Wow, thanks for sharing this experience. Sorry to hear that, sounds horrible. Yeah, that's one thing I'm so happy about my TRX...it never had any issue. I could get a newer (23 / 24) TRX but even that carries a risk of getting a bad one. The best thing is to shut up and wait, enjoy this beast while it runs well.
My pops had a tundra v6 tt and got 7-8mpg pulling a two place enclosed snowmobile trailer (it’s not that heavy), it’s not an rho but same type of engine… turbos spun the whole time. He now has a 5.7 hemi and it gets like 12mpg pulling the same trailer. I towed the same trailer with the TRX and got 11-12. Those 6 cylinder turbos are not for tugging and to be honest the trx isn’t the greatest at it either when talking serious weight. A small trailer is just fine. If you’re pulling heavy on a consistent basis a diesel is the way to go.
My son's RHO is having that same Dead Battery issue, it's been towed back to the dealer twice so far and he jump started it the first time took it in, no problems found, 2nd time towed in they replaced PCM, it's at the dealer again as of yesterday, dead again all in about 2 months owning it. It's a nice truck when it starts & runs...
It's unreal that they are selling these 75-90k trucks that are having the most basic of issues that no one seems to be able to figure out - how to keep the batteries from dying so someone can actually start and drive these trucks. I know everyone is excited about a 2026 TRX, but they will have the same electrical architecture as the RHO and presumably the same problems. They figured out the thermostat issues with them - but not all of the electrical gremlins. My TRX is running great and everything seems to work (which is more than can be said about many RHOs) - so fingers crossed!
Interesting. My wife has a Wagoneer too and we get quite a bit better mileage. She is getting 15.5 combined (20% better than 13!) and when we road trip we get 20-21 mpg. But, agree that an RHO isn't exactly a big savings vs. the TRX. I haven't driven an RHO on the highway, but my sense is it is quieter at speed than the TRX - I get quite a bit of road noise from the rear tires. So, RHO if you want a more serene/isolated experience . . . but not for fuel efficiency IMO.
That really sucks. Why would they have those issues and TRXs didn’t!? Mine is also first year, 21 and none of that.
Completely new electrical architecture (and thus all new electronic components as well) for the 2025s. The 5th gen Ram was aready out for 2 years when the TRX came out. And even that uses a spinoff of the same basic electrical system as any Ram going back to 2013. So there was much more time to have worked the bugs out.
Wow I see. Thanks for clarifying. That’s crazy bad for RAM’s reputation. There are several videos and articles out there already on RHO issues already.
They never should have made that abomination! Instead kept the TRX gave middle finger to anyone who said they can't make them.
I think it's a good truck (aside from electrical issues) and fills a market void. Spending 75-85k for a truck that isn't quite the King of the Hill vs. spending 105-125k for one that is - that's a huge jump. Ford has been selling a decent volume of Raptors for years before the R came out. There is a market for the. And again, the 2026 TRX will have the same architecture.
Base was what 68k then they kept going up. The rho market was TRX money don't let them move the ball and agree! Fully loaded shouldn't have been over 75k base 55k these prices they come up with are ridiculous. If they want to fix things and sell a fuck tone of trucks the 26 fully loaded should not be over 100k would like to see it at 80k myself but then we don't get raked over the coals. Yeah times change but this bullshit of accepting everything should be what was Lamborghini ferrari money gotta go start being realistic people it's out of hand. Starter houses at 500k this is all just plain wrong!
I can't disagree with that. I think (hope?) Ram learned a bit when they asked 125k for the FE TRXs. They didn't exactly fly off the shelves. The last time I looked there were still a few new ones on Autotrader. Surely they will dial it down a bit, but I still can't see it starting for less than about 95-100k. The RHO starts at 70k and 25-30k feels like about the right delta.
Never claim to be smart with my money too damn hard, when I spend it I expect the most though. Guess I'm just an old American usto the better life!
as an early warning 
visual for us Natives
! Definitely a mandatory safety default for Canadians
who will put the top down in 115d weather...looking like dehydrated lobsters. 
on their way to Sedona to purchase turquoise jewelry.
