Payload rant (sort of)

[bsbeedub]

I have a friend with a 2011 F250. I don't know a lot of details but it has the diesel for that year and 3.31 gears. He was looking to buy a fifth wheel after previously owning a 35 foot TT. Unfortunately he is one of those RV owners that doesn't know a lot about his truck's capability.
He told me what he wanted so I looked it up to check the info on it and found it had a 2485 lb pin weight. I told him to make sure he had plenty of towing capacity AND payload capacity and that they were two entirely different things. I also told him 3/4 tons are beasts but can't tow everything. He didn't know the payload so I asked him to look in the door jamb for the sticker. He took a pic and sent it to me and his payload capacity is a grand total of 2113 lb! I explained to him that by the time him and his wife were in the truck, stuff in the truck bed including the hitch, and stuff in the bedroom of the 5er (right over the king pin) he could be over 3000lb.

He talked with a guy from his Ford dealership and they said that "you have plenty of towing capacity." (That statement is actually true.) He asked the wrong question and got the wrong answer. He also has another friend that told him he would be fine because, again, he asked the wrong question and never told him about the door sticker. Of course the place where he bought the 5er never once asked him about payload capacity. I guess they assumed being a 3/4 ton it had plenty of it. How irresponsible can the salesperson be? But, as we all know, WE should know what the heck we're talking about.

He took possession of the new 5er and is ready to camp. I told him I was concerned for his truck and his safety but it fell on deaf ears because "no one else gave me reason for concern." You can lead a horse to water.......

One thing that surprises me is the low payload capacity. I thought 3/4 tons had about 3000 plus, give or take. With the limited info I have on the truck, can anyone tell me what would cause the capacity to be that low or is that pretty common?

[BarneyS]

We are getting the same arguments back and forth so I think this thread has run its' course. Time to close it down and move on.
Barney

[taken]

Sure they are de-rated. When they share every part with a SRW 350 but yet are rated lower, that's the definition of de-rating. They aren't rated for any different use than a SRW 350. They just lower the rating to get a class two truck out of it to fill that market segment.

As to 150's, yes, that's a completely different animal.

[mkirsch]

Really, 3/4 tons are not underrated. The difference is, they are rated for continuous use. You can load one to GVWR on day one and drive it 100,000+ miles with only normal expected wear and tear.

Try and do the same thing with a 1/2 ton. It will be ready to fall on a pile at 100,000 miles. They are only rated for occasional use at their maximum capacity.

Manufacturers don't state this explicitly on paper because they don't have to. They want you to think your 1/2 ton truck is some mean hauling beast, and it is, all the way home from the big box lumber store. Now take that pallet of Sakrete from Boston to Chicago and you'll see where the differences lie.

[taken]

All interesting Ben but none applies to the completely false and fabricated payload, axle rating, and GVWR of a 250. When the exact same truck with the exact same parts is rated lower to fill a different market segment, then it's ratings mean exactly nothing. It's not confusion about what those ratings mean or are referring to. It's confusion based of Ford fabricating numbers for marketing purposes and honest folks thinking those numbers are based on engineering facts.

[BenK]

I refer to their GVWR's...

[BenK]

Curious...would this discussion be happening of folks were NOT using market
badging, but their respective GVWR's and RGAWR's ?

No difference when someone talks about their 'half ton'...one forum
member posted that there are over 14 DIFFERENT F150's or half tons...
Which one are you guys talking about here?

This also touches on 'curb' and the mess with what folks 'think' it means...

Or the mess with what folks 'think' payload/cargo/etc means...

Also the mess with what folks 'think' MTWR (Max Tow Weight Rating) means...

