Forum Discussion

DLHarrison's avatar
DLHarrison
Explorer
Sep 11, 2017

2004 Silverado Towing Capacity

Hey Gang - I need a sanity check to go over my calculations. I have a a 2004 1500 Extended Cab Shortbed Silverado 4 x 4 with a 5.3 liter engine, HD towing capacity, 3.73 rear end fitted with E Rated truck tires. The weight of the truck, loaded for traveling is 5,760 lbs (actual weighed weight with trailer hitch, full tank of gas, my wife and our dog, extra 5 gallon of gas). The only thing that is carried in the bed of the truck is the extra gas can.

The travel trailer is a 30 foot Heartland Mallard with a dry weight of 5048 pounds and a dry hitch weight of 464 pounds. The loaded weight of the trailer ( full tank of water, two batteries, two loaded propane bottles, food, cooking and camping equipment, and miscellaneous stuff) is 6,480 pounds. The total actual weight was 12,260 pounds (weighed at a local grain handling facility in town). The maximum GCWR for the truck is 13000 pounds. The difference is 740 pounds (13000 lbs - 12260 lbs) so I am under the maximum weight for the truck. I tow with a E2 Weight Distribution Hitch with 1,000 pound rated torsion bars on the WDH. Please review my calcs and give me you comments. Thanks!
Tow Vehicles
  • Old-Biscuit's avatar
    Old-Biscuit
    Explorer III
    Sep 13, 2017
    TomG2 wrote:


    Not sure what your point was in providing the definition of words we all know. You really think should is not a strong enough word for them to use? When someone who designs and builds something as complex as a pickup truck tells me that I "should never" do something,I listen. But I do not know more than them. I admit it.

    Have a good day. You obviously don't like what Ford or I have to say on the subject.


    LAWYERS wrote it.......
    IF if was a BIG NO NO they would have used the words

    SHALL NOT vs should never

    And has NOTHING to do with FORD...RAM, CHEVY, GMC use the same language 'should never'. Which is a 'recommendation NOT a requirement.
    Simple.-----
  • TomG2's avatar
    TomG2
    Explorer
    Sep 12, 2017
    Old-Biscuit wrote:

    I have negotiated/written several Company/Union Contracts and understand the meaning of 'words'.


    So have I. I have also written purchase agreements for the state highway department. One can leave out the consideration of GVWR when giving towing advice. I don't. That might be called "misleading by exclusion". Those are nice words for something else.

    Not sure what your point was in providing the definition of words we all know. You really think should is not a strong enough word for them to use? When someone who designs and builds something as complex as a pickup truck tells me that I "should never" do something,I listen. But I do not know more than them. I admit it.

    Have a good day. You obviously don't like what Ford or I have to say on the subject.
  • HuckleberryHunt's avatar
    HuckleberryHunt
    Explorer
    Sep 12, 2017
    IMHO, that's a doable combination. Ideal? No. But doable. It won't be the most comfortable to drive, you won't win any races uphill or in a headwind, and you'll want to exercise a little more caution when loading and towing, but no reason you can't get from point A to point B with that setup. I pulled a 6k lbs (loaded) with a 2003 Silverado, similar specs, and it did just fine. Was happy when I switched to a 3/4 ton diesel, but the 1/2 ton got us around for ten years without incident. Not that I wouldn't recommend a more stout towing vehicle, but sometimes that's just not in the cards. For what it's worth.
  • Old-Biscuit's avatar
    Old-Biscuit
    Explorer III
    Sep 12, 2017
    TomG2 wrote:
    My quote. In a carefully worded statement by the Ford Engineers (and lawyers), they state very clearly, "The combined weight of occupants and cargo should never exceed xxx pounds". That number is derived by subtracting from the GVWR (Gross Vehicle Weight Rating). Note that it does not say, "Unless additional people want to ride on the tailgate or hood". it does not say, "Maybe", "Sort of" or any other ambiguous term.

    One can say that it does not matter, that it is a conspiracy to sell more trucks, or that it does not apply in your case. That is fine with me. I can read English and I know what it says.


    Contractual language
    The Big 3 ---Shall, Will & Should

    Shall – Requirement: If a statement does not contain the word “shall” it is not a requirement.

