Power Wagon vs F250 Tremor

Todd n Natalie

OverCamper
Probably in the next year or two. Which means, get one now, rather than wait for the new gen + 1-2 years to get the kinks worked out.
With all the testing they do now, I'm not terribly concerned about first year stuff. My F150 was the fist year of the aluminum design and I've had no issues.
Those two million mile Tundra's were '07's which was the first year of that design. I don't know, everybody is different I guess.
 

warwickscout

Observer
My recommendation would be to buy neither! Both are over priced and only partially better "off road" than any stock type truck.

We looked at the 2019-2020 Power Wagon. Here's what we didn't like:
6.4L Hemi Motor. It has plenty of power no issues there. It's the other stuff that sucks.
1. Recommends Premium Fuel. Motor can run regular but tunes down performance. My experience with past vehicles is to run the recommended octane. I don't want to run premium. These rigs suck gas and buying more expensive fuel... no thanks.
2. Special oil required. Chrysler spec 0w40 Synthetic. I'm sure there are many people who will run whatever they want but I always run recommended fluids. Specialty oil stucks. After owning a Mercedes Sprinter... I just wanted an easy to maintain rig.
3. Cylinder Deactivation. HECK NO!!! Ok, some people like this junk but it's not for me. This is partly why the special oil is required. This is a rather complicated system that will leave you going no where when it fails. Yes, it could slightly raise your mpg if driving modestly while unloaded but this small gain isn't worth the potential issues.
4. Cam Failures. Nobody really knows if this has been fully resolved or not. I don't want to find out.

Front AAM Axle.
1. Full time rotating axle assembly. Manual hub swap is thousands of dollars.
2. Many issues discussed online regarding ball joint failure and steering.

Rear Suspension: Coil Springs.
1. Minimal "flex" improvement due to the axle link design.
2. Can't carry heavy loads well. Even with air bags just not as good as old fashion leaf springs.
3. Complicated. More joints to wear and maintain/replace.

I believe the 2018 or 2019 got the well proven ZF transmission and boxed steel frame. And the body/interior fit/finish has drastically improved. Love the manual shift transfer case. So we definitely debated the Power Wagon. But just not willing to deal with the above items.

Another tip... you can buy the base RAM truck and add the "Power Wagon" package. Most dealers don't know this. It is much cheaper than an stickered Power Wagon RAM but with all the key components in a more basic finished rig. That was what we were investigating.

Here's what we did:
Custom ordered a base XL Super Duty truck with cool features like: 4.30 factory gears, rear locker, vinyl floor (no carpet), vinyl seats (nice), auxiliary switches... basically all the cool off road type parts. (Sadly Ford discontinued the manual shift transfer case in 2019 - I'm sure you could convert one since parts were made.) Under $40k out the door.

We then installed a proper OX Air Front Locker, air compressors, Carli Suspension, steel bumpers, rock sliders, method wheels and 37s. All in... we are less money than a Power Wagon or Tremor but with much better components. Love the high pinion D60 with manual hubs, simple proven motor design (no complicated crap to fail), proven transmission, overall beefy build quality. Aluminum body is great for cutting weight and no rust issues.

Just other ideas to consider! I'd also recommend only buying if you have the cash. Having impressive stuff with payments is no good. Save the money.
Power wagons don't require premium fuel and they don't use special oil. So much bad info out there
 

montypower

Adventure Time!
It says:
"The use of 89 octane "plus" gasoline is recommended for optimum performance and fuel economy."

Sure you don't need to run recommended octane or oil. But it won't perform "optimum" according to the manufacturer. For me... I follow the recommended items. Not to say you can't get by with less or different. But that is a consideration when I buy a vehicle. Not telling anyone to do anything. Just my approach.
 

Todd n Natalie

OverCamper
It says:
"The use of 89 octane "plus" gasoline is recommended for optimum performance and fuel economy."

Sure you don't need to run recommended octane or oil. But it won't perform "optimum" according to the manufacturer. For me... I follow the recommended items. Not to say you can't get by with less or different. But that is a consideration when I buy a vehicle. Not telling anyone to do anything. Just my approach.
But 89 isn't premium fuel. That would be 93. 89 octane is "plus" fuel.

