What if you could turn back time – to 2008 – and buy a brand-new half-ton truck like they used to make them? One without the “assistance” and other “technologies” that come standard with the new ones, like it or not – but with a standard eight-foot bed that’s increasingly hard to get . . . and for thousands less than what they’re selling the new double-and-crew cab short-bed trucks for today?
The very thought of it almost makes you want to dance around a battleship turret, doesn’t it?
Better to get out your checkbook – because for a time, you can buy a brand-new 2008 Ram 1500 Classic with a regular cab with an eight-foot bed and a standard 3.6 liter V6 without “e-Torque technology” for $32,345.
“Classic” meaning the previous generation Ram that was “all new” back in 2008 and hasn’t been changed much since then.
As opposed to a brand-new current generation 2024 Ram quad cab with a short bed (and standard “e-Torque technology”) for $38,570.
“E-torque technology” refers to an iteration of the automatic stop-start (or ASS) “technology” that practically every new vehicle now comes standard with that shuts off the engine every time the vehicle isn’t moving – in order to staunch the “emission” of the dread gas carbon dioxide. The gas that plants metabolize into the oxygen we breath.
In the new Ram, this takes the form of a 48 volt electric system that powers a high-torque belt-drive starter system. It re-starts the engine faster than less “advanced” versions of ASS “technology.” But it does so at the cost of a 48 volt electric system, the belt-drive starter system and a large (secondary) EV-style lithium-ion battery that will have to be replaced at your expense at some point down the road.
And that is the main reason why a new 2024 Ram 1500 that isn’t Classic costs $38,570 to buy – or $6,225 more than a brand-new Ram Classic that will never need a new lithium-ion battery.
That has an engine that stays running until you turn it off. That comes standard with an eight-foot rather than a short bed – and the regular cab you can’t get anymore in a new 2024 Ram 1500.
How about a V8-powered ’08 Ram 1500 regular cab with an eight foot bed – also without “e-Torque technology” – for $36,335? That’s the price of a ’24 Ram Classic so configured. As opposed to $41,755 – which is the cost of a new Ram 1500 quad cab with the V8 (and all the latest “technology” you may want no part of).
You can save yourself $5,440 by going Classic – and save yourself having to deal with all the latest “technology,” too.
This is what many truck buyers want – in part because it is what many truck buyers can afford. The new Ram 1500 that isn’t Classic is a truck many can no longer afford – and don’t want, besides. This includes people who do not want a four-door/short-bed truck, which may be more passenger-friendly but isn’t as work friendly.
The regular cab Classic with an eight foot bed is configured the way full-size trucks used to be – when trucks were not yet substitutes for the full-size cars that government regs de facto forced off the road. The italics to emphasize the evil subtlety of the method. No law was ever passed by Congress forbidding the manufacture or sale of the full-size sedans (and wagons) that were once even more popular than full-size trucks are today. Instead, regs were promulgated by the bureaucratic apparat styled EPA requiring cars to deliver ever-higher MPGs, irrespective of the cost – including the cost of such vehicles becoming almost-no-longer-available. The handful that still are all luxury-brand cars such as the Mercedes S-Class, Audi A8 and BMW 7 Series (and even these are only mid-sized sedans by the standards of the ’70s) that cost tens of thousands more than a full-sized truck. And they no longer come standard with a V8. The 2024 A8 no longer even offers one.
And that is why people who need a full-size vehicle (with a V8) buy trucks today.
But they are becoming unaffordable in their turn – as well as laden with “technology” people who buy trucks because they want a truck do not want. The “e-Torque technology” that is now standard in the ’24 Ram 1500 is a prime example of this. It does not make the truck more suited for work – and it makes it both more expensive and almost-certainly less long-term-reliable. These are not qualities that appeal to people who want a truck.
The fascinating – the depressing – thing is that in order to be able to offer the attributes truck buyers want, Ram is obliged to sell an old truck as an end-run around the regs that have rendered the new truck less desirable to truck buyers than the new one.
Let that sink in a minute.
