Low tow ratings for 2016?

[Brett Maverick]

The tow charts for the 2016 3500 crew cab long bed 4x4 Rams seem confusing,

With the Single Rear Wheel (SRW) The heavy HO engine with the heavy duty Aisin transmission actually loses a little tow capacity over the 68RFE, if that's the case why spend the extra money for it?
And if you compare two identical HO trucks w/ the 3.42 rear , with the only difference being the Aisin and SRW vs DRW, the DRW truck has 4K more trailer towing capacity.
My 12 year old old 3500 SRW has a 15,500 tow capacity, you'd think a comparable new 3500 would have gone up more than 2000 Lbs towing capacity.

Are these charts correct?
The capacity on that HO 3500 w/ Aisin seems underrated...........

 

[Kirwin]

Aisin weighs more hence less total weight allowed to be towed.

 

[Brett Maverick]

I realize the Aisin weighs a bit more, but what's the incentive to pay for the HO diesel option and the Aisin heavy duty transmission, when it actually costs you towing capacity?
Also, why are the SRW's restricted to the 3.42 gear ratio?
A family member is looking to purchase a new truck, this chart has all but talked him out of the HO/Aisin option as there doesn't seem to be any sense in spending the extra money.

 

[gsbrockman]

The AISIN shines brightest in DRW configurations, and is actually under-utilized in the 3500 SRW model due to axle rating, tire ratings, two rear tires versus four rear tires, and available axle ratios with the DRW (3.73 & 4.10).

 

[SnoKing]

The AISIN shines brightest in DRW configurations, and is actually under-utilized in the 3500 SRW model due to axle rating, tire ratings, two rear tires versus four rear tires, and available axle ratios with the DRW (3.73 & 4.10).

Can we agree to disagree. The 68RFE has a 3.23 first gear and the Aisin has a 3.75 first gear. So the Aisin is better at launching a load and getting it moving. The Aisin second gear is lower also. The only place the ratios of the 68RFE are better is in reverse. And given how the newer 68RFE are setup to shift, I am very glad I stuck to my guns and got the Aisin.

SNOKING

 

[gsbrockman]

Can we agree to disagree. The 68RFE has a 3.23 first gear and the Aisin has a 3.75 first gear. So the Aisin is better at launching a load and getting it moving. The Aisin second gear is lower also. The only place the ratios of the 68RFE are better is in reverse. And given how the newer 68RFE are setup to shift, I am very glad I stuck to my guns and got the Aisin.

SNOKING

I won't disagree with you any on the above. Indeed the 1st & 2nd gear AISIN ratios are better---especially when coupled with the 3500 SRW's 3.42 ratio.

 

[Brett Maverick]

Guys, dont get lost in the minutia, it might have a better spread between a couple gears, but why does the option cost so much AND drop the tow rating? The HO/Aisin option should increase the tow rating not decrease it, You know, because of the better spread between the gears and all.
The SRW tow rating should be the same as the DRW, which would be 20,500 not 16,860.

 

[gsbrockman]

Link to tow ratings in question.......

 

[SnoKing]

Guys, dont get lost in the minutia, it might have a better spread between a couple gears, but why does the option cost so much AND drop the tow rating? The HO/Aisin option should increase the tow rating not decrease it, You know, because of the better spread between the gears and all.
The SRW tow rating should be the same as the DRW, which would be 20,500 not 16,860.

Because you have to also be able to handle the pin weight. This ratings indicate that someone at RAM has become educated on what it takes to tow a large trailer including hauling the pin weight down the road. Even the fact that they give the Long Box trucks higher GVWR ratings than the Short Box trucks indicates that they are also looking at stability issues based on wheel base. SNOKING

 

[Brett Maverick]

Heres the URL (Took a while to figure out how to post it) The chart I'm using is the 5th page.
View attachment 2016_ram_3500_towing_charts.pdf
http://www.ramtrucks.com/assets/towing_guide/pdf/2016_ram_3500_towing_charts.pdf

 

[Brett Maverick]

Tongue weight is usually about 15%-20%, the difference in payload capacity between SRW and DRW doesn't justify the restrictions.

 

[Kirwin]

A SRW truck is limited by the rear axle capacity of two tires, about 7K pounds. Can't get much of a gooseneck or 5th wheel and stay within its capacity. Hence the 3.43 ratio can support all the trucks supposed to pull. CAN it pull more? Sure. Should it? Probably not. Heavier trucks always can tow less as you take the GCWR -truck weight to get the tow rating.

 

[gsbrockman]

Guys, dont get lost in the minutia, it might have a better spread between a couple gears, but why does the option cost so much AND drop the tow rating? The HO/Aisin option should increase the tow rating not decrease it, You know, because of the better spread between the gears and all.
The SRW tow rating should be the same as the DRW, which would be 20,500 not 16,860.

There's 2,750 lbs difference in Rear GAWR between the 3500 SRW LWB and any 3500 DRW truck...................
4 rear tires have a higher load capacity than two rear tires.....

 

[JR]

The payload drops by 150 pounds between the 68RFE and the heavier Aisin, which coincides with the difference in the published curb weight. Thats simply reflecting the heavier weight of the Aisin. The higher the curb weight, the lower the payload ratings.

Payload and tow ratings are established based on the trucks configuration, IE cab, wheel base, and SRW/DRW. Not just engine/Trans options.

 

[SnoKing]

So my truck wighed 8300 with me and one box in the bed a quarter full. Hitch is another 270 lbs. Second box with golf clubs. I will be pushing 9k when I ready to drop you 2600-2800 pin weight in the bed. Not sure what part of this you are having a hard time with. SNOKING

 

[Newsa]

There's 2,750 lbs difference in Rear GAWR between the 3500 SRW LWB and any 3500 DRW truck...................
4 rear tires have a higher load capacity than two rear tires.....

Does the DRW also have an extra leaf in the springs & overload springs?

And a beefed up front end to handle the weight when braking?

 

[cmills]

The 3.42 may be capable to tow the rated weight but I would still like to have options of different axle ratios.

 

[SnoKing]

The 3.42 may be capable to tow the rated weight but I would still like to have options of different axle ratios.

I use to think the same thing, before I bought one. The long legs on the freeway are really nice. 1750 RPM's at 80 and getting 18 MPG with less that 1K on the clock!!! 21 MPG at 65, what is not to like about the 3.42 gears. SNOKING

 

[NIsaacs]

Guys, dont get lost in the minutia, but why does the option cost so much AND drop the tow rating?

It sounds like you are irritated at Ram and are taking it out on TDR members. Truck builders always do goofy things we have no control over. Just do the best you can with what is offered. (compromise). Tow ratings are not set in stone, that's a grey area.

Nick

 

[Newsa]

I use to think the same thing, before I bought one. The long legs on the freeway are really nice. 1750 RPM's at 80 and getting 18 MPG with less that 1K on the clock!!! 21 MPG at 65, what is not to like about the 3.42 gears. SNOKING

Been secretly loving my 3.42 for 2 years for this very reason. I've seen alot of hate for this rear end here. It will only extend the life of my Cummins because it makes fewer revolutions which add up over the life of the truck. Works well with the G56 which has only one overdrive gear. I just pick the best gear on my manual transmission. Don't have to worry about automatic transmission programming. Those with 2 overdrive gears may not appreciate it as much. I only tow 1/4 of the time, tho.