New Ram 1500 Hurricane vs. Ford F-150 EcoBoost: The Results Are WAY Closer Than You Might Think!

Рет қаралды 214,954

Күн бұрын

( www.allTFL.com ) Check out our new spot to find ALL our TFLstudios content, from news to videos and our podcasts! In this Denver 100 fuel economy test, Andre and Kase pitch the new 2025 Ram 1500's 3.0-liter 'Hurricane' twin-turbocharged inline-six against Ford's long-running and explosively popular 3.5-liter twin-turbo EcoBoost V6. Here's which truck is most efficient on this 100-mile loop!
( / tflcar ) Visit our Patreon page to support the TFL team!
Watch more videos from TFL Studios:
The Fast Lane Truck ( / tfltruck )
The Fast Lane Car ( / tflcar )
TFLoffroad ( / tfloffroad )
TFLbike ( / tflbike )
TFLnow ( / tflnow )
TFLclassics ( / tflclassics )
TFLtalk ( / tfltalk )
0:00 Hurricane vs Ecoboost Intro
1:46 Start the Denver 100
4:17 Highway Driving
8:10 0-60 MPH Comparison
10:54 Finish the Denver 100
13:45 The Verdict
TFL Podcasts:
TFL Talkin' Cars Podcast ( redcircle.com/shows/tfltalk-c... )
TFL Talkin' Trucks Podcast ( redcircle.com/shows/tfl-talki... )
#ram #ford #truck

Пікірлер: 1 400

@VortexArcade 4 күн бұрын

I think the Hurricane is going to be a great engine, but I wouldn't touch it for 3 years!

@benwea76 4 күн бұрын

Lucky for you, it's already been out for 3 years in the wagoneer.

@843MudMafia. 4 күн бұрын

That true@@benwea76

@shettlock 4 күн бұрын

If Toyota needs 4 years to get turbo shit right, how long do you think Stellantis needs? 😂😂

@Bryce7O3 4 күн бұрын

@@benwea76is it similar tho cause the rams are supposed to have higher output versions?

@VortexArcade 4 күн бұрын

@@benwea76 Didn't they sell like 40 of those? 🥴 There was a similar issue with the Pentastar in the Wrangler. The 2012 and early 2013 Wranglers had bad cylinder heads despite the engine being in Grand Cherokee for a couple years.

@user-fq3uh7bt1t 4 күн бұрын

The real test here is which one goes 0-60 recalls first

@Steve-yr5vi 4 күн бұрын

recalls are part of the government corruption system, nothing more.

@ubeuonly 4 күн бұрын

FORD WINS EVERY TIME. TWICE AS MANY IN2023

@fireant1272 4 күн бұрын

We all know ford will have the most recalls 😂

@lordcommander3224 4 күн бұрын

Stellantis simply will refuse to announce any recalls. ;-)

@sgillen12 3 күн бұрын

@@lordcommander3224this is what people don’t wanna say out loud

@jeffkondra8246 3 күн бұрын

Ill take the F150, it's been proven to be a good engine already.

@shockracer 4 күн бұрын

No oil dipstick on an engine is bothersome. We'll see how it holds up over the next couple of years.

@darkdodger137 4 күн бұрын

How often is the average driver lifting their hood and reaching for a dipstick? Yes there are a few people that would do it, but those few are the exception.

@shay1116 4 күн бұрын

@@darkdodger137 I'd venture to guess truck owners are much more likely than the average driver.

@0HOON0 4 күн бұрын

Dipsticks are outdated but they should always be present as a backup.

@Javelinjoe73 4 күн бұрын

Yeah, just wait till the oil level sensors go bad. $$

@PantyDropper69 4 күн бұрын

@0HOON0 that's an absolutely insane take.

@mrconductor144 Күн бұрын

The No dipstick in the 3.0 hurricane is what kills it for me.

@DanielJaegerFilms 4 күн бұрын

420 / 469 🤔 tell me that wasn’t intentional 🤣

@Cloud30000 4 күн бұрын

RAM knows their customers, at least the ones that are alright dropping the V8

@brentmacklem1872 4 күн бұрын

Good catch. 😂

@ianberry5562 3 күн бұрын

Those are God’s power numbers right there

@BloodAlwaysFindsItsLevel 3 күн бұрын

Give the ford tears something to cope with😹

@Captain-Awesome 3 күн бұрын

@@ianberry5562God has no power numbers, that would imply a limit to God’s powers.

@cheftomsd 3 күн бұрын

I love the smoothness of an inline 6. Last one I had was in the 80's with the Ford 300.

@BIGGIEDEVIL 3 сағат бұрын

Can't compare engine from 40 years ago to today's there not even close in comparison

@firearminstructor135 Сағат бұрын

@@BIGGIEDEVIL 100% can compare. LOL what are you on?

@brucegeib263 4 күн бұрын

Awesome comparison. Please do the same trucks towing 5,000 lbs ish. Thank you so much TFL

@johnhufnagel 3 күн бұрын

As you noted, the Ford had an extremely short top off (0.057gal based on the video), whereas the Ram had a 0.369gal (based on the visible data.) If you take the pre-top off values, the Ford comes in at 24.04 vs the Ram at 24.89, so the deviation is 1.89mpg between the extremes. I think given the inherent inaccuracies involved both trucks are nearly identical, within measurement tolerances.

@adaycj 3 күн бұрын

I agree. TFL could do 1000 hours of MPG testing on each truck with 3 million in equipment and someone would still cry foul. It's close enough, and in this case it's a wash.

