2011 Ram 2500 6.7 tow capacity?

[sjturbo]

Hope I can get some quick responses on this as I am going to check out a 2011 Ram 2500 LB with a 40gal aux tank, with air bags. I have a 2010 Laredo 316RL I currently tow with a 2001 F250 (max cap 12500lb). I think I load to about 11500. Will the Ram handle the load? Does anyone know where the published specs on the 2011 Ram can be found. Thanks for the quick responses?

[FishOnOne]

Me Again wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Me Again wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Me Again wrote:
What will Troy do when Ford plays catch up and does something similar. Oh wait, may take another 18 years. Chris

Actually Chris Ford did do something similar in 1998... but I wouldn't expect you to know such facts.

If you are referring to the Expedition offering, internet search seem to indicate that it was not that good of a system. Like our Buick Rainier with rear air, it appears the best solution was to replace the air bags with coil springs. BTW our 2004 Buick is still riding on its OEM air bags with only 65K on the clock.


f=712494&y=1998&utm_campaign=gb_csv_br&utm_content=SSP&scid=scplp1ASSP00479-712494-1998&sc_intid=1AS...





So are the Rainier and Expeditions systems similar to the 3500 RAM's, no.

No... I'm referring to the F250 and more specific the LD version.

Which was really a F150 HD, and is in a completely different league from the RAM 3500. And similar coil conversion to the Expedition were offered.

http://www.strutmasters.com/products/1997-2000-ford-f-250-light-duty-pickup-truck-rear-air-suspensio...

It doesn't matter... Ford has already done it years ago so your statement above was incorrect, and they both will eventually fail with the likelihood under heavy loads.

As far as catch up Ford now has class leading payload, towing, and the highest GAWR.

[Me_Again]

FishOnOne wrote:

Me Again wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Me Again wrote:
What will Troy do when Ford plays catch up and does something similar. Oh wait, may take another 18 years. Chris

Actually Chris Ford did do something similar in 1998... but I wouldn't expect you to know such facts.

If you are referring to the Expedition offering, internet search seem to indicate that it was not that good of a system. Like our Buick Rainier with rear air, it appears the best solution was to replace the air bags with coil springs. BTW our 2004 Buick is still riding on its OEM air bags with only 65K on the clock.


f=712494&y=1998&utm_campaign=gb_csv_br&utm_content=SSP&scid=scplp1ASSP00479-712494-1998&sc_intid=1AS...





So are the Rainier and Expeditions systems similar to the 3500 RAM's, no.

No... I'm referring to the F250 and more specific the LD version.

Which was really a F150 HD, and is in a completely different league from the RAM 3500. And similar coil conversion to the Expedition were offered.

http://www.strutmasters.com/products/1997-2000-ford-f-250-light-duty-pickup-truck-rear-air-suspensio...

[BenK]

Folks..springs all have their positives and negatives...it is just how/where/etc they are designed into whatever

Springs...that includes the tires...as tires have that and many other duties...comes in many different forms

Leaf springs have more but not better attributes for automotive. Coil, air, etc all need additional...locational components. Like a panhard rod for side to side locational duties...links for side to side & forward/revers locational duties

Leaf springs can do all that locational duties and also carry a load...

As with anything, they can do the job...as long as they are designed in correctly

Here are the types of air bags I've designed into industrial stuff back in the 80's...
Firestone Industrial Air Springs

The curves might be of interest, as they correlate with automotive air springs too...just in a much smaller zone. Why air springs can have a much softer ride...while carrying similar to higher loads vs leaf springs

Sent from my iPad

[FishOnOne]

Me Again wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

Me Again wrote:
What will Troy do when Ford plays catch up and does something similar. Oh wait, may take another 18 years. Chris

Actually Chris Ford did do something similar in 1998... but I wouldn't expect you to know such facts.

If you are referring to the Expedition offering, internet search seem to indicate that it was not that good of a system. Like our Buick Rainier with rear air, it appears the best solution was to replace the air bags with coil springs. BTW our 2004 Buick is still riding on its OEM air bags with only 65K on the clock.


f=712494&y=1998&utm_campaign=gb_csv_br&utm_content=SSP&scid=scplp1ASSP00479-712494-1998&sc_intid=1AS...





So are the Rainier and Expeditions systems similar to the 3500 RAM's, no.

No... I'm referring to the F250 and more specific the LD version.

[Me_Again]

FishOnOne wrote:

Me Again wrote:
What will Troy do when Ford plays catch up and does something similar. Oh wait, may take another 18 years. Chris

Actually Chris Ford did do something similar in 1998... but I wouldn't expect you to know such facts.

If you are referring to the Expedition offering, internet search seem to indicate that it was not that good of a system. Like our Buick Rainier with rear air, it appears the best solution was to replace the air bags with coil springs. BTW our 2004 Buick is still riding on its OEM air bags with only 65K on the clock.


f=712494&y=1998&utm_campaign=gb_csv_br&utm_content=SSP&scid=scplp1ASSP00479-712494-1998&sc_intid=1AS...





So are the Rainier and Expeditions systems similar to the 3500 RAM's, no.

[FishOnOne]

Me Again wrote:
What will Troy do when Ford plays catch up and does something similar. Oh wait, may take another 18 years. Chris

Actually Chris Ford did do something similar in 1998... but I wouldn't expect you to know such facts.

