More Game Playing? Now GM 'Fesses Up

2015-GMC-Sierra-2500HD-001 II

GM has made an about-face regarding how it calculates maximum payload numbers for its full-size pickup trucks. You might recall that Ford got into a little hot water by admitting it strips out certain features from the Super Dutys and F-150 pickups (like the radio, spare tire, center console and tire jack) in order to calculate the highest possible payload capacity for a given truck. At the time, both Ram and GM denied they do anything similar. But that wasn't entirely true.

GM now says, according to Automotive News, that it does remove the rear bumper and swap out to an optional wheel choice on certain models if it helps achieve a lighter weight number — which automatically means a larger payload rating. Both deletions are done, we're told, because those are delete options that could be ordered by a customer.

Some automotive journalists have suggested that the only way to keep the automakers honest when calculating capacities is to have independent oversight and some kind of specific ruling as to exactly how to calculate weight and payload ratings. We have not heard whether the Society of Automotive Engineers will see this issue as significant enough to step in and create across-the-board standards to which all truckmakers must adhere.

Weight savings will continue to be an important strategy for all truckmakers, especially for the heavy-duty models as the government will require three-quarter and one-ton pickups to adhere to federally mandated standards in the future. Likewise, as long as the Truck Wars over towing and load-carrying capacity rage on (there looks to be no end in sight on that front), we suspect each of the big pickup makers will continue to try to work the system in their own favor.

Manufacturer image

 

Comments

Figures don't lie, but liars figure.

PUTC weighed the Ram Ecodiesel Laramie long Horn and it's cargo rating was 400 lb less than the door tag.

This is an area where standardization is also needed.

Is this more click bait from PUTC since they had to print a clarification when Ford was accused of stripping out trucks for cargo ratings?

This was added to the "let the games begin" news story.

"(Editor's Note: this story has been modified on 7/28 to reflect a more accurate list of the optinal equipment that could potentially be removed when determining a pickup's maximum payload. Ford does not remove seats for calculations.)

Ironic to see bozo's accuse TTAC of inaccurate or stolen news stories when this site is guilty as charged.

Its kinda dumb because most that remove the stock rear bumper probably add a heavier rear bumper to replace it.

@Mark Williams - are you guys EVER going to clean up the blogs or are we going to see a few more letters blowing smoke up our ass's asking for civility and nothing again will be done.

Wow, I'd sue the suckers for lieing. If anything they should be on the conservative side. I don't think Toyota does that crap.

Wait, what?

I thought I read in another article that they did this so they can move their heavier truck into a lower class like Ford did to move a class 4 into a class 3 because the class 4 was too heavy for class 3. Not remove weight to add more payload.

@Lou_BC, Please worry about and clean up your own blog up.

There is a lot of negative trash talking about pickup trucks on the TTAC. Much of their pickup truck commentary is not nice, and in fact very mean-spirited. The commentators are NOT called out for doing so, and are sometimes celebrated for doing so. So worry about your own blog.

As far as PUTC goes, you should be mindeful of YOUR own behavior here. I know YOU have been looking for people to be civil and have have asked mods to step in. But when the mods came to look at this behavior, they noticed YOU (and a lot of others) were crossing those same lines. Please don't think you are innocent. If you want to start a movement towards civility, please take this as an opportunity to take a step back and think about how YOU are using the comments section here.


As for the Ford, the center console on the SD can also be deleted off the build and price by the customer. Just saying. Were the other items actually confirmed by Ford or was that just a guess from an auto journo?

whats more important is the customers are too dumb and actually believe the towing/payload hype, they don't realize the only way to know what your exact truck can tow/haul is by actually weighing the truck and doing some math.