@fscottgray9784 4 күн бұрын

Beware of the 30 second top off procedure. After a few thousand miles of doing this on both my Ram and GM pickups the carbon canister becomes contaminated and triggers a check engine light. You will end up needing to replace it so the light does not come on. Owners manual says not to top off your fuel tank. TFL won't see the consequence because they never keep their trucks long enough to trigger this.

@danmurray07 4 күн бұрын

I've been told that as well. Surprised they do it.

@skipgumphrey9579 4 күн бұрын

I do it in my Toyota truck. I’ve always done it. It’s got just under 300,000 miles on it and I’ve NEVER had a CEL for anything, let alone an evap/canister issue. Just saying…

@thatfordguy2268 4 күн бұрын

100% correct, over filling or " topping off" is not recomended. This is the main culprit of the majority of "check engine" lights we see at my shop. The vent canister and purge valve are not able to function properly also😎👍

@melvinhunt6976 4 күн бұрын

The canister only has a problem when you overfill and it overflows! MAN!’

@fscottgray9784 4 күн бұрын

@@skipgumphrey9579 older vehicles are not as sensitive to this, less monitoring systems.

@joshuaenyart5570 4 күн бұрын

Andre's foot brake skills were not as beneficial to giving the engine enough time to build boost

@someguywithaford 4 күн бұрын

It doesn’t matter. I have a 3.5, and the 2017+ EcoBoost actually has electronic wastegates. So it will not build boost when stopped. I’ve tried, and I noticed the boost gauge just stays at 0. It seems to me like a nice controlled launch in RWD with a little weight in the bed would be the best way to get a 0-60 from the EcoBoost, it feels a little sluggish after 3rd in 4wd

@ecu4awhile 3 күн бұрын

with a Tune on these 150s, with brake boost i am pretty sure you were spinning the earth as opposed to moving forward. you absolutely benefit from brake boosting these trucks.

@enigma9789 3 күн бұрын

@@someguywithaford Fords dont like brake torquing. Mine always runs faster if i just mash the gas.

@HAPPYFUNTIMEx2 3 күн бұрын

The Raptors fastest 0-60 is with a pedal mash. I dont see why the regular 3.5 would be different. He should have just mashed the pedal.

@someguywithaford 3 күн бұрын

@@HAPPYFUNTIMEx2 that’s interesting. I wonder if the ECU is programmed not to let the engine do much work when brake torque to protect the drive components. This would make sense to me because my truck is less likely to spin the wheels if I just floor it instead of going about 3/4 throttle. I think Ford programmed stuff into these EcoBoosts to try to prevent excessive wheel spin or to prevent damage

@grizz474 4 күн бұрын

I have a 2019 3.5 ecoboost max tow. I get 19 around town and 21/22ish driving from Mn to Florida every year. I'm pretty happy with those numbers. It has the 36 gallon tank and the truck says I have 700 mile range on a fill up when road tripping, that's what what the truck says anyway. 😎

@Steve-yr5vi 4 күн бұрын

I have an F150 with the same setup, even a 209, I've got to say while I love a lot about that truck, what I find I love most is the 700+ miles range. I plan on keeping this a a long time, however if I get anything else it's gonna be able to better 600 miles on a tank or it's a non-starter.

@ycleveland7084 4 күн бұрын

I too have 2019 3.5 ecoboost, but no max tow. Regularly get 22mpg hwy w/o using eco mode. Drive Cle. OH to Augusta GA every year.

@KIDRR 3 күн бұрын

The truck calculates it on 32 gallons so you actually have another 4 gallons after it shows zero mile range

@josephina24 3 күн бұрын

'21 5.0 V8 in my F150, 36 gal tank get 650-700 miles on a full tank depending on the season lol

@xr7coug 3 күн бұрын

Same here but a 22. I know my tow mirrors reduce MPG because I've tested with them folded. Happy with the mileage and the power is awesome.

@DUDEWithDODGES 4 күн бұрын

I think Ram shoulda kept the 5.7 as an option.

@r.holdaway5839 4 күн бұрын

I have some friends deep in the auto industry who believe that Ram “shelved” the 5.7, but didn’t erase it. I hope they bring it back. We have some 5.7 trucks in the fleet and they are well over 350,000 with no issues.

@brentmacklem1872 4 күн бұрын

@@r.holdaway5839that ain’t a bad thing. Friends say this as well. Maintain them people.

@pbaker7160 4 күн бұрын

EPA wouldn't allow it. Blame our idiot government.

@Psuhockey-cr9if 4 күн бұрын

@@pbaker7160then why is ford able to keep the coyote?

@ZayneMcDonald 3 күн бұрын

@@Psuhockey-cr9ifdisplacement

@dearbulls 4 күн бұрын

Cannot wait for the Ramcharger vs. Hybrid F150.

@tomahawk7259 3 күн бұрын

If they get the ramcharger right I think it will blow the F150 Hybrid out of the water.

@dearbulls 3 күн бұрын

yea, but it's a huge IF. Both Stelantis and Leap Motors (the Chinese manufacturer who provided them the range extending technology) are famous for cheap price not high quality. So I'll take that hope with a grain of salt. I do have a preorder on it BTW

@ebenezerwheezer2957 3 күн бұрын

Plug in Ramcharger for the win Stellantis I hope. 🙏 2025 RamCharger 1500 Plug-in hybrid maybe a game changer. 141 mi on pure electric power. 690 miles combined Gas & Elec. impressive combined output of 663 horsepower and 615 pound-feet of torque 14,500 towing Target price $60,000. Best of all you NEVER HAVE TO PLUG IT IN IF YOU DON'T WANT TO.

