Huge discrepancies

Here's the funny thing...for those who stated the F350/F250 had identical brakes. Yes, since 2012 they are the same but for the model year BulldawgFan has, the brakes are not the same:

2011 SuperDuty Specifications wrote:
Brakes — Vacuum-boost (SRW gas and F-250 SRW diesel)
Brakes — Hydro-boost (F-350 SRW diesel and DRW)

Just wanted to throw that little nugget out there. ;)

BulldawgFan wrote:

...
Perhaps I am wrong...but only in Canada. Haha. Only kidding,
...

We're used to it. :)

You know, if Spoon is right and the *only* diff between the F250 and F350 is the rear spring set, I wouldn't hesitate to throw on a pair of air bags and pretend your F250 is an F350.

But usually it's just not that simple. Like the difference between a regular F150 and one with the HD Payload package. There are suspension and tire differences (that can be fixed), but the HD payload truck's rear axle and wheels are also different.

So, except where the differences are really simple and obvious, I prefer to stick with the manufacturer's GVWR rather than try to upgrade. Even if the manufacturer's GVWRs don't make sense all the time.

Nope. The tow vehicle only "knows" how much it is hauling and towing. It has no idea what the ccc of your trailer is. If it is overloaded, it is overloaded. Put X amount of weight on the tongue and behind it, and that is what it will feel. Period. In some way, you seem to be saying that the Toyota should be happy that you did not fill the trailer to the limit and you are probably right. Maybe you will get a thank you card for not overloading it even more, but I doubt it.

TomG2 wrote:
Explain how your pickup knows that you have unused CCC capacity and benefits from it? I say that if it is overloaded by 300 pounds, then it is overloaded by 300 pounds and has no idea why.

Toyota says that, properly loaded, my truck can safely tow a 10,300 lbs trailer. The brakes don't care if that is a 5th wheel, flat deck of bricks, etc. Therefore they believe that the Tundra's brakes plus the brakes of the 10,300 lbs trailer are sufficient enough to safely bring my vehicle to a halt. Furthermore, they met federal standards to make that claim.

My next trailer will be 6500 lbs dry with a max wet weight of 9500 lbs. I know that my total dry weight will be around 7000 lbs with options, possibly another 500 to 700 lbs of gear for a long trip. That means that my trailer manufacturer says that braking system on the trailer can safely stop 9500 lbs.

Since my trailer will usually be at around 7500 lbs, my trailer brakes will have 2000 lbs in reserve braking capacity.

The SAFETY ASPECT gets thrown around so often on this forum. They say the half tons can pull the weight, but can they STOP the weight? Well, my rig will be rated to stop a full ton MORE than I will be carrying (we aren't even going to get into the fact that the Tundra is rated to tow up to either 3500 or 5000 lbs without requiring brakes. That would further add to my point, but I am not even going to add that argument).

So, how do my brakes (SAFETY... right?) know if that additional 300 lbs is in the trailer or the bed of the truck? The brakes neither know nor do they care. I am still 1700 lbs below my brake rating.

Now, everyone agrees that a heavier tow vehicle is safer. By adding 300 additional pounds to the tow vehicle weight, that makes the truck that much less susceptible to sway and being "wagged by the tail", right? Again... SAFETY.

Understand my argument now?

spoon059 wrote:
....snippp...

My Tundra is rated around 1500 lbs. I don't think its going to fall apart if I load it to 1800 lbs (20% over my payload) and drive a 2000 mile round trip to Florida. It wouldn't be unsafe either, as that extra 300 lbs resting on the truck is countered by 2000 lbs of spare CCC in the trailer that isn't used.

....snip......

Explain how your pickup knows that you have unused CCC capacity and benefits from it? I say that if it is overloaded by 300 pounds, then it is overloaded by 300 pounds and has no idea why.

BulldawgFan wrote:
How funny would that be, to pull into a campground with my diesel 250 pulling a teardrop!I would just shrug and say "I am a regular on rv.net and was told to make sure I had enough truck! Maybe I should have bought a dualley!"

Funny enough, my good friend and camping buddy has a early 2000's F250 with the 6.0 diesel. He pulls a 12 foot box Colesman pop up camper.

