Diesel Power Wagon... Again..

[bstefanic]

The best way to deal with the emissions issues

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[RustyPW]

But power, with finesse, is exuberant.

I watched said video. It was painful to watch. See I've owned a couple powerwagons. And lots of diesels. I respect both for what each is capable of.
I did a decade of 24 month leases. New truck every couple years was nice. Then one happened to be the powerwagon. If I could turn the clock back I would have purchased it because parting with it was a heartbreak. Now I've finally built my dream truck. Plus .............

3rd gen = ultimate gen

[SeahawkDriver]

I've avoided this thread. But now I'm here. I am so far under that 80k mark that it's kind of a joke. Unless you pay someone else to do everything for you and they know you're a sucker. (Like aev haha)
I haul just as heavy with my 3/4 ton now as when I did before it got powerwagon axles and suspension. I also get to enjoy 1100km per 120 litres running 4.56 gears and 37" tires. There are very few rigs done as you state though. 99% are guys running lifts (not suspension systems) and big tires and just using brute torque to get around. They don't bother with lockers and a winch is an after thought. After they are buried in the mud up to the door handles. Or if they get hung up on a Prius

Is my truck heavier than a stock wagon. Of course. I sag about an inch more on thuren 3" coils as a powerwagon would. Another 200 lbs with the winch that will be mounted soon isn't going to make much difference. And how many wagons shed their winch and get a big ass bumper anyway reloacating their winch.
My payload rating I would argue is just the same as any with the air bags I run for towing. But nearly every truck setup for towing has air bags and nearly every wagon that hauls heavy has air bags so that's a nonissue. Towing? I don't see any loss in towing. I effectively have the same overall final drive ratio as a stock 2500 diesel with 3.73's. and I've hauled 15k trailer and equipment with no issues.
Expensive parts? Sure. But just the engine. A new 66rfe found in the wagons is just as pricy as a 68rfe. Everything else is pretty much interchangeable from truck to tuck of the same year. In fact I would argue that the powerwagon option would actually cost more than the diesel option. Billions of cummins to what 400 wagons (you know what I mean) wagon parts piece for piece actually are more expensive leaving the emissions out of the equation since that's a joke anyway.

Sure it's not a rubicon but why would you buy a pw if you are looking for a little jeep. Seems preposterous.

But I'll be damned I'd like to think I have an authentic diesel powerwagon.

Rant over

Nice post, but I think you missed the point. No one is saying YOU can't build a hybrid PW with CTD, it's that why Fiat-Chrysler won't build one. I think I made a pretty good argument as to why it's not in their interest... at least yet. YOU can certainly cut out all labor costs and stay well away from the $80k mark, but we're not talking about YOU or any other shade-tree mechanic. The current price on a base Laramie 2F/2H CTD CC 4x4 2500 is around $63-$67k depending on options, not the most blinged-out Limited but a nicely equipped rig with leather and a modest set of bells and whistles. Remember this isn't what's YOU are going to order, it's what Chrysler is going to stock their dealerships with...reality. Assuming you could get a small production number CTD-PW at a steep discount of $10,000 when you include rebates (you'd have to wait a while for those), you're still right back up to around $60k when you factor in State Tax, Reg, dock fee, etc, not to mentioned gap insurance and extended warranties.

Now CHRYSLER (not you) has to add all the PW goodies. They have to design it with the CTD, test it, certify it, market it, produce it, and ship it. All in all I don't think it would be unreasonable to see a price tag of at least $75k on a factory CTD-PW. The people in the marketing dept would have to convince Ralph Giles, head of Chrysler design, that they can MAKE MONEY off of this truck with the investment. Are there enough people who want them and would pay that much, maybe yes, maybe no, right now that answer is no and has been for some time.

Assuming you get pst that hurdle now you've got to get the engineers to come up with a way to make the PW (with the diesel in it) just as off road capable, or more capable, than it currently is. If you compromise on its ability, you will get nothing but whinging negative feedback from the fanboys, you and me, about how it's not good enough anymore. On the other side of the coin will be the diesel crowd, all expecting the CTD PW to to JUST AS MUCH as their regular 2500/3500 trucks, and if it doesn't, same reaction from their side. Remember we are supposedly doing all of this with no real added cost to what is already a MSRP of $75,000++.

The bottom line is that you're not, you're it going to appease both the off-road purists AND the coal-rolling, oil-burning tow-a-holics with a truck that is Jack of all trades- Master of none, and do it for no real additional costs above and beyond the OEM parts that exist in the inventory. For Chrysler it makes no fiscal sense, neither from their marketing perspecitve nor their cost/engineering analysis.

Rant-replied

[Shaved Ice]

Well said Seahawk Driver

[RustyPW]

I see why firerecuse likes you.

[FirerescuePW]

I'm an Early Adopter...

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[nts007]

http://www.trucktrend.com/cool-trucks/0 ... wer-wagon/

Maybe do a little reading. It's not that they can't or couldn't. Maybe this was before your time

In the end it's all about the bucks. If I can sell you toothpaste and a tooth brush as a separate package even though there is no reason they couldn't be a package deal then why would I. Rather soak as much cash outta people.

Which means we both completely agree.
But as I've gotten older I've learned to appreciate what I have and what I can do for myself not what someone has to do for me. What I need and want are no longer a blurred line.

