Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Dodge Ram Quad Cab



  • lariat1lariat1 Posts: 461
    I always thought that the oil filter was the first component the oil came in contact with after it left the pump, that way you get clean oil to the moving parts of the engine. A check valve to prevent the filter from draining seems like it will only provide minimal gain in cold start situations. I think if I was worried about cold start clatter I would install an electric oil pump to allow prelubing the engine.
  • bweavebweave Posts: 16
    I'm thinking about trading in my '00 Chevy Silverado for an '03 Ram QC. I need 4 real doors. Has everyone been happy with their '02 Rams. Any squeaks, rattles, trips back to the dealer to fix any problems?

  • loncrayloncray Posts: 301
    I've got a 2003 Ram 2500 CTD - I've been very pleased so far. The rooftop clearance lights leaked once (dealer resealed them) and I went in to check the fan assembly (mine was fine). No squeaks or rattles (other'n the normal diesel ones) that I know of. I had a 1991 Dodge Daytona long ago - the Ram is light years better than that car was.
  • I do not have an axe to grind vs. Fram. I used them for years on two Chrysler minivans with no mechanical failures. I loved the textured gripping surface they put on the outside of the can....very innovative and useful. All I can tell you is my experience with my '99 300M opened my eyes. I had the oil changed at the dealer for the first three years because they offered it "free" when I bought the car. Ownership changed and they revoked the "lifetime" policy, so I started changing it myself with Fram filters. I noticed the increased valve clatter immediately (I park in a two-car garage and the sound is amplified). I didn't know about the relationship between valve clatter and the filter's anti-drainback valve until I found this website. Changing filter brands definitely reduced cold start valve clatter. Call it whatever you like, but on my particular vehicle, it is fact. One obvious difference in the two vehicles I mention here is that one is overhead valve and one is a pushrod design valve train. It makes sense to me that OHV designs are more sensitive on this issue.
  • Several days ago I related a comment made by my Dodge service manager regarding the use of an aftermarket oil filter in the Cummins 5.9L engine. After researching the issue, I’ve found that DaimlerChrysler discusses the use of aftermarket oil filters in Technical Service Bulletin #09-004-01dated 5/18/01. The Technical Service Bulletin mentions that neoprene compounds used in some aftermarket oil filters can separate from the oil filter, lodge in the piston cooling nozzles, and cause engine failure. It also mentions that DC recommends only specific filters made by Mopar, Fleetguard, Cummins, MotorCraft, Purolator, and AC Delco. Finally, the TSB also mentions that engine failure caused by non recommended oil filters “. . IS NOT AN ENGINE DEFECT”. The use of caps in the TSB is DC’s way of emphatically letting us know that this type of engine failure is not covered by warranty.

    The plugged piston cooling nozzles issue is so serious that issue 36 of the “Turbo Diesel Register” (Alpharetta, GA) suggests insisting on buying oil filters only in unbroken plastic wrap. The Register mentions that one Cummins engine failure was caused by dirt and insect larvae plugging the nozzles. The same material was discovered in the filter can - apparently the location of an insect’s nest.
  • Just an owner's report here. Had my 02 QC Ram 2wd with 4.7/3:55's, tow package, posi, for a year now with 16k miles. Zero squeaks or rattles--I hate that-- and very tight yet. Great truck and I think it's a long term keeper for our family. Wife loves driving it too, despite its size it is a very easy vehicle to get around in....mileage is decent as well. Four doors come in really handy, especially for hauling things (I have the fold down floor option) or extra people. I run 89 octane and it seems to be happiest with that. Hope that helps. Also, I'm not alone in my "clean bill of health" for this truck. Lots of happy owners and service writers report less problems, if any, with this model.
  • Bweave, in answer to your request for information on the 2002 Ram, my 2001 diesel Ram quad cab, which is basically the same as the 2002, has been
    an excellent vehicle. The Ram has certainly changed my opinion about Chrysler products! It's comfortable, quiet (except the for sound of the engine which I expected when I bought the truck), and unlike earlier Dodge trucks, completely squeak and rattle free. Having owned a Chevy before I bought the Dodge, I think you'll be MUCH happier with the Ram. I've yet to see parts fall from under the dash as I did with the Chevy. Also, the fit and finish of the Ram is light years ahead of Chevy. If you don't object to the sound of the Cummins engine and the 3 gallon oil changes, I'd recommend the diesel option. Mileage with the diesel is nothing short of phenomenal. My truck consistently gets over 20 MPG and frequently delivers 22 MPG. Of course, that's reasonable driving. If you frequently take advantage of the engine's incredible torque, mileage will drop substantially. All considered, the Ram 2500 is one of the most enjoyable vehicles I have owned. I recommend it highly.
  • I am very happy with my 03 QC, but I have only had it a month. I had a 99 Sierra and this truck is much better, except the mileage is a little worse. With my GMC I was getting 16 on day to day driving and now I get about 14, but that may improve with more mileage (Now at 1,800).

