Is J2807 worthless?

[Huntindog]

A recent thread was locked due to brand bickering. Before I got a chance to respond to the latest turn of the conversation.

It was stated that J2807 a worthless standard by a few people... Primarily because it did not address a specific need that the poster felt was important,,,or did not have a high enough standard in a specific area...

This is nit picking. A standard is just that... A standard. If all meet the same standard in determining ratings, then the playing field is level.
The alternative is leaving it up to the smoke and mirrors of the marketing gurus, to come up with a number (and assorted fine print) that will sell to the public.

There will never be any standard that will totally satisfy everyone.

So it is better to have a minimum standard than not.
Those that for whatever reason think that the standard is not good enough for them... Are free to do their individual analyisis of the vehicles using the standard as a baseline to decide what TV meets their specicfic needs... They have been doing this now without any standard at all for years... So this standard would even help them.

[spud1957]

If you are fine with lower performance standards just so you can say your favorite make can tow 30k at a dismal 35 mph then fine. I would rather the standards be raised so it would be rated to tow a lower number at a higher speed closer to the actual speed limit.

X2

Some folks on here would rather thump their chests to say their truck is rated more than others and is J2807 compliant. That's fine if it strokes their ego. Whatever floats their boat. But if it means doing 35 mph up a hill? No thanks.

[ShinerBock]

Bionic Man wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:


That was actually the 2012 numbers, but as I said above they specifically "upgraded" and configured their truck to get high J807 numbers due to the lower standards and loopholes that it does not test. Basically overnight a 4.10 geared Ram 3500 with a 35 hp and 50 lb-ft of torque increase along with a slightly shorter 1-3rd gearing(4th is the same and 5-6th are taller) gave it enough of a performance boost to tow 30k the same as the previous model would tow 22k. Riiiggghhhttt....

Just so you don't think that I am just picking on Ram, I don't think that just a 40 hp and 60 lb-ft increase would allow the F450 to tow 31k with the same performance as it did with towing the 24k it was rated for the previous year either.

I can't speak to the Ford, but you are missing a LOT of the upgrades to RAM between 2012 and 2013. It is a whole new truck.

I listed the upgraded earlier in this thread. However, I am talking about performance upgrades as stated above. There is no way that adding just 35 hp and 50 lb-ft with slightly shorter ratios in the first three gears would allow you to tow 30k with the same performance and towing speed as you would without those upgrades and towing 22k. The only way that could happen is if the performance standards were lowered.

If you are fine with lower performance standards just so you can say your favorite make can tow 30k at a dismal 35 mph then fine. I would rather the standards be raised so it would be rated to tow a lower number at a higher speed closer to the actual speed limit.

[FishOnOne]

Cummins12V98 wrote:
"Then there is the Ram 3500. Before Ram made all their "upgrades" specifically for the J2807 the most a 3500 was rated tow was 22.7k lbs. Then afterwards it was 30k.

There is an incredible difference between my 2011 Dually and my current 15 Dually. RAM specifically has not just made up numbers. They LOOKED the same but that is the only similarity.

I thought ram made the changes due to poor sales so they copied Fords business model.

[Bionic_Man]

ShinerBock wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:
"Then there is the Ram 3500. Before Ram made all their "upgrades" specifically for the J2807 the most a 3500 was rated tow was 22.7k lbs. Then afterwards it was 30k.

There is an incredible difference between my 2011 Dually and my current 15 Dually. RAM specifically has not just made up numbers. They LOOKED the same but that is the only similarity.

That was actually the 2012 numbers, but as I said above they specifically "upgraded" and configured their truck to get high J807 numbers due to the lower standards and loopholes that it does not test. Basically overnight a 4.10 geared Ram 3500 with a 35 hp and 50 lb-ft of torque increase along with a slightly shorter 1-3rd gearing(4th is the same and 5-6th are taller) gave it enough of a performance boost to tow 30k the same as the previous model would tow 22k. Riiiggghhhttt....

