Big Three Will Comply With SAE Towing Standards for 2015

IMG_8200a II

You have to give Ford credit: The automaker said it would comply with the Society of Automotive Engineers' recommended towing standards (known as J2807) when its next new truck hit the market, and it looks like that means the 2015 Ford F-150.

According to Automotive News, the Detroit Three half-ton truckmakers will follow the SAE guidelines in calculating the towing capabilities of 2015 model-year light-duty pickup trucks; manufacturers have not adopted the SAE standards for heavy-duty trucks. As you might remember, the SAE put together a committee that included truckmaker representatives to provide input into the requirements for calculating maximum tow ratings.

The new ratings were supposed to go into effect for the 2013 model year, but that was delayed until the introduction of Ford's new F-150. Both GM (Chevrolet and GMC) and Ram were ready to make the switch but decided to wait until Ford complied with the standards. Toyota was the first to adopt the standards in 2011, and we're told Nissan's Frontier is now fully compliant as well. We expect certain models to drop in towing capacity (in certain cases the Tundra lost 400 pounds of rated towing capacity), with other select model and powertrain configurations to change very little.

The SAE standards will allow consumers to more accurately compare similarly sized and equipped pickups with segment competitors, providing a higher level of confidence in comparison numbers that will all be based on similar testing procedures. Previously, manufacturers used their own unique set of testing procedures to determine maximum tow ratings.



@T-Towing, I know the word "bigotry" is thrown out there like it's in style these days, but it does not mean the same as "hypocritical," which is probably what you really meant. Unless you really believe that bias toward or against car brands is equal to that of people of a particular race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, age group, etc.

@Alex I had other words on my mind...I did pick the wrong one, not the appropriate context. With that being, hypocrite was the word I originally planned to use ...but I changed what I had originally typed.

Either way, PUTC needs to cleanup the bias on the site. Credibility is going down the drain especially with the "Not so fast Toyota "article and this article praising Ford for adopting J2807. This is just one of many examples at PUTC.
Remember Ford was for it, then against it, and know they are for it again. I remember reading a report on the 5.4L F-150 dropping over 3000k when Ford tried to certify the numbers for J2807. Now the trucks have better engines they may be able to live up to those numbers.

Ford never said they were against J2807. What they said was it would confuse customers to switch to the new standard before a complete overhaul, because customers wouldn't understand why a 2013 would have different ratings to a 2012 when they are essentially the same vehicle. Though the counter argument to that is why then did they incrementally "increase" the ratings slightly each year for what appears to be the same truck too? Were the increments in specs for marketing proportional to some R&D changes, such as improving brake performance, better engine and tranny cooling, adjusting suspension settings? Were the previous limitations applied merely as a conservative number to avoid warranty and liability problems?

@Mark Williams

Yes I Give Ford Credit:

Twin I Beam Suspension = Failure

6.0l Diesel = Failure

F150 EcoBoost = Failure

No Warranties for Customers = Success!

It was clear cut why Ford delayed J2807 comliant, the F150's final J2807 would fall short of both GM's and Toyota's J2807 towing numbers. It would be a slap in Ford's face.

So... GM, Ford would get confused about the tow rating change but not Toyota costumers? Yeah, right...

well said uh huh! Toyota customers seemed to understand just fine. I would have given GM ALOT OF CREDIT if they would have went ahead with their numbers. If they would have then ram maybe would have followed suit and ford would have been forced too. shame on all of them! Their own engineers sat around the same table as each other and engineers from Toyota and others and the only one that said sure we'll go ahead now with it was Toyota who is the only one clearly that would have been ok because they didnt overstate the numbers.

If Ford wants to sell me a truck they need to raise their powertrain warranty. You have to back up the talk whether you need that warranty or not.

I do believe that GM should have posted the J2807 numbers for their vehicles, and should do it now. The public knows that the Ford numbers are fantacy, I believe it would be a great sales feature and I give Toyota a lot of credit for stepping up.

@Larry P

Bebe is what we call a troll. He's a hard core Ford fanboy and most likely just made up that he owns a Ram that fell apart.

@Fred the man They are saying you can't even get a plow package on Fords most sold and strongest fuel efficient eninge. It just goes to show Ford is building cars with a box on the back and the 2015 F150 car duty roll beer can proves it.

@Alex Sure the public might get confused... 2+2 does not always equal 4 nowadays. Advertising is like politics, the most effective messenger will win even though the information is inaccurate or flat out false. hemi lol and uh huh said it best, the big 3 sat in front of Toyota and others, agreed to the testing and when they realized their products would not live up to the scrutiny of J2807 they bailed.

