Ultimate payload monster?

Ratings are easily found by googling. Range from a little over 7,400 lbs for Chevy to a little over 7,800 lbs for Ford. Ram in between. But all those ratings are for a very particular configuration of cab, bed, engine, drive train, etc. that virtually no one actually buys. All for bragging rights.

For the most actual payload looks like a GM reg cab long bed 3500 DRW 6.6 diesel with those big 10500 rawr numbers are running in the 7500 lb in the bed payload.

The same GM 3500 DRW with the 6.6 gazzer gets 7630 lb in the bed payload.
These numbers come from GM weight calculator on their ordering guide website.

Ford is close with 9900 rawr and Ram has 9720 rawr.

I'd have no idea what the vehicle mfg payload stickers will say.

Hemling wrote:
What do you think is the top payload rating among new one-ton trucks? All the advertising goes toward horsepower/torque and towing capacity, but what configuration is king of payload?

Is this a trick question?
Useable payload among all duallies is basically the same, with the nod going to reg cab trucks.
By the sticker payload, again is not a function of who's badge is on the grille, but a 2wd dually stripped down gasser will have the most payload on paper and all of the big 3 are over 7klbs.

However, put 7klbs in any stock dually bed and it will equally tank the @ss end into the Carolina squat.

How much you wanna haul??

Or to be more succinct, basically the paper payload will be limited by the curb weight and gvw rating. With gvw rating being the same across the board, and likely the curb weights within a few hundred lbs of each other.

Payload specifications are not realistic. Are you telling me that if you choose a lighter engine, you can load more on an identical rear axle? Axle or wheel rating minus empty rear weight is closer to truth.

Bedlam wrote:
Payload specifications are not realistic. Are you telling me that if you choose a lighter engine, you can load more on an identical rear axle? Axle or wheel rating minus empty rear weight is closer to truth.

While I am far from well-versed in such things, I would assume that gross weights do play a role in how things are calculated as well. I know that combined axle weights often exceed the stated gross, so it clearly isn't a 1 to 1 relationship. That said, as an example, a lighter engine would mean less weight being stopped by the brakes, potentially allowing an increase in the stated axle weight.

Again, I'm not studied up on how they calculate these, but I can certainly see how a lighter engine could, in fact, allow for a greater rating for the rear axle.

Bedlam wrote:
Payload specifications are not realistic. Are you telling me that if you choose a lighter engine, you can load more on an identical rear axle? Axle or wheel rating minus empty rear weight is closer to truth.

If the GVWR is the same, the lighter truck will have a larger payload. Now towing, when all the load is on the rear axle, engine weight might not matter as much. But when it comes to hauling, especially dense material where you can load more weight in front of bed, a lighter engine will make a difference.
Back mid '90s a friend decided to buy a couple of new trucks. His driver wanted a Pete, but he bought Ford LTL9000 Both trucks had same engine, trans, all 4 axles, beds. The only difference was his had the XL interior. The driver got the XLT with more padding, carpets and such. The first day he brought the trucks to work the XLT was over 1,000 lbs heavier than the XL
Now when I think about the long cabs, with all the power heated seats, power windows and other FREDs, in front of a short bed, pickups aren't set up to haul snot.

Bedlam wrote:
Payload specifications are not realistic. Are you telling me that if you choose a lighter engine, you can load more on an identical rear axle? Axle or wheel rating minus empty rear weight is closer to truth.

If you don’t believe me, believe this guy. He’s well versed and more politically correct about it than I!

Bedlam wrote:
Payload specifications are not realistic. Are you telling me that if you choose a lighter engine, you can load more on an identical rear axle? Axle or wheel rating minus empty rear weight is closer to truth.

Lots of deceiving info out there. With a 5er it's all about RAWR.

GVWR is a JOKE!!! Someone please tell me how I can stay at or under 14k when my RAWR is 9,750# and my unloaded front axle weight is 5,250# when they add up to 15k. My solution is to have tonnage enough to cover my 6 tires load.

Cummins12V98 wrote:
GVWR is a JOKE!!! Someone please tell me how I can stay at or under 14k when my RAWR is 9,750# and my unloaded front axle weight is 5,250# when they add up to 15k. My solution is to have tonnage enough to cover my 6 tires load.

Even worse with my 2000 F250 diesel, to get to its 6100 lb or so RGAWR without exceeding its 8800 GVWR, I would have to pile all the weight behind the rear axle to unload the front axle from its 4500 lb or so empty weight to under 2800 pounds. Far safer to load the truck at 5500 on the rear, 4500 on the front even though at those weights I'm exceeding the GVWR by 1200 lbs.