Just so you don't think that I am just picking on Ram, I don't think that just a 40 hp and 60 lb-ft increase would allow the F450 to tow 31k with the same performance as it did with towing the 24k it was rated for the previous year either.

I can't speak to the Ford, but you are missing a LOT of the upgrades to RAM between 2012 and 2013. It is a whole new truck.

[ShinerBock]

Cummins12V98 wrote:
"Then there is the Ram 3500. Before Ram made all their "upgrades" specifically for the J2807 the most a 3500 was rated tow was 22.7k lbs. Then afterwards it was 30k.

There is an incredible difference between my 2011 Dually and my current 15 Dually. RAM specifically has not just made up numbers. They LOOKED the same but that is the only similarity.

That was actually the 2012 numbers, but as I said above they specifically "upgraded" and configured their truck to get high J807 numbers due to the lower standards and loopholes that it does not test. Basically overnight a 4.10 geared Ram 3500 with a 35 hp and 50 lb-ft of torque increase along with a slightly shorter 1-3rd gearing(4th is the same and 5-6th are taller) gave it enough of a performance boost to tow 30k the same as the previous model would tow 22k. Riiiggghhhttt....

Just so you don't think that I am just picking on Ram, I don't think that just a 40 hp and 60 lb-ft increase would allow the F450 to tow 31k with the same performance as it did with towing the 24k it was rated for the previous year either.

[Cummins12V98]

"Then there is the Ram 3500. Before Ram made all their "upgrades" specifically for the J2807 the most a 3500 was rated tow was 22.7k lbs. Then afterwards it was 30k.

There is an incredible difference between my 2011 Dually and my current 15 Dually. RAM specifically has not just made up numbers. They LOOKED the same but that is the only similarity.

[ShinerBock]

Huntindog wrote:

I like to tow at or slightly above the posted speed limit. Therefore I think your idea of a "test" is inadequete.:B

Give it a rest.


There is no such thing as a "perfect" test in everyones eyes.
We could go back to when there were no standards, and they could just pull numbers out of a hat.

I did give it a rest on the last page, but then mileshuff brought it back up again quoting me so I responded.


Although in a way I wish they would go back to having no standards. At least back then the tow numbers were more reasonable. Like I said earlier, before J2807 the max tow rating for 350/3500 trucks was under 25K. Now after J2807 the ratings skyrocketed to 30K and above.

For example....

Before the J2807, the pick up version of the F450 was rated at 24.7k. Then Ford made a few changes just get some high numbers on the test and the post J2807 number is 31.2k

Then there is the Ram 3500. Before Ram made all their "upgrades" specifically for the J2807 the most a 3500 was rated tow was 22.7k lbs. Then afterwards it was 30k.

Currently, the GM 3500s are rated at 22.9k at most. How much you want to bet that that number is going to jump to over 30k when they make their already stated "upgrades" to the truck specifically to get a high number on the test so they can market higher numbers.

Basically what is going to happen is exactly what happens with the EPA fuel mileage numbers. Automakers will configure their vehicle just to pass with high numbers on a test for marketing reasons when in reality most can't even get those numbers if they tried or it is not reasonably safe to do so.

[Cummins12V98]

Part of the tests are to determine if a truck will be able to perform these tasks over and over again and not just ONCE.

[Huntindog]

ShinerBock wrote:

mileshuff wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
Now which is more reasonable for this 350/3500 truck to be rated to tow...30k or 23k? Again, keep in mind that the truck will not be test going down the hill towing that weight. Funny thing is, most of these 350/3500 DRW trucks were rated at around 23k before J2807 came out.

Although, I would have to ask how many typical people tow 30k in their 350/3500 or how many people hear tow 12k in their 150/1500 trucks? That is what these trucks are J2807 rated for since the standard is so low at 40 mph for SRW and 35 mph for DRW.

