If I were buying a RAM, I honestly don't know which engine I'd buy. I do love a good V8, especially the sound, but I do tow fairly heavy and the significantly higher levels of hp and torque with the Hurricane would be hugely helpful. It would be hard to turn that down.

 

I think it’s pretty clear that many truck buyers want a V8.

 

I certainly feel a loss of power at high elevations with my naturally aspirated V8, especially when I'm loaded down. The boosted engines have a huge advantage there.

 

Ohh yeah, high elevations will sap at least 25% of NA power.

I'd never live near there without a ...... turbocharger! Lol.

 

Plus, they have an 8' bed that never has to be made.

 

just wait until they start putting the 392 engine (485 hp 475 torque) in anything and everything, and possibly even bigger engines. Theres no CAFE penalties or emissions rules holding companies back anymore.

 

Agreed....although that is more of a factor in your part of the country, where the mountains are higher, than in the Appalachians here in the East.

All else equal, in general, air loses roughly about 3% or so of of its density and pressure for every 1000 feet above sea level in elevation, which lessens its ability to contain its oxygen level, mix with fuel, and produce power. That's why airplanes need longer runways at high altitude airports....engines don't produce as much HP, propellers don't have as much thrust, and wings don't have as much lift because of the lower air pressure. Air temperature and humidity also play a factor....in general, lower temperature and lower humidity means more density, power, and lift.

Turbos and superchargers, of course, compensate for the altitude-loss in engine power by compressing what available air-density there is. When the turbo or supercharger can no longer compress and produce maximum thrust from the available air density at a given altitude, be it in an airplane or motor-vehicle, that is the "Critical Altitude"....which is measured from a reference of a standard atmosphere. (59 degrees F and 29.92" inches of mercury or 1013 millibars).

 

Its not going to stay that way

 

and it wasnt suppose to happen either, yet here we are

 

Yes it will, they try to take it back the same thing will happen again but even worse. The government in all its wisdom found out the hard way that you can't forcibly take shyt away from Americans they want/like.

I and others could have saved them billions but what do we enthusiasts know? It aint rocket science.

 

If you think the era of tightening CAFE standards and increasing efficiency standards, that has been going on for over 50 years is all of a sudden going to stop completely, thats just not going to happen. These things are a pendulum, people on one side are rejoicing now but the people on the other side are completely furious, and they will come back to power and things will swing just as far to the other side. If not further. So the net result of this may be tighter standards than were even rolled back here.

That idea that one way of doing things is going to win out entirely is just not reality. What we would like to see is BALANCE, with common sense regulations that allow for choice but sadly balance is something that is very hard to come by nowadays.

 

Common sense would be to just add a similar line item cost as the gas guzzler tax or just increase that and let people decide.

 

AJT123 has a point. Today's ICE vehicles, on average, emit less than 1% of the pollutants as the vehicles I grew up with in the 1960s, before CAFE and emission standards....and today's vehicles have better power and mileage figures to boot. That's an enormous accomplishment....and, IMO, it makes a good case that no more emission-standards are needed.

 

You could have made the same argument at any time along the path of this increasing efficiency and economy. We have no idea how much better those things can in fact be.

 

There is such a thing as the law of diminishing-returns. That's the point that I (and AJT) was making.