@dearbulls 3 күн бұрын

@@ebenezerwheezer2957 it can be plugged in but it's not a PHEV

@ebenezerwheezer2957 3 күн бұрын

@@dearbulls Please explain why Stellantis 2025 RamCharger 1500 Plug-in hybrid maybe a game changer. 141 mi on pure electric power. 690 miles combined Gas & Elec. impressive combined output of 663 horsepower and 615 pound-feet of torque 14,500 towing Target price $60,000. Best of all you NEVER HAVE TO PLUG IT IN IF YOU DON'T WANT TO. This isn't a phev?

@lp6wo 4 күн бұрын

Nice to see analog gauges in the Ram. I might be the minority but I’m sick of everything being a screen.

@stgibson2810 4 күн бұрын

I’m with you 100%. I just bought a new motorcycle with a digital tach. I love the bike but man do I miss my old bike’s analog tach. Nothing like watching it bang the rev limiter then seeing the shift light.

@evictioncarpentry2628 3 күн бұрын

You're not alone. Can't stand screens and buttons on screens. I want real buttons to push.

@hynsum 3 күн бұрын

110 % agreed 👍👍

@M4sterT3ch 3 күн бұрын

Yup, one of the many reasons I'll keep on driving my GMT800 Silverado and Suburban.

@ottovonbismarck7094 2 күн бұрын

They’re really not analogue, its all electronic with a little stepper motor. I do think the stepper motor is better than a full screen tho

@mrshopjulius5840 4 күн бұрын

That is the race everyone wanted to see. Good job explaining this to me.

@randyphillips559 3 күн бұрын

Andre really screwed up the launch on the Ford, I think they would be virtually identical accelerating trucks.

@bradleyscarreviews 4 күн бұрын

5.6 0-60 1mile above sea level for just the SO output is impressive

@27Zangle 3 күн бұрын

Very! I would still wait another year or two before getting one those engines. I have a feeling it is going to be very reliable though.

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

Straight 6 turbo is the best design. I’ve said it for 3 decades. About time a company does it.

@butchphillips873 3 күн бұрын

@@ryanb8736 In Australia we had inline 6 turbo in Falcon utes. Very good power and reliability.

@ecu4awhile 3 күн бұрын

If Andre knew how to drive, you can hit 5.4-5.5 in the F150. Both trucks are impressive

@bradleyscarreviews 3 күн бұрын

@@ecu4awhile I was wondering also.

@lesgoff 3 күн бұрын

Great trucks... I would buy either one.... Some good news pertaining to my 2022 RAM 5.7 with 3.92 tow gears (2wd). I drove 2,472.6 miles from Charlotte, NC to Tulsa OK (I-40 mostly) and returned through upper Arkansas mountains back to Nashville before returning to Charlotte and averaged 23.7 mpg (gas pump receipts returned 23.1 mpg). Still in shock the truck did that well.

@Franz-vg6hy 4 күн бұрын

Wrong Gas Station-there is no Dinosaur, I want my Dinocare 😂

@rsdaarud 4 күн бұрын

That 23+ is pretty impressive for those half ton pickups!

@Steve-yr5vi 4 күн бұрын

yep, my last V8 F150 was lucky to better 15, and you know that was actually good for the era, years ago 4x4 trucks were lucky to top 10.

@pbaker7160 4 күн бұрын

I have a 2016 F150 with the 2.7 Ecoboost. I get 24 on the highway as long as I keep it under 70. Combined is 19. With a 36 gallon tank, I only fill up about one per month.

@waterloo123100 3 күн бұрын

Not really I had a Silverado that got 23 in the city and 26 on the highway. It was 2004 with the 5.3

@rsdaarud 3 күн бұрын

Prime Chevy years for sure!

@danger7dan 3 күн бұрын

I agree. My 2008 Dodge Ram SLT 2WD single cab with the 4.7 liter V8 had an EPA rating of 18 mpg on the highway.

@canamxmr4760 4 күн бұрын

For those wondering, the sport mode on the ram also defaults to 4 auto. it adjust the steering feel as well as the transmission shift points.

@carholic-sz3qv 4 күн бұрын

its basically apples to orange. they have totally different gearing and many other different setups.

@canamxmr4760 4 күн бұрын

@@carholic-sz3qv my comment is for information of the ram sport mode. No comparison made in the comment.

@darrendaine4914 4 күн бұрын

You should test the loop in the economy mode and then test it normal and see if the economy mode actually does anything

@xr7coug 3 күн бұрын

Doesnt affect HWY mileage on my 22 F150

@darrendaine4914 3 күн бұрын

@@xr7coug My 23 Bronco is off and I'm not talking about a Broncos sport and I have 35s. I guess doing something or not doing something doesn't say much for the economy mode

@AntilleanConfederation 2 күн бұрын

I found out that on most cars with normal, sport and eco. Sport mode actually saves the most. Lmaoooo

@AlicesWondereland 3 күн бұрын

Andre. You've been one of my favorite hosts, not only on TFL, but of almost any channel. But, you sir have hurt my heart. Calling a Ram, inferior to anything was not a nice thing to say. lol

@Spoolingturbski 4 күн бұрын

Ram wasn’t just going to throw anything under the hood after dropping the legendary hemi. These over built straight 6 turbos are the real deal and make tons of power and have already proven more reliable then the Toyota offering. Before you come to a conclusion go drive one first. Yes it doesn’t rumble, but the power is insane.

@engineer_alv 3 күн бұрын

I've seen a couple videos from aftermarket exhausts and it can get quite a nice rumble. It will never sound like a V8 but unlike most V6s it will at least sound tastefully.

@waterloo123100 3 күн бұрын

I would have no problems with this engine if CAFE standards would allow a v8 still. Something needs to change

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

They took the best design and remade it.