Has there ever been a case of the new being less desirable than the old? Well, yes – many such cases. For instance, people who wanted a muscle car in 1975 would have done a Cher if they could have bought a new 1970 model that year rather than a gelded-by-government ’75 model.
But this is the first time a major manufacturer has brought back an old model to sell alongside the new. And that says a lot about the new – as well as the old.
It’s also a good sign in that at least one manufacturer is still trying to sell what people want to buy – as opposed to passively purveying what the government is trying to force people to buy, while pretending it isn’t doing exactly that.
Better hurry, though.
Time’s running short.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
If you like items like the Keeeeeeev T shirt pictured below, you can find that and more at the EPautos store!
My 2012 Ram 2500 5.7 gas, regular cab and 8′ box has a little over 48,000 miles on it, without all the current b.s.. It suits me and my slide-in camper just fine. Of course, it rides like a buckboard when empty, but those adjustable shocks and overload spring makes her handle that 9,000 lb. GVW like a dream when haulin’ that camper.
The RAM is a functional truck……
The EV freaks want to replace it with this…..
The Internet media is awash with Tesla Cyber Truck failures. Apparently it has trouble driving up the slightest incline if there is snow on the ground. Also automotive news outlets, reporting that Cyber Truck pre-orders are being canceled at a hefty rate.
When the RAM goes all electric….how much will the insurance cost?
This EV owner doesn’t like his EV….
The cost of car insurance has gone through the roof for Electric Cars, some EV owners are being quoted in excess of £10,000…($12,755. U.S.)….. for the year.
$1000/mon for insurance?…plus $1000/mon for truck payment financed…..
Less slaves driving around….the whole point….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvMfWUo61Ck
$100,000 truck loan over 6 years @ 7%….$1742 per month payment….
This EV owner doesn’t like his EV….
To replace his Porsche Taycan battery costs $50,000 U.S….. plus installation labor cost….with depreciation the battery now costs more then the used car value…..
Cher, you ignorant slut. Soft porn sells in music too.
A video somebody didn’t need to televise.
It’s okay, has to be ignored.
Agree. It’s rather harsh. Per Eric’s theme, her older version, when she sang with Sonny, was much better. .
Funny – when I first saw the title of this piece “Ram Channels Cher”, my initial thought was the Ram brand engineers were designing a custom Ram in the same way Sonny & Cher received garish George Barris customized Ford Mustangs in 1965. Cher’s was a horrible pink color and Sonny’s was an equally hideous tan or beige. They had weird square headlights and ugly grilles. Not some of Barris’ best work. Thankfully, though, I now know Stellantis is not collaborating with the also fugly Cher for a custom pickup truck.
Wasn’t that pig supposed to relocate to Canada if Trump was elected president BTW?
However, I have heard that the Ram Hemi’s with the cylinder deactivation end up having problems. (Chevy has this too) I have read that to turn off the cylinder, they have the lifters bleed down/compress so the valves then don’t actuate. All of this is internal to the engine. I ended up with a ’20 F150 precisely because the Ford does NOT have any cylinder deactivation. Now, Ford has the ASS and the twin-turbo eco-boost. (turbos being a complication…) but I figured the turbos are on the exterior of the engine. The ASS can be turned off with a simple switch on the dashboard. (Note: Had the Ford employed a method ANY MORE COMPLICATED than the simple dashboard switch, I would not have bought the Ford.)
I dont think the Ram with the 6 cyl has the cylinder deactivation. The Hemi does, so advantage six.
Unless you tow a lot (frequently, heavy stuff, or both) or drag race, the V6 is probably plenty of engine.
For me, a truck would be used to haul mulch, the occasional large appliance, plywood or drywall sheets, etc. Much more bulky than heavy stuff, and not for towing. Or as a second vehicle in case the main one is indisposed. Your basic suburban homeowner stuff. Fairly light use & not too frequent.
As always YMMV.
Take that ass switch out and jump the back of it, ass gone forever………….
I’ve owned my share of GM’s and Ram’s with cylinder deactivation, but never a trouble.
