J2807 Tow Ratings May Be Off For Years

J2807 Editorial 2


Dear Ford, GM, and Ram Truck, 


Let's have lunch.


Very truly yours, 



When we first reported on truck manufacturers' attempts to standardize how maximum and specific tow ratings are calculated, we were very optimistic. The idea was simple: Let's get all the truck makers on the same page when rating their vehicles' tow ratings so that consumers can compare apples to apples.

For years, truck makers have used a wide variety of testing procedures that, in some cases, were used only to allow them to market the biggest and baddest number for advertising purposes. With quite a bit of guidance from the Society of Automotive Engineers committe chair and representation from all the important players, the J2807 towing standards and practices (for vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating up to 13,000 pounds) were, as we understood it, discussed, agreed upon, and released.

Now the only hurdle is to figure out how and when each manufacturer will implement the standards.

As we understood the process, the committee, made up of representatives from both auto and trailering industries, agreed to begin using the J2807 test procedures for 2013 model-year vehicles. That way, anyone buying a truck from the 2013 model year or newer would be able to compare identically tested towing numbers against one another to make the smartest (and safest) purchase.

Not long ago, GM revealed new tow ratings for its long list of 2013 model configurations for light- and heavy-duty models, based on the test procedures mapped out in the J2807 standards. Toyota deserves special mention because they decided to apply the J2807 standards quite a bit earlier than all the other manufacturers, taking a pretty good hit in tow ratings, especially on certain Tundra models.

The truth is that ratings for all manufacturers are likely to take a hit on certain models because J2807 makes some significant requests concerning temperatures, speed and with certain accessories running. Several tests have to be accomplished at a minimum speed without any overheating issues — a tall task for some powertrain and ring-and-pinion combinations, we'd guess.

Regardless of how challenging the new tests are to meet and complete, at some point on this tow-rating committee there must have been some kind of agreement — maybe it's somewhere in the meeting minutes — about exactly what model year this new standard would be required. The committee was specifically designed with truck buyers in mind, to give them a chance to compare, in some manner, the maximum and specific tow ratings in a fair way with the competition. Consumers were supposed to be the priority.

But all that seems to have changed, for now. We're not sure how it happened, but somewhere along the way, SAE lost control of exactly when J2807 was to take effect. In fact, not long after GM announced its 2013 tow ratings, they were pulled back. GM said that if everyone didn't use the same procedures at the same time, there was no point in using the new procedures at this time. Ram seems to be holding off using its J2807 numbers as well.
As we understand it, Ford will use the J2807 standards when it offers a significantly redesigned truck starting in 2013, meaning that the next F-150 and Super Duty will use these "new" standards when those new trucks are designed and released.

Maximum tow ratings have always been a valuable key selling point, especially in the HD truck segment, for salesmen and dealerships to separate their products from the competition, just as important as horsepower and torque numbers. So it probably shouldn't surprise us that this subject is causing so much anxiety, especially to marketing and advertising departments.

We understand there are many facets to this issue. Certainly, it puts truck makers in a potentially awkward situation, coming to market with a new truck that could have less towing capacity than the exact same truck that the exact same dealership sold last year. In some cases, the truck may even look identical, too.

There's no question it will take some time for all the numbers to settle out once the decision is made to convert to the new standards, putting all your cards on the table, and we assume there may be some significant drops in capability. But it seems like some truck makers aren't giving consumers enough credit, especially smart truck consumers who understand there are new requirements now.

Sure, it might mean that someone won't be able to brag about being the max-tow-rating champ in an advertising campaign, but every truck engineer will be able to use that as the new (much fairer) starting point for the next stage of this race. If PickupTrucks.com proves anything, it's that there can be intelligent (and passionate) conversation about real trucks and how they compare, and if anyone wants to get in the way of that, it's a problem. 

Let's not lose sight of the real issues here: the people who buy trucks.

Maybe there's a way to get all these interested parties back to the table so they can get these tow-rating standards implemented, by everyone, as soon as possible. We'll even pay for the food, no matter how long it takes! Let's get this done so truck buyers can buy the right truck for their needs.




You better get the SAE to check out that basket's hauling rating. We don't want you to hurt yourself! According to some on this blog, if it is not tested by the SAE, it has not been tested.

@oxi, The bakset can hold 300 lbs but can the basket installed on your roof hold it day in and day out????

