By on June 27, 2019

The new Tremor off-road package will bring a new 7.3-liter V8 and 10-speed automatic transmission to the heavy-duty F-250 and F-350 lineups. The 6.7-liter Power Stroke turbo diesel V8 will also be available, paired with its 6-speed automatic.

Ford’s Tremor package is a shot across the bow of the RAM Power Wagon. The 35-inch Goodyear Wrangler Duratrac tires are the largest diameter rubber available on any HD pickup and a 2-inch lift of the front suspension and shorter air dam enable real off-road prowess for the Super Duty trucks.

For those looking to push the limits of their truck off-road, 10.8 inches of ground clearance are provided, as well as a claimed best-in-class water fording of 33 inches. Approach and departure angles are also improved to 31.65 degrees and 24.51 degrees, respectively. Larger dampers (shocks) feature internal hydraulic jounce bumpers (bump stops) to help soften the really big impacts — whether off-road or on.

Additional hardware includes off-road running boards that tuck up next to the body for damage control, extended-axle vent tubes, and thick skid plates.

Selectable drive modes will provide flexibility to power or traction as needed, based on the conditions encountered. Normal mode will be complimented by tow/haul, eco, slippery, and deep snow/sand — all of which should be self-explanatory.

To maximize off-road traction, the Tremor uses an electronically-locking rear differential, paired with a limited-slip front diff. Working with the 10-speed automatic transmission is a new rock-crawl mode, which is optimized to operate in low-range 4×4. Tremor trucks equipped with the 7.3-liter gas engine have a 53:1 crawl ratio while the 6.7-liter diesels have a 44:1 crawl ratio. Trail Control will be included, which acts like a cruise control for off-road driving.

Power figures for the 7.3-liter engine have not been released yet, though we can expect a healthy bump over the 385 horsepower and 430 ft-lbs of the base 6.2-liter V8. Meanwhile, the 6.7-liter turbo diesel will carry forward and is assumed to make the same 450 hp and 935 ft-lbs as the 2019 model.

Ford claims that the Super Duty Tremor package provides greater towing and payload than Ram Power Wagon, with tow and payload ratings similar to non-Tremor models. We’ll have to wait to find out exactly what those figures are, however.

The Tremor off-road package will be available on F250 and F350 models when the 2020 Super Duty launches later this year — but it will be limited to 4×4 single-rear wheel SuperCrew models with the 6.75-foot bed.

[Images: Ford]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

77 Comments on “2020 Ford F-Series Super Duty Tremor Brings 7.3 Liters of V8 Power...”


  • avatar
    ajla

    Where’s the factory winch?

  • avatar
    Lie2me

    How much?

  • avatar
    Hummer

    You can keep the running boards, I’m not a wuss. Otherwise this looks good, it’s missing the power wagons front locker, sway bar disconnect, and winch but it’s built in America which easily makes up for that.

    Waiting patiently for these power numbers to be released on the 7.3L, safe to say this is the most excited I’ve been about a Ford in a long time.

    Somewhat disappointed in tire choice, those Goodyear Wranglers are extremely loud and pretty uncomfortable even for a mud tire. Also wish they would have just put the 37s on it that it deserves from factory.

    What gears are we running? 4.27? 4.56?

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      35s are about the minimum tire size to get through any trails around me, add in this beasts breakover angle and it will need the extra inch.

      • 0 avatar
        gtem

        Chevy’s been big on using that Duratrac too, it’s actually marketed by Goodyear as an All Terrain, an aggressive one obviously. I agree, it’s way overkill for most of these factory applications, but then again if they went the usual route of offering a very mild AT that excelled at lower rolling resistance and low noise then we’d all complain about how lame that was too. Chevy putting them on Z71 Tahoes even as an option is particularly absurd.

        I was in a lifted Montero once running E-load rated (as I recall) Duratracs and it was LOUD and rough.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          I don’t mind factory mud tires but every manf seems to use this exact set and they Suck. Badly.

          Use Cooper, BFG, or Toyo mud tires but just stop using these and giving Goodyear a reason to continue making them. I swear there has to be some joke somewhere from whoever’s approving this design on new factory vehicles.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            They’re probably chosen for their year-round capabilities. They’re quite good in Canadian prairie winter conditions and can still get you through the muddy spring rig and farm roads almost as well as a dedicated mud tire.

