Go Back   iRV2 Forums > TRAVEL TRAILER, 5th WHEEL & TRUCK CAMPER FORUMS > Trailer Towing and Tow Vehicles Discussion
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-09-2013, 06:44 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
onechaddude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,542
2013 ram tow ratings

I just read on motor trend app that the tow ratings were increasing significantly on the new ram trucks. To the tune of 30,000 towing on a 3500 with a 37,600 GCWR. The 2500 had a tow rating of 18,350 lb. These are impressive numbers and should attract many heavy haulers.
Chad
__________________

__________________
onechaddude is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 01-09-2013, 08:35 AM   #2
Moderator Emeritus
 
RustyJC's Avatar


 
Texas Boomers Club
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Cypress, Texas USA
Posts: 8,854
Well, here's what Robert Patton (owner of the Turbodiesel Register website) posted this morning - supposedly he got the data from Ram at midnight last night.

Quote:
Ram to Build Most Capable Trucks Ever

By Robert Patton | Published Today | Press Releases | Unrated


• Ram 3500 Heavy Duty’s maximum trailer weight of 30,000 pounds far surpasses closest competitor’s 23,100-pound max

• 850 lb.-ft. Cummins Turbo Diesel is tops for torque

• 37,600-pound Gross Combined Weight Rating leads all heavy-duty pickups

• Ram 2500 leads all -ton pickups

• Ram Chassis Cab trucks also deliver best-in-class towing

In the quest to build the most capable trucks available, Ram officially released class-leading towing and weight ratings for its 2013 line of Ram Heavy Duty pickups and Chassis Cab trucks.

The Ram 3500 Heavy Duty pickup will claim a 30,000-pound trailer capacity thanks to a new class-exclusive 50,000 pounds-per-square-inch, high-strength steel frame, improved transfer case, higher-load transmission, an upgraded 6.7-liter Cummins Turbo Diesel engine with a best-in-class 850 lb.-ft. of torque and other significant driveline upgrades.

Ram’s closest competitor is limited to a 23,100-pound maximum trailer.

"We built the new 2013 Ram Heavy Duty to be the undisputed Heavy Duty ‘King of the Road.’ These new rigs deliver on the number one key attribute most critical to these customers: uncompromising capability,” said Fred Diaz, President and CEO — Ram Truck Brand and Chrysler de Mexico, Chrysler Group LLC. “Towing capability, reliability and engine performance are ranked first through third, respectively, with HD customers. The 2013 Ram Heavy Duty trucks unequivocally deliver all those things, as well as a very low total cost of ownership.”

The Ram 3500’s Gross Combined Weight Rating (GCWR) -- which is defined by the maximum combined weight of the truck, payload and trailer -- has been raised to 37,600 pounds, which again far surpasses the closest competitor’s 30,500-pound GCWR.

Ram has increased the capability in its other truck models as well.

For 2013, the Ram 2500 will also benefit from increased towing and GCWR. At 18,350 and 25,000, Ram 2500’s towing and GCW ratings are also best among -ton pickups.

Ram Chassis Cab trucks also deliver maximum capability with best-in-class towing and GCWR figures 29,600 pounds and 37,500 pounds, respectively (5500 model).

Ram Heavy Duty adds a number of new features for 2013, including a factory-integrated fifth-wheel and gooseneck hitch mount, a 17,000-pound Class V hitch with 1,800 pounds of tongue weight, class-exclusive electronic stability control (ESC) for dual-rear-wheels and a new Center High-Mounted Stop Light (CHMSL) –positioned camera, the first of its kind in the heavy-duty pickup category, to provide a full view of the bed for easier hook-up of fifth-wheel or gooseneck trailers as well as monitoring cargo.

For 2013, all Ram Heavy Duty diesels benefit from an all-new cooling system. A high-efficiency fan, dual radiators, dual transmission coolers and low-slung charge air cooler afford 25 percent more heat-rejection capacity. Lower operating temperatures deliver improved performance, durability and lower operating costs. Cummins Turbo Diesel-equipped Ram trucks also provide best-in-class 15,000-mile oil change intervals.

Ram is also introducing an industry-exclusive Ram Active Air intake system. When the intake system senses extreme heat, it draws cooler air from the front of the vehicle – a function that also engages at high altitudes for superior throttle response in low oxygen environments. When conditions are wet from snow, ice or water-fording, the system pulls air from an under-hood inlet, clear from snow packing and water.

Also among the upgrades for 2013, Ram Heavy Duty front drive shafts and U-joints are sized larger to align with the truck’s new Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) and Gross Combination Weight Rating (GCWR).