Did you get that in writing? Can just the basket hold 300 lbs or the roof? How much can your roof hold and is there a guarantee from the shop?

pickup makers (OEM's) are making and marketing vehicles to people who really don't need them. Witness the 'pretty' packages ALL of them are pushing. Platinum? King Ranch? Harley davidson? Cabelas? Laramie Longhorn? Sounds like advertising for something other than a pickup. Maybe a cartoon. Why should I be paying for someone elses advertising? But I digress. Manufacturers are pandering to suburban people who would not know how to figure a max tow rating if thier life depended on it. Pickups have stopped being a workmans necessity and become a cash cow for OEM's. And brother are they are milking it. Pickups are now the highest profit product for every OEM. How does that make you feel? Calling these things trucks is missleading at best and an outright lie at worst. A Truck has a dump bed, or 18 wheels, or a large multi-thousand gallon tank. A pickup is just that, a vehicle to pick up things with. Now you can only pickup small things because OEM's are pandering to suburbanites with 2+ car garages that don't fit an 8 foot long bed. So they have decided to call the 6ft bed a 'standard'. Except they are not all 6 feet, some are 6'4". Even worse a 5.5ft, what the heck am I going to do with that? Use it as a bathtub? They are all playing with the terms and figures, chasing the all-mighty buck.
The end result is that people who actually need these vehicles are paying more and getting less. Anybody remember The 'Urban cowboy'? After that trash, 501's went from 9.99 to 30+ bucks in a matter of weeks. The new big demand yielded lighter cloth, cheaper thred and shoddy workmanship. As a result they are a fashion item/statement instead of a piece of everyday use. The same marketing crap is now being used on vehicles. While selling a bizillion vehicles may somehow be 'good' it ticks me off that you can't find a real 'work' pickup.
And before you get your panties in a bunch, I would like you ALL to think how you would feel if someone got in into the passenger seat of YOUR PERSONNEL pickup with mud/cowcrap on thier boots. Or a dusty, sweat soaked shirt. Then took off a sweat soaked or greasy hat/cap and set it on the seat. Or even placed a greasy broken 'part' inside the bed. Anyone of you who would even think about the dirt doesn't need a work pickup. Go buy a nice honda ridgeline to carry your waterbike to the lake. Now don't get me wrong, I LIKE the crewcabs, I can actually carry a small 'crew' of men, but shortening the bed because of it being too long, is unacceptable. For those of you who think hauling a load of plywood with the tailgate down is ok. I would like you to get a fine "ticket', because it is unsafe and illeagle in most states.

Since OEM's want to play these games, they should all play with the same set of rules.

Pickups are now like show dogs, pretty to look at but no competition in a real fight.

@Ty I totally agree with you. Thats why I don't really care what the inside looks like, or who has the best looking. I buy my trucks for work, not to ride around in to look cool. If you want top of the line dashs or seats buy a car or suv. Leave the trucks for working. Why buy a 50 60 grand truck and trash the inside with oil and mud.

@ HEMI lol : All my local GM dealers have at least two of these trucks. that is with the 6.2 I WAS VERY SHOCKED to see them on some of the lots, I beleave it was due to the ads.

@Ty i agree with alot of what your saying, but manufactures still offer 8 foot beds. Ford offers the 8ft bed on all supper duty cabs and on all 150 cabs except crew. There are things people do to protect the insides of theirn truck from getting dirty with heavy duty floor mats. as far as stuf on the seats goes most back seats are vinal even if the fronts are leather, Raptors, Lariats and fx luxuary have vinal rear seats, same as a work truck its just made to look like leather. the 5.5 bed is all I need in my truck, it helps with off road driving. 15 yrs ago families who spent time out doors would buy SUVs that where based on trucks like broncos, blazers, cherokees, land crusiers, with many SUVs gone and repaced buy cross overs many people are forced into a crew cab short bed to maintian the fuunctions of those suvs. I switched from suburban z71 to Ford Raptor, bc i still needed 5 seats and off road cabability and the cargo room that that a suburban with the 3rd row out offered. the GMT 900 suburban did not have the required off road capabilities so i looked at pick ups and went with the raptor bc it had the best approach and depaarture angles and was comparable to my GMT 400 in aproach and departure angles. My work truck is an F150 xl 8ft box and a Ram mega cab with a 6.4 box

@Dave, Hold on now! Ram has not released their towing numbers yet because they are holding them close to their chest! The numbers will be out soon because Ram is preparing a CLASS LEADING ad campagin that will knock the socks off Ford.

