General Motors Waits to Implement J2807

GMC Towing 3 II
Just when you thought everyone in the room was going to be mature about this, we're right back in elementary school. 

GM released a statement accusing "other competitors" (meaning Ford) of not doing the right thing and updating their 2013 truck testing procedures with revised towing and GCWR numbers, following the new J2807 standards. As a result, GM says it is "postponing" its own full implementation of the standards and test procedures for determining said maximum trailer and gross combined weight ratings on its vehicles until everyone is doing it, even though the company released its 2013 towing info in which all the numbers have been recalculated.

This action is in direct response to Ford's earlier statements that the automaker will not implement the J2807 standards on its full lineup of pickup trucks until its all-new models come to market, which is not likely to be anytime soon. 

We recently reported that SAE's committee-born test procedures typically do not have any kind of legal teeth, and the group usually refers to the requirements only as "suggestions." In the most recently published J2807 document (dated May 23, 2012), this 27-page document refers to the implementation timing only once, stating:  

"This document establishes minimum performance criteria at GCWR and calculation methodology to determine tow-vehicle TWR (trailer weight rating) for passenger cars, multi-purpose passenger vehicles and trucks. This includes all vehicles up to 13,000 lb GVWR. It is recommended that the performance requirements within be adopted for all vehicles with model year designation 2013 or later." 

Whether or not this interpretation means we have to wait until model year 2014 or 2015 to see pickup trucks (or SUVs and crossovers for that matter) with truly comparable maximum towing and GCWR numbers for the Big Three truck makers, we suppose we'll have to wait and find out.

The GM statement is below: 

GM Statement on SAE J2807 

"General Motors is postponing the implementation of new SAE J2807 trailer tow vehicle ratings for its vehicles, which was planned to begin during the 2013 model year. GM has tested and prepared our ratings to the SAE standard and is ready to implement the new ratings when we can do so without creating consumer confusion about comparisons of vehicles commonly used for trailering.  

For example, key competitors are continuing to use their existing ratings for 2013 model year pickups. Retaining our existing rating system will reduce confusion for dealers and customers.

As always, customers must determine the appropriate vehicle and trailering capacity for their needs based on their particular situation, including the curb weight of their specific vehicle, the number of passengers they will actually carry, the actual tongue weight for their combination, the amount of cargo in their vehicle, and the weight of the load they plan to tow. Customers should follow the trailering guidelines in their owner's manual, ask their Chevrolet or GMC dealer for trailering advice, or contact their Customer Assistance offices for more information."

Comments

Isn't this kinda like closing the barn door after the horse has already ran off? They already released the numbers. So what's the point of now saying we aren't going to release the numbers? Too late GM.

C'mon Ford, instead of putting off the inevitable, just get in front and just adapt J2807 ASAP. All Ford is doing is giving the Chrysler, GM, and Toyota marketing departments a bucket load of ad material.

Ford needs to come clean, that's what. Those tail-dragging Super Dity's I see towing big trailers is all the proof I need to say Ford's towing rating are inflated!

BTW- when is the next generation Super Duty coming ? I was thinking about buying a new F-350 this time around, but I am not interesting in an updated 1999 model, even if the new engines are great.

Chrysler never adjusted it's numbers either. Now GM adjusted it numbers in an obscure download, but is not going ahead with it. It's not just Ford.

The Big 3 shown up by Toyota...pretty sad, really. :(

Ford simply doesn't want to be caught with their pants down!

Ohh boy...now I really wish I could see their ratings!

@Big Bob,

The current Super Duty is all new compared to the 1999. Do some research.

.....and quit the Ford bashing, you're sounding a lot like the GM Trolls. Oh wait, think you are.

Dave,

Chrysler has already said that while it's numbers aren't SAE official, they will not lower any because of their more strict in-house standards.

That being said, I would like to see the SAE ratings for the 2013 Hemi Ram, with the 8 speed and Air Suspension. I having a feeling Ram is getting a "class leading" ad campaign ready.

Thanks for confirming Ram did not adhere with SAE either.

And I've already seen what the numbers are with the new models. Old Ford Escape with the big V6 was 3500 lbs. The new Escape with a 4 cylinder EB matches this. These SAE tests are a joke and completely overblown. GM came out with their ratings before they took them back and most of the big ones only dropped 2-300 lbs. Is 200 lbs really going to make a difference on a 11,000 lb load? What a joke this is!!!!!!

From a previous article:
"In the 1500 class, a two-wheel-drive Extended Cab standard bed with a 6.2-liter V-8, 3.73:1 axle ratio and the Max Trailering package was rated to tow 10,700 pounds in 2012. According to the 2013 order guide, the rating will be 10,500 pounds."

