MotorTrend Tests the 1500's
The article The resident RAM and EcoDiesel haters might not want to read this.
Forum Discussion
Before the thread totally desintegrates into finger pointing and name calling... I just want to point out that not all EcoDiesels are cursed with low payload ratings. Here is a shot of a nicely equipped Ecodiesel Crew Cab 2wd Tradesmen. It had carpet, cloth seats, PW, PDL, Chrome appearance package and a decent 1500 lb payload rating.
I'm not a brand guy... I like and appreciate all of the brands out there and what they have to offer.
Example.. I really appreciate the 6.2 in the Chevy with the NHT package. Nearly 2000 lbs of payload in a half ton crew cab. Not too shabby... although it is often not mentioned with the 'heavy halfs'...i.e. Ford F150 with the HD payload package and a bonus lug nut.
Notice my picture above.. this payload rating is at 40 psi in the tires.. these tires likely have a 44-50 max PSI rating.
My MINIVAN's payload is spec'ed at 36 psi... while my tires have a max PSI of 44 PSI... Why is this?
I think that part of it is that the manufacturers put a common PSI for the tire size installed on the vehicle. Different tire brands have different max PSI ratings.
Just kind of playing off of what BenK stated... manufacturers spec to the LCD of the system.... for instance, a simple phone call to HINO verified that the rear axle on the Tundra was tested safely to 5500 lbs load rating (verified by user TundraBay over at Tundra Solutions so tifwiw)... But Toyota puts something around 3500 ish lbs rating on that rear axle just like most common half tons.
Much to the chagrin of FORD who loves talking about how stiff their 1/2 Ton frame is vs others I have not been able to find a single report of a 2nd gen Tundra Frame Breaking
Now Ford is having to deal with the same marketing against them by Chevy AND Ram with the HD trucks... weak twisting frames in SPECIAL circumstances (like driving over two ramps placed in different locations causing the frame to twist and prevent the user from opening the tailgate. The sad thing is that I CAN'T say that I have trouble finding broke SuperDuty frame reports.
Thanks!
Jeremiah
I'm not a brand guy... I like and appreciate all of the brands out there and what they have to offer.
Example.. I really appreciate the 6.2 in the Chevy with the NHT package. Nearly 2000 lbs of payload in a half ton crew cab. Not too shabby... although it is often not mentioned with the 'heavy halfs'...i.e. Ford F150 with the HD payload package and a bonus lug nut.
Notice my picture above.. this payload rating is at 40 psi in the tires.. these tires likely have a 44-50 max PSI rating.
My MINIVAN's payload is spec'ed at 36 psi... while my tires have a max PSI of 44 PSI... Why is this?
I think that part of it is that the manufacturers put a common PSI for the tire size installed on the vehicle. Different tire brands have different max PSI ratings.
Just kind of playing off of what BenK stated... manufacturers spec to the LCD of the system.... for instance, a simple phone call to HINO verified that the rear axle on the Tundra was tested safely to 5500 lbs load rating (verified by user TundraBay over at Tundra Solutions so tifwiw)... But Toyota puts something around 3500 ish lbs rating on that rear axle just like most common half tons.
Much to the chagrin of FORD who loves talking about how stiff their 1/2 Ton frame is vs others I have not been able to find a single report of a 2nd gen Tundra Frame Breaking
Now Ford is having to deal with the same marketing against them by Chevy AND Ram with the HD trucks... weak twisting frames in SPECIAL circumstances (like driving over two ramps placed in different locations causing the frame to twist and prevent the user from opening the tailgate. The sad thing is that I CAN'T say that I have trouble finding broke SuperDuty frame reports.
Thanks!
Jeremiah
