Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Super Duty Chassis Cab 2 II

Ford's Avon Lake, Ohio, assembly plant, which produces F-650 and F-750 commercial trucks, will get a significant upgrade in order to build aluminum-bodied 2017 F-350, F-450 and F-550 chassis-cab models.

The Ohio Assembly Plant has been operating since 1974, producing everything from E-Series vans to compact SUVs to minivans. Now it will be a dedicated commercial-vehicle production facility with both medium- and light-duty chassis cabs rolling off the line. This modification to the Ohio plant will free up the Kentucky Truck Plant to produce more personal-use F-250, F-350 and F-450 Super Duty models.

The all-new 2017 Ford Super Duty will be available this fall and will offer a stronger frame, bigger brakes and axles, and significant weight savings due to the switch to aluminum exterior body panels. Unlike the standard Super Duty models, chassis-cab models have a fully boxed frame only to the end of the cab, then a flat, open C-channel to make make it easier for aftermarket body builders to run hydraulics and additional electrical wiring for customers' specific work needs. All chassis-cab Super Dutys will have a choice of three engines:the 6.2-liter gas V-8, the 6.8-liter gas V-10 and 6.7-liter diesel V-8.

Manufacturer images

 

Super Duty Chassis Cab 1 II

 

Comments

@LMAO - you raise some valid points about engine use. THE BC Ambulance Service has thousands of units and many of the new ones are gassers. Some are used for long interhospital transfers and that is where a diesel will be superior to gas. I do agree that they get driven hard and then you get to a call and they sit.

Tundra Bob I know these past five months have been really hard because we couldn't be together. We've both been strong, but the wait is almost over. We can soon spend the rest of our lives together, waking up to each other every morning.

Bob I love you with all my heart and soul. You are truly my angel and my guardian, now and forever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37FGwDMMZEg

LMAO maybe you and Tundra Bob should get a room!

V10 is only available in commercial versions. Not the civilian versions of the f250-450.

A few reason this motor is still around in the commercial realm are they are very reliable, fleets maintenance are setup to maintain these..... No need to change over your speciality tools or maintenance items in stock that are bought in bulk. Less maintenance cost, lighter weight then a diesel. Typically on a 5500/550 you are going to only have a 4:88 axle ratio options for beefy axles reliability. At highway speeds with only 6 speed transmission you may be spinning 2700+rpms at those speeds. Motor homes are capacity limited so you throw a heavy diesel up front you may not have the capacities. Intial cost purchase cost and maintenance cost. Also the power difference is really close as all he diesels in commercial applications are detuned for longevity. The list goes on and on. My personally experience from having and retiring a 550 v10 and going to a 5500 6.7 cummins out on the highway mpg differences in any situation are around 2 mpg better for diesel. At 75 mph my 6 speed manual cummins runs at about 2800 rpm. It's out of snort compared to the v10 on the highway unless you are rolling along at 55mph or less is where the power band of the 660 ft lbs is in the cummins.

They will continue to make v10's on commercial rigs cause it is the best gas motor available to the commercial sector and a very popular engine for ford in that segment.

A few reason this motor is still around in the commercial realm are they are very reliable, fleets maintenance are setup to maintain these..... No need to change over your speciality tools or maintenance items in stock that are bought in bulk.

Posted by: Scott | Jan 27, 2016 6:25:50 PM

What is more ludicrous is some Ford fanbot talking garbage about the F150 pulling this weight when her favorite brand is the same weight and rated for the same towing. Sometimes people are to stupid to figure out their own ignorance.

What is more ludicrous is some Ford fanbot talking garbage about the F150 pulling this weight when her favorite brand is the same weight and rated for the same towing. Sometimes people are to stupid to figure out their own ignorance.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 6:30:45 PM

Again, nice try Lou_BC yopu F#ck'n loser.

THE BC Ambulance Service has thousands of units and many of the new ones are gassers. Some are used for long interhospital transfers and that is where a diesel will be superior to gas. I do agree that they get driven hard and then you get to a call and they sit.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 6:11:55 PM

If you have an emergency service that can do longer hauls a diesel could be more economical. The engine will be at operating temps, exhaust will be at temps and everything can perform as intended. It should be efficient at hwy speeds.

I know of an ambulance fleet that uses new E vans with V10s. They are pushing 300k on them. Maintained they do hold up. Even in severe service like that. Performance is how much do you want to spend. Cummins offers many power levels. A friend of mine is in the snapon tool business and he has the lowest power 6.7L that truck is a complete dog.

If you have an emergency service that can do longer hauls a diesel could be more economical. The engine will be at operating temps, exhaust will be at temps and everything can perform as intended. It should be efficient at hwy speeds.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:08:03 PM

Again, nice try Lou_BC loser, I fart in your general direction.

Passed weird yesterday. There's a few guys riding down broke back highway. And it doesn't belong here


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 7:35:24 PM

Just so you know, I only knock Fords. With that knowledge, it is only logical to assume that all gay reference postings directed towards myself are being posted by gay insecure Ford fan girls. I'm not saying all Ford fans are gay, just the ones that are posting gay.

A guy i fish with is a ford mech by day and works and a ambulance comp in the evenings and most of the ambulances are diesels. This is in Chicago and we have it all -20 to 100 deg. Ive personally seen bobcats and other diesel equip idle all day with out problems in sub-zero temps. I also have seen diesels gel up in -20 deg no mater no much diesel 911 is added.

I wonder why some get so worked up over what someone else posted. People get so mad at gmsrgreat, bafo, lou ect... i come here for the news even thou its usually old and read the posts to entertain myself.

So you have no objectivity to your comments. You simply write pro-GM and anti-ford remarks. Good to know. I will now ignore your posts. Maybe you are gay!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 8:36:42 PM

Oh no maybe about I know he's gay! Aren't you baby ;)

BREAKING NEWS

January 2016 Truck Sales data forecast.

Ford F-Series outsold both Chevy & GMC truck lines.

@LAMO & ROB : No objectivity huh! Below is a post I made earlier today. I will place in brackets my objectivity.

@ Walt: I am happy that your experience with Ford's V10 ended so well. My experience with the V10 had them running along side GM 6.0 liter V8 doing the exact type of work. ( Admittedly, the Ford handled the weight carrying better ) but the V10 life span was less than 1/2 of the 6.0 liter. Oh, the line about the turbos and BANG was hypothetical.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 1:05:25 PM

Did you see it.?

For my last post here I just want to say that I do NOT understand why PUTC does not just let @Big from Oz (aka N.Ns)* write their articles for them. It would save them so much trouble. The manufactures would not have to even provide vehicles for the results...N.Ns. already would know the results.

*Numb Nuts
--------------------------

Nothing more comical than BAFO, one who has never seen, sat in or driven any of these trucks, tries to pass off being knowledgable about something he's so oblivious too.

Looking forward to seeing the numbers: power, torque, and real world (but obviously unrated) fuel economy. I think Ford lost a lot of fuel economy on the 6.7, going to the updated version in 2015.

Jeff S many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yOlvL37680

This was your objective comment? While stating the Ford works better, you then bash the durability. That's likely a stretch considering the V10 is well known to last a very long time. Plenty have well over 200-300k miles on them. So by those numbers, your 6.0 should make it to 600k? I doubt any 6.0s have that many miles but I guess you were being objective for a pro-GM bot.


Posted by: Dave | Jan 28, 2016 6:15:18 AM

@Dave, you have to remember GMSRGREAT is just like Johnny doe. Don't have a clue on trucks and especially working trucks. They merely repeat what GM tells them on youtube. I will believe GMSRGREAT has any viable information pertaining to work trucks when pigs fly.

On the way to work this morning I saw 3 of those F-series trucks .( 1 was much bigger than the other 2 ) Anyway, the brakes lights worked on all three trucks. Good job Ford!

@dave So by those numbers, your 6.0 should make it to 600k? I doubt any 6.0s have that many miles

You maybe wrong

I have seen a few 6.0 and 5.3 with 400-500k and heard of at least one with over 600k.
Now im also sure there are some ford motors that have super high miles but allot of todays motors will make to 100k with even the worst maintenance so a very well cared for vehicle can have some really surprising longevity on allot of systems.
My dads 2004 2500hd 6.0 has 240k the motors looks like it only has 50k and leaks nothing. the original brakes even lasted to 225k and had 4mm left on the pads. Only reason i had to do them was the rf caliper was locking up. Now this truck is not worked and driven by a man that is never in a hurry. I sits in a heated garage and get the oil changed every 3k not when the mid says to. My 2006 2500hd is worked hard, tows, plows commercially and the motor it tuned with headers intake exhaust, electric fans and has 175k and i beat the s%! out of it and it always starts and asks for more. Just my 2 cents.

@Skeeter - the number of miles a truck is able to accumulate before needing major work all depends on how it is driven, what kind of work it is used for and where it is driven.
I had read a story about a guy who delivered newspapers with is Chevy pickup. He put 1 million miles on it in a relatively short time. It was bought from him by GM(IIRC) for PR purposes.
Experts weighed in on the subject and pointed out that the truck worked in the Southern USA and drove mostly long distance highway miles. Every factor was positive for a long life.
My brother on the other hand works for a forest resource company and gets a new truck every 1 1/2 to 2 years. He drives mostly gravel roads, logging sites, and construction sites. He is on his 4th GM HD 6.0 crew 4x4 in 7 years. They last roughly 160,000 - 225,000 km or 100,000 - 140,000 miles. He has had some trucks needing replacing at 50,000 miles.

I see LMAO kid missed the school bus again. He probably bought a pipe rack to put on his daddies truck to say he works that gas sucking eco pop v6 his dad owns. Glad I didn't have to grown up in this day and age. Wonder if LMAO kid cleaned his room this week to get fed his PB&J samwitch.

Yup that is johnny welfare doe again. You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better. Nothing worse than a section 8 trailer park living, food stamps hording, welfare loser spending his day on his free Obama phone trying to talk trash but poorly executes it by not spelling things correctly and using 4th grade english. Wait a minute, second thought, preschool english. Learn to work loser doe and start repaying my tax money back.

All you guys have to remember, when you shut down BigAl, he stops writing, gives up, then comes back as GMSRGREAT, its called bi polar

Nitro - bipolar isn't what I'd call it.

On the way to work this morning I saw 3 of those F-series trucks .( 1 was much bigger than the other 2 ) Anyway, the brakes lights worked on all three trucks. Good job Ford!

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

Don't act like you work GMSRGREAT. We all know you get paid by GM to post crap on here.

Boy the comments section on this site has really gone down the toilet. I just don't understand why all this filth is allowed to go on And FILTH it is. What was once a good place to come to has since been left to rot and that's ashamed.

Truck Crazy - bottom right of the page.click the link "contact us". They don't seem to be doing anything with my complaints.

Snitches get Stitches

how did that $2000 brake job work out on your Super Duty?
brakes working better now?

Good news in Ohio, Duramax, SuperDuty Chassis, Vitamix, Honda, Kirby, the best stuff comes outta OHIO,

On the way home from work today I witnessed several more F- series trucks that appeared to be functioning properly. (They were keeping up with traffic flow) All lighting appeared fine on most except for one that had inoperable license plate lamps. Overall, good job Ford.


Please shut up Rolling Can of Beer. As a GM customer, I think you're an idiot who makes us look bad. Stop posting garbage youtube links like a 7 year old child. Adults are trying to talk.

Posted by: DirtyMAXX | Jan 28, 2016 5:09:05 PM


Yea, that will not work. So far he has been posting under my username, yours, gmsnotsogreat, Lou_BC, and I few others. You can tell he is a school kid by the times that he post here. Early in the morning a few times before school and then most of the night after school.

WELCOME TO:

PUTC

PICKUPTROLLS.COM

You can tell by his terrible grammar and spelling abilities. I new I was wright. BARFO culd not resest his Ford besh. Lok at him go. Ecothirst, frad, tewing etc. Whet a pitifull and predectable cool.

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammer” what a boob....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA

You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better.

I'm the goodest!

Powered by Cars.com.

Home
Buy or Sell a Truck
Reviews
News
Special Reports

Search

Search PickupTrucks:


Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview

Posted by Mark Williams | January 25, 2016

Group Still 1 II

By Mark Williams, PickupTrucks.com

After two years of conducting unjudged Annual Physicals, we know pickup truck shoppers want our perspective on which trucks are best for them. Enter the Texas Truck Showdown. For its inaugural year we focused on two flavors of light-duty trucks: those with maximum towing ability and those that maximize mpgs.

For this max towing Showdown, we pushed the manufacturers to send us their best all-around half-ton pickups set up with their best towing option packages and features to see how they perform. Our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: MPG will publish in early February.

Our request here was simple: We asked each half-ton truckmaker to send us a two-wheel drive (to save some weight) with a crew cab to represent the heart of the market. Each player would need to be equipped with whatever max-tow package and features might be needed for multiple towing exercises, and it needed to be packaged as close to $51,000 as possible. What we got from the manufacturers was a group of test pickups close in size, capability and price, but each one displayed different personality traits when pushed in head-to-head competition.

Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test.

These are the tests we put our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing competitors through:
•We track-tested (acceleration and braking) all the players at the Royal Purple Raceway outside of Houston, both empty and loaded with 1,750 pounds of payload. We loaded the exact same weight into each pickup to better compare and measure them against one another.
•We also ran each of these pickups on a 170-mile fuel-mileage route in and around Houston to get a clearer idea of how much compromise their towing packages surrendered when driven empty and how they performed driving the exact same route towing a 10,100-pound 18-foot Load Trail flatbed trailer.
•We stopped by EngineLogics to run each of our test trucks on the Mustang MD250 chassis dyno to see how the engines compared using the same test equipment on the same day; all were tested by the same technician.
•Our judges drove each pickup in multiple back-to-back settings while transporting the trucks to and from the racetrack, the hotel, the dyno shop and various photo shoot locations.
•Finally, we did sound testing in each vehicle over the same stretch of Interstate 10 (east of Houston) at idle and at 60 mph in top gear with the windows rolled up, and the air conditioning and fan off.

The Contenders

2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LTZ (redesigned for 2016)

Chevy front 1 II

Our Deep Ocean Blue Metallic two-wheel-drive crew cab came to us with a $51,010 price tag (all prices include destination fee) that included the athletic 5.3-liter overhead valve V-8 and eight-speed automatic transmission (Chevy sent us a competitor with the smaller V-8, while GMC sent the 6.2-liter V-8 at an additional cost). Although $51,000 might sound like a lot of money, the Silverado 1500 is basically a well-equipped middle-of-the road player in this segment with all the proper equipment for heavier towing and payload hauling. The LTZ Plus Package (a $1,165 option) added power adjustable pedals, a Bose audio system, front and rear park assist, and a heated steering wheel. Our test truck also had 20-inch chrome wheels ($1,495), chrome side steps ($700), heated and vented leather front seats ($650), a leather wireless charging console ($510), spray-in bedliner ($475), special paint color ($395), towing mirrors ($230) and movable upper tie-downs ($60). The Max Trailering Package ($925) added a bigger and stronger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and an integrated brake controller inside the truck. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-8 truck are 16/22/18 mpg city/highway/combined. The Silverado 1500 is a strong mainstream pickup choice that delivers a lot of value for your dollar.

Chevy Engine 1 II

1 Chevy Silverado Crew 5.3 (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ford F-150 Lariat (all new in 2015)

Ford F-150 front 1 II

Our two-wheel-drive Shadow Black Ford F-150 SuperCrew Lariat had a final price of $50,270 and came equipped with the twin-turbo 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost engine ($1,200) and six-speed automatic transmission. Equipment Group 501A ($1,500) includes a remote start system, 360-degree blind spot detection, backup sensors, LED spotlights in the side-view mirrors and an extra 110-volt, 400-watt outlet. Our test truck also had the Lariat Chrome Appearance Package ($1,695), leather bucket seats and console ($650), and a bed tailgate step ($375). The Max Trailer Tow Package ($1,195) includes an integrated trailer brake controller, Pro Trailer Backup Assist, 3.55:1 axle gears and a GVWR up to 6,800 pounds. Although unrelated to towing, this Ford also came with voice-activated navigation for $795. Finally, the optional larger 36-gallon fuel tank ($395) allowed us to tow heavy loads without stopping for fuel every 200 miles. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-6 truck are 17/24/20 mpg. The F-150 is the No. 1-selling pickup in the segment because it offers a wide variety of options and features that many buyers seem to want.

Ford Engine 1 II

2 Ford F-150 Crew 3A (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ford F-150 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT (redesigned for 2016)

GMC Sierra front 1 II

Our Iridium Metallic two-wheel-drive GMC Sierra 1500 SLT crew cab came equipped with the bigger of GM's two V-8 options. The EcoTec3 6.2-liter V-8 is mated to the factory eight-speed automatic transmission for a final sticker price of $53,235, making it the most expensive player in our test. The priciest option was the more powerful V-8 engine ($2,495) rated at 420 horsepower and 460 pounds-feet of torque. The Sierra also came with 20-inch polished aluminum wheels ($895), chrome side steps ($700), leather bucket seats and console with additional USB ports and wireless phone charging ($510), high-performance LED headlights ($500), Intellilink with a color 8-inch touch-screen ($495), a spray-in bedliner ($475), a premium paint color ($395) and special chrome power side-view mirrors ($230). The GMC also had the Max Trailering Package ($925) providing a heavier-duty and larger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and the integrated trailer brake controller. Both GM trucks equipped with the max-trailering option have a GVWR of 7,400 pounds. EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/21/17 mpg. The GMC Sierra 1500 SLT, especially when equipped with the big V-8, is the hot rod of the segment, but does it with style.

GMC Engine 1 II

3 GMC Sierra Crew 6.2 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 GMC Sierra 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn (all new in 2013)

Ram 1500 front 1 II

Our Bright Silver Metallic crew-cab Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn came to us in the requested two-wheel-drive configuration with the 5.7-liter V-8 Hemi and eight-speed automatic transmission, finishing with a bottom-line price of $50,805. Because the Laramie Longhorn trim level comes well-equipped at a starting price of $49,980, there was not much need for optional equipment. Standard equipment included in this top trim level are 20-inch polished aluminum wheels with silver inserts, halogen projector headlamps, heated and ventilated leather seats and console, under-seat rear storage, power adjustable pedals, power 10-way driver's seat and six-way passenger seat, Alpine nine-speaker and subwoofer sound system, 8.4-inch nav touch-screen with Uconnect and a 32-gallon fuel tank. The options it came with merely added to the Longhorn's towing capability; it comes standard with a Class IV trailer hitch. Add-ons included towing mirrors (with swing-up capability) and an integrated trailer brake controller ($380), better-performing 3.92:1 axle gears ($75) and a limited-slip differential ($370). The EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/22/17 mpg. It's worth noting this is Ram's top-level trim package, which it is able to provide under our price ceiling; none of the other competitors could deliver their top trim level in this price range — although Toyota came close.

Ram Hemi Engine 1 II

4 Ram 1500 Crew 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ram 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Toyota Tundra 1794 Edition (all new in 2014)

Toyota Tundra front 1 II

Our Sunset Bronze Toyota Tundra came to us with its top-level trim, the 1794 Edition, at $52,722. Unfortunately, it also came to us with a 4x4 driveline and the TRD Off-Road Package. Although not the priciest truck in this test (that was the GMC), we did consider not allowing the Tundra into the Showdown because of the driveline disparity; however, in the name of delivering to our readers as much comparative data as possible, we decided to test it at the expense of the relatively small weight and payload penalty. We also discovered that the TRD option ($100) offered softer springs and shocks with a few other pricier styling options. Additional options on our test truck included the front-end paint protection film ($395), chrome Tundra tailgate inserts ($99), rubber bed mats ($139), a TRD performance air filter ($75), a center console storage tray ($85), a spare tire lock ($75) and alloy wheel tire locks ($85). The only other add-ons were the TRD dual exhaust ($1,100) and TRD rear anti-sway bar ($299), which probably helped with power output and trailering stability, respectively. As part of the well-equipped aspect of the 1794 Edition, our Tundra came standard with an integrated trailer controller, trailer-sway control and a high-quality backup camera. (Without the optional equipment, the total price for the Tundra would have been $50,275.) EPA fuel-economy ratings for this truck are a segment worst at 13/17/15 mpg. The Tundra is a solid performing pickup, but it is aging quickly and other players offer more strength and style.

Toyota Tundra Engine 1 II

5 Toyota Tundra 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Toyota Tundra Monroney, click on the picture above.

Scoring the Showdown

Scoring breaks down into 20 categories, including acceleration and braking when empty and loaded, trailered and trailer-free fuel economy, engine performance (dyno), maximum payload capability, GVWR and more. Added to that are scores from our four judges in six key areas: towing performance, ride quality, value, ergonomics, visibility, and tech and entertainment. All totaled, each competitor had about 2,500 available points.

The judges for this contest included truck testers from inside the Cars.com/PickupTrucks.com family as well as truck-loving freelancer experts. Each judge was able to spend lots of time driving each combatant in several back-to-back drive routes and had time to discuss their findings with other drivers.

The Judges

Joe Bruzek — Lead driver and Cars.com's senior road test editor, Bruzek has one of the fastest reaction times you'll ever see.
Bruce Smith — A longtime automotive enthusiast, Smith is skilled in the art of towing, four-wheeling, and wide-mouth bass and walleye fishing.
Kent Sundling — Known to the world as Mr. Truck, if it has a trailer or pickup bed, it's likely Sundling has driven it over the Rocky Mountains.
Mark Williams — Veteran automotive journalist and editor of PickupTrucks.com, Williams sometimes wakes up at night with new comparison test ideas.

To see the comparison specs of these pickups, click on our What You Get chart below.

TTS16_Tow_WYG_Final2

Cars.com photos by Evan Sears and Angela Conners

Overview | Acceleration | Braking | Mileage | Results

Two Truck Towing 1 II


Comments (51) in 2016 Texas Truck Showdown, Challenges


Comments


Leave it to Toyota to once again shoot themselves in the foot. Have they learned nothing from the TRD OffRoad Tacoma getting sand kicked in its face in no small part from OR biased tires.

Posted by: Mr Knowitall | Jan 25, 2016 9:23:18 AM

I know right. Instead of sending a limited which is lighter and with tow mirrors, toyota chose to send a heavy arse pig with low tow and payload. It's no wonder toyota can't break into the truck market. Suits them well to lose.

Posted by: uh huh | Jan 25, 2016 9:45:08 AM

Why didn't ford provide a truck with 3.73 gears?

Posted by: Kurt K | Jan 25, 2016 10:22:02 AM

Let one thumb their nose at the rules and someone will cry foul. Should have sent Toyota packing

Posted by: roadram | Jan 25, 2016 10:32:40 AM

Toyota knows they wouldn't win anyways, so if they send something different people can always wonder "what if they sent xxxx model??"

Posted by: Mike | Jan 25, 2016 11:21:19 AM

Mark - - -

"Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test."

Good Judgment! An excellent way to both include and not include this new and interesting vehicle.

=================

Posted by: NMGOM | Jan 25, 2016 12:08:02 PM

Mark and his team is fantastic! Everyone was complaining over the weekend about the lack of the XD (despite the reasons Mark listed above...and most readers recognize that logic). But Mark et al. saw that coming a mile away and the XD will be present to some degree.

Posted by: Tim | Jan 25, 2016 12:13:23 PM

It will be nice to see how the XD fared. I hope the GM and F150 blows it away for no other reason than to close biGal's pie hole.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 12:28:13 PM

notice the GM trucks both beat their sticker rated fuel economy, by quite a bit...the other manufacturers all got worse, gm got better.

Posted by: Wolfgang | Jan 25, 2016 12:38:07 PM

I like it. The idea of maxing out your towing or hauling and haul butt 0-60. I don't know about you, but when I tow I drive as fast as I can 0-60. Interesting read about the Ram. It shows it squatting really well. My last Hemi did the same thing. My 3D does not squat near as bad. I'm talking half a cord of Oak in my truck barely moved. My friends Hemi carrying the other half cord was down bad. Wonder why that is?

Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:57:33 PM

Of course the 6.2L won. Anyone could see that coming. Newest powertrain on the GMC to promote that brand. Better keep the Chevy with the weaker powertrain so people could see the difference in performance. Good move GM.

Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:59:09 PM

After reading all of these articles on the testing I have my list of preferences for these pickups.

1. Chev Silverado; it looks great and is packed with value. From the testing results it's overall performance from the testing is quite good.

2. The Ram (yes, don't know why); the Ram as the article stated is the premium Ram pickup. You can't really option it up. Since most of the time it's driven around empty, who cares how it handles 10 000lbs. So long as I'm comfortable going to Home Depot.

3. GMC Sierra; It's the best looking pick of the bunch; It sort of has the best figures all round. But as I have stated many times I don't buy on magazine data or sell on magazine data.

4. F-150; What worries me is how well will it's FE be with a fully enclosed trailer? Well, Ford, you had an opportunity to produce a game changer. You failed.

But, when is all said and one the F-150 is a very good pickup, but only competitive with older and even to some degree outdated vehicles. Pull your socks up Ford! You can do it.

