Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Appreciate the warm words; trying to hit every logical fallacy in the book though doesn't help.
Look, the tactic of stating someone doesn't
"have any real idea or clue" would be suitable for almost every single person here on this subject. Unfortunately, you decided to employ that with one of the few that does:
This is the kind of stuff I do on a daily basis. Not by observing vehicles going down the road and perceiving relationships to exist, but by actually getting behind the wheel of a truck or tractor.
As anyone familiar with the industry will tell you, light-duty pickup towing numbers have been nothing more than a back-and-forth marketing game for quite a period of time -- when capacities change with nothing more than a new model year, it doesn't take the sharpest tool in the shed to see that they're next to meaningless. Of course, your arbitrary 15k/20k figures have no bearing on reality either.
So, what does matter?
GVWR
GAWR
2001 Super Duty Chassis Cab:
5,200 (Front GAWR)
9,750 (Rear GAWR)
11,200 (Max GVWR)
2015 Super Duty Chassis Cab:
5,940 (Front GAWR)
9,650 (Rear GAWR)
13,000 (Max GVWR)
Now, take a truck that's popular for usage here - class 7 tractor @ 32k GVWR (avoiding the 12% FET). This would be spec'd as follows:
12,000 (Front GAWR)
21,000 (Rear GAWR)
32,000 (Max GVWR)
At these numbers (more than double pickup GVWR), it's equipped with a 250-280hp diesel (6 to 8 liters), 660-800lb-ft torque and either a Allison auto, or 5/6-speed manual.
Take a look again at my picture. Those are 61" x 72" bales coming in around 2400lbs. 16 total. Do the math. All moved with a truck that makes significantly less horsepower and torque than any new pickup.
As I originally stated in the other post, that's my point. Power output has nothing to do with limitations here -- pickups have made plenty for ages. It's all the other systems (suspension, transmission, braking, tires, etc.) where attention needs to be given.
Here are the specs you are missing from your comparison there:
2001 Maximum Trailer Weight Rating:
Ram 3500 4x2 Regular Cab 5.9-liter Cummins Turbo Diesel I-6: 13,900
2015 Maximum Trailer Weight Rating:
Ram 3500 4x2 Regular Cab 6.7-liter Cummins Turbo Diesel I-6: 30,000
So why the disparity in towing capacity between a 2001 Ram 3500, and say an International 4700 with the exact same engine? Why does a Ram 3500 need so much more torque to match a Medium Duty's Towing Capacity?
Well, you're forgetting that most of those trucks had an axle ratio of between 4.44-6.14. The 2015 Ram with the 30,000 lb. trailer rating has a 3.73.
The light duty 1-tons need to have drivable gear ratios that can deliver good fuel economy. The entire purpose of the 1-ton sector is to deliver a livable truck that can still haul the loads. If you're not going to use a super high axle ratio to increase wheel torque, then you have to make it at the engine.
I have 13 medium duty trucks, and I want one of those in my driveway at home about as much as I want an emptying SWAT van.
Pathetic unloaded acceleration, abysmal loaded acceleration, engine screaming in all gears, single digit fuel economy on the highway, 60mph top speed? No thank you. They have their purpose, and they can stay right there in it.
As to your comments about meaningless tow ratings; as a person who claims to be intimate with the art of towing large loads, you should know that all 1-ton trucks are now certified to SAE J2807 in their tow ratings. They are hardly an arbitrary number invented by the manufacturers.