Ram tops Consumer Reports pickup truck rankings.

[Deanh]

Anyone really concerned about the payload of the truck, most likely will be buying a 3/4 ton or 1 ton truck and skip right over the 1/2 ton. The 1/2 tons will tow occasionaly, so I expect the tow rating on such vehicles to be decent, but the payload is less imortant. Anyone really needed high capacity towing and payload will step up to the heavier duty models.

 

No statistics, just going buy observations and living in rural communities most my life.

not sure I would agree Chester, the F-150 is/ can be used as more of a day to day vehicle than Fords Superduties, and IMO having potentially more capacity than one needs is better than being caught with too little should the circumstances arise,....and thats where the 1/2 ton Dodge is compromised...

[fordmantpw]

Anyone really concerned about the payload of the truck, most likely will be buying a 3/4 ton or 1 ton truck and skip right over the 1/2 ton. The 1/2 tons will tow occasionaly, so I expect the tow rating on such vehicles to be decent, but the payload is less imortant. Anyone really needed high capacity towing and payload will step up to the heavier duty models.

 

No statistics, just going buy observations and living in rural communities most my life.

 

Absolutely no correct. Go spend a couple weekends in a campground. You'll be surprised how many half-tonners put the limits of their trucks to the test.

[Bryan1]

It's CU. It says what they say it says, and if you don't like it, you can kiss their feet and thank them for not taking your advertising, while they try to drum up relevance by relentlessly publicizing their test results.

 

I have to question their fuel economy testing for pickup trucks. Every truck. Every engine. Gets the same fuel economy. Every time. 15 mpg.

 

F-150: 15 mpg overall. (Both engines!)

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/ford/f-150.htm

 

Toyota Tundra: 15 mpg overall.

 

Nissan Frontier: 15 mpg overall.

 

Honda Ridgeline: 15 mpg overall.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/01/fuel-economy-vs-performance/index.htm

 

Ram: 15 mpg overall.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/07/16/ram-1500-best-truck-consumer-reports-says/2519369/

"The publication says it got "a class-leading 15 mpg overall in CR's own fuel economy tests."

 

Class leading?

[Deanh]

Absolutely no correct. Go spend a couple weekends in a campground. You'll be surprised how many half-tonners put the limits of their trucks to the test.

not to mention slide in Campers.......ie PAYLOAD.....

[RichardJensen]

Anyone really concerned about the payload of the truck, most likely will be buying a 3/4 ton or 1 ton truck and skip right over the 1/2 ton

 

Look. It's not like we're talking about a 2,100lb payload vs. a 2,200lb payload in the *max* payload.

 

We're talking about a truck that is at the absolute rock bottom of payload in the segment. And speaking of rocks, I can't imagine any landscaper buying a Ram. I can't imagine a carpenter buying a Ram. I can't imagine any professional in any trade that *requires* a truck buying a Ram.

 

Say you buy a 4x4 crewcab with a 1400lb payload. Okay. You're hauling 3 guys: That's about 500lbs right there coming off the payload. You're at 900lbs. Let's say you've got a full toolbox that weighs 150lbs. Boom. 750lbs.

 

You can *barely* haul a *fridge* at that point.

 

Now, with the 2,000lb payload of a typical Ford 4x4 crew, you're looking at almost double the *effective* payload for a *work* truck.

 

If Chrysler wants to sell trucks only to people that don't need them, then good luck surviving the next downturn.

Edited July 22, 2013 by RichardJensen

[jpd80]

The interesting point being that F150s product mix is 95% in favor of Double cabs and Crew cabs,

which is possibly completely different to the product mix in both Silverado and Ram as determined by their buyers

and what they expect each truc to do, be it hauling loads down the roads or just ferrying passengers and groceries around.

 

Ford's buyers seem unfazed that the ruck weighs the amounts it does and any lowering of that to achieve better economy

must be balanced against that efect on the thrucks other features like basic reserve of strength and how a lighter truck tows.

 

Look Ram, is there for the people who want it but I suspect that most buyers will still choose F Truck or Silverado over Ram

no matter how much economy Ram claims to have, I think its a credibility thing more to do with actual and perceived capability

Edited July 22, 2013 by jpd80

[fordmantpw]

Now, with the 2,000lb payload of a typical Ford 4x4 crew, you're looking at almost double the *effective* payload for a *work* truck.

 

Well, the 'typical' crew cab does not have a payload of 2k. Typical is probably closer to 1500, but you can get over 2k easily with a payload package.

[EBFlex]

Because the max payload on the Dodge is within about 100lbs of the minimum payload on a Ford?

 

If people aren't using their trucks to haul more than 1600lbs of payload, why are they even *buying* trucks in the first place?

 

Perhaps Dodge has come to terms with the fact that people aren't hauling anything at all with their trucks, and are planning accordingly.

 

----

 

And before you raise the '1/2-ton-with-3/4-ton-capability' argument regarding the F150, remember that the max payload on a Dodge Ram is almost the same as the car-based Ford Explorer. I mean, arguably, unless you're hauling stinky stuff or towing more than 8,000lbs, you might as well buy an Expedition or a Suburban.