5. Toyota; What a dismal vehicle. This vehicle is left behind. Wasn't this vehicle designed when sliced bread was invented?

Toyota can only rely on it's revering supporters for so long. They will leave you if you don't do better.

.......................................................................................

It will be interesting to see how the 1/2 ton Titan will perform as well as the XD. I don't suspect the XD will win any of the drag racing components of the testing.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 2:41:00 PM

Interesting and puts to rest several things......

First , the GM trucks are just flat out as good or better than the new all alum. twin turbo Ford is and is steel, less complex, etc. and can provide as good or better mileage doing it.

Second, the 5.3L is a good engine with the 8 spd it equals or beats everything out there from Ram and Toyota and is a great choice for the majority of GM buyers. Wonder how the 2.7l EB would have done , its strong as well.

Third, the weight savings didnt really help the Ford much .....gas mileage wasnt as good as the simpler GM v8 engines (insnt that supposed to be the whole point behind the EB?), truck couldnt hook up as well in back , didnt feel as stable etc.

Would be nice to have a comparative dyno sheet to see not just numbers......did I miss it?

The diesel Nissan wont even be close with these loads IMHO.

Posted by: Shriker | Jan 25, 2016 2:50:45 PM

Shirker,
You hit the nail on the head with the aluminium wunder trux from Ford.

I do recall for a considerable time after making the announcement that the F-150 will be moving toward aluminium Ford nearly declared a National Holiday regarding the FE advantages of moving to aluminum.

Well, as we have all witnessed Ford once Ford realised that the FE advantages were really only a 1mpg advantaged it moved to load and tow.

Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind.

If you are going to seriously tow 5 tons on a regular basis you will not buy anyone of these pickups tested.

Judging by how the standards the manufacturers are using you would want to buy a pickup that is rated to tow at least 20 000lbs and with a diesel.

To move 8 tons of combined mass around why would you want a gasoline engine?

Ford can do better, maybe Ford will, but by that time it's competitors will again have outstripped Ford. The only one that might not is Ram because FCA isn't flushed with money.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 3:02:24 PM

@ Shriker

The reason the GM trucks perform so well, even the 5.3 is because in 2014 all three of their engines went DI. This provides more power and greater FE. I haven't heard much about repairs for these engines, but the newest generation of anything has to work out kinks. GM is known to produce reliable power plants, even if the Ford guys knock'em for being old tech.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/02/pros-and-cons-of-direct-injection-engines/index.htm

Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 3:11:07 PM

Shriker - Ford did need to shed some weight. They let their PR over-hype MPG. At least now they are more accurately stating cargo gains over mpg. Ford now offers close to 2k cargo across all of their 1/2 ton crewcab trucks (with the exception of the Limited at 1450). there are those that will say that cargo does not matter but in a crewcab truck you can eat up 500-1000 lbs of capacity with passengers and their associated paraphernalia.

GM at least offers the 7600 gvw option. It is as rare as the 6.2 engine unfortunately. I'd consider a Chevy if I could find a mid-level spec truck with 7600 gvw, max tow and 6.2. This test proves that there isn't much point to buying a 5.3 other than not needing premium gas.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:29:58 PM

Shriker - agree on the Nissan XD. It can tow but not haul. 1500-2000lbs depending on trim level is too poor for a truck that is as big and heavy as it is.

TFL truck found it didn't go up a hill much faster than the 5.0. So that would mean that it probably is on par with the 5.3. Hardly worth the price premium.

as BARFo has pointed out , "Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind."

His statement indicates that there is zero business case for buying one to do the work of a 1/2 ton.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:35:22 PM

I wonder how people attempt to equate empty mass with payload?

Is it because of Frod and it alumnium wunder trux?

Does it matter the payload to vehicle weight?

One would think a heavier vehicle in comparison to it's payload has an advantage in ride comfort. Also with towing it is far better to have increased mass, especially the difference between say for arguments sake an XD Titan and a aluminium F-150, 2.7 EcoThirst or better still the Frod tested in this article with the 3.5.

Technically if a vehicle can have a 1 500lb load it should be able to tow 15 000lbs.

Hmmm .......................... some comments denigrating the Titans payload might be Frod biased and the claims are made one of those paid website product bullsh!tters. These types have no real allegiance. They are just talk with little knowledge and substance.

What's your opinion BC Mike ........ oops I mean Lou?

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 6:17:22 PM

Hey there BARFO. What was all that BS you were spewing about the 3.5L being winded towing 10K and would be under 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the all knowing. Is PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should write another email to Mark.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:34:03 PM

Many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yOlvL37680

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:52:08 PM

Hey there military grade BARFO. What was all that military grade BS you were military grade spewing about the military grade 3.5L being military grade winded towing military grade 10K and would be under military grade 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the military grade all knowing. Is military grade PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should military grade write another email to military grade Mark.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:54:15 PM

So did the Silverado have 3.42's or 3.73's. The article and window sticker mention 3.42's, but they listed it as having the max tow rating of the 5.3 NHT equipped with 3.73's, not the 3.42 axle ratio.

Max Conventional Trailering
5.3 w/ 3.42's 4WD CCSB - 9,200 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 4WD CCSB- 10,900 lb
5.3 w/ 3.42's 2WD CCSB- 9,400 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 2WD CCSB- 11,100 lb

Posted by: GMFordGuy | Jan 25, 2016 7:31:50 PM

Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.

Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM


Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.
Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

LOL what are you talking bout. Ford didn't even win one event, and barely came in second on a few LMAO!

Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 25, 2016 10:55:56 PM

It's comments like yours that embodies what's going wrong with the F150. They abandoned the fuel economy angle, market non-existant "class-leading payload" trucks that sag like a Fiat, and emphasize 0-60 times instead of the far more important TRUCK capabilites. They send a tow-package equipped truck that sags when hooked up to a trailer, gets twitchy on the highway while towing, shows up rolling on horrible eco passenger car tires, and despite a 2250 pound weight advantage, can't stop any better than an unloaded cheby. The new F150 is a military grade failure. Looks I won't be trading in my 2012 5.0 Screw anytime soon.

Posted by: phallacy | Jan 25, 2016 11:05:46 PM

Did the RAM have the Air Suspension option? It looks like it did not. If not, I wonder if Air Suspension would have materially improved the RAM's towing squat and handling. Past testers have raved about the towing handling using RAM's Air Suspension option. It would be interesting if that was still true towing this maximum load.

Posted by: MassMike | Jan 26, 2016 8:42:27 AM

Its hilarious reading some of the drivel typed on here.


Posted by: DriveAnyting | Jan 26, 2016 9:02:20 AM

MassMike - nope. the air ride wouldn't have saved the Ram. This is a quote from the last 1/2 ton shootout:

"where the Ram lost most of its points was in its limited payload, braking numbers and the ride quality of the air suspension when towing or loaded."

FCA wants you to buy a HD for anything other than SUV with a balcony duties.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 12:05:51 PM

I am so happy that I have a 2014 F150 4X4 Screw 157 WB with the Raptor 6.2 which comes as a Max Tow PKG. with 3:73 Final Drive. It's heavy, but pulls strong! This is rear configuration that I will keep forever!

Posted by: Kyle | Jan 26, 2016 12:17:13 PM

Kyle,
Ram/FCA is like the other pickup manufacturers, they are no different in the end.

75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement. This is valid for Frod, GM, Ram, Nissan and Toyota. Honda is a given.

This is why the 1/2 to is and aluminium Ford EcoThirst, GM twins or a steel, diesel Ram ar the biggest movers are the mid to high end models.

I'd even bet that most any one of the pickups sold that were tested in this latest towing "shootout" would never tow more than a few tons, at best a couple of tons.

This is how Ram/FCA has improved sales. Ram offered a very civilised product that appeals to the majority, except now FCA must update and improve the Ram.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:46:58 PM

^^^
Sorry, my above comment should of been addressed to massmike, not kyle.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:48:09 PM

I knew I was right. BARFO could not resist his Ford bash. Look at him go. Ecothirst, frod, towing etc. What a pitiful and predictable fool.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 3:48:48 PM

@LMAO -
The world according to BARFo..........incorrect..... the Canadian and American truck world according to BARFo:

"75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement."

Fortunately for you and I, we are in the 25%.

BARFo is firmly planted in the 75%. That does explain his view of trucks.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 4:08:17 PM

BAFO uses his truck to haul a fishing pole and beer. He once saw a Tundra at a mall in Jersey. That explains his view on trucks.

Posted by: Jeff | Jan 26, 2016 4:17:52 PM

Jeff - he must haul a lot of beer ;)

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 5:18:45 PM

Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.

Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM

Oh wait...I know how she is!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM

Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM

Oh wait...I know how she is!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM


Your Mom is doing just fine!

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:50:15 PM

I see school let out. I am surprised you want to ask about me "spanking" your Mom. That is rather weird but you also like to watch your sister in the shower so it is understood.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:51:35 PM

@LMAO - "I see school let out..."

You like hanging around school yards...you sick freak!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Y6UKMp8Qw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30AbH74uxdU

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:41:07 PM

Gents, Excellent set of articles. Thank you

Posted by: Ralph | Jan 26, 2016 7:47:30 PM

Speaking about spanking am excellent set of articles...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM


I guess you are retarded. I already told you your Mom is doing just fine.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 7:58:01 PM

Speaking about doing just fine...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 9:01:34 PM

I wish LMAO would spank me

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 10:17:34 PM

"Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines."

None of the trucks had big blocks....

Posted by: ky | Jan 27, 2016 7:56:27 AM

Thanks Lou_BC and Big Al from Oz. Since the trucks were supplied by the manufacturers to show their best performance, I suspected the RAM air suspension option would not have helped and may have hurt RAM's performance for this test. Thanks for the reference to the past test to prove that fact. The reviews that raved about the RAM air suspension during towing were for lighter loads, though the loads may be more realistic for most 1/2 ton owners. I agree the current popularity and increased production of trucks is due to targeting the suburban user with nicer rides and plusher interiors. Gone are the fantastically satisfying teeth loosening ride and efficient "hose it out" interior of my '70 Blazer, which sadly looses 20 lbs every time I slam the door.

Posted by: MassMike | Jan 27, 2016 8:41:37 AM

MassMike - the "air ride" on the Ram 1500 is actually a closed system using nitrogen. I've heard of incidences of having to get them recharged. I've also heard of overheating on rough roads. I have seen one air-ride Ram sitting behind the local dealership looking like a torpedoed ship about to topple over.

One thing people have to watch with crewcab trucks are the load ratings. A 5-6 passenger cabin full of family and/or adults can consume 1/2 to 3/4's of your cargo ratings. Adding even a light trailer can max the truck out.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:45:43 AM

Lou_BC,
Most any US 1/2 ton is not one of those new 3 000lb payload F-150s.

Most any US pickup as Massmike pointed out are CUVs for the Suburbs.

Why can't you get this through your head.

Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Just because a vehicle will tow a squillion pounds doesn't necessarily mean the person buying will ever use that capability.

Why don't you denegrate all US pickups for their overall lacklustre payload performance.

Have a look at the most popular payload class within the 1/2 ton pickups. I'd bet you'll find that there are far more Frod buyers that I would be concerned about regarding the payload/tow argument you go on ranting about.

I do believe you are completely disconnected from reality with the use of the NA pickup.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM

Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM

And by the Fiat sales numbers very few people have purchased what you say consumers want. Just because your a fiat fanbot does not mean that is what everyone wants. In fact the fiat trucks tend to be the cheapest pricedo on the market. Fiat even offers 7 and 8 year financing to try and get paymentsome lower and more people in their products. However Ford and GM remain the largest sellers of trucks and wait for it.....................................................................have leaf spring rear suspension. So what do consumers want?

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:59:35 AM

Next »


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

Working...


Working...


Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Comments



Browse News By:


Category

Aftermarket


Auto Shows


Awards


Compact/Midsize


Custom Trucks


Diesels


Fuel Economy


Full-Size


Heavy-Duty


Hybrids


Interiors


Light-Duty


New Trucks


Powertrains


Pricing


Safety


Spy Photos


Sources Say


Towing and Hauling


Manufacturer


Truck Shopping Tools
Search for New & Used
Find a Dealer
See Hottest Truck Deals
List your Truck for Sale
Read Expert Reviews
Review Your Own Truck


Recent Posts
Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
GMC Adds All Terrain X to Sierra 1500 Lineup
NHTSA Expands Takata Airbag Recall
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing Acceleration
Read recent stories
Read older stories

Latest User Comments
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Subscribe


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

Powered by Cars.com.

Home
Buy or Sell a Truck
Reviews
News
Special Reports

Search

Search PickupTrucks:


Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview

Posted by Mark Williams | January 25, 2016

Group Still 1 II

By Mark Williams, PickupTrucks.com

After two years of conducting unjudged Annual Physicals, we know pickup truck shoppers want our perspective on which trucks are best for them. Enter the Texas Truck Showdown. For its inaugural year we focused on two flavors of light-duty trucks: those with maximum towing ability and those that maximize mpgs.

For this max towing Showdown, we pushed the manufacturers to send us their best all-around half-ton pickups set up with their best towing option packages and features to see how they perform. Our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: MPG will publish in early February.

Our request here was simple: We asked each half-ton truckmaker to send us a two-wheel drive (to save some weight) with a crew cab to represent the heart of the market. Each player would need to be equipped with whatever max-tow package and features might be needed for multiple towing exercises, and it needed to be packaged as close to $51,000 as possible. What we got from the manufacturers was a group of test pickups close in size, capability and price, but each one displayed different personality traits when pushed in head-to-head competition.

Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test.

These are the tests we put our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing competitors through:
•We track-tested (acceleration and braking) all the players at the Royal Purple Raceway outside of Houston, both empty and loaded with 1,750 pounds of payload. We loaded the exact same weight into each pickup to better compare and measure them against one another.
•We also ran each of these pickups on a 170-mile fuel-mileage route in and around Houston to get a clearer idea of how much compromise their towing packages surrendered when driven empty and how they performed driving the exact same route towing a 10,100-pound 18-foot Load Trail flatbed trailer.
•We stopped by EngineLogics to run each of our test trucks on the Mustang MD250 chassis dyno to see how the engines compared using the same test equipment on the same day; all were tested by the same technician.
•Our judges drove each pickup in multiple back-to-back settings while transporting the trucks to and from the racetrack, the hotel, the dyno shop and various photo shoot locations.
•Finally, we did sound testing in each vehicle over the same stretch of Interstate 10 (east of Houston) at idle and at 60 mph in top gear with the windows rolled up, and the air conditioning and fan off.

The Contenders

2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LTZ (redesigned for 2016)

Chevy front 1 II

Our Deep Ocean Blue Metallic two-wheel-drive crew cab came to us with a $51,010 price tag (all prices include destination fee) that included the athletic 5.3-liter overhead valve V-8 and eight-speed automatic transmission (Chevy sent us a competitor with the smaller V-8, while GMC sent the 6.2-liter V-8 at an additional cost). Although $51,000 might sound like a lot of money, the Silverado 1500 is basically a well-equipped middle-of-the road player in this segment with all the proper equipment for heavier towing and payload hauling. The LTZ Plus Package (a $1,165 option) added power adjustable pedals, a Bose audio system, front and rear park assist, and a heated steering wheel. Our test truck also had 20-inch chrome wheels ($1,495), chrome side steps ($700), heated and vented leather front seats ($650), a leather wireless charging console ($510), spray-in bedliner ($475), special paint color ($395), towing mirrors ($230) and movable upper tie-downs ($60). The Max Trailering Package ($925) added a bigger and stronger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and an integrated brake controller inside the truck. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-8 truck are 16/22/18 mpg city/highway/combined. The Silverado 1500 is a strong mainstream pickup choice that delivers a lot of value for your dollar.

Chevy Engine 1 II

1 Chevy Silverado Crew 5.3 (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ford F-150 Lariat (all new in 2015)

Ford F-150 front 1 II

Our two-wheel-drive Shadow Black Ford F-150 SuperCrew Lariat had a final price of $50,270 and came equipped with the twin-turbo 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost engine ($1,200) and six-speed automatic transmission. Equipment Group 501A ($1,500) includes a remote start system, 360-degree blind spot detection, backup sensors, LED spotlights in the side-view mirrors and an extra 110-volt, 400-watt outlet. Our test truck also had the Lariat Chrome Appearance Package ($1,695), leather bucket seats and console ($650), and a bed tailgate step ($375). The Max Trailer Tow Package ($1,195) includes an integrated trailer brake controller, Pro Trailer Backup Assist, 3.55:1 axle gears and a GVWR up to 6,800 pounds. Although unrelated to towing, this Ford also came with voice-activated navigation for $795. Finally, the optional larger 36-gallon fuel tank ($395) allowed us to tow heavy loads without stopping for fuel every 200 miles. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-6 truck are 17/24/20 mpg. The F-150 is the No. 1-selling pickup in the segment because it offers a wide variety of options and features that many buyers seem to want.

Ford Engine 1 II

2 Ford F-150 Crew 3A (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ford F-150 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT (redesigned for 2016)

GMC Sierra front 1 II

Our Iridium Metallic two-wheel-drive GMC Sierra 1500 SLT crew cab came equipped with the bigger of GM's two V-8 options. The EcoTec3 6.2-liter V-8 is mated to the factory eight-speed automatic transmission for a final sticker price of $53,235, making it the most expensive player in our test. The priciest option was the more powerful V-8 engine ($2,495) rated at 420 horsepower and 460 pounds-feet of torque. The Sierra also came with 20-inch polished aluminum wheels ($895), chrome side steps ($700), leather bucket seats and console with additional USB ports and wireless phone charging ($510), high-performance LED headlights ($500), Intellilink with a color 8-inch touch-screen ($495), a spray-in bedliner ($475), a premium paint color ($395) and special chrome power side-view mirrors ($230). The GMC also had the Max Trailering Package ($925) providing a heavier-duty and larger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and the integrated trailer brake controller. Both GM trucks equipped with the max-trailering option have a GVWR of 7,400 pounds. EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/21/17 mpg. The GMC Sierra 1500 SLT, especially when equipped with the big V-8, is the hot rod of the segment, but does it with style.

GMC Engine 1 II

3 GMC Sierra Crew 6.2 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 GMC Sierra 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn (all new in 2013)

Ram 1500 front 1 II

Our Bright Silver Metallic crew-cab Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn came to us in the requested two-wheel-drive configuration with the 5.7-liter V-8 Hemi and eight-speed automatic transmission, finishing with a bottom-line price of $50,805. Because the Laramie Longhorn trim level comes well-equipped at a starting price of $49,980, there was not much need for optional equipment. Standard equipment included in this top trim level are 20-inch polished aluminum wheels with silver inserts, halogen projector headlamps, heated and ventilated leather seats and console, under-seat rear storage, power adjustable pedals, power 10-way driver's seat and six-way passenger seat, Alpine nine-speaker and subwoofer sound system, 8.4-inch nav touch-screen with Uconnect and a 32-gallon fuel tank. The options it came with merely added to the Longhorn's towing capability; it comes standard with a Class IV trailer hitch. Add-ons included towing mirrors (with swing-up capability) and an integrated trailer brake controller ($380), better-performing 3.92:1 axle gears ($75) and a limited-slip differential ($370). The EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/22/17 mpg. It's worth noting this is Ram's top-level trim package, which it is able to provide under our price ceiling; none of the other competitors could deliver their top trim level in this price range — although Toyota came close.

Ram Hemi Engine 1 II

4 Ram 1500 Crew 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ram 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Toyota Tundra 1794 Edition (all new in 2014)

Toyota Tundra front 1 II

Our Sunset Bronze Toyota Tundra came to us with its top-level trim, the 1794 Edition, at $52,722. Unfortunately, it also came to us with a 4x4 driveline and the TRD Off-Road Package. Although not the priciest truck in this test (that was the GMC), we did consider not allowing the Tundra into the Showdown because of the driveline disparity; however, in the name of delivering to our readers as much comparative data as possible, we decided to test it at the expense of the relatively small weight and payload penalty. We also discovered that the TRD option ($100) offered softer springs and shocks with a few other pricier styling options. Additional options on our test truck included the front-end paint protection film ($395), chrome Tundra tailgate inserts ($99), rubber bed mats ($139), a TRD performance air filter ($75), a center console storage tray ($85), a spare tire lock ($75) and alloy wheel tire locks ($85). The only other add-ons were the TRD dual exhaust ($1,100) and TRD rear anti-sway bar ($299), which probably helped with power output and trailering stability, respectively. As part of the well-equipped aspect of the 1794 Edition, our Tundra came standard with an integrated trailer controller, trailer-sway control and a high-quality backup camera. (Without the optional equipment, the total price for the Tundra would have been $50,275.) EPA fuel-economy ratings for this truck are a segment worst at 13/17/15 mpg. The Tundra is a solid performing pickup, but it is aging quickly and other players offer more strength and style.

Toyota Tundra Engine 1 II

5 Toyota Tundra 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Toyota Tundra Monroney, click on the picture above.

Scoring the Showdown

Scoring breaks down into 20 categories, including acceleration and braking when empty and loaded, trailered and trailer-free fuel economy, engine performance (dyno), maximum payload capability, GVWR and more. Added to that are scores from our four judges in six key areas: towing performance, ride quality, value, ergonomics, visibility, and tech and entertainment. All totaled, each competitor had about 2,500 available points.

The judges for this contest included truck testers from inside the Cars.com/PickupTrucks.com family as well as truck-loving freelancer experts. Each judge was able to spend lots of time driving each combatant in several back-to-back drive routes and had time to discuss their findings with other drivers.

The Judges

Joe Bruzek — Lead driver and Cars.com's senior road test editor, Bruzek has one of the fastest reaction times you'll ever see.
Bruce Smith — A longtime automotive enthusiast, Smith is skilled in the art of towing, four-wheeling, and wide-mouth bass and walleye fishing.
Kent Sundling — Known to the world as Mr. Truck, if it has a trailer or pickup bed, it's likely Sundling has driven it over the Rocky Mountains.
Mark Williams — Veteran automotive journalist and editor of PickupTrucks.com, Williams sometimes wakes up at night with new comparison test ideas.

To see the comparison specs of these pickups, click on our What You Get chart below.

TTS16_Tow_WYG_Final2

Cars.com photos by Evan Sears and Angela Conners

Overview | Acceleration | Braking | Mileage | Results

Two Truck Towing 1 II


Comments (51) in 2016 Texas Truck Showdown, Challenges


Comments


Leave it to Toyota to once again shoot themselves in the foot. Have they learned nothing from the TRD OffRoad Tacoma getting sand kicked in its face in no small part from OR biased tires.

Posted by: Mr Knowitall | Jan 25, 2016 9:23:18 AM

I know right. Instead of sending a limited which is lighter and with tow mirrors, toyota chose to send a heavy arse pig with low tow and payload. It's no wonder toyota can't break into the truck market. Suits them well to lose.

Posted by: uh huh | Jan 25, 2016 9:45:08 AM

Why didn't ford provide a truck with 3.73 gears?

Posted by: Kurt K | Jan 25, 2016 10:22:02 AM

Let one thumb their nose at the rules and someone will cry foul. Should have sent Toyota packing

Posted by: roadram | Jan 25, 2016 10:32:40 AM

Toyota knows they wouldn't win anyways, so if they send something different people can always wonder "what if they sent xxxx model??"

Posted by: Mike | Jan 25, 2016 11:21:19 AM

Mark - - -

"Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test."

Good Judgment! An excellent way to both include and not include this new and interesting vehicle.

=================

Posted by: NMGOM | Jan 25, 2016 12:08:02 PM

Mark and his team is fantastic! Everyone was complaining over the weekend about the lack of the XD (despite the reasons Mark listed above...and most readers recognize that logic). But Mark et al. saw that coming a mile away and the XD will be present to some degree.

Posted by: Tim | Jan 25, 2016 12:13:23 PM

It will be nice to see how the XD fared. I hope the GM and F150 blows it away for no other reason than to close biGal's pie hole.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 12:28:13 PM

notice the GM trucks both beat their sticker rated fuel economy, by quite a bit...the other manufacturers all got worse, gm got better.

Posted by: Wolfgang | Jan 25, 2016 12:38:07 PM

I like it. The idea of maxing out your towing or hauling and haul butt 0-60. I don't know about you, but when I tow I drive as fast as I can 0-60. Interesting read about the Ram. It shows it squatting really well. My last Hemi did the same thing. My 3D does not squat near as bad. I'm talking half a cord of Oak in my truck barely moved. My friends Hemi carrying the other half cord was down bad. Wonder why that is?

Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:57:33 PM

Of course the 6.2L won. Anyone could see that coming. Newest powertrain on the GMC to promote that brand. Better keep the Chevy with the weaker powertrain so people could see the difference in performance. Good move GM.

Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:59:09 PM

After reading all of these articles on the testing I have my list of preferences for these pickups.

1. Chev Silverado; it looks great and is packed with value. From the testing results it's overall performance from the testing is quite good.

2. The Ram (yes, don't know why); the Ram as the article stated is the premium Ram pickup. You can't really option it up. Since most of the time it's driven around empty, who cares how it handles 10 000lbs. So long as I'm comfortable going to Home Depot.

