By on July 18, 2016

2017 Ford F-450 Super Duty Platinum Crew Cab 4x4

Last week, Ford announced that the F-150’s new 3.5-liter Ecoboost V6 puts out more torque than V8-powered segment rivals. While that was exciting news for full-size truck buyers, Ford wasn’t done. Someone in Dearborn wants all of the torques. This morning, Ford escalated the twist wars by releasing engine and towing specifications for its updated Super Duty trucks.

Snatching the torque crown from Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, the 2017 F-Series Super Duty will be available with an updated 6.7-liter V8 turbo diesel that makes a class-leading 925 pounds-feet of torque. That beats the Ram 2500’s 900 lb-ft, when equipped with the venerable Cummins 6.7-liter inline six turbo diesel.

Ford’s diesel horsepower is also increased, to a best-in-class 440 hp. Not wanting to leave any torque stone unturned, the gas-powered 6.2-liter V8’s output grows to a best-in-class 430 lb-ft. Both engines will send their copious amounts of power through a new TorqShift-G six-speed automatic transmission.

The Super Duty’s upgraded power numbers, and a frame that is up to 24 times stiffer than the outgoing model, translates into class-leading towing and payload numbers. Maximum tow ratings are now 21,000 pounds for conventional towing, 27,500 for fifth-wheel towing, and 32,500 pounds when towing with a gooseneck. Maximum payload is now a ridiculous 7,630 pounds on the F-350. F-250 buyers will have to make do with a 4,200 pound payload capacity — 600 pounds more than the nearest rival.

The Super Duty’s maximum gross combined weight rating for truck and trailer is now 41,800 pounds. According to Ford, that is more than half the maximum weight of an 18-wheeler semi-tractor trailer combination on most federal highways.

Ford’s Kentucky Truck Plant will start building the 2017 F-Series Super Duty this month,with sales beginning this fall.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

126 Comments on “Torque Wars: 2017 Ford Super Duty Diesel To Top Ram 2500...”


  • avatar
    tresmonos

    Started building last week. Kind of.

    Edit: Adam, you left out that the new SuperDuty will have a paint finish that bests even Audi (as does the F150).

    • 0 avatar
      Adam Tonge

      The paint will be glorious.

    • 0 avatar
      bullnuke

      Beware Job 1. I bought a Job 2 SuperDuty in ’99 (a late November ’98 build). It suffered from none of the earlier Job 1 build problems which were many.

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        I wouldn’t be too wary. It’s got a lot of the same body as the F150. So you’re essentially getting a improved truck in terms of body construction. Powertrain is mostly carryover so the newness is all trim, wiring and frame.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      MP2?

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        Yes. Fully converted to Aluminum production the first week of July (on time). If I die of lung cancer, it won’t be surprising.

        There was at one time about 5 ‘bays’ for scrap recycling semi trucks that were continuously hauling out the old body shop. It was essentially a pile of robotics and control cabinets. This relay lasted about 24 hours. Two scrap excavators were just chewing through this giant pile that kept getting fed via fork trucks.

        Most of the controls and robotics were state of the art when I was still seeing an orthodontist. Door and tailgate hemmers that no longer resembled print and were fine tuned by decades of tribal knowledge. Like hemmers make any god d@mned sense anyway. Sealer robots that last came all over their last BOP in June. Dispensing/application equipment that belongs in the last decade. When I asked the relay of life foreman if they knew what they were scrapping, they told me “I don’t give a **** what this **** is, all we are here to do is make it smaller.”

        • 0 avatar
          JimZ

          how is contamination inside seams being prevented? ISTR there being a problem on a lot of cars (e.g. my Mustang) with aluminum hoods corroding from the inside out along the front edge.

          • 0 avatar
            tresmonos

            Are those hems of yours sealed up with hem sealing? Because all hems are now being sealed up in every new model. A la 1970’s.