 

I must correct some mis information. You stated that the max payload on the Ram is within 100 pounds of Fords minimum. Using the links you posted earlier, that is flatly false. The LOWEST F-150 payload is 1180. Giving Ford the benefit of the doubt because that is the Raptor, the next lowest is 1300 pounds. The HIGHEST payload for the Ram you can get is over 1900 pounds. A difference of 738 pounds (Raptor) or 618 pounds. You also stated that the Ram has almost the same MAX payload as the car based Explorer. Again, that is flatly false.

 

And you really need to re-examine the 1/2 ton pickup market if you think that all people do with a pickup is haul stuff in the bed that weighs more than 1600 pounds. Further, Ford has plenty of F-150s that are rated lower than the Explorer for payload so that argument is irrelevant.

[RichardJensen]

Okay, sorry I missed the standard cab section of the payload configurator.

 

Let me put this in different terms for you:

 

I can buy an 8' bed standard cab Dodge 1500 4x2 with a 1900lb capacity.

 

Or I can buy a crew cab F150 4x4 with a 1900lb capacity.

 

Look at the RAM configurator for any remotely popular cab/bed configuration and tell me what you see.

 

Quad and crew cabs hover around 1400lbs for 4x4 and 1600lbs for 4x2.

 

Now look at the F150 options.

Edited July 22, 2013 by RichardJensen

[EBFlex]

Well, the 'typical' crew cab does not have a payload of 2k. Typical is probably closer to 1500, but you can get over 2k easily with a payload package.

 

Just for S and Gs, I added up all the payloads of every F-150 crew listed on Ford's web site. There are 12 configurations. The average payload is 1733 pounds. That happens to be 266 pounds less than 2,000.

[Deanh]

I must correct some mis information. You stated that the max payload on the Ram is within 100 pounds of Fords minimum. Using the links you posted earlier, that is flatly false. The LOWEST F-150 payload is 1180. Giving Ford the benefit of the doubt because that is the Raptor, the next lowest is 1300 pounds. The HIGHEST payload for the Ram you can get is over 1900 pounds. A difference of 738 pounds (Raptor) or 618 pounds. You also stated that the Ram has almost the same MAX payload as the car based Explorer. Again, that is flatly false.

 

And you really need to re-examine the 1/2 ton pickup market if you think that all people do with a pickup is haul stuff in the bed that weighs more than 1600 pounds. Further, Ford has plenty of F-150s that are rated lower than the Explorer for payload so that argument is irrelevant.

EB the raptor isnt, and NEVER was designed for any sort of payload....and its not whether the do or dont carry a payload, just that if needed its there, safety cushion as such....there WILL be places where the Ram is out of its element, with the Ford you have the option no matter what, Should you not need those higher capacities? then those choices are there as well...choices you DONT have with the Ram...its interesting the route Dodge has taken,,,oooops, sorry I meant Ram ( sounds tougher....lol )

[EBFlex]

Under what configuration can you hit 1,900lbs with the Ram?

Per the site you linked:

2013 RAM 1500

TRADESMAN®

3.6L V6 FFV 24V VVT

REG | 8' | AUTO |4X2

[Anthony]

Well, the 'typical' crew cab does not have a payload of 2k. Typical is probably closer to 1500, but you can get over 2k easily with a payload package.

 

 

 

Typical is between 1,500 and 1,700 until you start opening the wallet a bit more for payload / towing packages. But, to be fair, payloads over 2k in that spec do exist...

Edited July 22, 2013 by Intrepidatious

[Deanh]

Per the site you linked:

2013 RAM 1500

TRADESMAN®

3.6L V6 FFV 24V VVT

REG | 8' | AUTO |4X2

TRADESMAN???????? seriously thats as bad as mentioning the payload of the Raptor....do you even know what the Tradesman entails?

[Deanh]

Per the site you linked:

2013 RAM 1500

TRADESMAN®

3.6L V6 FFV 24V VVT

REG | 8' | AUTO |4X2

you DO realize the trademan is basically a 1/2 ton with the 2500 underpinings right?...amd Im not sure, it may be being discontinued as the price was the same as the 2500 seires, so really waht was the point?...it was also pretty much just a pure commercial vehicle NOT an everyday vehicle as such...

[fordmantpw]

Just for S and Gs, I added up all the payloads of every F-150 crew listed on Ford's web site. There are 12 configurations. The average payload is 1733 pounds. That happens to be 2667 pounds less than 2,000.

 

And it happens to be 233 lbs MORE than what I said was typical.

[EBFlex]

EB the raptor isnt, and NEVER was designed for any sort of payload....and its not whether the do or dont carry a payload, just that if needed its there, safety cushion as such....there WILL be places where the Ram is out of its element, with the Ford you have the option no matter what, Should you not need those higher capacities? then those choices are there as well...choices you DONT have with the Ram...its interesting the route Dodge has taken,,,oooops, sorry I meant Ram ( sounds tougher....lol )

 

Deanh, I recognized that and as such, included both figures. The difference between the Raptor and the next lowest F-150 payload (1300 pounds) is 120 pounds.

