PDA

View Full Version : Tow Rig Comparison


Forrest-X45
12-31-2010, 02:18 PM
The latest heavy duty head to head comparison between Chevy and Ford. If you are looking for the ultimate tow rig here is your winner.

BTW - I was expecting a very close finish between the the two, not the total a$$ kicking.

Chevy vs. Ford in Heavy-Duty Rumble in the Rockies (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/11/chevy-vs-ford-in-heavy-duty-rumble-in-the-rockies.html)

willowtreexx
12-31-2010, 02:38 PM
love it!

always wanted a D-Max 2500 :)

vision
12-31-2010, 02:41 PM
Interesting test. It does beg the question though as to why Chevrolet wanted to do the test at an elevation of 8,000 to 11,000 feet? Does their ECM work much better than Ford's at compensating for oxygen tension differences?

I ask because they drove the trucks 1200 miles from Detroit to do the tests, yet the identical grades are easily found in the Appalachian mtns, which are less than half that distance from Detroit.

willowtreexx
12-31-2010, 02:47 PM
I do have to say that when driving my friends new 2500 DMax towing a 8200lb Baja from the lake, that the exhaust brake works EXCELLENT and the exceleration was just incredible.

It is interesting that they did have to drive far, i was thinking before you mentioned it that they did it to break in the motors a bit before putting it through such a stress test...? dont know though

Forrest-X45
12-31-2010, 03:12 PM
I believe they chose the Rockies for the testing is because they wanted to run the tests in the most extreme towing conditions and mountain passes. Where else do you test the best towing rigs then on the most extreme mountain passes/roads? That's why most if not all the best sports cars are tested on the Nurburgring, the best race track in the world.

thatsmrmastercraft
12-31-2010, 03:23 PM
All that does me a lot of good.

Viktimize
12-31-2010, 04:34 PM
Denali Diesel will most definitely be my next truck.

bturner2
12-31-2010, 05:33 PM
They could have found the same type grades on I75 in KY - TN with half the distance to get there but the altitude wouldn't have been near as great. Sounds a bit contrived but still the HD is one bad a$$ machine.

mccobmd
12-31-2010, 05:36 PM
Makes me want to buy a heavier boat so I need a diesel to tow it.

vision
12-31-2010, 07:17 PM
I have to agree with bturner2 on this one. Not knocking the test, but no company ever spends more time and money unless they think that traveling 1200 miles will make their product look better.

If you are towing at high elevations, clearly the Chevrolet is superior. But it be interesting to see the same tests at more common grades and elevations, and see the fuel efficiency while towing.

gatorguy
01-01-2011, 12:12 AM
I have a Chevy Suburban and love it. But I plan on buying a 4 door one ton truck in the next couple of years. It's gonna be a Ford regardless of what this test said. I just like 'em better!

CantRepeat
01-03-2011, 09:08 AM
The only issue with the review is they only did a high altitude test. There should have been some towing at sea level as well. At least try to make it an all around review.

thatsmrmastercraft
01-03-2011, 09:35 AM
Just like any statistics, they are easily manipulated to the outcome you desire.

This just in...............................Breathing is now the leading cause of death. ALL people who breathe will ultimately die!

eficalibrator
01-03-2011, 10:27 AM
I ask because they drove the trucks 1200 miles from Detroit to do the tests, yet the identical grades are easily found in the Appalachian mtns, which are less than half that distance from Detroit.
I actually do this kind of work for a living. The test was run on Eisenhower grade, which is not only steep, but remains so for a loooong time. It's much longer than the grade in the Appalachians (where we also test), so things like piston and exhaust component protection strategies also get stressed more when you leave your foot to the floor for a longer period of time. This is part of what separates a good powertrain from a great one both in calibration (tuning) and hardware selection.

DooSPX
01-03-2011, 10:45 AM
I agree with eficalibrator.

What I gathered from the article was they wanted to do the test at the altitude in the rockies because it was the most extreme place they could go for testing the performance of the trucks.

stuartmcnair
01-04-2011, 01:36 PM
meh...next door neighbor has a Chevy, I have a Ford. No difference. Both will pull a house off the foundation. Make the decision based on looks, options and comfort.

Either way you go you will never bog the truck down towing your mastercraft.

