[Ramfan]

Class leading torque and recent frame etc strengthening should be capitalised by also having a class leading tow rating. Certain buyers watch for this. Ford currently holds this with a 3,73 geared max tow option V6 turbo gasser and 6.2 V8 with a max payload of 2080 and 2010 lbs respectively.

I am not expecting phenomenal max tow rating of 30,000 like the 3500 but to not capitalize on the strengths of the class exclusive diesel & class leading torque with something like 11,400 max tow and even just a max payload of 2,000 lbs seems to shoot oneself in the foot. Heck we even have the option of 3.92 gears.

Maybe this is already in the works and I am just unaware. Thoughts?

 

[MoparNorm]

The echo diesel will be in the 1500. You can't overload this truck and expect the fuel economy and performance to not suffer.
I think it's enough to have class leading mpg and decent power.
If a buyer wants class leading towing and payload, they would step up to a 2500.
Maybe the VM will be offered in the 2500, maybe it won't, the important thing is its being offered in the 1500.
They can work on the side issues later, just having it offered is 90% of the pie and we don't want to be greedy*.




* this desire to have it all, is what kills a small truck every time the conversation comes up.
No one is satisfied with just a small truck, they start asking for long bed, crew cab, this that and the other thing and pretty soon the "small" truck, isn't.

 

[Bigun426]

I don't think it would be wise to put in 2500 because the ignorant would work it like the Cummins and create false liability problems. I live in NW Florida and some consider it to be LA (lower Alabama) and this being the land of the "Bubba" it would be scary to see what they would with the truck.

 

[phillyguy]

The biggest problem with the current 1500's are their relatively low payload numbers. I would have thought that if Ram were taking the time to introduce an airbag suspension setup, that it should have been able to bump the payload numbers by a decent amount. I had always thought that the rear coils were the primary limiting factor in the 1500 payload ratings. I guess that the limitation on the payload rating lies elsewhere.

 

[MoparNorm]

The biggest problem with the current 1500's are their relatively low payload numbers. I would have thought that if Ram were taking the time to introduce an airbag suspension setup, that it should have been able to bump the payload numbers by a decent amount. I had always thought that the rear coils were the primary limiting factor in the 1500 payload ratings. I guess that the limitation on the payload rating lies elsewhere.

They have low payload numbers, because they are 1500's. when the rating goes up, they really are no longer 1500's.
The coils have no bearing on payload the rating does.
My Chassis/Cab is rated at 23,600 and it has front coils.
Those who want bigger payloads, need to buy a bigger truck, that is why they sell, 2500, 3500, 4500 and 5500.

 

[66coronet]

Toyota SR5 chassis cab

Isn't this a 1 ton capacity?
Some of us just wanted the 1999 Dakota doing what this Toyota can.

7.4ft bed 1986-88

 

[Erik Latranyi]

People forget that the 1500 series trucks are competing for fuel economy, not payload.

If you want a serious work-truck, get a 2500.

 

[66coronet]

 

[66coronet]

Some people just do not want what Ram 3500 Ford 3500 Chevy 3500 big monster trucks. Some people just want a low to the ground smaller cab truck that can haul gravel or what ever else 1 ton.
Not everyone needs a one ton to haul something over the mountain with a trailer.
A 1999 dodge dakota cab with a VM 3.0L V-6 crd and a 1 ton dually to be similar to the Toyota SR5 is all a few people would like.
But now there is the Promaster Ducato 3.6L or I-4 3.0L crd. You can get that in a 2dr or 4dr, chassis cab that is different lengths. Allowing the customer to make or someone to make a custom bed. Plus it's available in 1500 2500 3500 and it's FWD. Plus a bonus Texas longhorn headlights.

 

[66coronet]

I like the Ram 1500 VM3.0Lcrd and wish it will sell well. May the VM 3.0L crd expand to the Ram2500
But I do wonder what if they had a 1999 Dakota cab VM3.0L crd 1 ton. Smaller cab, lower to the ground, Dually,

 

[MoparNorm]

People have been trying to get by on the cheap, for decades.
In the 1980's those little Toyota crap boxes and flatbeds with 1 ton ratings were very, very, popular.
There are very few of them still on the road. The suspensions, frames, brakes, clutches, transmissions and engines did not hold up when actually worked. I mostly see them as gardeners trucks now, hauling 100 lb. lawn mowers.
Again, if you have a need to work, get the proper size truck. There was a reason Toyota's got bigger in the US, we work our trucks beyond the ratings and they take a beating. What worked in Japan did not work here.

 

[Ramfan]

My point was we have the only diesel 1/2 ton and best in class torque we should have best in class (1/2 ton competitors) tow rating and a little more payload to match. (since we already have the strengthened frame etc) Why not take this advantage/selling point and sales away from Ford? Work hard to do something and then give it away.

 

[LtjimT]

A little higher payload, maybe as an option pkg. would be great. A 4x4 crewcab in the higher trim pkgs, has about a 1,000 lb payload. With 2 adults and the dog if you tow anything with 400-500 lb hitch weight (5,000lb trailer) you really can't carry anything in the bed without exceeding capacity. Ford inparticular does carry more in a similar configuration.