3. GMC Sierra; It's the best looking pick of the bunch; It sort of has the best figures all round. But as I have stated many times I don't buy on magazine data or sell on magazine data.

4. F-150; What worries me is how well will it's FE be with a fully enclosed trailer? Well, Ford, you had an opportunity to produce a game changer. You failed.

But, when is all said and one the F-150 is a very good pickup, but only competitive with older and even to some degree outdated vehicles. Pull your socks up Ford! You can do it.

5. Toyota; What a dismal vehicle. This vehicle is left behind. Wasn't this vehicle designed when sliced bread was invented?

Toyota can only rely on it's revering supporters for so long. They will leave you if you don't do better.

.......................................................................................

It will be interesting to see how the 1/2 ton Titan will perform as well as the XD. I don't suspect the XD will win any of the drag racing components of the testing.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 2:41:00 PM

Interesting and puts to rest several things......

First , the GM trucks are just flat out as good or better than the new all alum. twin turbo Ford is and is steel, less complex, etc. and can provide as good or better mileage doing it.

Second, the 5.3L is a good engine with the 8 spd it equals or beats everything out there from Ram and Toyota and is a great choice for the majority of GM buyers. Wonder how the 2.7l EB would have done , its strong as well.

Third, the weight savings didnt really help the Ford much .....gas mileage wasnt as good as the simpler GM v8 engines (insnt that supposed to be the whole point behind the EB?), truck couldnt hook up as well in back , didnt feel as stable etc.

Would be nice to have a comparative dyno sheet to see not just numbers......did I miss it?

The diesel Nissan wont even be close with these loads IMHO.

Posted by: Shriker | Jan 25, 2016 2:50:45 PM

Shirker,
You hit the nail on the head with the aluminium wunder trux from Ford.

I do recall for a considerable time after making the announcement that the F-150 will be moving toward aluminium Ford nearly declared a National Holiday regarding the FE advantages of moving to aluminum.

Well, as we have all witnessed Ford once Ford realised that the FE advantages were really only a 1mpg advantaged it moved to load and tow.

Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind.

If you are going to seriously tow 5 tons on a regular basis you will not buy anyone of these pickups tested.

Judging by how the standards the manufacturers are using you would want to buy a pickup that is rated to tow at least 20 000lbs and with a diesel.

To move 8 tons of combined mass around why would you want a gasoline engine?

Ford can do better, maybe Ford will, but by that time it's competitors will again have outstripped Ford. The only one that might not is Ram because FCA isn't flushed with money.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 3:02:24 PM

@ Shriker

The reason the GM trucks perform so well, even the 5.3 is because in 2014 all three of their engines went DI. This provides more power and greater FE. I haven't heard much about repairs for these engines, but the newest generation of anything has to work out kinks. GM is known to produce reliable power plants, even if the Ford guys knock'em for being old tech.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/02/pros-and-cons-of-direct-injection-engines/index.htm

Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 3:11:07 PM

Shriker - Ford did need to shed some weight. They let their PR over-hype MPG. At least now they are more accurately stating cargo gains over mpg. Ford now offers close to 2k cargo across all of their 1/2 ton crewcab trucks (with the exception of the Limited at 1450). there are those that will say that cargo does not matter but in a crewcab truck you can eat up 500-1000 lbs of capacity with passengers and their associated paraphernalia.

GM at least offers the 7600 gvw option. It is as rare as the 6.2 engine unfortunately. I'd consider a Chevy if I could find a mid-level spec truck with 7600 gvw, max tow and 6.2. This test proves that there isn't much point to buying a 5.3 other than not needing premium gas.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:29:58 PM

Shriker - agree on the Nissan XD. It can tow but not haul. 1500-2000lbs depending on trim level is too poor for a truck that is as big and heavy as it is.

TFL truck found it didn't go up a hill much faster than the 5.0. So that would mean that it probably is on par with the 5.3. Hardly worth the price premium.

as BARFo has pointed out , "Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind."

His statement indicates that there is zero business case for buying one to do the work of a 1/2 ton.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:35:22 PM

I wonder how people attempt to equate empty mass with payload?

Is it because of Frod and it alumnium wunder trux?

Does it matter the payload to vehicle weight?

One would think a heavier vehicle in comparison to it's payload has an advantage in ride comfort. Also with towing it is far better to have increased mass, especially the difference between say for arguments sake an XD Titan and a aluminium F-150, 2.7 EcoThirst or better still the Frod tested in this article with the 3.5.

Technically if a vehicle can have a 1 500lb load it should be able to tow 15 000lbs.

Hmmm .......................... some comments denigrating the Titans payload might be Frod biased and the claims are made one of those paid website product bullsh!tters. These types have no real allegiance. They are just talk with little knowledge and substance.

What's your opinion BC Mike ........ oops I mean Lou?

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 6:17:22 PM

Hey there BARFO. What was all that BS you were spewing about the 3.5L being winded towing 10K and would be under 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the all knowing. Is PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should write another email to Mark.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:34:03 PM

Many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yOlvL37680

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:52:08 PM

Hey there military grade BARFO. What was all that military grade BS you were military grade spewing about the military grade 3.5L being military grade winded towing military grade 10K and would be under military grade 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the military grade all knowing. Is military grade PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should military grade write another email to military grade Mark.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:54:15 PM

So did the Silverado have 3.42's or 3.73's. The article and window sticker mention 3.42's, but they listed it as having the max tow rating of the 5.3 NHT equipped with 3.73's, not the 3.42 axle ratio.

Max Conventional Trailering
5.3 w/ 3.42's 4WD CCSB - 9,200 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 4WD CCSB- 10,900 lb
5.3 w/ 3.42's 2WD CCSB- 9,400 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 2WD CCSB- 11,100 lb

Posted by: GMFordGuy | Jan 25, 2016 7:31:50 PM

Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.

Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM


Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.
Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

LOL what are you talking bout. Ford didn't even win one event, and barely came in second on a few LMAO!

Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 25, 2016 10:55:56 PM

It's comments like yours that embodies what's going wrong with the F150. They abandoned the fuel economy angle, market non-existant "class-leading payload" trucks that sag like a Fiat, and emphasize 0-60 times instead of the far more important TRUCK capabilites. They send a tow-package equipped truck that sags when hooked up to a trailer, gets twitchy on the highway while towing, shows up rolling on horrible eco passenger car tires, and despite a 2250 pound weight advantage, can't stop any better than an unloaded cheby. The new F150 is a military grade failure. Looks I won't be trading in my 2012 5.0 Screw anytime soon.

Posted by: phallacy | Jan 25, 2016 11:05:46 PM

Did the RAM have the Air Suspension option? It looks like it did not. If not, I wonder if Air Suspension would have materially improved the RAM's towing squat and handling. Past testers have raved about the towing handling using RAM's Air Suspension option. It would be interesting if that was still true towing this maximum load.

Posted by: MassMike | Jan 26, 2016 8:42:27 AM

Its hilarious reading some of the drivel typed on here.


Posted by: DriveAnyting | Jan 26, 2016 9:02:20 AM

MassMike - nope. the air ride wouldn't have saved the Ram. This is a quote from the last 1/2 ton shootout:

"where the Ram lost most of its points was in its limited payload, braking numbers and the ride quality of the air suspension when towing or loaded."

FCA wants you to buy a HD for anything other than SUV with a balcony duties.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 12:05:51 PM

I am so happy that I have a 2014 F150 4X4 Screw 157 WB with the Raptor 6.2 which comes as a Max Tow PKG. with 3:73 Final Drive. It's heavy, but pulls strong! This is rear configuration that I will keep forever!

Posted by: Kyle | Jan 26, 2016 12:17:13 PM

Kyle,
Ram/FCA is like the other pickup manufacturers, they are no different in the end.

75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement. This is valid for Frod, GM, Ram, Nissan and Toyota. Honda is a given.

This is why the 1/2 to is and aluminium Ford EcoThirst, GM twins or a steel, diesel Ram ar the biggest movers are the mid to high end models.

I'd even bet that most any one of the pickups sold that were tested in this latest towing "shootout" would never tow more than a few tons, at best a couple of tons.

This is how Ram/FCA has improved sales. Ram offered a very civilised product that appeals to the majority, except now FCA must update and improve the Ram.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:46:58 PM

^^^
Sorry, my above comment should of been addressed to massmike, not kyle.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:48:09 PM

I knew I was right. BARFO could not resist his Ford bash. Look at him go. Ecothirst, frod, towing etc. What a pitiful and predictable fool.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 3:48:48 PM

@LMAO -
The world according to BARFo..........incorrect..... the Canadian and American truck world according to BARFo:

"75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement."

Fortunately for you and I, we are in the 25%.

BARFo is firmly planted in the 75%. That does explain his view of trucks.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 4:08:17 PM

BAFO uses his truck to haul a fishing pole and beer. He once saw a Tundra at a mall in Jersey. That explains his view on trucks.

Posted by: Jeff | Jan 26, 2016 4:17:52 PM

Jeff - he must haul a lot of beer ;)

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 5:18:45 PM

Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.

Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM

Oh wait...I know how she is!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM

Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM

Oh wait...I know how she is!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM


Your Mom is doing just fine!

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:50:15 PM

I see school let out. I am surprised you want to ask about me "spanking" your Mom. That is rather weird but you also like to watch your sister in the shower so it is understood.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:51:35 PM

@LMAO - "I see school let out..."

You like hanging around school yards...you sick freak!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Y6UKMp8Qw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30AbH74uxdU

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:41:07 PM

Gents, Excellent set of articles. Thank you

Posted by: Ralph | Jan 26, 2016 7:47:30 PM

Speaking about spanking am excellent set of articles...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM


I guess you are retarded. I already told you your Mom is doing just fine.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 7:58:01 PM

Speaking about doing just fine...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 9:01:34 PM

I wish LMAO would spank me

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 10:17:34 PM

"Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines."

None of the trucks had big blocks....

Posted by: ky | Jan 27, 2016 7:56:27 AM

Thanks Lou_BC and Big Al from Oz. Since the trucks were supplied by the manufacturers to show their best performance, I suspected the RAM air suspension option would not have helped and may have hurt RAM's performance for this test. Thanks for the reference to the past test to prove that fact. The reviews that raved about the RAM air suspension during towing were for lighter loads, though the loads may be more realistic for most 1/2 ton owners. I agree the current popularity and increased production of trucks is due to targeting the suburban user with nicer rides and plusher interiors. Gone are the fantastically satisfying teeth loosening ride and efficient "hose it out" interior of my '70 Blazer, which sadly looses 20 lbs every time I slam the door.

Posted by: MassMike | Jan 27, 2016 8:41:37 AM

MassMike - the "air ride" on the Ram 1500 is actually a closed system using nitrogen. I've heard of incidences of having to get them recharged. I've also heard of overheating on rough roads. I have seen one air-ride Ram sitting behind the local dealership looking like a torpedoed ship about to topple over.

One thing people have to watch with crewcab trucks are the load ratings. A 5-6 passenger cabin full of family and/or adults can consume 1/2 to 3/4's of your cargo ratings. Adding even a light trailer can max the truck out.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:45:43 AM

Lou_BC,
Most any US 1/2 ton is not one of those new 3 000lb payload F-150s.

Most any US pickup as Massmike pointed out are CUVs for the Suburbs.

Why can't you get this through your head.

Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Just because a vehicle will tow a squillion pounds doesn't necessarily mean the person buying will ever use that capability.

Why don't you denegrate all US pickups for their overall lacklustre payload performance.

Have a look at the most popular payload class within the 1/2 ton pickups. I'd bet you'll find that there are far more Frod buyers that I would be concerned about regarding the payload/tow argument you go on ranting about.

I do believe you are completely disconnected from reality with the use of the NA pickup.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM

Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM

And by the Fiat sales numbers very few people have purchased what you say consumers want. Just because your a fiat fanbot does not mean that is what everyone wants. In fact the fiat trucks tend to be the cheapest pricedo on the market. Fiat even offers 7 and 8 year financing to try and get paymentsome lower and more people in their products. However Ford and GM remain the largest sellers of trucks and wait for it.....................................................................have leaf spring rear suspension. So what do consumers want?

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:59:35 AM

Next »


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

Working...


Working...


Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Comments



Browse News By:


Category

Aftermarket


Auto Shows


Awards


Compact/Midsize


Custom Trucks


Diesels


Fuel Economy


Full-Size


Heavy-Duty


Hybrids


Interiors


Light-Duty


New Trucks


Powertrains


Pricing


Safety


Spy Photos


Sources Say


Towing and Hauling


Manufacturer


Truck Shopping Tools
Search for New & Used
Find a Dealer
See Hottest Truck Deals
List your Truck for Sale
Read Expert Reviews
Review Your Own Truck


Recent Posts
Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
GMC Adds All Terrain X to Sierra 1500 Lineup
NHTSA Expands Takata Airbag Recall
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing Acceleration
Read recent stories
Read older stories

Latest User Comments
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Subscribe


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

Many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

Grammer...Grammer.....Grammer.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0rPv84gJ0g


Powered by Cars.com.

Home
Buy or Sell a Truck
Reviews
News
Special Reports

Search

Search PickupTrucks:


Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Posted by Mark Williams | January 27, 2016

Super Duty Chassis Cab 2 II

Ford's Avon Lake, Ohio, assembly plant, which produces F-650 and F-750 commercial trucks, will get a significant upgrade in order to build aluminum-bodied 2017 F-350, F-450 and F-550 chassis-cab models.

The Ohio Assembly Plant has been operating since 1974, producing everything from E-Series vans to compact SUVs to minivans. Now it will be a dedicated commercial-vehicle production facility with both medium- and light-duty chassis cabs rolling off the line. This modification to the Ohio plant will free up the Kentucky Truck Plant to produce more personal-use F-250, F-350 and F-450 Super Duty models.

The all-new 2017 Ford Super Duty will be available this fall and will offer a stronger frame, bigger brakes and axles, and significant weight savings due to the switch to aluminum exterior body panels. Unlike the standard Super Duty models, chassis-cab models have a fully boxed frame only to the end of the cab, then a flat, open C-channel to make make it easier for aftermarket body builders to run hydraulics and additional electrical wiring for customers' specific work needs. All chassis-cab Super Dutys will have a choice of three engines:the 6.2-liter gas V-8, the 6.8-liter gas V-10 and 6.7-liter diesel V-8.

Manufacturer images

Super Duty Chassis Cab 1 II



Comments (177) in Ford, Ford F-350, Ford F-450, Ford F-550


Comments


@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammar and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammer” what a pee pee head....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:09:25 PM

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammer” what a fool....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:09:44 PM

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grommmmmer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammur” what a boobie....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:10:31 PM

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammar and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammur” what a vag....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:11:14 PM

I love me some man elongated pee hole.

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:12:08 PM

You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better.

I'm the goodest!


Posted by: LMAO - “Grammer” | Jan 28, 2016 7:12:52 PM

My best friend Michael bet me a snickers bar I could not stick 5 match box cars in my butt hole. Guess what, I got that snickers bar!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:13:40 PM

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammar and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammour” what a pee pee hole....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:14:25 PM

I found this really neat trick. Take a twist tie for a loaf of bread bag and twist it around your shaft. It makes it almost 2" bigger. Really cool.

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:17:24 PM

I might have match box cars in my butt hole.

But I can spell Grammar...heeeeeheeeeee

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammer” what a fool....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA

I can keep him going all day folks....LMAO If you were twice as smart, you'd still be stupid.

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:18:08 PM

I am a big fan of Tonka toys in my anus. I am able to get one dump truck in there now. Really neat stuff. And I can do it all day long.

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:20:23 PM

Well this site has gone to crap. Someone let their retarded kid on a computer. I guess I'll go find a better truck site. Any ideas from the grown-ups still on here?

Posted by: DirtyMAXX | Jan 28, 2016 7:20:27 PM

I am not a big fan of cat poop. I don't mind the cat butt hole but the poop is kind of sour. But a bet is a bet.

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:21:18 PM

I might have match box cars in my butt hole.

But I cant spell Grammar...heeeeeheeeeee

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammer” what a foul....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA

I can keep him going all day folks....LMAO If you were twice as smart, you'd still be stopid.


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:22:27 PM

I might have match box cars in my butt hole.

But I cant spell Grammar...heeeeeheeeeee

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammer” what a foul....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA

I can keep him going all day folks....LMAO If you were twice as smart, you'd still be stopid.


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:23:00 PM

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammer” what a fool....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA

See what I mean I can keep him going all day folks...his birth certificate is an apology letter from the condom factory.

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:23:50 PM


I have never heard anything negative about the V-10 except it uses a lot of gas. As for durability it has that.


Posted by: Jeff S | Jan 27, 2016 5:14:05 PM

The only real negative and it was rather rare was the early V10s that did not have the PI heads could launch a spark plug out. Ford redesigned the heads in 2000 to the PI head and the spark plug changed. While an inconveniences for sure there were/are many repair kits for this. Many of the issues were not properly torqueing the spark plugs. It is obvious not every V10 out there is trouble free. There are some rare cases where there were a problem. Many engine issues can be attributed to maint and how they were abused. Other than MPG I have not heard hardly anything bad about them.

The GM 6.0L is not to bad either. We have had some issues with our 6.0L's but mostly minor stuff like exhaust manifolds, intake gaskets, drivability issues not related to the base engine. Did have to replace one 6.0L at 150K though. It would randomly loose oil pressure. Did not make any sense but I suspect it was a lifter bore issue due to some of the symptoms. Instead of trying to rebuild it decided to replace the engine.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:24:13 PM


Nitro - greed. PUTC acts like they want to commit suicide by allowing uncontrolled blogs. The blogs were much better when Mike Levine owned PUTC. Someone out there is extremely lazy or just does not give a sh!t.
Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:22:31 AM

Hey Lou_BC what was all that BS you were spewing? Lou you moron, I’m pretty sure that you are still rocking matchbox cars. What a pitiful and predictable fool. A true loser.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:31:32 PM


I am disappointed with 'mr. FERTILIZER' from 'down under'. Where is his 'all encompassing' comments lately? It is always 'refreshing' to read his 'words of wisdom'.


Posted by: Tundra Bob | Jan 27, 2016 5:31:57 PM


Tundra Bob I had a long day yesterday. A lot of work, bad traffic and crowds of people everywhere... I was really exhausted by the time I reached the hotel.
I sat down on the bed and wanted to turn on the TV to kill some more time before sleeping, but my mind started wandering.

Then everything just focused clearly. You appeared in front of me. Your angelic presence instantly calmed me down Bob, my tiredness evaporated and my spirits soared turning glum into bliss. Yes, my darling Bob, you do have that wonderful effect on me.

I remembered our first date when everything started. Like a burst of sunshine upon a desolate landscape, like the torrential rain in the dessert, like the first light after months of darkness, that date changed me forever. For better, for much better. It was love at first date Bob. I couldn't think of anything more important than to see you again, to be with you again. Your soft, sweet voice singing to me gently; your radiant smile warming my heart; your exquisite presence mesmerizing me completely.

How truly blessed I am to have you walk the roads of life with me! I could not imagine my life without you because you mean everything to me Bob. My love for you keeps on going as strong as ever and I know that I will always love you until the day I depart this world.

I turned around to kiss you, only to find an empty pillow there. That's when I realized that I fell asleep and kept thinking, dreaming about you. I smiled.
Soon we will be together again.

I love you so much Bob!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:36:52 PM


^^^^^sickening. Frankie seems to suffer from Dodge envy


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 5:46:51 PM

Nitro - greed. PUTC acts like they want to commit suicide by allowing uncontrolled blogs. The blogs were much better when Mike Levine owned PUTC. Someone out there is extremely lazy or just does not give a sh!t.
Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:22:31 AM

Hey Lou_BC what was all that BS you were spewing? Lou you moron, I’m pretty sure that you are still rocking matchbox cars. What a pitiful and predictable fool. A true loser.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:31:32 PM


Nice try loser!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:50:11 PM

I turned around to kiss you, only to find an empty pillow there. That's when I realized that I fell asleep and kept thinking, dreaming about you. I smiled.
Soon we will be together again.

I love you so much Bob!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:36:52 PM

Again, nice try loser.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:50:55 PM


@LMAO - you raise some valid points about engine use. THE BC Ambulance Service has thousands of units and many of the new ones are gassers. Some are used for long interhospital transfers and that is where a diesel will be superior to gas. I do agree that they get driven hard and then you get to a call and they sit.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 6:11:55 PM


Tundra Bob I know these past five months have been really hard because we couldn't be together. We've both been strong, but the wait is almost over. We can soon spend the rest of our lives together, waking up to each other every morning.

Bob I love you with all my heart and soul. You are truly my angel and my guardian, now and forever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37FGwDMMZEg


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 6:13:41 PM


LMAO maybe you and Tundra Bob should get a room!


Posted by: The Guru | Jan 27, 2016 6:20:14 PM


V10 is only available in commercial versions. Not the civilian versions of the f250-450.

A few reason this motor is still around in the commercial realm are they are very reliable, fleets maintenance are setup to maintain these..... No need to change over your speciality tools or maintenance items in stock that are bought in bulk. Less maintenance cost, lighter weight then a diesel. Typically on a 5500/550 you are going to only have a 4:88 axle ratio options for beefy axles reliability. At highway speeds with only 6 speed transmission you may be spinning 2700+rpms at those speeds. Motor homes are capacity limited so you throw a heavy diesel up front you may not have the capacities. Intial cost purchase cost and maintenance cost. Also the power difference is really close as all he diesels in commercial applications are detuned for longevity. The list goes on and on. My personally experience from having and retiring a 550 v10 and going to a 5500 6.7 cummins out on the highway mpg differences in any situation are around 2 mpg better for diesel. At 75 mph my 6 speed manual cummins runs at about 2800 rpm. It's out of snort compared to the v10 on the highway unless you are rolling along at 55mph or less is where the power band of the 660 ft lbs is in the cummins.

They will continue to make v10's on commercial rigs cause it is the best gas motor available to the commercial sector and a very popular engine for ford in that segment.


Posted by: Scott | Jan 27, 2016 6:25:50 PM


A few reason this motor is still around in the commercial realm are they are very reliable, fleets maintenance are setup to maintain these..... No need to change over your speciality tools or maintenance items in stock that are bought in bulk.

Posted by: Scott | Jan 27, 2016 6:25:50 PM

What is more ludicrous is some Ford fanbot talking garbage about the F150 pulling this weight when her favorite brand is the same weight and rated for the same towing. Sometimes people are to stupid to figure out their own ignorance.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 6:30:45 PM


Only way I would own a ford is if my boyfriend died and left it to me in his will. Even then I would have a hard time keeping it even after all my memories in that 8' bed.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 7:03:17 PM


What is more ludicrous is some Ford fanbot talking garbage about the F150 pulling this weight when her favorite brand is the same weight and rated for the same towing. Sometimes people are to stupid to figure out their own ignorance.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 6:30:45 PM

Again, nice try Lou_BC yopu F#ck'n loser.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:08:02 PM


THE BC Ambulance Service has thousands of units and many of the new ones are gassers. Some are used for long interhospital transfers and that is where a diesel will be superior to gas. I do agree that they get driven hard and then you get to a call and they sit.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 6:11:55 PM

If you have an emergency service that can do longer hauls a diesel could be more economical. The engine will be at operating temps, exhaust will be at temps and everything can perform as intended. It should be efficient at hwy speeds.

I know of an ambulance fleet that uses new E vans with V10s. They are pushing 300k on them. Maintained they do hold up. Even in severe service like that. Performance is how much do you want to spend. Cummins offers many power levels. A friend of mine is in the snapon tool business and he has the lowest power 6.7L that truck is a complete dog.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:08:03 PM


If you have an emergency service that can do longer hauls a diesel could be more economical. The engine will be at operating temps, exhaust will be at temps and everything can perform as intended. It should be efficient at hwy speeds.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:08:03 PM

Again, nice try Lou_BC loser, I fart in your general direction.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:10:22 PM


Only way I would own a ford is if my boyfriend died and left it to me in his will. Even then I would have a hard time keeping it even after all my memories in that 8' bed.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

Gm you are so Ghey! Are all GM owner as ghey as you. Ha Ha You are like the sister I never had.


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 7:16:28 PM


This site has got weird with all the homos like GM spreading their filth. GMSRGREAT let keep this about trucks and not your love life with other men.


Posted by: HEMI V8 | Jan 27, 2016 7:27:11 PM


Passed weird yesterday. There's a few guys riding down broke back highway. And it doesn't belong here


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 7:35:24 PM


Only way I would own a ford is if my boyfriend died and left it to me in his will. Even then I would have a hard time keeping it even after all my memories in that 8' bed.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

I knew you were a yuppie. Put your latte down and take the time to learn about real trucks. The 6.8 V10 is an excellent engine. Its durable and powerful enough to accomplish any job. It may not get the mileage of your sissy 5.3 but this engine was designed for work. Not patrolling gay bars with your prissy truck.


