Vehicle Capacity Comparison

So there are lots of numbers to know when buying a truck and trailer. I have recently purchased a truck and camping trailer I knew all these numbers but got a little suspicious once seeing the numbers the competition is posting vs the ones on our trucks. Hopefully you all know what these numbers stand for if not google them and it will make a lot more sense. So on RV.net I have seen lots of posts (mainly f150 guys) touting there large payload numbers and it got me thinking. Yes some of them have the larger axle but some do not.

So I have a 2012 Ram 1500 QC Outdoorsman 4x4 with the hemi. I have a gvwr of 6700lbs and both front and rear gawr is 3900lbs. My payload is 1165lbs. Sounds really lame I know but just keep reading and it may make you think differently. So the information I'm posting about other trucks is stuff I've come across and cannot say its 100% true but its what these guys are saying about there own trucks and not others.

Now we all know that Ram has lower payload numbers and it got me thinking why is it so low is our trucks really that much worse. So here goes a little comparison vs a regular 2011 f150 hopefully you can follow.

My truck:
GFAWR=3900
GRAWR=3900
7800lbs
but our actual gvwr is 6700 or 6800 for you guys with crew cabs.

Now lets look at Fords for example. Now this isn't a max payload were they basically throw in a 7 bolt axle its a regular 6 bolt one

<>

2011 F150 XLT screw
4X4
5.0
5.5 box
3:55 limited slip
7200# GVWR package
Trailer tow package--not MaxTow
18" wheels
GAWR front 3750
GAWR rear 3850
GVWR 7200
Payload 1438

So his payload is nearly 300lbs more than mine but look at the axle ratings. They are both LOWER. Our trucks have approx 1100lbs loss and the normal f150 has 400lb loss. weird right? If my truck has the same 400lb loss from axle ratings I would have a 7400gvwr and a payload of 1865 lbs . I am a member on this sight as well as rv.net and both are great sights and full of people who just want to help and are willing to dedicate there time to your/our questions. But this one has me thinking. What in our trucks makes them have so much more of a safety factor. Is it bc the coils are that soft or is there something else. Does Ram/Dodge just value the well being of the customer and just wants to keep them safe. What ever it is just think about this the next time you overload your truck by 100lbs. As My truck sits it will take 1700lbs to overload the rear axle and that makes me feel good.

Sorry about this going on forever but i've done a lot of reading since getting my camping trailer which is 6500lbs dry and 29.5' long and I feel very comfortable towing it with my RAM 1500.

What do you all think about these numbers? I'm not trying to be a hater against ford and can easily post the same against Chevy. Did this dawn across anyone else who pulls a trailer and thinks about these numbers?

Tow Vehicles

26 Replies

JIMNLIN
Explorer III
May 01, 2013
GM did post the new towing numbers but the 1500 trucks tow rating changed little if any. Biggest looser was the 2500 trucks which were up to 17k. The new J numbers dropped them to approx 14k

The SAE J2807 standards don't change a trucks GVWR or GAWR or payload numbers. Just the tow ratings.

THe OP was about payload and the GVWR/GAWRs.
BamaFlum
Explorer
May 01, 2013
Are there any third parties that have tested the vehicles based on the new ratings to compare them to the manufactures posted ratings?
2012Oudoorsman
Explorer
May 01, 2013
Well Chevy posted number but took them back once ford said they wouldn't comply. And ram said they wouldn't do anything till ford did. Toyota already is. Honda I think does and also includes two people in tow rating. So when ford does all three will supposedly.
BamaFlum
Explorer
May 01, 2013
When are all the manufactures going to get on board with the new SAE rules?
2012Oudoorsman
Explorer
May 01, 2013
Apt,
I don't know where I got the impression that Toyotas first gear was a 4 something but you are correct it deffinetly isn't. Now I agree with what you said but realistically how many Chevy 1500 have the big v8. Not many, I looked for them when I was looking to buy a truck as the 5.3 was just not enough for me. Yes when you get one they are provably a power house with the 3.73 axle but they just don't make many like ford doesn't make many people of the 6.2 in the half ton.

The eco boost is another story all together great little engine when working properly as they are just like having a small diesel in a pickup but just too many problems for me to consider. I live 50 mins. From the closest vehicle dealer for any manufacturer so proven relability was a huge issue for me. This is also why I bought a 2012 compared to a 13 hoping they fixed all the issues. I am not trying to take anything away from any manufacturer just trying to point out something I thought was interesting
APT
Explorer
May 01, 2013
2012Oudoorsman wrote:

I will also be willing to say that the Tundra may be the best set up half ton axle for towing, when looking at engine, tranny, and rear end gear.

You are looking at the wrong numbers then. Toyota and Ram have the lowest payloads in half tons, as noted in the OP. While the axles may handle higher loads, the springs, shocks, bushings, bolts, etc may not be. We do not know what the limiting factor is.

