Is it Safe to Overload

[spoon059]

Just out of curiosity, why do you believe that all software is the same between a 2500 and a 3500 Ram?
Have you got inside knowledge here or are you speculating?
I know that the transmissions are different and I know that the 3500 makes more power.
Bruce

Bruce you make good points. I am speculating about the software differences for two major reasons.

#1 it would be very expensive to write a completely different software program for the 2500 and 3500, even though the vehicles have the same exact mechanical components.
#2 when Ram has TSB and software upgrades, it is the same "part number" for the 2500 and 3500. If they had different software, the updates wouldn't be the exact same.

I think there is a HUGE difference between European vehicles and the 3/4 and 1 ton trucks that we are discussing. Lets take the Ford series, which are IDENTICAL between the 250 and 350. The only difference between the 2 is an overload spring pack and a 2" taller spacer on the rear wheel. That is the ONLY difference. Is there any example of European vehicle where the vehicles are IDENTICAL and yet have different software settings? I would guess that no such thing occurs in Europe.

I am only comparing SRW trucks with the 68RFE transmission when I discuss the 2500 and 3500. As far as I know, there is ZERO mechanical difference, same exact rear axle, same exact rear axle ratio, same exact transmission (unless you opt for the Aisin in the 3500) and same exact power output of the engine. Only the DRW model offers the larger rear axle and different rations.

And yes... the engineers are chosen with specific performance goals in mind. For the 2500, the SPECIFIC goal is to keep it a class 2B vehicle, as I have stated. The class 2B rating keeps the GVWR at 10000 lbs or less. I'm not telling you to drive your truck any differently, I am only answering the OP's question that MECHANICALLY there is NO DIFFERENCE (other than 500 lbs spring pack) between the SRW 3500 and the 2500 with the 68RFE trans.

 

[spoon059]

I am sure there is some merit to this, however, I also think keeping up with the competition is plays a bigger part.

An '01 Ram 3500 dually with a 6spd manual and 4:10 gears is rated 21,500 GCW. A new Ram 3500 dually with 4:10 gears is rated 38,000 GCW. Do you think the new truck is really 16,000 lbs. bigger and better? If they were parked side by side I would be hard pressed to tell the difference.

Nick

HUGE differences between the -01 and the 16. Stronger frame, better brakes, stronger transmission, integrated exhaust brake, bigger wheels with higher rated tires, stronger axles, etc. I would argue that the new truck is 8 tons stronger in 15 years. The advances are amazing.

 

[NIsaacs]

Actually, the truck in my signature has a 39,100 lb GCWR and 30,050 lb trailer tow rating.

Rusty

Yes, I can't keep up with Ram's numbers, they change every year

I just checked on the 4500/5500 at 33,500/38,500, they are almost up to Rams Flagship truck, (the 3500 Pickup) If bigger is better they should be more but aren't? Wonder why? Because the market wants pickups not cab chassis so they get all the attention and hype.

As an owner of a lot of Dodge trucks and heavy RV's, would you say that your new '16 is 17,600 lbs. more capable than your '02? What about your '11? I don't remember the rating on them but I know it is a lot less, yet the truck is very similar to the 16 model

PS: The '17 dually just went up to 31,210, Lol

Nick.

 

[NIsaacs]

HUGE differences between the -01 and the 16. Stronger frame, better brakes, stronger transmission, integrated exhaust brake, bigger wheels with higher rated tires, stronger axles, etc. I would argue that the new truck is 8 tons stronger in 15 years. The advances are amazing.

Have you ever towed 8 ton with a pickup, not to mention 15 ton?

This is what 15 ton looks like. Would you really want to tow this complete combo with a new 16 dually?

Nick

 

[spoon059]

Have I and would I want to? No to probably not.

The most I tow on a regular basis is about 9500 lbs. I have no need or desire for a heavier camper at this point and have no piece of equipment nor trailer large enough for a heavier weight than that.

I'm not sure that if I DID have that much weight to tow that I would want to tow it with a pickup truck, in all honesty. But just because I don't want to doesn't mean that a more competent driver couldn't, shouldn't or wouldn't. I used to ski double black diamond slopes in New England... now I can barely ski intermediate slopes in the Mid Atlantic. Just because I don't ski double blacks anymore doesn't mean that nobody should skit them and they should disappear from the face of the earth...