87 = regular
89 = plus / mid grade
93 = premium

At least that's the way it breaks down here.
 

montypower

Adventure Time!
Octane names and actual octane ratings vary by location around the country. I consider anything premium over "regular"...

My point is simple... You just have to know what you are buying and be happy with it. Nothing against the Ram product. Just things we considered while shopping.

I'm a bit old school. Simplicity and less technology is better to me. I like that the Super Duty recommends 87 "regular", 5w30 oil (found everywhere), no motor start/stop feature, no cylinder deactivation feature, no electric cooling fans. My biggest dislike with the 6.2L is the 16 spark plugs. Adds a bit of cost for maintenance but fairly easy to access and replace. The new 7.3L seems very interesting as it was engineered for reliability and durability. It could be an incredible motor design. Motors designed for efficiency or max power have trade offs.
 

phsycle

Adventurer
But 89 isn't premium fuel. That would be 93. 89 octane is "plus" fuel.

87 = regular
89 = plus / mid grade
93 = premium

At least that's the way it breaks down here.

Yup, regular, plus, premium. Same way from California to the east coast. Never heard of anyone referring to 89 as premium.

Side note, it does aggravate me most manufacturers are putting in that caveat of octane below 87 is not covered by warranty. Yet, regular grade in the Rockies is 85. It’s due to elevation but Ford specifically says even in high elevation places, 85 is not recommended and will void warranty.
 

docster

Member
It says:
"The use of 89 octane "plus" gasoline is recommended for optimum performance and fuel economy."

Sure you don't need to run recommended octane or oil. But it won't perform "optimum" according to the manufacturer. For me... I follow the recommended items. Not to say you can't get by with less or different. But that is a consideration when I buy a vehicle. Not telling anyone to do anything. Just my approach.

Most manufactures have this on at least a few models. It’s fairly common with ECUs today being smart enough they can adjust timing based on octane levels. So yea, most engines will respond better to better fuel, with the exception of base economy engines.

For me this is not a determining factor. The F150 ecoboosts all say the same and recommend it when towing. I run 93 all the time in mine since it makes more power and is tuned for it!
 

montypower

Adventure Time!
We typically run 87 regardless of altitude. Don't really want less octane in the tank especially if/when dropping elevation. I guess if you lived and stayed at elevation all the time it might not matter.

All the vehicles I've previously owned made a noticeable difference when running the "recommended" octane. The one that sticks in my mind is the Toyota 4.0L which was in my old Tacoma. It got 1-2mpg better with "premium" and ran better. MPG increase made paying more feel "worth it" but still I'd rather just run "regular". I don't enjoy fuel hungry trucks drinking high octane fuel.
 

jadmt

ignore button user
We typically run 87 regardless of altitude. Don't really want less octane in the tank especially if/when dropping elevation. I guess if you lived and stayed at elevation all the time it might not matter.

All the vehicles I've previously owned made a noticeable difference when running the "recommended" octane. The one that sticks in my mind is the Toyota 4.0L which was in my old Tacoma. It got 1-2mpg better with "premium" and ran better. MPG increase made paying more feel "worth it" but still I'd rather just run "regular". I don't enjoy fuel hungry trucks drinking high octane fuel.

does not make sense you said one of the negatives on the 6.4 was that it was designed to run on 87 but for optimum performance the owners manual stated to use 89 yet the Ford owners manual states the 6.2 is designed to run on 87 but for optimum performance recommends 91 yet you only run 87? it seems the 6.4 would give optimum performance on a cheaper fuel. Now I understand preferring a Ford over a Ram as I have always been fond of Fords since buying my first new F150 in 1977 a 1978 shortbox 4x4. Hell I can not believe I bought a Ram, but I sure like driving it.
 

Todd n Natalie

OverCamper
Now I understand preferring a Ford over a Ram as I have always been fond of Fords since buying my first new F150 in 1977 a 1978 shortbox 4x4. Hell I can not believe I bought a Ram, but I sure like driving it.
I've always been a GM guy but am now driving a Ford....

When it's due to be replaced in a few years, I have no clue what I'll end up with. I like the features of the 2021 F150's but not crazy about the looks of the redesign.

I like the looks of the new Rams. Inside and out. Kinda curious to see what the new Tundras will be like as well. Only one not really on my radar to check out are Titans.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,836
Messages
2,878,716
Members
225,393
Latest member
jgrillz94
Top