F150 vs 250

[Volkov]

Considering replacing the old girl - 04 8.1 Yukon XL as her electrical gremlins and module failures are becoming increasingly frequent. Plan 1 had been max payload SCrew with max tow pkg but then saw 250 with 6.2 for about the same $$. Both Lariats.
THe one thing I have not seen discussed (with apologies if my search skills are lacking) is the flip of the significant curb weight difference. It is great that the light weight f150 bumps its tow capacity, but coming in a only 5k#, I stopped to wonder if it might be more prone to being pushed around by the 8000+# I would have behind it. THoughts? Anyone with real life experience with the two?

[Volkov]

Yes, I mean shifting to first or second to keep speed down and keep off the brakes. Something I always use when driving the Duffy Lake Road.
We drive that about every one to two years. Don't let that shallow 10% at the end fool you, that is where the 6 switchbacks are!! First sign is hard to read...it is 13%. And those speed limits are km not mph, so multiply by .6 for conversion.

Downshifting lets me get down nice and slow in complete control and the tranny temps actually drop. I use the brakes only in pulses when the revs climb too high. Usually behind someone in a small vehicle whose brake lights are on the entire time with that wonderful smell of burning brake fluid.

[SoCalDesertRid1]

The 6.2 gas with 4.30 gears will have better engine braking than with 3.73 gears. There is no exhaust brake for the gas engines, that I am aware of. Using lower gears in the transmission accomplishes engine braking with a gas engine.

[brulaz]

Volkov wrote:

...
Less worried about going up than coming down. That remains the crux for me I think. How well does the EB engine brake on downhills?
...

If you let it rev up it will brake. But when you're used to cruising at 1700rpm, allowing the engine/tranny to rev in first gear to 4500-5000rpm at ~25 mph is rather disturbing and noisy. Can't be that good for the drive train either. But it definitely works.

In our experience, 2nd gear and lower rpms didn't provide enough engine braking, and we cooked the brakes down that particular Appalachian trail.

We only had this issue once or twice on small roads in the Appalachians over the 25K kms we towed with the truck. But after the first couple of times, I avoided those descents. Now I don't have to with the new truck. On regular highways we never had an issue with engine braking.

[Volkov]

DwnSth, many thanks for the info. NO, won't find a diesel 250 for comparable $$ but the gas 6.2 can be , and that would be my target. Less worried about going up than coming down. That remains the crux for me I think. How well does the EB engine brake on downhills? The next consideration is weighing the 2017 improvements relative to the deep discounts with employee pricing right now. I understand that the SCrew in the 250 is actually smaller than the 150 but that will change this year. Thought the back seat of the 150 was cavernous to begin with, and certainly bigger than the back seat of my current TV so not a concern really. Sales guy is trying to dissuade from the 250. NO idea why ( but I do have theories)and I could care less. I will decide based on my needs and expectations.

[myredracer]

We upgraded from an F150 to an F250 and the difference is black and white. Seriously! An F250 is a much more capable towing machine. We've got 4.10 gears which is really nice for the hills and mountains and it accelerates great. Never a need for more power. Lots payload capacity and braking is excellent. The longer wheelbase of the supercab and long bed helps for reducing sway. I like the power and torque of the V10 but it's no big deal compared to other recent engines on the market now. I just wish it didn't have 4WD.

[DwnSth]

Thought I'd chime in here since I'm running a 2013 F150 with the HD payload. My trailer sits between 7200 and 7500 loaded for trip when calculated from scaled weights. With myself, wife, two 100 lbs. dogs and loaded bed (generator etc.) I'm under every limit, payload, axles, tires etc. Only spot I have to keep a close eye on is hitch. I bump up right at 1100 lbs. so that's my only complaint (and no one makes a higher rated receiver for this model F150 with HD, they do for non-HD...but why?) Anyway, I've towed this set-up for well over 15K miles through mountains, flats, horrible rain storms (just yesterday coming down I59). This has been a great tow combination. It works well with this 31 ft. trailer and weight. Would I go any heavier or larger with a 150, probably not. The F150 when properly equipped is a wonderful tow vehicle. With my Equilizer hitch, I get no sway and only the occasional push/pull from a semi. I don't drive over 65 and never will towing a TT. I can't say for the current aluminum model, and I think the HD's are few and far between. The 2017 250 looks very nice from the early reviews. I've never been able to find a comparative new 250 diesel in the same price range as a similar equipped 150. May be just my local dealers or just the way they deal, who knows.

[IdaD]

Volkov wrote:

AlmostAnOldGuy wrote:

I believe the GVWR dropped from 8200 to 7850 for the 2015+ rigs. With the reduction in weight the payload still increased. Also, on the 2012 the receiver is good for 1150 with a WD hitch but that is less than you will get on the 250/2500 truck.