The test itself makes little difference if all trucks perform the same tests. Now we can compare. It doesn't matter if the tests represent what YOU will need. I can now compare one truck with another. Its not difficult to derive expected results for your particular needs.

I can pull my 5'er up highway 68 at 50mph. Mine is rather lite at 10K. I can downshift and pull at 65mph easily if I want to redline the engine the entire way. Would that be an accurate test? Again, it makes little difference as long as the conditions are the same for which to compare.

Most here realize that tow ratings are maximums with expected low speeds. Car manufactures also give 0-60mph times. How many people actually do 0-60mph starts on a typical basis? Very few but the times do give a good comparison between vehicles.

Then why are you for such high 30k tow ratings if you or the "typical person" will never even tow that much?

Also, I am not against a standardized tests to make sure everyone is comparing apples to apples. I just think the standards on that test should be raised so that the ratings from the tests are more inline with reality and safer towing. I don't see why one would be against having lower tow ratings to a more reasonable and safer number. Are you seriously telling that you think that a DRW 7,500 lb regular cab 3500 should be rated to tow over 31K? Or that a half ton should be rated to tow over 12k? That is the ratings of trucks now due to the low standards of the J2807.

I like to tow at or slightly above the posted speed limit. Therefore I think your idea of a "test" is inadequete.:B

Give it a rest.


There is no such thing as a "perfect" test in everyones eyes.
We could go back to when there were no standards, and they could just pull numbers out of a hat.

[ShinerBock]

mileshuff wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
Now which is more reasonable for this 350/3500 truck to be rated to tow...30k or 23k? Again, keep in mind that the truck will not be test going down the hill towing that weight. Funny thing is, most of these 350/3500 DRW trucks were rated at around 23k before J2807 came out.

Although, I would have to ask how many typical people tow 30k in their 350/3500 or how many people hear tow 12k in their 150/1500 trucks? That is what these trucks are J2807 rated for since the standard is so low at 40 mph for SRW and 35 mph for DRW.

The test itself makes little difference if all trucks perform the same tests. Now we can compare. It doesn't matter if the tests represent what YOU will need. I can now compare one truck with another. Its not difficult to derive expected results for your particular needs.

I can pull my 5'er up highway 68 at 50mph. Mine is rather lite at 10K. I can downshift and pull at 65mph easily if I want to redline the engine the entire way. Would that be an accurate test? Again, it makes little difference as long as the conditions are the same for which to compare.

Most here realize that tow ratings are maximums with expected low speeds. Car manufactures also give 0-60mph times. How many people actually do 0-60mph starts on a typical basis? Very few but the times do give a good comparison between vehicles.

Then why are you for such high 30k tow ratings if you or the "typical person" will never even tow that much?

Also, I am not against a standardized tests to make sure everyone is comparing apples to apples. I just think the standards on that test should be raised so that the ratings from the tests are more inline with reality and safer towing. I don't see why one would be against having lower tow ratings to a more reasonable and safer number. Are you seriously telling that you think that a DRW 7,500 lb regular cab 3500 should be rated to tow over 31K? Or that a half ton should be rated to tow over 12k? That is the ratings of trucks now due to the low standards of the J2807.

[mileshuff]

ShinerBock wrote:
Now which is more reasonable for this 350/3500 truck to be rated to tow...30k or 23k? Again, keep in mind that the truck will not be test going down the hill towing that weight. Funny thing is, most of these 350/3500 DRW trucks were rated at around 23k before J2807 came out.

Although, I would have to ask how many typical people tow 30k in their 350/3500 or how many people hear tow 12k in their 150/1500 trucks? That is what these trucks are J2807 rated for since the standard is so low at 40 mph for SRW and 35 mph for DRW.

The test itself makes little difference if all trucks perform the same tests. Now we can compare. It doesn't matter if the tests represent what YOU will need. I can now compare one truck with another. Its not difficult to derive expected results for your particular needs.