I feel much safer now knowing I can tow 10,500 instead of that dangerously high 10,700 pounds! Without SAE I might have put on an extra 200 lbs and all hell would have broken loose. Thank you SAE.

SAE is just like every other group other. They live to manipulate and control every citizen of every state from their perch.

Not much different from every Progressive proponent of centralized federal government, the only difference being a one of degree.

10,7000 lbs??? No, that is not allowed! 10,500 - yes go right ahead!!!

...bit of a problem with authority there Dave? LOL!

Sorry Frank, the 2012 Super Duty is certainly not 'all new' compared to a 1999. Granted a lot has been updated, including the drivetrain, front suspension, HVAC, and dash, but aside from trim the rest of the truck is largely unchanged. One of the 1999 features that I think really holds the 2012 Super Duty back is it's far to heavy chassis, which is a C-channel design made from (in most applications) 36,000 psi steel. That was pretty much standard back in the 90's, but both Ram and GM now use (respectively) 45,000 and 60,000 psi steel in a box section design. That is FAR stronger (as evident in the GM comparison 'frame twist' video) than the current Ford design. I think Ram's 5 link leading arm front suspension is superior both on and off road to Ford's antiquated ('65 Bronco) radius arm design, and the Ram does not suffer from as much shimmy and bump steer that the Ford does. GM's new IFS is probably the best HD 4X4 front suspension anyone has come up with yet, though there is still a slight penalty with ground clearance under some circumstances. I think the comments around here about the frame height on GM's is funny, I'd much rather high-center on the chassis than the transfer case! Plus, the new GM HD's frame has a lot more clearance than the 2010 and earlier HD's. The Super Duty was state-of-the-art back in 1999 but it isn't now. And I won't even bring up some of the lousy diesels that have been under the Super Duty hood either. Opps, I just did..........

Interesting, lets pass GM the crying towel please

Here's the thing.

It costs a pretty significant amount of money to test vehicles to the J2807 standard. It doesn't make sense for Ford to spend the money testing their current trucks, when their replacement is only a year or so away. For them it makes more sense just to wait and release the new numbers with their new trucks.

@Dave, Exactly. I don't understand why GM felt the need to back off. Their max rating on half tons only dropped 200-300 lbs. Who cares abotu 200 lbs!? Their diesel stayed at 13,000. A 2500 dropped a lot but in a config hardly anyone buys or cares about. Cry me a river!!!! GM is a bunch of cry babies.

Im confused I thought Ford started implementing the J2807 standard or at least thats what it said or maybe i misunderstood it in the previous article

"SAE Intros Final Test Procedures for J2807"

"Interestingly, Ford is taking a more legal approach, telling us they've started applying the new SAE standards to the company's all-new models, such as the completely redesigned 2013 Fusion and Escape, and it will continue to apply the standards as other all-new models are released. What this exactly means to the 2013 F-Series pickups, none of which are "all-new," will be interesting to see. (We'll have more on that front soon, as Ford will be releasing its 2013 F-150 model lineup information very soon.) "

Here Paul810... I think you had some typos in your last post dont worry though I have corrected them for you "It costs a pretty significant amount of money to test vehicles to the J2807 standard. It doesn't make sense for Ford to spend the money testing their current trucks, when their next front end facelift is only a year or so away. For them it makes more sense just to wait and release the new numbers with their minor cosmetic upgrades."

there we go should be good now

also Big Bob... spot on, I hear a lot of babble about the offroad advantages of an SFA on trucks that will rarely and really have no business ever seeing real "offroad" use. If Im towing something heavy on the highway, I would really prefer something that is going to track straight over bumps and ride smooth for long hours at a time = IFS ftw and no draggin that huge front diff through the mud when I do need the 4x4.

@Paul810:

How much you want to bet Ford has already completed this testing and found out that the tow ratings on half of their trucks are going down and decided to prevaricate instead of making a move that would surely cost them sales (which would cost them a damn sight more than a running a few tests would).

I'm of two minds about this:

As a consumer and potential truck buyer I'm pissed at Ford for this obvious cop-out and tantamount admission that their current towing numbers are inflated.

HOWEVER, as a Ford shareholder (I own a few grand forth of F stock) this makes a whole lot of sense. I think we all sometimes forget that, at the end of the day, Ford is a corporation beholden to shareholders who demand a profit for their investment. This makes a ton of sense from a business standpoint because it buys them time to make sure their next generation of trucks can actually walk the walk, as it were.

This SAE thing could be bad news kind like the EPA was bad news for diesels and trucks. They might start out with good intentions but then stick their noses where they don't belong. Be careful what you wish for.