@AntilleanConfederation 2 күн бұрын

Over built? Lol not even a dipstick but okay buddy.

@marcharris4176 2 күн бұрын

It's a Dodge. It will have many issues

@dochollywood1921 3 күн бұрын

FINALLY someone brought up the dog water capless systems not venting properly. What the hell was wrong with a capped system that just worked?

@mitchstein288 3 күн бұрын

My guess? Too many check engine lights (which have a significant impact on costumer satisfaction) for such a silly thing as leaving the gas cap off. It's a trip to the dealer that hurts the overall customer satisfaction.

@mikehaugen4177 2 күн бұрын

Im a dodge/ram guy but i don't think you can go wrong with either one of these trucks, my buddy has that 3.5 ecoboost and it seems to do real well. I think the biggest thing here is the 3.5 ecoboost has been out for a while and its pretty much good to go, where as the hurricane is brand new and who knows what kinda weird problems it may or may not have. Cool video either way

3 күн бұрын

love these mpg test videos!!

@DH-mf2lv 4 күн бұрын

Great job guys!

@marksullivan8200 4 күн бұрын

Topping off blocks the vent in the gas tank its not recommended by factory over time it may affect fuel pump

@truckguy6.7 3 күн бұрын

Add in the cost of replacing the charcoal canister and it doesn't make much sense to force a few extra ounces into the tank. People should know, it's not a smart thing to do.

@PeterDoesFarming 4 күн бұрын

Have the Hurricane in a wagoner L for the past two years. No issues. Plenty of power and unique sound.

@hellkitty1014 4 күн бұрын

Insurance agent has a GW w/ H.O. and he loves it.

@PeterDoesFarming 4 күн бұрын

@@kiplambel4052 we may be talking about two different things. The 2023 Waggoner L has the straight 6 twin turbo hurricane. I believe the 4 cyclinder you are talking about is in the grand Cherokee, Cherokee, and possibly the wrangler?

@kiplambel4052 4 күн бұрын

Yep. @PeterDoesFarming somehow I read "wrangler"

@johnwiegers3502 4 күн бұрын

@@kiplambel4052wagoneer L is basically a Chevy Suburban! You are thinking of the small Wagoneer S that they are coming out with!

@KIDRR 3 күн бұрын

I always wondered who bought those

@snoopyfix2 Күн бұрын

Awesome test guys! Im sure in speak for everyone when I say we appreciate the real-world teats you guys do!

@HowManyLegsItHas 3 күн бұрын

Good review, thank you.

@stevemueller3705 4 күн бұрын

Andre is awesome!

@jbell2018 3 күн бұрын

Just think about how hard ram has to be pushing that little 3.0 to not just match but beat a 3.5. That engine won’t last

@Daishar 41 минут бұрын

It is an inherently better/more reliable design than the 3.5 though. I6 can take a lot more over time due to the architecture of the engine than a V6 or a V8.

@ottovonbismarck7094 2 күн бұрын

As a general rule for all makes, never buy the first year of a refresh, redesign, or new engine option

@joeparker7508 4 күн бұрын

Great test

@jbdoublewide8757 3 күн бұрын

i work for ford. running 87 is a 11 percent reduction in power at peak, its even more at low rpm and high boost situations. its a drastic difference from 93

@terb5804 3 күн бұрын

At sea level?

@woodrmp1 3 күн бұрын

Huh. I’ve run premium a few times in my gen 2 3.5 eco and didn’t notice any difference. What do you do at Ford?

@trackpackgt877 3 күн бұрын

yes i knew they really needed 93 because there turbo charged! cant run as much boost or timing with lower octane. Appreciate that info

@anthonys7534 3 күн бұрын

@@woodrmp1judging by his user name, he must be pretty high up the ladder at Ford😂

@givnofuchs5742 3 күн бұрын

Good luck finding 93 in the southwest

@robertoestebandiaz3610 4 күн бұрын

Hola muy buen comparativo la RAM parece la mejor opción saludos desde Córdoba Argentina

@salchristiano6606 4 күн бұрын

One of the better mpg vids you’ve made.

@baltazarkosa29 4 күн бұрын

Guys, you are the best! good job!

@Kias1dad 4 күн бұрын

The mileage test is too short. A few ounces of gas one way or the other during top off can have a big impact.

@jarrodwidiger5472 3 күн бұрын

Yes, what is the consistency error on a fuel pump shutoff? They really need to do at least 300+ miles in my opinion.

@enigma9789 3 күн бұрын

@@jarrodwidiger5472 You guys can team up and go drive hundreds of vehicles 300 miles each, we will wait for the videos.

@user-ts8ss9cj1p 4 күн бұрын

From a guy who used to watch Donut (not anymore much lol) TFL has quickly become my favorite collection of channels. Keep up the great work

@Hybris51129 4 күн бұрын

But TFL has been where Dount is now for years only with less yelling and over the top antics.

@mediocreman2 2 күн бұрын

Donut blows.

@user-ts8ss9cj1p 2 күн бұрын

@@mediocreman2 they do now for the most part I agree

@Bobbybobby1 4 күн бұрын

Always be listening to Pretty Lights while driving through Morrison.

@h2o100c 2 күн бұрын

This was a good review. 👍

@vyasshivang8660 3 күн бұрын

3.5 Eco boost is great engine.

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

Straight 6 is better though. The HO will be even better. Ford should have kept their straight 6.

@Ratkill9000 Күн бұрын

@@ryanb8736 High Output is only available in the Limited and Tungsten luxury trucks and the Grand Wagoneer. The base model, big horn, laramie, Rebel will never see high output engine.

