What's new
By:
Ram Heavy Duty Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official 2025 Ram HD

RAMMITDOWN said:
Thanks for getting back to me. I meant the service interval on the solid lifter design. I totally agree with you on the supplier issue. Whether it is a Boeing airplane, Cummins engine or a flippin' blender, it seems that the supply chain is broken if not crooked. since Covid it has been even worse than before. In some ways, I feel bad for manufacturers trusting a vendor to deliver quality products/service. Just look at the airbag debacle. Greed seems to have grown more than 'normal'.
Click to expand...
Normal overhead valve service for a pre-2019 6.7 CTD was to check the clearances at 150,000 miles and adjust if needed. I’ve opened a lot of these engines up at that interval and don’t remember many that ever needed any adjustment at all.
RAMMITDOWN said:
I looked at the post/images regarding the lifter failure. I'm curious if the cam in our trucks are the same as the solid lifter. The images suggest that it is an oil supply failure and/or a hardening issue with the rollers. As you say, time will tell.
Click to expand...
The cam itself is different. As @Brutal_HO
 
RAMMITDOWN said:
Thanks for getting back to me. I meant the service interval on the solid lifter design. I totally agree with you on the supplier issue. Whether it is a Boeing airplane, Cummins engine or a flippin' blender, it seems that the supply chain is broken if not crooked. since Covid it has been even worse than before. In some ways, I feel bad for manufacturers trusting a vendor to deliver quality products/service. Just look at the airbag debacle. Greed seems to have grown more than 'normal'.
Click to expand...
Normal overhead valve service for a pre-2019 6.7 CTD was to check the clearances at 150,000 miles and adjust if needed. I’ve opened a lot of these engines up at that interval and don’t remember many that ever needed any adjustment at all.
RAMMITDOWN said:
I looked at the post/images regarding the lifter failure. I'm curious if the cam in our trucks are the same as the solid lifter. The images suggest that it is an oil supply failure and/or a hardening issue with the rollers. As you say, time will tell.
Click to expand...
The cam itself is different. As @Brutal_HO said above, the cam is hollow and is supported across the block by more bearings than what was previously done. It also has a different lobe profile. The ramp rate on the lobe is more aggressive. This is actually one of the areas being questioned / investigated. There’s a chance that aggressive valve actuation is partly to blame for the rollers being damaged prematurely.
 
RAMMITDOWN said:
Thanks for getting back to me. I meant the service interval on the solid lifter design. I totally agree with you on the supplier issue. Whether it is a Boeing airplane, Cummins engine or a flippin' blender, it seems that the supply chain is broken if not crooked. since Covid it has been even worse than before. In some ways, I feel bad for manufacturers trusting a vendor to deliver quality products/service. Just look at the airbag debacle. Greed seems to have grown more than 'normal'.
Click to expand...
The vendors are caught between a rock and a hard place with the manufacturer's primary concern being how cheap can you make it?

We have three vendors as customers and ALL three bitterly complain about this. They've been squeezing us on our telecommunications services too because they don't have any money. Walmart was so bad about this it drove vendors to bankruptcy. The vehicle manufacturers are going to do the same and rely on cheap Chinese imports. If Ford's CEO is correct the Chinese EVs he drove were far ahead of us in performance and quality.

He has no one to blame but himself, his company and the UAW.
mbarber84 said:
Normal overhead valve service for a pre-2019 6.7 CTD was to check the clearances at 150,000 miles and adjust if needed. I’ve opened a lot of these engines up at that interval and don’t remember many that ever needed any adjustment at all.

The cam itself is different. As @Brutal_HO said above, the cam is hollow and is supported across the block by more bearings than what was previously done. It also has a different lobe profile. The ramp rate on the lobe is more aggressive. This is actually one of the areas being questioned / investigated. There’s a chance that aggressive valve actuation is partly to blame for the rollers being damaged prematurely.
Click to expand...
Roller cams have a more aggressive profile resulting in much better flow rates. Everyone wants more horsepower and torque, this is the result.

Personally I'd be happy with an extremely reliable Cummins at say 800 ft lbs with no engine or emissions issues. Unfortunately all the idiots whose sole concern is "mo power" are winning this battle. The rest of us are having to put up with endless reliability concerns because of it.
 
If the big ugly grill on the Power Wagon does mean power upgrades, then I can live with that. If not, then just why. One thing I can say is Ram does not mess around with cooling systems. They are hard to over heat. Good point on reliability. We see the same issues on these little 4 banger turbo engines and 6s as well. They crank out the power, but down goes reliability. Ineos made a big deal of dialing down the power on the BN58 for max torque and reliability. So a billionaire who never built a car before figured that out. Ram does not need to chase the top dog numbers, give us a boost and make it reliable. Comparing whos is bigger is not worth it.
 
