So why does the Ram Eco-Diesel have such a low payload capacity? That would be a deal killer for me.
Last edited:
New F150 specs
- Thread starter hattaresguy
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: exranger06
I don't see how aluminum bodies will affect insurance rates. If it's too expensive to repair the truck, the insurance company will simply total it out and not fix it. Aluminum bodies might mean the truck is more likely to get totaled out, but it isn't going to make rates go up.
It's getting harder to total out trucks because they are so expensive. I have seen insurance companies replace entire frame assemblies before.
They may be worried that the average payout on trucks that are not a total loss will be higher, so they want to recoup that. Also, if more trucks get written off as a total loss due to the cost of repairs, that will cost them more as well compared to being able to repair one.
I don't see how aluminum bodies will affect insurance rates. If it's too expensive to repair the truck, the insurance company will simply total it out and not fix it. Aluminum bodies might mean the truck is more likely to get totaled out, but it isn't going to make rates go up.
It's getting harder to total out trucks because they are so expensive. I have seen insurance companies replace entire frame assemblies before.
They may be worried that the average payout on trucks that are not a total loss will be higher, so they want to recoup that. Also, if more trucks get written off as a total loss due to the cost of repairs, that will cost them more as well compared to being able to repair one.
After an extremely thorough look at ALL the big 3 we chose Ram. Note that we keep a truck for at least a two day test drive, not a ten minute joy ride. We took a year to decide! My Wife chose this truck as it is for her. I even pushed a bit for the new Ford as I really wanted one with the 5.0 V8 in it! But the price difference was HUGE! About 15k in REAL dollars. Hardly insignificant when the Ram has incredible amenities included.
Biggest reason was ride quality. Biscut may wish to note I said it rides better, not handles better, than our car. It also rides much better than the GM and Ford offerings. None of the shivery jitters over undulating surfaces. And amazing jounce and recovery, it just absorbs the biggest of bumps and heaves as though someone else hit them!
Since this is a home therapy-mobile it is not in need of a bigger payload. It needs to deliver economical operation while my Wife is safe and secure. It does all that. It can easily tow my boat and has excess capacity for anything we do in it.
Now factor in how much fun it is with the short gears 3.91 posi) and the 8 speed combined with real world fuel economy at 18 mpg and I am fine with my purchase.
Happy Wife equals happy life, fellas...
Biggest reason was ride quality. Biscut may wish to note I said it rides better, not handles better, than our car. It also rides much better than the GM and Ford offerings. None of the shivery jitters over undulating surfaces. And amazing jounce and recovery, it just absorbs the biggest of bumps and heaves as though someone else hit them!
Since this is a home therapy-mobile it is not in need of a bigger payload. It needs to deliver economical operation while my Wife is safe and secure. It does all that. It can easily tow my boat and has excess capacity for anything we do in it.
Now factor in how much fun it is with the short gears 3.91 posi) and the 8 speed combined with real world fuel economy at 18 mpg and I am fine with my purchase.
Happy Wife equals happy life, fellas...
Last edited:
here's a neat article that explains why it costs MORE to repair aluminum truck bodies...
http://blog.caranddriver.com/foils-gold-body-shops-weighing-aluminum-repair-face-a-steep-buy-in/
http://blog.caranddriver.com/foils-gold-body-shops-weighing-aluminum-repair-face-a-steep-buy-in/
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Let's also stipulate that the online "payloads" on the manufacturer websites have for years been manipulated to show inflated payload numbers by only showing numbers for the stripper model with no options. You can only trust the numbers that are on the actual truck that you are looking at by looking at the sticker on the door jam.
I read that somewhere as well. IIRC Chrysler's figures were closer to the actual real world #'s and Ford and GMC were somewhat overly optomistic. Which could explain why the numbers for the Eco-diesel might be a little lower.
Before I'm flamed for my comments note I used [IIRC] to cover my arse. It was a long time ago that I read the article and my facts could be off.
Either way this long loving Ford owner would probably jump ship and go with Ram for a pickup. Ford's offerings no longer impress me, and I wouldn't even consider GMC. Opinions vary.
Let's also stipulate that the online "payloads" on the manufacturer websites have for years been manipulated to show inflated payload numbers by only showing numbers for the stripper model with no options. You can only trust the numbers that are on the actual truck that you are looking at by looking at the sticker on the door jam.