And the question remains, when is the next generation Super Duty coming? I am not encouraged by the comment "not likely anytime soon".........

When is the next gen GM HD coming? Not likely anytime soone ither.

The reason GM came ahead with their numbers first is because they already know what the competitor is capable of. GM knows the Silverado and Sierra will out-pull/tow the competition in most real world conditions.

What is unfortunate is that Ford/Dodge also know GM makes the superior truck(s), unless were talking about ass warmers, leather and dashboard eye candy.

Everyone is just trying to wait to see who comes out with the best towing so they can beat them. Toyota and GM are now out. Nissan, Ford and Ram have already taken note of how much the Tundra and GM twins can do, so they will aim to beat them. And with the new Ram 1500 coming very, very soon they may only be able to say they are the best at towing until Nissan and Ford bring out the new trucks. Ram already came close when they tried to pass a 1500 badged 2500. For the mean time they all will all have a circus of commercials over Ford not doing the SAE tests but i don't think it will hinder Ford sales much if at all. Not even 2 terrible diesel engines was able to do that lol.

come on now we all know that the new GM 1/2 , 3/4, 1T trucks will be all new, the HD maybe not so much underneath, but will be as much new as can be! and then the SAE tow ratings will be built into the new trucks, and there is a good chance they will be better than the rest.

A MEN HAHAHAHA......!!!!!!!!!

Dave:

It's not "did not adhear" with the Ram numbers, it is "have yet to adhear."

Rams numbers will be out by the end of this month.

If you read between the lines and other blogs from different sites, they all write about the new SAE testing for towing load capacity and go further to suggest of the big 3, Dodge has allways been conservative with its numbers and that the "others" have been rather loosie or generous with there numbers. That being said the other and not GM (Which has released some prelim ratings), has realized that its numbers are way out to lunch with its ratings and wont use the SAE test requirements until its lineup has been redisgned. Now really Ford guys, if your feelings are hurt because of all this FORD BASHING you should maybe try and take the blinders off and see what ford really is, someone who puts more and more lipstick on there products and calls them all new. Come on really the SD has not been all new since 99 other than sheet metal, interior and front suspension. Basic cab, box, and frame structure is the same and don't sit there and say that its proven when its not. Who wants Frame twist from 99. Lets see here Ford has 4 differnt diesels in that time, 7.3, 6.0-ever so reliable...lol, 6.4-ever so reliable...lol oh wait i see a trend here..... and now there 6.7 power joke. 7.3 was the best of them all. Chevy has had the Duramax since 01 and Dodge with the 5.9 cummins since the beginning of time and now the 6.7 which is structurely the same.

I'm a dodge guy and i may be biased and by no means are they perfect but sometimes the facts are more hurtful than the bashing. Suck it Ford guys.

@Dutchbaggerie
It's not "adhear," it's "adhere."

I saw this one coming. This will definitely affect sales. This new J2807 tow rating is taboo.I think, and I have said this before,
Fords boasted tow, payload #'s have made them #1 in sales.
Things are about to change. I am I fan of this new test.Take it out of the hands of the manufacture. This will make it safer for everyone on the road.They all may have to build a more solid truck.

@Tom with a Ranger . I think that this late release is all to do with oneupmanship. Remember these ratings and who "wins" or "loses" matters a lot more for the PR department than the owner.

@big bob- Whats wrong with a "99" Superduty? Id rather have a 99 than a new one.

I wouldn't be surprised if GM bought and tested Ford trucks already and that's why they were so confident with putting their revised numbers out there.

@ almost everyone
And yet that '1999' Superduty is only beaten when its being raced up a mountain towing a trailer or having the exhaust brake compared, otherwise its more powerful, virtually the same acceleration to the GM twins, better brakes, better crash test ratings, better fuel economy and has better features, plus its more compatible to the commercial aftermarket making it the #1 choice for HD trucks for commercial use (C-channel frame, HD SFA, PTO). Like I said earlier there is a reason why it remained popular even with 2 bad diesel engines. Stay mad my friends.

They should put a SFA in the f150. Both front and rear 7 lug standard

Guts Glory Ram

"Like I said earlier there is a reason why it remained popular even with 2 bad diesel engines. Stay mad my friends."

This!


CTD,
"Dodge has allways been conservative with its numbers and that the "others" have been rather loosie or generous with there numbers."

So where's your source for this statement? Oh, other blogs, might as well be wikipedia or even worse allpar.com. Talk about blinders on.