            My buddies have been through a few sets and I’ve never noticed them to be noisy, provided no funny wear patterns due to misalignment.

            The one complaint I’d have is the flexible sidewall. They can feel very wobbly on the on-ramps. Fine as a driver but a little disconcerting as the passenger. My buddy had a set of 285/75R16 on his narrower stock Duramax rims for winter and decided to leave them on when he hooked up his fifth-wheel camper one spring. He didn’t get very far before he turned around and put his summer BFG ATs on 18s on. It just didn’t feel stable. Those BFGs are a better highway tire for sure.

          • 0 avatar
            cgjeep

            I had Duratracs on my WJ Jeep. Loved them. Amazing in the snow. Was funny that my lifted Jeep stopped and turned better in the snow than my BMW all wheel drive wagon in the snow. BMW was on all seasons. They were great off road too. Not as good as an MT but good enough and no MT will be that good on the street. After 20k miles though they got real noisy, but hey that’s the sound of traction. I have Falken At3Ws now on 4 Runner and not as good off road but quieter.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I have a set of Duratrac’s on my F150. They have gotten louder as the tread has worn down. They ride better than the General Grabber AT2’s I had and are excellent in the winter. My only complaint is that they are soft. I run them all year round and are wearing fast. I got 70,000 km out of the Grabbers. The Wranglers, I doubt I’ll see 60k.

    • 0 avatar
      dukeisduke

      What if the running boards were also rock sliders, like on the H2?

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Rock sliders on the H2 can’t actually be stepped on as they are tucked under the rocker panel. There are about 6 cross support bars on the rock rails each with two bolt holes intended on supporting 4-5 available step choices. I have the OEM accessory u-steps and nerf bars that can be attached.

        I leave them unattached from the rock rails because 1) Like every other vehicle with side steps they ruin the clean look, and two I’ve almost wiped out a u step on a large rock. Last I checked those u-steps are selling for $1,200 a set. I’d rather rocks hit the actual rock rail.

        • 0 avatar
          dukeisduke

          Thanks for the information on that. And, $1200 for u-steps – is that because they’re rare now, or because Hummer?

          I still see a lot of well-cared-for H2s on the road, so it sounds like there’s a lot of love for them.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            It’s because they’re rare, I bought a mint condition set in 2011 for $300 and two years later they were selling at $800-900 for similar condition.

            The U steps can be mixed and matched and made into a set of need be, but as with every car part you get someone to sell a truck and they have 1-2 setting in a garage corner that aren’t touched for 5 years.

            The u steps aren’t even the rarest ones either. The Limited edition steps that also incorporate slots in a redesigned rocker covers are the rarest. Those steps sit on top of the rock rails so they don’t interfere with the ground clearance but unless you buy a truck they left factory on it’s not likely you’ll find a set.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      It’s got 4.30s and the front has limited slip with traction control. It should give the Power Wagon a run for its money. A winch is planned for mid-year

  • avatar
    jack4x

    The takeaway for me on this is that the 7.3 will seemingly have a 6000 RPM redline (seen in a publicity shot of the dash not included with this article).

    That’s pretty good for an iron block OHV big block workhorse. I might have been wrong about this architecture finding its way into other Ford products…

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      I’m just thrilled that Ford has decided to make this offering available, and I bet they’ll sell every one they make, with unsatisfied demand for moah, moah, moah!

      BTW, price doesn’t matter because the difference between men and boys is the price of their toys.

      Watch Barrett-Jackson or Mecum auctions sometime to see what outrageous prices those toys go for.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      “I might have been wrong about this architecture finding its way into other Ford products…”

      If they put this engine in the Mustang for under $50K then there is an extremely high probability of me buying it.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        If Fiatsler can charge $70K – $100K for their beasts, and sell everyone of them, why would Ford put 452 cubic inches of brawn into a Mustang for under $50K?

        Lesser Corvettes didn’t, and they sell all of them they make, with clamoring for more!

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          Because FCA offers the 485hp 392ci cars for $39K.

          The naturally-aspirated 7.3L is not likely to be making Hellcat Redeye output so Ford would be stupid to charge $70K+ on it.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Using that reasoning, less than $50K makes sense.

            But this is the niche-game that is being played, limited-production entries. Only the monied can play, for only the wealthy few, and so on.

            But it is still a truck, and Ford does charge $70K for some of their upper-end gussied-up F150 pickup trucks already, so I would be surprised to see this iteration of their Mustang come in at $50K.