            Those hems have stressors that initialize the corrosion. They also may accumulate metals from pre treat baths (resulting galvanic corrosion). I also wonder if anyone has studied hemming tool ‘impregnation’ and the impact it has with galvanic corrosion.

            Either way, how do you stop a door hem (for example) from getting an electrolyte coming down the window panel and out the drain holes? They will still have the electrolyte so how does hem sealing on the outside prevent corrosion?

            So you’re now relying on the sealer to penetrate to the where the stressor resides. I’m confident that will happen, but what happens in the instance of a sealer skip? The only answer I’ve heard is that the Aluminum substrate is better.

            I want to get my eyes on corrosion studies and what not. I think it would be interesting to see a cross section of a hem, especially after a gel oven cure cycle.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            yes they were. TSB 16-0028 describes the repair procedure. it started with paint bubbling, then flaking off, with white dust underneath it like when you used to put those old-style clip-on wheel weights (with steel lips) on alloy wheels.

            http://ford.oemdtc.com/1349/aluminum-body-panel-corrosion-appearing-as-bubbled-or-peeling-paint-2000-2016-ford-lincoln-mercury

            what really ticked me off is they expected me to pay some of the cost of the repair on a car less than 3 years old, with ~30,000 miles on it. and of course, issued the TSB after I had sold the car.

          • 0 avatar
            tresmonos

            If its the 5th gen mustang, it did not have hem sealer. Look at a 5th vs 6th gen hood hem.

            You saying 3 yr old car makes me believe this. If I’m wrong, correct me. I’d be surprised if it was a 6th gen.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            it was a 2012.

    • 0 avatar
      Carlson Fan

      ‘Edit: Adam, you left out that the new SuperDuty will have a paint finish that bests even Audi (as does the F150).”

      How about it resiliency to resist chipping? That would be more important to me with a truck.

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        There is PVC sealer applied to the bottom of the rocker panels and rear bed. So I would say it is better that the outgoing P473.

        I’m not smart enough to expand every detail on Al vs FeC and adhesion. Phosphating steel, versus using a Zirconium precipitate / acid for surface corrosion / prep surely has its advantages and disadvantages. Surface adhesion should be to the same spec so long as you control your fluoride levels in a zirconium bath.

        I do know this: phosphate yields more solids / sludge in the pretreatment bath. Zirconium has very little sludge. It looks like a swimming pool – so insoluables in baths (that would have been out of spec had insoluables increase to this amount in a phosphate bath) that normally would crystallize and cause an adhesion issue will be eliminated.

        Adhesion should be better. Corrosion resistance is not as robust as it is with phosphate. The Aluminum substrate is improved for this reason.

        Only true downside that I see is surface finish specification needs to be controlled via incoming quality. Before, you could phosphate away issues with suppliers. With zirconium, you cannot hide sanding mars or surface imperfections.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          “I’m not smart enough to expand every detail on Al vs FeC and adhesion.”

          Sounds like you know a shipload to me & what your saying is that it should be less prone to chipping.

  • avatar
    Drzhivago138

    Maybe I said this already, but the Platinum grille (which is usually the gaudiest of any F-Series) seems reminiscent of the ’65 F-Series.

    http://momentcar.com/images/ford-f250-1965-5.jpg

    • 0 avatar
      Carlson Fan

      Nothing says “tough” to me like a big in your face plastic chrome grill. I remember thinking how big the front looked on my ’04 Sierra HD compared to a 1/2 ton PU with it’s heavier frame which meant a slightly taller snout. Now it looks relatively small compared to all the new HD trucks & 1/2 ton trucks..

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        I think (though I could be wrong) that the GMT800 Sierra HD models used the same grille as the 1500/2500s, with the only difference being a 2″ piece of plastic between the grille and bumper. Compare this to the Silverados, which used a taller hood between 1500/2500s and 1500HD/2500HD/3500s.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          Far as I know your correct about the same grill as the 1/2 ton in GMC guise with the plastic filler piece. My buddy had one of the early Chevys with the taller hood, which looks wise I always liked. When I bought mine in 2004 they had already slapped on the Avalanche front end on the Chevy HD’s. I think the grills on those are identical to the 1/2 tons with the filler piece above the bumper added in.