I can pull my 5'er up highway 68 at 50mph. Mine is rather lite at 10K. I can downshift and pull at 65mph easily if I want to redline the engine the entire way. Would that be an accurate test? Again, it makes little difference as long as the conditions are the same for which to compare.

Most here realize that tow ratings are maximums with expected low speeds. Car manufactures also give 0-60mph times. How many people actually do 0-60mph starts on a typical basis? Very few but the times do give a good comparison between vehicles.

[ShinerBock]

mileshuff wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
These are the two main reasons why I say raise the speed requirement which in turn would lower the tow ratings to a more reasonable number most pickup truck owners would tow with these trucks. Plus since the J2807 doesn't have a long distance down hill braking test I wouldn't mind seeing some lower towing numbers on these vehicles.

The gradeability test is done on highway 68 in AZ climbing from 550ft to 3500ft in 11 miles. It's a decent highway to use for such testing. Very few 2500/3500 trucks towing 25Klb+ rigs can sustain 55mph up this grade. Especially when its 115F! Making the test 55mph minimum isn't real world. I want tests that are inline with what the typical person would be experiencing.

For one, I don't think an 250/2500 should be towing 25K and and barely think a 350/3500 should.

Fore two, I don't think you are understanding what I am saying or how the J2807 works. If any of those 2500/3500 trucks you named above cannot tow 25k then their tow rating will decrease to an amount they can safely tow up the Davis Dam at the set lowest speed limit. That is how it works. The only thing that raising the speed limit requirement would do is make it harder to perform the test therefore the tow ratings will be lowered to a more reasonable number.... nothing more.

Basically this is how it goes. They take a 3500 DRW truck. They strap 20k to the back of that truck and send it up the hill. That truck maintains a minimum of 60 mph of the run which is well above the 35 mph so they strap more weight onto it and send it up again. The second run they strap 25k to the truck and it does a minimum of 50 mph up the hill. Now, any sane person would say "That is enough weight for a 3500/3500 truck", but these are truck makes that want to say that their truck is "best in class" so they strap even more weight and send it up the hill. On this run they strap 30k to the back of the truck and the truck is barely able to maintain 35 mph so voila... you have your tow rating of 30k. Keep in mind that this J2807 does not test towing that 30k down that very same hill.

So..... What will raising the speed limit to 55 do? Take the very same 3500 DRW truck performing the very same test above on the first run and send it up the hill with 20k. Like above it is able to do a minimum of 60 mph so they will put more weight on it. This time since they were so close to the 55 mph minimum, they only put 23k on the second run. The second run with 23k the truck ran a minimum of 55 mph up the hill so voila... you have your tow rating of 23k.

Now which is more reasonable for this 350/3500 truck to be rated to tow...30k or 23k? Again, keep in mind that the truck will not be test going down the hill towing that weight. Funny thing is, most of these 350/3500 DRW trucks were rated at around 23k before J2807 came out.


Although, I would have to ask how many typical people tow 30k in their 350/3500 or how many people hear tow 12k in their 150/1500 trucks? That is what these trucks are J2807 rated for since the standard is so low at 40 mph for SRW and 35 mph for DRW.

[mileshuff]

ShinerBock wrote:
These are the two main reasons why I say raise the speed requirement which in turn would lower the tow ratings to a more reasonable number most pickup truck owners would tow with these trucks. Plus since the J2807 doesn't have a long distance down hill braking test I wouldn't mind seeing some lower towing numbers on these vehicles.

The gradeability test is done on highway 68 in AZ climbing from 550ft to 3500ft in 11 miles. It's a decent highway to use for such testing. Very few 2500/3500 trucks towing 25Klb+ rigs can sustain 55mph up this grade. Especially when its 115F! Making the test 55mph minimum isn't real world. I want tests that are inline with what the typical person would be experiencing.

[45Ricochet]

rhagfo wrote:

I think they are still fighting server issues!

Lets not get political :B