. Despite getting him a 09' Civic Si (rev'd to 8000rpm) - he was happier when I replaced it with a 2nd Gen Prius. Obviously adopted my ex-wife's DNA in that regard! Driving Ms. Daisy....I know we are all speculating, but i would be very surprised to see a 392 TRX. Whether V-8 fanatics like it or not, the 3.0 TT will smoke that engine - especially in a truck this heavy. The 392 just can't come close to matching the HP/TQ under the curve. So, they would be releasing a much slower (dare I say weaker?) truck than the RHO when a lot of people (many of which are on here!) are saying how pathetic the RHO already is! I guess when an RHO blows past a 392 TRX like it's standing still, the driver could yell "but do you hear my exhaust note when you passed me?". Yes, we all love the TRX because it sounds great - but it's obviously fast as well. To have a great exhaust note in a truck that looks like this but is slow as hell (relatively speaking) doesn't seem like it would appeal to many. Now, if the base price was 60k, that's a different story - but I don't see that happening.Once a less expensive TRX WAS rumored: Pics of a red factory mule without painted mirrors and some other plain trim... that was rumored to be a 6.4L TRX intended to target the TTV6 Raptor market at the time. Need to find any thread/related photos now! Seemed a simple/logical and proven alternative, mimics the SCAT/392 vs. Hellcat Challenger/Charger comparison and $ consumer market.
Musings...a 'Tradesman' level 1500 w/TRX-ish 'package' option would have been interesting... Same body/stance and base wheels w/6.4 engine, 2wd default, non adjustable decent/brand named shock, no Alcantara , cloth interior option, normal sized head unit, no launch control, etc. Similar to how one could order a Power Wagon package too on a base model (used by Park Rangers here and alternative to GSA Raptors used by Border Patrol and some southern AZ Sheriff Offices). Toss in a carpet delete option, even aux wiring packages for supplemental equipment, etc. Front bumper winch ready too.
MPG quandary: Absolutely want to drive the RHO for a typical day of us to compare...but like the Tundra TRD Pro (with a hybrid drivetrain) I just wish the fuel mileage was more significant (like high teens) <- However regardless of engine it's still moving a lot of mass/rolling resistance and block shaped! Reminds me of an old 4wd magazine issue - swapping an inline 6 to a 460 in their project Bronco....noted fuel mileage for mellow driving wasn't that much worse given the added torque/etc. vs. the at times struggling inline 6.
Geography, traffic flow and typical speeds (+ Canadian lobsters): Given my typical 9mpg (metro-Phoenix) and not much higher on SW roadtrips - it's very difficult to compare against other forum members simply due to Geography/State speed limits... oh and grey haired/AARP 55yr old with a 20yr old mindset still and daily WFO on-ramp habits.
- Living in Arizona it's not unusual to be in a pack of 90mph+ traffic casually cruising to Tucson to to Las Vegas for the weekend. Spotting those from slower speed limit areas is obvious as they most often provided yellow or red Mustang convertible rentals while on holiday and even the posted 75mph seems intimidating, not to mention the approaching herds of minivans/SUV's navigating past them! I'm 100% convinced that the rental companies at Sky Harbor are mandated by AZ-DOT to provide these overt colors
- When my eldest was 15.5 and had his driving permit - I had him drive a longer stretch across the Navajo Reservation in our 2017 Raptor. Got a rare cat nap/attempting to display 'some' confidence in his abilities... awakening/glancing over as we finally hit a small town for a break I saw 19mpg average?! Honestly thought something was potentially wrong until Griffin replied "well Dad, maybe that's what happens when you don't floor it/frequently pass people AND drive the posted speed limit!"
The RHO is another Stellantis turd. Add the RHO to the list of recent Stellantis FAILS.
HornetNew ChargerRHODoes everyone say that about the Raptor? My guess is no. I think the RHO is superior to the Raptor in every way. If Ram followed Ford's approach and started with a lower power version (e.g. the RHO) and then released the TRX, I don't think the consensus would be that the RHO was a failure. I think it's a pretty bad ass truck - and other than missing the exhaust note and a little bit of performance vs. the TRX, I'm not sure how you get to the conclusion that it's a failure. 75% or 80% of the TRX performance, identical chassis, same looks and better interior for 30k less (or 35-40k less if compared to FE) doesn't equate to a fail in my book.The RHO is another Stellantis turd. Add the RHO to the list of recent Stellantis FAILS.