Yeah, they no longer upgrade to the 7 stud axles. That might be the reason for the lower gvwr. For me it was a bonus as it will be getting a set of winter wheels and the 7 stud weren't an easy or cheap pattern to find.
Max tongue is 1220 which is the same as my 1200 on the XL ( and many would say to keep it below that on the GM design on a 12 year old hitch.) and basically same as the 250 gasser which rates at 1250.

A thanks to everyone else's replies. It will be the gasser. I won't get into why and start a debate that has been beaten to death. We wanted the capacity to seat 6 with everyone getting both shoulder belts and headrest. That isn't negotiable with DW. Only the Ram and Ford give that. ONly the ford HD payload package offered the payload to be well above limits - something I knew without even looking ( I have been around a while). With the 250 in the discussion, maybe the Ram 2500 gets a revisit.
There are benefits to the 150 platform in daily use. 2 inch lower entry height might not sound like much, but with elderly parents with 3 bionic joints who we routinely drive around, it does make a difference.
The Lariat hits the spot for the indulgences I want. With 5 months of real winter, heated seats in a vehicle kept outside is no longer an option - it is a necessity for my purchase. Plus I want leather over cloth with kids and 3 large long haired dogs in the household. Cleans much easier.
I know the difference that 1500 to 2500 makes as I have done that upgrade, but given the 150 HD offers better numbers than my current 2500, it worked its way into the equation. Braking will be a big part of the final decision.

I don't think any HD Rams have a front center shoulder strap. Mine doesn't.

It sounds like you just need to decide whether your priority is towing or people hauling. Just make sure the F150 loaded up with your family and three big dogs has enough left over to tow and haul what you want. Look at all the ratings, not just payload.

[brulaz]

Volkov wrote:

...
There are benefits to the 150 platform in daily use. 2 inch lower entry height might not sound like much, but with elderly parents with 3 bionic joints who we routinely drive around, it does make a difference.
...

Ah yes. I used to be able to clamber front first into the bed of my F150, no more, and my wife can no longer reach over the side of the bed to get stuff. And hauling ourselves into the cab of the 2500 is a bit of a chore. Our diesel 2500 is definitely more of a "truck", rougher, noisier, but also a better tow-truck, especially going downhill.

If you're looking at big gas V8 3/4 tons, consider the RAM 6.4L in the 2500 as well. Actually all the big v8's in the 3/4 tons are supposed to be real good, reliable engines. Just gas hogs.

[Volkov]

AlmostAnOldGuy wrote:

I believe the GVWR dropped from 8200 to 7850 for the 2015+ rigs. With the reduction in weight the payload still increased. Also, on the 2012 the receiver is good for 1150 with a WD hitch but that is less than you will get on the 250/2500 truck.

Yeah, they no longer upgrade to the 7 stud axles. That might be the reason for the lower gvwr. For me it was a bonus as it will be getting a set of winter wheels and the 7 stud weren't an easy or cheap pattern to find.
Max tongue is 1220 which is the same as my 1200 on the XL ( and many would say to keep it below that on the GM design on a 12 year old hitch.) and basically same as the 250 gasser which rates at 1250.

A thanks to everyone else's replies. It will be the gasser. I won't get into why and start a debate that has been beaten to death. We wanted the capacity to seat 6 with everyone getting both shoulder belts and headrest. That isn't negotiable with DW. Only the Ram and Ford give that. ONly the ford HD payload package offered the payload to be well above limits - something I knew without even looking ( I have been around a while). With the 250 in the discussion, maybe the Ram 2500 gets a revisit.
There are benefits to the 150 platform in daily use. 2 inch lower entry height might not sound like much, but with elderly parents with 3 bionic joints who we routinely drive around, it does make a difference.
The Lariat hits the spot for the indulgences I want. With 5 months of real winter, heated seats in a vehicle kept outside is no longer an option - it is a necessity for my purchase. Plus I want leather over cloth with kids and 3 large long haired dogs in the household. Cleans much easier.
I know the difference that 1500 to 2500 makes as I have done that upgrade, but given the 150 HD offers better numbers than my current 2500, it worked its way into the equation. Braking will be a big part of the final decision.

[AlmostAnOldGuy]

Volkov wrote:
...I do think the brakes will be the biggest issue here. The GVWR is basically the same, just added payload for the weight they took off the truck in '15. NO doubt the 250 will see bigger brakes, but as I said they need that just to stay even. THe better engine braking of the 6.2 is a very good point. Years ago I picked up that advice here and have used it many times to good effect on some nasty descents.

I believe the GVWR dropped from 8200 to 7850 for the 2015+ rigs. With the reduction in weight the payload still increased. Also, on the 2012 the receiver is good for 1150 with a WD hitch but that is less than you will get on the 250/2500 truck.