            To me, financially it just doesn’t make sense since Ford needs to maximize the profit on such a specially-equipped Mustang.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “But it is still a truck, and Ford does charge $70K for some of their upper-end gussied-up F150 pickup trucks”

            This wouldn’t be a truck though. If Ford wants $70K for a Mustang it is going to need at least ZL1 (~650hp) output. Otherwise it is uncompetitive and only Ford mega-fans would be interested. And, those people are probably buying trucks/SUVs.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            ajla, I understand the Mustang is not a truck.

            My point was that if the OEMs can charge $70K for a halfton truck, why would they charge less for a specialty/niche/special edition Mustang? Something truly unique.

            However, we shall see what we shall see, if it ever comes to pass.

            I bet that your idea set a lot of enthusiasts’ hearts afluttering.

            And I don’t mean AFIB either.

          • 0 avatar
            jack4x

            As a simpler engine also intended for volume sales in the Super Duty, I’d be very surprised if the 7.3 costs any more to manufacture than the 5.0, meaning there’s no reason Ford *couldn’t* offer a version of the 7.3 in the Mustang GT in the $40K range.

            Now, would they? Besides the ability to charge more for the big inch engine just based on desirability and power, they’d need to balance CAFE and gas guzzler considerations in the Mustang that they won’t need to in the Super Duty. It’s possible they would rather sell fewer units at a higher margin for this reason, similar to how GM has handled the Suburban/Yukon/Tahoe. In that case you might see the 7.3 only in a special edition for $70K or thereabouts (Boss 445?) Hopefully not.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        The 7.3 is only planned for HD trucks. That would be F250 – F650. The F150 Raptor is rumoured to be getting a version of the GT500 engine. No point in putting this engine into the Mustang when you have the standard 5.0, the GT350 flat plane crank 5.2 voodoo and the GT500 cross plane crank 5.2.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          I would be surprised to see Ford keep multiple V8 families alive in the future to support a steadily decreasing sales volume. My thought is that the 5.0L, 5.2L, and 6.2L all go away in the next 4 years with the 7.3L being the only thing left from Ford to serve the V8 market in the SD, F-150 (with a decent paywall), and the Mustang (with a decent paywall).

          The oversquare engineering, compact (and low cost) pushrod design and relatively high redline all point to Ford having plans for this engine beyond HD tugboats.

          • 0 avatar
            jfb43

            I want to see this in the new Bronco, but I know that’s a pipe dream.

            I think that’s a good analysis, ajla, but I believe the 5.0 still has some life left. The Mustang is due for a new generation here fairly soon, so we shall see. If the 5.0 carries over in anything, I think it’ll be the Mustang.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @jfb43 “I want to see this in the new Bronco”

            The new Bronco is built on a Ranger chassis not a full sized chassis. This engine won’t fit. I’m betting that the Bronco will borrow heavy from the Brazilian Troller.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    The only area this bests the Power Wagon is the availability of a diesel engine. Otherwise this is a laughable attempt to come up with a competitor to the Power Wagon. Some brodozer wheels and some stickers do not make a very compelling off road vehicle.

    The Ram has a nicer interior, better drive train, far better price and is more capable. The body isn’t fragile either.

    My guess is after seeing this, Ram will drop the diesel into the Power Wagon…which they will be able to do with the flick of the switch.

    • 0 avatar
      SSJeep

      Agreed, the Tremor isnt a bad truck, but it cant hold a candle to the Power Wagon. The interior of the Ford F250/F350 line is abysmally dated and not quite as functional or comfortable as the Power Wagon / Ram 2500. Add to that the dated Ford Sync system when comparing it to the Power Wagons massive, modern U-Connect interface and I know where Id rather spend time. Also the power wagon has electronic locking front and rear differentials.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      “My guess is after seeing this, Ram will drop the diesel into the Power Wagon…which they will be able to do with the flick of the switch.”

      “the diesel”

      Which diesel?

      The 3.0 would be the only one that can be mounted into the PW “with the flick of a switch”.

