Towing capacity vs max cargo weight rating

[ognend]

Hello all!

Can someone clarify something for me? If a truck's max gooseneck trailer loaded weight is 15,100 lbs (as per manufacturer towing guide - it is a Ford) - how can the max cargo weight rating be 1792 lbs?

If I understand correctly, the max cargo weight rating is all the weight that can be put into/onto the truck (passengers, their things) PLUS the, for example, weight of the gooseneck pin of the loaded, 15,100 lbs trailer.

Ford's towing guide says: "Cargo Weight Rating shown in chart is maximum allowable, assuming weight of a base vehicle with required camper option content and a 150-lb. passenger at each available seating position".

Does this mean the allowed payload is AFTER 5 passengers? if I removed 3 passengers, does that add 450 lbs to payload capacity (max allowed cargo weight as per Ford)?

In addition, what gooseneck trailer weighs 15,100 lbs (max loaded trailer weight spec as per Ford) but only 1792 on the hitch (as per max allowed cargo weight)? This would imply that only 12% of the loaded trailer weight is on the hitch. Does this sound right?
I know this is not the case for my loaded horse trailer with living quarters (but then horse trailers with living quarters tend to be front heavy).

Am I understanding this right?

Thanks!

[ognend]

Huntindog wrote:

ognend wrote:

philh wrote:
don't like the number on the door sticker, you just get to pick a new number? Interesting way of dealing with payload capacity.

I picked a different number on the sticker - RAWR minus actual weight of rear axle. I feel that number is the right one. What do you think?

I "think" that you do not like Fords number, so you are using one that you came up with.

Why don't you write a letter to Ford Motor Company with all of the pertintnent info (VIN#) and tell them what you posted here?
Tell them why your calculations are better than the ones their engineers came up with.

Then post their response.

Of course I don't like the number. However, I would also like to understand how they reached the exact 2184lbs payload capacity number (it is not exactly explained in the owner manual) and why they bothered to publish the 6100 RAWR number on the door sticker if the RAWR number has zero relevance. Do you have the explanation for that one? I am not saying this to argue but at the end of the day, if the payload capacity is the single number to look at, why publish the FAWR and RAWR numbers? Thanks!

[Huntindog]

ognend wrote:

philh wrote:
don't like the number on the door sticker, you just get to pick a new number? Interesting way of dealing with payload capacity.

I picked a different number on the sticker - RAWR minus actual weight of rear axle. I feel that number is the right one. What do you think?

I "think" that you do not like Fords number, so you are using one that you came up with.

Why don't you write a letter to Ford Motor Company with all of the pertintnent info (VIN#) and tell them what you posted here?
Tell them why your calculations are better than the ones their engineers came up with.

Then post their response.

[ognend]

philh wrote:
don't like the number on the door sticker, you just get to pick a new number? Interesting way of dealing with payload capacity.

I picked a different number on the sticker - RAWR minus actual weight of rear axle. I feel that number is the right one. What do you think?

[philh]

don't like the number on the door sticker, you just get to pick a new number? Interesting way of dealing with payload capacity.

[ognend]

BenK wrote:

ognend wrote:
snip...

I already have a set of super springs on it. I was more concerned with the actual numbers. Thanks!

Yes, that will level and not squat as much...but the 'numbers' AKA ratings has embedded things for performance of that 'number'

I installed the super springs to prevent squat, I understand they do not add payload capacity to the vehicle - I am not trying to turn a 3/4 ton truck into a 1ton truck 😉 . I was trying to get more comfortable with the actual payload numbers. One way to look at it is simply the payload capacity as per manufacturer sticker inside driver door - this is 2184lbs on my truck. The other way (as was explained to me) is to weigh the rear axle of the truck and deduct that from RAWR rating of said axle. This gives me the 2820lbs number. I simply chose the latter as it suits me (haha)

[BenK]

ognend wrote:
snip...

I already have a set of super springs on it. I was more concerned with the actual numbers. Thanks!

Yes, that will level and not squat as much...but the 'numbers' AKA ratings has embedded things for performance of that 'number'

Mainly braking of the load up to that rating..."numbers"

things like larger dia disc/drum, thicker disc, thicker friction material (therefore wider calipers and most likely larger dia caliper pistons) and even an more hidden component...the front/rear brake line bias valve (if yours has one).

Here is one for my GMT400 Suburban,and assume later models with 4 wheel disc has similar hidden differences





Tahoe/Yukon, Suburban/Yukon XL are all J or B 5 though 7.

Once into HD's, changes to JB8 and JF9

Most 3/4 ton Suburban's come with JD7's, but if the snow plow option ordered, it begets JB8's and the attendant components. Like larger bore MC, larger bore wheel cylinders and different front/rear brake line bias valve body.

All to stop the rated load to min DOT requirement for that load.

