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."


point being is back 10 yrs ago, you couldnt tow a 10 yard trailer loaded with a 97-03 f150 etc

@TRX4 Tom
I think your Tundra rumors are way off and I would bet on 2014. I really like the idea of a Tundra Heavy Half Ton.

Regarding the comment about the horse already having run off... and that GM has already published the numbers... yes, they published the numbers but few have actually seen them and even fewer will remember them since they'll no longer be out there in public. What the general buying public will see are the numbers GM is NOW publishing, which are the older numbers. Same as "the competition." So, bottom line is the horse got out of the barn but GM is putting it back in the barn and closing the door until the others let their horses out of the barn. I think use of the J2807 results needs to have some kind of legal backing to force all manufactures to publish those numbers.

Mark can you give us a new story. These fan boys are getting tiresome. Its the same old Chevy, Ford, RAM rantings with nothing new. These rantings are enough to make me want to go out and buy a Toyota or Nissan.

When Ford knows it beaten, they always hee haw and brag about being the best when they are not.

This proves again my theory that GM isn't a leader. GM is a follower.

Ford marketing has given the perception that it's the best truck among the Silverado and Ram, but in reality it's the worst. Just to show what advertising can do.

What I don't get about this is the standard has been out there for two years now. So Ford has had time to make some changes to avoid embarrassment. Trailer towing is important to me, so I absolutely wouldn't buy a new truck that didn't meet the new standards.

All trucks meet the standard. The question is with how much weight in tow. GM's tow rating only dropped 200-300 lbs on the 6.2 and the diesel stayed the same. It is much adoo about nothing.

I don't understand how manufature tow ratings are bad, it should be a function of brakes and suspension. I drive a for raptor that has a rating of 6000lbs its the same for the 5.4 as the 6.2 . I have not towed with the raptor but my suburban with a tow rating of 8400 lbs moved a 7000lb trailer from Pheonix to Salt Lake no problem , the engine reved hig on the grades and the MPGs where low but the truck did it. the Raptor is more power full, heavier , more fuel efficeint, and can accelerate and stop faster than my suburban can, but it tows less b/c of its suspenssion. I see many over loaded pickups on the road my understanding is if your truck is overloaded and gets in an acident than you are responsable, the manufature is aying that the combination of drive traing, suspenssion, brakes and tires will allow the vehicle to safley transport up to that weight. Now maybe you will not be drag racing up a hill with a huge load but you can still get there. with Payload same thing they are saying you cannot go over a certain limit or the vehicle will not me laws on stoping distance or wheel travel will be reduced to the point that damage is caused.

Question if I add ton-and-a-half deaver springs to the rear of my Raptor can I tow a 17,500 lb trailer? bahahaha

Just go with what your truck says and you'll be fine leagly. if you tow alot in the margin than you should up grade to the next size up i.e. if you tow 11000lbs regularly dont buy an 1/2 ton buy a 3/4 ton or one ton and if you tow more than a f450 can leagly handel than its time to get a semi.

Every inteligent person should relize that the motor plays a small part in towing and payload i.e. a 6.2 raptor can tow 6000lbs where as the 6.2 supper duty can tow 12500 lbs. 6.2 raptor ext cab has a 900lb payload f350 lariat ext cab 4x4 can haul 3900 lbs.

For what its worth..poking my head in on suspension and frame talk... I was just given a new 2012 GMC 2500HD for my work truck... I thought the 2007 I had was nice... WOW...this thing drives and handles beautifully... even weighing in at 9450 with the workbed, parts/tools... I'm just saying...

This proves again my theory that GM isn't a leader. GM is a follower.

@Tim, GM IS a follower. Name 1 thing truck related they were the leader in since the introduction of the 4x4 torsion bar IFS in 1988. And I'm fully aware it wasn't new but they did make it the standard for a short time in the 1500 segment. Unfortunately they didn't know that Ford would capitalize on their stupidity of yanking the SFA from the HD's and go on to build the Super Duty. That company builds the most cost cutting cheapest trucks in the industry. I found it funny when Ford put their blue oval on the tailgate that Chevy did theirs the same way. Chevy did it so cheap though that there was no stamping to recess the logo. And the logo's themselves were so cheaply sourced that most of them have all turned black now. The gold washed right out.... lol!! Probably sourced from CHINA like their rims and everything else.

I was just given a new 2012 GMC 2500HD for my work truck...

@Jason. My thoughts go out to you. Anything that says Government Motors Co. on the front is surely an embarassment. The Least your boss could have done was have some pride and bought a Chevrolet if it Had to be a GM. At least GMC's leader will be voted out of office soon. Heck, you better hope so..