  • avatar
    jjster6

    How long until we find out that all this torque is changing the axis of rotation of the planet? Could this be used to combat global warming?

  • avatar
    slow_poke

    whoa. seems completely crazy. 50% of towing capacity of a semi? Does the US have special certifications required to tow such big trailers? i know i sometimes do a bit of towing (maybe 4500# max)but 21k# up to 32k#’s yikes.

    and 4000# in the bed? blessed mother, what’s the stopping distance on that?? i guess i shouldn’t talk, i had an ’88 Toyota pickup w/ 1 ton rear springs and loaded that up… that thing had torque in the mid 900’s, as well. oh, sorry, typo, mid 90’s…

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      slow_poke – all depends on the jurisdiction. Where I live in BC if you are towing over 4,600 kg (10,120lbs)then you need an endorsement to one’s license as long as you aren’t running air brakes. If you are towing recreationally a “house trailer endorsement” is needed for campers or a for any trailer towed recreationally or vocationally you need a “heavy trailer endorsement”. Anything with air needs a Class 1. IIRC this is fairly uniform across Canada. In the USA you’d have to do a lot of homework. California seems to be pretty close to BC on its tow regulations.

    • 0 avatar
      Onus

      slow_poke

      It depends. I used to live in Connecticut, their you can tow up to 10,000 lbs. Any more requires a CDL. I now live in North Carolina and its less restrictive.

      My license says the following “CLASS: C-Any noncommercial single vehicle with a GVWR of less than 26,001 lbs. A vehicle towing a vehicle which has a combined GVWR of less than 26,001 lbs operation by a driver 18 yrs or older.”

      So here as long as one doesn’t go over 26,001 lbs GCVWR you can tow it. The f350 listed with these rating has about a 14000 lb GVWR. That leaves you with about 12 000 lb for the trailer. You can honestly tow more with a f250 due to lower GVWR at least for the non CDL driver.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        Heck in ‘Merica there are plenty of states that will allow you to tow a trailer attached to another trailer without special licensing. Tow a 5th wheel with your SuperDuty the weld a hitch to the 5th wheel frame and tow your boat with that.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @PrincipalDan – I think that in some of Canada’s prairie provinces you are allowed to tow double trailers.
          That thought creeps me out since I already see too many p!zz poor recreational RV haulers.

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            I once saw an RV towing a flatbed car hauler towing a boat…

            Makes you want to cross yourself and say a Hail Mary.

      • 0 avatar

        In CT if it’s commercial you need a CDL if it’s for pleasure use (5th wheel, boat, race trailer not used to make money etc) there are no limits in CT.

  • avatar
    indi500fan

    41,800 pounds GCW. OMG….
    Be careful out there folks. Is there enough brake on these to handle it?

    • 0 avatar
      bumpy ii

      That’s what the trailer brake controller is for.

      95% of these will never haul anything more taxing than a home appliance. People who actually haul heavy trailers for pay or pleasure will get a F450 or other medium-duty truck.

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        You have to live under a rock to think that. Easily > 5% of these will see heavy use in commercial fleets and bypass the dealership.

        If you can afford one of these beasts, you usually have some serious recreational hobbies or you’re making money with the capital you own.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          The F-350 is easily the most bang for your commercial buck.

          The commercial F-450 is a real kidney buster with expensive 100 psi tires. It’s a heavy pig that you’ll swear has no suspension until it’s full loaded down. And it’ll probably take a harder hit at resale, than the F-350.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          Yep my brother used his dirtymax HD to tow a 36′ enclosed triple axle trailer when his boys were racing snowmobiles. And that trailer was heavy empty. What else you gonna use to tow that billboard shaped trailer down an interstate. Like I’ve said before you buy a diesel for the pulling power. Many times moving the air out of your way is a bigger factor than moving the weight. That’s why my gasser HD can handle 8 tons of wedge shaped boat fairly decently. It would tow 5 tons of lead shaped like a brick on a flat bed trailer even easier.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        I’ve never seen an F-450 pickup that wasn’t pulling a triple-axle fifth wheel or gooseneck.

