F150 w/ Eco Boost Enough

And from the data I posted, its fine, even fully loaded. A 4x4 with HD is only slightly different, and I used the heavier 5.0 V8 numbers to make it look CLOSER than it actually is, a 4X4 Crewcab Eco only moves the numbers around by a bit, everything still adds up to not maxed out, basically the it puts the OP within 200# of GVWR. For a full time tow rig, the F250 is a better choice, for the rest of us who use our trucks as a daily driver, the HD is perfect. (I don't own one btw).
And mike, it makes no difference that the HD "only adds" 150# to the front axle, because it is nearly impossible to overload it, and then only the WDH would need tweaking.
And Mike its you who argues and posted false info on the HD package, that's why I posted the AcTuAl numbers.
And besides, your trailer numbers and my truck numbers allowed for a total of 2400 of people and stuff. That's kinda ridiculous, about 1/2 that amount is probably correct. Tongue weight should be managed, no matter what the rig, right?

OH MY GOD!!!

OP, get your weights and compare it to what Ford says it can handle. If the Ecoboost can handle the weights, its fine. It looks like the Ford should handle the weight and still give you some wiggle room for extra stuff. If not, its up to you to decide if you want to push the boundaries (not recommended) or purchase a heavier truck.

Who cares what the frame thickness is, so long as Ford stands behind it to carry X lbs?

The bickering that has gone on in this thread is reminiscent to what is wrong with this forum. There are so many intelligent people and helpful threads on this forum that are polluted with the bickering and brand bashing. We are robbing ourselves of talented people and helpful information with this nonsense.

Before someone tells me that they didn't force me to read this post, that is not my point. Some people on here need to either grow up and act like adults or go camping in a national forest with no wi-fi connection.

Hybridhunter wrote:
2013 ecoboost F150 LOAD CALCULATION - (Specs from Ford Fleet)

ENG - 3.5
GVWR - 8200

PAYLOAD - 2590 minus 1000#tongue + 500#stuff + 600# ppl = 490# remaining capacity

frGAWR - 3750 - minus 300# (half the passenger wt)- curb = 300# remaining capacity

rrGAWR - 4800 - minus 1K# tongue + 500# junk +300# people +rr curb wt = 513# remaining capacity

frCURB - 3150
rrCURB - 2404
TOTALCURB - 5554

There you haved it folks, 500# payload RESERVE, 513# capacity remaining on the rear axle, 300# remaining on the front. Thats a lot of baloney the OP could carry on top of the trailer, his family, water, generator, and so on.
Happy trails folks, don't believe Mike when the 1/2 ton bashing starts, the F150 is in no way a 1/2 ton. It's actually a consumer 1 ton. (Flame away, but first answer, how many tons is 2590#?)

Oh brother, how old are you?

The OPs dry weight is 6900 lbs, his low trailer GVWR is 8200 lbs. 13% of 8200 lbs is 1066 lbs not 1000 lbs. 14% of 8200 lbs is 1148 lbs, not 1000 lbs.

Crew Cab 4WD HD

Not Fleet:

GFAWR = 4050 lbs
GRAWR = 4800 lbs
GVWR = 8200 lbs

BTW, brochure payloads are for a totally stripped truck. NO power anything, no carpet but vinyl floor and seats. Payload of the actual truck goes by the Government MANDATED Tread Act sticker which will be much less.

The debate was not payload but guess you didn't look at that. It was hitch receiver rating and front axle rating. A standard NONE HD Crew Cab 4WD 157" WB truck has a 3900 lbs Front Axle rating and a .150 frame thickness. The HD option only adds an insignificant 150 lbs to 4050 lbs front axle rating and has the same frame. I linked and gave a page number even but guess you didn't read that. :R This is a big deal because with the longer 157" wheelbase, more weight will be shifted towards the front axle from weight in the bed of the truck and the backseat.

The truck is near it's max hitch rating with 13% and is right at it with 14%. OP will be over if he loads the trailer front heavy or if it's front heavy by design.

The HD truck is marginal. What is so hard to see. Comprehension?

Then you take to arguing about payload which was never brought up about a HD F150 in any of my posts. You're arguing over nothing that was said.

Ignorance is rampant in the thread.

Go ahead and post more ignorance as I'm done arguing. When you argue with an idiot, some times it's hard to tell which is the idiot. So I'm done.