Posted by: Patriotgrunt | Jan 27, 2016 7:43:53 PM


Ford Super Duty....these trucks are hot!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 7:54:59 PM


GMSRGREAT,

You're hot too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAZX65p9MIs


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 8:01:04 PM


Passed weird yesterday. There's a few guys riding down broke back highway. And it doesn't belong here


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 7:35:24 PM

Just so you know, I only knock Fords. With that knowledge, it is only logical to assume that all gay reference postings directed towards myself are being posted by gay insecure Ford fan girls. I'm not saying all Ford fans are gay, just the ones that are posting gay.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 8:23:33 PM


A guy i fish with is a ford mech by day and works and a ambulance comp in the evenings and most of the ambulances are diesels. This is in Chicago and we have it all -20 to 100 deg. Ive personally seen bobcats and other diesel equip idle all day with out problems in sub-zero temps. I also have seen diesels gel up in -20 deg no mater no much diesel 911 is added.


Posted by: SKEETER | Jan 27, 2016 8:26:09 PM


GM,

Whatever helps you sleep at night!


Posted by: DirtyMAXX | Jan 27, 2016 8:26:35 PM


For my last post here I just want to say that I do NOT understand why PUTC does not just let @Big from Oz (aka N.Ns)* write their articles for them. It would save them so much trouble. The manufactures would not have to even provide vehicles for the results...N.Ns. already would know the results.

*Numb Nuts


Posted by: Tundra Bob | Jan 27, 2016 8:32:02 PM


Just so you know, I only knock Fords. With that knowledge, it is only logical to assume that all gay reference postings directed towards myself are being posted by gay insecure Ford fan girls. I'm not saying all Ford fans are gay, just the ones that are posting gay.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

So you have no objectivity to your comments. You simply write pro-GM and anti-ford remarks. Good to know. I will now ignore your posts. Maybe you are gay!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS7nqwGt4-I


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 8:36:42 PM


I wonder why some get so worked up over what someone else posted. People get so mad at gmsrgreat, bafo, lou ect... i come here for the news even thou its usually old and read the posts to entertain myself.


Posted by: SKEETER | Jan 27, 2016 8:37:21 PM


Well I'll knock em all if it's warranted. I own a d-150 but if Chrysler does something stupid they deserve criticism. For instance, Sergio is killing Chrysler and spending the money on brands few want, trying to expand globally instead of concentrating on domestic vehicles, and continually shops around for a partner. Sure he's done some good things but the future doesn't look bright.


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 8:55:39 PM


So you have no objectivity to your comments. You simply write pro-GM and anti-ford remarks. Good to know. I will now ignore your posts. Maybe you are gay!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 8:36:42 PM

Oh no maybe about I know he's gay! Aren't you baby ;)


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 9:08:57 PM


BREAKING NEWS

January 2016 Truck Sales data forecast.

Ford F-Series outsold both Chevy & GMC truck lines.


Posted by: blueman | Jan 27, 2016 9:33:23 PM


The all-new red-hot 2017 Ford Super Duty will be available this fall and will offer a scorching frame, bigger brakes and axles, and significant weight savings due to the switch to inferno aluminum exterior body panels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4

Unlike the standard hot Super Duty models, chassis-cab models have a fully boxed combustion frame only to the end of the cab, then a blaze, open C-channel to make it easier for aftermarket body builders to run flames and additional inferno electrical wiring for hot customers' specific work needs.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/08/04/ford-f-series-super-duty-fire-photos-amazing/

All chassis-cab Super Duty will have a choice of incineration engines: the 6.2-liter gas V-8, the 6.8-liter gas V-10 and 6.7-liter blaze diesel V-8.


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 9:38:20 PM


@LAMO & ROB : No objectivity huh! Below is a post I made earlier today. I will place in brackets my objectivity.

@ Walt: I am happy that your experience with Ford's V10 ended so well. My experience with the V10 had them running along side GM 6.0 liter V8 doing the exact type of work. ( Admittedly, the Ford handled the weight carrying better ) but the V10 life span was less than 1/2 of the 6.0 liter. Oh, the line about the turbos and BANG was hypothetical.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 1:05:25 PM

Did you see it.?


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 9:54:30 PM


For my last post here I just want to say that I do NOT understand why PUTC does not just let @Big from Oz (aka N.Ns)* write their articles for them. It would save them so much trouble. The manufactures would not have to even provide vehicles for the results...N.Ns. already would know the results.

*Numb Nuts
--------------------------

Nothing more comical than BAFO, one who has never seen, sat in or driven any of these trucks, tries to pass off being knowledgable about something he's so oblivious too.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 10:43:07 PM


Looking forward to seeing the numbers: power, torque, and real world (but obviously unrated) fuel economy. I think Ford lost a lot of fuel economy on the 6.7, going to the updated version in 2015.


Posted by: Alex | Jan 27, 2016 11:35:34 PM


You ok GMSRGREAT? You seem very confused in your comments lately. Its ok if you live a certain lifestyle but you need to find peace with yourself. Now, on to pickups.

( Admittedly, the Ford handled the weight carrying better ) but the V10 life span was less than 1/2 of the 6.0 liter. Oh, the line about the turbos and BANG was hypothetical.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

This was your objective comment? While stating the Ford works better, you then bash the durability. That's likely a stretch considering the V10 is well known to last a very long time. Plenty have well over 200-300k miles on them. So by those numbers, your 6.0 should make it to 600k? I doubt any 6.0s have that many miles but I guess you were being objective for a pro-GM bot.


Posted by: Dave | Jan 28, 2016 6:15:18 AM


Jeff S many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yOlvL37680


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:15:29 AM


This was your objective comment? While stating the Ford works better, you then bash the durability. That's likely a stretch considering the V10 is well known to last a very long time. Plenty have well over 200-300k miles on them. So by those numbers, your 6.0 should make it to 600k? I doubt any 6.0s have that many miles but I guess you were being objective for a pro-GM bot.


Posted by: Dave | Jan 28, 2016 6:15:18 AM

@Dave, you have to remember GMSRGREAT is just like Johnny doe. Don't have a clue on trucks and especially working trucks. They merely repeat what GM tells them on youtube. I will believe GMSRGREAT has any viable information pertaining to work trucks when pigs fly.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:32:14 AM


On the way to work this morning I saw 3 of those F-series trucks .( 1 was much bigger than the other 2 ) Anyway, the brakes lights worked on all three trucks. Good job Ford!


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 28, 2016 8:02:32 AM


@dave So by those numbers, your 6.0 should make it to 600k? I doubt any 6.0s have that many miles

You maybe wrong

I have seen a few 6.0 and 5.3 with 400-500k and heard of at least one with over 600k.
Now im also sure there are some ford motors that have super high miles but allot of todays motors will make to 100k with even the worst maintenance so a very well cared for vehicle can have some really surprising longevity on allot of systems.
My dads 2004 2500hd 6.0 has 240k the motors looks like it only has 50k and leaks nothing. the original brakes even lasted to 225k and had 4mm left on the pads. Only reason i had to do them was the rf caliper was locking up. Now this truck is not worked and driven by a man that is never in a hurry. I sits in a heated garage and get the oil changed every 3k not when the mid says to. My 2006 2500hd is worked hard, tows, plows commercially and the motor it tuned with headers intake exhaust, electric fans and has 175k and i beat the s%! out of it and it always starts and asks for more. Just my 2 cents.


Posted by: SKEETER | Jan 28, 2016 9:04:14 AM


WOW!!! I came to this site looking for news about American trucks, only to find a bunch of crazys trying to show they know everything.
But I know that no us truck would ever compare with a Russian UAZ truck. Your trucks are like baby trucks for these.


Posted by: Igor | Jan 28, 2016 10:31:16 AM


@Skeeter - the number of miles a truck is able to accumulate before needing major work all depends on how it is driven, what kind of work it is used for and where it is driven.
I had read a story about a guy who delivered newspapers with is Chevy pickup. He put 1 million miles on it in a relatively short time. It was bought from him by GM(IIRC) for PR purposes.
Experts weighed in on the subject and pointed out that the truck worked in the Southern USA and drove mostly long distance highway miles. Every factor was positive for a long life.
My brother on the other hand works for a forest resource company and gets a new truck every 1 1/2 to 2 years. He drives mostly gravel roads, logging sites, and construction sites. He is on his 4th GM HD 6.0 crew 4x4 in 7 years. They last roughly 160,000 - 225,000 km or 100,000 - 140,000 miles. He has had some trucks needing replacing at 50,000 miles.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 28, 2016 10:43:22 AM


I see LMAO kid missed the school bus again. He probably bought a pipe rack to put on his daddies truck to say he works that gas sucking eco pop v6 his dad owns. Glad I didn't have to grown up in this day and age. Wonder if LMAO kid cleaned his room this week to get fed his PB&J samwitch.


Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 28, 2016 10:46:07 AM


Yup that is johnny welfare doe again. You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better. Nothing worse than a section 8 trailer park living, food stamps hording, welfare loser spending his day on his free Obama phone trying to talk trash but poorly executes it by not spelling things correctly and using 4th grade english. Wait a minute, second thought, preschool english. Learn to work loser doe and start repaying my tax money back.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 11:00:49 AM


All you guys have to remember, when you shut down BigAl, he stops writing, gives up, then comes back as GMSRGREAT, its called bi polar


Posted by: Nitro | Jan 28, 2016 1:21:50 PM


Nitro - bipolar isn't what I'd call it.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 28, 2016 1:58:13 PM


On the way to work this morning I saw 3 of those F-series trucks .( 1 was much bigger than the other 2 ) Anyway, the brakes lights worked on all three trucks. Good job Ford!

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

Don't act like you work GMSRGREAT. We all know you get paid by GM to post crap on here.


Posted by: Patriotgrunt | Jan 28, 2016 2:19:22 PM


Boy the comments section on this site has really gone down the toilet. I just don't understand why all this filth is allowed to go on And FILTH it is. What was once a good place to come to has since been left to rot and that's ashamed.


Posted by: Truck Crazy | Jan 28, 2016 2:35:17 PM


Truck Crazy - bottom right of the page.click the link "contact us". They don't seem to be doing anything with my complaints.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 28, 2016 3:01:18 PM

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:24:42 PM


I have never heard anything negative about the V-10 except it uses a lot of gas. As for durability it has that.


Posted by: Jeff S | Jan 27, 2016 5:14:05 PM

The only real negative and it was rather rare was the early V10s that did not have the PI heads could launch a spark plug out. Ford redesigned the heads in 2000 to the PI head and the spark plug changed. While an inconveniences for sure there were/are many repair kits for this. Many of the issues were not properly torqueing the spark plugs. It is obvious not every V10 out there is trouble free. There are some rare cases where there were a problem. Many engine issues can be attributed to maint and how they were abused. Other than MPG I have not heard hardly anything bad about them.

The GM 6.0L is not to bad either. We have had some issues with our 6.0L's but mostly minor stuff like exhaust manifolds, intake gaskets, drivability issues not related to the base engine. Did have to replace one 6.0L at 150K though. It would randomly loose oil pressure. Did not make any sense but I suspect it was a lifter bore issue due to some of the symptoms. Instead of trying to rebuild it decided to replace the engine.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:24:13 PM


Nitro - greed. PUTC acts like they want to commit suicide by allowing uncontrolled blogs. The blogs were much better when Mike Levine owned PUTC. Someone out there is extremely lazy or just does not give a sh!t.
Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:22:31 AM

Hey Lou_BC what was all that BS you were spewing? Lou you moron, I’m pretty sure that you are still rocking matchbox cars. What a pitiful and predictable fool. A true loser.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:31:32 PM


I am disappointed with 'mr. FERTILIZER' from 'down under'. Where is his 'all encompassing' comments lately? It is always 'refreshing' to read his 'words of wisdom'.


Posted by: Tundra Bob | Jan 27, 2016 5:31:57 PM


Tundra Bob I had a long day yesterday. A lot of work, bad traffic and crowds of people everywhere... I was really exhausted by the time I reached the hotel.
I sat down on the bed and wanted to turn on the TV to kill some more time before sleeping, but my mind started wandering.

Then everything just focused clearly. You appeared in front of me. Your angelic presence instantly calmed me down Bob, my tiredness evaporated and my spirits soared turning glum into bliss. Yes, my darling Bob, you do have that wonderful effect on me.

I remembered our first date when everything started. Like a burst of sunshine upon a desolate landscape, like the torrential rain in the dessert, like the first light after months of darkness, that date changed me forever. For better, for much better. It was love at first date Bob. I couldn't think of anything more important than to see you again, to be with you again. Your soft, sweet voice singing to me gently; your radiant smile warming my heart; your exquisite presence mesmerizing me completely.

How truly blessed I am to have you walk the roads of life with me! I could not imagine my life without you because you mean everything to me Bob. My love for you keeps on going as strong as ever and I know that I will always love you until the day I depart this world.

I turned around to kiss you, only to find an empty pillow there. That's when I realized that I fell asleep and kept thinking, dreaming about you. I smiled.
Soon we will be together again.

I love you so much Bob!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:36:52 PM


^^^^^sickening. Frankie seems to suffer from Dodge envy


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 5:46:51 PM

Nitro - greed. PUTC acts like they want to commit suicide by allowing uncontrolled blogs. The blogs were much better when Mike Levine owned PUTC. Someone out there is extremely lazy or just does not give a sh!t.
Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:22:31 AM

Hey Lou_BC what was all that BS you were spewing? Lou you moron, I’m pretty sure that you are still rocking matchbox cars. What a pitiful and predictable fool. A true loser.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:31:32 PM


Nice try loser!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:50:11 PM

I turned around to kiss you, only to find an empty pillow there. That's when I realized that I fell asleep and kept thinking, dreaming about you. I smiled.
Soon we will be together again.

I love you so much Bob!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:36:52 PM

Again, nice try loser.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:50:55 PM


@LMAO - you raise some valid points about engine use. THE BC Ambulance Service has thousands of units and many of the new ones are gassers. Some are used for long interhospital transfers and that is where a diesel will be superior to gas. I do agree that they get driven hard and then you get to a call and they sit.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 6:11:55 PM


Tundra Bob I know these past five months have been really hard because we couldn't be together. We've both been strong, but the wait is almost over. We can soon spend the rest of our lives together, waking up to each other every morning.

Bob I love you with all my heart and soul. You are truly my angel and my guardian, now and forever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37FGwDMMZEg


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 6:13:41 PM


LMAO maybe you and Tundra Bob should get a room!


Posted by: The Guru | Jan 27, 2016 6:20:14 PM


V10 is only available in commercial versions. Not the civilian versions of the f250-450.

A few reason this motor is still around in the commercial realm are they are very reliable, fleets maintenance are setup to maintain these..... No need to change over your speciality tools or maintenance items in stock that are bought in bulk. Less maintenance cost, lighter weight then a diesel. Typically on a 5500/550 you are going to only have a 4:88 axle ratio options for beefy axles reliability. At highway speeds with only 6 speed transmission you may be spinning 2700+rpms at those speeds. Motor homes are capacity limited so you throw a heavy diesel up front you may not have the capacities. Intial cost purchase cost and maintenance cost. Also the power difference is really close as all he diesels in commercial applications are detuned for longevity. The list goes on and on. My personally experience from having and retiring a 550 v10 and going to a 5500 6.7 cummins out on the highway mpg differences in any situation are around 2 mpg better for diesel. At 75 mph my 6 speed manual cummins runs at about 2800 rpm. It's out of snort compared to the v10 on the highway unless you are rolling along at 55mph or less is where the power band of the 660 ft lbs is in the cummins.

They will continue to make v10's on commercial rigs cause it is the best gas motor available to the commercial sector and a very popular engine for ford in that segment.


Posted by: Scott | Jan 27, 2016 6:25:50 PM


A few reason this motor is still around in the commercial realm are they are very reliable, fleets maintenance are setup to maintain these..... No need to change over your speciality tools or maintenance items in stock that are bought in bulk.

Posted by: Scott | Jan 27, 2016 6:25:50 PM

What is more ludicrous is some Ford fanbot talking garbage about the F150 pulling this weight when her favorite brand is the same weight and rated for the same towing. Sometimes people are to stupid to figure out their own ignorance.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 6:30:45 PM


Only way I would own a ford is if my boyfriend died and left it to me in his will. Even then I would have a hard time keeping it even after all my memories in that 8' bed.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 7:03:17 PM


What is more ludicrous is some Ford fanbot talking garbage about the F150 pulling this weight when her favorite brand is the same weight and rated for the same towing. Sometimes people are to stupid to figure out their own ignorance.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 6:30:45 PM

Again, nice try Lou_BC yopu F#ck'n loser.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:08:02 PM


THE BC Ambulance Service has thousands of units and many of the new ones are gassers. Some are used for long interhospital transfers and that is where a diesel will be superior to gas. I do agree that they get driven hard and then you get to a call and they sit.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 6:11:55 PM

If you have an emergency service that can do longer hauls a diesel could be more economical. The engine will be at operating temps, exhaust will be at temps and everything can perform as intended. It should be efficient at hwy speeds.

I know of an ambulance fleet that uses new E vans with V10s. They are pushing 300k on them. Maintained they do hold up. Even in severe service like that. Performance is how much do you want to spend. Cummins offers many power levels. A friend of mine is in the snapon tool business and he has the lowest power 6.7L that truck is a complete dog.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:08:03 PM


If you have an emergency service that can do longer hauls a diesel could be more economical. The engine will be at operating temps, exhaust will be at temps and everything can perform as intended. It should be efficient at hwy speeds.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:08:03 PM

Again, nice try Lou_BC loser, I fart in your general direction.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 7:10:22 PM


Only way I would own a ford is if my boyfriend died and left it to me in his will. Even then I would have a hard time keeping it even after all my memories in that 8' bed.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

Gm you are so Ghey! Are all GM owner as ghey as you. Ha Ha You are like the sister I never had.


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 7:16:28 PM


This site has got weird with all the homos like GM spreading their filth. GMSRGREAT let keep this about trucks and not your love life with other men.


Posted by: HEMI V8 | Jan 27, 2016 7:27:11 PM


Passed weird yesterday. There's a few guys riding down broke back highway. And it doesn't belong here


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 7:35:24 PM


Only way I would own a ford is if my boyfriend died and left it to me in his will. Even then I would have a hard time keeping it even after all my memories in that 8' bed.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

I knew you were a yuppie. Put your latte down and take the time to learn about real trucks. The 6.8 V10 is an excellent engine. Its durable and powerful enough to accomplish any job. It may not get the mileage of your sissy 5.3 but this engine was designed for work. Not patrolling gay bars with your prissy truck.


Posted by: Patriotgrunt | Jan 27, 2016 7:43:53 PM


Ford Super Duty....these trucks are hot!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 7:54:59 PM


GMSRGREAT,

You're hot too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAZX65p9MIs


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 8:01:04 PM


Passed weird yesterday. There's a few guys riding down broke back highway. And it doesn't belong here


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 7:35:24 PM

Just so you know, I only knock Fords. With that knowledge, it is only logical to assume that all gay reference postings directed towards myself are being posted by gay insecure Ford fan girls. I'm not saying all Ford fans are gay, just the ones that are posting gay.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 8:23:33 PM


A guy i fish with is a ford mech by day and works and a ambulance comp in the evenings and most of the ambulances are diesels. This is in Chicago and we have it all -20 to 100 deg. Ive personally seen bobcats and other diesel equip idle all day with out problems in sub-zero temps. I also have seen diesels gel up in -20 deg no mater no much diesel 911 is added.


Posted by: SKEETER | Jan 27, 2016 8:26:09 PM


GM,

Whatever helps you sleep at night!


Posted by: DirtyMAXX | Jan 27, 2016 8:26:35 PM


For my last post here I just want to say that I do NOT understand why PUTC does not just let @Big from Oz (aka N.Ns)* write their articles for them. It would save them so much trouble. The manufactures would not have to even provide vehicles for the results...N.Ns. already would know the results.

*Numb Nuts


Posted by: Tundra Bob | Jan 27, 2016 8:32:02 PM


Just so you know, I only knock Fords. With that knowledge, it is only logical to assume that all gay reference postings directed towards myself are being posted by gay insecure Ford fan girls. I'm not saying all Ford fans are gay, just the ones that are posting gay.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

So you have no objectivity to your comments. You simply write pro-GM and anti-ford remarks. Good to know. I will now ignore your posts. Maybe you are gay!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS7nqwGt4-I


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 8:36:42 PM


I wonder why some get so worked up over what someone else posted. People get so mad at gmsrgreat, bafo, lou ect... i come here for the news even thou its usually old and read the posts to entertain myself.


Posted by: SKEETER | Jan 27, 2016 8:37:21 PM


Well I'll knock em all if it's warranted. I own a d-150 but if Chrysler does something stupid they deserve criticism. For instance, Sergio is killing Chrysler and spending the money on brands few want, trying to expand globally instead of concentrating on domestic vehicles, and continually shops around for a partner. Sure he's done some good things but the future doesn't look bright.


Posted by: roadram | Jan 27, 2016 8:55:39 PM


So you have no objectivity to your comments. You simply write pro-GM and anti-ford remarks. Good to know. I will now ignore your posts. Maybe you are gay!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 8:36:42 PM

Oh no maybe about I know he's gay! Aren't you baby ;)


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 9:08:57 PM


BREAKING NEWS

January 2016 Truck Sales data forecast.

Ford F-Series outsold both Chevy & GMC truck lines.


Posted by: blueman | Jan 27, 2016 9:33:23 PM


The all-new red-hot 2017 Ford Super Duty will be available this fall and will offer a scorching frame, bigger brakes and axles, and significant weight savings due to the switch to inferno aluminum exterior body panels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4

Unlike the standard hot Super Duty models, chassis-cab models have a fully boxed combustion frame only to the end of the cab, then a blaze, open C-channel to make it easier for aftermarket body builders to run flames and additional inferno electrical wiring for hot customers' specific work needs.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/08/04/ford-f-series-super-duty-fire-photos-amazing/

All chassis-cab Super Duty will have a choice of incineration engines: the 6.2-liter gas V-8, the 6.8-liter gas V-10 and 6.7-liter blaze diesel V-8.


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 9:38:20 PM


@LAMO & ROB : No objectivity huh! Below is a post I made earlier today. I will place in brackets my objectivity.

@ Walt: I am happy that your experience with Ford's V10 ended so well. My experience with the V10 had them running along side GM 6.0 liter V8 doing the exact type of work. ( Admittedly, the Ford handled the weight carrying better ) but the V10 life span was less than 1/2 of the 6.0 liter. Oh, the line about the turbos and BANG was hypothetical.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 1:05:25 PM

Did you see it.?


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 9:54:30 PM


For my last post here I just want to say that I do NOT understand why PUTC does not just let @Big from Oz (aka N.Ns)* write their articles for them. It would save them so much trouble. The manufactures would not have to even provide vehicles for the results...N.Ns. already would know the results.

*Numb Nuts
--------------------------

Nothing more comical than BAFO, one who has never seen, sat in or driven any of these trucks, tries to pass off being knowledgable about something he's so oblivious too.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 10:43:07 PM


Looking forward to seeing the numbers: power, torque, and real world (but obviously unrated) fuel economy. I think Ford lost a lot of fuel economy on the 6.7, going to the updated version in 2015.


Posted by: Alex | Jan 27, 2016 11:35:34 PM


You ok GMSRGREAT? You seem very confused in your comments lately. Its ok if you live a certain lifestyle but you need to find peace with yourself. Now, on to pickups.

( Admittedly, the Ford handled the weight carrying better ) but the V10 life span was less than 1/2 of the 6.0 liter. Oh, the line about the turbos and BANG was hypothetical.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

This was your objective comment? While stating the Ford works better, you then bash the durability. That's likely a stretch considering the V10 is well known to last a very long time. Plenty have well over 200-300k miles on them. So by those numbers, your 6.0 should make it to 600k? I doubt any 6.0s have that many miles but I guess you were being objective for a pro-GM bot.


Posted by: Dave | Jan 28, 2016 6:15:18 AM


Jeff S many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yOlvL37680


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:15:29 AM


This was your objective comment? While stating the Ford works better, you then bash the durability. That's likely a stretch considering the V10 is well known to last a very long time. Plenty have well over 200-300k miles on them. So by those numbers, your 6.0 should make it to 600k? I doubt any 6.0s have that many miles but I guess you were being objective for a pro-GM bot.


Posted by: Dave | Jan 28, 2016 6:15:18 AM

@Dave, you have to remember GMSRGREAT is just like Johnny doe. Don't have a clue on trucks and especially working trucks. They merely repeat what GM tells them on youtube. I will believe GMSRGREAT has any viable information pertaining to work trucks when pigs fly.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:32:14 AM


On the way to work this morning I saw 3 of those F-series trucks .( 1 was much bigger than the other 2 ) Anyway, the brakes lights worked on all three trucks. Good job Ford!