Hey NoGuts.NoGlory.Ram,

I work at a surface coal mine were every pickup is a Frod SD or half tons for management and the first thing they do when a new SD comes in is strip the box off before it falls off and replace it with a deck then they strip the bumpers before they rattle off. These trucks are driven daily from 75 - 100 miles a day and not a lick of it is on pavement. They need to be replaced every year because they don,t hold up. The mine received a 3 new 2012 SD back in feburuary and they have been in for warranty work more than they have been on site. They constantly replace windsheilds in them because of the flex the frame has which is transfered to the cab and into the windsheild......can you say crack.....the door latch pins don't aline with the door latch and are worn due to miss alingment. The reason they have stuck with ford is because they offer a insanely low lease rate and when they are returned aren't worth what they resell them for.

So really do i need a blog or other web site to prove my i get to see it every day!

Quality is job one my ass!

They have also tried Dodge and GM HD. Dodge raised there leasing prices because of the abuse they take and the condition they come back in, but the warranty issues were a whole lot less than ford and when they were returned they were drove back unlike the fords that were trailered back. GM HD didnt fare well because there front ends went soft quickly but there warranty issues were still less than ford!

By all means they all were returned with issues and no are perfect and Ford was the worst for ware when it finally left the mine.

Thanks.....I'll stick with my RAM!

Why does everybody on here have their most hated brand of truck for work, have a coworker or family member that owns one and it's always in the shop unlike yours. The comments section is either full of BS or their is not one decent pickup here in America.

@CTD - any truck would not fair well in such an environment. I know of companies who do the same. They strip off the stock bumpers and boxes and put steel bumpers on them and put "rockbox" or decks on the truck. One of the local reforestation companies even goes as far as putting adhesive plastic film down the sides of all of their lease trucks. The main reason has more to do with resale than whether or not they rattle apart. If those trucks are all leased, then the company has to pay to repair the trucks to make them "sellable". That can be expensive, same thing happens if the company exceded the time or mileage stipulated in the lease contract. If the Fords are as bad as you say, they would get dinged pretty bad on the lease return. That would negate the "lowest bid" benefit you are pointing out.
Another point is that if your company goes to all the trouble of using the same decks and bumpers over and over again, it may be cheeper to stay with the same brand then to change over all of the bumpers and decks with every different brand.
I'm surprised that your company would even bother with warranty. They can get a much better purchase price by waving the basic warranty.
Fords aren't always the cheepest fleet trucks around. In my region most of the fleet trucks have been Chevy lately. It changes based on who wants to move inventory. One year it might be Chev the next Ford and the next Dodge.
I tend to look more to what the small contractors buy. Those are the guys who buy what they drive and pay the repairs out of their own pockets.
As 5.3LOL pointed out, everyone has a story about a brand being a complete POS or as indestructable as a cockroach in a nuclear holocaust.

I am disappointed that GMC chose to back down on adopting these standards.
Ford may very well be delaying until the next gen trucks to save face.
Ram will probably wait until the next gen as well.

What a bunch of Corporate babies. The "mine is bigger than yours" crap is stupid. They all chickened out when it was time to drop the towel in the locker room. It looks like the little Japanese guy in the corner has the biggest balls.

If GM takes the same stance as Ford and Ram that means the SAE standards will be implemented in 2014 MY for GMC and 2015 MY for Ford and Ram.
Kudos to Toyota for adopting the standards before everyone else.

The towing standard will have to be settled by the first officer that finds a new Ford towing a utility trailer.
If they will not certify the unit is capable of doing the JOB then they are admitting they are fudging the numbers. Just park them all, and wait, Ford will figure it out.

A few 100lbs. here and there do not make that much difference. A friend of mine once pulled 16,000 lbs. with a 92 chevy 1500 with a 350 and 4 sp. auto. I'm not saying this was smart, but he did put a 30,000 gvw trans cooler on it, used spring bars, and had the trailer brakes turned up all the way. He traveled 2 lane roads and never drove over 50 mph in 2nd gear. He went 250 miles round trip. When he got back he changed the tranny fluid and then drove it another 40,000 miles before he sold it with the same tranny in it. Once in a while you can get away with a stunt like this, but he was ok this one time. I was his passenger and everything went alright. I was a lot younger then (and dumber) but would not do that again.

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.

Who says we don t need more government regulation? People never get the truth from corporations because profit always comes before people. The government should make this J2807 standard mandatory, only then will we know the truth about tow ratings.

The comments to this entry are closed.