@deionhughes6867 3 күн бұрын

I hope the 3.0L hurricane engine ends up being reliable, but I simply do not like the fact that there is no oil dipstick.. that’s too much of a European design and doesn’t have a place in truck world.

@danieldornes8416 2 күн бұрын

Great video, as usual! It was good info that the Ford had an "efficiency minded" rear end, while the Ram had one meant more for towing, I wish they would have actually said what the rear end ratios were on these tested trucks.

@michaelcurren1821 4 күн бұрын

More Case, no Roman, great video.

@itgoesfast2722 4 күн бұрын

So with almost identical engines the truck with the taller rear end has a longer 0-60 but better fuel economy…. Who would have ever thought that would be the case. LOL.

@51AB 3 күн бұрын

10 speed transmission vs. 8

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

Not identical engines at all. One is a V6 and other is an inline 6. Massive difference. Inline will always last longer. Reason why the straight 6 were always legendary engines.

@itgoesfast2722 3 күн бұрын

@@ryanb8736 I was talking horse power 400 F150 and 420 Ram. In my book that is almost identical….I know one is a v6 and the other a straight 6. Wow both are six cylinders with twin turbos making almost the same horse power. So glad you felt you had to call me out..

@joshgts9675 3 күн бұрын

"Nearly identical engine" is the same thing as identical horsepower to you? English is your second language I'm assuming? You need to be specific if you don't want people calling you out.

@itgoesfast2722 3 күн бұрын

@@joshgts9675 get a life

@BoostKingMatt Сағат бұрын

Andre, my 2022 3.5L f150 XLT did 5.7 seconds 0-60 in Denver. I have the time to prove it too.

@marksullivan8200 4 күн бұрын

The hurricane engine surprised me, I'd like to see it tested in the h.o. variant as well

@lawnpro44 4 күн бұрын

The Ford also has a 6.5 foot bed, the Ram seems to have a 5.5. So there will be a distinct weight difference.

@cmick8577 3 күн бұрын

From a previous video, the F150 with all of its aluminum, is probably still 500 pounds lighter even with a slightly longer bed.

@lawnpro44 3 күн бұрын

@@cmick8577 My brother has 2018 with a 6.5 foot bed. It's really not that much lighter than a steel 2013. The weight savings might be in an XL model not in a Lariat. The new aluminium trucks have so many more options now than the the older steel models did.

@cmick8577 3 күн бұрын

@@lawnpro44 The Ram is also well optioned. Look it up. Apples to apples the curb weight on the Ram is about 600-800 pounds heavier. 9” more bed on the Ram from a 5’7” to 6’4” isn’t erasing that.

@lawnpro44 2 күн бұрын

There are no websites that publish the curb weight of a 2025 Ram yet. Not even their own. It might be a touch heavier apples to apples but long box to short box could be a different tale. Either way that 3.0 packs some punch. Sure blows the doors off that 2.7 in the GM. That’s the only other inline that’s close in displacement.

@Thedoors432 4 күн бұрын

I believe this will be a great engine for RAM. Glad Ford is getting competition. Maybe Ford will start doing realistic pricing now.

@robbycheaib1719 4 күн бұрын

These ram trucks are priced crazy as well

@Steve-yr5vi 4 күн бұрын

Are RAM trucks priced any lower, the last time I looked RAM trucks were priced higher than comparable Ford trucks.

@jtthedon4230 4 күн бұрын

RAM/JEEP anything Stellantis is the most expensive out of the big 3 GOOFY!!!🤔🤐🤪😂😭

@melvinhunt6976 4 күн бұрын

Ford! Have you been to a GM, Ram, Toyota dealer lately? Obviously Not!

@fredmoucatel2058 4 күн бұрын

No difference at dodge ! But really it's the dealers that make the difference in pricing . You have to look at the MSRP number first .

@timgurr1876 3 күн бұрын

Thanks for the comparison test. One time check on MPG is not enough to verify “exact” mileage comparsion. Both are so close to one another that MPG would not be a major tie breaker. I agree with another comment: with a new engine one should wait a few years to understand quality of the Hurricane engine.

@jasonmelton8966 4 күн бұрын

I agree I've gotten out of my hemi with 26 gal tank 545 to a tank at 75 mph

@27dmarshall 3 күн бұрын

GM 3.0L Duramax: 305 hp / 495 lb-ft. I get 32-36 mpg on my 33 mile commute. Would buy anything else. Absolutely love the smooooth Inline-6 diesel.

@mitchstein288 3 күн бұрын

That's a great engine too. The only downside is the serviceable belt on the back of the engine. My gosh what a bad place to put that.

@carltongray3302 Күн бұрын

@@mitchstein288has a 200k mile service interval

@dansherwood9851 Күн бұрын

Why folks keep bring it up as if most folks will never even see that service.

@carltongray3302 Күн бұрын

@@dansherwood9851 idk lol. They won’t even keep that truck to that amount of mileage unless they’re like a rancher

@dansherwood9851 Күн бұрын

@@carltongray3302 true that and the engine is so good you’ll only need to do it once

@glaffoon1 4 күн бұрын

I do like the idea of a straight 6 engine. However, for a Truck , I would have preferred something in the order of 3.6 to 4.2 Liters. And a little less boost. And I would like it if the trucks were more aerodynamic than a Garage Door. And 1,000 lbs lighter.

@travishill7873 4 күн бұрын

Where would the 1000lbs come from?

@ocln2481 3 күн бұрын

Also make it 10000 dollars, have a drink dispenser and do my accounting while driving

@jaredwyaco9369 3 күн бұрын

Good to see tonneau covers on both trucks!