Thrall
01-04-2011, 09:05 PM
To give an idea of the grade running up to the Eisenhower Tunnel from down in Silverthorne ( I drive it a couple times a week), my 08 F150 5.4L, with no trailer behind it, will run that grade at only 60-65mph tops, wound out in 2nd gear, pedal mashed, and no upshift until I hit the tunnel.
My Dodge 5.9 diesel running a healthy tune will pull it empty or with the X2 no problem in 6th gear, but my EGT's are about 1100deg runing empty at 65-70mph and close to 1400deg running the same speed with the boat. I usually downshift to 5th with the boat behind and keep it wound up to lower the EGT's a bit.
Coming down that hill in the winter time in either diesel pickup, the DMax or the Cummins, without an exhaust brake or winter front will have the engine temp bottomed out on the guage and heater almost blowing cold air by teh time I reach Silverthorne.

TT197
01-04-2011, 10:27 PM
This the same reason I took the Ilmor guys to lake Dillon to test their engine. If it runs up there it will run anywhere!

eficalibrator
01-04-2011, 10:40 PM
This the same reason I took the Ilmor guys to lake Dillon to test their engine. If it runs up there it will run anywhere!

THAT is some seriously COLD water! :eek: Oh and the 9000' altitude changes the engine math a little bit too. We typically worked out of Dillon when we were doing cold weather and altitude testing for GM. I had no desire whatsoever to even think about hopping in the reservoir.

FourFourty
01-05-2011, 10:40 AM
One other thing that you all should take into consideration is that GM provided both trucks for this test...... And we all know what can be done with a quick tune on these new diesels. GM may have pulled some shenanigans on this comparo....we will never know. I have drivin them both, and to be honest, those test results look pretty fishy to me. In that test, the GM performed so much better, that I have my doubts that it was a fair fight.




That being said, I upgraded to a '11 Denali HD a couple months ago, And it is an animal!

Tealchevy
01-05-2011, 10:50 AM
Still take an early 7.3!!!!

Barefooter92
01-05-2011, 01:08 PM
Why did they not envite the Dodge to play?

scott023
01-05-2011, 01:11 PM
Why did they not envite the Dodge to play?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You're kidding, right? :D

Sodar
01-05-2011, 01:16 PM
Why did they not envite the Dodge to play?

Just gotta read...

Where’s Ram?

If you were wondering where the Ram 3500 is in all of this, it wasn't included because these weights exceeded its 24,500 maximum GCWR by more than 2,500 pounds. It wouldn’t have been safe or responsible to test the truck in these conditions.

To help manage these astonishing weights, which we couldn’t have imagined a decade ago, we used a professional driver with a commercial driver’s license paid for by Diesel Power Magazine. Please see Diesel Power for the driver's bio.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You're kidding, right? :D

Pretty Much!

scott023
01-05-2011, 01:20 PM
Just gotta read...






Pretty Much!

You sure made that easy. ;)

Thrall
01-05-2011, 04:51 PM
Any of you who think that Dodge, Ram, whatever they're badged this week isn't as heavy duty a truck as the other 2 brands needs to go check one out. Dodge has continually given their light duty trucks conservative GVWR's and GCWR's compared to the other 2 brands, especially Ford. If you think about it, how could a DMax GM that has the same #of leaf springs and an essentially identical rear axle (both AAM 11.5's) really have several thousand lbs more gross capacity? It's all in the #'s each mfr puts out.
Yes, Ram hasn't gotten into the latest round of hp wars.........yet. My guess is they're sitting comfortable with the best engine and the only one that doesn't require peeing in a tank under the hood. Anyone who's been around any of these trucks in the last 10 years knows that OE hp/tq ratings are merely a starting point. Throw a Smarty Jr programmer on a new Dodge for $500 and it'll whip up on both the other stock trucks. Put a tune on the others then they'll have more power........until you got 3 different pickups rollin coal up the pass all sportin' 1000ft/lbs + at the wheels. Then it becomes a contest to see who has the best trans!

scott023
01-05-2011, 04:59 PM
Try driving that Dodge off road (lease roads etc) for a year and see what's left of it. The ''other two'' makes trucks that will stand up to abnormal (not just on road) use far better than the Dodge will. This is based on actual experience in the field, not sitting behind a computer. There are Ford's around here with 250K of lease road and field use that haven't required any major mechanical work. There aren't many companies that use Dodges for that application up here because they fall apart.