With all the frame twist and ditch twist posturing since Howie Long came out with his commercial why do I still have yet to see a tailgate buckled as shown in the video on the hundreds/thousands of construction, farming, landscape, heavy industry trucks I see every week? "Don't say its proven when its not". The SuperDuty is not proven?! Hahaha! Thanks for the laugh!

Yes, facts can be more hurtful than bashing so I guess we will just wait until you actually start posting facts.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

OMG I CANT STOP LAUGHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TOYOTA is the ONLY one that adopted this because of EXACTLY what i have been saying ALL along. Everyone else will get their ass handed to them when people see the real tow ratings! GM's half tons werent hurt too bad because they basically only build the 5.3 which they dont boast as being over the top. the 6.2 isnt very much of the build pattern.

JUST WHEN THE TRUTH WAS COMING Ford wooses out!!!! LOL what a F-N Joke!

Ford does not want to release their numbers because they are going to drop big time on their Super Duty trucks because of their weak frames. They want to wait until they come out with a new Super Duty. This way they can lie about what their trucks can really haul and tow.

I like the Fords, Rams and the Tundra but GM is pretty much crying here and it reminds me of a professional three year old temper tantrum. Ford is not releasing their SAE ratings and I ask why? Does it matter if it will make you a year behind in best in class towing? Is Ford afraid of losing it's image? As a Truck owner it now makes me think Ford really did over inflate their numbers to get ahead of the competition. Why is it taking Ram a while to come out with their numbers?

Seriously is the Big 3 run by children right now?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OC2KXxb2dTM

LMFAO, Ford and GM are whimping out! I guess that's to be expected since they both have something to loose! Toyota came forward first with adoption of the J2807 standard, the first to introduce a 6 speed tranny, etc., etc., etc.

This is totally awesome!

ecoBoost 11,400 lb trailer tow rating my a**!
Hah, hah, hah, hah!!!

One of the 1999 features that I think really holds the 2012 Super Duty back is it's far to heavy chassis, which is a C-channel design made from (in most applications) 36,000 psi steel. That was pretty much standard back in the 90's, but both Ram and GM now use (respectively) 45,000 and 60,000 psi steel in a box section design. That is FAR stronger (as evident in the GM comparison 'frame twist' video) than the current Ford design. I think Ram's 5 link leading arm front suspension is superior both on and off road to Ford's antiquated ('65 Bronco) radius arm design, and the Ram does not suffer from as much shimmy and bump steer that the Ford does. GM's new IFS is probably the best HD 4X4 front suspension anyone has come up with yet, though there is still a slight penalty with ground clearance under some circumstances. I think the comments around here about the frame height on GM's is funny, I'd much rather high-center on the chassis than the transfer case! Plus, the new GM HD's frame has a lot more clearance than the 2010 and earlier HD's. The Super Duty was state-of-the-art back in 1999 but it isn't now.

-GM's torsion bar suspension sucks. It's the Sole reason they don't have the HD sales like Ford and Dodge. Slight penalty my ass. That frame is slung so low to the ground you see sparks fly at night. No wheel travel at all beyond 5 inches. You can't run a larger tire beyond those training wheels they come with without voiding the warranty.. You act as though it's some "revelation" to suspension to tie torsion bars into a low slung frame. Here's a clue dude, it ain't new. Those thing are JUNK. It's nothing but yet Another cost cutting measure (Cheap way of doing things) by GM. I find it pathetic that Chevrolet is dragged doiwn into GM's gutter trash way of building so called trucks.

we no by fact gm is the best puller no matter what ford said ..dont try to defend ford whit is soft frame ,,,gm have better hd no matter what ford lover said y no is hard for you to be always number 2 or 3 but the reality gm have a better truck,,maybe one day ford lover you have the chance to drive a real pickup for now go play whit you ford in the sand box whit your kids... brrruummmm..lol

Word is the 20112-up GM HD's have as much front suspension travel as a coil spring Super Duty. And, you can order 265/75R-18E tires, certainly not 'training wheels'. In addition, you will void the warranty just as quick on a Ford if you install oversize tires and a suspension lift kit.

Ford sells a lot of trucks on low bid fleet sales, and I think that accounts for quite a bit of their 'popularity'. Fleets seldom care much outside of purchase price. Don't believe me? I have been working for major fleets for nearly 30 years.

LOL, Toyota adapted cause they aren't gonna change anything soon!

I seen some a$$hole with a F150 platinum crew cab towing a 10 yard dump trailer loaded. The trucks A$$ end was only down a inch or two. For all that weight, the 150 held it pretty well. A 10 yard dump trailer weighs 5k pounds. You cant tow a trailer like that with a older model f150

*5k unloaded trailer. and it was a 6 lug truck, no HD payload pkg



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2014 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com