2013 ecoboost F150 LOAD CALCULATION - (Specs from Ford Fleet)

ENG - 3.5
GVWR - 8200

PAYLOAD - 2590 minus 1000#tongue + 500#stuff + 600# ppl = 490# remaining capacity

frGAWR - 3750 - minus 300# (half the passenger wt)- curb = 300# remaining capacity

rrGAWR - 4800 - minus 1K# tongue + 500# junk +300# people +rr curb wt = 513# remaining capacity

frCURB - 3150
rrCURB - 2404
TOTALCURB - 5554

There you haved it folks, 500# payload RESERVE, 513# capacity remaining on the rear axle, 300# remaining on the front. Thats a lot of baloney the OP could carry on top of the trailer, his family, water, generator, and so on.
Happy trails folks, don't believe Mike when the 1/2 ton bashing starts, the F150 is in no way a 1/2 ton. It's actually a consumer 1 ton. (Flame away, but first answer, how many tons is 2590#?)

Just tell me where your pulling your trailer so we can avoid you.

I can only image you're the one severly overloaded, riding a wheely with 8 bikes on your front bumper, a canoe on top of your pickup, a Golf Cart in the bed, and your hitch dragging the pavement, with your trailer bumper pointing to the sky.

Happy trails.:)

Mike Up wrote:


your facts are all wrong as I pointed out with references and links. Only a fool would ignore what was right in front of his face. :S

Which facts Mike? Oh, and the F150 can also handle 14% tongue weight, if the trailer is loaded incorrectly, unless you think going over the "hitch rating" by a 1.6% is a deal breaker.....
Factor in the weight transfer of a properly setup WDH, and a starting tongue weight of 15% would still likely be manageable, but that is way to much tongue weight, and silly.

Hybridhunter wrote:
Gee Mike, you have been proven to be wrong on virtually all points, And deceiving with your "non-facts". You have more what ifs in your post than Chicken Little could dream up.

The F150 HD (which are all long wheelbase models, including the Supercab), has a thicker (.150") frame, as I inferred. It specs out a lot beefier than the standard F150 frame. Care to post the comparable F250 frame specs? Hmmm? The rear 9.75 axle has a rep as super tough. And the CC F150 HD still has a rear axle load capacity of in excess of 2500#, so after connecting the fully loaded trailer, the OP could still add 1500# of stuff people, junk etc, in the box, in the cab, or both.

The trailer the OP mentioned is easily managable, when fully loaded. Tongue weight is a "managed" number, any time you add load. So keeping the tongue weight around 1K,(12.5%) is both feasible, and safe, and gets an appropriate amount of load on the truck, and trailer.

Bottom line, Mike is either deceiving, twisting facts, or inserting opinions as "facts".

Amen!

Hybridhunter wrote:
Gee Mike, you have been proven to be wrong on virtually all points, And deceiving with your "non-facts". You have more what ifs in your post than Chicken Little could dream up.

The F150 HD (which are all long wheelbase models, including the Supercab), has a thicker (.150") frame, as I inferred. It specs out a lot beefier than the standard F150 frame. Care to post the comparable F250 frame specs? Hmmm? The rear 9.75 axle has a rep as super tough. And the CC F150 HD still has a rear axle load capacity of in excess of 2500#, so after connecting the fully loaded trailer, the OP could still add 1500# of stuff people, junk etc, in the box, in the cab, or both.

The trailer the OP mentioned is easily managable, when fully loaded. Tongue weight is a "managed" number, any time you add load. So keeping the tongue weight around 1K,(12.5%) is both feasible, and safe, and gets an appropriate amount of load on the truck, and trailer.

Bottom line, Mike is either deceiving, twisting facts, or inserting opinions as "facts".

your facts are all wrong as I pointed out with references and links. Only a fool would ignore what was right in front of his face. :S

You go ahead and keep spreading misinformation. It's fruitless in trying to show facts to someone who doesn't want to see them.

Gee Mike, you have been proven to be wrong on virtually all points, And deceiving with your "non-facts". You have more what ifs in your post than Chicken Little could dream up.

The F150 HD (which are all long wheelbase models, including the Supercab), has a thicker (.150") frame, as I inferred. It specs out a lot beefier than the standard F150 frame. Care to post the comparable F250 frame specs? Hmmm? The rear 9.75 axle has a rep as super tough. And the CC F150 HD still has a rear axle load capacity of in excess of 2500#, so after connecting the fully loaded trailer, the OP could still add 1500# of stuff people, junk etc, in the box, in the cab, or both.

The trailer the OP mentioned is easily managable, when fully loaded. Tongue weight is a "managed" number, any time you add load. So keeping the tongue weight around 1K,(12.5%) is both feasible, and safe, and gets an appropriate amount of load on the truck, and trailer.

Bottom line, Mike is either deceiving, twisting facts, or inserting opinions as "facts".

joshuajim wrote:

No, instead of conjecture and speculation, you finally did some real investigation for YOURSELF!

Actually NO! I did your work as the OP obviously is considering a Crew Cab for his "family" and their bunkhouse trailer. You should had put the effort in and did the research yourself to see there's no frame upgrade on a Crew Cab F150! ;)