if not most, head gasket failures are due to corrosion in the water jacket seal area. Some, like older Chrysler 4-cyl (American made, 2.2 versions) leaked oil. In my experience few have actually "blown" out in the chamber area, although in my aging memory I seem to recall that some of these were the old Chevrolet (GM) straight sixes (BlueStreak motor), and I have seen a few 302 Fords. The GM V6s are probably the most notable for this in recent years, along with the Ford 3.8 V6 of certain vintage.

It just so happens that the 3.9 V6 used in the Dakota is actually a 318 V8 with two of the center cylinders removed. It's a very old design that goes back to 1967 and in all my experience I don't ever remember seeing or even hearing of a 318 or a 3.9 head gasket failure. I'm sure there have been some, because just about everything fails sometime, somewhere. But I believe it's pretty rare.

But be careful. This could be sort of like men, you know. I'd hate to see you run from any aluminum head/iron block design into something else with another type of problem.

Best of luck,
Dusty

hersbird

The Dakota with a 3.9 and 5-speed will seem much more powerful then your Chevy. The problem is that the 4.7 is a very low priced option (under $600) and down the road you might be wishing you had a V-8. Mileage is similar too although the 4.7 can put down so much power with the manual that it is pretty much at the limits of the transmission and hard on the whole drive line. Still the 4.7 5-speed is just as fast as a similar style Dakota R/T with the 5.9 and automatic (meaning 2wd compared to 2wd and regular cab compared to regular cab.) If you do think the 3.9 has plenty of power get a SXT model, in 2wd or 4wd form it is a good deal. The 2wd RC at invoice pricing after all rebates is only $12,829. The 4x4 is $15,768. I would add the 3.92 gears and limited slip axle no matter how you plan on using the Dakota, especially with the 3.9. There are lots of 3.9 5-speeds Dakota on the used market as well, but not too many regular cabs.
Just a plug for me, I have a regular cab Dakota R/T that I want to sell so I can buy a Ram. It's a rare yellow color for 2000 (only 5 RC R/Ts made in this color for 2000) and only has 18,000 miles on it. No v-6, and no manual, a good hot rod and arguable the best handling production pickup ever made. I was asking $13,700.

venturagal

Thank you for the information about the Dakotas and their track records. I ended up with a GMC, simply because I could not reach the foot pedals without pedal extenders in the Dakotas.
Thanks again