      Ram would have to upgrade the suspension and change the axles if they put the 6.7 into the Power Wagon. They would also have to relocate some components to fit a winch.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Nice re-use of the Tremor name. This time it’s not just a Ranger with a high-power Pioneer audio system.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    If you’re fording water, you’ll definitely want to inspect the axle vent tubes periodically. On my ’95 F-150 it was a plain, unreinforced rubber hose, slipped onto a fitting on the front of the driver’s side axle tube on one end, with the other end clipped to the top of the frame rail. Once the rubber got old and hardened, it would crack at the end of the fitting on the axle, and then hang off, so I’d pull the piece off the fitting and slide the rest on. I occasionally see F-150s with the vent tube hanging down under the truck.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Very important when a truck gets age, there was a picture on the subreddit where a truck wouldn’t move, when they removed the diff cover it was a solid block of ice.

    • 0 avatar

      A broken vent filled the transfer case of My Ramcharger with a lovely clay water mixture many years ago. Pulled the plug on a lift it looked like a pottery studio poured out.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Only the Raptor, Tremor, Rubicon and Power Wagon have decent stock fiording depth. If one looks at the owners manual on anything else, it is basically the bottom of the center wheel cap.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    If anyone is interested, there’s a very good article with 8 cutaway photos on the 7.3 in Hot Rod, posted in March:

    https://www.hotrod.com/articles/inside-look-fords-new-7-3l-pushrod-v8/

    It’s oversquare and compact (like a small block Windsor) with lots of nice efficiency and durability features (four-bolt, cross-bolted mains, deep skirted iron block, nine cam bearings, one cam phaser, roller rockers and roller lifters, a dry valley, etc.). The top development guys are drag racers, so it’s possible that there could be a crate offering in the future. One thing that could be an issue going into cars is the deep oil pan with integrated oil pump and pickup, but that could be worked around.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @dukeisduke – I’m surprised that it would be “oversquare” since it is intended for commercial use. If memory serves me correctly, Ford has preferred long stroke motors in those applications.

  • avatar
    schmitt trigger

    I echo another previous poster’s question: suggested MSRP?

  • avatar

    So it looks like a 70% power wagon. Cool but not quite there. The softer suspension is what drives down the payload on the PW, so I’m guessing this one is just a lift and not otherwise tuned for more travel like the PW. Same for the available Diesel.

    Nice to have more factory offroad options out there thou.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @mopar4wd – This looks like a HD variation of what GM did with their 1500 Trail Boss. I’m all for it. A mild lift to help clear stumps and trail debris but with decent payload. Payload is one of the reasons that I chose not to buy a Power Wagon in 2010 when I bought my F150.

  • avatar
    thelaine

    Now that Ford has come after the PowerWagon, I would love to see FCA come after the Raptor. At the very least, they need to throw some power into the Wrangler/Gladiator.

  • avatar
    crtfour

    Last year I rented one of these (a Super duty crew cab 4×4) with the 6.2 engine to tow a travel trailer one way. It averaged 8mpg towing the trailer and 9.8 on the way back unloaded. I didn’t know there was any modern vehicle out there, truck or otherwise, that would register in the single digits.

    Total overkill for my needs but its awesome that we can still get something like a 7.3 gas engine in 2020.

    • 0 avatar
      jack4x

      You must have been driving 90+ mph or with 6th gear locked out to get sub 10 mpg unloaded.

      12-14 is more typical at 70-75 mph, and I have 4.30 gears in mine.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      crtfour, both my 2011 and 2016 Tundra trucks, and my wife’s 2016 Sequoia, all equipped with the 5.7L V8 were pretty thirsty, even when not towing or hauling.

      I never kept track of the actual mpg I was getting, but I always carried a spare 20 gallons of gas in four Walmart 5-gal plastic gas containers either in the beds of the trucks or on the hitch-mounted cargo carrier of the Sequoia.

      And on one trip through Death Valley on the way to Gardnerville, NV, and Lake Tahoe, I used much of that stash of gas. Mileage was atrocious, towing a fully loaded 5X9 trailer from Detroit, MI to Zephyr Cove, NV.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      “I didn’t know there was any modern vehicle out there, truck or otherwise, that would register in the single digits.”

      Pretty much every Ford truck will, when doing work, return abysmal gas mileage. Even the “Eco”boost engines.

      Oddly enough The Fast Lane Truck just tested a 5.0L V8 vs a 6.7L diesel to see which got the better mileage while towing the same 9,000 pound trailer. Surprisingly the 5.0L V8 while worse, was only half a gallon off the MPG of the diesel. Both were under 9 miles per gallon though.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Single digit MPG is typical for pickups towing or otherwise performing work.