[ognend]

IdaD wrote:
If it were me I wouldn't worry about it. In most cases if you throw a set of bags or timbrens on a 3/4 ton you turn it into a same MY SRW 1 ton from a carrying capacity standpoint (provided the tires are also rated for the additional weight). That would effectively give you the higher applicable 1 ton RAWR to work with.

I already have a set of super springs on it. I was more concerned with the actual numbers. Thanks!

[IdaD]

If it were me I wouldn't worry about it. In most cases if you throw a set of bags or timbrens on a 3/4 ton you turn it into a same MY SRW 1 ton from a carrying capacity standpoint (provided the tires are also rated for the additional weight). That would effectively give you the higher applicable 1 ton RAWR to work with.

[ognend]

Quick update on this thread: I finally got around to taking my truck to the scales with a full tank of diesel ('16 F-250 Crew Cab FX4 Powerstroke). Front axle: 4860, rear axle: 3280, total weight, 8140 lbs.

My RAWR is 6100lbs so I am going with payload capacity of 2820lbs, even though Ford's sticker in the door says - 2184lbs.

My total trailer loaded weight: 9270. Since it is a horse trailer with living quarters, I am going with 30% of the weight being on the hitch - which would be 2780lbs. Hence, I feel like I am not overweight. n fact, I am comfortable with replacing the stock 26gal fuel tank with a 50 gal Titan - which would add 192lbs to the equation.

What do y'all think? Thanks!

[Grit_dog]

RoyJ wrote:
I'm not anti-dually, just pointing out there are some high payload tires out there.

That particular tire is the "super single" option on a Sprinter. Expeditors often require to carry full size pallets, which do not fit between the dually wheel wells on a Sprinter / Transit.

I considered that for my old 2nd gen, as a dually conversion probably cost more than the truck is worth...

But it's a select example that isn't even a remote option for HD pickups. I'm with ya, though. Lots' of gotta have a dooley folks out there. Credit where it's due, duallys are MORE stable and greater carrying capacity. Just depends how over truck or not, or other considerations for the use of the vehicle enter into the equation or decision.

[RoyJ]

I'm not anti-dually, just pointing out there are some high payload tires out there.

That particular tire is the "super single" option on a Sprinter. Expeditors often require to carry full size pallets, which do not fit between the dually wheel wells on a Sprinter / Transit.

I considered that for my old 2nd gen, as a dually conversion probably cost more than the truck is worth...

[Grit_dog]

rhagfo wrote:

I can’t believe the lengths people will go to to avoid driving a DRW!

How many years did you use that white 2nd Gen srw to tow the same 5ver?

[MFL]

"Six month of the year the DRW is our only vehicle. I do ride the HD for entertainment."

You absolutely need your DRW, and lucky your wife enjoys driving it. I would not mind driving a DRW myself, if needed. I much prefer a truck, over car or suv. I think Russ is full-time, carries a lot of extra things, so he also needs a DRW, with a long bed.

BTW: That HD is not just for entertainment! It promotes good health and relaxation, not to mention good fresh air.

So much worry over GVWR legal issues! Probably more likely to get struck by lightning while towing! I've dealt with 2 IRS audits, that many people fear. Not a fun experience, but both ended well for me!

Jerry

[Cummins12V98]

rhagfo wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

RoyJ wrote:
There's one tire size (other than 19.5s) that can get us close to the DRW axle capacity:

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Continental&tireModel=VanContact+A%2FS&partnum=865...

4300 lbs / tire, or 8600 lbs GAWR. Factor in the SRW bed is a bit lighter, and we have one less set of tires / wheels, that probably puts us within 500 lbs of a dually.

My RAWR is 9,750# but my stock 4 rear tires have a lot more capacity if I want to carry more weight. 65# in my tires is all I need out of 80 to carry the RAWR.

Wider stance gets much more stability.

X2 to the stability.
I would also add I would not want to loose a rear tire on a SRW loaded to 8,000# on the axle.
I can’t believe the lengths people will go to to avoid driving a DRW! Our only vehicle is a DRW, Crew Cab, long bed, and both me and DW drive it where ever we want.

Six month of the year the DRW is our only vehicle. I do ride the HD for entertainment.

[rhagfo]

Cummins12V98 wrote:

RoyJ wrote:
There's one tire size (other than 19.5s) that can get us close to the DRW axle capacity:

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Continental&tireModel=VanContact+A%2FS&partnum=865...

4300 lbs / tire, or 8600 lbs GAWR. Factor in the SRW bed is a bit lighter, and we have one less set of tires / wheels, that probably puts us within 500 lbs of a dually.

My RAWR is 9,750# but my stock 4 rear tires have a lot more capacity if I want to carry more weight. 65# in my tires is all I need out of 80 to carry the RAWR.

Wider stance gets much more stability.

X2 to the stability.
I would also add I would not want to loose a rear tire on a SRW loaded to 8,000# on the axle.
I can’t believe the lengths people will go to to avoid driving a DRW! Our only vehicle is a DRW, Crew Cab, long bed, and both me and DW drive it where ever we want.