Forum Discussion
Learjet wrote:
For people using a truck as a daily driver and towing a 6-9000lb travel trailer during the summer months the F150HD the perfect choice. when not towing you will average 19-20+ mpg, Your F250 with 6.2L cant come close to those mpg #'s...itguy08 wrote:
Add the HD Payload to the F150 and it goes up to around 2,000 lbs.
IF you are going go with the F150HD, just get the F250 for @ the same price. That is what I did, and I know I made the right choice :)- Wow, 17 pages of some real******with some scattered decent info. Lots of arguing mainly from some guy that doesn't even own a pickup. Is camping season already over for some of you? geesh....
itguy08 wrote:
Add the HD Payload to the F150 and it goes up to around 2,000 lbs.
IF you are going go with the F150HD, just get the F250 for @ the same price. That is what I did, and I know I made the right choice :)ryanb-72 wrote:
Mike Up wrote:
Like I said, if Ram was more go and less show, I may be driving one instead of a F150 but I needed something that wouldn't be overloaded and beyond it's ratings before even hitching up the trailer.
I have been trying to compare the F-150 to the Ram and as I see it the payload capacities are very close. I compared the supercrew 4x4 ecoboost to the Ram big horn edition which had the 5.7 Hemi (as the diesel specs aren't out) and there is about a 200 lb difference. Maybe I am missing something but that just doesn't seem like enough to be a huge game changer?
Add the HD Payload to the F150 and it goes up to around 2,000 lbs. If you look at pickuptrucks.com's test of the Light duties you'll see the payload chart - F150 is tops and Ram is on the bottom.Mike Up wrote:
Like I said, if Ram was more go and less show, I may be driving one instead of a F150 but I needed something that wouldn't be overloaded and beyond it's ratings before even hitching up the trailer.
I have been trying to compare the F-150 to the Ram and as I see it the payload capacities are very close. I compared the supercrew 4x4 ecoboost to the Ram big horn edition which had the 5.7 Hemi (as the diesel specs aren't out) and there is about a 200 lb difference. Maybe I am missing something but that just doesn't seem like enough to be a huge game changer?- ...
Is this the same diesel?
( http://www.bankspower.com/magazines/show/668-Banks-Diesel-V6 )
Might already be a destined Gale Banks hotrod engine...
Wes
... Acei wrote:
I think the sweetest point would have been a 3.5L Diesel, and have Ram offer a HD Payload package like Ford that offers another 1000lb of payload capacity. IMO, this will just about kill all arguments against Diesel as we have seen in this thread.
I would buy such a product.
If Ram just offered more payload, that alone would had put me in a Ram.
For years, the only full size I'd consider was a RAM. That's until I had my 2008 Sport Trac 4WD V8 6 speed auto truck (for fuel economy and price), which I loved. I only got rid of it because my payments would had continued while the truck was out of warranty. Plus I wanted more room inside and out, that a Full size offered.
The logical choice was a new gen F150. Looked at the new GEN RAM and was so disappointed. It had lower payload than my Sport Trac that had 4WD, 4.6L V8, plus the added weight of factory side steps and a heavy factory hard folding tonnuea cover! It looked like all show and no go in the work truck department. More of a pretty boy car/truck than of any utility like the older Gen.
Loved the 2010 F150 even with it's problems. Ford was great about fixing without hassle and was bending backwards to make things right. I've seen no other company ever go to these lengths to make things right. I've owned NEW Chrysler, GM, and Nissan vehicles previously and none ever went to these lengths.
Ford and Chrysler were the ones that didn't fight me on warranty repairs. Nissan and GM did and why I'll never put a penny again towards their unreliable vehicles.
Like I said, if Ram was more go and less show, I may be driving one instead of a F150 but I needed something that wouldn't be overloaded and beyond it's ratings before even hitching up the trailer.
While I'm not a diesel fan in vehicles that aren't towing 15,000 lbs trailers, a upgraded payload package would make Dodge a consideration for sure!- I think the sweetest point would have been a 3.5L Diesel, and have Ram offer a HD Payload package like Ford that offers another 1000lb of payload capacity. IMO, this will just about kill all arguments against Diesel as we have seen in this thread.
I would buy such a product.
Still, a 3.0L Diesel is pretty good as far as the engine is concerned. But without the HD Payload package, the use is rather limiting. I bet you, available payload with CrewCab and nicely optioned package will only give you sub-1200lb payload which is really too low for any RV use. Most mid-sized crossovers will kill this payload rating... Ford F150 Lariat with HD Payload package gives you 2500lb-ish so you can actually pull a decent trailer with it. - I was one of 11,000 of the original liberty crd owners. At the time towing 5k or achieve 25 to 28 mpg highway was rare. I have no problems diving in to another VM Moturi engine.
N-Trouble wrote:
Rant on: Would all the big three manufacturers PLEASE stop using the term "Eco" in naming your motors. FIrst it was Ford with the EcoBoost, then GM with their new EcoTech line of motors and now Dodge with their EcoDiesel.
THere is nothing "Eco" about driving a 6K lb+ brick down the road so please stop trying to polish a turd by calling it Eco... IF you want somethign "Eco" friendly then go by a Prius... Rant off
I agree I am sick of the false propaganda with "GREEN" (Eco) being thrown at everything. It is all a bunch of Barbara Streisand.