Like I said Ram is holding the numbers close to their chest and the following figures will be j2807 compliant!

The Ram 1500 Tradesman HD offers the most towing capacity (11,500 pounds) and most payload (3,125 pounds) of any light-duty truck!!!!!!!!!!!

Ram is going to pull out all of the stops. When GM and Ford don't play the j2807, Ram is here to save the day!

11,500 towing!!!!!!!!!!!!

3,125 pounds payload!!!!


J2807 RAM!

@Dave, If the tests are so easy, why isn't Ford using it? Answer me!

Let me help you with the answer. The fact of the matter is Ford fans don't care. Ford is always EXAGGERATING their products, especially their F150. They've been fooling the public for so long that many believe their exaggerations on towing, so for them, it's been a positive thing to lie about them!

j2807 RAM

Watch this!


As you can see we thoroughly updated the GUTS on this new Ram. And we wrapped it in a handsome new exterior around these countless improvements to give you the GLORY that we come to expect from RAM.

THE NEW 2013 RAM 1500
The larger more HEROIC grille and larger badge enhance Ram's big rig look!
And finally,

All backed by
more guts
more glory
more ram.


I always keep speeds reasonable and braking distances long. Never had a problem yet.

Here is the quote form the link you provided.

"Ram Trucks is also keeping its cards close to the vest, as they have told us they'll have more information on the subject by the end of the month when the company releases material on the 2013 Ram, Jeep, and Dodge models."


Ram will release the info at the end of the month. It is not the end of the month yet!!!!!!

Ram will release their J2807 Tow Ratings at the end of the month.

More Guts
More Glory
More Ram

@MoparMan Class leading for maybe 3 or 4 months. I am sure Ford has room since they got newer motors to program for better fuel mpgs, and hp tq figures. Then GM will have all new motors to, aerodynamic formed body style, more weight reductions parts, and more then likely a 8 speed trans at some point. I don't think ram stands must of a chance until they update their current ageing motor line up.

As the updated saying goes:
No Guts (J2807)
No Glory

Is oxi making his truck wider?

A 2 inch widening of the track will help with clearance with rear shocks and stability on/off-road...



oxi tested the aluminum basket and she works swell...


@Ty, while I do agree with some of what you said, I freak out when people handle anything in my work truck (company provided, not actually mine) with dirty gloves on or just completely trash the interior. The job I have now I drive an '05 F-350 SRW with tool bed and hi-rail wheels (I work for a railroad) and it's a plain truck that's only real option is an A/C but it's mine and I have to work out of it everytime I work so I do like keeping it as clean as possible both on the inside and in the bed/tool boxes. Same with the truck I drove on my previous job (4300 International crew cab, tool bed, crane, and hi-rail wheels). I got praise from everyone at how nice the inside of that truck stayed as well as the cabinets and bed.

Getting them dirty is one thing, but just letting them get trashed is another. So yeah I can understand people not wanting their personal vehicles getting dirty/trashed like how you implied. I know I for one sure wouldn't want my personal truck ('06 Sierra crew cab 1500) getting greasy and filthy on the inside. I bought it as a daily driver/pull my race car vehicle. It effectively (like all crew cabs from ANY brand) can take the place of two vehicles because I've got plenty of room for my wife and daughter and all of our stuff when we go anywhere AND I can still pull my car with it. I couldn't do that with a single cab truck or a crossover/car.

As for the tow standards, I think they all should comply, and I do give credit to Toyota, but the fact is GM stands more to lose by complying if Ford doesn't simply because GM sales 3/4-ton-up trucks where Toyota is 1/2-ton only. And If GM does go ahead and go by the standards, then a comparable SRW Ford will have between 3000-4000 lbs more 5th wheel towing capacity than the GM truck. So how many fleet buyers that use trucks just for towing that did buy GM switch to Ford JUST FOR that reason due to legal issues? And Ford guys (or Ram guys for that matter) don't think the Ford/Ram SRW trucks woudn't take the hit too because the new standards makes the OEMs use a higher percentage of hitch weight on the 5th wheels than what they were using. And on the super heavy trailers, this made the hitch weight exceed the payload of the truck. IF you remember, the dually ratings for GM actually increased under the new standards.

