2009 Ford F150 vs 2009 Dodge Ram – Ride, Handling, and Comfort – Part Three
Jason Lancaster | Mar 06, 2009 | Comments 10
The third and final part of our 2009 Dodge Ram and 2009 Ford F150 comparison – see Part One – Mechanicals and Part Two – Features – to get up to speed.
RIDE:
You can feel the extra weight and all the rigidity of the F-150; Ford stuck with the tried-and-true rear leaf springs, but added six-inches to the spring length for both load capacity and ride smoothness. The F-150 drives like a truck with enough sedan comfort to keep your kidneys intact.
The Ram’s rear coil-overs do give Dodge’s half-ton a true car-like ride quality. The ’09 whipped around corners somewhat like a sports car, no doubt a result of the new suspension design. The five-link coil spring setup absorbs bumps and reduces friction, making for better handling and a nicer ride. The trade-off is reduced payload and tow capacities, but such is life. You can’t have it all.
Winner: Ram. The better ride really is the criteria here, but we stress that you should decide this one for yourself. Ride is important, but it depends on what you’re trying to accomplish in your truck. To paraphrase Raider’s quarterback Jim Plunkett, “If you want pretty, go to the ballet.” If you want a car-like ride, maybe you should buy a car.
HANDLING:
As we’ve said in other comparison tests, handling goes hand-in-hand with ride. Both vehicles put the driver in control, or at least give him or her the impression they’re in control (taking into consideration the countermeasures taken by a slew of invisible electronics). Slalom testing reveals little when it comes to pickups, mostly because there’s no real-world equivalent to good slalom test performance. The two trucks performed similarly (54.6 mph for the Ram, 56.5 mph for the F150) with the Ford edging out the Ram ever so slightly.
However, the news here is that the older design – the F150’s good old-fashioned leaf springs – performed similarly. We’re not big fans of the Ram’s coil rear suspension because it hampers towing, and one of the benefits is supposed to be better handling. Yet that’s not how the tests went…
Winner: F150. Ties go to older designs. The Ram should have performed better considering it gave up 2000 lbs in towing capacity to gain ride and handling, but we’ll have to put this “should’ve in sack, mister.”
COMFORT:
A true test of comfort takes much more time than we had available. In a perfect world, a few weeks of testing would have given us a very clear picture. Still, both offered controls that were highly visible, handy and intuitive. The Ram Laramie’s top-of-the-line gadgetry was great (or intimidating, depending on your perspective), and the basics were where you expected them to be. The F-150 is not as quiet as the Ram, but we have a hard time taking points away for a nicely tuned exhaust and motor “noise.”
Winner: The Ram, but it’s a very close call. All of our testers agreed the Laramie’s interior was the most welcoming.
OVERALL WINNER
The Ram’s superior engine, interior and exterior features, and ride didn’t really hold much of a candle to the F150’s advantages in capability (due in large part to the Ford’s 6 speed transmission and more rugged suspension). Considering that the F150 edged out the Ram in price and safety, it’s hard to believe there’s really a choice between these two trucks. Don’t get us wrong – the Ram’s superior looks (inside and out) and great featurse are nothing to be ashamed of. There’s nothing bad about the Ram…but there’s nothing it does especially better than the F150, either.
It says here that Chrysler’s decision to use a coil-spring rear suspension in the new Ram was a mis-step. Not only does the Ram have less capability than the F150, but it doesn’t ride or handle appreciably better to compensate for these shortcomings. It’s not that the Ram is a bad truck, it just doesn’t make much sense…at least not to us. Choosing the F150 over the Ram seems like the prudent choice across the board.
Dodge needs to do the following to the Ram in order to better match-up to the new F150:
- Add a 6-speed transmission
- Find a way to boost towing and payload capacities while simultaneously improving handling
- Improve safety ratings
- Cut costs
Considering Chrysler’s financial position, this seems like a tall order. With the volume of experts predicting a collapse at Chrysler, we certainly hope that this isn’t the last Dodge Ram…but we wouldn’t be surprised if that were the case.