@Tommy-Tucker 3 күн бұрын

The rearend gearing in the ram, gave it a little bit of an advantage in the 0 to 60.

@itgoesfast2722 4 күн бұрын

Can’t wait to see what self destruct mechanism is designed into the new hurricane engine like it’s predecessor and it’s defective lifters that usually fail after the warranty has expired.

@BuCkYwUcKy123 3 күн бұрын

1. F150 was long bed 2. Did Andre turn traction control off? 3. Was Andre in 4x4 like the ram?

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

A straight six will always win. Thats not even the HO. HO puts trucks into 4’s. Fast. Then you will have tuning too. Dodges best engine choice to date.

@BuCkYwUcKy123 3 күн бұрын

@@ryanb8736 Don't disagree, but at least level the playing field.

@Bosha92 23 сағат бұрын

I’m very happy with my ‘22 TRX. But certainly would give Ram a look again especially with how impressive this Hurricane motor is.

@cobalt86 14 минут бұрын

When i worked with a fleet of these trucks, half ton ram's have smaller fuel tanks than half ton fords. It makes the truck lighter and after a while you realize you don't always need the extra distance you get in a Ford.

@BigInjun05 4 күн бұрын

Im impressed with that ram engine.

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

Not even the HO. That engine is on another level.

@normbittner3762 3 күн бұрын

Gotta love in-line sixes!

@stevehunt9703 3 күн бұрын

Its half an engine. 6 L V12 would be worth talking about.

@JROC734 3 күн бұрын

Well not really. I like I6's, but they have their faults. They're long, they're heavy, and they're generally pretty ugly, even though engine covers help a lot.

@josipdolic6391 3 күн бұрын

Solid numbers

@benfletcher7608 14 сағат бұрын

I’ve driven a few I6 vehicles. They were all pretty smooth. I’m still sticking with my eco boost though. At least for a few years

@jhrubicon1470 4 күн бұрын

The first time they did this test 0-60 they were less than 1 second apart! The dodge was brake brake torqued a lot harder so boost was already there! 3.73 vs 3.55 gearing as well

@chiplangowski3298 4 күн бұрын

The gear ratio difference was likely even greater. The towing ratio in the RAM is 3.92 and the standard, non-towing ratio in the Ford is 3.31.

@jkim13055 4 күн бұрын

The ford doesn't let you build any boost from a stop. I have a 21 3.5 and the best launch by far is if the surface is wet, and if it starts to spin while brake boosting in 4a. Then the tq management gives up and it rips and hops . Otherwise it's very weak out of the hole

@jhrubicon1470 4 күн бұрын

@@chiplangowski3298 I thought it was 3.55 on the Ford but I'm pretty sure I've been wrong before lol. Either way the Ram had a huge advantage in this one. He braked it hard enough for it to break traction, I could hear it.

@seandemura128 4 күн бұрын

@@jhrubicon1470 3.55 standard for 3.5 on the 2024s. 3.31 for 2021-2023.

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

Straight 6 is a faster engine. Wait till the HO version is tested.

@jcshobbiesandrecreation5873 4 күн бұрын

Nice video. Looks like the Hurricane is going to be a nice replacement for the old Hemi. Looking forward to performance mods and the release of the RHO. I enjoyed the 0-60 runs but would have liked to see a side by side run.

@ivancliff2514 2 күн бұрын

A mile above sea level is defeated by the turbos. The engine will make the same boost regardless of the elevation. Unless you’re on top of a mountain full boost is achieved.

@JHuffPhoto 4 күн бұрын

Although you eliminate as many variables as possible this mpg results are well within the margin of error. The inconsistent top off on the Ecoboost could make the results very different. Both trucks did great. I also get great results from my 22 RAM 5.7 HEMI although not quite that good unless I slow down a bit.

@bgehsen 4 күн бұрын

That was a great match up. I love this channel and look forward to these videos. Andre, this time, i don't think you launched the f150 correctly. 6.7 sec to 60 in a 3.5 ecoboost doesn't sound right. That truck is faster than that even a mile above sea level.

@Mike-Capz83 3 күн бұрын

you guys should also include the 2.7 ecoboost!

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

It’s slower.

@trackpackgt877 3 күн бұрын

@@ryanb8736surprisingly the 2.7 is not much slower than the 3.5 it spoils the turbos faster and will actually walk away from a 3.5 in the first few hundred feet than the 3.5 will reel in the 2.7 and slowly pass it but it's not as big of Gap as you would think

@Kingswood7189 5 сағат бұрын

More gallons to the tank also means more pain at the pump😅. When gas topped ~$4/gallon (AZ), it was over $100 to fill our '04 durango from empty (about 28 gallons) and that was painful...

@LionRunner 3 күн бұрын

Wow I didn't noticed that on Denver 100 loop you are passing my house on E470. If I see you I will go in front of you and put my head out the moonroof to add some comedy to the video 😀😀

@user-tl2gx5wk3j 4 күн бұрын

Everyone should base their truck purchase on 0-60 times!

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

Dodge will win.

@rrnonya5472 2 күн бұрын

That is TFL, good for clicks and views, but I was wondering the same thing, WTF does 0-60 have to do with anything in a truck unless you are dropping 100k for something you will never, ever, ever do "truck things" with it ... then yes, to some, it does matter...

@whodat90 23 сағат бұрын

I tow once in a while. I need a truck bed once in a while. I accelerate from a stop 30 or 40 times a trip, so yes that’s important too.

@neilcarter77 4 күн бұрын

I’ll stick with the 3.5 ecoboost!!

@fireant1272 4 күн бұрын

Mine was garbage after 60k miles so many issues.😢

@rogeriopimenta6247 4 күн бұрын

The 2.7 seems to be great, but the 3.5 is problematic. I would rather a inline 6 over a V6 anyways.