Toyota failed ...they did not call them out.

At least GM had the balls to post their numbers on their older trucks

Toyota and GM should be the ones with the most credit.

Ford and Ram shouldn't get nothing.

Good for Ford. Putting consumers first is (almost) never a losing business strategy. I am hopeful that this will put a stop to some of the ridiculous "towing wars" going on with 1/2 tons. I'm still of the mind that when towing 10k+ you really need a 3/4 for the brake size and axles. Above 15k I'd prefer a 1 ton at least.

Honestly though, Ford and GM owners aren't confused at all about the towing numbers and their trucks capacity or capability. What's sad is that Ford and Gm statement presumes their costumer aren't too bright to figure out the towing numbers. Ouch!!!

I love all the babies on here! Waa waa waa! I love all the people blasting Ford for waiting to use the standard! SO DID RAM AND GM! Guess what? All the tow ratings are going to drop! Especially GM's 5.3!
And someone said the F_150's diet will cause it to loose towing capability? Wrong! It will improve it or keep it about the same.

lol Tyler, GM just set out for bragging rights, so they exagerated ratings.

I mean, I sure am no Ecoboost fan, but to think a like geared Chevy 3.73 gears, similar gears, would pull more then a Ecoboost with more low speed engine torque. Same as the Hemi 8 speed, a bit more torque, much better towing gears, but Gm went leapfrog.

I won't say payload has nothing to do with towing, as you need to have 10% or so total weight on the hitch. But then, lots of cheap people wont spend money on a weight distributing hitch, are you one of those, Tyler?

The 2008 shootout showed the Ram had just a bit more squat the the Chivy, lol, an eighth or quarter inch. The Ram is more realistically rated, while GM preys on the people that believe anything they tell them.

Hey Tyler, since they compared 3.6 Pentastar to a 4.3, they pretty well said (the reviews) said the 4.3 is a towing slug, with it's 3.42s so it gets mileage. Yes, I know 3.55 isn't far from that, but transmission makes up more then the differance.

Why is it GM gets people to tow and test drive stuff, yet they stick lightweight trailers behind them.

I know there is far more to it then how fast up a hill, there is cooling system, brakes, steering response, gears and transmission, wheelbase, spring rates.

I know a better gear ratio, in both forward and reverse, go a long way in being able to get it moved on a steep hill, from a stop.

I'd like to see 30-50 or 30-60 times.

If its any indication how well its rated to tow, that Ram rated to tow "only" 8400 poubds, sure out towed that Chivy and Get a Mechanic Comming in the last challenge.

Come to think of it, cause you are crying about payload, that Ram outhandled them with weight in the bed. The GMs stopped great empty, but they gained alot when just 1000 of 1600-1800 max payload was added. How good they gonna be with max weight?

The GMs also had smaller tires with less inertia. The Rams had big tires, they will only stop better while going to the 265/70 17 tire, while the GMs will stop worse if you put a 33" tire on them (which some might really consider, as they are low riders busting up air dams and denting bumpers)

Expect some GMs to lose 800-1200 pounds capacity. Atleast.

I wonder how the people that own a pre 2015 Ford, GMC/Chevy or Dodge must feel about this (did they lie to??????). I give Toyota props and also feel that Ford deserves no credit. Hey here is an idea lets take some 2011 1/2 tonne trucks out and find some real #'s. Sounds like a great article that will never happen:)

@Diesel - I own a 2010 and don't loose sleep over SAE tow ratings.
There does need to be a universal standard.

The magic pixie dust makes a lot of these towing figures very rubbery indeed. I have doubts about the J2807 standard. More a towing guide for people who have no idea at all.
Some of the dubious figures i have encountered are these: A Sprinter in the US has a 7,500lb towing rating in Australia exactly the same Van, a 4,400lb rating. Cars tow roughly 4500-5000ib Caravans in Europe and Australia, but the same vehicle "not suitable for towing" in the US?
I posted a photo of a Holden Commodore Station Wagon towing a 24ft English Caravan on a RV site. Comments were "That is impossible", "A Midsize Truck could not pull that"
The Holden towed this at 75mph. Says a lot about the inability of a Midsize Truck to pull what a car can do easily??

@Robert Ryan
I agree with you about the difference in towing between Australia and the US. The US tow limits are geared to move pickups, not cars.

Even here no HD can tow more than 4.5 tons or 10 000lbs.