      • 0 avatar
        Flipper35

        The truck they are talking about in the article with regards to towing is the F450 which Ford gives a Class III rating for it (below 14000 lbs) and is comparing to the Ram 3500 and Chevy 3500HD.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      What are the licencing requirements for a vehicle with a fifth wheel with that much mass?

      I how some RV’er isn’t allowed to just put on a huge fifth wheel and just drive down the road after driving a Corolla or Focus all of their lives.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        In my state (others are mostly similar), you need a CDL if:

        1) you are towing, and
        2) your trailer GVWR is over 10,000 lbs., and
        3) your GCWR is over 26,000 lbs.

        So that means anyone towing a trailer rated for over 10,000 lbs. with the heavier versions of these pickups needs a CDL. Good luck with that.

        (You also need one for single truck over 26,000 lbs. or any bus over 16 passengers but those obviously aren’t relevant here.)

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          Florida has similar rules, but *all* RVs and travel trailers are exempt from the CDL requirements.

          • 0 avatar
            Toad

            RV’s are exempt from CDL requirements; they should not be, but they are.

            I owned a 38,000lb Blue Bird motor home and driving it made me tense even though I’ve had a CDL for 30+ years. Yet pop pop and grandma can buy a 40′ RV with a 500hp Cummins and drive it off the lot with no training whatsoever. Scary.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @Toad,
            Frightening. Seeing a 60-70yr old driving a 40ft Motorhome,with no extra training in case of an emergency, is pretty stupid

          • 0 avatar
            redmondjp

            Yup. Personally, I have no desire to drive something that big, and even less so on a vacation or in retirement.

          • 0 avatar

            When I was 19 I worked for a few months for an RV dealership it was entertaining driving around the big pusher motor homes on deliveries etc. No extra licence required. Most people did fine with it but a few customers were pretty scary.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          “In my state (others are mostly similar), you need a CDL if:

          1) you are towing, and
          2) your trailer GVWR is over 10,000 lbs., and
          3) your GCWR is over 26,000 lbs.”

          Must be different in MN. I’ve rented dump trailers that fully loaded put you over 10K pounds. I scaled it at the landscaping place loaded before I left. 12K pounds on the trailer wheels plus whatever was on the tongue of my pick-up.

          They only requirement they had before renting that dump trailer to me was that I pulled up in a 3/4 ton or heavier truck. Wouldn’t let you rent it with a 1/2 ton.

  • avatar
    yamahog

    Help me understand – if you’re going to tow 20,000 lbs, why get one of these over a used tractor/semi-truck?

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      What advantages does this motor car have over, say, a train, which I could also afford?

    • 0 avatar
      Toad

      A Super Duty pickup is a lot easier to drive and more versatile than a semi truck. You can pull a goose-neck trailer hauling a small excavator with a Super Duty, then drop the trailer and take your crew out to lunch. Hard to do that with a semi tractor. Plus a semi tractor without a sleeper will run you about $120k and you can’t pull your boat with it on the weekend.

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      Depends on what you’re towing. Perhaps the biggest, and almost certainly the most profitable, market for these things are fro retired people pulling gigantic travel trailers around the country in their Limited Platinum Upspec Emperor Highest of Countries edition that they paid $90K for. With one of these, they can unhook at the RV Resort (no simple parks for these guys…), and drive something that’s not too much different size wise from an everyman’s halfton.

      I know some guys who do pull big travel trailers with semi tractors, but they almost always have elaborate rigs (cranes and such) to lift Smart cars or small SUVs on and off the big rig for local use. Meaning they inevitably need CDLs, and the rigs are quite a lot costlier as well.