I read that somewhere as well. IIRC Chrysler's figures were closer to the actual real world #'s and Ford and GMC were somewhat overly optomistic. Which could explain why the numbers for the Eco-diesel might be a little lower.
Before I'm flamed for my comments note I used [IIRC] to cover my arse. It was a long time ago that I read the article and my facts could be off.
Either way this long loving Ford owner would probably jump ship and go with Ram for a pickup. Ford's offerings no longer impress me, and I wouldn't even consider GMC. Opinions vary.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
After an extremely thorough look at ALL the big 3 we chose Ram. Note that we keep a truck for at least a two day test drive, not a ten minute joy ride. We took a year to decide! My Wife chose this truck as it is for her. I even pushed a bit for the new Ford as I really wanted one with the 5.0 V8 in it! But the price difference was HUGE! About 15k in REAL dollars. Hardly insignificant when the Ram has incredible amenities included.
Biggest reason was ride quality. Biscut may wish to note I said it rides better, not handles better, than our car. It also rides much better than the GM and Ford offerings. None of the shivery jitters over undulating surfaces. And amazing jounce and recovery, it just absorbs the biggest of bumps and heaves as though someone else hit them!
Since this is a home therapy-mobile it is not in need of a bigger payload. It needs to deliver economical operation while my Wife is safe and secure. It does all that. It can easily tow my boat and has excess capacity for anything we do in it.
Now factor in how much fun it is with the short gears 3.91 posi) and the 8 speed combined with real world fuel economy at 18 mpg and I am fine with my purchase.
Happy Wife equals happy life, fellas...
The coil springs give it a nice ride. But what is really interesting is my 96 Toyota tacoma 2.4 cyl 2wd automatic trans gets 17 city and 23 freeway driving it easy. That is exactly the claimed mpgs.
After an extremely thorough look at ALL the big 3 we chose Ram. Note that we keep a truck for at least a two day test drive, not a ten minute joy ride. We took a year to decide! My Wife chose this truck as it is for her. I even pushed a bit for the new Ford as I really wanted one with the 5.0 V8 in it! But the price difference was HUGE! About 15k in REAL dollars. Hardly insignificant when the Ram has incredible amenities included.
Biggest reason was ride quality. Biscut may wish to note I said it rides better, not handles better, than our car. It also rides much better than the GM and Ford offerings. None of the shivery jitters over undulating surfaces. And amazing jounce and recovery, it just absorbs the biggest of bumps and heaves as though someone else hit them!
Since this is a home therapy-mobile it is not in need of a bigger payload. It needs to deliver economical operation while my Wife is safe and secure. It does all that. It can easily tow my boat and has excess capacity for anything we do in it.
Now factor in how much fun it is with the short gears 3.91 posi) and the 8 speed combined with real world fuel economy at 18 mpg and I am fine with my purchase.
Happy Wife equals happy life, fellas...
The coil springs give it a nice ride. But what is really interesting is my 96 Toyota tacoma 2.4 cyl 2wd automatic trans gets 17 city and 23 freeway driving it easy. That is exactly the claimed mpgs.
Maybe it's the electric power steering,
but my old 2004 Dodge Ram 1500 had better handling
and road feel than my brand new 2014 F150 XL,
less 'vague' steering input.
Both trucks very similar configuration:
XL / ST 'base' model trucks, with minimal equipment:
2WD, short cab, short box, leaf spring rear.
The F150 on the other hand soakes up rough roads better
has less 'bump steer' and is much more comfortable.
Both are used to tow/haul about 2000lbs of trailer/dirtbikes and gear.
Michel
but my old 2004 Dodge Ram 1500 had better handling
and road feel than my brand new 2014 F150 XL,
less 'vague' steering input.
Both trucks very similar configuration:
XL / ST 'base' model trucks, with minimal equipment:
2WD, short cab, short box, leaf spring rear.
The F150 on the other hand soakes up rough roads better
has less 'bump steer' and is much more comfortable.
Both are used to tow/haul about 2000lbs of trailer/dirtbikes and gear.
Michel
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Let's also stipulate that the online "payloads" on the manufacturer websites have for years been manipulated to show inflated payload numbers by only showing numbers for the stripper model with no options. You can only trust the numbers that are on the actual truck that you are looking at by looking at the sticker on the door jam.