Then again, if for some reason my needs changed then I would much rather pull that combo with a new 3500 than an older 3500...

 

[NIsaacs]

HUGE differences between the -01 and the 16. Stronger frame, better brakes, stronger transmission, integrated exhaust brake, bigger wheels with higher rated tires, stronger axles, etc. I would argue that the new truck is 8 tons stronger in 15 years. The advances are amazing.

Thank you for the response, however I am not done with you yet

So lets hear your argument. What do use to compare the two trucks with, just because Ram says so? The rates just went up again. Do you think that Ram built a bigger truck in 17 to justify this 1100 lbs. increase in capacity or do you think maybe Ford caused it?

The '01 is under rated and the '17 is over rated, in my opinion.

Nick

 

[spoon059]

I am far from an engineer, so I cannot speculate on over and under rating of mechanical parts. I know that things were substantially upgraded between 2001 and 2016, with the intent to make the truck stronger, faster, safer and able to stop quicker. I know that Ram wouldn't take the chance to over rate a vehicle to make it unsafe. I know enough about marketing to believe, as I stated above, that vehicle ratings are a combination of marketing, legal, engineering and accounting. They want to carry a balance that allows them the higher number than competition, while remaining structural able to safely carry the load, without absorbing higher warranty costs and without a liability for an unsafe vehicle.

I believe that these trucks have built in "wiggle room" to allow them to step up their numbers on a yearly basis to compete against the other manufacturers. In other words, maybe the new Ram is truly rated to 33K lbs towing... but since Ford and GM are only 29K lbs, Ram only announces 30K towing. Then when Ford and GM up their numbers for 2017, Ram has a little more room to bump up their numbers a little bit more.

At the end of the day, these vehicles have to pass some sort of standardized testing to show they can carry their loads. Hard to say the numbers are inflated if they can pass these tests. All that being said, I don't know that I would ever want to tow that much weight with a pickup truck that weights 1/3 of the trailer weight. That is just a personal preference... much like skiing on double black diamonds vs intermediate slopes.

 

[SnoKing]

Thank you for the response, however I am not done with you yet

So lets hear your argument. What do use to compare the two trucks with, just because Ram says so? The rates just went up again. Do you think that Ram built a bigger truck in 17 to justify this 1100 lbs. increase in capacity or do you think maybe Ford caused it?

The '01 is under rated and the '17 is over rated, in my opinion.

Nick

My guess is you have never driven or towed with a 2013+ 3500 SRW or Duallie truck. I towed a 12,400 pound 5th wheel for 11 years with a 2001.5 2500 4x4 that had around 8K spent on it to beef up the transmission, smart controller, injectors, exhaust system, exhaust brake, gauges, timing box, 3rd gen track bar, steering box brace, Rancho stocks and the list goes on and on.

Fast forward to Sept 2015 and I bought a 2015 3500 SRW SB 4x4 CC and towed the same trailer to Arizona and back last winter. It was child's play to the 3500 and well balance to the 2500 after all the mods. This year we came to Arizona with a 16K 39'4" 5th wheel being towed by the 3500. Other then the length getting in and out of service stations the new rig was 10 times more relaxed to tow with including the almost 2 tons more weight and 8 foot longer taller. We were loaded heavy in both the truck and trailer at 25K+ as full timers.

Buy a new one with the factory puck system, drop a hitch in the bed and turn the four lock handles, hook up a trailer, set the brake controller selections and off you go. No extra gauges needed or required, no transmission to beef up, push a button on the steering wheel to check air pressure in the tires, no external XM radio to install, truck answers the phone for you, seats are heated and cooled. And it is quiiiiet!

Do I miss the spirited performance of the 2001.5 running around bob tail, yes once in awhile. It was a 7K hot rod.

But, there is no going back.

#ad

 

[SnoKing]

All that being said, I don't know that I would ever want to tow that much weight with a pickup truck that weights 1/3 of the trailer weight. That is just a personal preference... much like skiing on double black diamonds vs intermediate slopes.