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 28, 2016 8:02:32 AM


@dave So by those numbers, your 6.0 should make it to 600k? I doubt any 6.0s have that many miles

You maybe wrong

I have seen a few 6.0 and 5.3 with 400-500k and heard of at least one with over 600k.
Now im also sure there are some ford motors that have super high miles but allot of todays motors will make to 100k with even the worst maintenance so a very well cared for vehicle can have some really surprising longevity on allot of systems.
My dads 2004 2500hd 6.0 has 240k the motors looks like it only has 50k and leaks nothing. the original brakes even lasted to 225k and had 4mm left on the pads. Only reason i had to do them was the rf caliper was locking up. Now this truck is not worked and driven by a man that is never in a hurry. I sits in a heated garage and get the oil changed every 3k not when the mid says to. My 2006 2500hd is worked hard, tows, plows commercially and the motor it tuned with headers intake exhaust, electric fans and has 175k and i beat the s%! out of it and it always starts and asks for more. Just my 2 cents.


Posted by: SKEETER | Jan 28, 2016 9:04:14 AM


WOW!!! I came to this site looking for news about American trucks, only to find a bunch of crazys trying to show they know everything.
But I know that no us truck would ever compare with a Russian UAZ truck. Your trucks are like baby trucks for these.


Posted by: Igor | Jan 28, 2016 10:31:16 AM


@Skeeter - the number of miles a truck is able to accumulate before needing major work all depends on how it is driven, what kind of work it is used for and where it is driven.
I had read a story about a guy who delivered newspapers with is Chevy pickup. He put 1 million miles on it in a relatively short time. It was bought from him by GM(IIRC) for PR purposes.
Experts weighed in on the subject and pointed out that the truck worked in the Southern USA and drove mostly long distance highway miles. Every factor was positive for a long life.
My brother on the other hand works for a forest resource company and gets a new truck every 1 1/2 to 2 years. He drives mostly gravel roads, logging sites, and construction sites. He is on his 4th GM HD 6.0 crew 4x4 in 7 years. They last roughly 160,000 - 225,000 km or 100,000 - 140,000 miles. He has had some trucks needing replacing at 50,000 miles.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 28, 2016 10:43:22 AM


I see LMAO kid missed the school bus again. He probably bought a pipe rack to put on his daddies truck to say he works that gas sucking eco pop v6 his dad owns. Glad I didn't have to grown up in this day and age. Wonder if LMAO kid cleaned his room this week to get fed his PB&J samwitch.


Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 28, 2016 10:46:07 AM


Yup that is johnny welfare doe again. You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better. Nothing worse than a section 8 trailer park living, food stamps hording, welfare loser spending his day on his free Obama phone trying to talk trash but poorly executes it by not spelling things correctly and using 4th grade english. Wait a minute, second thought, preschool english. Learn to work loser doe and start repaying my tax money back.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 11:00:49 AM


All you guys have to remember, when you shut down BigAl, he stops writing, gives up, then comes back as GMSRGREAT, its called bi polar


Posted by: Nitro | Jan 28, 2016 1:21:50 PM


Nitro - bipolar isn't what I'd call it.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 28, 2016 1:58:13 PM


On the way to work this morning I saw 3 of those F-series trucks .( 1 was much bigger than the other 2 ) Anyway, the brakes lights worked on all three trucks. Good job Ford!

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

Don't act like you work GMSRGREAT. We all know you get paid by GM to post crap on here.


Posted by: Patriotgrunt | Jan 28, 2016 2:19:22 PM


Boy the comments section on this site has really gone down the toilet. I just don't understand why all this filth is allowed to go on And FILTH it is. What was once a good place to come to has since been left to rot and that's ashamed.


Posted by: Truck Crazy | Jan 28, 2016 2:35:17 PM


Truck Crazy - bottom right of the page.click the link "contact us". They don't seem to be doing anything with my complaints.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 28, 2016 3:01:18 PM

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:26:21 PM

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

“Grammer” what a bonehead....lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA

I’m jealous of all the people that haven't met you!


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:27:07 PM


Powered by Cars.com.

Home
Buy or Sell a Truck
Reviews
News
Special Reports

Search

Search PickupTrucks:

Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Posted by Mark Williams | January 27, 2016

Super Duty Chassis Cab 2 II

Ford's Avon Lake, Ohio, assembly plant, which produces F-650 and F-750 commercial trucks, will get a significant upgrade in order to build aluminum-bodied 2017 F-350, F-450 and F-550 chassis-cab models.

The Ohio Assembly Plant has been operating since 1974, producing everything from E-Series vans to compact SUVs to minivans. Now it will be a dedicated commercial-vehicle production facility with both medium- and light-duty chassis cabs rolling off the line. This modification to the Ohio plant will free up the Kentucky Truck Plant to produce more personal-use F-250, F-350 and F-450 Super Duty models.

The all-new 2017 Ford Super Duty will be available this fall and will offer a stronger frame, bigger brakes and axles, and significant weight savings due to the switch to aluminum exterior body panels. Unlike the standard Super Duty models, chassis-cab models have a fully boxed frame only to the end of the cab, then a flat, open C-channel to make make it easier for aftermarket body builders to run hydraulics and additional electrical wiring for customers' specific work needs. All chassis-cab Super Dutys will have a choice of three engines:the 6.2-liter gas V-8, the 6.8-liter gas V-10 and 6.7-liter diesel V-8.

Manufacturer images

Super Duty Chassis Cab 1 II

Comments (168) in Ford, Ford F-350, Ford F-450, Ford F-550


Comments

Nicely done, now thats military grade Number 1 for 39 years F series!


Posted by: Nitro | Jan 27, 2016 8:32:49 AM


Ford is still making the 6.8 V10, geez! Ford stop holding on to your mistakes. But I digress, just add a couple turbo's, that will make it go, at least a couple thousand miles and BANG!


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 8:37:36 AM


Man that is one ugly over priced piece of sad s##t truck.


Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 27, 2016 8:38:04 AM


PUTC,

johnny doe should not be allowed to post these kinds of comments here.


Posted by: Scott N. | Jan 27, 2016 9:44:57 AM


Good news for Ohio.

Why are they still making the 6.8 V10? It held up well besides the spark plug issue. But I always felt it was light in power for its size. Trying to find a used one (since a 6.0 is the kiss of death) that isn't completely wore out is very hard. It wasn't really common and the ones that were bought were used hard and have crazy miles on them. I ended up settling for 3V 5.4 someone else already went through the plug issue with. Its fine for me since I don't do any serious towing.

It seems like the 6.2 V8 is a more than adequate replacement for the V10.


Posted by: Clint | Jan 27, 2016 9:49:18 AM


Leave to the 2 typical GM losers to post negative again. Funny why johnny welfare doe is posting though. This anew article on a work truck. Something he knows nothing about or work. I guess he thinks waiting in line for food stamps is work.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 9:50:37 AM


@ SCott N, PUTC could care less.....


Posted by: Nitro | Jan 27, 2016 9:50:39 AM


Clint, I'm not sure if the 6.2L would be a good replacement for the 6.8L. While on paper the 6.2L is a stronger running engine the 6.8L has a great working powerband. Makes it perfect for 30K GCVW motorhomes, F650 and 750. It is not uncommon to see the 6.8L with 300k or more with 15K-20k engine hours. They are not the fastest engine around but they work hard and reliably. They are more and more commonly found in E Series ambulances and utility trucks.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 10:05:45 AM


If you think about it these gm idiots are one in the same. Im just so glad that its gm's problem cause it sure gives them a very bad name Good for gm..


Posted by: Truck crazy. | Jan 27, 2016 10:48:50 AM


The Ford clown kids can't stand to hear the truth to funny.


Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 27, 2016 11:11:18 AM


The Ford clown kids can't stand to hear the truth to funny.


Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 27, 2016 11:11:20 AM


This is another part of the way Ford is eliminating the horrendous downtime they experienced converting for the aluminum F-150. The Kentucky plant has been slowly adding the needed body/paint shop upgrades, and moving the C&Cs to Avon Lake means the new assembly line will be ready to go in late summer when 2017 production would normally begin.

FCA is doing something similar for the next Ram. The Chrysler 200 will leave Sterling Heights (for Mexico) and the plant undergo a complete conversion in time for the new Ram 1500. Then, the Warren plant where the Ram 1500 is currently made will undergo conversion for the Grand Cherokee, new Grand Wagoneer, and Durango SUVs to give Jefferson extra capacity for those models.


Posted by: RoadTrip | Jan 27, 2016 11:18:39 AM


FORD
LOVE!


Posted by: redbloodedxy | Jan 27, 2016 11:19:40 AM


LMAO - agreed. At one time the 6.8 gasser had similar power and performance of diesel engines.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:20:45 AM


LMAO - agreed. At one time the 6.8 gasser had similar power and performance of diesel engines.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:20:56 AM


Nitro - greed. PUTC acts like they want to commit suicide by allowing uncontrolled blogs. The blogs were much better when Mike Levine owned PUTC. Someone out there is extremely lazy or just does not give a sh!t.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:22:31 AM


Nitro - ha ha looks like I lost an "a" meant to say agreed. The frequent 'a' holes must of consumed it ;)


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:23:30 AM


I don't know what to think of the 6.8 i know 2 people that had them, one in a 2004 f350 4x4 and the other a 200? f450. the f350 has 250k on it a the guy even plowed a night with the oil light on because his ford cousin said it was a sending unit and it was out of oil. (It has always leaked allot but runs good)
The f450 was owned by the comp i plow for and was well maint. and the motor went bang at 70k.


Posted by: SKEETER | Jan 27, 2016 11:47:29 AM


"Ford is still making the 6.8 V10, geez! Ford stop holding on to your mistakes. But I digress, just add a couple turbo's, that will make it go, at least a couple thousand miles and BANG!"

The only opinions that matter are those where people are willing to back them up with action. I just sold a 10 year old V10 simply because I don't need it anymore and I had people competing for it. I got a lot more money for it than I expected. One guy was willing to drive 6 hours to get it and pay my asking price based just on pictures but he was too late. It appears to me that a lot of people out there think that it is a great engine.


Posted by: Walt | Jan 27, 2016 11:51:51 AM


I know half a dozen people who have run the V10 and have nothing but good things to say about them. It's a workhorse engine, not well suited to the daily commuter gang.


Posted by: Gom | Jan 27, 2016 12:13:51 PM


I do like the "real truck" SuperDuty at the top.

It is a work truck! Finally PUTC has a picture of a work truck and not some CUV with a bed out the back!

As for the V10, My view is if you require such a huge engine use a diesel. It might be a reliable engine, but it's FE would be extreme compared to a diesel.

The only reason the V10 is used is because of the difference in FE regulations with vehicles over 8 500lbs.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 12:31:23 PM


the V10 is a solid motor, I have no issue with mine other than an Alternator and a MAF sensor. I am happy with mine.

TRVLLS being TRVLLS.

Happy Wednesday.


Posted by: Frank | Jan 27, 2016 12:36:36 PM


the V10 is a solid motor, I have no issue with mine other than an Alternator and a MAF sensor. I am happy with mine.

TRVLLS being TRVLLS.

Happy Wednesday.


Posted by: Frank | Jan 27, 2016 12:36:36 PM


Frank,
So was the flat head Briggs and Strattons considered by many.

But, the OHV Hondas had them for breakfast.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 12:41:58 PM


@BAFO,

I don't get your point, my old 99 has 150K + miles and suits my needs fine, I tow a trailer with ATVs and haul Tents etc....the motor has been steller, but wtf would you know, you drive a friggin el camino. GTFO


Posted by: Frank | Jan 27, 2016 12:46:09 PM


@BAFO,

I don't get your point, my old 99 has 150K + miles and suits my needs fine, I tow a trailer with ATVs and haul Tents etc....the motor has been steller, but wtf would you know, you drive a friggin el camino. GTFO


Posted by: Frank | Jan 27, 2016 12:46:10 PM


As for the V10, My view is if you require such a huge engine use a diesel. It might be a reliable engine, but it's FE would be extreme compared to a diesel.

The only reason the V10 is used is because of the difference in FE regulations with vehicles over 8 500lbs.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 12:31:23 PM

This is another area where your ignorance is appearant about the functions of gas over diesel. Modern emissions diesels are not well suited for applications like utility trucks. They can high idle all day long operating a crane or other equipment. Between the need to have a DEF and regeneration this is problematic. Ambulance use and emergency equipment use also posses issues. These guys run then hard and shut them off. They hardly every get the long runs needed for the emissions. Unfortunately larger trucks need the power of diesel and this is where you see issues of forced shut down. A Diesel is not the answer to everything.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 12:56:15 PM


Oh, and do we need to discuss coking issues with turbos, egr coolers, Cummins intake grid heaters from long idle times and not being able to reach full exhaust temps.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 12:59:07 PM


Frank,
It sounds like your pickup is a lifestyle enhancer, not a work truck.

Please read my comment.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:04:17 PM


@ Walt: I am happy that your experience with Ford's V10 ended so well. My experience with the V10 had them running along side GM 6.0 liter V8 doing the exact type of work. Admittedly, the Ford handled the weight carrying better but the V10 life span was less than 1/2 of the 6.0 liter. Oh, the line about the turbos and BANG was hypothetical.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 1:05:25 PM


LAMO, aka DenverMike,
One with your anti diesel rhetoric again?

Hmmm .............. maybe you should go out and own a diesel, I'd say if you are a V8 person there is a good chance you'll love the torque, real usable torque that doesn't chew through fuel.

This is why real trucks use diesel.

As for your overstated comments regarding diesel drawbacks, well some of what you state does occur. But you comment is akin to stating that owning a pickup you will be involved in a vehicle accident, because you've seen evidence of pickups involved in accidents.

Nice try.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:07:16 PM


@BAFO,

Point taken, don't need a diesel, phuuuuck you're stooopid


Posted by: Frank | Jan 27, 2016 1:07:27 PM


Holy cow BARFO yout are about as dumb as GMSRGREAT with the pure garbage he states. I already stated a diesel is needed in some cases and is the only option. But a gasser does have some strong benefits in certain work vehicles. You are so anti Ford and gasser why are you even here. Maybe you should go out and drive some of the stuff I have full access to before you spout off. Fyi that is GM 4.8L 6.0L, 8.1, Ford 6.7L, 6.2L. 5.4L, 6.8L , International DT466, Cummins 6.7L. And this includes truck and trailer at 48K lbs.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 1:22:43 PM


Oh, almost forgot the GM 6.6L


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 1:23:11 PM


Frank,
Did I say "Frank go out and buy a diesel"?

Hmmm ..............


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:26:15 PM


LAMO,
I do agree pickup trucks are involved in motor vehicle accidents. But not all pickups or even the majority.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:27:12 PM


BARFO, your analogy does not even hold water. If you know a certain engine does not work well under certain applications and another does, then why would you not opt for that? Now your just trying to be stupid.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 1:36:10 PM


LAMO,
Okay,

Maybe you'll be able to relate to this one.

Everyone has stubbed their toe, but does has every toe been stubbed?

Toe stubbing does occur, I don't disagree with you.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:44:37 PM


Here is another for you BARFO. What happens to a diesel engine idling all day long during the middle of winter? Even idling at 1100 rpm.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 1:45:46 PM


Maybe you'll be able to relate to this one.

Everyone has stubbed their toe, but does has every toe been stubbed?

Toe stubbing does occur, I don't disagree with you.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:44:37 PM

BARFO, this again points out your ignorance. You have 2 choices.

1 keep stubbing your toe.
2 put on a pair of shoes.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 1:50:55 PM


BARFO, please stick with what you know. Horse floats during gay pride week


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 1:53:37 PM


@big al from AHHHHHsss

If ever 'fertilizer' (human excretion) were sold by the POUND, you would take 1st prize for highest $ paid. You just don't get it do you? You have to give your 1 cent's worth on every topic...when really, if I were you, I would keep your DUMB opinions to yourself. Your mouth and EGO is just like your sign in name...'BIG'


Posted by: Mr. Knowledge | Jan 27, 2016 2:32:33 PM


@LMAO

BARFO does NOT need to try to be 'stupid', he IS 'stupid'!


Posted by: Tundra Bob | Jan 27, 2016 2:36:38 PM


The V10 is being made because the motorhomes built on F450+ chassis use it. Nothing more.


Posted by: dale milner | Jan 27, 2016 2:39:05 PM


The V10 is being made because the motorhomes built on F450+ chassis use it. Nothing more.


Posted by: dale milner | Jan 27, 2016 2:39:05 PM

Not sure what you include with the + but these all have the V10.. F53, F59, F650, F750, F450 chassis cab, F550 chassis cab.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 3:29:10 PM


Just so you know, GM never made a good V10 because our V8s are so good. We figured that we didn't need the extra two cylinders to keep up with the competition. Why do you think we put the 6.0 powerhouse in all of our gas HD trucks. Even though we come in last place in every heavy duty competition, we still love it enough to keep buying them. GM customers are either loyal or stupid.


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 27, 2016 4:07:33 PM


Ford is still making the 6.8 V10, geez! Ford stop holding on to your mistakes. But I digress, just add a couple turbo's, that will make it go, at least a couple thousand miles and BANG!

Posted by: GMSRGREAT

This is why Ford puts a V10 in its trucks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo059un-Cg0

Its blowing a cummins diesel away you stupid fool! BTW how's your wife?


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 27, 2016 4:12:28 PM


@GMSRGREAT your a POS raise your right hand up stare hard at it . now smash into face .... I had a 2006 F250 V10 4x4 crewcab 4.10 55,000 trouble free hard working miles pulled well great daily driver as well . only thing was MPG sucked but its a truck .... GM 6.0 is a you mean POS ... we have a few in our fleet at the BNSF and there JUNK ....

@ Big Al from Oz Really ? at the time I bought mine the diesel option was 5,000 more and also diesel was heading towards 5 bucks a gallon so hell no i wouldn't get a diesel .


Posted by: cory | Jan 27, 2016 4:40:54 PM

@GMSRGREAT your a POS raise your right hand up stare hard at it . now smash into face .... I had a 2006 F250 V10 4x4 crewcab 4.10 55,000 trouble free hard working miles pulled well great daily driver as well . only thing was MPG sucked but its a truck .... GM 6.0 is a you mean POS ... we have a few in our fleet at the BNSF and there JUNK ....


Posted by: cory | Jan 27, 2016 4:40:54 PM

FYI GMSRNOTSOGREAT is a GM trollbot. He does not have a clue about anything let alone trucks. You can take his post with a grain of salt because he is pure BS. Not a clue about trucks let alone working trucks.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 27, 2016 5:01:09 PM


I have never heard anything negative about the V-10 except it uses a lot of gas. As for durability it has that.


Posted by: Jeff S | Jan 27, 2016 5:14:05 PM


Next »


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


Working...

Working...


Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments


Browse News By:


Category

Aftermarket


Auto Shows


Awards


Compact/Midsize


Custom Trucks


Diesels


Fuel Economy


Full-Size


Heavy-Duty


Hybrids


Interiors


Light-Duty


New Trucks


Powertrains


Pricing


Safety


Spy Photos


Sources Say


Towing and Hauling


Manufacturer

Truck Shopping Tools
Search for New & Used
Find a Dealer
See Hottest Truck Deals
List your Truck for Sale
Read Expert Reviews
Review Your Own Truck


Recent Posts
Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
GMC Adds All Terrain X to Sierra 1500 Lineup
NHTSA Expands Takata Airbag Recall
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing Acceleration
Read recent stories
Read older stories


Latest User Comments
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Subscribe

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


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:27:17 PM

Powered by Cars.com.

Home
Buy or Sell a Truck
Reviews
News
Special Reports

Search

Search PickupTrucks:

Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview

Posted by Mark Williams | January 25, 2016

Group Still 1 II

By Mark Williams, PickupTrucks.com

After two years of conducting unjudged Annual Physicals, we know pickup truck shoppers want our perspective on which trucks are best for them. Enter the Texas Truck Showdown. For its inaugural year we focused on two flavors of light-duty trucks: those with maximum towing ability and those that maximize mpgs.

For this max towing Showdown, we pushed the manufacturers to send us their best all-around half-ton pickups set up with their best towing option packages and features to see how they perform. Our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: MPG will publish in early February.

Our request here was simple: We asked each half-ton truckmaker to send us a two-wheel drive (to save some weight) with a crew cab to represent the heart of the market. Each player would need to be equipped with whatever max-tow package and features might be needed for multiple towing exercises, and it needed to be packaged as close to $51,000 as possible. What we got from the manufacturers was a group of test pickups close in size, capability and price, but each one displayed different personality traits when pushed in head-to-head competition.

Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test.

These are the tests we put our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing competitors through:
•We track-tested (acceleration and braking) all the players at the Royal Purple Raceway outside of Houston, both empty and loaded with 1,750 pounds of payload. We loaded the exact same weight into each pickup to better compare and measure them against one another.
•We also ran each of these pickups on a 170-mile fuel-mileage route in and around Houston to get a clearer idea of how much compromise their towing packages surrendered when driven empty and how they performed driving the exact same route towing a 10,100-pound 18-foot Load Trail flatbed trailer.
•We stopped by EngineLogics to run each of our test trucks on the Mustang MD250 chassis dyno to see how the engines compared using the same test equipment on the same day; all were tested by the same technician.
•Our judges drove each pickup in multiple back-to-back settings while transporting the trucks to and from the racetrack, the hotel, the dyno shop and various photo shoot locations.
•Finally, we did sound testing in each vehicle over the same stretch of Interstate 10 (east of Houston) at idle and at 60 mph in top gear with the windows rolled up, and the air conditioning and fan off.

The Contenders

2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LTZ (redesigned for 2016)

Chevy front 1 II

Our Deep Ocean Blue Metallic two-wheel-drive crew cab came to us with a $51,010 price tag (all prices include destination fee) that included the athletic 5.3-liter overhead valve V-8 and eight-speed automatic transmission (Chevy sent us a competitor with the smaller V-8, while GMC sent the 6.2-liter V-8 at an additional cost). Although $51,000 might sound like a lot of money, the Silverado 1500 is basically a well-equipped middle-of-the road player in this segment with all the proper equipment for heavier towing and payload hauling. The LTZ Plus Package (a $1,165 option) added power adjustable pedals, a Bose audio system, front and rear park assist, and a heated steering wheel. Our test truck also had 20-inch chrome wheels ($1,495), chrome side steps ($700), heated and vented leather front seats ($650), a leather wireless charging console ($510), spray-in bedliner ($475), special paint color ($395), towing mirrors ($230) and movable upper tie-downs ($60). The Max Trailering Package ($925) added a bigger and stronger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and an integrated brake controller inside the truck. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-8 truck are 16/22/18 mpg city/highway/combined. The Silverado 1500 is a strong mainstream pickup choice that delivers a lot of value for your dollar.

Chevy Engine 1 II

1 Chevy Silverado Crew 5.3 (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ford F-150 Lariat (all new in 2015)

Ford F-150 front 1 II

Our two-wheel-drive Shadow Black Ford F-150 SuperCrew Lariat had a final price of $50,270 and came equipped with the twin-turbo 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost engine ($1,200) and six-speed automatic transmission. Equipment Group 501A ($1,500) includes a remote start system, 360-degree blind spot detection, backup sensors, LED spotlights in the side-view mirrors and an extra 110-volt, 400-watt outlet. Our test truck also had the Lariat Chrome Appearance Package ($1,695), leather bucket seats and console ($650), and a bed tailgate step ($375). The Max Trailer Tow Package ($1,195) includes an integrated trailer brake controller, Pro Trailer Backup Assist, 3.55:1 axle gears and a GVWR up to 6,800 pounds. Although unrelated to towing, this Ford also came with voice-activated navigation for $795. Finally, the optional larger 36-gallon fuel tank ($395) allowed us to tow heavy loads without stopping for fuel every 200 miles. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-6 truck are 17/24/20 mpg. The F-150 is the No. 1-selling pickup in the segment because it offers a wide variety of options and features that many buyers seem to want.

Ford Engine 1 II

2 Ford F-150 Crew 3A (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ford F-150 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT (redesigned for 2016)

GMC Sierra front 1 II

Our Iridium Metallic two-wheel-drive GMC Sierra 1500 SLT crew cab came equipped with the bigger of GM's two V-8 options. The EcoTec3 6.2-liter V-8 is mated to the factory eight-speed automatic transmission for a final sticker price of $53,235, making it the most expensive player in our test. The priciest option was the more powerful V-8 engine ($2,495) rated at 420 horsepower and 460 pounds-feet of torque. The Sierra also came with 20-inch polished aluminum wheels ($895), chrome side steps ($700), leather bucket seats and console with additional USB ports and wireless phone charging ($510), high-performance LED headlights ($500), Intellilink with a color 8-inch touch-screen ($495), a spray-in bedliner ($475), a premium paint color ($395) and special chrome power side-view mirrors ($230). The GMC also had the Max Trailering Package ($925) providing a heavier-duty and larger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and the integrated trailer brake controller. Both GM trucks equipped with the max-trailering option have a GVWR of 7,400 pounds. EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/21/17 mpg. The GMC Sierra 1500 SLT, especially when equipped with the big V-8, is the hot rod of the segment, but does it with style.