@DeverMike/Paul/Tom Lemon/Greg Baird/TRX4Tom/Dave/Hemi V8/Tom Terrific/sandman 4x4/lautenslager/zveria/Bob/US Truck Driver/Glenn/Jason/Hemi Rampage/smartest truck guy/Maxx/SuperDuty37/Ken/Ron/johnny doe/jim/ALL1/Frank/Idahoe Joe/The Guy/AD/Casey/papa jim/Young Guy/BeeBe/Steve/Chris/The truck guy/Alex/Mr Chow/Yessir/All Americans/Scott/Buy American or say Bye to America/Ram Big Horn 1500/Hemi Monster/Tom Wilkinson at Chevy/mark49/Tom#3/Truck Crazy/carilloskis or whoever you want to call yourself.

Quit the crap, really.

It's getting long in the tooth.

You want to debate, but it has to be on your terms.

Learn to debate with good information, then we might be able to have a decent debate.

Opinions are good, but if they are only your view to support the UAW, then how good are they. Look at what you guys have done to Detroit.

Terror tactics (union tactics) don't work on me.

If PUTC wants the UAW or whatever to control this site I suppose it's their decision.

It's not kids like I've been told by PUTC.

"He also said the maximum payload claims for the 2015 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500 are based on a minimum curb weight that deletes the rear bumper and the spare tire."

I'm sorry, but I don't know anyone that removes the rear bumper from a half ton. Center console maybe. Bumper cannot be removed from the order. So GM is juicing the half-ton payloads.

I think GM and Ford are both wrong for removing the spare tire and jack. I hope this practice changes. If it's standard equipment, it should be included in the payload!!!

I hope Mike Levine sends word to Ford that this practice should stop.

I hope Tom Wikenson does the same at Chevy.

@Chris - take note of whom I address in a civil manner.

Whats the big deal?
Ford lied about the eco-boost gas mileage and in 2013 they changed the horsepower and torque rating and never told anybody.
So if you guys are going to believe the numbers the new 2.7 eco-boost puts out then goody goody gum drops to you.

an engine is an air pump, the more air you force into the engine the MORE fuel it needs
the Chevy and Ram V8's with engine deactivation cuts that engine air pump into half (air is not being pumped in to all 8 cyls, but only into 4 cyls and that why they get better gas mileage).
its so easy to understand

@DeverMike/Paul/Tom Lemon/Greg Baird/TRX4Tom/Dave/Hemi V8/Tom Terrific/sandman 4x4/lautenslager/zveria/Bob/US Truck Driver/Glenn/Jason/Hemi Rampage/smartest truck guy/Maxx/SuperDuty37/Ken/Ron/johnny doe/jim/ALL1/Frank/Idahoe Joe/The Guy/AD/Casey/papa jim/Young Guy/BeeBe/Steve/Chris/The truck guy/Alex/Mr Chow/Yessir/All Americans/Scott/Buy American or say Bye to America/Ram Big Horn 1500/Hemi Monster/Tom Wilkinson at Chevy/mark49/Tom#3/Truck Crazy/carilloskis/Chris/Mike Levine/Mark Williams or whoever you want to call yourself.

Quit the crap, really.

It's getting long in the tooth.

You want to debate, but it has to be on your terms.

Learn to debate with good information, then we might be able to have a decent debate.

Opinions are good, but if they are only your view to support the UAW, then how good are they. Look at what you guys have done to Detroit.

Terror tactics (union tactics) don't work on me.

If PUTC wants the UAW or whatever to control this site I suppose it's their decision.

It's not kids like I've been told by PUTC.

When Jane Average asks her husband, "Honey, can you take me to Home Depot so we can get a pallet of topsoil for the yard?", Joe Average doesn't reply, "Sure thing, but give me 30 minutes to remove the rear bumper and spare tire from the truck."

At some point, truck buyers will realize that pickups shouldn't be carrying/pulling loads previously handled by class 5/6 medium-duty rigs. The old saying still holds - calculate the truck that will handle what you want... then buy the next higher weight class.