      The latest HD pickups aren’t too far gone to use as daily drivers, yet can still tow the kind of 5000 sq ft rolling McMansions that qualifies as camping trailers nowadays.

      Anther rapidly growing niche for HD pickups, are for use by “hotshotters.” Basically owner operated, minimalist commercial towers. Look it up. It’s an interesting trade, full of old school, salt of the earth type truckers who knows a little bit of every part of the business. The economics works for them, because so many people buy HD pickups but don’t put nearly any miles nor wear on them before upgrading to a newer version. So even though the pickups are less specifically optimized for commercial long haul than bigger trucks, the ability to pick them up barely worn yet well depreciated, increasingly tips the scale in their favor.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @stuki
        They have a niche use here, for Caravans( 5th Wheelers, for various reasons,unrelated to the tow vehicles, have struggled, may improve in time) If you have a humongous RV ( 50ft plus) get a Japanese or European Truck
        Hot shotters more a US/European thing

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Recreationally or for intermittent commercial use this makes more sense. Commercial trucks get checked by motor vehicle inspectors regularly. They don’t tend to bat an eye at pickups.

      There is a guy in town with a custom F650 crew pickup. I’ve seen him stopped several times by vehicle inspectors because it is a commercial truck.

      In my region I have rarely ever seen a commercial operator use a HD like the F450. They just don’t live on industrial roads. I do know an electrical company with a Ram reg cab HD dually 4×4 for towing a heavy boom lift. They got it to save money and keep from having to train their crews to commercial licencing level. I know a guy who has driven it and he hated it. You definitely know that something big is back there.

      • 0 avatar
        yamahog

        I guess that gets to the heart of my question – the only time I see these trucks is when my dad rents them to tow his bulldozer / excavator around. One time a RAM broke down towing his dozer and ever since then he’s just hired a semi to tow to it wherever.

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    “Maximum tow ratings are now 21,000 pounds for conventional towing, 27,500 for fifth-wheel towing, and 32,500 pounds when towing with a gooseneck.”

    My neighbor just picked up a new F150 w/eco-boost and tried to tell me it had a 28K pound tow rating. It amazes me how fu$%ing clueless people can be sometimes.

    The kicker is he doesn’t own anything that he needs to tow with it. But he is supposedly going to be buying a boat soon.

    • 0 avatar

      Sounds like someone who’s going to be an unscheduled passenger on a Coast Guard Jayhawk in the near future.

      • 0 avatar
        FormerFF

        I do see the occasional Super Duty dressed up in brodozer fashion around here, but they’re the exception. The vast majority of the ones I see are used for work.

        F150s, those I see lots of being used as personal transport.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Carlson Fan,
      You can have a laugh one morning when you wake up to find he has a huge fifth wheel behind his F-150.

      Maybe Ford miss use of “F Series” confused him.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Carlson Fan – that is extremely typical. They think 1/2 ton means it can carry 1/2 a ton but don’t even know how little weight it takes to hit that mark especially with a crew cab 4×4. I’ve pointed out the cargo ratings on the B – pillar and they don’t even know what a B-pillar is. I’ve seen some stupid sh!t pulled with 1/2 tons.

      I find many HD buyers are worse but in a different way. A 9400lb trailer is nothing behind a diesel HD and they drive like there is nothing back there.

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        Lou why is it every time I see a pick-up wrecked in the ditch w/trailer it’s an oil burner. I drove my brothers dirty-max w/that triple axle race trailer mentioned above hooked to the back. The way that truck effortlessly accelerated that load and kept it at speed on the interstate was borderline ridiculous. Easy to see how anyone that owns one of these modern diesel HD’s can get over confident towing a heavy load.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          Carlson Fan – too much power and with traction and stability control it is too easy to get in over your head. It was pretty common in the summer to have to deal with tourists wrecking their rigs on some of our more rougher routes.
          I’ve heard of guys damaging their trailers because of all of the power that these trucks have.
          I can see it happening since I’ve know guys in the logging industry that have broken the reach on the log trailer and walked out from under their loads.

