"Slide in truck camper not recommended for this truck"

[Royals_Fan]

So digging through my owners manual of my 1997 F-250 HD I found a paper that said not recommended for truck camper???? Anyone know wht thats all about?

[whizbang]

Flashback to September 2002...

We walk into the Ford dealership and my wife asks the salesmen "what's the biggest thing you have that not a diesel and not a dually"?

We drove off in a 2003 F-350 Crew, Long Bed, 4X4 with the 6.8L V10.

At home, I found the dreaded "not recommended" warning in the glove box. We ignored it.

[Royals_Fan]

Treehouser wrote:
It's entirely possible your F250 is the elusive mid- to late-90s "light duty" F250 longbed, which I've come to know a bit about because I happen to own one -- a 1995.

You'll want to check the sticker inside your door frame for the answer. The giveaway that it's a "light duty" model is that the GVWR is listed as 6600 pounds, rather than (if I remember right) more than 8000 for a standard F250 of this vintage.

I had a leaf professionally built and added to mine, as well as a transmission cooler, because I was overly sentimental about using this particular truck I have (it was my dad's), and plus mine has less than 50K miles on it, so it's like a new truck. But check your door, it may be rated for less than you might think and may need some surgery to perform as you'd like.

.....It's a HD 8600 gvwr front and rear sway bar tranny cooler.But I'm sure its gonna need some surgery:)

[Treehouser]

It's entirely possible your F250 is the elusive mid- to late-90s "light duty" F250 longbed, which I've come to know a bit about because I happen to own one -- a 1995.

You'll want to check the sticker inside your door frame for the answer. The giveaway that it's a "light duty" model is that the GVWR is listed as 6600 pounds, rather than (if I remember right) more than 8000 for a standard F250 of this vintage.

I had a leaf professionally built and added to mine, as well as a transmission cooler, because I was overly sentimental about using this particular truck I have (it was my dad's), and plus mine has less than 50K miles on it, so it's like a new truck. But check your door, it may be rated for less than you might think and may need some surgery to perform as you'd like.

[mkirsch]

Hope you won't lose any sleep over not knowing, because it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that they will never give a reason. Either there is no reason or it is a very petty/stupid reason. Regardless, it would probably open them up to litigation.

[towpro]

Page 111, 3rd one down is my truck.
This form says CWR (lbs) = 4587.21 lbs
But my "camper paper" says not recommended.

Plus I have looked, I can't see where they even offer a "camper package" in the new dodge line. Maybe only the air suspension ones are getting the camper paper that says OK?

Oh well, it would be interesting to know why they don't recommend, but its not stopping me. I bought the truck for using a truck camper and that is what I am doing.

[jefe_4x4]

It would be nice to see what the actual cause and effect is with each truck. It has been my experience that truck mfgrs., especially Dodge (and not so much Ford) try like crazy to give you only the minimum information to get their product across the finish line.
After reading the chart, it seems to me that just going from an extra cab down to a regular cab is a BIG increase in cargo capacity, way beyond the slight decrease in weight. And what about that touted 3.0L, V-6 Diesel's ability to move with a camper? Non existent. Must be a lightweight. I'm sure a lot of combined 'logic' has gone into making these tables, but I for one am not impressed. The one bright spot for TC-er's was the 3500 with a nearly 6000 pound cargo capacity. Of course, 2 WD, reg cab, gas, striped.
Just the minimum info gets us nowhere.
**************
The light weight 3.0L diesel reminds me of the past. Historic glimpse, beware: Do not continue reading if nostalgia offends you:
I've lived long enough to see the first wave of new concept vehicles come and go. In about 1978, International Harvester came out with an 80 HP, 3.3L, 6 cyl. Nissan Diesel in their Scout and Traveller 4WD's. The engine alone weighed 950 pounds. What a boat anchor. In fact, the engine was used around the world as a boat engine that would just keep running with its 23:1 compression ratio. This was well before the 'diesel warz' started around 2000. The hungry-for-diesel folks glommed onto this new rig and tried to pull long, heavy trailers which totally swamped the normally aspirated rig. I have this snap shot in my head going down the 5 fwy near San Onofre, passing a 1979 Scout Diesel pulling this impossibly long trailer, pumping the black @ 45 mph in the slow lane. I'm sure the driver spent a long time in each of the 4 speeds of the Warner Gear T-19, all synchro trans. to get up to 45 mph. At least he had his oil burner and was getting better mpg than a big block Chevy 454, Ford 390, or Dodge 401. We bought a used 1980 Traveler after they upgraded the engine to 101, neck snapping turbo charged HP. Slightly better but still no match for heavy loads or towing.
jefe

[Reddog1]

dhull wrote:
camper guide

perhaps this is the link you are referring to...

This is the chart I was referring to. Thanks for the link dhull .

I must say it could use a bit more information as to why a given truck is is recommended, and on others it is not. I haven't really studied the chart, and after doing so it might be more clear.

Wayne

[dhull]

camper guide

perhaps this is the link you are referring to...

[RWDIII]

to get the certicate,you must buy camper pack

[languiduck]

I'd run it!

[jefe_4x4]

There are a lot of moving parts to this dilemma. My SHORT BED, 2001.5 Dodge 2500/CTD/4x4 came with the factory authorized and installed "Camper Package". In trying to find out what actual physical differences there were between camper and camper not authorized, I found that my 'camper' package added the 3500 upper secondary springs, factory anti sway bars, front and rear, the new bigger disc brakes all around, the H.O. CTD (HP-245/TQ-505#feet), NV5600 trans (26K pound rated), and a 35 spline (not 30 spline), Dana 80 rear axle. The snow plow prep package I also ordered included the NV 241HD transfer case with the extra wide chain HD (to blunt the snow plow shock loading on the chain), higher spring rate front coils, and nothing else that I could see. It does have a transmission skid plate that I assume came with the extra long NV5600. Maybe not.
The things that remained the same were the wimpy Michelin tires and 8800 GVW which both were in cahoots to keep the lawyer generated GVW lower and satisfy the bean counters.
For those that suspect you can just upgrade your tires and suspension to get incredible carrying capacity, I would argue that it depends on how close to the edge you are willing to go. I'm reminded of the Clint's famous quote, "Are you feeling lucky?"
Years ago I had a good laugh when a guy with a 1/2 ton Ford pickup announced he could carry any size camper. I asked how that could be and he replied, "because I have the fabled Ford 9" rear axle."
I have seen the 'no camper' certification ebb and flow during my lifetime, seemingly having nothing to do with the actual carrying capacity of that year, only litigious considerations.
jefe

[Eric_Lisa]

My bet... Part legalese, part marketing.

The legal part... "Yeah, we recommended you don't do that. You did it anyway. Now it is all busted. Not our fault".

The marketing part... Anyone remember the "Camper Special" pickup truck models from the late 60's - early 70's? It wouldn't surprise me if they were throwing on a couple extra features - like a bed plug, adding a badge, charging a few extra grand, and calling it 'Camper ready' or something like that. Oh, and now we "Recommend this model if you are hauling a camper". Same basic truck, just more money.

-Eric

[cewillis]

'It was suggested that the paper was CYA for the auto companies.'
This is it pure and simple. NO other reason.

[SugarHillCTD]

Definitely CYA.

A while ago I contacted GM to ask about their OEM steel wheel weight rating.

They gave me a reply 2 weeks later. What a surprise- the wheels are rated for the exact same amount as the OEM tires. Coincidence? I doubt it. More legal reasons than engineering.