@ Lou in BC: and Diesel Power also weighed a 1500 Ram Laramie Ecodiesel crewcab 4x4, with air suspension and Ram boxes. On a Cat scale. Had mostly everything that adds weight, air suspension, Ram box, 20" wheels, no side steps (maybe 40 pounds of aluminum?) Their number? 6,040 pounds, full of fuel, no driver. Ram boxes are said to weigh 150 pounds or so, so minus that 150 is 5890, so if 5890 was the weight of it minus those, it would have about a 1050 payload. Well gee wiz, the Laramie 4x4 1500 Eco-diesel 1500 crew I drove with 20" wheels (minus the 150 pounds or so of Ram Boxes it didn't have) had I believe a 1059 pound payload, so it weighed (6,950 GVWR minus 1059=5891 CURB-weight, so if Ram Boxes were on it, 900 or so pounds of payload, not what Mark said.

The point is, the Diesel Power Cate scale weight jives with the payload sticker on the Laramie I drove, with the 150 pound difference because of the Ram Boxes.

Somebody screwed up. The truck DP magazine used looks like the one The Annual Test used. Maybe Mark have Levine on the scale, along with his own weight? After all, Mark likes Ford! Ford would never lie, not about towing weight or gas mileage of C-Maxs, right?

Nice try to spin it, lost Lou.

At Johhny Doe: notice they said smaller optional tires? What have I been saying all the time about smaller wheels? Lol @GM!

I'm sorry Tom, but I never saw the 3.5L EcoBoost's HP and Tq ratings change. Last I checked they were 365/420. Never saw their fuel economy ratings change either. The last time I checked? Just now. http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/specifications/engine/ Any other mis-truths you'd like to share?

You need to go after GM too because GM also deletes the center console and/or center seat on some trucks...

"Other available interior options include front center seat delete, which provides an open center console space..."

- The 2015 Chevrolet Silverado 1500

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/chevrolet/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2014/Apr/0429-silverado-ssv.html

Ram probably does it too but they won't admit it here and I don't have the time to research it.

TRX in Ramistan - interesting spin - Ram doesn't lie because their 1/2 ton and 3/4 ratings are so damned low............

okay.

I get it now.

Thanks for the update.

@Chris - your right, I'm sorry.

I sound like I'm talking to my wife.

FYI, on GM 1500's....

GM deletes the rear bumper, spare tire, spare tire carrier, all ornamentation, and possibly the center seat since it can be ordered that way some fleet 1500 trucks. This has been going on for awhile, not just since 2011.

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2014/chevrolet/silverado_1500/packages_options/

I also believe GM deletes the jack, since they delete the spare tire and carrier, then is no sense in having a jack.

Someobody at PUTC needs to get to the bottom of this because I still don't think we are being told the whole truth by GM, Ford or Ram.

Iray 801
I read it here PUTC from many other people posting information that the 3.5 Eco-Boost has a much lower HP and Torque rating cause they restricted the inner cooler on the 2013 and 2014 models cause the inner cooler collected too much water by cooling the air too cool making condensation and turning that into water being sucked into the engine.
So its basic common sense when you cover up half of the inner cooler its going to produce less power.
The fix for the older eco-boost was installing a plastic cover on the outside of the inner cooler but the new eco-boost has a restrictor plate installed inside of the inner cooler.

I am SUPRIZED you didn't know that !

I wouldn't count on Ram not "lying." They seem to be evasive and don't give out too many details like GM was being before they got called out. Because Ram uses coils with low ratings I bet they try to add as much payload as they can.

Ram says they use "unmodified base weight."

Define unmodified. Rams sells a base 1500 service package without the front center seat. That could count as unmodified as they sell the base truck that was from the factory.

I bet there is more going on here than meets the eye.

I read it here PUTC from many other people posting information that the 3.5 Eco-Boost has a much lower HP and Torque rating cause they restricted the inner cooler on the 2013 and 2014 models cause the inner cooler collected too much water by cooling the air too cool making condensation and turning that into water being sucked into the engine.
So its basic common sense when you cover up half of the inner cooler its going to produce less power.
The fix for the older eco-boost was installing a plastic cover on the outside of the inner cooler but the new eco-boost has a restrictor plate installed inside of the inner cooler.