Its hilarious to see. He had a F150 and the pop up. Bought the F250 diesel with the intention of buying a 5th wheel. Well... ended up getting divorced and never bought the 5er. The pop up meets his needs and was in great shape, so he is still driving that combo around!

spoon059 wrote:

brulaz wrote:
Do you truly believe that there is no difference between an F250 and an F350SRW other than "the exception of a slightly larger bump stop"?

Just looking at the 2015 brochure, how do you explain the increased
loadfloor height: a full 2". Clearly the F350 has heavier duty rear springs that give you the increased GVWR and payload.

Perhaps he was slightly oversimplifying... but there is really very little difference between the F250 and F350. The engine, transmission, axles, wheels, brakes, cooling system, steering system, body, frame, etc etc are all IDENTICAL on the F250 and F350. The F350 has an additional overload spring and 2" blocks in the rear.

Someone can go out and bolt on the overload spring or add a supplemental airbag system to an F250 and it will be as good as, or better, than a F350.

His point was that these payload and tow ratings aren't the "SAFETY ISSUE" some on here want it to be. They are numbers agreed upon by engineers who know the fail point, lawyers who know the liability point, accountants who know the cost point and marketing who know the price point. Manufacturers want to decrease liability and warranty repair issues... they have a LOT of reserve built into these trucks. I have every reason to believe these trucks to pull RV's can safely go 10%... 20%... maybe even 50% OVER their rated payload with very minimal chance of causing premature wear. How many miles does the average RVer tow per year? I would estimate less than 5000 miles per year (on average). 50% over your payload for less than 5,000 miles per year and you will likely never over stress anything. On the other hand, if you are a farmer hauling to market or a landscaper hauling around every single day for 15 or 20,000 miles then you are going to have much higher likelihood of wearing out your truck faster.

Its a balancing act. Claim the bigger number than your competitor and keep warranty claims down while increasing vehicle longevity and making the average idiot understand what their truck can do. People can't figure out easy enough concepts like payload, GVWR and GCWR. It would get a LOT fuzzier if you started hearing things like max GVWR when towing less than 5,000 on paved roads vs a lower max GVWR when towing in excess of 12,000 miles on gravel roads vs towing a rounded trailer vs towing a 5th wheel vs this vs that...

My Tundra is rated around 1500 lbs. I don't think its going to fall apart if I load it to 1800 lbs (20% over my payload) and drive a 2000 mile round trip to Florida. It wouldn't be unsafe either, as that extra 300 lbs resting on the truck is countered by 2000 lbs of spare CCC in the trailer that isn't used.

Again... I don't advocate that anyone ever go over their ratings. I just don't buy all the SAFETY propaganda that is thrown around when its convenient to marginalize a group of truck owners because you have a heavier truck.

I do think he is wrong about the GVWR of a F350SRW. Highest I can find is 11,400 lbs.

You get me, you really get me! Yes, I am somewhat oversimplifying. That is correct. And you are also right, and I was mistaken. The highest GVWR you can order on a 350SRW is indeed 11,400. It was a couple of weeks ago when I went through the Build and Price process and I forgot. Never happens, haha, right.

The point does remain however, you can "select" either the 10,000 lbs GVWR OR the 11,400 lb GVRW. And you know what, nothing changes mechanically. Nothing. Just the number on the door. That point remains the same. Now, as I said before, overloading would still not be legal, due to the rating. I however, was only making two points, one of mechanical capability.

To the point of difference in the rear springs, actually if you option in the RV towing package to the 250, you get the same spring pack. Exact same, by the part number. But still have the 10,000 GVWR. Due again, to the rating system on the 250. At that point, the only difference that remains are those 2" blocks.

I have studied this quiet a bit. I have done so because we have considered an upgrade to a 5th wheel. So I have researched, and what I learned, I could "buy a higher rating" with no real difference in truck for (as I want it equipped) around $72 grand. Or I can keep my current rig, mechanically the same, that I only owe less than $20K on.

But now it's a bit of a moot point. I am off 5th wheels. Now I think I may add a Little Guy Silver Shadow teardrop camper to the stable of toys. I think I have enough truck for that. Can't wait to look at them at the Atlanta RV Show later this month.