And to start bringing programmers into the discussion opens up a whole new can of worms. Why shoud one have to put one on a Dodge just to keep up with the other two? Doesn't make sense to me.

Sodar
01-05-2011, 05:02 PM
A level playing field is coming for the 1-ton trucks, just like it has for the trucks upto 16,000 GVW. Why it is taking so long is beyond me.

http://auto.ihs.com/news/2009/sae-towing-standard-041609.htm

bbymgr
01-05-2011, 06:16 PM
Try driving that Dodge off road (lease roads etc) for a year and see what's left of it. The ''other two'' makes trucks that will stand up to abnormal (not just on road) use far better than the Dodge will. This is based on actual experience in the field, not sitting behind a computer. There are Ford's around here with 250K of lease road and field use that haven't required any major mechanical work. There aren't many companies that use Dodges for that application up here because they fall apart.


And to start bringing programmers into the discussion opens up a whole new can of worms. Why shoud one have to put one on a Dodge just to keep up with the other two? Doesn't make sense to me.

Is the grocery store on a mountain side?:D

Forrest-X45
01-05-2011, 07:13 PM
Any of you who think that Dodge, Ram, whatever they're badged this week isn't as heavy duty a truck as the other 2 brands needs to go check one out. Dodge has continually given their light duty trucks conservative GVWR's and GCWR's compared to the other 2 brands, especially Ford. If you think about it, how could a DMax GM that has the same #of leaf springs and an essentially identical rear axle (both AAM 11.5's) really have several thousand lbs more gross capacity? It's all in the #'s each mfr puts out.
Yes, Ram hasn't gotten into the latest round of hp wars.........yet. My guess is they're sitting comfortable with the best engine and the only one that doesn't require peeing in a tank under the hood. Anyone who's been around any of these trucks in the last 10 years knows that OE hp/tq ratings are merely a starting point. Throw a Smarty Jr programmer on a new Dodge for $500 and it'll whip up on both the other stock trucks. Put a tune on the others then they'll have more power........until you got 3 different pickups rollin coal up the pass all sportin' 1000ft/lbs + at the wheels. Then it becomes a contest to see who has the best trans!

But the length and width of the springs makes a significant difference in capacity ratings even if they have the same number of springs. Plus GM might have different specs for the the AAM 11.5....

Otherwise I agree - the marketing folks have gotten out of control with their ratings. A half ton truck rated to tow 10K plus pounds, really??????

Barefooter92
01-05-2011, 11:08 PM
Glad I asked...About the dodge thing

Third generation GM boy...:cool:

eficalibrator
01-06-2011, 09:11 AM
Another big consideration in the tow and GCVW ratings are braking system (rotor size, caliper arrangement, friction material, fluid spec) and ABC/stability control capabilities. Just having a big axle and springs doesn't give you the ability to stop safely (repeatedly!) and avoid trailer sway.

pmkkdx
01-06-2011, 09:42 AM
Very interesting thread here!!!

I also enjoyed reading the articles and test results ... but for the majority of us, 99.99998% of the time ... who on this board will be towing something anywhere close to those in the test?

yeah, yeah, I know it's a test, but seriously?

In my opinion, doesn't it really come down to personal preference of brand, comfort features, style, appearance, color availability, etc. ... as any of the big three HD trucks will tow (or haul) anything "we" would need the same 99.99998% of the time?

Of course, if you have a business doing hot-shot hauling, espeically long distance thru mountain terrain, could be a different story.

;)

scott023
01-06-2011, 09:53 AM
Is the grocery store on a mountain side?:D

Some of us may have stakes in more than one business...

bbymgr
01-06-2011, 05:31 PM
Some of us may have stakes in more than one business...

Goat herder?????????:D Just joking Scott.

scott023
01-06-2011, 06:26 PM
Goat herder?????????:D Just joking Scott.

How'd you know? Got's me one of these on the front. :D:D:D

Thrall
01-06-2011, 08:48 PM
But the length and width of the springs makes a significant difference in capacity ratings even if they have the same number of springs. Plus GM might have different specs for the the AAM 11.5....