Filed Under: Auto News
I saw it pretty much the same way you guys did, they’re different trucks for different people. OVERALL, as a truck, I agree that the Ford wins. I dont’t agree with this line though “It’s not that the Ram is a bad truck, it just doesn’t make much sense.” The way Dodge sees it, if you have to tow more than 9100 lbs, get a HD, otherwise, the 1500 is perfect for almost everyone. I think it makes a lot of sense. Best daily driver, can’t tow 11000 lbs, but it can tow pretty much what the majority of truck buyers tow (or dont tow, many dont tow at all). Makes sense to me.
Jason what a great debate. Really it’s like you stated you have to get the truck for what you need it for.
Great reviews. Now I’m going back to my bias. Screw Dodge and Ford. I love my Tundra!!!! Or better yet, remember the old Toyota commercials? “I love what you do for me…..TOYOTA!!”
IF Chrysler collapses, who’s gonna make the next gen Titan? Nissan has checked out the Big truck market.
I would hate to see both Chrysler and Nissan trucks off the road.
Maybe this is just me and maybe it would cost to much for R&D but I think it would be great if all the half ton truck manufacturers offered both the coil and leaf spring suspension. One for the smoth ride for the majority of buyers but one with a high capacity for the heavy haulers. For me the hauling and towing capacity of the Ram is about right for me (hauling my fourwheeler, a load of mulch towing my pressure washer) but I hate Dodges quality in years past. My Tundra rides a little jittery for me, I would like to have a little more of a composed ride. I love my Tundra but I think I may have to switch to the F-150 in a year or two because of the interior quality and great features like Ford Syc (because I think Toyota dropped the ball on this one on the new Tundras, a lot of cheaper quality plastics compared to the older Tundras and the new offerings from Ford and Dodge) plus I read an article that said that Ford is going to be offering the 6.2 Boss in the future (which puts it in the same boat as the Tundra in power) on most of its f-150 line-up not just the Raptor. Just my .02
just why in the hell are you posting about these POS trucks on this site anyway? this is supposed to be a site about tundras….
LMAO @ Obama…..wow….that’s different. I guess it’s to appease the Ford/Dodge lovers that tend to come in here on occassion. I don’t think it’s bad to have the discussions once in a while.
To know what the competiton has to offer. Nothing wrong with that. Thats the main reason I come on here, to see other people’s point of view on things. To better understand on why people choose the Tundra and so on.
ICUH8N – Your point is well taken. The Ram DOES offer plenty of capability for 70%+ of half-ton owners. Still, the tough part for us on this comparison is that while the F150 isn’t quite as nice, it’s darn close. For that smidgen of “darn close”, the F150 wins out in almost every other measurable way. Still, if we had to choose the nicest most luxurious pickup available, the Ram would win. If the truck market weren’t so competitive, the Ram would have an excellent niche. Perhaps if Dodge focuses 100% on the luxury market, they’ll enjoy success. I strongly doubt they’ll sell half as many Rams per year as they do now if they disregard the “capability” side of the market, but if they can stay profitable selling top-quality luxury pickups, more power to them. I certainly don’t see anything wrong with that.
Mickey and TXTee – Thanks a bunch – great support as always.
***
Jeremy – I echo your sentiments. I think the Titan is gone forever, but I sincerely hope the Ram endures. If Chrysler can survive, I’m sure the Ram will too.
***
Mike – It’s an interesting idea. Some truck manufacturers offer a “heavy duty” suspension option for heavy haulers, so why don’t they also offer a “smooth ride” package? First, it should be noted that GM does offer this package (or at least they did), but it wasn’t a completely different suspension design as you suggest. I think your comment about R&D costs hits the nail on the head – there’s not a lot of money to design a completely different suspension unless the option is going to be popular. With so much competition, it’s hard to imagine any option on any truck being a real difference maker.
***
Obama – Get back to work man! Aren’t you supposed to be running the country? FYI, we’ll get back to Tundra specific stuff this week. This segment was sort of a test. If it works out, we’ll sprinkle these in with our normal content.
***
ICUH8N – Always look forward to your reasoned, careful, and balanced comments. Keep em’ coming.