Need help understanding Truck Capabilities
In 2001 I purchased a 2001 Silverado 1500 HD Crew Cab 4x4 for the specific purpose of adding a slide-in truck camper. I was soon discouraged when all the camper dealers told me that my “1/2 ton” tru...
Forum Discussion
In all my years of hauling truck campers and tons and tons of firewood/logging equipment etc,I have never seen a broken axle on a pickup from weight..Not saying it can't happen,just saying I have never seen it or heard about it, on a properly serviced axle..
These guys at the 4X4 pirate forum are the axle gurus of the internet and I enjoy reading there post on axle strengths...
Here is one copy and paste about the GM 1500 HD vs the 2500 HD,and it's funny..
ENGGGGGGGHHHHHH! Wrong answers. The primary difference between the 1500HD & the 2500HD IS the rear axle, that & the frame. 6.0 2500HD's come with a 10.5" FF 14-bolt rear. 1500HD's & auto-tranny 2500's come with 9.5" SF rear. Manual tranny 2500's get the 10.5" FF (manual tranny is not available in the 1500HD). All of the above get the 4L80E & a 9.25" IFS front. I went for the 2500HD primarily to get the FF rear. But, you'll notice that the 2500HD has larger exhaust than the 1500HD/2500. Most literature will show both trucks to have the same power rating, but the stuff I saw at my GMC dealer showed the 2500HD at 325HP vs. 300HP for the 1500HD/2500. Seat of the pants, I thought the 2500HD ran better, but not appreciably so. Internally, I'm quite certain the engines are identical, I just think the exhaust flows better on the 2500HD (none of which matters once you change the pipe anyway).
For reference, the 2500HD is essentially a SRW 3500. At 9,200 GVWR, it has the same weight rating as the previous generation SRW 3500. The 2500 & 1500HD are both 8,600 GVWR, the same as the previous gen 2500"hd".
Also, 8.1 & Duramax trucks don't share a rear axle with either of these machines. Both come with an all-new 11.5" FF rear. This 11.5" rear may or may not be used in 6.0 powered dually's. That's the only model of which I'm not sure.
And FWIW, I think my 2002 GMC 2500HD with the 6.0 is an excellent choice for hauling a single rig, a 1500HD would be **** near as good. 4.10's are ideal for towing with the stock-size rubber too. I only wish 4.56's would have been available since I'm planning to go to 255/85 R16 tires eventually.
These guys at the 4X4 pirate forum are the axle gurus of the internet and I enjoy reading there post on axle strengths...
Here is one copy and paste about the GM 1500 HD vs the 2500 HD,and it's funny..
ENGGGGGGGHHHHHH! Wrong answers. The primary difference between the 1500HD & the 2500HD IS the rear axle, that & the frame. 6.0 2500HD's come with a 10.5" FF 14-bolt rear. 1500HD's & auto-tranny 2500's come with 9.5" SF rear. Manual tranny 2500's get the 10.5" FF (manual tranny is not available in the 1500HD). All of the above get the 4L80E & a 9.25" IFS front. I went for the 2500HD primarily to get the FF rear. But, you'll notice that the 2500HD has larger exhaust than the 1500HD/2500. Most literature will show both trucks to have the same power rating, but the stuff I saw at my GMC dealer showed the 2500HD at 325HP vs. 300HP for the 1500HD/2500. Seat of the pants, I thought the 2500HD ran better, but not appreciably so. Internally, I'm quite certain the engines are identical, I just think the exhaust flows better on the 2500HD (none of which matters once you change the pipe anyway).
For reference, the 2500HD is essentially a SRW 3500. At 9,200 GVWR, it has the same weight rating as the previous generation SRW 3500. The 2500 & 1500HD are both 8,600 GVWR, the same as the previous gen 2500"hd".
Also, 8.1 & Duramax trucks don't share a rear axle with either of these machines. Both come with an all-new 11.5" FF rear. This 11.5" rear may or may not be used in 6.0 powered dually's. That's the only model of which I'm not sure.
And FWIW, I think my 2002 GMC 2500HD with the 6.0 is an excellent choice for hauling a single rig, a 1500HD would be **** near as good. 4.10's are ideal for towing with the stock-size rubber too. I only wish 4.56's would have been available since I'm planning to go to 255/85 R16 tires eventually.