@LJC, No problem! Ram has already tested for the J2807 standards!!!!!!!

They are just waiting for the right time to make the announcement.

The tow figures may be delayed because the 8 speed hemi won't be out until NEXT YEAR!!!!!


Ram will not come out with the tow numbers
because they don't want to have one set of
number for a Hemi with a 5 speed and one set
of number for a 8 speed. That is not smart
business! Ram will wait.

@ x007

dude you crack me up........... why are you sooooo childish???
for the record its Rhoads. i need to hide behind nothing, nor do i need to prove a single thing to you. YOU need to prove yours to me as much as me to you.

I use my truck, doesnt bother me whether you do or not. your simply full of hot air ALL the time. so here's a link to MY truck with 76 8x8x16 cinders in the bed. do the math if you can its about 2300lbs. sittin pretty as always and despite being loaded it handles it like a champ. Now lets see some pics of yours big mouth!


Oh and by the way, Toyota posted their towing numbers so we have proof what it will do, but your puny Ford motor company wont even post the numbers on your weak truck.......

Anyone else find it interesting that even though it has been reported on numerous other websites (Jalopnik, Car & Driver, Detrot News) PUTC has nothing on reports that Ford will have a fully aluminum body on the next F-150?

Nevermind, PUTC broke the story in 2010, My bad. Carry on ragging on each other's tow ratings.

@HEMI MAN: Can you site your source? I ask because this article suggests differently.

I thought OXI thought that full size tanks didnt belong off road, now he widens his truck?


@ HEMI MAN: Can you provide a URL to the article you site so we can read it?

They have told us they'll have more information on the subject by the end of the month when the company releases material on the 2013 Ram, Jeep, and Dodge models.


@Ty. Similar things are happening in Australia. A basic truck Licence here is for a vehicle that weighs more than 10,000lb GVWR(in New Zealand upgraded to 14,000lb GVWR). So builders of some Class C Motorhomes , Hire Companies, importers of US HD Pickups, stress that they can be driven on a "car licence"

@Matt we have people driving around and towing with their "Corvettes with a Bed" Utes. No way would they get a speck of dust on them.



This may come out as a repost.
@Ty and @Matt A basic Truck Licence in Australia is 10,000lbs GVWR in Australia(14,000lbs) everything else is treated as a car. Yes the same things are happening as in the US. Importers of US HD Pickups, U-Haul type operations, Some Class C Motorhomes, stress the fact that they only need a car licence.

@Matt you would not see a spec of dust on a "Corvette with a Bed"

After reading some of these threads, I still think an independent agent should test each vehicle for its claimed tow capacity and use a 5 star rating system. I think some of the one eyed brand buyers would be surprised at which vehicles would be the best vehicles for towing.

It can cover all aspects of towing, most importantly safety.

@Ty - Just because a person takes good care of their pickup doesn't mean the vehicle can't be used for work. That is a very narrow view, the same goes if someone wants to buy an upmarket truck. Personally I love all the features in my truck and I don't live in the city.

The most weight I have ever towed was 4 tonnes or about 9 000lbs. This was behind my Nissan D22 dual cab (fancy pickup). In Australia these came out with a 3.2 naturally aspirated diesel of 100hp. It towed very well, but I had 4 wheel brakes and light truck tires on the trailer. It still pulled the trailer at 110kph (68mph).

Engine size has very little to do with tow capacity, look at a tractor.

Continuous heavy towing takes its toll on the drivetrain more than any other part of the pickup.

If you tow alot with any 1/2 tonner you might as well buy a HD. Alot of the drivetrain in the smaller pickups use car components.

@ Mr. Rhoads- Sorry for the misspelling.

1 8x8x16 cinder block if it 2 core is about 20lbs. So 76x20=1,520lbs yeah that seems more like it and is the max for your turd. O it sits real nice.

I'll see your 2,300lbs of payload and rise you 3,500lbs towing at the same time.

5500lbs of porch post, railings, decking, and floor joist

8500lbs of new porch

I'm glad I make you laugh. Good luck to you sir and and a good evening

@Big Al from Oz - you raise a very valid point. Why doesn't someone else take all of the pickups out their and test them?
Does the SAE have the power, time, or finances to do that?
Any professional organization is self policing in the interest of public good. Could they pass a ruling forcing the issue?
They probably couldn't force the auto companies to comply but they could call into question the ethics of any Automotive Engineer involved in tow/haul standards. Non compliance could mean the loss of one's professional licence.