  • avatar

    And before all the anti-bro-truck agitators post their one-liner penis-size corollaries, the people who buy these trucks DO use them more often than you’d think.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Yeah god forbid one of these is caught hauling air or a kitchen appliance. It probably towed a backhoe earlier in the day, but even big rigs are empty most of the their miles, deadheading or even running errands.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    That’s a whole lot of torque for such a lightweight vehicle.

    I wonder if this Ford towed at it’s max how long the drive train will last?

    I do believe more realistic and safer regulations are needed for light trucks.

    A F-350 doesn’t appear to be a heavy hauler in my mind.

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      They can probably sit at max tow on the highway for many, many miles. Think travel trailer/motorhome. Or point to point long haul, like inter dealer car delivery in sparsely populated areas.

      It tends to be the slow, back and forth, bullying of construction site machinery and farm equipment, as well as mining/forestry type work, that breaks light duty trucks down the quickest, compared to their heavier counterparts. And, especially for modern diesels, the “hard work” of stop-start-stop-start 5 minute errand running around town unloaded.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        @stuki
        They would not use them like that here. You would not have constant towing but more interrupted towing,that puts more strain on the components

  • avatar
    dal20402

    So what effect does this continuous turning up of boost have on engine durability?

    Worth noting that in the F-650/750 medium-duty trucks — an application where most of the trucks *do* actually push the engine hard in everyday use — the 6.7 is limited to 675 lb-ft, and the 6.2 gasser isn’t available at all (instead, you get the old V10).

    And that’s before you get to the driver factor. How many people who buy these and then use them to their rated capacity will actually bother to get the CDL that such capacity requires?

    • 0 avatar
      Toad

      I’m curious about the durability myself: you can always turn up the hp in an engine as long as you can keep it cool, but with the greater power everything wears out faster. It would be interesting to see the average rebuild intervals for the Super Duty diesel at 300 hp vs. 440.

      At one time I owned a vehicle with a Detroit Diesel 8V92; in standard trim it ran about 475 hp and would go about 10,000 hours between inframe rebuilds. With tuning and bigger injectors it was not hard to get 750+hp out of the same motor, but rebuild intervals dropped closer to 1000 hours.

      Since most of these Super Duty trucks will not see that many miles from the first owner I wonder how Ford balanced reliability vs. power.

    • 0 avatar
      IAhawkeye

      Here’s a secret. You could already get the above specs out of a 6.7 w/a tuner, at least allegedly, not many are going to dyno their trucks just to find out. Just watch your EGT’s and water temps-which nice tuners already display for you, and there shouldn’t be too many problems. Obviously driving calmly keeps the temps down, as does just choosing a less aggressive tune.

      The nice thing about buying one from a factory that way is obviously the warranty SHOULD anything go wrong.. then it’s on Ford’s dime. It’s also for sure EPA compliant when running, if you live in a state with testing and such.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        But doesn’t having to “watch your EGTs and water temp” defeat the purpose of a truck? Maybe it’s my experience driving transit buses talking, but it seems to me like a truck is worthless unless it can work flat-out, fully loaded, all day, every day, under any conditions, for hundreds of thousands of miles. I’d rather climb a pass at 25 mph and not have to worry about a thing than climb it at 45 mph with a distrustful eye on my aftermarket gauges.

        Maybe I’m just expecting too much. We had mini transit buses on Ford chassis with the legendary 7.3. In that application, the powertrains were junk, failing all the time. That scared the agency away from ever ordering anything but a “real bus” (pusher, dedicated bus chassis, Class 8 engine) ever again.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      The V10 is the gasser I’d want anyway. Heck, it’s thee engine I’d want.

    • 0 avatar

      In the marine world the durability rating drops with each horsepower increase I imagine the same would apply here there is only so much you can do at higher specific outputs. Take a look at this link for 38L cummins marine engines and you can see the duty rating drop as the HP increases.
      https://cumminsengines.com/showcase-item.aspx?id=313&title=KTA38+for+Marine&#ratings

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    “Maximum payload is now a ridiculous 7,630 pounds on the F-350. F-250 buyers will have to make do with a 4,200 pound payload capacity — 600 pounds more than the nearest rival.”

