Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-09-2014, 12:32 AM   #57
3 Rivet Member
 
2014 28' Flying Cloud
Snoqualmie , Washington
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 168
My pal picked up a new ecodiesel in Laramie trim with the air bags. Sure rides nice, nicer than my 2013 RAM 2500HD. He's on a trip to Alaska now and averaging 27 mpg unloaded. I averaged 18-20mpg on a trip to CA unloaded, but avg of 75mph. Mileage would have been better if I slowed down.

I'm still glad I bought the 3/4 ton. Payload is never a concern, nor is tongue weight, and I also haul dirt bikes. If I had the 23 or 25, I'd look real hard at the ecodiesel.
__________________

__________________
2014 28' Flying Cloud
2013 Ram 2500 Laramie Crew Cab CTD 4x4
Lara Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 10:57 AM   #58
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,692
Images: 1
The ever-handy Ron Gratz chart:

Woodalls Open Roads Forum: Towing: Heading to the CAT scales tomorrow

Weighing #1 -- TT attached and Weight Distribution Activated

Let Front Axle Load be "FA1" 3,700

Let Rear Axle Load be "RA1" 3,520

Let TT Axles Load be "TT1" 5,700

Then, while in same position on scales, take
Weighing #2 -- TT attached and Weight Distribution Not Activated

Let Front Axle Load be "FA2" 3,400

Let Rear Axle Load be "RA2" 3,980

Let TT Axles Load be "TT2" 5560

Then, drive off scales and drop TT. Return to scales and take
Weighing #3 -- TV only -- TT Not Attached

Let Front Axle Load be "FA3" 3,720

Let Rear Axle Load be "RA3" 2,560

From the above values, you can calculate:

TV weight = FA3 + RA3 6,280

Gross Combined Weight = (FA1 + RA1 + TT1)
- should also be equal to (FA2 + RA2 + TT2) if scale weights are correct

12,920 12,940

TT Weight = Gross Combined Weight - TV Weight

6,650 = 12,930 - 6280

Tongue Weight = (FA2 + RA2) - (FA3 + RA3), or

7380 - 6280 = 1,100 (16%; higher than the target of 12-13%; generally a higher TW [15%+] does add some stability, but usually at the expense of WD difficulties)

Load Transferred to TT Axles
when WD System in Activated = TT1 - TT2

140 (with 300# to FA; or, roughly 2:1 as is to be expected).

The GCW of this rig is the same as my parents '76 Cadillac pulling their '75 28' Silver Streak where the TT outweighed the TV by around 1k and with all five of us aboard . . . and at an usual 7-8 mpg at 55. My grandparents '67 Dodge pulling a '66 Streamline weighed less, but saw 10-mpg due mainly to the higher compression and better tuning for power in that pre-emissions-control era.

Boy, that TW sure is high, what's the story? More batteries and bigger propane tanks a start?

The WD numbers look nice in the main sense. No surprise, here. The other step is to have look at the tire loads individually. TV tire pressure is to the heaviest tire on an axle, not to the axle average (TT tire pressure is always to sidewall maximum).

BRIDGESTONE TIRE "How to Weigh an RV"

I look to moving my toolboxes to get the best read in the above. Then comes the need to secure gear in the event of a rollover. I was waiting for it a few years back and then found the story . . young man survives crash but is killed by flying IPod (years before it was a flying cellphone and for decades previous the contents of a womans purse). In other words whatever we can do to keep gear in place and doors, etc, closed in the TT is worth the trouble and I needn't go further in re with the truck cab or bed.

Brake drag on both vehicles as well as alignment ought to be verified (a vehicle being new is only a coincidence to this need) and trailer bearing pre-set also verified for FE [fuel economy] purposes. The best TT brake controller is also indicated for highest FE (and a VPP hitch to round things off).

