Tell me I didn't make a mistake.......

[runamuck]

Originally Posted by tuffr2

Good looking rig, and glad to hear the car like, smooth, quiet, ride was as good as people told you it would be. My experience towing reasonable size trailers with a half ton truck will continue to be a pleasant experiece.

That bobbling is normal when you hit a dip in the road.

To level the rig a bit more I would add air bags. I would give a Firestone store a call to get a price.

Good luck

I added a pair of Helwig helper springs on the rear of my 1500 gmc to better handle those dips in the highway. they are adjustable as to how much assist you get for daily driving and I have them set loose so they only come into play when we hit a stretch of roller coaster highway..not expensive. my son added airbags to his 100 ram and I may eventually do that but on the 10 or 11 trips we have on our rig so far these helper springs have seemed to make a noticeable difference

[Papa_Jim]

Our rig is in the same ballpark as the OPs rig, except we're using a Ram truck.


Everything about my Ram truck is great, except for the saggy rear coil spring suspension. I solved this by installing the AirLift 5000 rear air bag suspension kit, which works real cool. I can set the air pressure in the rear air bags from the driver's seat.


I think the OPs GM truck could benefit from the use of the rear air bag system. Another thought - I think the GM truck uses leaf springs in the rear. A truck suspension shop should be able to add an additional load leaf spring and switch out the rear shocks for something a little heavier.

[runamuck]

the gm 1500's do use leafs, that's why I added one to each side in the rear. easy to do and not expensive. there are several kinds out there that are adjustable so you dont sacrifice ride quality when not towing. I dont know what brand my son put on his 1500 ram but it was a little wishy washy till he did that. they are easy to install thru the springs. I did the extra leaf because the gmc has leafs already and all the air bag systems for it cost more. I also change out the rear shocks to Bilsteins.

[tuffr2]

Much better shocks will reduce the bounce you feel in the back.

But to level, I still say air bags because if you sag you just add more air. With springs, usually if you still sag there is nothing you can do. Someone mentioned adjustable springs but I would not want to mess with those in the rain or in the dark.

[richamor]

Returned home last night from another great trip to Bristol Dragway. Had a fantastic time and, once again, camped with some great folks. Trip meter shows 504.2 miles door to door and gas meter shows 10.3 MPG average. At the speeds I was driving the Ford 7.3 would not have done that well.

I hit a few long grades that seemed to tax the 5.3 just a bit and speed would drop to around the 60mph mark. I talked to the wife and IF we decide to head out west I will look in to some sort of forced air induction. Otherwise I'm gonna drive it as is and not give it's ability to tow another thought.

I will only add, and I know some will want to argue, that MY Ford 7.3 was not "gold". Bronze maybe...but not gold. The Chevy 5.3, while not gold either, is a helluva lot closer IMO.

[tuffr2]

I am kinda with you on the 7.3 diesel. To me it is not all that great as others say. It was very slow to build power and made a ton of noise.

60mph going up a hill is not that bad. And how about using the truck as a daily driver. Man, you are now spoiled.

[09 harley]

Originally Posted by RROLDSX

Your trailer isn’t heavy enough to warrant 3.73’s, I’d keep the 3.42 ratio.

There was research done by a team from Ford and Chevy. They found that the higher ratios had better mileage when towing and also better around town. The mileage was not as good on the highway without a trailer. The reason is that your engine doesn’t need to work as hard. I have a 2017 F250 with 7.2 gas and 4.30 axles. It is a towing beast and it has been better than I expected. The salesman said I didn’t need it and of course he never towed anything. I told him to orde it the way I wanted and it was the correct choice. I run about 2150 RPM’s at 65 MPH not exactly high revs. Going over the Cascade Range I get up to just under 3800. No sweat.
Bigger is better when it comes to trucks because it gives you some room to trade up to a larger RV.

[tuffr2]

It is always a fine line between fuel economy and engine rpms. I have seen tests that support 09 harley's post. What I read was that the additional rpms generated by the engine is off set a lot by working less hard. The higher rpm will use ever so slightly more fuel.

Now what I found even more interesting was how much better a higher rpm engine towed. Every tester could tell by the way the trucks went up a mountain.

All that being said, I would leave the truck alone and not change anything unless I could have the gearing changed and speedometer recalibrate by a very trust worthy person at a reasonable price.

Twice I looked into having gearing changed and neither time did I do it.

Sent from my SM-G900V using iRV2 - RV Forum mobile app

[richamor]

Either of you guys have a link to these tests? I'd be interested in reading how more RPM's use less fuel. Typical small blocks generally make their power in the upper RPM band. The 5.3 is no exception making max HP at 5600 and torque at 4100. The Ford 3.5 EB is even higher with HP at 6350 and TQ at 4250.

Less fuel at higher RPM goes against everything I've read, heard, and experienced. Not looking to argue anything just looking to learn something

Just out of curiosity........09harley..what sort of gas mileage do you get around town?

eta: I think you meant to say you had the 6.2L gas with 4:30 gears. That one max HP at 5750 and TQ at 3800. I can see how that would run up a hill:-)

[tuffr2]

Just to be clear I saw where more rpm's used more fuel but by ever slightest amount. Around .1 or .2 mpg.
I think the testers were surprised expecting a lot more fuel used when it turned out to be a little bit.

I saw the test a long time ago in 'Trailer Boat' magizine. I read the article about 3 times.

I would 'Google' Chevy 3.42 vs 3.73 fuel usage.

Sent from my SM-G900V using iRV2 - RV Forum mobile app

[tuffr2]

Hold your horses, I did the Google and seems the 3.73 gearing got between 1 and 2 mpg less from the 3.42 gearing. That is not as little as I said above.

I forget exactly what gears 'Trailer Boat' was testing. Might have been Rams 3.92 vs 4.10 gears.

Sent from my SM-G930V using iRV2 - RV Forum mobile app

[lcboy]

I had a 06 Chevy with 323 gears and it was a little weak taking off from a dead stop pulling my lawn mower and trailer . I had 373 gears installed and it was peppy then. I lost 1 mpg empty by going two sizes so every size should be around 1/2 mpg.

[09 harley]

Yes my engine is a 6.2 not a 7.2. Hate those typos. The test results showed better mileage while towing and better around town. Unloaded road mileage was not as good as you would expect. The load on the engine explains the test results. The article was put together by Ford, Chev and Chrysler engineers. I thought it was remarkable that they all came to the same conclusion.
My mileage while towing averages about 11.3. The highest I have seen on the road is 16.4. These are not great but I didn’t purchase an RV and a 22 foot long truck expecting good mileage. I wanted performance without going to diesel. This choice would be wrong if I had plans, which I don’t, of buying an RV of over 10 or 11K.
I just came back from a trip over the Cascades and back. I maintained 55-60 mph and never had to go lower than 4th or over 3500 rpm. To me that is what I wanted and expected when I bought my new truck.
Now I wish my Ford got 62 mpg like my 04 Prius did on my last trip to the coast. Never going to happen.
In these types of threads it seems that the problem is that people think they will get close to the factory figures while towing. You don’t.
If you buy a 3.5 ECOBOOST and expect good mileage when towing you’ll be disappointed. My friends that have them like the torque and simply fill them up when empty. I chose the 250 because it is much heavier duty than the 150. That’s what I wanted. I had a 250 van and compared to the 150 was night and day just like the trucks.
I hate long posts do I better quit. Safe travels to all.