Most car/truck magazines will not do that that since they could potentially alienate/irritate the car companies and loose access to the press fleets or all tof these news tidbits we argue about on a daily basis.
Consumer Reports as much malligned as they are on this site would be a good option. They buy their own test vehicles so do not need to rely on freebee's from car companies.

I wouldn't suggest government intervention as they usually f--k things up.

They already did and all three would have passed this stupid test easily.




This is a “put up” or “shut up” test. The J2807 standard is a test for what a truck is about, plain and simple. There is no problem with the testing procedures. The problem is a lack of compliance. As the saying goes “Sometimes the truth hurts”. Why in this case? Because truck owners are the most dedicated group of vehicle enthusiasts in the god damn universe and have pride in their truck’s manufacturer. If you’re pissed that the maker of your truck didn’t comply, then complain to them. Don’t complain about the test.

GM, Ford and RAM delaying compliance is a huge disappointment. Level the playing field by laying some ground rules and they won’t play.

Toyota will play. Any takers?

So bottom line is that Ford saw what kind of a hit they were going to take and decided not to use this new standard until they can make a new truck that is actually up to par with what their current truck should already be... That is flat out pathetic, but I am not really surprised at all that Ford would pull that kind of a stunt. That's just FordMoCo being FordMoCo. It's pretty funny though that they finally got caught, with proof of this new standard, that they've always way over padded their numbers, and that their trucks cannot handle what they say they can. Point and case you ask? Rumble in the Rockies downhill test, Ford smoked the brakes to the bottom. That would definitely be a red flag for the new standards. Now Ford is making excusses as to why they can't comply with the new standard like GM did eariler this year and are scrambling to catch up to where they won't look so pathetic by using new towing performance measures. typical Ford.

Toyota played early because they know they aren't updating their trucks until 2017-2018 and they are desperate to gain credibility any way they think they can.

6 years in and Toyota Tundra still doesn't offer an integrated trailer brake controller. Trailer sway control will only brake the truck's wheels, not the trailer's too. This could be why you saw a larger drop in Tundra half tons and only 50-200 lb drop in GM half tons.

They will all play, just not now until the new trucks arrive. GM and Ford will start with it for the new trucks in 2013 and 2014, not 2012 and 2013. That's less than a year away.

If that is not good enough for some people, you can't please everyone. PUTC did the Davis Dam test the SAE set up and it was a joke. All 3 trucks would easily pass the SAE testing.

@ Jason: Toyota gained credibility by complying. Yes, they did take a small hit in max tow rating, but GM took much bigger hit in some of the 3/4 ton trucks. That's a good point about an integrated brake controler, I didn't consider that.

The Davis Dam test some are referring to is for the 1 ton duallies, right? Compliance covers 1/2 tons too, the biggest selling segment.

@ x007

So again you have NO CLUE what you are saying. the blocks in the bed of my truck are mixed between medium and heavy blocks so i was being GENEROUS in my estimate. they weigh anywhere from 32lbs. to 35lbs. a piece, EVEN if they were the light ones at 28lbs. thats STILL 8lbs more than your estimate which as always you have NO CLUE. i see your old ford pullin a tiny little Uhaul trailer how cute........... so heres a link to PROVE THE WEIGHT.


Further more here is my 08 Tundra TOWING my 2010 when i picked it up new. Trailer weighs 2000lbs. truck weighs 5900lbs. and i still got 12mpg towing 80 mph.


i need say no more, i could drag your ford behind that trailer too and still get better fuel ecomony than your little uhaul trailer got. i USE MY TRUCK, i just proved it..... you have a nice day now too.

In the half ton class, the GM half ton max towing only dropped a net of 50-150 lbs when taking into account the 150 lb passenger.

These ratings are not going down because they overated them they are just taking into account a passenger and 50-100 lbs of extra equipment.

50 lbs is nothing.

You are supposed to do the calulations of the passengers yourself. You don't need the SAE to tell you to subtract for passengers. That is common knowledge.

And if you are running within 100 lbs of the max on a half ton on a regular basis you probably need a larger truck anway. Don't need a bunch of engineers to tell you that.

In the 2500 class, a V8 only dropped a net of 150 lbs minus the passenger. That's nothing and most due to the equipment being factored in, not because it was overrated.

