Can my truck tow this?

If you don't have 8 lug wheels then fagetaboutit. I busted a 6 lug 1/2 ton axle @70mph on I-95 in SC in 1986 and have only used 3/4-1 ton 8 lug trucks since then for towing TTs.

^ lol

What the heck is that about "making up numbers and frozen children"?

valhalla360 wrote:

JRscooby wrote:
The ring and pinion in the rearend not only change the speed/power of rotation, they also change the direction. And I'm not a engineer, but I have rebuilt rearends that have different ratios moving the same loads. A higher speed ratio puts a lot more side force on the bearings. (And most of the "Bang! truck won't go" failures happen in reverse. Turning backward, the shape of teeth adds to the force"

But we are still back to...if you are within ratings, you shouldn't expect "bang! truck won't go".

They already addressed durability when setting the ratings.

Like ALL things great and small. No matter the tow rig too, you need to know WHAT the specs are for said ratings.just because you think you are under ratings, you may very well be way the heck over the ratings.
Examples.
Minimum gradability in first gear is 12%.if on a 13% grade, you may or may not be able to start, or if you hit said grade mid trip up a road, you may stall out.
Max frontal area for a given weight is 60 sq ft for smaller rigs, 80 sq ft for larger rigs. If maxed out weight Wise, but over the frontal area, you may not you may or may not make it to freeway speed, or hold the minimum speed required up a 5% freeway grade, over heat engine, trans, differential.
Minimum speed on said 5% freeway grade is 35 or 40 mph depending on gvw of the rig. Your minimum personal spec may be 50. You would consider said spec too low. You need more HP to go 50 mph, or lower the weight of trailer or frontal area, or make it more aerodynamic to meet your min speed spec.
I've had rigs under ratings, that di way worst than those OVER ratings. Depends on how the drivetrain is speced.

Marty

valhalla360 wrote:

But we are still back to...if you are within ratings, you shouldn't expect "bang! truck won't go".

They already addressed durability when setting the ratings.

You are right, a RVer is very unlikely to get over ratings far enough to hear the bang. But that does not change the fact that higher speed rear ends put more side force in the rear end. That friction must be overcome.

JRscooby wrote:
The ring and pinion in the rearend not only change the speed/power of rotation, they also change the direction. And I'm not a engineer, but I have rebuilt rearends that have different ratios moving the same loads. A higher speed ratio puts a lot more side force on the bearings. (And most of the "Bang! truck won't go" failures happen in reverse. Turning backward, the shape of teeth adds to the force"

But we are still back to...if you are within ratings, you shouldn't expect "bang! truck won't go".

They already addressed durability when setting the ratings.

^LOL, and for the small small % of people who prioritize climbing a 30% grade at max gcvw or more from a dead stop with a 1/2 ton, AND drive 15-20mph UNDER the posted speed limit in some places, the new 1/2 ton gearing isn’t optimal or needed for you.
But mfgs don’t typically mass produce things that aren’t popular or wanted by the majority, so there’s that.
For the rest of us, we can have a machine that not only tows very well, but cruises very comfortably with low rpms at high speeds.

Grit dog wrote:
Gents, I don't think anyone is arguing that lower final drives multiply torque more and generally are better for towing.
What I am saying, is, now, with more powerful engines and more gears (super deep first, 5-7 more underdrive ratios and still a couple OD gears) we can now have our cake and eat it too compared to times of yore.

Grit,
WHile I agree with ALL that you are saying. Some of us do not drive over 60-65 mph.....at all! As such, these taller RA ratio's while nice from an MPG at freeway speeds....some of us never will literally use or need said DOD gear, UNLESS, we can get a lower RA, say a 3.73 or 4.10 to have a decent rpm at 60-62.

But as noted, one needs an overall ratio of 24-1, with 400 lb ft of torque, to move 20K lbs up a 30% grade. How you get there, does not matter, you can do a 4-1 axle, 6-1 trans. or a 3-1 axle, with an 8-1 in trans. Both will do an equal job. The 4-1 with a .75 OD, will net you a 3-1 final drive, if the 3-1 RA is running in direct, same 3-1 final ratio.

No right or wrong way to look at this issue, only what is BEST for whos reading my 02!

Marty

Grit dog wrote:
Gents, I don't think anyone is arguing that lower final drives multiply torque more and generally are better for towing.
What I am saying, is, now, with more powerful engines and more gears (super deep first, 5-7 more underdrive ratios and still a couple OD gears) we can now have our cake and eat it too compared to times of yore.

Yup, lots of bickering, lack of understanding of modern day drive trains. Getting the best of everything, low end torque for takeoff when towing, taller gears with double overdrive for mileage, when not towing, and the ability to lock out gears to lessen up/down shifts, while running in the middle gears, or uphill/downhill.

Haven't heard from the OP in many pages, but I think he figured it out, early on, that his modern day/new truck will work.

Jerry

Gents, I don't think anyone is arguing that lower final drives multiply torque more and generally are better for towing.
What I am saying, is, now, with more powerful engines and more gears (super deep first, 5-7 more underdrive ratios and still a couple OD gears) we can now have our cake and eat it too compared to times of yore.