To handle the best-in-class towing and payload capability of the new Ram Heavy Duty, a new front and rear suspension system with advanced geometry builds upon the chassis improvements and greatly improves overall roll stiffness. An advanced three-link front suspension on the Ram 3500 is necessary for the vehicle’s higher GVWR and for use with heavy front loads, including snow plows. Additionally, a newly designed Hotchkiss leaf spring rear suspension on the Ram 3500 offers improved ride and handling while delivering higher towing and payload capability.
Source HERE.

Rusty
__________________

__________________
2016 Ram Longhorn 3500 Dually 4x4 CCLB, 385/900 Cummins, Aisin AS69RC, 4.10
2014.5 DRV Mobile Suites 38RSSA #6972
Come join us on a TEXAS BOOMERS rally!
RustyJC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 06:01 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 368
Nice commercial posting. For who knows what reason the stronger frame is used only on the 2013 Ram 3500 trucks and is unchanged for the 2500 trucks. With the same frame the increase in GCWR for the 2500 needs to be taken with a large grain of salt.

Same applies to the 17,000 lb. rating of the Class V hitch. Class V hitches are rated for a maximum of 12,000 lbs. unless they are the load distributing type. Doubt that the stock 3500 and 2500 trucks come with a load distributing hitch system.

Pickups are the most profitable vehicles by far that are sold by the manufacturers. They make more in profit per unit than with their top of the line luxury sedans. That has caused them to get in a numbers war game where one manufacturer provides a 700 ft lb torque engine and then their competitor comes out the following year with 765 and then the next year someone has 800 ft lb of torque and the year after that 850. Is anyone naive enough to think that this is going to noticeably improve performance and handling and reliability? Personally I would rather see improvement in fuel economy than in 0-60 MPH drag strip times.

At least with regard to the diesel trucks the reverse has occurred. GM has had to redesign its diesel engines 5 times over the past 10 years alone. Ram has changed the emissions systems for its diesel trucks 3 times in the past 3 years.

The entire load capacity ratings is another case of misdirection. Ram trucks and GM trucks use the same AAM manufactured axles on their 3/4 and 1-ton pickups and these axles and their wheel bearings are rated as having a 10,900 lb. load capacity. Why the differences in RAWR between trucks? Well it largely comes down to the capacity of the leaf springs and the capacity of the rims and the tires.

Most of these trucks come from the factory with tires rated at 3200 lbs. or less which equates to a SRW maximum load capacity of 6400 lbs. and subtracting the weight of the truck and the calcs work out to roughly a 3,000 lb. payload capacity. One has to completely ignore the ability of owners to add helper springs, air bags, adjustable shocks, and higher capacity rims and tires to take the sticker rating as gospel.

What is more relevant to how good a truck will perform in the real world and not on paper the new J2807 tests should be used. This procedure was followed by the mrtrailer.com people with their 2011 Hurt Locker tests and by Car and Driver magazine with their 2012 tests of 1-ton trucks which were actually towing loads in the flats and in the mountains. For people wanting a truck to tow a heavy trailer the results on mountain towing and transmission temperatures and downhill grade control with the different trucks' engine, exhaust brake, and transmissions working as a unit, is the information upon which to base objective conclusions about the best truck for the job.

I understand full well that the majority of people buy based on brand loyalty or even their dad's brand loyalty but if someone wants to be objective there are good sources of information available and one does not need to rely on the manufacturers marketing hype.
__________________
elkhornsun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 06:35 PM   #4
Moderator Emeritus
 
RustyJC's Avatar


 
Texas Boomers Club
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Cypress, Texas USA
Posts: 8,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhornsun View Post
Nice commercial posting.
Nope, just putting the information referred to by the OP out on the forum for discussion.

Rusty
__________________
2016 Ram Longhorn 3500 Dually 4x4 CCLB, 385/900 Cummins, Aisin AS69RC, 4.10
2014.5 DRV Mobile Suites 38RSSA #6972
Come join us on a TEXAS BOOMERS rally!
RustyJC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 08:42 PM   #5
Moderator Emeritus
 
TXiceman's Avatar


 
Vintage RV Owners Club
Texas Boomers Club
Oklahoma Boomers Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Full Time, TX Home Base
Posts: 17,150
Blog Entries: 21
When will it stop.....nannnan nannnana mine is bigger than yours.