I drove this semi in the late 70's for three years. Titan 90 Chevy weighed 15K, the fully load trailer weighed 65K. So what's your problem. SNOKING

#ad

 

[gsbrockman]

Great post, Snoking.

I was awaiting a post similar to yours.

Previously----all I'd gained from this thread (???) :-laf was there's barely little to NO significant changes in any key components (frames, springs, brakes, axle ratings, wheel ratings, tire ratings) yet the RAM simply goes up in GVWR & GCWR on paper every year (whether it be 2nd GEN to 3rd GEN or 3rd GEN to 4th GEN).

Additionally....I learned that 4500 / 5500 Cab & Chassis trucks suck {the hind teat} even though I know that 4500's and 5500's are "turned down" for longevity and fuel economy...reasons that most true fleet purchasers desire.

Lastly.......based on pictures I see.....it's always acceptable to tow 30,000 lbs with a '74 F-350 Fummins and then question other's ability / truck capacity when the person in question is an owner of a "Flagship Truck". In a nutshell....there's a lot of engineering that goes into these trucks, and my level of confidence in them is backed and supported by what the engineers state are true GVWR's and GCWR's...and is also supported by 183,754 real world miles of use on my '14.

I don't question other's opinion and real-world experiences of peach pie when all I eat is apple pie. Until I cram a little peach pie into my pie*hole.....then, and only then, can I make any type of accurate assessment regarding peach pie. Translation : take your "opinions" to the Cummins Conversion forums and continue opining there until you get some seat time in a '13 and newer RAM pickup.

This thread can't get locked fast enough.....IMO. :-laf

 

[kthaxton]

At the end of the day, these vehicles have to pass some sort of standardized testing to show they can carry their loads. .

Just as an FYI, only recently did a standardized test get used, SAE J2807
http://www.trucktrend.com/how-to/towing/1502-sae-j2807-tow-tests-the-standard/

Ram has been adhering to it for the last several years.....I think Ford and Chevy either have just begun, or are about to begin adhering to it as well.

To me, this means current ratings actually mean something.

 

[Killgore]

The original legitimate question that was asked by the OP dealt with an '11 2500. His experience level, including age, health is not known as well as the condition of his truck including any modifications. Obviously, there are several levels of expertise on this thread with some drivers that I would put in the professional category and several individuals who have very insightful knowledge.

When I attended the CMEP in Columbus several years ago I was blown away by the frame and running gear on the 2013 that was on display. It was clearly light-years beyond my 2006 and obviously built for heavy work. I was impressed but too broke to do anything other than admire the improvements.

For too many years I drove a ready-mix concrete truck with 66,000 lbs. balanced on three axles carrying a shifting load with a high center of gravity. I never rolled one and was the driver who was called on to put them in tight places on the side of mountains when other drivers shook their heads and walked away. Today, I don't want to have that sucking feeling against the seat cover when I hitch-up the camper and go somewhere. Living on the edge is invigorating as a young man but it sucks when you get old.

-Ed

 

[SnoKing]

I might also add that with our 3.42 gears and driving it 1400 miles in the first 48 hours that we owned it, that cruising at 80 MPH the truck is like it is on rails and turning 1750 RPM's getting 18 MPG. DW share the driving on the trip home from the dealer in Colorado and she also cruised along at 80 MPH when it was her turn to drive. 1400 miles in 48 hours and two nights motel receipts. Left Monday and 25 minutes after noon and pulling into our driveway at 25 after noon on Wednesday. At 60 MPH in 5th gear towing the trailer at 60 MPH it is turning 1700 RPMs.

I knocked the 3.42 gearing for SRW until I owned one. With the lower first and second gear in the Aisin the 3.42's work great. Old truck had 4:10's and it got busy cruising bob tail at higher freeway speeds. With the 2015 I have to use the cruise control or I find myself speeding. SNOKING

 

[Killgore]

Chris, with my AD G-56 in sixth gear I am coming out of the sweet-spot at 64 MPH; two different horses but with the same pedigree. My only question for the benefit of the OP is whether his horse is more like mine or yours as far as the frame and running gear. I don't know, just asking.