Finally, a ditto to 'dry' or OEM listed tongue weight means...

autoblog.com wrote:

http://www.autoblog.com/2005/09/27/a-brief-primer-on-pickup-truck-payload-capacities/

In a previous post, one of our commenters suggested that I did not understand payload ratings on trucks (actually, the commenter questioned my math skills in a manner that suggested he has access to my college transcript). I thought we'd clear things up a bit…

Payload designations such as half-ton, 3/4-ton, and 1-ton are little but nods to the past practice of naming a truck according to its actual payload, and don?t accurately describe total or per-axle payloads. While some modern half-tons (such as the heavier crew-cab models) indeed have payload ratings close to 1,000 lbs, most are rated to carry around 1,500 lbs or so. 3/4- and 1-ton pickups can carry far more than their name would suggest. My 3/4-ton GMC has a GVWR of 8600 lbs, and thus can carry 3300 lbs in addition to its wet curb weight of 5300 lbs. In fact, the rear axle of my truck is rated for 6000 lbs by itself, and maybe has 2000 lbs on it when unladed. Total payload is thus limited in this case not by spring, axle, or tire capacity, but by the brakes. Most dual rear wheel 1-tons have GVWR somewhere north of 11,000 lbs and rear axle ratings of 9,000 lbs (the two extra tires allow for the extra weight), which gives them a maximum payload of up to 5,000 lbs or so. For the record, the 4 cubic yards of wet mulch shown in the picture above was well within my truck?s capabilities, but 3 cubic yards of damp sand may have been a bit too much.

I like this one and best for folks who do neet listen to forum info...

pickuptrucks.com wrote:
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2012/03/the-weight-game-understanding-pickup-classes-and-where-they-cam...

The Weight Game: Understanding Pickup Classes--And Where They Came From
Posted by Mark Williams March 31, 2012

By Mike Magda

Learning the idiomatic differences among modern half-, three-quarter- and one-ton pickups is a rite of passage in becoming a truck enthusiast. We understand truck lingo, and we use its terms fluidly when chatting with other enthusiasts at truck shows or at the 4x4 shop.

Judging by questions in various web forums and talking with a number of clueless sales reps at dealerships, we’ve noticed that many people involved with trucks don’t get it. They either haven’t heard of certain terms or fail to grasp that these terms are no longer literal references to payload capacity. In today’s truck enthusiast vernacular, half-, three-quarter- and one-ton designations help differentiate consumer pickups by a manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating, or GVWR. They help distinguish the “class” of truck we drive instead of trying to reveal a specific capability.

But where did these terms originate, and how did they evolve into a different meaning within today’s truck lingo? We’re not completely sure, but with a little research we’ve developed a theory — albeit one with a couple holes that our readers might be able to help close.

Defining Terms: GVWR
GVWR represents manufacturer’s maximum allowable weight for a fully loaded vehicle. This includes the vehicle weight, maximum cargo and passengers. The manufacturer establishes the GVWR based on considerable load-carrying criteria, including, but not limited to, axle capacity, wheel and tire combination, frame strength, and suspension components. A truck’s GVWR is usually listed on a sticker in the doorjamb and in the owner’s manual. Remember, GVWR changes considerably across a vehicle’s lineup. A 4x2 regular cab/standard bed with a V-6 will have a different GVWR from a V-8-powered 4x4 crew cab/long bed.

Let’s define payload, since that term is part of this discussion. A vehicle’s payload capacity is calculated by subtracting the weight of the vehicle from the GVWR. For example, let’s say your truck’s GVWR is 6,800 pounds, and on the scale it weighs 5,375 pounds with a full tank of gas but no passengers or cargo. The maximum payload that particular truck can safely support is 1,425 pounds. One of the biggest misconceptions by first-time truck owners is that payload refers only to the cargo in the bed; however, the vehicle’s calculated payload includes all occupants, items stored in the cab and the tongue weight of the trailer when towing.



A History of Payload
Payload has been a measure of load-carrying capability for centuries. To meet commercial transport demands, engineers rated the payload capacity of ships, railcars and probably stagecoaches long before the first automobile — usually in metric tonnes (1,000 kilograms) or our current standard of a short ton equaling 2,000 pounds.