And trust me I know very well that Chrysler don't give a shit about what wants and needs are. It's only bout bottom line. IMO since the introduction of the 4th gen they have turned into Ford. Instead of building a practical vehicle with a few simple Trim levels they have found ways to have dozens of different fit and finishes to appease those who feel they have to just have someing better than the next guy. At least with the powerwagon it's a practical upgrade. It's a legitimate change from a common 2500. It's truly amazing that they ever had the balls to introduce the wagon in 05 and to this day continue with it.
Vehicles are a bad investment. We can talk when your monthly vehicle payments are over $6000 for only 4 vehicles on leases. Been there done that. Ass is still sore. But damn was it neat to say I had almost $300k in vehicles parked in my shop. This was prior to 2009 when the prices dropped by like 20grand a piece. But yea 2007 megacab dually slt no leather was $73,000. Funny eh.
So let's talk about what we can do instead of what we can buy. there's no big stick swinging here. This is just a cyclic conversation that has been ongoing since 2005. And 2007 when I joined dodgetalk powerwagon form. And here when this forum started. There is no winner or loser to this. We have found a truck together that is the most bad ass factory machine you can buy under $100k. If you want a diesel wagon. Build it. They won't do it for you.

[TwinStick]

My wife & I drove through a closed Chevy/GMC used truck lot today while on a day trip. It made us both 2012 GMC's, Chevy's that had $49,900 across the windshield ! Everytime we do that, I like my truck more !

[Sweet5ltr]

Ram produced 2,600 Power Wagons in 2015. Ram sold 488,000 trucks that year. Power Wagon was 0.5% of total sales for Ram. 0.1% total sales for FCA..

Why would FCA invest, potentially, millions of dollars to recertify this vehicle to install a Cummins? Cummins is a $9,200 option currently, and would most-likely, offer very little improvements in towing capacity; if any.
If it made sense, they would have offered an EcoDiesel in the Jeep Wrangler Rubicon; but they didn't.

Ram built single cab Power Wagons in the early 3rd gens. Nobody wanted them, look at the sales numbers (rounded).
2005 - 200 single cabs - 2,200 quad cabs.
2006 - 100 single cabs - 1,500 quad cabs.
2007 - 50 single cabs - 800 quad cabs.
2008 - 50 single cabs - 770 quad cabs.
2009 - 6 single cabs - 400 quad cabs.

I'm sure the purchase rate of early 3rd gens with the G56 transmission was abysmal too. Which would seem like the holy grail to the off-road community; single cab, G56 manual transmission, 5.7 hemi, and 4.56 gears.

If someone wants to attempt to build a 'power wagon' like vehicle, then they can order a single cab 6.7 Cummins Tradesman 4x4 with a G56 transmission for $42,000. I don't see many people going down that route, even though it seems like that would be the most logical move for the ultimate overlanding rig. The Power Wagon is extremely dependable because it's heavily overbuilt with the 6.4 Hemi, putting 600 additional pounds over the front axle & driveline components, while also delivering twice the amount of available torque on tap, isn't going to put it in a good spot on any terrain. Nearly everything on the driveline is unique to the Power Wagon, including the frame. All of these components would require recertification & R&D to run in a Diesel rig. I don't see any situation where adding a modern diesel would be an improvement other than the factor. I got 15.7 MPG in the mountains with an average speed of 60 MPH on 35's (13 MPG around town), what else can I ask for in a 7,000 vehicle with 4.10 gears.

[TwinStick]

Here is the problem with Detroit's big 3. (can they even be called that anymore ?) They are usually a day late & a dollar short. Something that is in demand today, will take them 20 yrs or more to produce. When I was a kid, circa 1978 @ 15 yrs old, & working at a large farm & living on a small farm, people wanted crew cabs but couldn't get them very easily. Farmers did not want to order something, when they needed it "right now." The big farm ended up settling for a single cab dually, because thats all that was avail "right now". It just made sense, to be able to use the truck for work & still be able to haul the workers to the fields. Now, all the farms by me are gone & there is 1 GIANT CORPORATE farm, that bought out everyone else. The pendulum has swung or is swinging the other way. Most farm workers have their own vehicles or the farm has buses for the workers & the population is aging, kids are gone & empty nesters don't have the need for a crew cab anymore. I still love crew cabs for their versatility. Open bed + dry inside storage in the backseat. But I still love station wagons too & have never liked 2 door anythings, so I may be in the minority.

IMHO, the ONLY thing that "Detroit" has done right recently, is the Power Wagon & the Colorado ZR2. I would also say diesels but they have smogged the shit out of them so bad, that it kills the point of having one. Yes, I am proud to say that I own my "Holy Grail dream truck." Even though it has it's issues, but all do, of some kind. And the fact that GM REALLY touted it's 2.8L DuraMax in the ZR2, but none are even avail for a test drive, makes it seem like they REALLY don't want anyone to have one. Every single dealer by me said---"Yeah, we are not gonna get any unless someone orders one." Seems to be the same for electric cars, at least around here. And, I realize it's about the money, it's ALWAYS about the money.

[ramv]

I averaged 16.5 mpg today going to a rig in Western Colorado. With one of the company trucks (6.7 Power Stroke) I averaged 13.5 (34" tires, 3.73 gears) on the same trip.

It's hard to beat the Hemi empty. I am sure dragging a 20k lb trailer around a diesel would be superior but that's not a PW purpose. It tows my 2nd gen ok, and my 5k lb travel trailer with ease.