2017 Ford Super Duty Tech and Specs Revealed

The new Ford looks really impressive to me- I love the bigger fuel tank and the numbers speak for themselves. I absolutely love the King Ranch interior!

Still, I can't seam to get over the 2004 Ford 6.0 fiasco I went through and doubt I can ever bring myself to purchase another Ford product. It wasn't the fact the motor was bad but the way I was treated by Ford and the several dealerships I worked with...

That said- Congrats to Ford and really to all of us. Competition breeds innovation and Fords latest and greatest will bring out the best in the others- so we all win!

Cummins12V98 wrote:
"See, you finally got it. B&W can't make a hitch rated at 25K for Ford and others can. It only took you about 5 posts to figure it out."

Just spoke to B&W my side to side mimi shock absorber that has a small leak. They are sending me out a new one today.

I asked about the 20K Puck system rating on the Ford and GM's. They said they test to the weakest component as in puck attachment and base footprint. RAM has the strongest frame/puck attachment and largest base so they were able to give it a 25K rating. They could not give the other two more than 20K as their stringent testing and high standards would not allow it.

Thanks for confirming they are not able to build a higher rated capacity hitch like other manufactures are.

"See, you finally got it. B&W can't make a hitch rated at 25K for Ford and others can. It only took you about 5 posts to figure it out."

Just spoke to B&W my side to side mimi shock absorber that has a small leak. They are sending me out a new one today.

I asked about the 20K Puck system rating on the Ford and GM's. They said they test to the weakest component as in puck attachment and base footprint. RAM has the strongest frame/puck attachment and largest base so they were able to give it a 25K rating. They could not give the other two more than 20K as their stringent testing and high standards would not allow it.

UGA33 wrote:

CumminsDriver wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:
Troy I really don't care what the "capacity" is so please tell me what the RAWR on the 350 and 450 Dually's are.

Same ol bolt on fenders sort of a combo of the last two styles.

Is there actually an engine under all that plastic and tubing???

Very weak Puck system placement/attachment still as B&W will only rate their hitch to 20K, same exact head on a RAM hitch is rated at 25K.

I actually think it's a good looking truck and with a Gas engine it's one I would consider for sure!

F450 RAWR is 9900 lbs. From what I understand the F350 and F450 use a similar rear end now.

I actually prefer the Ford fenders over a ram for two simple reasons: Access to the bed on the Ford is better over the swooping ram fenders that block access. And simplistic repair. I can replace a ford fender without the truck even entering a paint both.

There's actually a very big engine under that hood.

After owning a 6.7 Powerstroke for 4 years I would take it over any gas engine offering.

Also the long wheel base trucks have a 48 gallon diesel tank

Troy,

What rear axle is that? Obviously it's not the same as the 2016 F450. It looks big, but not as big as the previous model. Maybe a way to shave some weight from the truck as the S130 was probably a bit overkill for the pickups.

Rich

Rich, the new DRW axle that replaced the Dana 80, 110 and 130 is the Dana M300. The 350 DRW will also use it.

There will be 2 versions. A light duty and a heavy duty version. The 350 DRW pickups and C&C trucks will use the light duty version and the 450 pickups and 450/550 C&C trucks will use the heavy duty version.

The new SRW axle added to the lineup is the Dana M275. It will be in diesel equipped 350 SRW trucks along with diesel 250s with the High Capacity tow package.

Josh,
Thanks for the update... Keep them coming!
Troy

Cummins12V98 wrote:

Travlingman wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

Travlingman wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:


Very weak Puck system placement/attachment still as B&W will only rate their hitch to 20K, same exact head on a RAM hitch is rated at 25K.

Weak puck system? One company has a hitch that is rated at 27.5K for the pucks, another 24K. Looks to me like the weak one is the company that can only design a hitch that is rated for 20K.

I think you should look at the way some build things and rate them at a much higher rating than reality.

The EXACT same system is used on the RAM with a 25K rating, the ONLY difference is the puck spacing and possibly the mounting of the pucks. If B&W could justify 25K they sure would. You really believe Craftsman when they claim their ShopVac "developed 6hp" ???

If it is the same exact system why is it not rated 25K then? Because, it is not the same. You first say it is Ford's weak puck system, but when confronted with other manufactures making systems rated at 27.5K you come up with s "ShopVac" comparison. Face it, your beloved B&W is behind the times and needs to step it up. And by the way, I have a B& in my truck now, but I am not in love with it like you are yours. Sorry, I don't have a picture of it to post.:B

Let me help you with that!

Please explain why B&W rates the RAM puck system at 25K and only 20K on the GM's and Ford. Don't you think they would rate them at 25 if they could??????

See, you finally got it. B&W can't make a hitch rated at 25K for Ford and others can. It only took you about 5 posts to figure it out.

Me Again wrote:

Bedlam wrote:



The under carriage changed two or three times in the last 18 years, but the body style remained mostly unchanged. You might want to look at replacement parts and what years they cover to give you an idea of when these changes occurred.

The Ford Rep himself said in the video first new Super Duty in 18 years! They went right into the frame details. This is an extreme catch up effort. Chris

Where are the nay sayers on the rigid frame VS C channel flexi model? Maybe the tailgate can be opened now on the ramp.

Believe me all these updates are great for competition but to wait 18 years just shows the blind loyalty some have.

YES I am a RAM/Cummins guy for good reason but I was not a fan of the 3rd gen trucks 5.9 or 6.7.

"my guess is that Ford widened the spacing on their puck system for 2017"

It appears to be the same.

Travlingman wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

Travlingman wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:


Very weak Puck system placement/attachment still as B&W will only rate their hitch to 20K, same exact head on a RAM hitch is rated at 25K.

Weak puck system? One company has a hitch that is rated at 27.5K for the pucks, another 24K. Looks to me like the weak one is the company that can only design a hitch that is rated for 20K.

I think you should look at the way some build things and rate them at a much higher rating than reality.

The EXACT same system is used on the RAM with a 25K rating, the ONLY difference is the puck spacing and possibly the mounting of the pucks. If B&W could justify 25K they sure would. You really believe Craftsman when they claim their ShopVac "developed 6hp" ???

If it is the same exact system why is it not rated 25K then? Because, it is not the same. You first say it is Ford's weak puck system, but when confronted with other manufactures making systems rated at 27.5K you come up with s "ShopVac" comparison. Face it, your beloved B&W is behind the times and needs to step it up. And by the way, I have a B& in my truck now, but I am not in love with it like you are yours. Sorry, I don't have a picture of it to post.:B

Let me help you with that!

Please explain why B&W rates the RAM puck system at 25K and only 20K on the GM's and Ford. Don't you think they would rate them at 25 if they could??????

Bedlam wrote:



The under carriage changed two or three times in the last 18 years, but the body style remained mostly unchanged. You might want to look at replacement parts and what years they cover to give you an idea of when these changes occurred.

The Ford Rep himself said in the video first new Super Duty in 18 years! They went right into the frame details. This is an extreme catch up effort. Chris

Dana M275.

I'm going to guess that means a 275mm ring gear or 10.83 inches. Slightly upsized from the Sterling 10.5 if my guess is correct.

And 300mm equals 11.811 inches. Edged out RAM by 0.011 inches.

(Sarcasm on) There is another bragging point to write home about.

Adam