Otherwise I agree - the marketing folks have gotten out of control with their ratings. A half ton truck rated to tow 10K plus pounds, really??????

You're all correct, there could be numerous differences that are not readily observable that would increase or decrease the payload and towing capacity, but after having driven and owned all 3 brands of HD pickups, and seeing MANY more, working construction. I can safely say that the Dodge and Ford are both built heavier than the GM and on par with each other payload wise. Not to say the GM won't tow more. The Dmax/Alli is probably the most proven combination, although the 6.7 Cummins/68RFE is just as reliable IMO.

As far as Fords lasting longer than Dodges running around in the bush.........I don't buy it. The Super Dutys I've been around eat ball joints and U Joints, etc just as much as the Dodges. I'd give the edge to GM for off road durability. The only thing the GM lacks is the flexibility to keep teh wheels in traction in off camber situations due to the IFS vs a solid axle.
And what's up with being able to get a good OE rear locker in the GM AAM axles, but not the Dodge AAM axles?
Half ton ratings are even worse and Ford tops the list of bullsheeters in this dept. My F150, per the TV commercials has a 3000# payload capacity (commercials a couple years ago). That thing would be dragging it's rear bumper with 2000# in it! I have about 1500# in the front half of the bed and it will not stay up without helper springs.
BTW that "Heavy half ton" Ford is not only the most gutless truck I've had since my 1980 Blazer, in 70k miles it's gone through 1 transmission, 1 steering pump, 1 cat converter + everything the cat melted when it plugged up, complete brakes at 35k and new shocks and struts and about 4 front end alignments to keep it from chewing front tires. Truck does not even tow or go off road much, 90% interstate highway miles. They are fine grocery getters, but they're not construction trucks.
If towing capacity is what we're talking about, next time you're on a long road trip count how many Dodges are pulling hotshot trailers vs the other 2 brands. Dodge takes the over the road towing about 3 to 1 compared to the other two combined. Weekenders, snowbirds and const companies use GM and Ford, but the high milers are all running Cummins.
Basically they're all junk, or all good, just which wrapper do you want?

Viktimize
01-10-2011, 10:51 AM
You're all correct, there could be numerous differences that are not readily observable that would increase or decrease the payload and towing capacity, but after having driven and owned all 3 brands of HD pickups, and seeing MANY more, working construction. I can safely say that the Dodge and Ford are both built heavier than the GM and on par with each other payload wise. Not to say the GM won't tow more. The Dmax/Alli is probably the most proven combination, although the 6.7 Cummins/68RFE is just as reliable IMO.

As far as Fords lasting longer than Dodges running around in the bush.........I don't buy it. The Super Dutys I've been around eat ball joints and U Joints, etc just as much as the Dodges. I'd give the edge to GM for off road durability. The only thing the GM lacks is the flexibility to keep teh wheels in traction in off camber situations due to the IFS vs a solid axle.
And what's up with being able to get a good OE rear locker in the GM AAM axles, but not the Dodge AAM axles?
Half ton ratings are even worse and Ford tops the list of bullsheeters in this dept. My F150, per the TV commercials has a 3000# payload capacity (commercials a couple years ago). That thing would be dragging it's rear bumper with 2000# in it! I have about 1500# in the front half of the bed and it will not stay up without helper springs.
BTW that "Heavy half ton" Ford is not only the most gutless truck I've had since my 1980 Blazer, in 70k miles it's gone through 1 transmission, 1 steering pump, 1 cat converter + everything the cat melted when it plugged up, complete brakes at 35k and new shocks and struts and about 4 front end alignments to keep it from chewing front tires. Truck does not even tow or go off road much, 90% interstate highway miles. They are fine grocery getters, but they're not construction trucks.
If towing capacity is what we're talking about, next time you're on a long road trip count how many Dodges are pulling hotshot trailers vs the other 2 brands. Dodge takes the over the road towing about 3 to 1 compared to the other two combined. Weekenders, snowbirds and const companies use GM and Ford, but the high milers are all running Cummins.
Basically they're all junk, or all good, just which wrapper do you want?

I 100% agree with everything you just said. I am a Heavy Duty Mechanic by trade, and when I worked in light duty up here in the oil patch, the Ford's were by far the worst truck I have seen fro off road conditions. The big problem I seen on the GM's is that they have no ground clearance.