In the 2500, in the same config for the diesel, the tow rating STAYED the same. Some 5th wheel saw a bigger drop but that was because a larger average 20% king pin weight was used. Ford and GM say to use 15% to 25% king pin. Was the truck overrated or was just a larger king pin weight used to come up with the number?

3500 class was UNCHANGED. Although 5th wheel saw a 100 lb INCREASE.

Look at this with an open mind and don't believe everything just because it comes from a society of an engineer. All of the performance requirements are just a bunch of smoke and mirrors. The real change comes from how they now calculate: add in for a passenger, extra equipment and a higher king pin for 5th wheeling.

@hemi lol,
The last thing you want is someone calculating their own rating? I can tell you don't haul or tow very much because that is exactly what you're supposed to do. Calculate your own rating. You're supposed to take the max and subtract for of the passengers, cargo, options, and tongue weight if applicable.

I know it's hard for some to look at the data GM provided and see that there was only a 200 lb drop and 150 of that was from a passenger and the rest from a higher average equipment content. It is hard for some to look at the data and see there was no performance related drops.

I know it is much easier to be get all emotional, and claim there are big stat padders out there and there is a big conspiracy to cover up performance issues. I'm sorry, but that is not how it works. Legally they can't do it even if they wanted to. The rating is what it is good for what they say is good for.

As Jason pointed out, on the GM trucks, nothing really changed except the way its calculated (passenger, more options, higher king ping weight.)

200 lbs is peanuts and not performance related! specially when 150 of that is from a passenger that you may or may not have riding along with you.

I already account for the passengers and know the weight only accounts for 150 lb driver. I do my own calculations and adjust for this accordingly. I don't need to rely on anyone else to do it for me. I know we live in a culture where we expect everything to be done for us.

The higher average equipment content may be the correct way to go, but an extra 100 lbs is not going to make or break anyone's towing calcs and loads. And I don't buy the loaded trucks anyway.

5th wheel towing reduction on some 3/4 tons doesn't concern me because 1) I don't do 3/4 tons at this time and and 2) and when I did I was like most people who don't 5th wheel. So I don't care which % of king ping was used. You should always go with the higher % anyway just to be on the safe side (the 25% that Ford recommends is higher than the 20% SAE recommended) Again this doesn't affect me.

Also as Jason pointed out, Toyota not having a trailer brake (which is part of the SAE braking test) and not having trailer sway which works on the truck's brakes too (part of the test), is Toyota's problems. Not Ford, not GM. Toyota should have fixed this year's ago. Maybe their rating wouldn't have dropped 1000 lbs if they did.

This whole SAE J2807 is the biggest fairy tale I have ever seen.

@Dave - the auto companies had input into the standard. Whether or not the standard is easy to meet is a separate issue. The biggest reason for the standard is for that word "standard". There isn't one. It would eliminate the "Ford pads their numbers" camp, or "Toyota is a joke" camp or what ever brand or doubts one has in their minds. Even if it is an "easy" standard. It is a standard.

@Mr. Rhoads- If the turdra is the greatest of all trucks as you claim, then why doesn't it out sale all other trucks?

Me an 8 other contractors tried out the turdra on a few jobs and were disappointed. We were expecting more and got less than or current trucks.

Maybe you can't except the fact that the turd doesn't work for everyone. The turd is junk to me and I'm sorry you can't get over it.

The only thing you have proved is you have weak sales tactics.

@x007: What was disappointing about the Tundra?
And, what do you drive? Not a cyber vechicle, but a real one.
Year, make and model.

@ x007

they dont have better sales because there are so many people like you with blinders on lol

In Australia tow ratings seem to be a little ambiguous on how they are arrived at, it seems more so in the US.

Have the crash testing authority devised a 5 star system to rate the tow vehicles.

Because you can't trust any manufacturer to provide the data needed if it will affect sales.

The guys can then be critical of each brand using a standard, at the moment no one knows for sure which vehicle is safer or better at towing.

Its just one eyed brand buyers spinning bu!lsh#t.

@Hemi lol-"Oh and by the way, Toyota posted their towing numbers so we have proof what it will do, but your puny Ford motor company wont even post the numbers on your weak truck......." Its ok man, not everyone will like what you like. In you case, nobody will like what you like. But thats ok! Your happy with you truck arent you? No need to get angry and insult others trucks. Dont get angry. Just hold your chin up high and think positive thoughts! :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.