Agree I don’t like the stupid thing either. But I also don’t own them past 60K miles.
To me, cars have become throwaway many years ago with all this e-shit.
Give me a NEW Chevy LUV, with a hybrid drive train.
Eric, is the ‘classic’ Ram being discontinued? I didn’t know they were even still avail.
IMO Ram had to release the ’25 with the new I6TT Hurricane engine earlier than they wanted to because the ’24’s were hemorrhaging sales. Supposedly, the new ’25 is avail Q1-24. Why? Again, IMO it was because the ONLY V8 you could get had to come with the e-torque, and the majority of buyers didn’t want that.
Soooo, They are betting that the new I6 engine will attract the lost buyers back, which will remain to be seen. My bet is they will get some back, but many will go to GM that still offers a V8 (5.3 and 6.2 uptrim).
GM, the worst EPA-CAFE enabler, still has a V8, go figure.
My Pathfinder is fine, 4-wheel drive, air, some cargo space. For about 9,000 USD you can buy a used one, avoid the V-8. Get one with a V-6, a 2012 year is the best year.
If it’s Boeing, I’m not going. They fly apart like wind turbines on Prince Edward Island.
If it’s Israel, I’m leaving. So 300 thousand to 500 thousand have left for parts unknown.
If it’s an EV, I’m not buying.
United Finds “Loose Bolts” On 737 Max Doors After Emergency Inspection
cockpit recording data on the Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 9 jet, which lost a fuselage panel that triggered a sudden decompression event near Portland on Friday, won’t be retrieved because the data was erased.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/alaska-737-max-cockpit-recording-data-erased-after-mid-flight-door-blowout
I’m shocked at the increasing size of the mainstream trucks. I’m 5’11” and the top of the hood on some of them is at the level of my nose. I can’t get stuff with any weight in and out of the bed without a little step ladder. When I’ve rented one to move some standard 4×8 plywood, it didn’t fit in the bed since I couldn’t rent an 8′ bed and the one I did rent had the wheel wells intruding into the short bed, so you couldn’t even put it down flat. They’re really useless as trucks.
Amen, OL!
I’m 6ft 3 – and I feel like a midget (proportionately) next to one of these behemoths. The best way to get a sense of how huge they have become is to park one next to an early 2000s half-ton such as a Tundra from that era. The early 2000s Tundra looks like it’s about the size of a current Tacoma…
Count me as one that likes the new behemoths for how I use them.
And I make them a little bigger cause I order the slightly longer 6+ft bed.
I think mine are 20ft long! I love it.
Granted, I agree that the tallness is a little silly, but I manage.
And again, I even order them a little taller with their ‘off road package’, BUT can lower the bed height with the air-suspension to make loading stuff a little easier and more like 10yr old versions.
I’m curious – why do you like that car so large? Where I live, parking it outside any store or workplace would be difficult.
Good question. Been driving 40 years. Usually had two, a work sedan for some level of comfort driving 20-40K miles a year, and a lesser older truck for truck duties. Sedans got smaller, yuk…. Then as the trucks got better (90’s), I went to just one, a pickup crew. Did that for a long time, but as I got older, I couldn’t handle the harshness of the ride, so I went back to sedan/truck for a while. Now…………one big ass truck does it all for what I need it to do. Ride is better than my last 300 sedan, interior room is better. Tow with it, haul 2-3 dirtbikes 1-2 times month, highway cruise at 70-80 for a whole day is pleasant with the long wheelbase and how quiet they are now. Often have to pickup 2-4 at airports with luggage, no problem. And it can go into a winter storm and/or back dirt roads with confidence. Andy why I get the factory locking rear, she can go through 1-2ft of snow, and has many times. I don’t have to ‘adjust’ my time left for anything.
Yeah it sucks parking them, but you adjust, no biggie. I wouldn’t say difficult, just different. Tight parking garages? just have to 2-3-point her in. Every other parking lot, just park away, just an extra 1-3min. walk.
I can honestly say I am finally in vehicle nirvana.