Ken
__________________
Amateur Radio Operator (KE5DFR)|Full-Time! - 2012 6.7L Ford Crew Cab Dually -2013 HitchHiker Champagne 38RLRSB - Travel with one Standard Schnauzer and one small Timneh African Gray Parrot
TXiceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 09:36 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
tuffr2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Palm Coast Florida
Posts: 2,457
Holy Cow, Holy Cow twice.

Sounds like Ram is serious. Stronger frame, dual trans coolers, dual radiators, probably dual oil coolers.

What came 1st, bigger trailers or bigger trucks? The F-150 I had was a bigger truck than the old F-250's.

I went to Tom Raper RV to look for a small 22 - 24 foot trailer. All they had were rows and rows of 32 to 34 foot bumper pull trailers. So I guess trucks have to get bigger and stronger.

I wonder if a 2013 Ram 3500 can pull a DP backwards now. Seems diesel truck engines are starting to overlap DP power.

Cool !!!!
__________________
tuffr2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 12:59 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhornsun View Post
Nice commercial posting. For who knows what reason the stronger frame is used only on the 2013 Ram 3500 trucks and is unchanged for the 2500 trucks. With the same frame the increase in GCWR for the 2500 needs to be taken with a large grain of salt.

Same applies to the 17,000 lb. rating of the Class V hitch. Class V hitches are rated for a maximum of 12,000 lbs. unless they are the load distributing type. Doubt that the stock 3500 and 2500 trucks come with a load distributing hitch system.

Pickups are the most profitable vehicles by far that are sold by the manufacturers. They make more in profit per unit than with their top of the line luxury sedans. That has caused them to get in a numbers war game where one manufacturer provides a 700 ft lb torque engine and then their competitor comes out the following year with 765 and then the next year someone has 800 ft lb of torque and the year after that 850. Is anyone naive enough to think that this is going to noticeably improve performance and handling and reliability? Personally I would rather see improvement in fuel economy than in 0-60 MPH drag strip times.

At least with regard to the diesel trucks the reverse has occurred. GM has had to redesign its diesel engines 5 times over the past 10 years alone. Ram has changed the emissions systems for its diesel trucks 3 times in the past 3 years.

The entire load capacity ratings is another case of misdirection. Ram trucks and GM trucks use the same AAM manufactured axles on their 3/4 and 1-ton pickups and these axles and their wheel bearings are rated as having a 10,900 lb. load capacity. Why the differences in RAWR between trucks? Well it largely comes down to the capacity of the leaf springs and the capacity of the rims and the tires.

Most of these trucks come from the factory with tires rated at 3200 lbs. or less which equates to a SRW maximum load capacity of 6400 lbs. and subtracting the weight of the truck and the calcs work out to roughly a 3,000 lb. payload capacity. One has to completely ignore the ability of owners to add helper springs, air bags, adjustable shocks, and higher capacity rims and tires to take the sticker rating as gospel.

What is more relevant to how good a truck will perform in the real world and not on paper the new J2807 tests should be used. This procedure was followed by the mrtrailer.com people with their 2011 Hurt Locker tests and by Car and Driver magazine with their 2012 tests of 1-ton trucks which were actually towing loads in the flats and in the mountains. For people wanting a truck to tow a heavy trailer the results on mountain towing and transmission temperatures and downhill grade control with the different trucks' engine, exhaust brake, and transmissions working as a unit, is the information upon which to base objective conclusions about the best truck for the job.

I understand full well that the majority of people buy based on brand loyalty or even their dad's brand loyalty but if someone wants to be objective there are good sources of information available and one does not need to rely on the manufacturers marketing hype.
I have been unable to find where the 2500 didn't get the new frame upgrade. Are you sure on that?
__________________
Cumminsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 09:25 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,079
IMO the RAM is wisely concentrating on the bread and butter end of LDT market which is commerce. Especially with the 3500 DRW that seems to have a 14000 GVWR 9750 RAWR 6200 FAWR and a much heavier frame with 850 ft/lbs torque from the Cummins and the big heavy Asian tranny.

GM did much the same in '11 with the new heavier frames/other upgrades on the DRW in particular with higher 13xxx GVWR 9375 RAWR 6000 FAWR and 22xxx lb tow ratings. In '05 time frame GM derated their 3500 DRW RAWR from 8700 to 8200 lbs and lost many GM owners in commerce. Sales dropped. GM admitted they made a mistake in not keeping up with Dodge and Ford.