    One of my pet peeves with the Chevy/GMC's is that the upper fender seems really flimsy where it meets with the lower winshield. You can grab that area of the fender and move it 1/2" easily. I know it doesn't make any real difference, but you shouldn't be able to move the sheet metal on a new truck that easily.
  • bweavebweave Posts: 16
    Thanks for the feedback about your trucks. I'll be getting a Ram in January when the new Hemi is available in the 1500.

    For those of you who have the 20" wheels, was the upgrade worth it (in your opinion)?

  • themanxthemanx Posts: 110
    Is that a Hemi?

  • lariat1lariat1 Posts: 461
    "hemi" refers to the hemishperical shape of the combustion chamber in some engine designs. The original "hemi" I believe was manufactured back in 1967 by mopar and it was used in a select few street cars and also used in NASCAR by Dodge. It was a new design and made craploads of HP and as a result Dodge won so many races that NASCAR banned the "hemi" to level out the playing field.
  • Anyone have info on self installation of the factory keyless entry. Can be purchased from dealer for about 100.00. How difficult is the installation? 2002 Ram QC. Thanks.
  • ChrisCraft,
    I purchased the keyless entry separately and installed myself. It comes with detailed instructions and it was a fairly easy task. But you still have to have it programmed by your dealer or with someone who has a DRBIII. I believe the dealer charged $35 for the programming.
  • I have a 2002 dodge 1500. Last week, I got a card in the mail telling me that if I tow a trailer for any extended period, I need to change the fluid in the rear-end to a different fluid. I lost this card and the dealer does not know anything about it. Has anyone received a similar card from dodge?
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,926

    At post 619 Peppe remarks he got the same type of notice:

    >>Just got a notice that says Caution your 2002 Ram Truck was filled at the factory with GL-5 SAE 75W-90 rear gear lubricant. This notice states that before towing a great distance replace the factory rear axle lubricant with SAE 75W-140 synthetic gear lubricant to reduce the potential for the rear axle over heating. My question should this be done in any case towing or not? If so then when your buy the towing package why don't they put this lub in at the factory?<<
    #620 of 659 Differential lubricant................ by dustyk Nov 17, 2002 (10:14 am)
    My first guess is that the 75W-90 was installed to reduce driveline friction and correspondingly reduce fuel consumption. For most applications, 75W-90 would be more than adequate, including long distance operation with some load. Replacing 75W-90 with 75W-140 will probably provide an additional margin under conditions close to the extreme limit of the axle.


  • I have a 2002 1500 Quad, Silver, 10K miles, 5.9L. I am trying to determine if there is something wrong with my trip computer/MPG computer in the overhead consule?

    When my trip computer in my overhead consule says the fuel tank is almost empty ("10 miles to empty"), and the gas gauge is down in the orange zone, the low fuel light is on, I pull in to the nearest station and fill her up. But I can only get 20-21 gallons in the tank. Isn't this a 26 gallon tank, which would mean at approx 10-11 MPG I get in the city, I should have another 50 miles left. With the consule reading "10 miles to empty" I would expect to pump in around 25 gallons. I have to be missing something, but if there are 50 miles left until empty, why wouldn't the computer or gas gauge show there to be?