@brandondannys-menary3678 3 күн бұрын

@@rogeriopimenta6247don’t the 2.7s have a belt driven oil pump which are prone to failure? The engines were awesome aside from that damn belt

@rogeriopimenta6247 3 күн бұрын

@@brandondannys-menary3678 Even the coyote has it now.

@plmn93 3 күн бұрын

@@brandondannys-menary3678 After over six years on the market and quite literally millions sold I have not seen one single example on the forums of that belt failing. So no, they are not "prone to failure".

@jamesvasser2941 4 күн бұрын

Pretty even performances. What’s the as tested price for each of those trucks?

@rofin9541 15 сағат бұрын

Nice round numbers. Perfect for a Ford Recall. FORD, King of the recalls. Drove a Wagoneer for a week in SW Colorado. Quite glitchy on the infotainment, clunky from park to Drive or Reverse. Hurricane was quite impressive for such a heavy vehicle. Hope it works out as far as reliability. We will se in a couple years.

@RGP_WA 3 күн бұрын

I would never buy any car with a newly designed engine in it's first year. Still love my 2018 3.5 lariat!

@HEMI345375 3 күн бұрын

Its not a new engine its been in the jeeps for well over a year now!

@woodrmp1 3 күн бұрын

Yep I have an 18 3.5 platinum and not a single engine issue. Can barely tell it’s running it’s so smooth.

@daniel0atk 4 күн бұрын

I would rather the 5.0 Coyote over the EcoBoost or Hurricane.

@paullane7489 3 күн бұрын

Me too!!!👍🇺🇸👍🇺🇸👍🇺🇸

@Johnlu464 3 күн бұрын

That’s what I got, went from a 2020 2.7. 22-23mpg highway with 5.0. Got 13 pulling a rzr turbo and a grizzly with gear to SD.

@warlockgonzalez9050 3 күн бұрын

Cool story!

@dennisrutherford6973 3 күн бұрын

I got rid of mine drank oil and very noisy

@daniel0atk 3 күн бұрын

@@dennisrutherford6973 I mean that's fair, I just love the sound of V8s and the feel of them, I've always been a 5.7 Hemi guy though.

@joes3689 3 күн бұрын

Next, same trucks on the Ike Gauntlet! Let's see what their towing differences are.

@townhall05446 3 күн бұрын

0 to 60 comparisons don't mean a lot when the gearing is significantly different.

@blankrobber 4 күн бұрын

2.7 Ecoboost would be a better comparo. It is faster 0-60 and gets better mpg. I drove a hurricane recently and loved it. Like any new powerplant I'm sure it will be optimized for durability and efficiency in later gens

@engineer_alv 3 күн бұрын

The reason the 2.7 Ecoboost is faster is because it's usually fitted to lighter trucks. Lariats and above don't offer the 2.7 anymore and on top of that the tested truck is a Crew Cab long bed, 4x4, with a tall gear ratio (3.31?), pretty much the heftiest and slowest 3.5 Ecoboost of them all. That Ram looks like a lightly optioned Big Horn. A Laramie with the long bed might still win but it would be much closer than these two

@blankrobber 3 күн бұрын

Would love to see a 2.7 v 3.5 in the same otherwise optioned vehicle. I was under the impression that the 2.7 was so quick was due to the torque at earlier rpm

@dmandman9 2 күн бұрын

@@blankrobber The 2.7 is actually as quick or slightly quicker than the 3.5 when the truck is empty. The 3.5 significantly outperforms it when loaded or towing. So if I didn’t need the extra towing or hauling capacity, I’d choose the 2.7. It’s a solid engine as well. But gets better fuel economy.

@pkmkb007 18 сағат бұрын

The driver in the video is bad, car and driver got 5.3 sec 0-60 time for the same engine.

@trentslusher317 4 күн бұрын

The ford is more broken in. The Ram should get a little better mpg’s once it has been driven enough.

@codemang3635 2 күн бұрын

Soooo glad to see a turbo straight six. It'll be in very high demand for engine swaps. I'd also like to see if there's any more open engine bay space under the hood than the v6.

@CJColvin Күн бұрын

For me I still choose a V8

@CJColvin Күн бұрын

I doubt it mate

@treyhart6861 3 күн бұрын

Hmmm, there is a video idea... 87 vs 91 octane... Does it REALLY make that big of a difference with a stock NA, vs stock turbo?

@treyhart6861 3 күн бұрын

But PLEASE, try to keep the axle ratios the same...... Actually...... There is another video idea!! Completely identical trucks, but one has 3.23, another has 3.55, then 3.73.... and of course, don't forget the 4.56 gearing!! I'd also love to see an interstate loop, AND a city loop. Just because a truck can maintain 23 mpg with the cruise control set at 70 means nothing between stoplights.... And then, the really hard one! The interstate by me is 80... How do these trucks do at 80-85mph?? Speeds completely within the realm of real world driving. I have about a 300 mile stretch I've done several times now, 80mph speed limit 90% of the time.

@Julian-do7bv 4 күн бұрын

Ram was quick and got basically the same mpg thats awesome

@MalphMaisy 4 күн бұрын

Andre needed to brake torque like his kid, and bring up the RPM before launching

@Julian-do7bv 3 күн бұрын

@@MalphMaisy he said he did to like 2500rpm

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

@@MalphMaisythat’s how you do it properly. Wait till the HO. Will be in 4’s.

@tbone9405 4 күн бұрын

Impressive fuel mileage, I like the ram for power, the ford for mpg.