How funny would that be, to pull into a campground with my diesel 250 pulling a teardrop!I would just shrug and say "I am a regular on rv.net and was told to make sure I had enough truck! Maybe I should have bought a dualley!"

spoon059 wrote:

...
I just don't buy all the SAFETY propaganda that is thrown around when its convenient to marginalize a group of truck owners because you have a heavier truck.
...

???

BulldawgFan is turning your arguments around to marginalize those same truck owners.

He says Payload ratings are arbitrary, and he uses as proof the fact that his F250 Diesel Lariat has a lower payload than an F150 HD Payload truck. In his own words: payload rating has "Nothing to do with actual real capacity" and "the proof is right there as a comparison of these two posts. An F150 has a higher MECHANICAL CAPACITY than a HD 250? Nope."

His F250 with the lower payload has a higher "MECHANICAL CAPACITY" (or whatever) than the F150 with the higher payload. Or so he claims.

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

brulaz wrote:

Do you truly believe that there is no difference between an F250 and an F350SRW other than "the exception of a slightly larger bump stop"?

Just looking at the 2015 brochure, how do you explain the increased
loadfloor height: a full 2". Clearly the F350 has heavier duty rear springs that give you the increased GVWR and payload.

I do agree that some ratings are arbitrary. For example, most F250's in Ontario are ordered with a downgrade from 10,000# GVWR to 9900# GVWR simply for tax and legal reasons. But that is a small and conservative change (meaning it actually lowers the GVWR).

Looking through the 2015 Canadian Superduty brochure, I see no way to upgrade an F350SRW to 12,500# GVWR. You can get to the 13,500-14,000# GVWR with a dually.

You are wrong. Pure and simple.

Perhaps I am wrong...but only in Canada. Haha. Only kidding, I was mistaken on one thing I will address in next post...

brulaz wrote:
Do you truly believe that there is no difference between an F250 and an F350SRW other than "the exception of a slightly larger bump stop"?

Just looking at the 2015 brochure, how do you explain the increased
loadfloor height: a full 2". Clearly the F350 has heavier duty rear springs that give you the increased GVWR and payload.

Perhaps he was slightly oversimplifying... but there is really very little difference between the F250 and F350. The engine, transmission, axles, wheels, brakes, cooling system, steering system, body, frame, etc etc are all IDENTICAL on the F250 and F350. The F350 has an additional overload spring and 2" blocks in the rear.

Someone can go out and bolt on the overload spring or add a supplemental airbag system to an F250 and it will be as good as, or better, than a F350.

His point was that these payload and tow ratings aren't the "SAFETY ISSUE" some on here want it to be. They are numbers agreed upon by engineers who know the fail point, lawyers who know the liability point, accountants who know the cost point and marketing who know the price point. Manufacturers want to decrease liability and warranty repair issues... they have a LOT of reserve built into these trucks. I have every reason to believe these trucks to pull RV's can safely go 10%... 20%... maybe even 50% OVER their rated payload with very minimal chance of causing premature wear. How many miles does the average RVer tow per year? I would estimate less than 5000 miles per year (on average). 50% over your payload for less than 5,000 miles per year and you will likely never over stress anything. On the other hand, if you are a farmer hauling to market or a landscaper hauling around every single day for 15 or 20,000 miles then you are going to have much higher likelihood of wearing out your truck faster.

Its a balancing act. Claim the bigger number than your competitor and keep warranty claims down while increasing vehicle longevity and making the average idiot understand what their truck can do. People can't figure out easy enough concepts like payload, GVWR and GCWR. It would get a LOT fuzzier if you started hearing things like max GVWR when towing less than 5,000 on paved roads vs a lower max GVWR when towing in excess of 12,000 miles on gravel roads vs towing a rounded trailer vs towing a 5th wheel vs this vs that...

My Tundra is rated around 1500 lbs. I don't think its going to fall apart if I load it to 1800 lbs (20% over my payload) and drive a 2000 mile round trip to Florida. It wouldn't be unsafe either, as that extra 300 lbs resting on the truck is countered by 2000 lbs of spare CCC in the trailer that isn't used.

Again... I don't advocate that anyone ever go over their ratings. I just don't buy all the SAFETY propaganda that is thrown around when its convenient to marginalize a group of truck owners because you have a heavier truck.

I do think he is wrong about the GVWR of a F350SRW. Highest I can find is 11,400 lbs.