J2807 SAE towing standards
Do all trucks, all models follow the standards now?
Forum Discussion
drittal wrote:
I'm saying you can't compare numbers from a 2011-2014 to a 2015 because all those changes made add up to different capability.
Ford Fairy Dust.
Ford has been playing this game for years.
Not to say that GM and Dodge are innocent but Ford bends the rules more.- I'm saying you can't compare numbers from a 2011-2014 to a 2015 because all those changes made add up to different capability.
drittal wrote:
Im reading a lot of increased, improved, and better...
Okay. What do you see that was increased, improved, or better that help increase the tow rating by 2,100 lbs besides weight savings?
Did they increase engine power? No.
Did they change transmissions? No
Did they change brakes? No.
Did they use different axles? No.
Did they use different leaf springs? No.
Did they increase the yield strength of the frame? No.
So you are saying it is only because of the frame that there is a 2,100 lb increase in the J2807 test standard and that the 2011-2014 ratings were just "fluffing" their number like I was originally posting about?. If the 2011-2014 F150 couldn't handle more weight than the 9,800 lbs that the Ecoboost 3.55 was rated at then why was the exact same truck (frame and all), but with a 3.73 gear, rated for 11,300 lbs?spud1957 wrote:
Apparently when Ram upgrades their trucks and increase the payload/towing capacity, it's obvious why. When another manufacturer does it and uses the same test standards as Ram, it's fairy dust, and they make up their ratings.:S
Loo, I don't get into the truck wars on RV.net very often. I believe the "Ford Fairy Dust" comments came into our lingo when it was revealed that Ford was literally stripping the test trucks to achieve these ratings... taking off the bumpers, seats, consoles, air conditioners, etc etc.
There was no way to buy a truck, or drive it on the roadway, missing these vital pieces of equipment... but Ford made their tow and payload ratings based upon these vital pieces missing.
I like Ford, my first truck was a 95 F150. I loved that truck and miss it. It doesn't mean that Ford is perfect and doesn't deserve some second guessing though...- More improved frame here...
www.motortrend.com/news drittal wrote:
Are you sure everything is the same? From Road and Track...
"...a larger percentage of high-strength steel."
"... lowering the center of gravity by about 0.6 inch..."
"The lower CG lead to better handling which prompted extra frame strengthening"
"the trucks perform better and can carry more with similar output."
"...to improve trailering. The lower CG also plays a part, as does the rear-suspension design."
Im reading a lot of increased, improved, and better...drittal wrote:
ShinerBock wrote:
drittal wrote:
For one, 2011-2014 f150 ecoboost was a different truck than the 2015.
The very same 2011-2014 F150 with a 3.73 ratio is rated to tow 11,300 lbs using the same brakes, frame, and powertrain. This means if Ford was "fluffing" the numbers then they would have given the 3.55 an 11,300 lb tow rating instead of the 9,800 lb max tow rating that they gave it since the truck itself can clearly handle it.
The 2014 F150 has the same front 13.8"/rear 13.7" brakes, the same power rated 3.5L Ecoboost engines, the same 6R80 transmission, the same 8.80" or 9.75"(HD) rear axle, and the frame has the same 49,300 psi yield strength as the 2011-2014 model. The major difference between the two is the body design and and the weight savings.
Are you sure everything is the same? From Road and Track...
"Engineers took 70 pounds out of the frame using some new processes and a larger percentage of high-strength steel. The aluminum body took care of the bulk of the claimed 700-pound weight loss, lowering the center of gravity by about 0.6 inch along the way. The lower CG lead to better handling which prompted extra frame strengthening to further improve the way the truck drives. These changes wouldn't have been worth the admittedly minor weight and cost increases on a steel truck. Less mass also means an improved power-to-weight ratio, so the trucks perform better and can carry more with similar output."
"Suspension geometry changes were aimed at reducing axle wind-up, which is an engineer-y term for the binding that causes shakes, shudders, and other sh…tuff you don't want. They went to staggered outboard shock mounts—one located ahead of the axle and one behind—and also aligned the engine and pinion better, allowing the use of one-piece aluminum driveshafts in many cases where Ford used two-piece steel units in the past."
"The F-150 goes from worst to best steering among full-sizers by solving the old setup's two main problems: it didn't self-center and it required constant input during high-speed, straight-line cruising. The parts are similar, but the control method is different; it's now current-based instead of voltage-based, allowing for more precise tuning. The rack is mounted differently now as well, taking compliance out of the system to improve trailering. The lower CG also plays a part, as does the rear-suspension design."
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/first-drives/reviews/a6360/first-drive-review-2015-ford-f150-pickup/
Look for yourself although everything stated above would not increase tow ratings except for weight......
2014 F150
2015 F150
But, like I said before. The same exact truck with the only difference being a 3.73 is rated to tow 11,300 lbs so clearly the 2011-2014 truck was rated to handle more weight yet Ford didn't rate the 3.55 that high until the J2807.ShinerBock wrote:
drittal wrote:
For one, 2011-2014 f150 ecoboost was a different truck than the 2015.
The very same 2011-2014 F150 with a 3.73 ratio is rated to tow 11,300 lbs using the same brakes, frame, and powertrain. This means if Ford was "fluffing" the numbers then they would have given the 3.55 an 11,300 lb tow rating instead of the 9,800 lb max tow rating that they gave it since the truck itself can clearly handle it.
The 2014 F150 has the same front 13.8"/rear 13.7" brakes, the same power rated 3.5L Ecoboost engines, the same 6R80 transmission, the same 8.80" or 9.75"(HD) rear axle, and the frame has the same 49,300 psi yield strength as the 2011-2014 model. The major difference between the two is the body design and and the weight savings.
Are you sure everything is the same? From Road and Track...
"Engineers took 70 pounds out of the frame using some new processes and a larger percentage of high-strength steel. The aluminum body took care of the bulk of the claimed 700-pound weight loss, lowering the center of gravity by about 0.6 inch along the way. The lower CG lead to better handling which prompted extra frame strengthening to further improve the way the truck drives. These changes wouldn't have been worth the admittedly minor weight and cost increases on a steel truck. Less mass also means an improved power-to-weight ratio, so the trucks perform better and can carry more with similar output."
"Suspension geometry changes were aimed at reducing axle wind-up, which is an engineer-y term for the binding that causes shakes, shudders, and other sh…tuff you don't want. They went to staggered outboard shock mounts—one located ahead of the axle and one behind—and also aligned the engine and pinion better, allowing the use of one-piece aluminum driveshafts in many cases where Ford used two-piece steel units in the past."
"The F-150 goes from worst to best steering among full-sizers by solving the old setup's two main problems: it didn't self-center and it required constant input during high-speed, straight-line cruising. The parts are similar, but the control method is different; it's now current-based instead of voltage-based, allowing for more precise tuning. The rack is mounted differently now as well, taking compliance out of the system to improve trailering. The lower CG also plays a part, as does the rear-suspension design."
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/first-drives/reviews/a6360/first-drive-review-2015-ford-f150-pickup/Flashman wrote:
No
Fairy Dust is a Ford thing.
No, it is an all manufacturer thing.