    Also, does anyone know the gas mileage specs. on the Hemi 5.7L? I'm considering buying shares in Exxon with the 5.9L Magnum. Any ideas how I can get better than 9-11 MPG in the city, stop and go?
  • I don't have a 1500 (yet) but the trip computer in my 300M does the same thing. I believe their computers are very accurate but they purposely leave a fairly large reserve on the "dte" reading. My guess is that they just decide you would rather always make it to that next gas station than be walking when it hits zero. Also, the dte reading is based on an average mileage achieved with that tankful. So, if you have a mix of city and hwy, it won't be very useful. However, if I'm running tank to tank on the interstate, I can very confidently run at least 30 miles past zero on the dte. In my car, this means a reserve of at least two gallons. In four years of using this computer, I have found the avg. mpg. to be very accurate and in general the whole thing to be very reliable once you understand how they designed it. Hope it turns out to be the same in your truck. Re: tank capacity, my car is listed as 17 gl in the owners manual. I have put 16+ in it when I really pushed it to the limit as described above. Once, the thing died just as I pulled up to the pumps and took 17.2. I assume this means you have a real capacity slightly larger than stated due to the filler nozzle.
  • One thing that I read in the owners manual of my 2003 QC is that there is a "reserve" in the gas tank which is 10% of the tank volume.
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,926
    My 2003 Dakota Club Cab has a 22 gallon tank. When the low fuel indicator comes on and I get the chime, the fuel gauge reads less than a quarter of a tank. At this point I can only get about 16-17 gals in the tank. When the gauge indicates 1/2 full, I can only get 9.5 gallons in to it. I pumped just over 20 gallons once. This gauge will go below the "empty" mark by quite a bit as I recall.

    So, it seems that whatever increment the fuel gauge, there is always more fuel than you think. This might be intentional on the part of the designers.

  • z71billz71bill Posts: 2,000
    I have the same "problem" with my 99 Z-71 - low fuel light comes on when I have 4.5 - 5 gallons left.

    I wanted to know for sure - so I put my lawn mower gas can in the bed (just in case) and drove 70 more miles with the low fuel light on. When I pulled in to get gas it would still only take 25 gallons. I guess it is better to have a few extra gallons in the tank - you never know when you are going to get stuck in traffic.
  • lariat1lariat1 Posts: 461
    For those of you out there that have the 5.9 and want to make a large improvement on both fuel mileage and power I found that putting a 28" cherry bomb in place of the OEM muffler makes a large difference. I went from 13mpg in the city up to 14 mpg and the truck no longer gets the exhaust note is awsome its not to loud and has a nice deep rumble. The whole project cost me $50 and 1 hour of work.
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,926
    I was thinking of the extra-gas-in-the-gas-can thing myself, but I'm going to wait until a little better weather.

    Because the fuel indication signal from the tank is dampened on most vehicles, there could be a scenario where you out-drive the fuel gauge and actually run out before the needle rests on empty. And, of course, there are people who live on the edge, so to speak, and will push the envelope and run the tank low thereby correspondingly run the risk of driving out of fuel.

    This Dakota overshoots the empty and full marks considerably. But because the action of my fuel gauge does appear to be linear, I suspect that the engineers have built in some 'reserve' fuel supply by just under representing the actual amount of fuel left in the tank (as indicated). This probably keeps some people from walking.