    Probably handle more than that. I dropped a 3500 lb pallet of pavers in the bed of my ’04 Sierra HD at Home Depot and headed 150 miles north to my place in northern WI in tow with an enclosed trailer.. Plenty of spring left, never bottomed out once on the trip up.

    Even my compact ’93 Toy PU with its saggy rear suspension could haul 1800 pounds of 1-1/2″ river rock all day long without breaking a sweat.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Static compression of springs has little to do with payload ratings, unlike places like Australia, Africa, etc.

      US pickups are really underrated for the sake of handling, braking, cooling, ball-joints, bearings, axles, etc.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Flaming DiM’est,

        Why the comment in relation to Africa and Australia?

        Fncking trolling?

        • 0 avatar
          SCE to AUX

          Africa and Australia – both being ‘upside down’ south of the equator – actually have higher tow ratings because the suspension is unloaded there.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          It’s a common misconception. Overloading a pickup because the springs aren’t nearly maxed, static weight. But before the very impressive Australian/Africa payload figures are mentioned, and they always are, it’s the same difference.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            No, we limit the towing numbers here for US SuperDuties in the interest of safety.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Well what’s the tow limits? Or could you be a little more vague? Is a CDL required above 10,000 lbs towing? If not, wouldn’t it be safer?

            Except isn’t Oz the place that allows road trains?

            The point is your payload limits are really high for midsize pickups, bordering on stunt driving.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            “No, we limit the towing numbers here for US SuperDuties in the interest of safety.”

            considering I’ve seen pics and vids of some of the dodgy “conversions” done in Australia, that’s probably a good thing.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @JimZ,
            US towing numbers are in the fantasy range. 7,500lbs for a Sprinter?
            What ” Dodgy Conversions”?

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Then what’s the OZ tow limit for Super Dutys?

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            “What ” Dodgy Conversions”?”

            some random company taking a vehicle never intended to be right-hand-drive, and hacking it up who knows how using parts from who knows where to make it conform to “ADR.” Oh, and charging you 144,000 AUD for it.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @JimZ
            Not Dodgy. FCA approved in the case of RAMS. Ford convertor has the same warranty,but from Ford.US.
            Ford allowed Powermax or whatever their name is to update their SuperDuty and give the same warranty( Technical updates from Ford US and Ford approval for suspension retuning for local tastes)Then both had to pass ADR inspection of their production and compliances to be allowed to be classified as a serial producer , rather than a limited quota importer.( 100 vehicles)
            Yes the $144,000 is ridiculous and is only ONE reason, these are rare.
            Luckily both producers are involved with other work, which is booming

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      You need those huge cargo ratings to be able to tow those big trailers. Pin weight is going to suck up a lot of that cargo rating. That is the biggest problem with the Nissan Titan XD. It doesn’t really have the cargo ratings to handle its trailer ratings. TFL Truck tested one and could only max tow with the driver and one passenger and deliberately loaded tail heavy to keep pin weight to a minimum.

  • avatar
    VW16v

    Not only does Ford beat Ram/Cummins in torque. You also don’t have to deal with extremely subpar FCA dealership network. I swear they don’t drug test there mechanics.

  • avatar
    mason

    Slight correction to above title, there are 3 HP/TQ ratings for Ram.

    Any CTD equipped with a G56: 350hp/660–lb-ft

    Ram 2500/3500 equipped with the 68RFE trans: 370hp/800 lb-ft

    Ram 3500 HO equipped with Aisin AS69RC: 385hp/900 lb-ft.

    • 0 avatar
      Adam Tonge

      I’m waiting for an FCA press release stating that the 3500 HO is now at 926 lb-ft. We will have torque wars forever.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Adam,
        The US vehicle marketing appears to be very “Best in Class”.