In fact, trucks were given payload ratings before they were even invented. According to the book “Trucks: An Illustrated History 1896-1920,” a French engineer patented a design for a “4-ton truck” in 1828. When trucks started appearing near the turn of the century, most were described with a payload rating — and with good reason. They were directly competing against horse-drawn carts for moving goods. Advertising that these new vehicles could carry one or two tons of cargo with an engine rated at 20 or 30 horsepower was a distinct advantage.

In 1911, Captain Alexander E. Williams wrote in the Infantry Journal that the military should put a greater emphasis on motor-powered vehicles. That same year the captain started conducting tests with one- and three-ton trucks, and he was charged with establishing specifications for a standard military truck. As early as 1913, the Society of Automotive Engineers and the Quartermaster Corps formulated detailed specifications for a standardized Army truck — but they were tabled briefly as the Calvary scoffed at the motor vehicle’s use in combat.

Smaller Models Appear
The Army did use trucks to move supplies when fighting Pancho Villa, then it used one-ton and larger trucks in World War I. Ford, which discouraged modifying its Model T into a truck, finally saw the potential for truck sales in 1917 and released the one-ton Model TT chassis. Other automakers ramped up truck production, mostly one-ton and larger trucks, for the war effort.

When the fighting stopped, automakers recognized the value of an expanded truck line for commercial and agriculture purposes, and they offered different payload options, including half-ton and three-quarter-ton versions. Slowly, the automakers differentiated these payload classes with separate model designations. For example, Dodge had the half-ton Series RC truck and the three-quarter-ton Series RD in 1938.

The military also stepped up its efforts to standardize trucks and established a wider range of payload classes, including quarter-ton (example: Jeep), half-ton (command cars) and three-quarter-ton (ambulances) in addition to the one-ton and larger trucks used for artillery, munitions and personnel transport in World War II.

This classification mentality continued after WWII. In 1948, Ford designated its half-ton model as the F-1 followed by the F-2 (three-quarter-ton) and F-3 (one-ton). Ford, of course, expanded those badges to F-100/150, F-250 and F-350 by the late 1950s. Dodge used a variety of designations until the familiar D/W100, 200 and 300 models started in the late ‘50s. Chevy also used a quirky approach to model designations with its Series 1100 through 3800 lineup in the ‘50s, but in the ’60s the automaker established the more familiar C/K 10, 20 and 30 designations.



Looking For Help
Here’s where the trail gets a little fuzzy, and we could use a little more insight from PickupTrucks.com readers who are commercial and military historians. The military likely stood by its payload designations, even as the growing auto industry evolved. If it needed a three-quarter-ton payload truck for flight line security, it got a truck with a payload capacity of at least 1,500 pounds. Whether or not there was an F-150 or C20 badge probably didn’t matter.

However, as the consumer truck market grew, automakers added more payload capacity to their trucks wearing the familiar badging that originated with the traditional half-, three-quarter- and one-ton designations. I suspect the automakers then initiated a combative one-upmanship marketing game by increasing the payload numbers for those models. Something like: “My half-ton can outhaul your half-ton!” very similar to what we see today.

So who kept the half-, three-quarter- and one-ton vernacular going, even though the automakers now had distinct model designations that no longer correlated directly to specific payload capacities? Our guess is that most consumer pickup buyers in the ‘60s and ‘70s were war veterans. When their sons took over the family business or went shopping for a ranch truck, they also talked in terms of half- or three-quarter-ton trucks, even though the payload capacities were much higher. It was most likely a matter of military language morphing into a popular colloquialism. And truck enthusiasts today continue to use those terms, much the same way they call any type of limited-slip differential a “posi” regardless if it truly is a Positraction unit.