As RVers we can enjoy the weights race.
__________________
'03 Dodge 2500 Cummins HO 3.73 NV5600 Jacobs
'98 3500 DRW 454 4x4 4.10 crew cab
'97 Park Avanue RK 28' 2 slides
JIMNLIN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2013, 08:47 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
wingnut60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wherever the Suites is
Posts: 2,982
So, with a 37600 GCVW, and a 30000 trailer, the tow truck has to be less than 7600lbs?
Obviously, Dodge has seriously upgraded the specs, but like all the mfgs, they are putting out marketing tripe for one-up status.
Joe
__________________
'15 38RSSA Mobile Suites
'05 36TK3 Mobile Suites--retired but not forgotten
'17 F450--trying one more Ford
'09 F450--died, replaced with '10--retired
wingnut60 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2013, 09:20 AM   #10
Moderator Emeritus
 
RustyJC's Avatar


 
Texas Boomers Club
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Cypress, Texas USA
Posts: 8,854
The example you cite would be for a Ram 3500 ST standard cab 4x2 long bed dually - the actual chart figures are a GCWR of 37,600 with a maximum trailering equipment weight of 30,010. This is the best case scenario, but I don't disagree that this base truck with no options and only a 150 lb driver doesn't represent the typical configuration or loading scenario for those of us who pull 5th wheels. That's why a number of us urge prospective buyers to go by the manufacturers' GCWR, GVWR and GAWR ratings less the laden curb weight of the actual truck equipped and loaded as it will be when one hits the road. Don't just read the maximum trailer tow rating and stop there - understand what it's based on.

By the way, the release document providing the 2013 Ram 3500 ratings is based on the following:

Quote:
1. All weights in pounds unless stated. Payload and Max Trailer values are rounded to the nearest 10 lbs.

2. Payload = GVWR - Base Wt.

3. Payload and maximum trailer weight are mutually exclusive.

4. GCWR is a defined value from Vehicle Development in lbs.

5. Max Trailer = GCWR - Base Weight - 170 lbs (Driver weight + 20 lbs. Optional Equipment).
In Ram's Bodybuilder's Guide which is the Bible for the truck's ratings, the following statement is included in the Notes section:

Quote:
Additionally, the GAWRs and GVWRs should never be exceeded.
In 5th wheel applications, it's common for SRW trucks to hit the GVWR or rear axle GAWR limit long before reaching the maximum trailer tow rating or GCWR.

IMHO, the most significant numbers in this release are the 37,600 lb GCWR, the 14,000 lb GVWR and the 9,750 lb rear axle GAWR.

Rusty
__________________
2016 Ram Longhorn 3500 Dually 4x4 CCLB, 385/900 Cummins, Aisin AS69RC, 4.10
2014.5 DRV Mobile Suites 38RSSA #6972
Come join us on a TEXAS BOOMERS rally!
RustyJC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2013, 09:53 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
wingnut60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wherever the Suites is
Posts: 2,982
Thanks, Rusty. Good info.
Joe
__________________
'15 38RSSA Mobile Suites
'05 36TK3 Mobile Suites--retired but not forgotten
'17 F450--trying one more Ford
'09 F450--died, replaced with '10--retired
wingnut60 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 01:40 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 368
Hi Cumminsfan,

The Ram product releases that have mentioned the new frame with its additional cross members, etc. have also stated that it would only be provided for the 1-ton trucks. No idea why Ram is doing this, it may be added cost or it may be the added weight that cuts into the payload rating for a 3/4 ton truck.

When GM produced its new fully boxed frames in 2011 that increase torsional rigidity by 500% (according to GM) they used these frames on both the 2500 and 3500 trucks. I can see where from a ease of manufacturing it is advantageous to have virtually identical truck frames and components moving down the production line and only change the rear brakes and rear axle and add helper springs to create a 1-ton Dooley instead of a SRW 3/4 ton truck.
__________________
elkhornsun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 10:03 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,079
Quote:
For 2013, the Ram 2500 will also benefit from increased towing and GCWR. At 18,350 and 25,000, Ram 2500s towing and GCW ratings are also best among -ton pickups
Looks like the '13 2500 got the same frame upgrade as the 3500 SRW. Brake and frame specs are the same for both trucks.


'12 Rams had 9000 and 9600 GVWR with 22000 GCWR and 15000 lb tow rating. These are max numbers.
__________________
'03 Dodge 2500 Cummins HO 3.73 NV5600 Jacobs
'98 3500 DRW 454 4x4 4.10 crew cab
'97 Park Avanue RK 28' 2 slides
JIMNLIN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 11:44 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Ray,IN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North America somewhere
Posts: 13,700
What is this beast going to cost?
__________________

__________________
Ray,IN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.