GMC Engine 1 II

3 GMC Sierra Crew 6.2 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 GMC Sierra 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn (all new in 2013)

Ram 1500 front 1 II

Our Bright Silver Metallic crew-cab Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn came to us in the requested two-wheel-drive configuration with the 5.7-liter V-8 Hemi and eight-speed automatic transmission, finishing with a bottom-line price of $50,805. Because the Laramie Longhorn trim level comes well-equipped at a starting price of $49,980, there was not much need for optional equipment. Standard equipment included in this top trim level are 20-inch polished aluminum wheels with silver inserts, halogen projector headlamps, heated and ventilated leather seats and console, under-seat rear storage, power adjustable pedals, power 10-way driver's seat and six-way passenger seat, Alpine nine-speaker and subwoofer sound system, 8.4-inch nav touch-screen with Uconnect and a 32-gallon fuel tank. The options it came with merely added to the Longhorn's towing capability; it comes standard with a Class IV trailer hitch. Add-ons included towing mirrors (with swing-up capability) and an integrated trailer brake controller ($380), better-performing 3.92:1 axle gears ($75) and a limited-slip differential ($370). The EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/22/17 mpg. It's worth noting this is Ram's top-level trim package, which it is able to provide under our price ceiling; none of the other competitors could deliver their top trim level in this price range — although Toyota came close.

Ram Hemi Engine 1 II

4 Ram 1500 Crew 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ram 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Toyota Tundra 1794 Edition (all new in 2014)

Toyota Tundra front 1 II

Our Sunset Bronze Toyota Tundra came to us with its top-level trim, the 1794 Edition, at $52,722. Unfortunately, it also came to us with a 4x4 driveline and the TRD Off-Road Package. Although not the priciest truck in this test (that was the GMC), we did consider not allowing the Tundra into the Showdown because of the driveline disparity; however, in the name of delivering to our readers as much comparative data as possible, we decided to test it at the expense of the relatively small weight and payload penalty. We also discovered that the TRD option ($100) offered softer springs and shocks with a few other pricier styling options. Additional options on our test truck included the front-end paint protection film ($395), chrome Tundra tailgate inserts ($99), rubber bed mats ($139), a TRD performance air filter ($75), a center console storage tray ($85), a spare tire lock ($75) and alloy wheel tire locks ($85). The only other add-ons were the TRD dual exhaust ($1,100) and TRD rear anti-sway bar ($299), which probably helped with power output and trailering stability, respectively. As part of the well-equipped aspect of the 1794 Edition, our Tundra came standard with an integrated trailer controller, trailer-sway control and a high-quality backup camera. (Without the optional equipment, the total price for the Tundra would have been $50,275.) EPA fuel-economy ratings for this truck are a segment worst at 13/17/15 mpg. The Tundra is a solid performing pickup, but it is aging quickly and other players offer more strength and style.

Toyota Tundra Engine 1 II

5 Toyota Tundra 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Toyota Tundra Monroney, click on the picture above.

Scoring the Showdown

Scoring breaks down into 20 categories, including acceleration and braking when empty and loaded, trailered and trailer-free fuel economy, engine performance (dyno), maximum payload capability, GVWR and more. Added to that are scores from our four judges in six key areas: towing performance, ride quality, value, ergonomics, visibility, and tech and entertainment. All totaled, each competitor had about 2,500 available points.

The judges for this contest included truck testers from inside the Cars.com/PickupTrucks.com family as well as truck-loving freelancer experts. Each judge was able to spend lots of time driving each combatant in several back-to-back drive routes and had time to discuss their findings with other drivers.

The Judges

Joe Bruzek — Lead driver and Cars.com's senior road test editor, Bruzek has one of the fastest reaction times you'll ever see.
Bruce Smith — A longtime automotive enthusiast, Smith is skilled in the art of towing, four-wheeling, and wide-mouth bass and walleye fishing.
Kent Sundling — Known to the world as Mr. Truck, if it has a trailer or pickup bed, it's likely Sundling has driven it over the Rocky Mountains.
Mark Williams — Veteran automotive journalist and editor of PickupTrucks.com, Williams sometimes wakes up at night with new comparison test ideas.

To see the comparison specs of these pickups, click on our What You Get chart below.

TTS16_Tow_WYG_Final2

Cars.com photos by Evan Sears and Angela Conners

Overview | Acceleration | Braking | Mileage | Results

Two Truck Towing 1 II


Comments (51) in 2016 Texas Truck Showdown, Challenges


Comments

Leave it to Toyota to once again shoot themselves in the foot. Have they learned nothing from the TRD OffRoad Tacoma getting sand kicked in its face in no small part from OR biased tires.


Posted by: Mr Knowitall | Jan 25, 2016 9:23:18 AM


I know right. Instead of sending a limited which is lighter and with tow mirrors, toyota chose to send a heavy arse pig with low tow and payload. It's no wonder toyota can't break into the truck market. Suits them well to lose.


Posted by: uh huh | Jan 25, 2016 9:45:08 AM


Why didn't ford provide a truck with 3.73 gears?


Posted by: Kurt K | Jan 25, 2016 10:22:02 AM


Let one thumb their nose at the rules and someone will cry foul. Should have sent Toyota packing


Posted by: roadram | Jan 25, 2016 10:32:40 AM


Toyota knows they wouldn't win anyways, so if they send something different people can always wonder "what if they sent xxxx model??"


Posted by: Mike | Jan 25, 2016 11:21:19 AM


Mark - - -

"Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test."

Good Judgment! An excellent way to both include and not include this new and interesting vehicle.

=================

Posted by: NMGOM | Jan 25, 2016 12:08:02 PM


Mark and his team is fantastic! Everyone was complaining over the weekend about the lack of the XD (despite the reasons Mark listed above...and most readers recognize that logic). But Mark et al. saw that coming a mile away and the XD will be present to some degree.


Posted by: Tim | Jan 25, 2016 12:13:23 PM


It will be nice to see how the XD fared. I hope the GM and F150 blows it away for no other reason than to close biGal's pie hole.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 12:28:13 PM


notice the GM trucks both beat their sticker rated fuel economy, by quite a bit...the other manufacturers all got worse, gm got better.


Posted by: Wolfgang | Jan 25, 2016 12:38:07 PM


I like it. The idea of maxing out your towing or hauling and haul butt 0-60. I don't know about you, but when I tow I drive as fast as I can 0-60. Interesting read about the Ram. It shows it squatting really well. My last Hemi did the same thing. My 3D does not squat near as bad. I'm talking half a cord of Oak in my truck barely moved. My friends Hemi carrying the other half cord was down bad. Wonder why that is?


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:57:33 PM


Of course the 6.2L won. Anyone could see that coming. Newest powertrain on the GMC to promote that brand. Better keep the Chevy with the weaker powertrain so people could see the difference in performance. Good move GM.


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:59:09 PM


After reading all of these articles on the testing I have my list of preferences for these pickups.

1. Chev Silverado; it looks great and is packed with value. From the testing results it's overall performance from the testing is quite good.

2. The Ram (yes, don't know why); the Ram as the article stated is the premium Ram pickup. You can't really option it up. Since most of the time it's driven around empty, who cares how it handles 10 000lbs. So long as I'm comfortable going to Home Depot.

3. GMC Sierra; It's the best looking pick of the bunch; It sort of has the best figures all round. But as I have stated many times I don't buy on magazine data or sell on magazine data.

4. F-150; What worries me is how well will it's FE be with a fully enclosed trailer? Well, Ford, you had an opportunity to produce a game changer. You failed.

But, when is all said and one the F-150 is a very good pickup, but only competitive with older and even to some degree outdated vehicles. Pull your socks up Ford! You can do it.

5. Toyota; What a dismal vehicle. This vehicle is left behind. Wasn't this vehicle designed when sliced bread was invented?

Toyota can only rely on it's revering supporters for so long. They will leave you if you don't do better.

.......................................................................................

It will be interesting to see how the 1/2 ton Titan will perform as well as the XD. I don't suspect the XD will win any of the drag racing components of the testing.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 2:41:00 PM


Interesting and puts to rest several things......

First , the GM trucks are just flat out as good or better than the new all alum. twin turbo Ford is and is steel, less complex, etc. and can provide as good or better mileage doing it.

Second, the 5.3L is a good engine with the 8 spd it equals or beats everything out there from Ram and Toyota and is a great choice for the majority of GM buyers. Wonder how the 2.7l EB would have done , its strong as well.

Third, the weight savings didnt really help the Ford much .....gas mileage wasnt as good as the simpler GM v8 engines (insnt that supposed to be the whole point behind the EB?), truck couldnt hook up as well in back , didnt feel as stable etc.

Would be nice to have a comparative dyno sheet to see not just numbers......did I miss it?

The diesel Nissan wont even be close with these loads IMHO.


Posted by: Shriker | Jan 25, 2016 2:50:45 PM


Shirker,
You hit the nail on the head with the aluminium wunder trux from Ford.

I do recall for a considerable time after making the announcement that the F-150 will be moving toward aluminium Ford nearly declared a National Holiday regarding the FE advantages of moving to aluminum.

Well, as we have all witnessed Ford once Ford realised that the FE advantages were really only a 1mpg advantaged it moved to load and tow.

Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind.

If you are going to seriously tow 5 tons on a regular basis you will not buy anyone of these pickups tested.

Judging by how the standards the manufacturers are using you would want to buy a pickup that is rated to tow at least 20 000lbs and with a diesel.

To move 8 tons of combined mass around why would you want a gasoline engine?

Ford can do better, maybe Ford will, but by that time it's competitors will again have outstripped Ford. The only one that might not is Ram because FCA isn't flushed with money.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 3:02:24 PM


@ Shriker

The reason the GM trucks perform so well, even the 5.3 is because in 2014 all three of their engines went DI. This provides more power and greater FE. I haven't heard much about repairs for these engines, but the newest generation of anything has to work out kinks. GM is known to produce reliable power plants, even if the Ford guys knock'em for being old tech.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/02/pros-and-cons-of-direct-injection-engines/index.htm


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 3:11:07 PM


Shriker - Ford did need to shed some weight. They let their PR over-hype MPG. At least now they are more accurately stating cargo gains over mpg. Ford now offers close to 2k cargo across all of their 1/2 ton crewcab trucks (with the exception of the Limited at 1450). there are those that will say that cargo does not matter but in a crewcab truck you can eat up 500-1000 lbs of capacity with passengers and their associated paraphernalia.

GM at least offers the 7600 gvw option. It is as rare as the 6.2 engine unfortunately. I'd consider a Chevy if I could find a mid-level spec truck with 7600 gvw, max tow and 6.2. This test proves that there isn't much point to buying a 5.3 other than not needing premium gas.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:29:58 PM


Shriker - agree on the Nissan XD. It can tow but not haul. 1500-2000lbs depending on trim level is too poor for a truck that is as big and heavy as it is.

TFL truck found it didn't go up a hill much faster than the 5.0. So that would mean that it probably is on par with the 5.3. Hardly worth the price premium.

as BARFo has pointed out , "Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind."

His statement indicates that there is zero business case for buying one to do the work of a 1/2 ton.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:35:22 PM


I wonder how people attempt to equate empty mass with payload?

Is it because of Frod and it alumnium wunder trux?

Does it matter the payload to vehicle weight?

One would think a heavier vehicle in comparison to it's payload has an advantage in ride comfort. Also with towing it is far better to have increased mass, especially the difference between say for arguments sake an XD Titan and a aluminium F-150, 2.7 EcoThirst or better still the Frod tested in this article with the 3.5.

Technically if a vehicle can have a 1 500lb load it should be able to tow 15 000lbs.

Hmmm .......................... some comments denigrating the Titans payload might be Frod biased and the claims are made one of those paid website product bullsh!tters. These types have no real allegiance. They are just talk with little knowledge and substance.

What's your opinion BC Mike ........ oops I mean Lou?


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 6:17:22 PM


Hey there BARFO. What was all that BS you were spewing about the 3.5L being winded towing 10K and would be under 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the all knowing. Is PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should write another email to Mark.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:34:03 PM


Many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yOlvL37680


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:52:08 PM


Hey there military grade BARFO. What was all that military grade BS you were military grade spewing about the military grade 3.5L being military grade winded towing military grade 10K and would be under military grade 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the military grade all knowing. Is military grade PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should military grade write another email to military grade Mark.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:54:15 PM


So did the Silverado have 3.42's or 3.73's. The article and window sticker mention 3.42's, but they listed it as having the max tow rating of the 5.3 NHT equipped with 3.73's, not the 3.42 axle ratio.

Max Conventional Trailering
5.3 w/ 3.42's 4WD CCSB - 9,200 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 4WD CCSB- 10,900 lb
5.3 w/ 3.42's 2WD CCSB- 9,400 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 2WD CCSB- 11,100 lb


Posted by: GMFordGuy | Jan 25, 2016 7:31:50 PM


Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.


Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.
Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

LOL what are you talking bout. Ford didn't even win one event, and barely came in second on a few LMAO!


Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 25, 2016 10:55:56 PM


It's comments like yours that embodies what's going wrong with the F150. They abandoned the fuel economy angle, market non-existant "class-leading payload" trucks that sag like a Fiat, and emphasize 0-60 times instead of the far more important TRUCK capabilites. They send a tow-package equipped truck that sags when hooked up to a trailer, gets twitchy on the highway while towing, shows up rolling on horrible eco passenger car tires, and despite a 2250 pound weight advantage, can't stop any better than an unloaded cheby. The new F150 is a military grade failure. Looks I won't be trading in my 2012 5.0 Screw anytime soon.


Posted by: phallacy | Jan 25, 2016 11:05:46 PM


Did the RAM have the Air Suspension option? It looks like it did not. If not, I wonder if Air Suspension would have materially improved the RAM's towing squat and handling. Past testers have raved about the towing handling using RAM's Air Suspension option. It would be interesting if that was still true towing this maximum load.


Posted by: MassMike | Jan 26, 2016 8:42:27 AM


Its hilarious reading some of the drivel typed on here.

Posted by: DriveAnyting | Jan 26, 2016 9:02:20 AM


MassMike - nope. the air ride wouldn't have saved the Ram. This is a quote from the last 1/2 ton shootout:

"where the Ram lost most of its points was in its limited payload, braking numbers and the ride quality of the air suspension when towing or loaded."

FCA wants you to buy a HD for anything other than SUV with a balcony duties.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 12:05:51 PM


I am so happy that I have a 2014 F150 4X4 Screw 157 WB with the Raptor 6.2 which comes as a Max Tow PKG. with 3:73 Final Drive. It's heavy, but pulls strong! This is rear configuration that I will keep forever!


Posted by: Kyle | Jan 26, 2016 12:17:13 PM


Kyle,
Ram/FCA is like the other pickup manufacturers, they are no different in the end.

75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement. This is valid for Frod, GM, Ram, Nissan and Toyota. Honda is a given.

This is why the 1/2 to is and aluminium Ford EcoThirst, GM twins or a steel, diesel Ram ar the biggest movers are the mid to high end models.

I'd even bet that most any one of the pickups sold that were tested in this latest towing "shootout" would never tow more than a few tons, at best a couple of tons.

This is how Ram/FCA has improved sales. Ram offered a very civilised product that appeals to the majority, except now FCA must update and improve the Ram.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:46:58 PM


^^^
Sorry, my above comment should of been addressed to massmike, not kyle.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:48:09 PM


I knew I was right. BARFO could not resist his Ford bash. Look at him go. Ecothirst, frod, towing etc. What a pitiful and predictable fool.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 3:48:48 PM


@LMAO -
The world according to BARFo..........incorrect..... the Canadian and American truck world according to BARFo:

"75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement."

Fortunately for you and I, we are in the 25%.

BARFo is firmly planted in the 75%. That does explain his view of trucks.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 4:08:17 PM


BAFO uses his truck to haul a fishing pole and beer. He once saw a Tundra at a mall in Jersey. That explains his view on trucks.


Posted by: Jeff | Jan 26, 2016 4:17:52 PM


Jeff - he must haul a lot of beer ;)


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 5:18:45 PM


Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.

Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM


Oh wait...I know how she is!


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM


Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM

Oh wait...I know how she is!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM


Your Mom is doing just fine!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:50:15 PM


I see school let out. I am surprised you want to ask about me "spanking" your Mom. That is rather weird but you also like to watch your sister in the shower so it is understood.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:51:35 PM


@LMAO - "I see school let out..."

You like hanging around school yards...you sick freak!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Y6UKMp8Qw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30AbH74uxdU


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:41:07 PM


Gents, Excellent set of articles. Thank you


Posted by: Ralph | Jan 26, 2016 7:47:30 PM


Speaking about spanking am excellent set of articles...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM


I guess you are retarded. I already told you your Mom is doing just fine.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 7:58:01 PM


Speaking about doing just fine...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 9:01:34 PM


I wish LMAO would spank me


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 10:17:34 PM


"Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines."

None of the trucks had big blocks....


Posted by: ky | Jan 27, 2016 7:56:27 AM


Thanks Lou_BC and Big Al from Oz. Since the trucks were supplied by the manufacturers to show their best performance, I suspected the RAM air suspension option would not have helped and may have hurt RAM's performance for this test. Thanks for the reference to the past test to prove that fact. The reviews that raved about the RAM air suspension during towing were for lighter loads, though the loads may be more realistic for most 1/2 ton owners. I agree the current popularity and increased production of trucks is due to targeting the suburban user with nicer rides and plusher interiors. Gone are the fantastically satisfying teeth loosening ride and efficient "hose it out" interior of my '70 Blazer, which sadly looses 20 lbs every time I slam the door.


Posted by: MassMike | Jan 27, 2016 8:41:37 AM


MassMike - the "air ride" on the Ram 1500 is actually a closed system using nitrogen. I've heard of incidences of having to get them recharged. I've also heard of overheating on rough roads. I have seen one air-ride Ram sitting behind the local dealership looking like a torpedoed ship about to topple over.

One thing people have to watch with crewcab trucks are the load ratings. A 5-6 passenger cabin full of family and/or adults can consume 1/2 to 3/4's of your cargo ratings. Adding even a light trailer can max the truck out.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:45:43 AM


Lou_BC,
Most any US 1/2 ton is not one of those new 3 000lb payload F-150s.

Most any US pickup as Massmike pointed out are CUVs for the Suburbs.

Why can't you get this through your head.

Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Just because a vehicle will tow a squillion pounds doesn't necessarily mean the person buying will ever use that capability.

Why don't you denegrate all US pickups for their overall lacklustre payload performance.

Have a look at the most popular payload class within the 1/2 ton pickups. I'd bet you'll find that there are far more Frod buyers that I would be concerned about regarding the payload/tow argument you go on ranting about.

I do believe you are completely disconnected from reality with the use of the NA pickup.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM


Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM

And by the Fiat sales numbers very few people have purchased what you say consumers want. Just because your a fiat fanbot does not mean that is what everyone wants. In fact the fiat trucks tend to be the cheapest pricedo on the market. Fiat even offers 7 and 8 year financing to try and get paymentsome lower and more people in their products. However Ford and GM remain the largest sellers of trucks and wait for it.....................................................................have leaf spring rear suspension. So what do consumers want?


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:59:35 AM


Next »


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


Working...

Working...


Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments


Browse News By:


Category

Aftermarket


Auto Shows


Awards


Compact/Midsize


Custom Trucks


Diesels


Fuel Economy


Full-Size


Heavy-Duty


Hybrids


Interiors


Light-Duty


New Trucks


Powertrains


Pricing


Safety


Spy Photos


Sources Say


Towing and Hauling


Manufacturer

Truck Shopping Tools
Search for New & Used
Find a Dealer
See Hottest Truck Deals
List your Truck for Sale
Read Expert Reviews
Review Your Own Truck


Recent Posts
Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
GMC Adds All Terrain X to Sierra 1500 Lineup
NHTSA Expands Takata Airbag Recall
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing Acceleration
Read recent stories
Read older stories


Latest User Comments
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Subscribe

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


Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Jan 28, 2016 7:29:29 PM

Well I guess its official. Rolling Can of Beer is also GMSRGREAT. Look at the last two idiotic post. One from RCoB and the other from his closet homo alias GMSRGREAT. We all knew it but now there's proof.

Posted by: DirtyMAXX | Jan 28, 2016 7:35:27 PM

@GMSRGREAT - I finally got that "LMAO Grammer" moron to lose it.

It was a blast!

Check out his post earlier today....

@LMAO - "You can tell by his terrible grammer and spelling abilities. I wish the welfare system would send some of these morons back to school so they could be educated a little better...."

please please please use this against him...it's so easy....no one is that stupid...I guess LMAO is....heeeeheeeee

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:37:45 PM

Powered by Cars.com.

Home
Buy or Sell a Truck
Reviews
News
Special Reports

Search

Search PickupTrucks:

Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview

Posted by Mark Williams | January 25, 2016

Group Still 1 II

By Mark Williams, PickupTrucks.com

After two years of conducting unjudged Annual Physicals, we know pickup truck shoppers want our perspective on which trucks are best for them. Enter the Texas Truck Showdown. For its inaugural year we focused on two flavors of light-duty trucks: those with maximum towing ability and those that maximize mpgs.

For this max towing Showdown, we pushed the manufacturers to send us their best all-around half-ton pickups set up with their best towing option packages and features to see how they perform. Our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: MPG will publish in early February.

Our request here was simple: We asked each half-ton truckmaker to send us a two-wheel drive (to save some weight) with a crew cab to represent the heart of the market. Each player would need to be equipped with whatever max-tow package and features might be needed for multiple towing exercises, and it needed to be packaged as close to $51,000 as possible. What we got from the manufacturers was a group of test pickups close in size, capability and price, but each one displayed different personality traits when pushed in head-to-head competition.

Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test.

These are the tests we put our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing competitors through:
•We track-tested (acceleration and braking) all the players at the Royal Purple Raceway outside of Houston, both empty and loaded with 1,750 pounds of payload. We loaded the exact same weight into each pickup to better compare and measure them against one another.
•We also ran each of these pickups on a 170-mile fuel-mileage route in and around Houston to get a clearer idea of how much compromise their towing packages surrendered when driven empty and how they performed driving the exact same route towing a 10,100-pound 18-foot Load Trail flatbed trailer.
•We stopped by EngineLogics to run each of our test trucks on the Mustang MD250 chassis dyno to see how the engines compared using the same test equipment on the same day; all were tested by the same technician.
•Our judges drove each pickup in multiple back-to-back settings while transporting the trucks to and from the racetrack, the hotel, the dyno shop and various photo shoot locations.
•Finally, we did sound testing in each vehicle over the same stretch of Interstate 10 (east of Houston) at idle and at 60 mph in top gear with the windows rolled up, and the air conditioning and fan off.

The Contenders

2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LTZ (redesigned for 2016)

Chevy front 1 II

Our Deep Ocean Blue Metallic two-wheel-drive crew cab came to us with a $51,010 price tag (all prices include destination fee) that included the athletic 5.3-liter overhead valve V-8 and eight-speed automatic transmission (Chevy sent us a competitor with the smaller V-8, while GMC sent the 6.2-liter V-8 at an additional cost). Although $51,000 might sound like a lot of money, the Silverado 1500 is basically a well-equipped middle-of-the road player in this segment with all the proper equipment for heavier towing and payload hauling. The LTZ Plus Package (a $1,165 option) added power adjustable pedals, a Bose audio system, front and rear park assist, and a heated steering wheel. Our test truck also had 20-inch chrome wheels ($1,495), chrome side steps ($700), heated and vented leather front seats ($650), a leather wireless charging console ($510), spray-in bedliner ($475), special paint color ($395), towing mirrors ($230) and movable upper tie-downs ($60). The Max Trailering Package ($925) added a bigger and stronger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and an integrated brake controller inside the truck. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-8 truck are 16/22/18 mpg city/highway/combined. The Silverado 1500 is a strong mainstream pickup choice that delivers a lot of value for your dollar.

Chevy Engine 1 II

1 Chevy Silverado Crew 5.3 (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ford F-150 Lariat (all new in 2015)

Ford F-150 front 1 II

Our two-wheel-drive Shadow Black Ford F-150 SuperCrew Lariat had a final price of $50,270 and came equipped with the twin-turbo 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost engine ($1,200) and six-speed automatic transmission. Equipment Group 501A ($1,500) includes a remote start system, 360-degree blind spot detection, backup sensors, LED spotlights in the side-view mirrors and an extra 110-volt, 400-watt outlet. Our test truck also had the Lariat Chrome Appearance Package ($1,695), leather bucket seats and console ($650), and a bed tailgate step ($375). The Max Trailer Tow Package ($1,195) includes an integrated trailer brake controller, Pro Trailer Backup Assist, 3.55:1 axle gears and a GVWR up to 6,800 pounds. Although unrelated to towing, this Ford also came with voice-activated navigation for $795. Finally, the optional larger 36-gallon fuel tank ($395) allowed us to tow heavy loads without stopping for fuel every 200 miles. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-6 truck are 17/24/20 mpg. The F-150 is the No. 1-selling pickup in the segment because it offers a wide variety of options and features that many buyers seem to want.