I am SUPRIZED you didn't know that !

Intercooler was too effective....had nothing to do with boost and did not effect HP or Torque.

New 3.5 Eco Boost will receive a remap and have more power and torque.

How GM Will Fight Back Against Ford's Radical 2015 F-150

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/07/30/how-gm-will-fight-back-against-fords-radical-2015.aspx

What I have tried to explain to people here again and again is that tow ratings are all a marketing ploy. Smart truck shoppers purchase the truck that suites their needs and is capable of handling the kind of hauling and towing they need to do.

When manufacturers decide their own tow ratings, there is an inherent bias. This is because they can do whatever they need to do in order to obtain the numbers that they want. I'm sure each automaker is guilty of this in one way or another.

The problem is that now more than ever people are becoming obsessed with tow ratings, engine ratings, etc when in a vast majority of the time any truck of the same class/engine type would be capable of the same task and do the job well.

They should remove the seats and smash out all the glass too. Don't need that anyway.

When will Ram fess up?

2014 Ram 1500

Seats — Cloth bucket front seats with 10-way power adjustment for driver, 115-volt
auxiliary power outlet, *center console delete*, folding rear bench seat trimmed in
vinyl

https://www.fleet.chrysler.com/v7fleet/StaticFiles/files/Brochures/MY14_Law_Enforcement_Guide.pdf

2014 Ram ProMaster

Available Rear Frame Cross Member Delete


Available Passenger Seat Delete


Available Spare Tire Delete

https://www.fleet.chrysler.com/FleetHome/Pages/Vehicle.aspx?vehicleID=ram-promaster

Ram has juiced the weight in other ways.

23 gallon only tank on EcoDiesel, 6' 4" box instead of the standard 6' 6" box.

32 gallon tanks on HD 2500/3500 LB instead of 36/37.5 gallon tanks.

smaller crewcabs on the halftons, no true supercrew on halfton.

cheaper tires.

no safety cage, thinner roof with poor roll over protection

@HEMI MONSTER - I agree. Most guys buying trucks who tow or haul often do not believe car company bullsh!t.

That is why most guys will not tow more that 5-7K with a 1/2 ton, 9-11 with a 3/4 ton and 15-20 with a 1 ton.

I rarely ever see HD dual wheel pickups used to tow heavy loads as work trucks. That is what commercial tractor units are used for. Pickups won't last.

Yeah, I never believe the manufacturer's BS about their trucks. What matters to me is how it performs in MY world.

And I have to say, as the owner of only three brand new trucks in my lifetime, a 1988 Silverado 350, a 2006 F150 5.4 and a 2011 Tundra 5.7, the Tundra wins the Gold Medal in my world.

My towing and hauling has remained the same over the decades with each truck, but the Tundra really does it better, smoother, with better handling and ride than any of the other ones I owned.

That's my opinion. But it is also the only opinion that matters since I put my money where my mouth is.

No one else is paying my bills.

Very dissappointed in such games regardless of the perp.

(I have to say, as the owner of only three brand new trucks in my lifetime, a 1988 Silverado 350, a 2006 F150 5.4 and a 2011 Tundra 5.7, the Tundra wins the Gold Medal in my world.) Post by: Highdesertcat

I sure would hope your 2011 Toyota Tundra would tow and handle a load better then the a 23 year old Chevy truck and a 5 year old Ford truck.

Perhaps every vehicle needs a wet weight on the door jamb- as built, fully fueled.

F-150's are rated unmodified.

The HD with a radio or tire jack delete only take off 6 lbs. At the end of the day that's not going to matter.

I'd be more worried with GM taking off bumpers and swaping standard wheels with optional lighter wheels.

@lOU,

You said most guys will tow 5-7K with a halfton, if they did they would be over weight, unless they are using weight distribution, not only on the truck, but the classIV hitch itself

@ Chris and Jason T and others,

Wow, Ford and General Motors got caught red handed and now the Ford and Chevy/GMC fan boys all want to cry but , but , but Ram must be cheating as well.