    Facts or Declaration of Purpose: Will is used to indicate a statement of fact.

    Should – Goals, non-mandatory provisions: Should is used to indicate a goal which must be addressed by the design team but is not a mandatory requirement

    The MFG. LAWYERS wrote that 'carefully worded' statement and fully understand its intent.
    I have negotiated/written several Company/Union Contracts and understand the meaning of 'words'

    'Should' intent is a 'goal' not a 'requirement' to be meet.
  • TomG2's avatar
    TomG2
    Explorer
    Sep 12, 2017
    My quote. In a carefully worded statement by the Ford Engineers (and lawyers), they state very clearly, "The combined weight of occupants and cargo should never exceed xxx pounds". That number is derived by subtracting from the GVWR (Gross Vehicle Weight Rating). Note that it does not say, "Unless additional people want to ride on the tailgate or hood". it does not say, "Maybe", "Sort of" or any other ambiguous term.

    One can say that it does not matter, that it is a conspiracy to sell more trucks, or that it does not apply in your case. That is fine with me. I can read English and I know what it says.
  • TomG2's avatar
    TomG2
    Explorer
    Sep 12, 2017
    JIMNLIN wrote:
    Ford says it all on the gawrs can = gvwr subject.


    Got it. Great. A few folks on here seem to think that Max rear axle weights combined with max front axle weights are the actual upper limit. When Ford says "GVWR is the Maximum total weight including all cargo and passengers", they are looking at the total vehicle and not individual components.

    That word "Can" is a big part of your quote that some may not notice.
  • JIMNLIN's avatar
    JIMNLIN
    Explorer III
    Sep 12, 2017
    Here is the deal. Ford says the front axle is good for 4,000 pounds and the rear is also good for 4,000 pounds. But here is where you take off in the wrong direction. When Ford also says that the Gross weight of the vehicle shall not exceed 7,500 pounds, you turn a blind eye as if the Ford engineers suddenly became inept and don't know what they are saying.

    Now your just flappin' your jaws. Nowhere have I said or indicated Ford engineers are inept. Lets stick with facts what I or Ford has said.
    One fact I've repeated and you have ignored is from fleet Ford..... **Front and rear GAWRs will, in all cases, sum to a number equal to or greater than the GVWR for the particular vehicle.**

    Ford says it all on the gawrs can = gvwr subject.
  • TomG2's avatar
    TomG2
    Explorer
    Sep 12, 2017
    "Goat" (not his real name) purchased a farm three hundred miles away in Missouri that was covered in Hickory trees. He figured to make his fortune hauling firewood back to Illinois. He knew, like some on here, that all that really mattered were rear axle ratings. Thus the dually rear axle. When "Goat" was not at his soft serve ice cream stand he was destroying his F-100. Worked for a little while. At least it made more sense than the chevy engined Jeep that he hitched to a goose neck trailer to increase his load capacity. Rear axles were the weak part of that deal. Thank goodness, he finally got in the bar business and left the hauling business to his customers. True story of my buddy and a real American entrepreneur.
  • Grit_dog's avatar
    Grit_dog
    Navigator
    Sep 12, 2017
    TomG2 wrote:
    Grit dog wrote:
    So bed loads of firewood killed the engine and multiple transmissions? Mmmmmmk
    How many loads of wood per transmission?
    I've been around enough trucks to have to go get my hip boots on to get near that one!

    Believe whatcha want.


    Since you don't seem to know:

    "The average weight of a cord of wood is between 4,700 and 6,075 pounds."

    If you don't think that puts some strain on a 1972 F-100, you don't know as much about trucks as you claim. Believe what you want to.

    BTW, the rear axle held up fine. If you are not a redneck, you probably don't understand my buddy.


    Haha, I'm redneck enough to haul my camper on my, by some, woefully overloaded 2500 Dodge. But it doesn't weigh as much as a cord of your swamp logger buddy's wet green cords of white oak! Cheers man!
    Either way, has about 0 bearing on the OPs question. Apologize for the super thread jack.

About Travel Trailer Group

44,029 PostsLatest Activity: Jan 21, 2025