1999 Dodge Ram 3500 Laramie Slt 4dr 4wd Extended Cab Lb Drw on 2040-cars
Engine:5.9L I6 Turbocharger
Fuel Type:Diesel
Body Type:Pickup Truck
Transmission:Automatic
For Sale By:Dealer
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 1B7MF3367XJ595693
Mileage: 93900
Make: Dodge
Trim: Laramie SLT 4dr 4WD Extended Cab LB DRW
Drive Type: --
Number of Cylinders: 5.9L I6
Features: --
Power Options: --
Exterior Color: White
Interior Color: Gray
Warranty: Unspecified
Model: Ram 3500
Dodge Ram 3500 for Sale
2001 dodge ram 3500 slt 4dr quad cab 4wd lb drw(US $35,995.00)
1999 dodge ram 3500(US $14,000.00)
1996 dodge ram 3500(US $16,000.00)
2007 dodge ram 3500 slt 4x4 4dr quad cab 8 ft. lb drw pickup(US $35,995.00)
2006 dodge ram 3500 st(US $14,000.00)
2001 dodge ram 3500(US $2,000.00)
Auto blog
Barracuda's Dodge branding no biggie, but what about engines?
Thu, Aug 27 2015Rumors about a revival of the Barracuda nameplate have been circulating for years now, though which brand it might fall under has been a bit of a mystery. Initial speculation had the car labeled an SRT product, but that acronym has since returned to its former role as a sub-brand for top-performance Mopars. Thanks to leaks from a recent FCA dealership event, we know the Barracuda is back on the table but will be sold under the Dodge umbrella, a move that has been generating a bit of ire from Pentastar fanatics, as the car was originally part of the defunct Plymouth brand. Given what's known about the new model, however, the badge is the least of my concerns about the new car. Let's start with the re-branding itself. This isn't the first time Chrysler has shuffled models around to different brands. The current-generation Viper spent two years as the flagship model under the SRT banner, only to return to Dodge for 2015 when SRT resumed its former role as a sub-brand. Years ago, the Neon was sold as a Plymouth, a Dodge, and a Chrysler model, depending on where you shopped for one. When Plymouth ceased to exist, the last few years of Prowler production got Chrysler badges instead. Then there's the new Jeep Renegade, a model whose name was born out of a trim level. The Barracuda might not turn out to be a muscle car in the way we currently define them. Further examples of naming liberties taken throughout automotive history could fill a book, but suffice it to say that these days a model's name has very little to do with the vehicle itself or any legacy it might have. The Barracuda name might be a particularly sacred cow with enthusiasts, but to me, a much bigger concern is the fact that the car might not turn out to be a muscle car in the way we currently define them. News from the Fiat Chrysler dealer briefing earlier this week indicates that when the next Charger debuts it will share its platform with the Barracuda, much the way the Charger and Challenger are twinned now. One difference is that the Barracuda is tipped to be offered as a convertible, while the modern Challenger is tintop-only. The Charger and Barracuda will use the rear-drive platform developed for Alfa Romeo's new Giulia, itself designed as a BMW M3 fighter both from a dimensional and dynamic standpoint; the Barracuda is expected to be slightly smaller than the current Challenger.
Total auto recalls already on record pace in 2014
Tue, 08 Apr 2014If you've noticed that there have been more recalls than usual this year, you may be on to something. According to a report from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the US market is on pace to break a record for recalls. In 2013, 22 million cars were recalled. We're only a third of the way through 2014, though, and we've already halved that figure, with 11 million units recalled. That's wild.
Considering the past few months, it shouldn't be a surprise that General Motors is leading the charge, with six million of the 11 million units recalled coming from one of the General's four brands. Between truck recalls, CUV recalls and the ignition switch recall, 2014 hasn't been a great year for GM.
Other recall leaders include Nissan (one million Sentra and Altima sedans), Honda (900,000 Odyssey minivans), Toyota (over one million units in a few recalls), Volkswagen (150,000 Passat sedans), Chrysler (644,000 Dodge Durango and Jeep Grand Cherokee SUVs) and most recently, Ford (434,000 units, the bulk of which were early Ford Escape CUVs). So while it's been a bad year for GM so far, its competitors aren't doing too well, either.
Killing the Dart and 200 might lower FCA's fuel economy burden
Tue, Feb 9 2016Killing the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 could allow FCA US to take advantage of an intriguing quirk in the next decade's fuel economy regulations. By increasing its ratio of trucks versus cars, the automaker might not need to worry so much about hitting the more stringent efficiency rules. At first thought, it might seem harder for an automaker with a ton of trucks to meet the government's mandated 54.5 mile per gallon corporate average fuel economy for 2025. However, every company doesn't need to hit that lofty figure, according to The Detroit Free Press. The exact target varies by the product mix between trucks and cars. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target," Brandon Schoettle, Project Manager Sustainable Worldwide Transportation at the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, told Autoblog. "While passenger car and light truck categories have separate CAFE targets, it's still true that more trucks versus cars in a company lineup means a lower combined CAFE target." FCA US' current product blend has 80 percent pickups and CUVs, which means the company stands to benefit from a lower fuel economy target. It might not seem entirely fair environmentally, but this is a great move from a business perspective. The new CAFE rules aren't set in stone, according to The Detroit Free Press, but potentially taking advantage of the regulation is just one more reason to cut the Dart and 200. Modern crossovers also aren't gas guzzlers like older SUVs, which could make it easier to hit the fuel economy target. "Utilities offer practicality and versatility that cars do not, and now, built on car architectures, they do not penalize consumers on fuel economy as they once did," AutoTrader Senior Analyst Michelle Krebs told Autoblog. Schoettle warns that FCA is still making a gamble by killing the small sedans. "Depending on the previous sales volumes and how much these vehicles might have exceeded their specific CAFE targets, it's possible that these cars helped earn CAFE credits for FCA that they could bank for future use," he said. "Future sales breakdowns [car vs.