        I do think this is quite a pathetic way to promote a vehicle.

        Really if the Power Stroke had a little less torque I don’t think any astute person after a truck would care.

        It seems these vehicles are then being sold to the less than knowledgeable masses.

        • 0 avatar
          Adam Tonge

          This is Ford showing off capability in their new truck. Is the difference between 860 lb-ft and 925 lb-ft significant? Probably not. Buyers of these trucks are going to judge them on performance plus total cost anyway. But it matters to the brand. If you are a company that is trying to move product, you better be out there marketing yourself.

          • 0 avatar
            mason

            “Is the difference between 860 lb-ft and 925 lb-ft significant? ”

            It isn’t as they simply compensate with more torque management. The only real advantage in going with the HO option in the Ram is that is you get the AS69RC, which is a true MD trans.

  • avatar
    runs_on_h8raide

    Who care about tow ratings and class leading torque…where’s the Brodozer and Rollin’ Coal editions of these bad boys?

    https://youtu.be/etm6j6ZvL5I?t=3m50s

    Honestly, if you don’t get a tingle down your leg from watching that, you’re not ‘Murican!!! Smoke’em if you got’em!!!

  • avatar
    Sigivald

    “What makes this truck different from all other trucks?

    Next year, half a ton of torque!”

  • avatar
    stuki

    The ram 3500 was the one with 900 ftlb HO engine. Not the 2500.

    Also, the new Torqueshift-G tranny is only for the gas F250. The F350 Gasser and all the diesels keeps the same old, higher input torque spec, one.

    • 0 avatar
      Adam Tonge

      You are correct on both accounts. I was using info from two different press releases and one was more updated. I’ll ask Steph to fix it. My first post. I’ll get better. Thank you. :)

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Ok that much torque and no mention if it can handle a McDonalds food run or picking little jimmy up from his after school activities.

    Honestly though this torque war has gone from ridiculous to down right reckless. People do not need that much power…especially in a half assed truck.

    This is a lot like the megapixel wars that digital cameras went through a few years ago. Megapixels were growing and growing to numbers that were completely unnecessary. The camera manufacturers them discovered that you can improve other elements of the camera and still increase picture quality while not relying on an outrageous amount of megapixels.

    This is the exact same thing. But, as if Fords usual behavior. As long as they can win the war on paper, that’s all that matters.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      If we all drove what we “needed,” we’d all have Trabants. That argument holds no water.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        One can argue that unless you use your vehicle for work then you don’t need it.
        Irony…. I don’t see bloggers saying you don’t need Hellcats or GT350’s.

        There is mass transit for the huddled masses.

        It isn’t a question of “do you need it” but of “can you safely operate it”?

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      “Honestly though this torque war has gone from ridiculous to down right reckless. People do not need that much power…especially in a half assed truck.”

      There are a lot of hidden nannies going on in there euphemistically described as torque management.

      That ain’t your daddy’s 950 ft/lbs! Just like the 500+ horsepower cars of today aren’t like the 500+ horsepower cars of yester year.

      The best example I’ve seen of this is the electronic throttle cars compared to previous cars that used a mechanical connection from the pedal to the throttle. The latter is way more immediate in its response compared to the former and can get you into trouble a lot more quickly.

  • avatar
    Flipper35

    A quick question Adam, are these SAE towing specs or manufacturer supplied specs? I know Ford hasn’t always been real keen on using SAE in the past.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • anomaly149: I’ll miss your vehicle segment articles Tim, best to you in your next moves!
  • dal20402: Yes, the early N63 engine is a problem. Mostly it seems to be fuel system issues, which are fixable with...
  • Lorenzo: Well… Ford once made everything that went on its cars, and GM did mostly the same. That was before the...
  • golden2husky: Really? What happens when the back seat is occupied and the front seat gets moved up?
  • Lorenzo: No one in America wanted to hear him, but he was an authority in Japan. That’s why this is so shocking.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States