 

[SnoKing]

Chris, with my AD G-56 in sixth gear I am coming out of the sweet-spot at 64 MPH; two different horses but with the same pedigree. My only question for the benefit of the OP is whether his horse is more like mine or yours as far as the frame and running gear. I don't know, just asking.

The question the OP has never return to address is if he has 17" wheels and tires, and is willing to spend the bucks for 18's, 20's or 19.5's. I see no problem pushing is leaf spring rear axle to 7K with 18's or 20's, or more than 7K with 19.5's. Leafs will need some help, but the tires need to be addressed first. Would I say this about a 2014+ 2500 with rear coils, no!

SNOKING

 

[Killgore]

A major point, and of course this changes the scenario. What modifications have been made to adapt the truck for what he will be asking it to do?

 

[SnoKing]

Another thing to remember is that the addition of air bags or Timbner helpers places load on the truck frame at a point that the manufacture did not plan on. This was a real issue on 1/2 trucks with their lighter frames, however something that everyone should be aware of. If you looked at frames for years they got skinnier over the rear axles. SNOKING

 

[NIsaacs]

Just as an FYI, only recently did a standardized test get used, SAE J2807
http://www.trucktrend.com/how-to/towing/1502-sae-j2807-tow-tests-the-standard/

Ram has been adhering to it for the last several years.....I think Ford and Chevy either have just begun, or are about to begin adhering to it as well.

To me, this means current ratings actually mean something.

Yes, I remember when Ram started that, I think it was with the big jump in ratings, maybe '13 or 14. I wonder if they confirm when they raise it every year?

And for the guys trucks I insulted, I said never said the new trucks are not capable, I would load one up to the 40k and hit the road. But I am always heavy and don't mind the ratings on my '01, I just question the big difference between them.

Jeeze.... I am one of Ram's biggest fans......

Nick

 

[TCollier]

My 5er had my 06 2500 1000 lbs over the weight rating which put it equal to SRW 3500 rating. I had air bags with 35 psi in them and the truck was level so I used the "the only difference between a 25 & 35 is one leaf so the air bags give me a 35". It towed good, didn't feel sloppy. I installed the basic gauges and was building a list; steering stabilizer & beefier steering box, exhaust brake, in cab air bag control, wider tires, were the first. Got a lot of info on here for the best way to go. I hadn't towed too far with it yet, stayed along the coast. After considering the time and money my little growing list would cost for the thousandth time, I finally admitted that even with all that stuff, it will still be a overloaded 2500 in the least or a maxed out srw 3500 at the most. Then I thought about having to swerve hard or slam on brakes or bad weather or driving to Gatlinburg... with my family onboard. I spent the next 8 months making preparations to afford a new truck. After deducting what the upgrades and a smoked transmission would eventually cost and adding the value my 3rd gen was getting, it was a no brainer. I went with a DRW as overkill but I definitely feel good about having it. And the trip to Gatlinburg was great.

 

[ChrisOlson]

I might also add that with our 3.42 gears and driving it 1400 miles in the first 48 hours that we owned it, that cruising at 80 MPH the truck is like it is on rails and turning 1750 RPM's getting 18 MPG. DW share the driving on the trip home from the dealer in Colorado and she also cruised along at 80 MPH when it was her turn to drive. 1400 miles in 48 hours and two nights motel receipts. Left Monday and 25 minutes after noon and pulling into our driveway at 25 after noon on Wednesday. At 60 MPH in 5th gear towing the trailer at 60 MPH it is turning 1700 RPMs.

I knocked the 3.42 gearing for SRW until I owned one. With the lower first and second gear in the Aisin the 3.42's work great. Old truck had 4:10's and it got busy cruising bob tail at higher freeway speeds. With the 2015 I have to use the cruise control or I find myself speeding. SNOKING

WHAT HE SAID ^^^^^^^

I have a 13 3500 CCSB SRW with 18 inch tires. I reiterate everything Snoking said. Amazing trucks. I am considering a Dually though if I upgrade to a much larger fifth wheel. Otherwise I am perfectly content with the present truck as is!

Great thread here. Lots of information thank you snoking for your informed input.

Chris