And, by the way, you are choosing to give up mpg by not using cruise control. The days of outsmarting it are prettty well gone outside of the hilliest terrain. The usual safety caveats apply, but one has to work tremendously hard to outguess the software. This mental effort outweighs being alert to road, load, traffic and weather and is thus counterproductive. Change the travel set speed IOW. This is a given for CUMMINS or KENWORTH (white papers on fuel economy online).

The cc programming for your little truck deserves a chance. Use the dash mpg read over a 100-mile distance and compare to the cc for another hundred whle on the Interstate. MPG is all about the tenths and hundredths adding up over thousands of miles . . and they do.

Smarter use of onboard diagnostics also indicates use of engine run time as well as average trip speed. Percentage of idle time for a trip. These can all be used quite well to further fine-tune a trip plan where the first day or three is about making distances versus sight-seeing. The conditions under which I work are different, but we are both running the roads. Understanding through experimentation is all about best fit to conditions and not forcing wants on what is encountered.

Thanks for the report, Lance!

.
__________________

__________________
1990 35' Silver Streak Sterling; 9k GVWR.
2004 DODGE Cummins 305/555; 6-manual; 9k GVWR.
Hensley Arrow. 9-cpm solo, 15-cpm towing
Sold: Silver Streak Model 3411
slowmover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 01:06 PM   #59
Top
Always learning
 
Top's Avatar
 
1972 29' Ambassador
1962 19' Globetrotter
1951 21' Flying Cloud
Central , Texas
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,779
Images: 24
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to Top
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover View Post


Tongue Weight = (FA2 + RA2) - (FA3 + RA3), or

7380 - 6280 = 1,100 (16%; higher than the target of 12-13%; generally a higher TW [15%+] does add some stability, but usually at the expense of WD difficulties)


Boy, that TW sure is high, what's the story? More batteries and bigger propane tanks a start?
I always knew the TW was a lot, I didn't think it would be over 1,000.

On this trailer the fresh water tank is forward of the axles and it holds 50 gallons, so having the fresh tank full adds a good bit to the tongue weight. I had just filled both 30lb propane bottles. The pantry and refer (packed with food for a week) are both forward of the axles along with the galley with a good amount of pots and pans. I don't carry anything under the gaucho up front. I guess a few things need to be moved to the under bed storage bins.
It has just the one rear mounted battery.

I'll give the CC another try, maybe.

Thanks Ross
__________________
Lance

Work is never done, so take time to play!
Top is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2014, 02:16 PM   #60
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,692
Images: 1
Well, reducing the TW by a couple of hundred pounds seems like a good idea more I'd guess from A-frame integrity versus pure WDH numbers as the TV is fine for the given loading of same. I'm not up on that issue as I would be if I owned an A/S.

I wouldn't ever choose to travel without full fresh water. I'd rather move some kitchen gear to the area just aft of the rear axles -- close as possible -- but not until I saw the individual tire weight readings. There may indeed be room given a heavier load on the front TT tires at present than the rear, so the move of gear seems obvious if the numbers prove out. This might be one time where carrying cast iron dutch ovens, etc, is the better part of the permanent loading.

As a 16% TW is no big deal past TV payload capacity my concern would be in making TT tire load numbers fore & aft as well side-to-side as equal as is reasonable. If that results in a lower TW, then, nice.

Now, for the record,

Keeping the load centered on the TT axles is the genuine concern; directly over and within about two feet feet fore & aft otherwise, with preference to the front as a general rule. The problem of I/S TT's is their need to not only ride level, but to also have nearly-equal tire loadings for best performance. The shortcomings of a conventionally-suspended trailer don't overcome their inherent instability vis-a-vis a suspension design whch is more forgiving of improper loading.

So far as FE is concerned best loading is conducive to fewer steering inputs to remain lane-centered and upright. Lane-centeredness is the key. The best mechancial baseline -- numbers to which I can refer -- is the start of a mpg quest. As I see diesel prices of $3.60/gl lately, 14.5-mpg is close enough to my 25-cpm while towing. My son is the Marine, so what is "Army Strong" in this case where the USMC rig is far longer and heavier and older, eh?