Ford Engine 1 II

2 Ford F-150 Crew 3A (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ford F-150 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT (redesigned for 2016)

GMC Sierra front 1 II

Our Iridium Metallic two-wheel-drive GMC Sierra 1500 SLT crew cab came equipped with the bigger of GM's two V-8 options. The EcoTec3 6.2-liter V-8 is mated to the factory eight-speed automatic transmission for a final sticker price of $53,235, making it the most expensive player in our test. The priciest option was the more powerful V-8 engine ($2,495) rated at 420 horsepower and 460 pounds-feet of torque. The Sierra also came with 20-inch polished aluminum wheels ($895), chrome side steps ($700), leather bucket seats and console with additional USB ports and wireless phone charging ($510), high-performance LED headlights ($500), Intellilink with a color 8-inch touch-screen ($495), a spray-in bedliner ($475), a premium paint color ($395) and special chrome power side-view mirrors ($230). The GMC also had the Max Trailering Package ($925) providing a heavier-duty and larger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and the integrated trailer brake controller. Both GM trucks equipped with the max-trailering option have a GVWR of 7,400 pounds. EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/21/17 mpg. The GMC Sierra 1500 SLT, especially when equipped with the big V-8, is the hot rod of the segment, but does it with style.

GMC Engine 1 II

3 GMC Sierra Crew 6.2 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 GMC Sierra 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn (all new in 2013)

Ram 1500 front 1 II

Our Bright Silver Metallic crew-cab Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn came to us in the requested two-wheel-drive configuration with the 5.7-liter V-8 Hemi and eight-speed automatic transmission, finishing with a bottom-line price of $50,805. Because the Laramie Longhorn trim level comes well-equipped at a starting price of $49,980, there was not much need for optional equipment. Standard equipment included in this top trim level are 20-inch polished aluminum wheels with silver inserts, halogen projector headlamps, heated and ventilated leather seats and console, under-seat rear storage, power adjustable pedals, power 10-way driver's seat and six-way passenger seat, Alpine nine-speaker and subwoofer sound system, 8.4-inch nav touch-screen with Uconnect and a 32-gallon fuel tank. The options it came with merely added to the Longhorn's towing capability; it comes standard with a Class IV trailer hitch. Add-ons included towing mirrors (with swing-up capability) and an integrated trailer brake controller ($380), better-performing 3.92:1 axle gears ($75) and a limited-slip differential ($370). The EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/22/17 mpg. It's worth noting this is Ram's top-level trim package, which it is able to provide under our price ceiling; none of the other competitors could deliver their top trim level in this price range — although Toyota came close.

Ram Hemi Engine 1 II

4 Ram 1500 Crew 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ram 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Toyota Tundra 1794 Edition (all new in 2014)

Toyota Tundra front 1 II

Our Sunset Bronze Toyota Tundra came to us with its top-level trim, the 1794 Edition, at $52,722. Unfortunately, it also came to us with a 4x4 driveline and the TRD Off-Road Package. Although not the priciest truck in this test (that was the GMC), we did consider not allowing the Tundra into the Showdown because of the driveline disparity; however, in the name of delivering to our readers as much comparative data as possible, we decided to test it at the expense of the relatively small weight and payload penalty. We also discovered that the TRD option ($100) offered softer springs and shocks with a few other pricier styling options. Additional options on our test truck included the front-end paint protection film ($395), chrome Tundra tailgate inserts ($99), rubber bed mats ($139), a TRD performance air filter ($75), a center console storage tray ($85), a spare tire lock ($75) and alloy wheel tire locks ($85). The only other add-ons were the TRD dual exhaust ($1,100) and TRD rear anti-sway bar ($299), which probably helped with power output and trailering stability, respectively. As part of the well-equipped aspect of the 1794 Edition, our Tundra came standard with an integrated trailer controller, trailer-sway control and a high-quality backup camera. (Without the optional equipment, the total price for the Tundra would have been $50,275.) EPA fuel-economy ratings for this truck are a segment worst at 13/17/15 mpg. The Tundra is a solid performing pickup, but it is aging quickly and other players offer more strength and style.

Toyota Tundra Engine 1 II

5 Toyota Tundra 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Toyota Tundra Monroney, click on the picture above.

Scoring the Showdown

Scoring breaks down into 20 categories, including acceleration and braking when empty and loaded, trailered and trailer-free fuel economy, engine performance (dyno), maximum payload capability, GVWR and more. Added to that are scores from our four judges in six key areas: towing performance, ride quality, value, ergonomics, visibility, and tech and entertainment. All totaled, each competitor had about 2,500 available points.

The judges for this contest included truck testers from inside the Cars.com/PickupTrucks.com family as well as truck-loving freelancer experts. Each judge was able to spend lots of time driving each combatant in several back-to-back drive routes and had time to discuss their findings with other drivers.

The Judges

Joe Bruzek — Lead driver and Cars.com's senior road test editor, Bruzek has one of the fastest reaction times you'll ever see.
Bruce Smith — A longtime automotive enthusiast, Smith is skilled in the art of towing, four-wheeling, and wide-mouth bass and walleye fishing.
Kent Sundling — Known to the world as Mr. Truck, if it has a trailer or pickup bed, it's likely Sundling has driven it over the Rocky Mountains.
Mark Williams — Veteran automotive journalist and editor of PickupTrucks.com, Williams sometimes wakes up at night with new comparison test ideas.

To see the comparison specs of these pickups, click on our What You Get chart below.

TTS16_Tow_WYG_Final2

Cars.com photos by Evan Sears and Angela Conners

Overview | Acceleration | Braking | Mileage | Results

Two Truck Towing 1 II


Comments (51) in 2016 Texas Truck Showdown, Challenges


Comments

Leave it to Toyota to once again shoot themselves in the foot. Have they learned nothing from the TRD OffRoad Tacoma getting sand kicked in its face in no small part from OR biased tires.


Posted by: Mr Knowitall | Jan 25, 2016 9:23:18 AM


I know right. Instead of sending a limited which is lighter and with tow mirrors, toyota chose to send a heavy arse pig with low tow and payload. It's no wonder toyota can't break into the truck market. Suits them well to lose.


Posted by: uh huh | Jan 25, 2016 9:45:08 AM


Why didn't ford provide a truck with 3.73 gears?


Posted by: Kurt K | Jan 25, 2016 10:22:02 AM


Let one thumb their nose at the rules and someone will cry foul. Should have sent Toyota packing


Posted by: roadram | Jan 25, 2016 10:32:40 AM


Toyota knows they wouldn't win anyways, so if they send something different people can always wonder "what if they sent xxxx model??"


Posted by: Mike | Jan 25, 2016 11:21:19 AM


Mark - - -

"Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test."

Good Judgment! An excellent way to both include and not include this new and interesting vehicle.

=================

Posted by: NMGOM | Jan 25, 2016 12:08:02 PM


Mark and his team is fantastic! Everyone was complaining over the weekend about the lack of the XD (despite the reasons Mark listed above...and most readers recognize that logic). But Mark et al. saw that coming a mile away and the XD will be present to some degree.


Posted by: Tim | Jan 25, 2016 12:13:23 PM


It will be nice to see how the XD fared. I hope the GM and F150 blows it away for no other reason than to close biGal's pie hole.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 12:28:13 PM


notice the GM trucks both beat their sticker rated fuel economy, by quite a bit...the other manufacturers all got worse, gm got better.


Posted by: Wolfgang | Jan 25, 2016 12:38:07 PM


I like it. The idea of maxing out your towing or hauling and haul butt 0-60. I don't know about you, but when I tow I drive as fast as I can 0-60. Interesting read about the Ram. It shows it squatting really well. My last Hemi did the same thing. My 3D does not squat near as bad. I'm talking half a cord of Oak in my truck barely moved. My friends Hemi carrying the other half cord was down bad. Wonder why that is?


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:57:33 PM


Of course the 6.2L won. Anyone could see that coming. Newest powertrain on the GMC to promote that brand. Better keep the Chevy with the weaker powertrain so people could see the difference in performance. Good move GM.


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:59:09 PM


After reading all of these articles on the testing I have my list of preferences for these pickups.

1. Chev Silverado; it looks great and is packed with value. From the testing results it's overall performance from the testing is quite good.

2. The Ram (yes, don't know why); the Ram as the article stated is the premium Ram pickup. You can't really option it up. Since most of the time it's driven around empty, who cares how it handles 10 000lbs. So long as I'm comfortable going to Home Depot.

3. GMC Sierra; It's the best looking pick of the bunch; It sort of has the best figures all round. But as I have stated many times I don't buy on magazine data or sell on magazine data.

4. F-150; What worries me is how well will it's FE be with a fully enclosed trailer? Well, Ford, you had an opportunity to produce a game changer. You failed.

But, when is all said and one the F-150 is a very good pickup, but only competitive with older and even to some degree outdated vehicles. Pull your socks up Ford! You can do it.

5. Toyota; What a dismal vehicle. This vehicle is left behind. Wasn't this vehicle designed when sliced bread was invented?

Toyota can only rely on it's revering supporters for so long. They will leave you if you don't do better.

.......................................................................................

It will be interesting to see how the 1/2 ton Titan will perform as well as the XD. I don't suspect the XD will win any of the drag racing components of the testing.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 2:41:00 PM


Interesting and puts to rest several things......

First , the GM trucks are just flat out as good or better than the new all alum. twin turbo Ford is and is steel, less complex, etc. and can provide as good or better mileage doing it.

Second, the 5.3L is a good engine with the 8 spd it equals or beats everything out there from Ram and Toyota and is a great choice for the majority of GM buyers. Wonder how the 2.7l EB would have done , its strong as well.

Third, the weight savings didnt really help the Ford much .....gas mileage wasnt as good as the simpler GM v8 engines (insnt that supposed to be the whole point behind the EB?), truck couldnt hook up as well in back , didnt feel as stable etc.

Would be nice to have a comparative dyno sheet to see not just numbers......did I miss it?

The diesel Nissan wont even be close with these loads IMHO.


Posted by: Shriker | Jan 25, 2016 2:50:45 PM


Shirker,
You hit the nail on the head with the aluminium wunder trux from Ford.

I do recall for a considerable time after making the announcement that the F-150 will be moving toward aluminium Ford nearly declared a National Holiday regarding the FE advantages of moving to aluminum.

Well, as we have all witnessed Ford once Ford realised that the FE advantages were really only a 1mpg advantaged it moved to load and tow.

Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind.

If you are going to seriously tow 5 tons on a regular basis you will not buy anyone of these pickups tested.

Judging by how the standards the manufacturers are using you would want to buy a pickup that is rated to tow at least 20 000lbs and with a diesel.

To move 8 tons of combined mass around why would you want a gasoline engine?

Ford can do better, maybe Ford will, but by that time it's competitors will again have outstripped Ford. The only one that might not is Ram because FCA isn't flushed with money.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 3:02:24 PM


@ Shriker

The reason the GM trucks perform so well, even the 5.3 is because in 2014 all three of their engines went DI. This provides more power and greater FE. I haven't heard much about repairs for these engines, but the newest generation of anything has to work out kinks. GM is known to produce reliable power plants, even if the Ford guys knock'em for being old tech.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/02/pros-and-cons-of-direct-injection-engines/index.htm


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 3:11:07 PM


Shriker - Ford did need to shed some weight. They let their PR over-hype MPG. At least now they are more accurately stating cargo gains over mpg. Ford now offers close to 2k cargo across all of their 1/2 ton crewcab trucks (with the exception of the Limited at 1450). there are those that will say that cargo does not matter but in a crewcab truck you can eat up 500-1000 lbs of capacity with passengers and their associated paraphernalia.

GM at least offers the 7600 gvw option. It is as rare as the 6.2 engine unfortunately. I'd consider a Chevy if I could find a mid-level spec truck with 7600 gvw, max tow and 6.2. This test proves that there isn't much point to buying a 5.3 other than not needing premium gas.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:29:58 PM


Shriker - agree on the Nissan XD. It can tow but not haul. 1500-2000lbs depending on trim level is too poor for a truck that is as big and heavy as it is.

TFL truck found it didn't go up a hill much faster than the 5.0. So that would mean that it probably is on par with the 5.3. Hardly worth the price premium.

as BARFo has pointed out , "Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind."

His statement indicates that there is zero business case for buying one to do the work of a 1/2 ton.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:35:22 PM


I wonder how people attempt to equate empty mass with payload?

Is it because of Frod and it alumnium wunder trux?

Does it matter the payload to vehicle weight?

One would think a heavier vehicle in comparison to it's payload has an advantage in ride comfort. Also with towing it is far better to have increased mass, especially the difference between say for arguments sake an XD Titan and a aluminium F-150, 2.7 EcoThirst or better still the Frod tested in this article with the 3.5.

Technically if a vehicle can have a 1 500lb load it should be able to tow 15 000lbs.

Hmmm .......................... some comments denigrating the Titans payload might be Frod biased and the claims are made one of those paid website product bullsh!tters. These types have no real allegiance. They are just talk with little knowledge and substance.

What's your opinion BC Mike ........ oops I mean Lou?


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 6:17:22 PM


Hey there BARFO. What was all that BS you were spewing about the 3.5L being winded towing 10K and would be under 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the all knowing. Is PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should write another email to Mark.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:34:03 PM


Many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yOlvL37680


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:52:08 PM


Hey there military grade BARFO. What was all that military grade BS you were military grade spewing about the military grade 3.5L being military grade winded towing military grade 10K and would be under military grade 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the military grade all knowing. Is military grade PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should military grade write another email to military grade Mark.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:54:15 PM


So did the Silverado have 3.42's or 3.73's. The article and window sticker mention 3.42's, but they listed it as having the max tow rating of the 5.3 NHT equipped with 3.73's, not the 3.42 axle ratio.

Max Conventional Trailering
5.3 w/ 3.42's 4WD CCSB - 9,200 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 4WD CCSB- 10,900 lb
5.3 w/ 3.42's 2WD CCSB- 9,400 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 2WD CCSB- 11,100 lb


Posted by: GMFordGuy | Jan 25, 2016 7:31:50 PM


Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.


Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.
Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

LOL what are you talking bout. Ford didn't even win one event, and barely came in second on a few LMAO!


Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 25, 2016 10:55:56 PM


It's comments like yours that embodies what's going wrong with the F150. They abandoned the fuel economy angle, market non-existant "class-leading payload" trucks that sag like a Fiat, and emphasize 0-60 times instead of the far more important TRUCK capabilites. They send a tow-package equipped truck that sags when hooked up to a trailer, gets twitchy on the highway while towing, shows up rolling on horrible eco passenger car tires, and despite a 2250 pound weight advantage, can't stop any better than an unloaded cheby. The new F150 is a military grade failure. Looks I won't be trading in my 2012 5.0 Screw anytime soon.


Posted by: phallacy | Jan 25, 2016 11:05:46 PM


Did the RAM have the Air Suspension option? It looks like it did not. If not, I wonder if Air Suspension would have materially improved the RAM's towing squat and handling. Past testers have raved about the towing handling using RAM's Air Suspension option. It would be interesting if that was still true towing this maximum load.


Posted by: MassMike | Jan 26, 2016 8:42:27 AM


Its hilarious reading some of the drivel typed on here.

Posted by: DriveAnyting | Jan 26, 2016 9:02:20 AM


MassMike - nope. the air ride wouldn't have saved the Ram. This is a quote from the last 1/2 ton shootout:

"where the Ram lost most of its points was in its limited payload, braking numbers and the ride quality of the air suspension when towing or loaded."

FCA wants you to buy a HD for anything other than SUV with a balcony duties.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 12:05:51 PM


I am so happy that I have a 2014 F150 4X4 Screw 157 WB with the Raptor 6.2 which comes as a Max Tow PKG. with 3:73 Final Drive. It's heavy, but pulls strong! This is rear configuration that I will keep forever!


Posted by: Kyle | Jan 26, 2016 12:17:13 PM


Kyle,
Ram/FCA is like the other pickup manufacturers, they are no different in the end.

75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement. This is valid for Frod, GM, Ram, Nissan and Toyota. Honda is a given.

This is why the 1/2 to is and aluminium Ford EcoThirst, GM twins or a steel, diesel Ram ar the biggest movers are the mid to high end models.

I'd even bet that most any one of the pickups sold that were tested in this latest towing "shootout" would never tow more than a few tons, at best a couple of tons.

This is how Ram/FCA has improved sales. Ram offered a very civilised product that appeals to the majority, except now FCA must update and improve the Ram.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:46:58 PM


^^^
Sorry, my above comment should of been addressed to massmike, not kyle.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:48:09 PM


I knew I was right. BARFO could not resist his Ford bash. Look at him go. Ecothirst, frod, towing etc. What a pitiful and predictable fool.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 3:48:48 PM


@LMAO -
The world according to BARFo..........incorrect..... the Canadian and American truck world according to BARFo:

"75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement."

Fortunately for you and I, we are in the 25%.

BARFo is firmly planted in the 75%. That does explain his view of trucks.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 4:08:17 PM


BAFO uses his truck to haul a fishing pole and beer. He once saw a Tundra at a mall in Jersey. That explains his view on trucks.


Posted by: Jeff | Jan 26, 2016 4:17:52 PM


Jeff - he must haul a lot of beer ;)


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 5:18:45 PM


Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.

Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM


Oh wait...I know how she is!


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM


Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM

Oh wait...I know how she is!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM


Your Mom is doing just fine!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:50:15 PM


I see school let out. I am surprised you want to ask about me "spanking" your Mom. That is rather weird but you also like to watch your sister in the shower so it is understood.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:51:35 PM


@LMAO - "I see school let out..."

You like hanging around school yards...you sick freak!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Y6UKMp8Qw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30AbH74uxdU


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:41:07 PM


Gents, Excellent set of articles. Thank you


Posted by: Ralph | Jan 26, 2016 7:47:30 PM


Speaking about spanking am excellent set of articles...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM


I guess you are retarded. I already told you your Mom is doing just fine.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 7:58:01 PM


Speaking about doing just fine...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 9:01:34 PM


I wish LMAO would spank me


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 10:17:34 PM


"Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines."

None of the trucks had big blocks....


Posted by: ky | Jan 27, 2016 7:56:27 AM


Thanks Lou_BC and Big Al from Oz. Since the trucks were supplied by the manufacturers to show their best performance, I suspected the RAM air suspension option would not have helped and may have hurt RAM's performance for this test. Thanks for the reference to the past test to prove that fact. The reviews that raved about the RAM air suspension during towing were for lighter loads, though the loads may be more realistic for most 1/2 ton owners. I agree the current popularity and increased production of trucks is due to targeting the suburban user with nicer rides and plusher interiors. Gone are the fantastically satisfying teeth loosening ride and efficient "hose it out" interior of my '70 Blazer, which sadly looses 20 lbs every time I slam the door.


Posted by: MassMike | Jan 27, 2016 8:41:37 AM


MassMike - the "air ride" on the Ram 1500 is actually a closed system using nitrogen. I've heard of incidences of having to get them recharged. I've also heard of overheating on rough roads. I have seen one air-ride Ram sitting behind the local dealership looking like a torpedoed ship about to topple over.

One thing people have to watch with crewcab trucks are the load ratings. A 5-6 passenger cabin full of family and/or adults can consume 1/2 to 3/4's of your cargo ratings. Adding even a light trailer can max the truck out.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:45:43 AM


Lou_BC,
Most any US 1/2 ton is not one of those new 3 000lb payload F-150s.

Most any US pickup as Massmike pointed out are CUVs for the Suburbs.

Why can't you get this through your head.

Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Just because a vehicle will tow a squillion pounds doesn't necessarily mean the person buying will ever use that capability.

Why don't you denegrate all US pickups for their overall lacklustre payload performance.

Have a look at the most popular payload class within the 1/2 ton pickups. I'd bet you'll find that there are far more Frod buyers that I would be concerned about regarding the payload/tow argument you go on ranting about.

I do believe you are completely disconnected from reality with the use of the NA pickup.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM


Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM

And by the Fiat sales numbers very few people have purchased what you say consumers want. Just because your a fiat fanbot does not mean that is what everyone wants. In fact the fiat trucks tend to be the cheapest pricedo on the market. Fiat even offers 7 and 8 year financing to try and get paymentsome lower and more people in their products. However Ford and GM remain the largest sellers of trucks and wait for it.....................................................................have leaf spring rear suspension. So what do consumers want?


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:59:35 AM


Next »


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


Working...

Working...


Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments


Browse News By:


Category

Aftermarket


Auto Shows


Awards


Compact/Midsize


Custom Trucks


Diesels


Fuel Economy


Full-Size


Heavy-Duty


Hybrids


Interiors


Light-Duty


New Trucks


Powertrains


Pricing


Safety


Spy Photos


Sources Say


Towing and Hauling


Manufacturer

Truck Shopping Tools
Search for New & Used
Find a Dealer
See Hottest Truck Deals
List your Truck for Sale
Read Expert Reviews
Review Your Own Truck


Recent Posts
Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
GMC Adds All Terrain X to Sierra 1500 Lineup
NHTSA Expands Takata Airbag Recall
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing Acceleration
Read recent stories
Read older stories


Latest User Comments
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Subscribe

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


Posted by: GMSRGREAT+ Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:40:57 PM

Powered by Cars.com.

Home
Buy or Sell a Truck
Reviews
News
Special Reports

Search

Search PickupTrucks:

Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview

Posted by Mark Williams | January 25, 2016

Group Still 1 II

By Mark Williams, PickupTrucks.com

After two years of conducting unjudged Annual Physicals, we know pickup truck shoppers want our perspective on which trucks are best for them. Enter the Texas Truck Showdown. For its inaugural year we focused on two flavors of light-duty trucks: those with maximum towing ability and those that maximize mpgs.

For this max towing Showdown, we pushed the manufacturers to send us their best all-around half-ton pickups set up with their best towing option packages and features to see how they perform. Our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: MPG will publish in early February.

Our request here was simple: We asked each half-ton truckmaker to send us a two-wheel drive (to save some weight) with a crew cab to represent the heart of the market. Each player would need to be equipped with whatever max-tow package and features might be needed for multiple towing exercises, and it needed to be packaged as close to $51,000 as possible. What we got from the manufacturers was a group of test pickups close in size, capability and price, but each one displayed different personality traits when pushed in head-to-head competition.

Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test.

These are the tests we put our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing competitors through:
•We track-tested (acceleration and braking) all the players at the Royal Purple Raceway outside of Houston, both empty and loaded with 1,750 pounds of payload. We loaded the exact same weight into each pickup to better compare and measure them against one another.
•We also ran each of these pickups on a 170-mile fuel-mileage route in and around Houston to get a clearer idea of how much compromise their towing packages surrendered when driven empty and how they performed driving the exact same route towing a 10,100-pound 18-foot Load Trail flatbed trailer.
•We stopped by EngineLogics to run each of our test trucks on the Mustang MD250 chassis dyno to see how the engines compared using the same test equipment on the same day; all were tested by the same technician.
•Our judges drove each pickup in multiple back-to-back settings while transporting the trucks to and from the racetrack, the hotel, the dyno shop and various photo shoot locations.
•Finally, we did sound testing in each vehicle over the same stretch of Interstate 10 (east of Houston) at idle and at 60 mph in top gear with the windows rolled up, and the air conditioning and fan off.

The Contenders

2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LTZ (redesigned for 2016)

Chevy front 1 II

Our Deep Ocean Blue Metallic two-wheel-drive crew cab came to us with a $51,010 price tag (all prices include destination fee) that included the athletic 5.3-liter overhead valve V-8 and eight-speed automatic transmission (Chevy sent us a competitor with the smaller V-8, while GMC sent the 6.2-liter V-8 at an additional cost). Although $51,000 might sound like a lot of money, the Silverado 1500 is basically a well-equipped middle-of-the road player in this segment with all the proper equipment for heavier towing and payload hauling. The LTZ Plus Package (a $1,165 option) added power adjustable pedals, a Bose audio system, front and rear park assist, and a heated steering wheel. Our test truck also had 20-inch chrome wheels ($1,495), chrome side steps ($700), heated and vented leather front seats ($650), a leather wireless charging console ($510), spray-in bedliner ($475), special paint color ($395), towing mirrors ($230) and movable upper tie-downs ($60). The Max Trailering Package ($925) added a bigger and stronger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and an integrated brake controller inside the truck. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-8 truck are 16/22/18 mpg city/highway/combined. The Silverado 1500 is a strong mainstream pickup choice that delivers a lot of value for your dollar.

Chevy Engine 1 II

1 Chevy Silverado Crew 5.3 (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ford F-150 Lariat (all new in 2015)

Ford F-150 front 1 II

Our two-wheel-drive Shadow Black Ford F-150 SuperCrew Lariat had a final price of $50,270 and came equipped with the twin-turbo 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost engine ($1,200) and six-speed automatic transmission. Equipment Group 501A ($1,500) includes a remote start system, 360-degree blind spot detection, backup sensors, LED spotlights in the side-view mirrors and an extra 110-volt, 400-watt outlet. Our test truck also had the Lariat Chrome Appearance Package ($1,695), leather bucket seats and console ($650), and a bed tailgate step ($375). The Max Trailer Tow Package ($1,195) includes an integrated trailer brake controller, Pro Trailer Backup Assist, 3.55:1 axle gears and a GVWR up to 6,800 pounds. Although unrelated to towing, this Ford also came with voice-activated navigation for $795. Finally, the optional larger 36-gallon fuel tank ($395) allowed us to tow heavy loads without stopping for fuel every 200 miles. The EPA fuel economy ratings for this V-6 truck are 17/24/20 mpg. The F-150 is the No. 1-selling pickup in the segment because it offers a wide variety of options and features that many buyers seem to want.