There’s a neat website for comparing car sizes. Here’s a modern F150 next to a random average car I picked, an Altima.
https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/nissan-altima-2006-sedan-vs-ford-f150-2014-4-door-pickup-supercrew/
I have no use for a quad cab short bed PU w/ 5′ high bed sides. As a journeyman carpenter (among other qualifications) I need to actually haul stuff, and the above specs don’t cut the mustard. Still driving my 1989 F150 single cab 8′ bed, which was standard config at time of purchase.
If you want to drive to Bozeman in Montana, you can buy a 1986 Ford pickup with a six-cylinder engine and a camper on an eight-foot bed for 4950 USD. It is in good shape.
They’re out there, just have to look.
https://www.iseecars.com/used_cars-t5698-1986-ford-f-150-for-sale#id=100643569785
Correct link, so sorry.
I got upgraded to a Wagoneer last time I rented a car. It was a lot of fun!
But it was literally too tall to fit into my garage. By a good couple inches.
I wonder…. Is rust also included? Both my 70s Dodge trucks were rust attractants. The good thing was I didn’t have to stop to pee.
Right. Pay $33,000 for a vehicle that’s worth $15,000.
Eat $h!t Stellantis. Take your crappy products and shove ’em.
I’d rather have a 25 year old Japanese market pickup than support your rubbish.
How do companies like Ferrari & Lamborghini i.e. niche market / high performance / high price get by the stupid federal mileage regulations? Assume their “fleet” isn’t exactly easy on the gas tank.
EPA is issuing a final determination of Light-duty greenhouse gas (GHG) alternative emissions standards for four small volume vehicle manufactures.
EPA’s regulations established as part of the 2012 Light-duty Greenhouse Gas program allow manufacturers with annual U.S. sales of less than 5,000 vehicles per year to apply for alternative GHG standards.
Four small volume manufacturers applied for and are receiving alternative standards: Aston Martin, Ferrari, Lotus and McLaren. The alternative standards in these determinations cover model years 2017-2021.
This goes up to 2021 but I imagine its been updated.
https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/small-volume-manufacturer-alternative-ghg-standards
Plus a few of these cars are probably parked in EPA apparatchik garages.
They bundle regulatory compliance fee into six figure purchase price. Making them even MORE appealing snob trrrrrrrrrrrrinkets.
That’s pretty brassy to put a Cher video on the libertarian site. She’s about as libertarian as the president of the homeowner’s association.
If I could justify paying $32k for something that ought to cost under $20k, I might be tempted. I just don’t like the mothly bills at all.
I was thinking of another take on this old-instead-of-new business but lost my train of thought after watching the Cher video.
In addition to being substitutes for full size cars, half ton trucks have become expressions of manhood and outlets for Americans’ gadget obsession in order to get people to part with the $700+ monthly payment before taxes and insurance. Ironicallly, Ram is among the worst offender and started the trend with the introduction of the Classic in the mid-90s.
Now the Classic seems retro when compared to the fetish items the vehicle class has become with the crew cabs and big console screens. Sex toys.
It also appears people in general are getting too large and heavy for legacy vehicles. Watching any F² ingress and egress a Camaro might explain the need for giant doorways, pillar grab handles and gravity asssisted step platforms. How much can legacy knees take?
‘In the new Ram, this takes the form of a 48 volt electric system.’ — eric
There’s a reason why the 6-volt electrical systems standard in vehicles until the 1950s changed to 12 volts: for the same power delivered, the 12-volt system can use smaller diameter cables, saving weight and cost.
If we were starting from scratch today without all the legacy 12-volt components, 48-volt systems probably would be the choice for vehicles — just as new houses would be cheaper to wire at the 240-volt AC standard used in the rest of the world.
Adopting 48-volt DC for useless fedgov dogshit like automated stop/start systems is a misuse of an otherwise good technology. Stellantis can Ram that up their ASS.
Ram Channels Cher — such an evocative, poetic title.
Nothing to add to Eric’s masterful exposition, except Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.
I suspect this will be a hot item among those that actually work a truck, and can afford one. Hell, I would buy one just on principal, if I could in any way justify it or afford it.