Just like all of you said just wait until Ram has to use the J2807 standard and see how far their rating fall. Gee Ram was not lying about their ratings and when they complied with the J2807 standard across their entire line of trucks, 1500, 2500 and 3500 they all stayed the same and some went up in rating.

Toyota can't say that, Ford can't say that and Chevy/GMC can't say that.

Ford is completely redesigning their trucks and refuses to this day to apply the J2807 standard to their current trucks because they would take a huge hit on their ratings and as it is even with their complete redesign they are taking a hit on their ratings.

All the manufactures state the maximum ratings on a base model truck, but it seems that both Ford and Chevy/GMC go farther by deleting extra equipment that the public would not delete making both Ford and Chevy/GMC rating worthless.

Seems if you want a truthful rating you need to go to either Ram or Toyota as at least they comply with the J2807 standard and yes I include the 2014 Rams because the ratings stayed the same or increased on the Ram trucks not a single Ram went down in their rating.

Lead, Follow or get out of the way, it seems Ram is once again the leader.

Uhh, Toyota led the way with J2807--years before Ram complied... .

@Dav

Reading comprehension is not your strong point is it?

Toyota only sells one full size truck that is in the 1500 series.

Toyota adapted the J2807 standard first, Ram adapted the J2807 standard to all of their trucks, the 1500, 2500 and 3500 series.

Ford and Chevy/GMC have not adapted the J2807 standard to all of their line up that includes their 1500/F150, 2500/F250 and 3500/F350 series trucks.

In fact Ford has now tried to muddy the waters even more with their BS by using a F450 series truck to try and fool the public into thinking that Ford has the highest rating.

The public does not buy but a handful of 4500/F450 series trucks. What they do buy are 1500/F150, 2500/F250 and even 3500/F350 series trucks and Ford does not beat the Ram's 3500 rating with Ford's best F350.

I know the Ford and Chevy/GMC fan boys have a hard time dealing with the truth, after all they have been lied to by Ford and Chevy/GMC for decades now about the phony ratings on their trucks.

This should piss off the Ford and Chevy/GMC fan boys:

Ram Truck Brand

The Ram pickup truck had its best July sales since 2005. Sales of the Ram pickup – Motor Trend “Truck of the Year” in 2014 and 2013 – were up 14 percent in July, its 51st-consecutive month of year-over-year sales gains. Ram Light Duty sales increased 15 percent in July, while Ram Heavy Duty pickups were up 18 percent. Ram Truck brand sales, which include the Ram ProMaster van and Ram Cargo Van, were up 18 percent in July, the brand’s best July sales since 2006.

@ Ram Big Horn 1500

Oh I read just fine--but I don't believe and regurgitate BS like Fiat fanboys do hook, line, and sinker.

Toyota was the first to adopt J2807 for all of its pickups (and SUVs and minivans)--it didn't need some BS qualifier cause it actually was the first.

Fiat needs some BS qualifier like "fullsize" cause they know they are years behind the real first. Why didn't they do it back when Toyota did?

Now, if you guys bragged about being the first manufacturer to go through multiple bankruptcies and owned by a number of European countries--well, I couldn't argue with that.

@Dav,

Well you win the crown of worlds biggest idiot.

Funny how Fiat fans are quick to turn to personnal attacks--a sure sign of insecurity.

Big Horn = small pee-pee?

@Dav - you have pissed off the Clan from Ramistan.

The Jihad will descend upon you like fleas on a camel.

LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Govt Mo Co (GMC) for the MORONS is an Obama JOKE. Where's Chevrolet in THIS? Further Proof Dodge OWNS Chevrolet.

@Lou - "BC Tom I'm constantly amazed at how disorganized the USA seems to be when it comes to looking out for their own..."

Hey bonehead, before you through stones you might want to get your own house in order!