I read that somewhere as well. IIRC Chrysler's figures were closer to the actual real world #'s and Ford and GMC were somewhat overly optomistic. Which could explain why the numbers for the Eco-diesel might be a little lower.
Before I'm flamed for my comments note I used [IIRC] to cover my arse. It was a long time ago that I read the article and my facts could be off.
Either way this long loving Ford owner would probably jump ship and go with Ram for a pickup. Ford's offerings no longer impress me, and I wouldn't even consider GMC. Opinions vary.
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload." I've been on a few road trips with a friend and his '12 F150/Eco Boost towing a 6k lb boat and I'm far from impressed with the performance of that engine and the trucks ability to handle the load. He's told me more than once if he wasn't upside down on his payments he'd get out from under it. I've owned and worked on both Ford and Ram pick ups, and the wifes Mountaineer is the LAST Ford I will ever own. They are nice vehicles but IMO too over engineered. I have had enough repeat failures between the last F250 and her Mountaineer to last a lifetime.
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Let's also stipulate that the online "payloads" on the manufacturer websites have for years been manipulated to show inflated payload numbers by only showing numbers for the stripper model with no options. You can only trust the numbers that are on the actual truck that you are looking at by looking at the sticker on the door jam.
I read that somewhere as well. IIRC Chrysler's figures were closer to the actual real world #'s and Ford and GMC were somewhat overly optomistic. Which could explain why the numbers for the Eco-diesel might be a little lower.
Before I'm flamed for my comments note I used [IIRC] to cover my arse. It was a long time ago that I read the article and my facts could be off.
Either way this long loving Ford owner would probably jump ship and go with Ram for a pickup. Ford's offerings no longer impress me, and I wouldn't even consider GMC. Opinions vary.
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload." I've been on a few road trips with a friend and his '12 F150/Eco Boost towing a 6k lb boat and I'm far from impressed with the performance of that engine and the trucks ability to handle the load. He's told me more than once if he wasn't upside down on his payments he'd get out from under it. I've owned and worked on both Ford and Ram pick ups, and the wifes Mountaineer is the LAST Ford I will ever own. They are nice vehicles but IMO too over engineered. I have had enough repeat failures between the last F250 and her Mountaineer to last a lifetime.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Those Rams! Why would anyone buy one?
Lots of people around here are buying them. I've seen quite a few newer Ram trucks on the road recently. The Rams make more sense in my opinion. The trucks are being marketed towards real world circumstances. The average truck owner (excluding commercial buyers) use the truck as a daily driver and haul something in the bed every once in awhile. A truck that offers slightly less payload but significantly better fuel economy and ride quality only makes sense. With the higher purchase prices and higher cost of fuel, it doesn't make sense to ride around in a brand new F250 as a daily driver so you can haul a sheet of plywood every other Saturday.
Those Rams! Why would anyone buy one?
Lots of people around here are buying them. I've seen quite a few newer Ram trucks on the road recently. The Rams make more sense in my opinion. The trucks are being marketed towards real world circumstances. The average truck owner (excluding commercial buyers) use the truck as a daily driver and haul something in the bed every once in awhile. A truck that offers slightly less payload but significantly better fuel economy and ride quality only makes sense. With the higher purchase prices and higher cost of fuel, it doesn't make sense to ride around in a brand new F250 as a daily driver so you can haul a sheet of plywood every other Saturday.
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
After an extremely thorough look at ALL the big 3 we chose Ram. Note that we keep a truck for at least a two day test drive, not a ten minute joy ride. We took a year to decide! My Wife chose this truck as it is for her. I even pushed a bit for the new Ford as I really wanted one with the 5.0 V8 in it! But the price difference was HUGE! About 15k in REAL dollars. Hardly insignificant when the Ram has incredible amenities included.
Biggest reason was ride quality. Biscut may wish to note I said it rides better, not handles better, than our car. It also rides much better than the GM and Ford offerings. None of the shivery jitters over undulating surfaces. And amazing jounce and recovery, it just absorbs the biggest of bumps and heaves as though someone else hit them!
Since this is a home therapy-mobile it is not in need of a bigger payload. It needs to deliver economical operation while my Wife is safe and secure. It does all that. It can easily tow my boat and has excess capacity for anything we do in it.
Now factor in how much fun it is with the short gears 3.91 posi) and the 8 speed combined with real world fuel economy at 18 mpg and I am fine with my purchase.
