Rockcrawlindude
a rock crawlin’ dude
I only halfway read this thread but definitely buy the 4x4
Another reason to choose gas over diesel: Outside of camping, I only drive about 5,000 miles per year. This year we did about 3000 miles with our small camping trailer. With the new trailer we might go a little more, but total miles per year on the new truck will still be less than most people put on their vehicles. It is then hard to benefit from the fuel mileage and the durability of a diesel. The extra gas cost from upgrading to the 4.10 ratio is not going to be very important, and seems to give me great flexibility is choosing a trailer. However, I don't like engine noise. In my 2014 1500 with the 3.6 L, I like cruising along almost silently at about 1200 RPM. I wonder if the 6.4 with 4.10 would seem noisy in comparison.
Just make sure you get the limited slip option . about $475 for so .Right now I have 4x4 in the build. The reason is I am afraid of getting stuck on soggy ground when boondocking. Not into off-roading at this stage of my life, but certainly travel some dirt roads. But I am thinking of going 2x4 because: 1. The 4x4 sits so high off the ground, I could barely enter it during test drive (no running boards). I would get running boards, but fear the my wife and visiting grandkids would still find it difficult to get in. 2. The 2x4 should give me more load capacity, which is critical for towing a 5w. Towing capacity is not the limiting number for those. 3. I would save some $$ by omitting the 4x4. 4. When I had a 4x4 Chevy years ago, I saw significant extra maintenance costs from that. Not much concerned with snow, since I live in Phoenix, but of course one could run into snow and ice at a Colorado mountain pass.
You sure couldn't buy that alternator for what they are charging for it as an option.Prepper motto: Two is one and one is none.
Glad I opted for the dual 220 (diesel option) on my truck even though I don't currently have any high amp charge requirements. The recovery after cold starts is so much quicker and the chance of anything being shut down due to low voltage lessened.
My 4.10 geared 6.4 was no louder than my 3.73 truckGas mileage for daily driving with the 6.4 and 4.10 axle ratio is not a major concern, but the engine noise would probably be a little worse than with the 3.73. An idea just hit me. We are familiar how the Tow/hill function will change the shift points toward higher RPM's. Any reason why we could not have a Quiet/ECO button to move the shift point in the other direction, so that with that function activated, the vehicle with 4.10 would behave more like a 3.73 with the function not activated?
Remember the old adage, better to have and not need than to need and not have. I ordered mine as well. No one seems to stock the 6.4 Hemi in anything other than the Tradesman trim. Dual alternators and the 4.10 limited slip rear end. For the guy who mentioned noise, the 4.10 does not make any more noise than the 3.73. What it does do is make towing easier. And when not towing the truck is very peppy off the line. I have towed in the Smokies and out west. The Hemi has plenty of power for my 9000 pound TT. Just be aware, it is a thirsty beast. But I knew that going in.
Gas mileage for daily driving with the 6.4 and 4.10 axle ratio is not a major concern, but the engine noise would probably be a little worse than with the 3.73. An idea just hit me. We are familiar how the Tow/hill function will change the shift points toward higher RPM's. Any reason why we could not have a Quiet/ECO button to move the shift point in the other direction, so that with that function activated, the vehicle with 4.10 would behave more like a 3.73 with the function not activated?
My 4.10 geared 6.4 was no louder than my 3.73 truck
My dual 220s would put up a good fight lolI went with the base 180-amp alternator. Suits my needs fine. Battery choice is more important, in my opinion.
No alternator option can keep up with a winch anyway at 440 amps max draw.
Lugging the engine would take a toll on the engine lifeGas mileage for daily driving with the 6.4 and 4.10 axle ratio is not a major concern, but the engine noise would probably be a little worse than with the 3.73. An idea just hit me. We are familiar how the Tow/hill function will change the shift points toward higher RPM's. Any reason why we could not have a Quiet/ECO button to move the shift point in the other direction, so that with that function activated, the vehicle with 4.10 would behave more like a 3.73 with the function not activated?
I get around 16.6 to 17 calculated driving around with the average trip around 12 miles. Haven't had it out on a long highway run. HO dually with 4.10 axle and dual alternators.While I don't drive a lot around town, so gas mileage without towing is not that important, I would be interested to learn what kind of mpg to expect with the 4.10 and no trailer. I am not a leadfoot. In fact, with my 1500 I have the gas mileage display on the screen all the time while driving, and trying to improve mpg. BTW, I find that the cruise control harms mpg, as it never upshifts at constant speed. Without cruise control, If I just lift the foot, I get the upshift and dramatically better mpg.
4.10 with the 6.4? If so, then I always averaged 10.5 to 11.3 in townWhile I don't drive a lot around town, so gas mileage without towing is not that important, I would be interested to learn what kind of mpg to expect with the 4.10 and no trailer. I am not a leadfoot. In fact, with my 1500 I have the gas mileage display on the screen all the time while driving, and trying to improve mpg. BTW, I find that the cruise control harms mpg, as it never upshifts at constant speed. Without cruise control, If I just lift the foot, I get the upshift and dramatically better mpg.
I think the only way to truly achieve what you are mentioning is have an extra overdrive in the trans… changing the shift points lower would not do it as the engine would be lugging if it shifted any lower the other Option would be a 2 speed transfercase (the old 2nd gens nv5600 with 4.10s you could get this aftermarket) could as the RPM reduction would have to happen after the transmission or by physically changing ratios in the transMy idea was that with the 4.10:1 axle ratio (which raises engine rpm) and shift points to lower engine rpm, the engine rpm would end up being the same as with 3.73:1 and standard shift points. I don't see why the engine would lug more at the same rpm when the transmission together with differential has the same overall ratio, just redistributed over the various components. Of course one could argue that the load and wear is also distributed in a new way, and friction/efficiency is affected.