  • Don't buy a full-size pickup without considering this one. It has the roomiest front seat in its class. Don't listen to Consumer Reports in their negative review of the Ram. They had to have been paid by GM and Toyota since those reviews are so totally positive. The styling is very sporty as a bonus. The interior of the SLT and Laramie with leather is SO more luxurious than its competitors especially the Tundra and F150 AGAIN. The Tundra doesn't have a crew cab, so most buyers immediately rule that out. The best alternative to a Ram is the Avalanche, but that is very costly and has a less luxurious and ergonomic interior. Also, the Ram is one of the most exclusive and least often seen full-size pickups.
  • First off, Consumer Reports doesn't know how to test trucks, they treat trucks just like cars. CR expects the truck to ride and handle like a car for some reason?? CR poo-pooed my 1998 Chevy C1500 extended cab, yet after 5 years of service nothing has fallen off and the only replacement items is tires and battery.
    So I wouldn't let CR sway my decision. BTW, I looking to replace my Chevy with a 1500 QC. I narrowed it down the the Ford Supercrew and the QC. The QC is first on my list because of the 6'3" bed vs the 5' for the Ford.
  • Regarding Consumer Report's ratings, as a 25+ year subscriber to that magazine, I doubt that Consumer's Union would risk their reputation by accepting &#147;bribes&#148; from any manufacturer or service provider. However, I don&#146;t consider many of their tests to be objective and now consider them to be only a tester&#146;s opinion. Twice just this year, I have been &#147;stung&#148; by relying solely on Consumer Report&#146;s ratings. Had I fully trusted their test results, I would not presently be driving a Dodge PU and would instead be driving a GM product. Having owned a Chevy truck and now the Ram, it&#146;s my opinion that the Ram is far superior to the GM product. One area where Consumer Reports ratings are of great value however, is their product reliability rating. Those ratings are based entirely on Consumer Report&#146;s readers responses to annual questionnaires, not the magazine&#146;s testers.

    Also, mbatchelor, I also considered buying a Ford truck when I was considering buying the Dodge, but after learning of Ford's numerous(!) recalls on their new vehicles, bought the Dodge. After driving the Dodge Ram for over 30,000 miles since August 2001, I now realize that I made the best decision. The Ram is great!!
  • Jason5Jason5 Posts: 440
    As a long time subscriber to Consumer Reports, I tend to turn a "blind eye" to their automotive reports. The relatively recent Ram review was perhaps the most unreasonable in memory. Never do I recall a single article so diametrically opposed to what the truck and automotive press were saying. I've seen several debates where folks cite some disgruntled "former Chrysler engineers" dirtying the water at Consumer Reports. Certainly wouldn't know if it were true, but I do know that their reports on vehicles that I've owned (Intrepid, Montero, Diamante', Ram) seemed off base.
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380

    did you ever spring for a new ram??
  • dustykdustyk Posts: 2,926

    Actually, the Consumers' Report reliability rating is not as reliable as you might think. There are data point flaws and serious ambiguities in the way they report. And despite the fact that it is all self-report, statistical analysts will tell you that this type of data is subject to potentially significant corruption.

    I agree with you that Consumers' Union would unlikely accept outright bribes, however do not dismiss the possibility of politics seeping into their opinion. They have practiced outright deception. In the past they have used a marketing trick common to magazines and journals. They will mail you a "reminder" that your subscription is about to run out, sometimes up to six months prior to your actual renewal date. Because most people easily forget and are too busy to keep up on renewals of magazines and such, some people have stated that they were actually paid up through 3 or 4 years before they realized this deception practice. I'm not sure they still do this, but they did for some time. It seems sort of contradictory for a so-called "consumer advocate" to be practicing this type of tactic.

    Best regards,
  • emaleemale Posts: 1,380

    the issue you bring to light about subscription practices is more of a problem with the contractor that CR uses to do their subscriptions rather than CR itself. when i was in college i used to work for a magazine subscription company and this is common practice...
  • I'll agree with everyone that the dte reading is a bit conservative. I tried the same test on my last hunting trip. I threw in the five gallon gas can as my trip would total seven hundred miles. I drove the first leg 40 miles past the dte reading zero. That required a refill of 24+ gallons. This is still less than the published 26 gallon capacity. The two subsequent tanks duplicated similar results. I returned home with the same five gallons in the can. This is a huge relief when traveling long distances in the plains states. I was more worried about snapping off the needle on the empty peg than I was about running the tank dry.

    On a related note we bounced that pickup over some extremely rough terrain and nary a squeak or rattle was to be found when I got home. This truck really is Ram tough!
This discussion has been closed.