Happy Wife equals happy life, fellas...
The coil springs give it a nice ride. But what is really interesting is my 96 Toyota tacoma 2.4 cyl 2wd automatic trans gets 17 city and 23 freeway driving it easy. That is exactly the claimed mpgs.
It's amazing what better shocks will do on the GM truck. I noticed the rear end wasn't handling bumps and dips very well, so I put HD rear gas shocks on it. Made a big difference on the ride. As far as compact trucks go, my 4.3 Chevy in a fullsize gets within 1 mpg highway of that Toyota with more capability. I had a few compact trucks and for the little bit of difference in mileage and price I'll stick with a fullsize. The Dakota actually got worse mileage than a fullsize, btw, so there's no point unless you just want to drive something smaller. Maybe that's why Dodge discontinued it. Ram will definitely be high on my list if I ever decide to buy another truck.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
After an extremely thorough look at ALL the big 3 we chose Ram. Note that we keep a truck for at least a two day test drive, not a ten minute joy ride. We took a year to decide! My Wife chose this truck as it is for her. I even pushed a bit for the new Ford as I really wanted one with the 5.0 V8 in it! But the price difference was HUGE! About 15k in REAL dollars. Hardly insignificant when the Ram has incredible amenities included.
Biggest reason was ride quality. Biscut may wish to note I said it rides better, not handles better, than our car. It also rides much better than the GM and Ford offerings. None of the shivery jitters over undulating surfaces. And amazing jounce and recovery, it just absorbs the biggest of bumps and heaves as though someone else hit them!
Since this is a home therapy-mobile it is not in need of a bigger payload. It needs to deliver economical operation while my Wife is safe and secure. It does all that. It can easily tow my boat and has excess capacity for anything we do in it.
Now factor in how much fun it is with the short gears 3.91 posi) and the 8 speed combined with real world fuel economy at 18 mpg and I am fine with my purchase.
Happy Wife equals happy life, fellas...
The coil springs give it a nice ride. But what is really interesting is my 96 Toyota tacoma 2.4 cyl 2wd automatic trans gets 17 city and 23 freeway driving it easy. That is exactly the claimed mpgs.
It's amazing what better shocks will do on the GM truck. I noticed the rear end wasn't handling bumps and dips very well, so I put HD rear gas shocks on it. Made a big difference on the ride. As far as compact trucks go, my 4.3 Chevy in a fullsize gets within 1 mpg highway of that Toyota with more capability. I had a few compact trucks and for the little bit of difference in mileage and price I'll stick with a fullsize. The Dakota actually got worse mileage than a fullsize, btw, so there's no point unless you just want to drive something smaller. Maybe that's why Dodge discontinued it. Ram will definitely be high on my list if I ever decide to buy another truck.
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Let's also stipulate that the online "payloads" on the manufacturer websites have for years been manipulated to show inflated payload numbers by only showing numbers for the stripper model with no options. You can only trust the numbers that are on the actual truck that you are looking at by looking at the sticker on the door jam.
I read that somewhere as well. IIRC Chrysler's figures were closer to the actual real world #'s and Ford and GMC were somewhat overly optomistic. Which could explain why the numbers for the Eco-diesel might be a little lower.
Before I'm flamed for my comments note I used [IIRC] to cover my arse. It was a long time ago that I read the article and my facts could be off.
Either way this long loving Ford owner would probably jump ship and go with Ram for a pickup. Ford's offerings no longer impress me, and I wouldn't even consider GMC. Opinions vary.
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload." I've been on a few road trips with a friend and his '12 F150/Eco Boost towing a 6k lb boat and I'm far from impressed with the performance of that engine and the trucks ability to handle the load. He's told me more than once if he wasn't upside down on his payments he'd get out from under it. I've owned and worked on both Ford and Ram pick ups, and the wifes Mountaineer is the LAST Ford I will ever own. They are nice vehicles but IMO too over engineered. I have had enough repeat failures between the last F250 and her Mountaineer to last a lifetime.
You just reminded me, the article mentioned they stripped the Fords down as much as possible and then ran it against the Ram as delivered to the customer. The more I read about the Ram and after spending a week working out of one the more I like them.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Let's also stipulate that the online "payloads" on the manufacturer websites have for years been manipulated to show inflated payload numbers by only showing numbers for the stripper model with no options. You can only trust the numbers that are on the actual truck that you are looking at by looking at the sticker on the door jam.