So, I'd say that if tire loading can be improved it may be that both TW and steering corrections per 100-miles come down. And, for a truck not yet broken in and outstanding MPG numbers for a back road, this rig is on it's way up even before the driver is fully used to it. We gotta spot Army something.

.
__________________
1990 35' Silver Streak Sterling; 9k GVWR.
2004 DODGE Cummins 305/555; 6-manual; 9k GVWR.
Hensley Arrow. 9-cpm solo, 15-cpm towing
Sold: Silver Streak Model 3411
slowmover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2014, 03:52 PM   #61
2 Rivet Member
 
2014 28' International
San Jose , California
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 54
Images: 1
Thumbs up resse dc

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top View Post
So, the first trip is in the books. Thanks to all of you for your kind words.
Overall, I am very, very happy with this truck. It did take me a long time reading and researching to make the decision to buy this truck. Hopefully all goes well with durability and longevity.
Trip stats-
610.2 miles
42.114 gallons
14.5 MPG (hand calculated)
The roads traveled were two lane US and state highways. I travelled at 65 MPH most of the time. I did pass someone on the way down and had plenty of passing power. I was going 85 when I let off. I wouldn't think of attempting a pass on a two lane highway with the Sequoia. The terrain was mostly flat coastal plains with a few hills between Cameron and Sealy on TX 36.
Steady state towing showed-
Water temp 215-220F
Trans temp 195-200F
Oil temp 230-235
I was in tow/Haul mode.
Most of the time it would stay in 7th gear, but occasionally it would shift to 8th.
I tried the cruise control on the way home and didn't like how it seemed to stay in 6th gear, so I shut it off. I never use cruise control, I just wanted to see how it worked on this truck.
On the way out, we went by the CAT scales to check loading and hitch rigging. These weights are fully loaded for a week of camping, three adults and one old furry feline, full 50 gallons of fresh water and two full 30# propane tanks.
Weighing one-WD applied
Attachment 218538
Weighing two-No WD
Attachment 218539
Weighing three-no trailer
Attachment 218540
I have good weight transfer with the old Reese Dual Cam and 750lb bars.
This combo tows so wonderfully I don't think I'll mess with it.
I was surprised to see that the calculated tongue (or is it reciever ) weight at 1,100lbs.


In summary, I don't think I could be happier with any other new truck.
It's working for me!
after reading your scale numbers we have about the same weights, please let me know what Resse p/n you have, it is hard to get anything from the sales guy's at etrailer. They insist we get the 1000bars....thank you
__________________
Flyingsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2014, 04:14 PM   #62
Top
Always learning
 
Top's Avatar
 
1972 29' Ambassador
1962 19' Globetrotter
1951 21' Flying Cloud
Central , Texas
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,779
Images: 24
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to Top
Flyingsilver,
I have the first generation Reese dual cam like is pictured in TomW's website.
Tuning a Reese Hitch
It is not sold any longer. It works really well.
If you go to the Reese website, you can look up part numbers for things.
Find your hitch (round or trunnion) and select 800lb then click on replacement parts.

The 800lb round bars are REESE PN 58114
The 800lb trunnion bars are REESE PN 22225

Take these numbers to a retailer of your choice to get the bars you need.

Good luck!
__________________
Lance

Work is never done, so take time to play!
Top is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2014, 01:35 AM   #63
2 Rivet Member
 
2014 28' International
San Jose , California
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 54
Images: 1
Wd

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top View Post
I always knew the TW was a lot, I didn't think it would be over 1,000.

On this trailer the fresh water tank is forward of the axles and it holds 50 gallons, so having the fresh tank full adds a good bit to the tongue weight. I had just filled both 30lb propane bottles. The pantry and refer (packed with food for a week) are both forward of the axles along with the galley with a good amount of pots and pans. I don't carry anything under the gaucho up front. I guess a few things need to be moved to the under bed storage bins.
It has just the one rear mounted battery.

I'll give the CC another try, maybe.