The Cummins is my favorite power train choice, but my vote goes with the Chevy as it is easily the best all around package. As far as strictly on road choices, the Ford is a nice option to look at as well, but I can't support a company that makes so many junk vehicles. The GT500 and the diesel truck are the only vehicles in their line up worth spending money on.

FourFourty
01-10-2011, 01:17 PM
but I can't support a company that makes so many junk vehicles. The GT500 and the diesel truck are the only vehicles in their line up worth spending money on.

I dont own a Ford, nor do I want one..... However, what you just said is completely off base.

Ford is building some of the best vehicles on the road right now. They have been rating better than GM and Chrysler in almost every catagory in recent years....especially reliability. I wish I could say otherwise, because I am a big GM fan..... Sadly, I cant.


You wont support Ford???
I would love to say that I wouldnt want to support GM or Chrysler, but wait, every American did.....And we didnt have a choice. ;)

Viktimize
01-10-2011, 02:25 PM
I dont own a Ford, nor do I want one..... However, what you just said is completely off base.

Ford is building some of the best vehicles on the road right now. They have been rating better than GM and Chrysler in almost every catagory in recent years....especially reliability. I wish I could say otherwise, because I am a big GM fan..... Sadly, I cant.


You wont support Ford???
I would love to say that I wouldnt want to support GM or Chrysler, but wait, every American did.....And we didnt have a choice. ;)

I base my opinion of Ford from what they have built over the last 20 years. Maybe they have really stepped their game up and started to make something worthwhile in the last 2 years, and I should give them another look now??

Forrest-X45
01-10-2011, 03:50 PM
I feel both GM and Ford have really stepped up their game the last few years and they both are building quality and reliable cars and trucks, almost if not on par with the Japanese. I can't honestly say the same for Chrysler, they are still struggling with building quality cars. Maybe that will change under the new ownership but only time will tell.
Back to tow rigs....the half ton truck market is ultra competitve these days which is great and I would love to see a tow test with all half ton trucks like the one from this thread. The Chevy 6.2L, Ford 6.2L, Ram 5.7L, Toyota 5.7L, and Nissan 5.4L all towing 8000 pound trailers to see which is best and which marketing departments are full of crap.

The heavy duty market is currently down to two trucks, the GM and Ford. Not sure what Ram is up to but they have lots of work to do to catch up power wise let alone with quality issues, IMO. But it was sure a wake up seeing the towing performance difference between the Chevy and Ford and to top it off the Chevy got better MPG.

vision
01-10-2011, 04:36 PM
I would love to see a tow test with all half ton trucks like the one from this thread. The Chevy 6.2L, Ford 6.2L, Ram 5.7L, Toyota 5.7L, and Nissan 5.4L all towing 8000 pound trailers to see which is best and which marketing departments are full of crap.

Second. Throw in the new turbo V6 Ford is talking about as well. Trailer Boat magazine usually reviews tow rigs each year, but do they do a head to head comparison?

Thrall
01-10-2011, 05:57 PM
Second. Throw in the new turbo V6 Ford is talking about as well. Trailer Boat magazine usually reviews tow rigs each year, but do they do a head to head comparison?

I hope my next company truck is a Ecoboost V6 (or a Dmax:D...hahaha, they'd never pony up for one of those) just to see how they run.

maxpower220
01-12-2011, 11:09 AM
Slightly off topic, Car and Driver did a study on the "more gas mileage" claims of turbo 4-6s vs V-8 cars a few months ago. In all of the comparos, the V-8s had equal or better mileage in town and all of the V-8s had better on the Highway. Cars included were the BMW 535 vs 540, some Audi models, and a different brand. Sorry, I don't remember the specifics only that the results were different than the marketing.

I have a strong belief that this will hold true for a truck using a V-6 with turbo. It's hard to believe a large, blunt truck won't be using that turbo a lot. Having owned a few Volvo turbo cars, gas mileage sucks when in turbo. I don't doubt the power will be there, but I do doubt the gas mileage claims.

My wife currently has a Fusion Hybrid. It is the best built and quality cars that we have owned. Ford has come a long way in the last 5 years in quality and innovation.