I read that somewhere as well. IIRC Chrysler's figures were closer to the actual real world #'s and Ford and GMC were somewhat overly optomistic. Which could explain why the numbers for the Eco-diesel might be a little lower.
Before I'm flamed for my comments note I used [IIRC] to cover my arse. It was a long time ago that I read the article and my facts could be off.
Either way this long loving Ford owner would probably jump ship and go with Ram for a pickup. Ford's offerings no longer impress me, and I wouldn't even consider GMC. Opinions vary.
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload." I've been on a few road trips with a friend and his '12 F150/Eco Boost towing a 6k lb boat and I'm far from impressed with the performance of that engine and the trucks ability to handle the load. He's told me more than once if he wasn't upside down on his payments he'd get out from under it. I've owned and worked on both Ford and Ram pick ups, and the wifes Mountaineer is the LAST Ford I will ever own. They are nice vehicles but IMO too over engineered. I have had enough repeat failures between the last F250 and her Mountaineer to last a lifetime.
You just reminded me, the article mentioned they stripped the Fords down as much as possible and then ran it against the Ram as delivered to the customer. The more I read about the Ram and after spending a week working out of one the more I like them.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Originally Posted By: Boomer
And Ford just announced that these trucks with all the aluminum are just rated to get a measly 2 mpg more than their older steel counterparts. The PU champ still is the new Ram 6 cylinder diesel.
As long as you don't plan on using to carry stuff sure. 859 pounds, 4 guys and a golf bag. Have to take another truck to bring the other 3 golf bags I guess.
Makes me wonder how my 1500 Sport model 2014 Ram is rated to carry 1875 pounds and tows 10,500.
Rides better than our car, drives like a champ and returns 18 mpg with my lead footed Wife driving. Driving dynamics are so car like you could forget you are in a truck!
Outrageously better price also, just a tick over 40k LOADED with options and features. The Ford I looked at was 15k more and drove like a 70's pickup would, all jittery and shaky. I felt no "quality" there at all.
Those Rams! Why would anyone buy one?
Cause its not a diesel which is what we are talking about.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Originally Posted By: Boomer
And Ford just announced that these trucks with all the aluminum are just rated to get a measly 2 mpg more than their older steel counterparts. The PU champ still is the new Ram 6 cylinder diesel.
As long as you don't plan on using to carry stuff sure. 859 pounds, 4 guys and a golf bag. Have to take another truck to bring the other 3 golf bags I guess.
Makes me wonder how my 1500 Sport model 2014 Ram is rated to carry 1875 pounds and tows 10,500.
Rides better than our car, drives like a champ and returns 18 mpg with my lead footed Wife driving. Driving dynamics are so car like you could forget you are in a truck!
Outrageously better price also, just a tick over 40k LOADED with options and features. The Ford I looked at was 15k more and drove like a 70's pickup would, all jittery and shaky. I felt no "quality" there at all.
Those Rams! Why would anyone buy one?
Cause its not a diesel which is what we are talking about.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Originally Posted By: Boomer
And Ford just announced that these trucks with all the aluminum are just rated to get a measly 2 mpg more than their older steel counterparts. The PU champ still is the new Ram 6 cylinder diesel.
As long as you don't plan on using to carry stuff sure. 859 pounds, 4 guys and a golf bag. Have to take another truck to bring the other 3 golf bags I guess.
Makes me wonder how my 1500 Sport model 2014 Ram is rated to carry 1875 pounds and tows 10,500.
Rides better than our car, drives like a champ and returns 18 mpg with my lead footed Wife driving. Driving dynamics are so car like you could forget you are in a truck!
Outrageously better price also, just a tick over 40k LOADED with options and features. The Ford I looked at was 15k more and drove like a 70's pickup would, all jittery and shaky. I felt no "quality" there at all.
Those Rams! Why would anyone buy one?
Cause its not a diesel which is what we are talking about.
Its a Hemi !!!
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Originally Posted By: Boomer
And Ford just announced that these trucks with all the aluminum are just rated to get a measly 2 mpg more than their older steel counterparts. The PU champ still is the new Ram 6 cylinder diesel.
As long as you don't plan on using to carry stuff sure. 859 pounds, 4 guys and a golf bag. Have to take another truck to bring the other 3 golf bags I guess.