Ford Engine 1 II

2 Ford F-150 Crew 3A (3)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ford F-150 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT (redesigned for 2016)

GMC Sierra front 1 II

Our Iridium Metallic two-wheel-drive GMC Sierra 1500 SLT crew cab came equipped with the bigger of GM's two V-8 options. The EcoTec3 6.2-liter V-8 is mated to the factory eight-speed automatic transmission for a final sticker price of $53,235, making it the most expensive player in our test. The priciest option was the more powerful V-8 engine ($2,495) rated at 420 horsepower and 460 pounds-feet of torque. The Sierra also came with 20-inch polished aluminum wheels ($895), chrome side steps ($700), leather bucket seats and console with additional USB ports and wireless phone charging ($510), high-performance LED headlights ($500), Intellilink with a color 8-inch touch-screen ($495), a spray-in bedliner ($475), a premium paint color ($395) and special chrome power side-view mirrors ($230). The GMC also had the Max Trailering Package ($925) providing a heavier-duty and larger rear axle, stronger rear leaf springs, retuned shocks, better radiator cooling and the integrated trailer brake controller. Both GM trucks equipped with the max-trailering option have a GVWR of 7,400 pounds. EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/21/17 mpg. The GMC Sierra 1500 SLT, especially when equipped with the big V-8, is the hot rod of the segment, but does it with style.

GMC Engine 1 II

3 GMC Sierra Crew 6.2 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 GMC Sierra 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn (all new in 2013)

Ram 1500 front 1 II

Our Bright Silver Metallic crew-cab Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn came to us in the requested two-wheel-drive configuration with the 5.7-liter V-8 Hemi and eight-speed automatic transmission, finishing with a bottom-line price of $50,805. Because the Laramie Longhorn trim level comes well-equipped at a starting price of $49,980, there was not much need for optional equipment. Standard equipment included in this top trim level are 20-inch polished aluminum wheels with silver inserts, halogen projector headlamps, heated and ventilated leather seats and console, under-seat rear storage, power adjustable pedals, power 10-way driver's seat and six-way passenger seat, Alpine nine-speaker and subwoofer sound system, 8.4-inch nav touch-screen with Uconnect and a 32-gallon fuel tank. The options it came with merely added to the Longhorn's towing capability; it comes standard with a Class IV trailer hitch. Add-ons included towing mirrors (with swing-up capability) and an integrated trailer brake controller ($380), better-performing 3.92:1 axle gears ($75) and a limited-slip differential ($370). The EPA fuel economy ratings for this truck are 15/22/17 mpg. It's worth noting this is Ram's top-level trim package, which it is able to provide under our price ceiling; none of the other competitors could deliver their top trim level in this price range — although Toyota came close.

Ram Hemi Engine 1 II

4 Ram 1500 Crew 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Ram 1500 Monroney, click on the picture above.

2016 Toyota Tundra 1794 Edition (all new in 2014)

Toyota Tundra front 1 II

Our Sunset Bronze Toyota Tundra came to us with its top-level trim, the 1794 Edition, at $52,722. Unfortunately, it also came to us with a 4x4 driveline and the TRD Off-Road Package. Although not the priciest truck in this test (that was the GMC), we did consider not allowing the Tundra into the Showdown because of the driveline disparity; however, in the name of delivering to our readers as much comparative data as possible, we decided to test it at the expense of the relatively small weight and payload penalty. We also discovered that the TRD option ($100) offered softer springs and shocks with a few other pricier styling options. Additional options on our test truck included the front-end paint protection film ($395), chrome Tundra tailgate inserts ($99), rubber bed mats ($139), a TRD performance air filter ($75), a center console storage tray ($85), a spare tire lock ($75) and alloy wheel tire locks ($85). The only other add-ons were the TRD dual exhaust ($1,100) and TRD rear anti-sway bar ($299), which probably helped with power output and trailering stability, respectively. As part of the well-equipped aspect of the 1794 Edition, our Tundra came standard with an integrated trailer controller, trailer-sway control and a high-quality backup camera. (Without the optional equipment, the total price for the Tundra would have been $50,275.) EPA fuel-economy ratings for this truck are a segment worst at 13/17/15 mpg. The Tundra is a solid performing pickup, but it is aging quickly and other players offer more strength and style.

Toyota Tundra Engine 1 II

5 Toyota Tundra 5.7 (2)

For a larger version of the 2016 Toyota Tundra Monroney, click on the picture above.

Scoring the Showdown

Scoring breaks down into 20 categories, including acceleration and braking when empty and loaded, trailered and trailer-free fuel economy, engine performance (dyno), maximum payload capability, GVWR and more. Added to that are scores from our four judges in six key areas: towing performance, ride quality, value, ergonomics, visibility, and tech and entertainment. All totaled, each competitor had about 2,500 available points.

The judges for this contest included truck testers from inside the Cars.com/PickupTrucks.com family as well as truck-loving freelancer experts. Each judge was able to spend lots of time driving each combatant in several back-to-back drive routes and had time to discuss their findings with other drivers.

The Judges

Joe Bruzek — Lead driver and Cars.com's senior road test editor, Bruzek has one of the fastest reaction times you'll ever see.
Bruce Smith — A longtime automotive enthusiast, Smith is skilled in the art of towing, four-wheeling, and wide-mouth bass and walleye fishing.
Kent Sundling — Known to the world as Mr. Truck, if it has a trailer or pickup bed, it's likely Sundling has driven it over the Rocky Mountains.
Mark Williams — Veteran automotive journalist and editor of PickupTrucks.com, Williams sometimes wakes up at night with new comparison test ideas.

To see the comparison specs of these pickups, click on our What You Get chart below.

TTS16_Tow_WYG_Final2

Cars.com photos by Evan Sears and Angela Conners

Overview | Acceleration | Braking | Mileage | Results

Two Truck Towing 1 II


Comments (51) in 2016 Texas Truck Showdown, Challenges


Comments

Leave it to Toyota to once again shoot themselves in the foot. Have they learned nothing from the TRD OffRoad Tacoma getting sand kicked in its face in no small part from OR biased tires.


Posted by: Mr Knowitall | Jan 25, 2016 9:23:18 AM


I know right. Instead of sending a limited which is lighter and with tow mirrors, toyota chose to send a heavy arse pig with low tow and payload. It's no wonder toyota can't break into the truck market. Suits them well to lose.


Posted by: uh huh | Jan 25, 2016 9:45:08 AM


Why didn't ford provide a truck with 3.73 gears?


Posted by: Kurt K | Jan 25, 2016 10:22:02 AM


Let one thumb their nose at the rules and someone will cry foul. Should have sent Toyota packing


Posted by: roadram | Jan 25, 2016 10:32:40 AM


Toyota knows they wouldn't win anyways, so if they send something different people can always wonder "what if they sent xxxx model??"


Posted by: Mike | Jan 25, 2016 11:21:19 AM


Mark - - -

"Just to make things interesting, we tested a new 2016 Nissan Titan XD alongside our competitors to see how it would compare with this segment. However, we are not including this truck in this package of stories because it did not meet enough of our criteria and, technically, given its gross vehicle weight rating and size, it sits outside the segment. But because we know you'll want to know all the details, we will publish a separate story soon about how this all-new entry directly compares with the trucks in this test."

Good Judgment! An excellent way to both include and not include this new and interesting vehicle.

=================

Posted by: NMGOM | Jan 25, 2016 12:08:02 PM


Mark and his team is fantastic! Everyone was complaining over the weekend about the lack of the XD (despite the reasons Mark listed above...and most readers recognize that logic). But Mark et al. saw that coming a mile away and the XD will be present to some degree.


Posted by: Tim | Jan 25, 2016 12:13:23 PM


It will be nice to see how the XD fared. I hope the GM and F150 blows it away for no other reason than to close biGal's pie hole.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 12:28:13 PM


notice the GM trucks both beat their sticker rated fuel economy, by quite a bit...the other manufacturers all got worse, gm got better.


Posted by: Wolfgang | Jan 25, 2016 12:38:07 PM


I like it. The idea of maxing out your towing or hauling and haul butt 0-60. I don't know about you, but when I tow I drive as fast as I can 0-60. Interesting read about the Ram. It shows it squatting really well. My last Hemi did the same thing. My 3D does not squat near as bad. I'm talking half a cord of Oak in my truck barely moved. My friends Hemi carrying the other half cord was down bad. Wonder why that is?


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:57:33 PM


Of course the 6.2L won. Anyone could see that coming. Newest powertrain on the GMC to promote that brand. Better keep the Chevy with the weaker powertrain so people could see the difference in performance. Good move GM.


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 12:59:09 PM


After reading all of these articles on the testing I have my list of preferences for these pickups.

1. Chev Silverado; it looks great and is packed with value. From the testing results it's overall performance from the testing is quite good.

2. The Ram (yes, don't know why); the Ram as the article stated is the premium Ram pickup. You can't really option it up. Since most of the time it's driven around empty, who cares how it handles 10 000lbs. So long as I'm comfortable going to Home Depot.

3. GMC Sierra; It's the best looking pick of the bunch; It sort of has the best figures all round. But as I have stated many times I don't buy on magazine data or sell on magazine data.

4. F-150; What worries me is how well will it's FE be with a fully enclosed trailer? Well, Ford, you had an opportunity to produce a game changer. You failed.

But, when is all said and one the F-150 is a very good pickup, but only competitive with older and even to some degree outdated vehicles. Pull your socks up Ford! You can do it.

5. Toyota; What a dismal vehicle. This vehicle is left behind. Wasn't this vehicle designed when sliced bread was invented?

Toyota can only rely on it's revering supporters for so long. They will leave you if you don't do better.

.......................................................................................

It will be interesting to see how the 1/2 ton Titan will perform as well as the XD. I don't suspect the XD will win any of the drag racing components of the testing.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 2:41:00 PM


Interesting and puts to rest several things......

First , the GM trucks are just flat out as good or better than the new all alum. twin turbo Ford is and is steel, less complex, etc. and can provide as good or better mileage doing it.

Second, the 5.3L is a good engine with the 8 spd it equals or beats everything out there from Ram and Toyota and is a great choice for the majority of GM buyers. Wonder how the 2.7l EB would have done , its strong as well.

Third, the weight savings didnt really help the Ford much .....gas mileage wasnt as good as the simpler GM v8 engines (insnt that supposed to be the whole point behind the EB?), truck couldnt hook up as well in back , didnt feel as stable etc.

Would be nice to have a comparative dyno sheet to see not just numbers......did I miss it?

The diesel Nissan wont even be close with these loads IMHO.


Posted by: Shriker | Jan 25, 2016 2:50:45 PM


Shirker,
You hit the nail on the head with the aluminium wunder trux from Ford.

I do recall for a considerable time after making the announcement that the F-150 will be moving toward aluminium Ford nearly declared a National Holiday regarding the FE advantages of moving to aluminum.

Well, as we have all witnessed Ford once Ford realised that the FE advantages were really only a 1mpg advantaged it moved to load and tow.

Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind.

If you are going to seriously tow 5 tons on a regular basis you will not buy anyone of these pickups tested.

Judging by how the standards the manufacturers are using you would want to buy a pickup that is rated to tow at least 20 000lbs and with a diesel.

To move 8 tons of combined mass around why would you want a gasoline engine?

Ford can do better, maybe Ford will, but by that time it's competitors will again have outstripped Ford. The only one that might not is Ram because FCA isn't flushed with money.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 3:02:24 PM


@ Shriker

The reason the GM trucks perform so well, even the 5.3 is because in 2014 all three of their engines went DI. This provides more power and greater FE. I haven't heard much about repairs for these engines, but the newest generation of anything has to work out kinks. GM is known to produce reliable power plants, even if the Ford guys knock'em for being old tech.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/02/pros-and-cons-of-direct-injection-engines/index.htm


Posted by: Montands | Jan 25, 2016 3:11:07 PM


Shriker - Ford did need to shed some weight. They let their PR over-hype MPG. At least now they are more accurately stating cargo gains over mpg. Ford now offers close to 2k cargo across all of their 1/2 ton crewcab trucks (with the exception of the Limited at 1450). there are those that will say that cargo does not matter but in a crewcab truck you can eat up 500-1000 lbs of capacity with passengers and their associated paraphernalia.

GM at least offers the 7600 gvw option. It is as rare as the 6.2 engine unfortunately. I'd consider a Chevy if I could find a mid-level spec truck with 7600 gvw, max tow and 6.2. This test proves that there isn't much point to buying a 5.3 other than not needing premium gas.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:29:58 PM


Shriker - agree on the Nissan XD. It can tow but not haul. 1500-2000lbs depending on trim level is too poor for a truck that is as big and heavy as it is.

TFL truck found it didn't go up a hill much faster than the 5.0. So that would mean that it probably is on par with the 5.3. Hardly worth the price premium.

as BARFo has pointed out , "Most 1/2 ton pickups are sold as a car/SUV alternative with the occasional 5 000lb (if you are lucky) trailer hitched up behind."

His statement indicates that there is zero business case for buying one to do the work of a 1/2 ton.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 25, 2016 4:35:22 PM


I wonder how people attempt to equate empty mass with payload?

Is it because of Frod and it alumnium wunder trux?

Does it matter the payload to vehicle weight?

One would think a heavier vehicle in comparison to it's payload has an advantage in ride comfort. Also with towing it is far better to have increased mass, especially the difference between say for arguments sake an XD Titan and a aluminium F-150, 2.7 EcoThirst or better still the Frod tested in this article with the 3.5.

Technically if a vehicle can have a 1 500lb load it should be able to tow 15 000lbs.

Hmmm .......................... some comments denigrating the Titans payload might be Frod biased and the claims are made one of those paid website product bullsh!tters. These types have no real allegiance. They are just talk with little knowledge and substance.

What's your opinion BC Mike ........ oops I mean Lou?


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 25, 2016 6:17:22 PM


Hey there BARFO. What was all that BS you were spewing about the 3.5L being winded towing 10K and would be under 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the all knowing. Is PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should write another email to Mark.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:34:03 PM


Many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yOlvL37680


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:52:08 PM


Hey there military grade BARFO. What was all that military grade BS you were military grade spewing about the military grade 3.5L being military grade winded towing military grade 10K and would be under military grade 8 mpg towing? Common, you are the military grade all knowing. Is military grade PUTC wrong with this? Maybe you should military grade write another email to military grade Mark.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 25, 2016 6:54:15 PM


So did the Silverado have 3.42's or 3.73's. The article and window sticker mention 3.42's, but they listed it as having the max tow rating of the 5.3 NHT equipped with 3.73's, not the 3.42 axle ratio.

Max Conventional Trailering
5.3 w/ 3.42's 4WD CCSB - 9,200 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 4WD CCSB- 10,900 lb
5.3 w/ 3.42's 2WD CCSB- 9,400 lb
5.3 w/ 3.73's 2WD CCSB- 11,100 lb


Posted by: GMFordGuy | Jan 25, 2016 7:31:50 PM


Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.


Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.
Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

LOL what are you talking bout. Ford didn't even win one event, and barely came in second on a few LMAO!


Posted by: johnny doe | Jan 25, 2016 10:55:56 PM


It's comments like yours that embodies what's going wrong with the F150. They abandoned the fuel economy angle, market non-existant "class-leading payload" trucks that sag like a Fiat, and emphasize 0-60 times instead of the far more important TRUCK capabilites. They send a tow-package equipped truck that sags when hooked up to a trailer, gets twitchy on the highway while towing, shows up rolling on horrible eco passenger car tires, and despite a 2250 pound weight advantage, can't stop any better than an unloaded cheby. The new F150 is a military grade failure. Looks I won't be trading in my 2012 5.0 Screw anytime soon.


Posted by: phallacy | Jan 25, 2016 11:05:46 PM


Did the RAM have the Air Suspension option? It looks like it did not. If not, I wonder if Air Suspension would have materially improved the RAM's towing squat and handling. Past testers have raved about the towing handling using RAM's Air Suspension option. It would be interesting if that was still true towing this maximum load.


Posted by: MassMike | Jan 26, 2016 8:42:27 AM


Its hilarious reading some of the drivel typed on here.

Posted by: DriveAnyting | Jan 26, 2016 9:02:20 AM


MassMike - nope. the air ride wouldn't have saved the Ram. This is a quote from the last 1/2 ton shootout:

"where the Ram lost most of its points was in its limited payload, braking numbers and the ride quality of the air suspension when towing or loaded."

FCA wants you to buy a HD for anything other than SUV with a balcony duties.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 12:05:51 PM


I am so happy that I have a 2014 F150 4X4 Screw 157 WB with the Raptor 6.2 which comes as a Max Tow PKG. with 3:73 Final Drive. It's heavy, but pulls strong! This is rear configuration that I will keep forever!


Posted by: Kyle | Jan 26, 2016 12:17:13 PM


Kyle,
Ram/FCA is like the other pickup manufacturers, they are no different in the end.

75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement. This is valid for Frod, GM, Ram, Nissan and Toyota. Honda is a given.

This is why the 1/2 to is and aluminium Ford EcoThirst, GM twins or a steel, diesel Ram ar the biggest movers are the mid to high end models.

I'd even bet that most any one of the pickups sold that were tested in this latest towing "shootout" would never tow more than a few tons, at best a couple of tons.

This is how Ram/FCA has improved sales. Ram offered a very civilised product that appeals to the majority, except now FCA must update and improve the Ram.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:46:58 PM


^^^
Sorry, my above comment should of been addressed to massmike, not kyle.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 26, 2016 12:48:09 PM


I knew I was right. BARFO could not resist his Ford bash. Look at him go. Ecothirst, frod, towing etc. What a pitiful and predictable fool.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 3:48:48 PM


@LMAO -
The world according to BARFo..........incorrect..... the Canadian and American truck world according to BARFo:

"75% of pickups are sold to the wannabe car/SUV/CUV style operators. They do want utility, but slightly different utility that the CUVs and SUVs offer, with an added middle class lifestyle statement."

Fortunately for you and I, we are in the 25%.

BARFo is firmly planted in the 75%. That does explain his view of trucks.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 4:08:17 PM


BAFO uses his truck to haul a fishing pole and beer. He once saw a Tundra at a mall in Jersey. That explains his view on trucks.


Posted by: Jeff | Jan 26, 2016 4:17:52 PM


Jeff - he must haul a lot of beer ;)


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 26, 2016 5:18:45 PM


Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines.

Posted by: blueman | Jan 25, 2016 10:29:18 PM

Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM


Oh wait...I know how she is!


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM


Speaking about spanking the competition...how's your wife LMAO?

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:46:55 PM

Oh wait...I know how she is!

Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 5:47:27 PM


Your Mom is doing just fine!


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:50:15 PM


I see school let out. I am surprised you want to ask about me "spanking" your Mom. That is rather weird but you also like to watch your sister in the shower so it is understood.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 5:51:35 PM


@LMAO - "I see school let out..."

You like hanging around school yards...you sick freak!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Y6UKMp8Qw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30AbH74uxdU


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:41:07 PM


Gents, Excellent set of articles. Thank you


Posted by: Ralph | Jan 26, 2016 7:47:30 PM


Speaking about spanking am excellent set of articles...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 7:54:31 PM


I guess you are retarded. I already told you your Mom is doing just fine.


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 26, 2016 7:58:01 PM


Speaking about doing just fine...how's your wife LMAO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy1UZfzICi4


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 9:01:34 PM


I wish LMAO would spank me


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 26, 2016 10:17:34 PM


"Nice going Ford, for spanking the competition with a V6 215 cid engine VS big block V8 engines with 331cid to 400 cid engines."

None of the trucks had big blocks....


Posted by: ky | Jan 27, 2016 7:56:27 AM


Thanks Lou_BC and Big Al from Oz. Since the trucks were supplied by the manufacturers to show their best performance, I suspected the RAM air suspension option would not have helped and may have hurt RAM's performance for this test. Thanks for the reference to the past test to prove that fact. The reviews that raved about the RAM air suspension during towing were for lighter loads, though the loads may be more realistic for most 1/2 ton owners. I agree the current popularity and increased production of trucks is due to targeting the suburban user with nicer rides and plusher interiors. Gone are the fantastically satisfying teeth loosening ride and efficient "hose it out" interior of my '70 Blazer, which sadly looses 20 lbs every time I slam the door.


Posted by: MassMike | Jan 27, 2016 8:41:37 AM


MassMike - the "air ride" on the Ram 1500 is actually a closed system using nitrogen. I've heard of incidences of having to get them recharged. I've also heard of overheating on rough roads. I have seen one air-ride Ram sitting behind the local dealership looking like a torpedoed ship about to topple over.

One thing people have to watch with crewcab trucks are the load ratings. A 5-6 passenger cabin full of family and/or adults can consume 1/2 to 3/4's of your cargo ratings. Adding even a light trailer can max the truck out.


Posted by: Lou_BC | Jan 27, 2016 11:45:43 AM


Lou_BC,
Most any US 1/2 ton is not one of those new 3 000lb payload F-150s.

Most any US pickup as Massmike pointed out are CUVs for the Suburbs.

Why can't you get this through your head.

Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Just because a vehicle will tow a squillion pounds doesn't necessarily mean the person buying will ever use that capability.

Why don't you denegrate all US pickups for their overall lacklustre payload performance.

Have a look at the most popular payload class within the 1/2 ton pickups. I'd bet you'll find that there are far more Frod buyers that I would be concerned about regarding the payload/tow argument you go on ranting about.

I do believe you are completely disconnected from reality with the use of the NA pickup.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM


Ranting and your retorts slamming Ram are ridiculous. FCA has realised what the average and expected use of a pickup is and they have manufactured what the consumer wants.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Jan 27, 2016 1:02:11 PM

And by the Fiat sales numbers very few people have purchased what you say consumers want. Just because your a fiat fanbot does not mean that is what everyone wants. In fact the fiat trucks tend to be the cheapest pricedo on the market. Fiat even offers 7 and 8 year financing to try and get paymentsome lower and more people in their products. However Ford and GM remain the largest sellers of trucks and wait for it.....................................................................have leaf spring rear suspension. So what do consumers want?


Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 6:59:35 AM


Next »


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


Working...

Working...


Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments


Browse News By:


Category

Aftermarket


Auto Shows


Awards


Compact/Midsize


Custom Trucks


Diesels


Fuel Economy


Full-Size


Heavy-Duty


Hybrids


Interiors


Light-Duty


New Trucks


Powertrains


Pricing


Safety


Spy Photos


Sources Say


Towing and Hauling


Manufacturer

Truck Shopping Tools
Search for New & Used
Find a Dealer
See Hottest Truck Deals
List your Truck for Sale
Read Expert Reviews
Review Your Own Truck


Recent Posts
Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
GMC Adds All Terrain X to Sierra 1500 Lineup
NHTSA Expands Takata Airbag Recall
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing Acceleration
Read recent stories
Read older stories


Latest User Comments
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
Rolling Can of Beer on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio

Subscribe

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


Posted by: Rolling Can of Beer | Jan 28, 2016 7:42:20 PM

Many times I will check this site out when I am sitting on the toilet making a statue of Johnny Welfare!

Grammer...Grammer.....Grammer.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0rPv84gJ0g

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 28, 2016 7:52:43 PM

I think the retard finally passed out. Don't worry LMAO, he's too stupid to make sound arguments so instead he posts crap like this.

Posted by: Dave | Jan 28, 2016 7:55:32 PM

« Previous


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

Working...


Working...


Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Comments



Browse News By:


Category

Aftermarket


Auto Shows


Awards


Compact/Midsize


Custom Trucks


Diesels


Fuel Economy


Full-Size


Heavy-Duty


Hybrids


Interiors


Light-Duty


New Trucks


Powertrains


Pricing


Safety


Spy Photos


Sources Say


Towing and Hauling


Manufacturer


Truck Shopping Tools
Search for New & Used
Find a Dealer
See Hottest Truck Deals
List your Truck for Sale
Read Expert Reviews
Review Your Own Truck


Recent Posts
Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
GMC Adds All Terrain X to Sierra 1500 Lineup
NHTSA Expands Takata Airbag Recall
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing Overview
Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Towing Acceleration
Read recent stories
Read older stories

Latest User Comments
Dave on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
LMAO on Ford to Produce Super Duty Chassis Cabs in Ohio
GMSRGREAT on GMC Adds All Terrain X to Sierra 1500 Lineup
Vilson on Nissan's Titan Warrior Concept: How Close to Production?
Vilson on Nissan's Titan Warrior Concept: How Close to Production?

Subscribe


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

Great service very professional on time will use again recommend to friends and family if in need for service like this get a hold of this company

This service is easy and extremely professional. Not to mention AFFORDABLE. I have been using this service for a long time and I have turned ALL my friends on to this taxi service. They have saved me in emergency's EVERY time



The comments to this entry are closed.