I think it has something to do with the vehicles' GVM vs trailer weight.

I have seen larger trailers but many trailers that we have to tow 30 000lbs would be a pig or a dog with commercial applications. I have seen some 5th wheelers but they I don't recall ever seeing one that I would consider over 10 000lbs.

What the US should do maybe is use their system of Class identification to determine a max weight a vehicle can tow. Also the Class system in the US is the GVM not the unladen weight of the truck. The GVM like we use has a signifcant factor in the GCM, or laden and trailer weight.

So, for example a Class 2 in the US is a 1/2 ton pickup, which is the same as our midsizers. They should have a tow limit set at say 7 500lbs max.

The US class one or their midsizers would have a tow limit of 6 000lbs. A Class 3 a tow limit of 10 000lbs, Class 4 of 15 000lbs, etc. The limits I've just stated are just examples.

This way the manufacturers can engineer to a set limit. Then these tow test will tell you which is best for towing.

But the manufacturer can set the limit lower than the regulated maximum.

We are half way there in Australia, but some of our tow limits like the Grand Cherokee is quite high as well. We could do a little better to make it safer for people to tow.

For some reason our tow limits for current SUV and midsizers is sitting on 3 500kg for many vehicles.

@Big Al from Oz - I do think that most people don't know what the regulations are. In BC where I live anything over 4,600 kg (10,120lb) requires a "house trailer" endorsement if pulling a RV, a heavy trailer Endorsement for anything other than campers, or a Class 1 commercial licence if trailer has air brakes.
If you need a 3/4 - 1 ton truck to tow in my jurisdiction you need an endorsement of some kind. California and some other USA states have similar rules.

Wasn't it the Ram that spanked all others in the latest 1500 tow test climbing the hill with the lowest tow rating?

Wasn't it Ford who sprinkled tow dust on their F 150 V6 with no changes after Ram came out with higher numbers? lol

Wasn't it Ram 3500 that spanked Fords 450 in the Beast test?

Ram already builds their trucks to exceed the j2807 standard.

This is a step in the right direction for the segment. We can point fingers and wave flags over the "best" brand or we can appreciate the progress of this standard actually being used.

I suspect Ford's 2015 F150 numbers will be class-leading, simply because it was engineered to be J2807 compliant from the onset.

To close the potential gap, I also suspect that GM will announce the implementation of the 8L90 transmission into the half-tons.

Ram? Hard to tell. Their marketing strategy hasn't been as much about the highgest towing/payload numbers.

Toyota? Harder to tell. They were the early J2807 adopters and couldn't be class-leading without significant mechanical changes.

Nissan? Whenever the new Titan is released I expect very competitive numbers.

I'm confused.

Some of these posts are full of ignorant misinformation.

Most GM 1/2 ton trucks are being pushed with highway gears of 3.25 or 3.45

Ford's ecoboost engines have mountains of torque at 1600-1800RPM.

The article was written in a biased fashion. Ford deserves no credit on this one. Toyota took the high road.

@ All the Ford bashers due to non compliance - I've never seen so many whiners in my life looking for a reason to call Ford a Follower not a leader. Ford didn't care about the new Rules, their own standards we're higher than anyone else's. Just visit the You Tube channel and see the truth about trucks. No other manufacturer builds a better suspension, chassis and stronger driveline. Try breaking a Ford the way you would a Chevy or anything else. The only Drive train that caries heavy equipment to tow is RAM. At least all they have to do is add the proper spring rates...the rest are a joke and are followers!!!

@Mark Williams, Randolf , greg. Gregory J. - All of you are so envious, wishing your favourite auto maker could balk at the new standard. That's exactly what Ford did. Why care about something that you have already over exceeded in Quality and strength. When I tow with my Ford...its confident, the brakes work, the suspension carries the load well, its enough power to go where I have to and trouble free for as long as it takes. I have an old 2006 F150 Crew w - 5.4 and Max Tow, that's only 8600 Lbs. My family have a total of 9 Fords which all do a great job and are reliable beyond expectation. Thanks Ford for such a great truck and I look forward to the 2015, ya the One that Chevy will copy by 2018. We don't need no stinking Diesels lololol

@ Harvey Bedard, Ram is the Tow King. 450 Ford vs Ram 3500

Ram wins!

I believe that Ford was holding off on adopting the new SAE J2807 Standard until they were able to come up with tooling that would work with a new Aluminum body.
Aluminum is much lighter then the sheet metal, so that would allow them to add that weight difference to the Towing capacity

The comments to this entry are closed.