What is the weak link for Chevy max tow ratings?

Fella's why don't we get one of these in a Laramie Limited and be done with it.

https://news.pickuptrucks.com/2019/02/new-and-stronger-2019-ram-chassis-cabs-go-upscale.html

Cummins12V98 wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

Me Again wrote:
Allison 1000 transmission!

YUP! The mighty Allison is at the end of its power limitations. All three are SAE rated. If GM could compete with RAM n Ford they sure as HE!! Would.

Engine just had big HP n TQ increases so that is not the issue.

C,
What about the mighty sushi aisin backing big power.

OP,
GM is targeting the largest percentage of the market with their trucks towing capabilities.

Well "Fish" it looks like a Magic Wand and a little electronic tweaking and it will be eating up 400hp and 1,000#' TQ.

What do you have for an excuse of why GM is now towing with the BigBoys???

Targeting BS, HA.

I think we know what the excuse is... Having said that, the GM truck pulling that massive camper makes yours look like a pop up! :E

Viperpoker wrote:


This year a Chevy 3500 dually work truck costs about the same as a ford or Ram but it is down about 9,000 lbs give or take in towing capability. I strongly suspect that in 2020 the Chevy will once again cost about the same as the ford or Ram, but will be able to tow as much or a little more than its competitors.

I don't care about cost in relation to each other, but rather cost increases year over year and why. If it is to make the truck more reliable at towing what I tow, then I am fine with that. But if it is because Ram spent most of their budget and time just to say they are "best in class" then I think that is a waste of money especially when they are popping out recalls on their trucks every other month.

There was nothing wrong with the previous frame that was able to tow 30k, yet Ram spent more money and time for a new one just to win a pissing match which will probably add to the cost of the new trucks.

Viperpoker wrote:
I’m assuming you have a 2500 3:42 pulling that 14k trailer.

Yes.

ShinerBock wrote:

Rocknita wrote:
ShinerBock I usually like to read your posts. I believe you’re very knowledgeable. But it seems as though you’re having a bad day and taking it out here. It seems the “pissing match” is you versus everyone else here. My very uninformed opinion is most of us don’t need to tow 30,000 lbs but we like having a truck that is capable of more than we need. Also these trucks have new features besides new towing/hauling capabilities. And as to the point about braking, all trucks rely on the trailer brakes to stop. I’ve never once brought up how much my trucks could tow but every truck I’ve had was more capable than the last. Certainly not going to whine about that.

My complaint is that a brands highest tow rating is worthless in a shop bay. I have had more recalls on a truck that is rated to tow just 17k then any truck I have ever had. My brother has the exact same truck and year and has a water pump fail on him under 50k and the same recalls.

My take is, instead of spending the R&D money to keep besting each other in useless tow ratings that a very very small portion of their customers even tow, they should have instead spent it on making the truck more reliable at the current ratings it can tow for most customers. I would much rather have a reliable truck that is rated to tow 17k than a less reliable truck rated at 35k.

As I said before, I have worked for engine and truck manufacturers before and I know how their budget for each section usually works. To keep costs low, you have to take away or decrease the budget from one area to focus on others. Or you focus on multiple places and increase the cost on all of the trucks.

Lots of money and time was spent on the frame, and other things to get to these new worthless for most customers tow ratings. Money that is either taken from other areas that make the truck more reliable or spread out among all the trucks (even those that aren't rated to tow 35k) increasing the cost of each truck.

I say at the very least they should have kept the previous years 30k tow ratings(since 99.9999% of their customers don't even tow that much in a light duty truck) so they didn't have to spend more money and time on those things. That way, more money and brain power could go into making the truck more reliable and efficient at the current ratings so owners don't have to keep sending their truck to the dealer every other month for recalls. As I said, I would much rather have a reliable truck that is rated to tow 17k than a less reliable(and/or more expensive) truck rated at 35k.