Today’s Terminology
In today’s consumer market, the designations for half-, three-quarter- and one-ton trucks are a little different. Ford still goes with F-150, F-250 and F-350, respectively, while Ram, Chevy and GMC follow 1500, 2500 and 3500 terminology. Some modern half-ton trucks have payload ratings above 2,000 pounds. And a good one-ton pickup can carry more than 5,500 pounds. Payload simply isn’t the determining factor for the traditional designations. Now they’re used to identify a general GVWR range.

A half-ton or 150/1500 model typically falls under an 8,500-pound GVWR. A three-quarter-ton or 250/2500 model ranges between 8,500 and 9,990 pounds. A one-ton or 350/3500 truck is likely to be 9,900 pounds or more. Again, these are not official standards set down by a regulatory or engineering body. They’re just a reflection of today’s truck market. Ten years from now, the numbers may change and probably confuse even more new-truck buyers.

Adding to the puzzle, of course, is the government. Hardcore truck enthusiasts and commercial operators know about federal truck classifications based on GVWR. They are:


Class GVWR (pounds)

Class 1 0-6,000
Class 2 6,001-10,000
Class 3 10,001-14,000
Class 4 14,001-16,000
Class 5 16,001-19,500
Class 6 19,501-26,000
Class 7 26,001-33,000
Class 8 33,000 and higher


Categorizing these class designations can also be confusing when differentiating between “light duty” and “heavy duty.” For consumer vehicles, light duty is a half-ton truck, which can be Class 1 or 2, while heavy duty is a three-quarter- or one-ton truck, which is Class 2 or 3. In the commercial truck world, light duty is Class 1-3; medium duty is Class 4-6 and heavy duty is Class 7-8. It all depends on the context of the conversation.

So, that’s our theory on how the various model designations evolved, based on researching truck books at home and military reference books. However, we’re sure we may have missed something and would love to hear back from any PUTC readers with their contributions to this topic.




Sources for this article include:

An Illustrated History of Military Vehicles by Ian V. Hogg and John Weeks

Military Vehicles from World War I to the Present by Hans Halberstadt
Standard Catalog of US Military Vehicles, 1940-1965

Trucks: An Illustrated History 1896-1920 by G.N. Georgano and Carlo Demand

Standard Catalog of American Light Duty Trucks by James T. Lenzke and John Gunnell

[spud1957]

OH48Lt wrote:
Some of the confusion here may be thinking that all F-250's are created equal. They are not. Capacity depends on what options or configuration was chosen for each vehicle. If you buy the F250 with the lower payload, you do not get the F350 springs. The axles are the same. Order the F250 with the 10000 GVWR, and you get a F350 with 2" spring blocks and F250 badging. The camper package can be added, and that gives you the rear sway bar, and the helper springs if you did not choose the 10K package (why wouldn't anybody go for the 10K package??). The snow plow package will give the F250 the larger coils in the front.

Rear springs are the same excluding overloads. Look up the part numbers.

Part Number: BC3Z5560G

spring F350, w/o dual rear wheels, w/o 4WD Left
PARTS: Order by application.

Part Number: BC3Z5560G

spring F250, w/o 4WD Left
PARTS: Order by application

If it's a 4WD the letter is an "H".

Not sure how many times this has been discussed.

[taken]

OH48Lt wrote:
Some of the confusion here may be thinking that all F-250's are created equal. They are not. Capacity depends on what options or configuration was chosen for each vehicle. If you buy the F250 with the lower payload, you do not get the F350 springs. The axles are the same. Order the F250 with the 10000 GVWR, and you get a F350 with 2" spring blocks and F250 badging. The camper package can be added, and that gives you the rear sway bar, and the helper springs if you did not choose the 10K package (why wouldn't anybody go for the 10K package??). The snow plow package will give the F250 the larger coils in the front.

To make it much more simple... A 250 ordered with the identical options to a SRW 350 will be physically 100% the same but will always be rated less for no other reason than catering to a different market.