Thanks Ross
Hi all, I have some concerns about the wd of my tv, i have a Ram ecodiesel just like Russ, empty at the cat scale I got these numbers, steer axle 3420, drive axle, 3140, gross weight, 6560. Today we departed from Portland with a brand new intl signature, 28, 5968#with a tongue weight of 950, ẃ have the propane tanks full, and water tank full. The truck,? Two people and around 300lbs of cargo. On the way out of Portland we stoped at the cat scale and weighed the truck and trailer with the wd, we only had the chance to do one run at the scale as they were so busy with lots of trucks and our weight came to to 3620 steer axle, 6720 drive axle and 2720 trailer axle, total of 13120 which comes close to the 13500max gcvw of the bighorn. However we drove 420 miles without any problem. Altough i feel the truck heavy ln gne back the steering is ok and no sway. We have a reese dual cam wd with 800lbs trunion bars and it performed excellent. I am aware we can do better. We have the chain at the third link and i wonder why we have so much difference in axle weight weight from Russ numbers while we have almost similar tt weight and truck. Please help us here. thank you
__________________
Flyingsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2014, 06:20 AM   #64
Top
Always learning
 
Top's Avatar
 
1972 29' Ambassador
1962 19' Globetrotter
1951 21' Flying Cloud
Central , Texas
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,779
Images: 24
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to Top
Flyingsilver,
I think when you weighed with the trailer you had the front trailer axle and the truck rear axle on the same scale platform. You appear to have plenty of weight transfer to the front axle of the truck.
I'd suggest you reweigh using the instructions in Slowmover's post 58 above.
__________________
Lance

Work is never done, so take time to play!
Top is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2014, 09:21 PM   #65
2 Rivet Member
 
2014 28' International
San Jose , California
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 54
Images: 1
weight distribution

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top View Post
Flyingsilver,
I think when you weighed with the trailer you had the front trailer axle and the truck rear axle on the same scale platform. You appear to have plenty of weight transfer to the front axle of the truck.
I'd suggest you reweigh using the instructions in Slowmover's post 58 above.
Greetings, thank you for your note, indeed we went to another cat scale today on the way to Coalinga CA, about 300p,us miles from Redding, the ride went fine on the flats we did around 19.1mpg on paper, the evic said 19.4, however here are the weight numbers, 3480 steer axle, 3660 drive axle amd trailer 5680, indeed the steer axle seems quite light, will do some changes tomorrow with the link chain on the reese. Maybe a link ip will do it, however it is not s bad but transfering another 200lbs to the front may help. What do you think? thank you , Antonio
__________________
Flyingsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2014, 05:07 AM   #66
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,692
Images: 1
I drive around 12-14,000 miles/month lately, mainly Texas Gulf Coast up to West Texas and Oklahoma with oil field loads . . . and what I see consistently is Airstream TT's being pulled nose-down. Not greatly in mainy cases, and not at all confined to old TT's and TV's. Braking performance is the issue, as is TT lateral stability. Only individual tire weight readings -- of both vehicles -- will uncover this.

That best safety practice and best fuel economy coincide in regards mechanical issues of setting up the rig makes the attention to details highly satisfying as to ease of handling, braking and manuverability (a trailer that feels different when changing lanes one way versus the other is enough to send it to the shop on my return; usually, but not always axle alignment).


Tire loads are a big deal, and not just for the heat. As I have been known to post on other forums, fuel economy pays cash money. Confidence in the Texas heat (which didn't really show up until mid-August this year), plus stable performance left and right, will yield best FE from that diesel. I was satisfied with 18-mpg around town with mine until I took on the challenge of bettering it from a Cummns engineer . . and saw 23-mpg in the city limits for an 1100-mile stretch. Mechanical baseline was first, then came the real work of trip-planning and driving skill.

Don't leave anything on the table when it comes to the baseline of numerical values.