        The 2019 Ram 1500/Hemi got 9.4 MPG on the same TFLT ‘test loop’ except towing just a 7,000 lbs trailer.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    Probably a $3,500 “Tremor” package on top of a Lariat with FX4.

  • avatar
    Garrett

    I look forward to seeing these driven on-road exclusively by people that think 80-90mph speeds are appropriate in a pickup truck of this size and weight.

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      In the winter with 2 snowmobiles on a flat deck over the bed.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      What does size and weight matter? I had a 99 frontier that didn’t feel stable above 70 and my H2 can hold 80 all day long comfortably. Weight and size make a vehicle more stable at speed.

      • 0 avatar
        Garrett

        Ummm. Size and weight matter with regards to a few things: stopping and changing direction.

        Your H2 can go from 60-0 in around 152 feet, compared to something like a Camry that can do it 30 feet earlier. As speed increases, that number is going to go up. It’s hard to escape the basic fact that E=m*v^2.

        When you look at the ability to deal with emergency handling, you’re dealing with a higher center of gravity, a worse suspension setup, and extra weight (sprung and unsprung).

        Finally, there’s no way your H2 deals with road undulations that throw a car out of balance the same as a sedan.

        Large SUVs and trucks really have no business being driven at high rates of speed.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          I’m all for stopping fast but your making a case that I need a nuburkerkingring tuned car to do simple driving tasks. The H2 is not a 1932 Pontiac, it’s fully capable of stopping in a reasonable time, it smooths our bumps and undulations very well since it is (relatively) softly sprung for its weight, and has meaty tires to absorb impact. Unless your following someone much too close there are few to no reasons I need to be able to make quick movements at 80 MPH, not in my H2, and not in my SS. It’s a pretty ridiculous assertion that an off-road vehicle is incapable of smoothing at undulations given that the entire suspension was designed to accept them.

          You have an unrealistic view of the capabilities of SUVs that have been built after 1970.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Garrett – “size and weight” does make a vehicle more stable at speed. The trade off is agility and quick deceleration. Basically Newton’s laws of motion. I’d much rather be in a 20 foot long crew cab pickup on a rough paved highway,gravel road, or winter conditions than in a small car or CUV.

    • 0 avatar

      Ahh yes my youth.
      Quick highlights of lifted truck speeding antics.
      PA turnpike race between
      Cummins Ram on 35.s with a 26′ Travel trailer in tow
      7.3 Power stroke on 33s super swampers towing a 30′ travel trailer.
      We decided it was a bad idea around 95 MPH.

      F-250 on 42″ Swampers: Honestly officer the Speedo said 65
      Officer: I clocked you at 90

      Ramcharger 33″ Mud Terrains Over CB to friend in 99 Silverado
      How fast am I going speedo stops at 85
      Looks like 95
      Silverado suddenly slows down as it hits speed limiter
      Oops I guess you hit 100.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        How did that Ramcharger handle at speed? My dad had one with full time 4×4 when I was younger but I don’t remember it.

        • 0 avatar

          Not bad really. It had no rear sway bar so handling is an issue but on a straight highway it did just fine. It was better on All terrains the mud terrains got a bit screwy above 80. The bigger issue was the 3.21 gearset and 33″ tires meant getting to speed required alot of patience.
          When I was in trade school I drove the 400 odd miles between my parents house and school quite a bit with the ramcharger most of the time I just set cruise to 70 but there were a few late night high speed runs.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      “I look forward to seeing these driven on-road exclusively by people that think 80-90mph speeds are appropriate in a pickup truck of this size and weight.”

      Why isn’t it?

  • avatar
    IBx1

    Ford: We’re making a new 7.3!

    Everyone: WOOOOOO

    Ford: It’s a gasser!

    Everyone:

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Who’s the last everyone? I’m super excited about a gas 7.3L I wouldn’t care 2 seconds for another diesel in today’s emissions predicament.

      Big displacement gas engines are the ultimate fantasy.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        I think large displacement gasoline motors will become en vogue because of how they ruined diesel, but man 935 ft-tq from the new 6.7? That’s so ridiculous I’m in awe, part of me is must-have-ludicrous-product-just-because (of course that attitude is how I ended up with my Audi 100 C3).

        “Meanwhile, the 6.7-liter turbo diesel will carry forward and is assumed to make the same 450 hp and 935 ft-lbs as the 2019 model.”