[OH48Lt]

Some of the confusion here may be thinking that all F-250's are created equal. They are not. Capacity depends on what options or configuration was chosen for each vehicle. If you buy the F250 with the lower payload, you do not get the F350 springs. The axles are the same. Order the F250 with the 10000 GVWR, and you get a F350 with 2" spring blocks and F250 badging. The camper package can be added, and that gives you the rear sway bar, and the helper springs if you did not choose the 10K package (why wouldn't anybody go for the 10K package??). The snow plow package will give the F250 the larger coils in the front.

[taken]

Exactly Bob. In many states registration and insurance are directly tied to GVWR. That's also why the SRW 350 can be ordered with a 10k GVWR package. It means nothing to the physical build but rather is de-rated on paper to save the end user fees. It always surprises me that people understand that the 10k rated 350 is the same as an 11.5k rated 350 but can't fathom the 250 also being the same truck.... even when presented with the part numbers to back it up.

[bsbeedub]

taken wrote:

rhagfo wrote:

The reason the F250 is lower is the 17" tires rated at 3,195#, the F350 comes with 18" tires rated at3,525#.

One other point, even if the axle shafts were smaller, it would not affect carrying capacity of a full floating axle as the axle hub carries the weight not the shaft.

Most opt for the 18" wheels on a 250 as well. The point of all this being, yes, a 250 can be ordered with less capacity. It can also be ordered to be 100% identical to a SRW 350 and yet it's ratings will still be falsely lower on paper due to Ford marketing the 250 to the Class 2 market.

I guess similar to back in the muscle car glory days an engine like a 428 Cobra Jet or 426 Hemi indicated a much lower horsepower rating for insurance purposes.

[taken]

rhagfo wrote:

The reason the F250 is lower is the 17" tires rated at 3,195#, the F350 comes with 18" tires rated at3,525#.

One other point, even if the axle shafts were smaller, it would not affect carrying capacity of a full floating axle as the axle hub carries the weight not the shaft.

Most opt for the 18" wheels on a 250 as well. The point of all this being, yes, a 250 can be ordered with less capacity. It can also be ordered to be 100% identical to a SRW 350 and yet it's ratings will still be falsely lower on paper due to Ford marketing the 250 to the Class 2 market.

[rhagfo]

taken wrote:

ttommyy48 wrote:


Actually, the rear axles are different. Refer to pages 80 & 81 of the last link. F250 rear axle is only rated at 6200#, F350 is rated at 7280#. Contrary to popular belief on this forum, they do not just change the door jamb stickers/fender emblems.

Actually the rear axles are NOT different. They are identical and have the same part number. They are artificially de-rated from the factory just like the entire 250 truck is.

F250 Left Rear Axle BC3Z4234C
F250 Right Rear Axle BC3Z4234D

F350 Left Rear Axle BC3Z4234C
F350 Right Rear Axle BC3Z4234D

Links to verify:

250

350

Here is a link to the question being asked directly to a Ford engineer when they were on the FTE forums answering questions about the 2015 motor update. They were only there to answer questions about 2015 so the MY is mentioned but is irrelevant as they are all the same.

FTE

The reason the F250 is lower is the 17" tires rated at 3,195#, the F350 comes with 18" tires rated at3,525#.

One other point, even if the axle shafts were smaller, it would not affect carrying capacity of a full floating axle as the axle hub carries the weight not the shaft.

[taken]

carringb wrote:


The specs in that PDF are for each component, not for each assembly like you see posted on the door sticker. 6200# is the rating as configured for Ford. While some versions of the Sterling 10.5" go higher, that is absolutely the rating for that exact axle. The F250 version of that axle has smaller axle shafts and less splines than the F350 version.

Also incorrect. They are identical and have the same diameter and number of splines. See above. The higher spline count and larger diameter is a very well known misprint in Ford's tech literature. It's been discussed ad nausem on the forums and debunked by anyone who has taken the time to compare the part numbers between the two.