RAMMITDOWN said:
Thank you for the explanation. Do you happen to know what the service intervals are on the valve lash? I'm not sure why Cummins is having such problems with the rollers - typically a very desirable setup for wear. Could be an oiling issue related to volume or quality. I have heard of some synthetics causing 'skidding' of certain types of bearings (ball) if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

mbarber84 said:
There is no service interval on the current valvetrain because the lash is supposed to be taken up by the hydraulic lifter assembly itself. The rocker arms are not adjustable. There is no external document (yet) but I would expect there will be some viable explanation for some of the issues they’re having at some point. Supplier quality control issues being one of them for sure. As for the roller itself, it is a bushing style bearing. It does not use ball or needle bearings.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with the rollers themselves, it's the high pressure that the HLAs are exerting on the valvetrain...they're taking up too much slack.
 
mbarber84 said:
So that excessive pressure is causing the spalling on the rollers?
Click to expand...
Sorry, I wasn't thinking about the rollers. I haven't heard what's going on with those, only the interface between the rockers and push tubes.
 
GirchyGirchy said:
Sorry, I wasn't thinking about the rollers. I haven't heard what's going on with those, only the interface between the rockers and push tubes.
Click to expand...
Yeah there’s two big issues. The valvetrain wear at the top with the pushrods, and the roller damage down low. HLA’s could be responsible for both I guess. Lots to figure out there… I don’t want to derail this thread but feel free to reach out to me via PM or start another thread on this subject. It’s a good one that needs more focused discussion. (Or check out / jump in on some of the big threads on that topic already, I think there’s a few)
 
Interesting conversation on some rumors regrading the 2025 HD. I'm trying to decide when to pull the trigger so curious about what is gonna show up.

Highlights:
1. 6.7L still but only one choice no HO vs SO
2. 430hp, 1075lbft
3. 8 speed ZF
4. Same cab (major disappointment)

Some other stuff too, but thought people might like this.

 
neoprufrok said:
Interesting conversation on some rumors regrading the 2025 HD. I'm trying to decide when to pull the trigger so curious about what is gonna show up.

Highlights:
1. 6.7L still but only one choice no HO vs SO
2. 430hp, 1075lbft
3. 8 speed ZF
4. Same cab (major disappointment)

Some other stuff too, but thought people might like this.

Click to expand...
I saw this too, more of the same we have been hearing... can't wait to 'see' the engine, which supposedly has a new head, and exposed injectors, and (yikes) glow plugs.... and [maybe] a CP4.XX fuel pump
 
neoprufrok said:
Interesting conversation on some rumors regrading the 2025 HD. I'm trying to decide when to pull the trigger so curious about what is gonna show up.

Highlights:
1. 6.7L still but only one choice no HO vs SO
2. 430hp, 1075lbft
3. 8 speed ZF
4. Same cab (major disappointment)

Some other stuff too, but thought people might like this.

Click to expand...

LOL, they've been reading HDRAMS.

We've been "leaking" all this info and more for a few weeks now.
 
johanh13 said:
"anonymous sources" eh?
Click to expand...

Yes, info is coming from anonymous sources. I think we've been very good about protecting them and withholding details we had insight into until internet chatter started heating up about them.

Believe me, there's plenty more that I cannot divulge.
 
Brutal_HO said:
Yes, info is coming from anonymous sources. I think we've been very good about protecting them and withholding details we had insight into until internet chatter started heating up about them.

Believe me, there's plenty more that I cannot divulge.
Click to expand...
ARGH, how long must we wait ? ? ?
 
I think ram is also protecting power numbers. im hoping at least the "leaks" are intentionally low. I dont think 2025 Ford Superduty numbers have been released either.
 
I do not understand how TFL has such a big following.

Either way, the thing I'm most surprised about is the change in engine block material. Thus far, I've not heard of a single problem with the block itself, and the CGI block resulted in weight savings, so I'm curious why they would revert back, if true.
 
UglyViking said:
I do not understand how TFL has such a big following.

Either way, the thing I'm most surprised about is the change in engine block material. Thus far, I've not heard of a single problem with the block itself, and the CGI block resulted in weight savings, so I'm curious why they would revert back, if true.
Click to expand...
Exactly, let's not go backwards. Also, why the big deal about the roller lifters? Don't change them back to solid lifters, fix what's wrong with them. For example, if the rollers are spalling, increase the width or diameter of the rollers (or use stronger material). Same thing with the CP4.xx, I think it would have been better to address the weaknesses of the pump, than to retrofit the older gen lower PSI pump....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top