 

[phillyguy]

They have low payload numbers, because they are 1500's. when the rating goes up, they really are no longer 1500's.
The coils have no bearing on payload the rating does.
My Chassis/Cab is rated at 23,600 and it has front coils.
Those who want bigger payloads, need to buy a bigger truck, that is why they sell, 2500, 3500, 4500 and 5500.

You can say that, but then prospective buyers that want larger payload numbers and do not want a larger truck will go to Ford and Chevrolet, not bump up to a 3/4 or 1 ton. The suspension will always play a role in the manufacturer's calculated payload capacity. Whether it is the limiting component here I do not know. Most (if not all) half tons have front coils, I was referring to the rear coils on the 1500, which are unique in the half ton market.

People forget that the 1500 series trucks are competing for fuel economy, not payload.

If you want a serious work-truck, get a 2500.

I would agree what if you want a serious work truck you will be much better off in a 3/4 ton or 1 ton pickup, but that said the 1500's are competing with the other half tons, across a variety of features, both fuel economy and payload included. A laramie longhorn with a 1060 lb payload capacity should be embarassing for Ram.

 

[SouthPawXJ]

I would agree what if you want a serious work truck you will be much better off in a 3/4 ton or 1 ton pickup, but that said the 1500's are competing with the other half tons, across a variety of features, both fuel economy and payload included. A laramie longhorn with a 1060 lb payload capacity should be embarassing for Ram.

You know, I would agree with you, except they are competing in the half-ton payload class (1000 lb). I don't necessarily think 1060 lb is embarrassing at all, considering a Laramie Longhorn is a luxury model (more standard equipment and options = more "dead" weight = less payload).

 

[phillyguy]

You know, I would agree with you, except they are competing in the half-ton payload class (1000 lb). I don't necessarily think 1060 lb is embarrassing at all, considering a Laramie Longhorn is a luxury model (more standard equipment and options = more "dead" weight = less payload).

It is, and in my opinion is the nicest super luxury truck in existence, and I gave that as an extreme example. The unfortunate current situation is that you can currently get a King Ranch or Platinum F150 from ford with a 1500+lb payload capacity. I am curious as to why there is such a large difference in the rating. My assumption had always been that it was due to the coils in the rear, and that an air spring setup would do away with that limiting factor. That has not changed (yet), and it is something that I hope that Ram will work to improve.

 

[LtjimT]

Going to a 2500 is a big step up in capability that isn't needed for many of us truck consumers. I have a 2001 dakota quadcab,4x4,4.7,3.92 with all the HD options that were available. It has served me well (230,000 miles), but want to replace it with a half ton with reasonably good payload and tow rating. It will be our everyday driver and trip vehicle including some towing duty. I don't like to carry or tow up against factory rating( though I have with the Dakota with surprisingly good results), especially on trips vs. local. The diesel/8speed sounds like a perfect drivetrain combination for my use. We have a 2005 Liberty CRD which I am very happy with so aVMmotori diesel I would welcome.I Like the rambox, but that reduces effective payload as well. May have to stay at SLT/Bighorn vs Laramie to make the capability number work and I think that is an unfortunate compromise to have to make.

 

[MoparNorm]

You can say that, but then prospective buyers that want larger payload numbers and do not want a larger truck will go to Ford and Chevrolet, not bump up to a 3/4 or 1 ton. The suspension will always play a role in the manufacturer's calculated payload capacity. Whether it is the limiting component here I do not know. Most (if not all) half tons have front coils, I was referring to the rear coils on the 1500, which are unique in the half ton market.
.

I knew exactly which springs you were referencing, that same coil- link rear, is found on the front of the chassis/cabs, it's not he ability of the springs, it's the limitation of the ratings. My coil sprung Dodge is rated at 5 tons, so coils are not the limiting factor.
1/2 ton means 1000 lbs. If ford and GM want to play games with the numbers we can easily go back to the 1960's when Dodge had the "heavy half", which was nothing more than a 3/4 ton, short bed.
Many states tax trucks and registration based upon weight, usually based upon 8500, or 8000 GVWR. Ford is costing some buyers an unexpected tax.

 

[Ramfan]

Anybody know of any reason the 2014 Ram 1500 with or without air ride could/should not offer say a max tow rating of 11,350 lbs & a max payload of say 2,000 lbs to take sales & bragging rights away from the F-150?

Currently the max is 10,500 & I believe 1500 lbs respectively. What about the rear carrier? It seems there has been some issues with it even if only a very small percentage. I have read where there is to be a set industry standard for determining tow & payload but that it has not yet been put into place. Maybe it will play a factor.

 

[MoparNorm]

Anybody know of any reason the 2014 Ram 1500 with or without air ride could/should not offer say a max tow rating of 11,350 lbs & a max payload of say 2,000 lbs to take sales & bragging rights away from the F-150?

Other than the discussion directly above this post???
1/2 Ton is 1,000 lbs
3/4 Ton is 1,500 lbs
1 Ton is 2,000 lbs.
Anything greater puts you in the next weight classification. If Ford wants to be silly and sell a 3/4 ton as a 1/2 ton, that's their folly.
The tow rating is another thing and the supposed agreement to set towing standards was blownup and I haven't heard if they are going to try again, or not.