Canadian White Paper 1969 “In spite of all government attempts to convince Indians to accept the white paper, their efforts will fail, because Indians understand that the path outlined by the Department of Indian Affairs through its mouthpiece, the Honourable Mr. Chrétien, leads directly to cultural genocide. We will not walk this path.” —Harold Cardinal, The Unjust Society

This week, Industry Minister James Moore quietly tabled a new Digital Privacy Act in the Senate. The proposed legislation should safeguard Canadians' privacy online but sadly does not. The proposal is likely to reinforce the feeling that the Conservatives are just bad on privacy issues despite privacy's increasing importance to daily life and our digital economy. - STEVE ANDERSON

Canada's relationship with First Nations peoples is a rapidly accelerating failure, borne of its contempt for international and national law, and an overarching moral weakness, outgrowths of its atrophied sense of self. - Mark Taliano

Few parliamentary actions have been so well-intentioned yet produced so disappointing a result. Almost a quarter-century ago the House of Commons unanimously voted to end child poverty by the year 2000. But more children are living in a low-income household than in 1989, when Members of Parliament made their optimistic pledge. – Toronto Star

Glen Clark, the NDP premier of British Columbia in the late 1990s, had what sounded like a good idea—bring shipbuilding back to British Columbia by creating a fast ferry that would be trendsetting. The plan was for three ferries to be built at $70 million each. Even with cost-cutting measures that crippled the fleet, the ships cost twice that much to build and the program topped out at almost $450 million. By the time the Liberals came to power in B.C., the ferries were up for sale. They were sold for $20 million. Not each—for the whole fleet of three. -Kamloops Daily News

A landmark Canadian parliamentary report released on March 7, 2014, failed to recommend needed steps to stem violence against indigenous women, Human Rights Watch said today. The committee did not recommend either an independent national inquiry or a comprehensive national action plan on the violence, and made no recommendations to address accountability for police misconduct. - Parliament Panel Fails Indigenous Women

Ontario in the 1970s had some problems. The Progressive Conservative government of the day was being criticized for not dealing with the chronic housing shortage. The solution, arrived at by provincial treasurer John White, was to create cities. One of these was near Nanticoke and was called Townsend. In 1974, the province spent the equivalent of more than $260 million in today’s money to buy 3,700 hectares. The population was supposed to be 100,000 by year 2000. Today about 1,500 call it home. - Le Droit.

Yeah Lou we can learn a lot from F%k’n Canada…lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4ml6pc5

Posted by: Lou Ama Su Vestido Rosa | Jul 31, 2014 7:11:57 PM
/QUOTE

Every country has some problems,
Cherry picking bad news from 1970 s proves what exactly!?

Name one bank that went bankrupt in Canada ever,
thats right there was NONE.

Care to share with us how many US banks went belly up and had to be rescued by the Govt!?

GM has made an about-face regarding how it calculates maximum payload numbers for its full-size pickup trucks. You might recall that Ford got into a little hot water by admitting it strips out certain features from the Super Dutys and F-150 pickups (like the radio, spare tire, center console and tire jack) in order to calculate the highest possible payload capacity for a given truck. At the time, both Ram and GM denied they do anything similar. But that wasn't entirely true.

GM now says, according to Automotive News, that it does remove the rear bumper and swap out to an optional wheel choice on certain models if it helps achieve a lighter weight number — which automatically means a larger payload rating. Both deletions are done, we're told, because those are delete options that could be ordered by a customer.
/QUOTE

So whats the problem??

If one can order it it's perfectly legal to claim the stated weight rating,,
GM is just one step ahead of the competition as always LOLOL


@Harley - Canada has been slowly working on addressing the effects of colonization on first nations.

The inbred moron unemployed troll that made that post once again proves that he is clueless.

Lucky for him conscription no longer exists in the USA........... actually it is lucky for Canada too as the lazy piece of crap would hop the border to hide in Canada.

Only RAM is Honest Brand.
GM and FORD dishonest their customers.
I will never buy anything from lier.
RAM is the best again.



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