@A2J_Tim 4 күн бұрын

they were basically the same and the ram had a disadvantage with the lower gear ratio rear end which will make it rev higher on the highway. I bet if both trucks had the identical ratio, the ram would have posted better numbers than the ford. Both are nice trucks and I have driven an ecoboost 3.5 on many long trips, its a very nice truck and very comfortable.

@plmn93 4 күн бұрын

@@A2J_Tim The Ford would have been faster to 60 with a different rear end too. All in all they seem to be close to a wash for performance and economy. But remember Ford has dual injection to keep the intake clean, a dipstick, and a much better base engine in the 2.7 compared to Ram's 3.6. I do like that you can get 4A on a midlevel Ram, though.

@MarcMonson 2 күн бұрын

At least for performance the powerboost vs the high output dodge would be interesting

@tymac3306 3 күн бұрын

Mythbusters did a show on pickup truck bed cover and tested for fuel economy. It turned out the cover was harder on fuel, and by a decent amount as well. You guys need to test this I'd say. I'd watch it!!

@ebenezerwheezer2957 3 күн бұрын

@tymac3306 On Dec.20, 2022 TFL did test Tonneau Cover versus Open Bed. Having a tonneau cover got 1.6 miles per gallon BETTER gas mileage. MythBusters found the exact same thing. MythBusters also found that removing the tailgate was worse.😢 Have a safe 4th of July. Take care

@EnthusiastCarHangar 4 күн бұрын

That kid could be a car salesman. Talks and talks and knows it all.

@benoitdufresne337 4 күн бұрын

How about checking for typos before posting, makes you look bad.🤣

@derfderfson 4 күн бұрын

@@benoitdufresne337oh no

@notabotiswear 4 күн бұрын

Your sound old and sad

@derfderfson 4 күн бұрын

@@benoitdufresne337 oh no

@kbarrett1844 4 күн бұрын

Would you view a comparison between two trucks without commentary?

@pcihector 4 күн бұрын

The HO boost up to 28 psi. Ford learned their lesson and put port inyection alongside the direct inyection. Lets see what happens when you mix 28 psi of boost with some carbon deposits in the intake valves.

@coachvonyo 4 күн бұрын

Most of the whining about this engine is BS. This particular concern is something I worry about.

@MrFordguy73 3 күн бұрын

Is the Hurricane direct and port injected like the 3.5?

@Ratkill9000 Күн бұрын

@@MrFordguy73 No, just direct injected. However they are in the works with BG to make a injection cleaning setup to have it done every I think 30k miles, per our BG rep.

@devn3813 2 күн бұрын

Their prices are absolutely insane.

@Steve-yr5vi 4 күн бұрын

Hat's off to RAM, I believe their new engine is going to be a good seller for them, I've drove the Grand Wagoneer with that engine to Breckenridge and I was impressed, it delivered as expected, drove like a turbo - quiet, maintained speed w/o effort on climbs as a turbo should. I'm not surprised of the efficiency results, Ford has been making the 3.5 EB for a while now and it's tuned perfectly to deliver cost efficient power. Given the power ratings the RAM should be quicker than the Ford. I have a 2019 Lariat SC, FX4, max tow 3.5 and couldn't be happier with that truck.

@adamharriger5193 4 күн бұрын

Good results, but I would still wait a few years for the hurricane to prove it’s reliability. You do really have to credit Ford for their foresight- they’ve been at this boosted V6 aluminum body game for 10+ years.

@brentmacklem1872 4 күн бұрын

Mechanics i listen to say that the Coyote was built to last compared to the EB.

@dmandman9 2 күн бұрын

@@brentmacklem1872I work at Ford. To be honest. Both engines last a long time. You can’t go wrong with either one. However, if you’re the type to be a bit sloppy with maintenance, I’d go with the 5.0 because turbos don’t like missed oil changes. But otherwise it’s mainly just preference.

@johnkokkas5052 4 күн бұрын

Everything is good. When it's brand new, we'll see what happens down the road. Could end up being junk like the new Toyota motor. And the new EcoDiesels were great during testing. And we know how they all turned out. Time will tell!

@omardevonlittle3817 4 күн бұрын

Lol the hurricane has been in stellantis cars just as long as Toyotas v6 TT... it's clearly a better engine... CLEARLY. The hurricane has been in the wagoneer for over 2 years now. Zero of the issues Yota is having

@formerice 4 күн бұрын

My Ecodiesel has averaged over 30 mpg for almost 180,000 mi and been trouble free. Tuned when new. Don't see any reason to trade.

@truckguy6.7 3 күн бұрын

@@omardevonlittle3817 Toyota will work out the details surrounding the V6TT. 15 years from now people will be talking about how legendary that motor is. Went through this when Toyota first introduced there V6's back in the day. This is just a small hiccup for them.

@carlirving2138 4 күн бұрын

On the zero to sixty and drag race tests every video TFL mentions that they are a mile above sea level. We know this makes a difference on normally aspirated engines but does it really make a difference on forced induction. I would like to see a zero to 60 and quarter mile tests on the exact same turbo/ super charged vehicles at sea level and Denver. I would not be surprised to see the sensors compensate for elevation to increase boost for elevation and the times are comparable at elevation. Would like to see that test.

@JonBecker81 3 күн бұрын

I think it still makes a difference even with turbo engines. Less oxygen is less oxygen. The difference is probably less than it would be with a NA though. I just got back from Colorado. We got as high as almost 13k feet. I could tell a small difference with the Bronco how it drove there vs Alabama where I live.

@ryanb8736 3 күн бұрын

NA engines suffer a lot more at higher levels. They have to work a lot harder. This is where turbo engines win.