(I was deadheading from Ardmore, OK down IH-35 to Corpus Christi on Labor Day weekend Saturday and it was stop-n-go from Willie Nelson's hometown of Abbott all the way to Austin according to northbound drivers . . so I cut across on TX-190 from Belton to Lampasas to use US-281 and thought of several of you Central Texas A/S'ers while on the way. Have't been on that stretch of 190 in maybe twenty years.)


.
__________________
1990 35' Silver Streak Sterling; 9k GVWR.
2004 DODGE Cummins 305/555; 6-manual; 9k GVWR.
Hensley Arrow. 9-cpm solo, 15-cpm towing
Sold: Silver Streak Model 3411
slowmover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2014, 06:24 AM   #67
Top
Always learning
 
Top's Avatar
 
1972 29' Ambassador
1962 19' Globetrotter
1951 21' Flying Cloud
Central , Texas
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,779
Images: 24
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to Top
Us 190

Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover View Post
. . so I cut across on TX-190 from Belton to Lampasas to use US-281 and thought of several of you Central Texas A/S'ers while on the way. Have't been on that stretch of 190 in maybe twenty years.)
You drove right past my shop then. If you aren't in a hurry, give me a ring next time.
__________________
Lance

Work is never done, so take time to play!
Top is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2014, 10:38 AM   #68
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,692
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Top View Post
You drove right past my shop then. If you aren't in a hurry, give me a ring next time.
Thanks, I'll put it in the phone. Be good to meet up for a coffee.

And, GENOS now has the '14 Ram EcoDiesel 'Finger Touch' 14mm Oil Drain Valve for the 3L. Everyone -- you and the garage monkey -- will love it. There've been no concerns even with the smash'em/crash'em offroad crowd on the straight six as to integrity. No concerns ever again about stripped pan threads. The Cummins oil pan costs over $400, as a reference.

.
__________________
1990 35' Silver Streak Sterling; 9k GVWR.
2004 DODGE Cummins 305/555; 6-manual; 9k GVWR.
Hensley Arrow. 9-cpm solo, 15-cpm towing
Sold: Silver Streak Model 3411
slowmover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 04:34 PM   #69
Top
Always learning
 
Top's Avatar
 
1972 29' Ambassador
1962 19' Globetrotter
1951 21' Flying Cloud
Central , Texas
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,779
Images: 24
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to Top
Drain valve

Quote:
Originally Posted by slowmover View Post
Thanks, I'll put it in the phone. Be good to meet up for a coffee.

And, GENOS now has the '14 Ram EcoDiesel 'Finger Touch' 14mm Oil Drain Valve for the 3L. Everyone -- you and the garage monkey -- will love it. There've been no concerns even with the smash'em/crash'em offroad crowd on the straight six as to integrity. No concerns ever again about stripped pan threads. The Cummins oil pan costs over $400, as a reference.

.
Thanks slowmover. I was looking at the Fumoto valve with the nipple. I'm sure that either on would work fine.
__________________
Lance

Work is never done, so take time to play!
Top is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2014, 07:14 AM   #70
2 Rivet Member
 
Horsey5's Avatar
 
2014 23' International
Sandy , Utah
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 21
Hi Lance,
I am looking at the 2015 ram 1500 like yours. I wanted to get some feedback from you regarding how you like your truck and what kind of gas mileage you get when towing?? I have a 2014 international 23 ' . I drove the truck yesterday and liked everything but the price. Thanks Lorri
__________________

__________________
Horsey5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
1500


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 5 (0 members and 5 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hemi-Powered Ram 1500 versus 30' Classic LittleRadio 2001 - 2005 Classic 34 10-19-2014 09:10 PM
Dodge Ram 1500 Ecodiesel dlarsen Towing, Tow Vehicles & Hitches 3 07-10-2014 08:24 PM
2014 Ram 1500 Eco Diesel RamblinManGa Tow Vehicles 2 02-11-2014 10:43 PM
Dodge RAM 1500 SLT 5.9 liter tow vehicle abridges01 Tow Vehicles 10 08-17-2006 08:25 AM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by



Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.