Due to the larger payloads on the 250/2500 I think you will see a net gain on braking over the 150. The F150 has a very good brake controller and tow / haul mode. With that said the engine braking is definitely less than I had with the 8.1 and 4.10.

I will be curious what you think of the ride (and what the yellow payload sticker says) if you take one for a test drive. When the truck weighs about 5000 and has a payload of 2500 or so how comfortable is the ride? How does that compare to the F-250. If you want to compare 'apples to apples' check the air pressure on the tires and keep them similar on both rigs. I run at 50 lbs unloaded front and back which is more than I need when unloaded. Any lower and the TPMS complains.

Good luck,
Stu

p.s. Do you have a scale nearby? If you go for a test drive and scale it I would be curious what the axles come in at on the new F150 Max Payload. With the cap on and me in the rig - front is 3500, rear is 2800.

[SoCalDesertRid1]

Powerdude wrote:
I just got a F250 gas crew cab, outgoing model year (see my sig). It was cheaper than most current production F150 crew cabs with aluminum body by about $3k.

Yes, it's less efficient on gas, by about 3-4 mpg, but $3k can buy a lot of gas.

I'm sure some will want to argue, but in the exact same trim (XLT) and options, the F250 was cheaper by $3k, at 6 different dealers. Plus, it has way more payload (3k lbs), and more towing capacity (12k vs 11.3k lbs).

For me, it was a no-brainer.

I have found that to be true for a long time now. Those F150's are rediculously expensive, while the bigger trucks are similar and less, as long as you don't get the diesel.

The 6.2 gas with 4.30 axle can tow some heavy weight too, making the diesel unnecessary for all but the heaviest of fifth wheelers.

[Volkov]

Many thanks Stu that is just the sort of info I was hoping for. I also run a Dual Cam. One big thing will be the driving characteristics, so I will have to wait for the Max Payload that is coming in to the dealer.
I do think the brakes will be the biggest issue here. The GVWR is basically the same, just added payload for the weight they took off the truck in '15. NO doubt the 250 will see bigger brakes, but as I said they need that just to stay even. THe better engine braking of the 6.2 is a very good point. Years ago I picked up that advice here and have used it many times to good effect on some nasty descents.

[AlmostAnOldGuy]

Volkov wrote:
...I stopped to wonder if it might be more prone to being pushed around by the 8000+# I would have behind it. THoughts? Anyone with real life experience with the two?

I went from a very similar rig - 2001 Suburban 2500 with 8.1L and 4.10 to a 2012 F150 Max Payload. I am also towing an 8,000# trailer (loaded).

I use a Reese Dual Cam and the combination has worked well. I do not get pushed around. To repeat this is the Max Payload with the 8,200 GVWR (heavier axles, LT tires, heavier suspension). I also like how it drives as a daily driver.

Your specific question is about the new F150 Max Payload and I have not driven one of those. For that matter I am not aware of anyone on the forum that has a 2015+ Max Payload (there are about a half dozen 2011-2014 Max Payloads on the forum IIRC). My truck scales at at about 6,300 with the cap. A new AL version without a cap will likely come in 1000# lighter. Like you I would be concerned about that. You would be well within capacities for the Max Payload version but it is still a 5000# rig. You could utilize a premium hitch (Hensley or ProPride) which would help stability.

I would be interested in what you learn on this or other forums from owners of the current generation Max Payload.

As mentioned by several others if you go with a heavier platform (250 / 2500) and you will certainly be solid.

Good luck,
Stu

[IdaD]

transamz9 wrote:

spoon059 wrote:

valhalla360 wrote:
Oddly, we didn't find much difference in resale values once you get to 8-10yrs old when we bought a 2003 a few years back and with diesel typically a bit higher per gallon, most of the savings goes out.

I see the exact opposite where I am. 10 year old high mileage diesel trucks are still commanding a much higher premium than lower mileage gas engine trucks. I was even researching the 6.0 Fords and trying to figure in costs of bulletproofing them, they were still higher than gas engine trucks.

Same here. Every time I get my yearly tax bill on my 2005 Cummins I about pass out. Last three years the taxable value has went up.:M

x3

I initially planned to buy used but the discounts on used diesels weren't big enough compared to new so I went new instead. The only deals I found on used diesels were the bad Ford years but I didn't really want to deal with those issues, and even with those you're still paying a premium over gas (just not as much, with good reason).

Diesels cost more up front that gassers but in terms of total cost they're no more expensive or perhaps even a little cheaper. Really the cost element is overblown, imo - the difference isn't ultimately material. Now in terms of towing performance or fuel economy there are very material differences once you step up to a diesel.