        • 0 avatar

          I’m waiting for the low pressure Turbo v8’s, to become a thing in trucks. You could run a diesel like turbo setup (or 3.5 ecoboost) on a 5.0 liter v-8 and have very diesel like low end grunt. Based on Ford’s experience with ecoboost 150 and ranger I’m surprised it hasn’t already happened.

          • 0 avatar
            jack4x

            Turbos and aluminum engines won’t stand up to an HD duty cycle like this 7.3 will. Without pressure from fuel economy standards there’s no reason to complicate or downsize in this market.

          • 0 avatar
            EBFlex

            “I’m waiting for the low pressure Turbo v8’s, to become a thing in trucks. You could run a diesel like turbo setup (or 3.5 ecoboost) on a 5.0 liter v-8 and have very diesel like low end grunt. Based on Ford’s experience with ecoboost 150 and ranger I’m surprised it hasn’t already happened.”

            I’m not surprised at all. Those engines aren’t that reliable (egobust)

            In most all forms, the 3.5L egobust has more power and delivers it better than the 6.8L V10 yet the V10 soldiered on because the 3.5L is not reliable enough for heavy truck use. It’s a shame Ford chooses to focus on power numbers that look good on paper and not making their stuff more reliable. You’d think reliability would be a more sustainable path forward.

          • 0 avatar

            I wasn’t really thinking of the coyote 5.0. I was thinking a dedicated iron block with low pressure turbo. You could make it durable and still have the unrea low down torque diesel buyers go for. The high redline actually has me a bit concerned the old 460 and 454 truck engines had really low redlines and tuned for longevity and pulling power.
            There are some guys online buying old gas HD trucks and putting low pressure turbos and seeing big jumps in low end torque with the right tuning. I had been thinking of putting a Cummins in my ramcharger but my new thought is to see what I can do with a turbo and a RV or boat grind can on the 318.

            On the Ecoboost, I have been trolling the forums, the 3.5 in the flex and other applications has a ton of issues, but the truck versions seem to do better, at least better then the 5.4 used to do.

    • 0 avatar
      EBFlex

      Ford mouth breathers: GM and Chrysler suck because they use ancient pushrod V8s.

      Ford: Launches a massive pushrod V8

      Ford mouth breathers: OMG it’s the second coming! All hail pushrods!

  • avatar
    micko4472

    I lived in CO for 20 years and did a lot of off-roading to a lot of very
    interesting places over some very gnarly “roads”. None of these full
    sized pickups have the slightest chance of traversing any of these
    “roads”/trails. You gotta have something the size of a Jeep Wrangler
    to get to these places. Anything bigger ain’t gettin’ there. See the
    website http://www.traildamage.com for examples.

    • 0 avatar

      Micko,
      I have to agree I was offroad constantly from a teenager thru my 20’s. Here in New England it was much the same. My Toyota pickup and Cherokee were much better suited to the trails up here. I took my ramcharger out alot as well but the short wheel base helped mitigate damage. And even then I got lots of trail rash. Now I did wheel with guys running full size pickups in the day but it usually resulted in lots of body damage or them avoiding the tighter sections. When I was in Maine the trails tended to be easier on a fullsize but it was still problematic.

      However in the mud of Florida and the Desert Southwest the size thing isn’t as much of an issue. Also the bigger trend in offroading is away from more extreme scenarios and into the overlanding, which usually involves easier trails and longer trips. Which again a fullsize does well with.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      The big trucks are definitely a “compromise”, but all trucks have to compromise something. But by far the best trials I’ve been to aren’t accessible by any Jeeps, not even if Samurais.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        Most off-roaders buying full-sized trucks aren’t planning on competing head to head with Wranglers. They tend to be used to haul or tow their toys (bikes,quads,boat) to to their base camp.
        If one switches over to the industrial side of off-road use, all I see are full-sized pickups.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @mopar4wd – This looks like a HD variation of what GM did with their 1500 Trail Boss. I’m all for...
  • Lou_BC: @jfb43 “I want to see this in the new Bronco” The new Bronco is built on a Ranger chassis not a...
  • Lou_BC: @Inside Looking Out – I believe the USA military has a policy of not buying foreign made military...
  • iNeon: Maymar- neon was released in 1994 as a 1995 model and achieved instant success. Proof of cross-pollination is...
  • speedlaw: Oh Fox….your echo chamber is so much fun !

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • 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