Loading a pickup to GVWR allows different distributions of weight. Not everything pickup owners carry will perfectly distribute the weight such that the sum of axle weights would match GVWR.

Tundra with 4.30 gearing is almost identical to Ford/GM with 3.73. Both Ford and GM offer 6.2L engines with more power than Toyota and with 3.73, even 4.10 for Ford. And then there's the Ecoboost...

That said, the Tundra is a strong truck. It was first to market with the 6-spd trans and powerful 5.7L. Owners love the power. It performed very well at and over it's ratings for RVers. It's not my first choice for a half ton, but it is a strong one when payload is not a factor.

The SAE towing spec is primarily a performance driven standard, how much weight can a vehicle tow up a hill to reach a certain speed within a certain time. It has nothing to do with how well a vehicle tows at part throttle. It has nothing to do with how well a truck handles tongue weight. IMHO, it has little benefit to the market. Few people actually drive their trucks, or any cars, at wide open throttle.
camp-n-family
Explorer
May 01, 2013
This is where I disagree. Manufactures all but one in particular which I will not mention will at the drop of a dime change its numbers when they hear that others are higher. This is why when new trucks are coming out that they will not post numbers until the other does in hoping to out do the other. I can provide examples but I think you all get what i'm saying. I'm not just saying its all about the axles as thats like saying all you need is torque to pull your trailer, and don't worry about tranny gears or rear end gears.

Yes there is probably some way that they are rate these vehicle but thats like saying all manufactures abide by the same rules when calculating mpg and we all know thats not true.

This is what the new J2807 towing standards was supposed to stop and put everyone on a level playing field. Tow rating guidelines set out, and agreed upon, by the big manufacturers to test against. Well guess what, they can't even do that right. GM won't implement it until Ford does, Ford won't until Dodge does wah wah wah. Toyota was the only one to step up to the plate and abide by the guidelines, good on them, but now they are paying the price with reduced sales because their advertised ratings are now lower than the others (even though nothing on the truck has physically changed)
2012Oudoorsman
Explorer
May 01, 2013
camp-n-family wrote:
As a Tundra owner I've been arguing your point for a while. For some reason the Tundra gets bashed even though it has higher ratings than both the Ram and F150 you mention. I'm not saying this to brand bash or start the loyalty wars, just continuing with the OPs point.

FAWR 4000lbs
RAWR 4150lbs (d-rated, axle manufacturer actually lists them much higher)
Yet a GVWR of only 7200lbs resulting in payloads as low as 1300lbs.

With a strong drivetrain, 4.30 towing gears, more power than a GM 6.0l and brakes that are comparable, if not bigger, than most 3/4 tons, I have yet to find the weak link for my situation. My Tundra handles my 31' 8000lbs trailer very well even though I'm a couple hundred pounds over my "rated" payload.

It all comes down to who can build the truck the cheapest, but still give it ratings that will sell, while keeping the legal department happy.

As much as I hate to admit it bc i'm really against foreign products I will deff. agree with you. I will also be willing to say that the Tundra may be the best set up halfton axle for towing, when looking at engine, tranny, and rear end gear. As many have stated there may be a reason our trucks are rated lower but I just don't see it and I wish these manufactures would all agree on how to rate their products so one could compare.

As it is Ford does have the best "numbers" but to me thats all they are
2012Oudoorsman
Explorer
May 01, 2013
BenK wrote:
skipnchar wrote:
Dot safety plate is prescribed by federal law and standard engineering mathematics are used in computing capacities. There is a LOT more to it than axle size. In determining GVWR numbers they take into account brake system, cooling system and the entire drive line from tranny through axles. it is all a standard formula where the weakest link determines the rating.

X2...perfectly stated !!!

This is where I disagree. Manufactures all but one in particular which I will not mention will at the drop of a dime change its numbers when they hear that others are higher. This is why when new trucks are coming out that they will not post numbers until the other does in hoping to out do the other. I can provide examples but I think you all get what i'm saying. I'm not just saying its all about the axles as thats like saying all you need is torque to pull your trailer, and don't worry about tranny gears or rear end gears.

Yes there is probably some way that they are rate these vehicle but thats like saying all manufactures abide by the same rules when calculating mpg and we all know thats not true.

Could Ford as provided in my example engineer everything to work till the same load and thats why the lower safety factor. Maybe. Could my truck have a weak link that I dont know about and thats the reason for the lower rating, maybe. But I will say I feel there is a lot of numbers that change from year to year and vehicle magically didn't change
APT
Explorer
Apr 30, 2013
skipnchar wrote:
Dot safety plate is prescribed by federal law and standard engineering mathematics are used in computing capacities. There is a LOT more to it than axle size. In determining GVWR numbers they take into account brake system, cooling system and the entire drive line from tranny through axles. it is all a standard formula where the weakest link determines the rating.

This, specifically stopping distances and vehicle handling. There are many factors other than the sum of all components.