[Me_Again]

What will Troy do when Ford plays catch up and does something similar. Oh wait, may take another 18 years. Chris

[rhagfo]

FishOnOne wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

Old-Biscuit wrote:

IdaD wrote:

Old-Biscuit wrote:
Payload & RAWR if one cares about ratings.......

Otherwise you can justify being overloaded like using air bags (which do NOT add any capacity)

Ignorance is bliss!

Edit to clarify - the only difference between OPs truck and a 3500 is a softer rear spring pack. That can be directly addressed with airbags and thus in this situation you can effectively add capacity with air bags. Everything else between the two trucks is identical.

Common sense, people. This isn't complicated.

Air bags do not add capacity.
2500 has 10,000# GVWR
3500 has 12,000# GVWR

BIG difference.
Correct..........it isn't complicated

Go with ratings or 'justify'

Technically I agree on the bags comment. But they sure hold up a lot of weight on my truck with only two full length springs.

I cringe every time I see that picture...

Do you cringe every time a semi passes you with air suspension??

[FishOnOne]

Cummins12V98 wrote:

Old-Biscuit wrote:

IdaD wrote:

Old-Biscuit wrote:
Payload & RAWR if one cares about ratings.......

Otherwise you can justify being overloaded like using air bags (which do NOT add any capacity)

Ignorance is bliss!

Edit to clarify - the only difference between OPs truck and a 3500 is a softer rear spring pack. That can be directly addressed with airbags and thus in this situation you can effectively add capacity with air bags. Everything else between the two trucks is identical.

Common sense, people. This isn't complicated.

Air bags do not add capacity.
2500 has 10,000# GVWR
3500 has 12,000# GVWR

BIG difference.
Correct..........it isn't complicated

Go with ratings or 'justify'

Technically I agree on the bags comment. But they sure hold up a lot of weight on my truck with only two full length springs.

I cringe every time I see that picture...

[Cummins12V98]

Old-Biscuit wrote:

IdaD wrote:

Old-Biscuit wrote:
Payload & RAWR if one cares about ratings.......

Otherwise you can justify being overloaded like using air bags (which do NOT add any capacity)

Ignorance is bliss!

Edit to clarify - the only difference between OPs truck and a 3500 is a softer rear spring pack. That can be directly addressed with airbags and thus in this situation you can effectively add capacity with air bags. Everything else between the two trucks is identical.

Common sense, people. This isn't complicated.

Air bags do not add capacity.
2500 has 10,000# GVWR
3500 has 12,000# GVWR

BIG difference.
Correct..........it isn't complicated

Go with ratings or 'justify'

Technically I agree on the bags comment. But they sure hold up a lot of weight on my truck with only two full length springs.

[SoCalDesertRid1]

Ford/GM/Dodge should really just stop putting the diesel in the 250/2500 trucks. Equip them only with the gas engine. Put the diesel in the 350/3500 trucks. That would solve alot of lack of payload problems with the class 2 trucks right there.

[SoCalDesertRid1]

...Or, you could just buy a 3500 truck, and not have to 'upgrade' anything to get the weight rating you need...

Sometimes the simplest solution is the most overlooked... :w

[john_bet]

Grit dog wrote:

Old-Biscuit wrote:
Payload & RAWR if one cares about ratings.......

Otherwise you can justify being overloaded like using air bags (which do NOT add any capacity)

But you're only overloaded on paper since you have the same axle and chassis save for spring rate/design as a much heavier paper rated truck.
Same truck as the OP describes can have over 7klbs rawr based on the weak link of tires, right off the dealer lot. Up that again by a couple thousand pounds if you add 2 more rear tires and some more spring rate....factory.

One of these days, I'd like to see what all the weight police on here used to pull or haul back in the day when a 390 or 454, 3 speed auto, drum brakes truck with 16.5 rims and bias tires was all you could get.

Grit dog, how about a '61 Dodge 1 ton with a 225 cid slant six with a 16K tag loaded with wheat. Scales says 16k with 154 bushels on it. I done it more than once from field to elevator.

[john_bet]

sjturbo wrote:
I appreciate all of the inputs so far. Let me also clarify please. The Ram is a 2011 2500 Long Bed Single Rear Wheel Laramie with air bags. It has a 6.7 Cummins. At this point I do not know the gear ratio which makes some difference according to the charts.
According to the spec. sheets link that Old-Biscuit provided in his first post on this thread:
GVWR for the truck I am considering is listed at 9600lb.
GVWR for the same truck but in the 3500 series is listed at 10100lb.
A 500lb increase in GVWR.
As some have mentioned these numbers may not reflect actual scale weights measured, but at this time it is all I can work with.
I hope my clarification or the vehicle I am looking at will help in formulating additional inputs. Thanks.

I have a suggestion for you. Have the seller send you a picture of the door jamb stickers showing all the weights on it.

[sjturbo]

I appreciate all of the inputs so far. Let me also clarify please. The Ram is a 2011 2500 Long Bed Single Rear Wheel Laramie with air bags. It has a 6.7 Cummins. At this point I do not know the gear ratio which makes some difference according to the charts.
According to the spec. sheets link that Old-Biscuit provided in his first post on this thread:
GVWR for the truck I am considering is listed at 9600lb.
GVWR for the same truck but in the 3500 series is listed at 10100lb.
A 500lb increase in GVWR.
As some have mentioned these numbers may not reflect actual scale weights measured, but at this time it is all I can work with.
I hope my clarification or the vehicle I am looking at will help in formulating additional inputs. Thanks.