This year a Chevy 3500 dually work truck costs about the same as a ford or Ram but it is down about 9,000 lbs give or take in towing capability. I strongly suspect that in 2020 the Chevy will once again cost about the same as the ford or Ram, but will be able to tow as much or a little more than its competitors.

I’m assuming you have a 2500 3:42 pulling that 14k trailer.

Rocknita wrote:
ShinerBock I usually like to read your posts. I believe you’re very knowledgeable. But it seems as though you’re having a bad day and taking it out here. It seems the “pissing match” is you versus everyone else here. My very uninformed opinion is most of us don’t need to tow 30,000 lbs but we like having a truck that is capable of more than we need. Also these trucks have new features besides new towing/hauling capabilities. And as to the point about braking, all trucks rely on the trailer brakes to stop. I’ve never once brought up how much my trucks could tow but every truck I’ve had was more capable than the last. Certainly not going to whine about that.

My complaint is that a brands highest tow rating is worthless in a shop bay. I have had more recalls on a truck that is rated to tow just 17k then any truck I have ever had. My brother has the exact same truck and year and has a water pump fail on him under 50k and the same recalls.

My take is, instead of spending the R&D money to keep besting each other in useless tow ratings that a very very small portion of their customers even tow, they should have instead spent it on making the truck more reliable at the current ratings it can tow for most customers. I would much rather have a reliable truck that is rated to tow 17k than a less reliable truck rated at 35k.

As I said before, I have worked for engine and truck manufacturers before and I know how their budget for each section usually works. To keep costs low, you have to take away or decrease the budget from one area to focus on others. Or you focus on multiple places and increase the cost on all of the trucks.

Lots of money and time was spent on the frame, and other things to get to these new worthless for most customers tow ratings. Money that is either taken from other areas that make the truck more reliable or spread out among all the trucks (even those that aren't rated to tow 35k) increasing the cost of each truck.

I say at the very least they should have kept the previous years 30k tow ratings(since 99.9999% of their customers don't even tow that much in a light duty truck) so they didn't have to spend more money and time on those things. That way, more money and brain power could go into making the truck more reliable and efficient at the current ratings so owners don't have to keep sending their truck to the dealer every other month for recalls. As I said, I would much rather have a reliable truck that is rated to tow 17k than a less reliable(and/or more expensive) truck rated at 35k.

$0.55 Postage Stamp. I like chocolate ice cream. Dogs.

ShinerBock I usually like to read your posts. I believe you’re very knowledgeable. But it seems as though you’re having a bad day and taking it out here. It seems the “pissing match” is you versus everyone else here. My very uninformed opinion is most of us don’t need to tow 30,000 lbs but we like having a truck that is capable of more than we need. Also these trucks have new features besides new towing/hauling capabilities. And as to the point about braking, all trucks rely on the trailer brakes to stop. I’ve never once brought up how much my trucks could tow but every truck I’ve had was more capable than the last. Certainly not going to whine about that.

Just because they can rate them that high due to a standard that does not test braking down grades longer than a 1/4 mile does not mean they should. That is like giving a half ton a 17k tow rating just because it can pull that up a hill at a minimum of 35 mph yet do not test to see if it can keep the weight in check down the hill without burning up the brakes.

I think it's clear that RAM is going after a market hauling equipment that used to take a SEMI to do so. also look at the multiple car trailers out there being hauled by 350/3500's now.

Cummins12V98 wrote:
ShinerBrock, YOU are the one CONSTANTLY in a "PISSING MATCH". Pick the subject it's the same over and over.

YOU are the one calling a "pissing match".

Us guys that are towing at the top end of the RV market want the most capable truck possible, if that's a "pissing match" OK I am in a pissing match with every other heavy rV hauler out there. ;)

Pot.....kettle?


I am just saying that Ram would probably please more customers by spending the R&D money to make a truck that we do not need to keep sending back to the dealer for recalls, on water pumps that lasts more than 50k, a better shifting transmission, and/or to make the truck more reliable & efficient than to waste it to attain some 35k tow rating just for bragging rights that only a very small percentage of customers actually utilize or care about.