Makes me wonder how my 1500 Sport model 2014 Ram is rated to carry 1875 pounds and tows 10,500.
Rides better than our car, drives like a champ and returns 18 mpg with my lead footed Wife driving. Driving dynamics are so car like you could forget you are in a truck!
Outrageously better price also, just a tick over 40k LOADED with options and features. The Ford I looked at was 15k more and drove like a 70's pickup would, all jittery and shaky. I felt no "quality" there at all.
Those Rams! Why would anyone buy one?
Cause its not a diesel which is what we are talking about.
Its a Hemi !!!
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload."
Funny, the sticker on the door of my F150 says 1870-something lbs payload, which is: 1) close to what they say in the book, and 2) legally required to be accurate. No games played since there can be no games played on that sticker.
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload."
Funny, the sticker on the door of my F150 says 1870-something lbs payload, which is: 1) close to what they say in the book, and 2) legally required to be accurate. No games played since there can be no games played on that sticker.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload."
Funny, the sticker on the door of my F150 says 1870-something lbs payload, which is: 1) close to what they say in the book, and 2) legally required to be accurate. No games played since there can be no games played on that sticker.
Please take a picture of your door sticker where it shows payload ratings. This would be a first. I've only ever seen GVWR, and front and rear GAWR on any door sticker. There are too many variations with all the different trim packages and cab/bed configurations and drivetrain options to post specific pay load ratings for each individual truck.
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload."
Funny, the sticker on the door of my F150 says 1870-something lbs payload, which is: 1) close to what they say in the book, and 2) legally required to be accurate. No games played since there can be no games played on that sticker.
Please take a picture of your door sticker where it shows payload ratings. This would be a first. I've only ever seen GVWR, and front and rear GAWR on any door sticker. There are too many variations with all the different trim packages and cab/bed configurations and drivetrain options to post specific pay load ratings for each individual truck.
Just out of curiosity I went out to the garage and took down these infos
on the door sticker in case they might be of interest to your discusion here:
on my 2014 F150 XL (the most basic model I could order)
only got the 101A option / towing package added:
specs:
3.7 V6, 6-speed auto, 126" wheel base, single cab, 6.5' box, 3.73 limited slip axle:
GVWR 6540 lbs
GAWR front 3000 lbs, rear 3500 lbs
P235/75R17 108S @ 38 psi
registration says vehicle weight is 2053 kg, so around 4516 lbs I guess.
on the door sticker in case they might be of interest to your discusion here:
on my 2014 F150 XL (the most basic model I could order)
only got the 101A option / towing package added:
specs:
3.7 V6, 6-speed auto, 126" wheel base, single cab, 6.5' box, 3.73 limited slip axle:
GVWR 6540 lbs
GAWR front 3000 lbs, rear 3500 lbs
P235/75R17 108S @ 38 psi
registration says vehicle weight is 2053 kg, so around 4516 lbs I guess.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload."
Funny, the sticker on the door of my F150 says 1870-something lbs payload, which is: 1) close to what they say in the book, and 2) legally required to be accurate. No games played since there can be no games played on that sticker.
Please take a picture of your door sticker where it shows payload ratings. This would be a first. I've only ever seen GVWR, and front and rear GAWR on any door sticker. There are too many variations with all the different trim packages and cab/bed configurations and drivetrain options to post specific pay load ratings for each individual truck.
My truck has two stickers one shows the actual payload for my specific truck. GVWR and GAWR, tire information etc are also separately listed.
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Bingo. Ford does all kinds of neat little tricks when rating their trucks for payload capacity, such as removing the spare tire, testing with STRIPPED interiors, I.E. vinyl floors, radio delete, manual windows/locks, no a/c, etc. etc. Who orders a truck with no radio? Or no A/C for that matter? Every pound shed is a pound you can claim for "payload."
Funny, the sticker on the door of my F150 says 1870-something lbs payload, which is: 1) close to what they say in the book, and 2) legally required to be accurate. No games played since there can be no games played on that sticker.
Please take a picture of your door sticker where it shows payload ratings. This would be a first. I've only ever seen GVWR, and front and rear GAWR on any door sticker. There are too many variations with all the different trim packages and cab/bed configurations and drivetrain options to post specific pay load ratings for each individual truck.
My truck has two stickers one shows the actual payload for my specific truck. GVWR and GAWR, tire information etc are also separately listed.
- Status