 

Removing the Raptor from the mix completely, the average payload of the F-150 crew cabs, the average payload goes from 1733 to 1783 pounds. Or, 217 pounds less than 2,000.

[RichardJensen]

Just for S and Gs, I added up all the payloads of every F-150 crew listed on Ford's web site. There are 12 configurations. The average payload is 1733 pounds. That happens to be 266 pounds less than 2,000.

 

Excluding trims that have no equivalent at Chrysler (Limited and Raptor), the non-sales-weighted mean is 1832 in 4x4 configuration and 1,876 in 4x2 configuration.

[RichardJensen]

Typical is between 1,500 and 1,700 until you start opening the wallet a bit more for payload / towing packages. But, to be fair, payloads over 2k in that spec do exist...

 

Nice job with the 4x4 only post. That's almost as disingenuous as "anything over 1,000lbs is enough for a half-ton"

[Deanh]

Deanh, I recognized that and as such, included both figures. The difference between the Raptor and the next lowest F-150 payload (1300 pounds) is 120 pounds.

 

Removing the Raptor from the mix completely, the average payload of the F-150 crew cabs, the average payload goes from 1733 to 1783 pounds. Or, 217 pounds less than 2,000.

HOWEVER, you have the option should you need more...8800 GVW package anyone?..( then again its only avail in a couple of body configurations.....) heres the reality, Ford has all of Rams bases covered, Rams doesnt have all of the f-150s...all depends on ones needs I guess....but choices are important....personally i would would have more faith in fords drivetrains...STILL leery of Dodges based on the condition and driveability of several trade ins, not to mention a propensity for the dreaded clearcoat burnoff....( a Honda trait as well )

[EBFlex]

you DO realize the trademan is basically a 1/2 ton with the 2500 underpinings right?...amd Im not sure, it may be being discontinued as the price was the same as the 2500 seires, so really waht was the point?...it was also pretty much just a pure commercial vehicle NOT an everyday vehicle as such...

 

Doesn't matter. It's a Ram 1500 with a payload that is over 1900 pounds. If you want to balk at that, we can remove the F-150s with the "Heavy Duty Payload Package".

 

And it happens to be 233 lbs MORE than what I said was typical.

 

Yep, you were right in the ball park.

[Deanh]

Doesn't matter. It's a Ram 1500 with a payload that is over 1900 pounds. If you want to balk at that, we can remove the F-150s with the "Heavy Duty Payload Package".

 

 

Yep, you were right in the ball park.

its a bare bones commercial iteration.....does it even have the same suspension as the regular Rams?....

[EBFlex]

HOWEVER, you have the option should you need more...8800 GVW package anyone?..( then again its only avail in a couple of body configurations.....) heres the reality, Ford has all of Rams bases covered, Rams doesnt have all of the f-150s...all depends on ones needs I guess....but choices are important....personally i would would have more faith in fords drivetrains...STILL leery of Dodges based on the condition and driveability of several trade ins, not to mention a propensity for the dreaded clearcoat burnoff....( a Honda trait as well )

 

Deanh, I'm not saying Ford is somehow being threatened by Dodge trucks. But to paint Dodge trucks as somehow severely compromised as Richard is trying to do is dishonest. Even more-so when facts are not presented in a fair light.

 

Again, I will fully agree that Ford has an overall more capable truck. That was never in question. But the Ram is not all that far behind.

[EBFlex]

its a bare bones commercial iteration.....does it even have the same suspension as the regular Rams?....

 

Dean, it does not matter. The assertion was made that the Ram 1500 has a max payload that is only 100 pounds more than Ford's minimum. All I was doing was correcting the record. It's very simple, can you get a Ram 1500 with a payload greater than 1900 pounds? The answer is yes.

[Deanh]

Dean, it does not matter. The assertion was made that the Ram 1500 has a max payload that is only 100 pounds more than Ford's minimum. All I was doing was correcting the record. It's very simple, can you get a Ram 1500 with a payload greater than 1900 pounds? The answer is yes.

its a lot further behind when you take into account something other than a std cab ( and for all intenets and purposes ) 2500 series....that MAY be discontinued....

Just a few short years ago, Ram introduced the Ram Tradesman 1500 HD at the State Fair of Texas. The truck was skinned to look like a 1500 but had all 2500 HD suspension and chassis parts underneath. Ram certainly wasn't the first big truck-maker to use heavier-duty parts and pieces in order to offer half-ton (usually in name only) buyers a stronger choice. In fact, last year we wrote about how heavy-duty half-tons are familiar territory for all the big truck makers.

But the Ram 1500 Tradesman HD will not be part of the 2013 Ram 1500 lineup, and it may never come back, according to our sources. We suspect that attempting to continue the reskinning of a light-duty-looking but heavy-duty-underpinned Tradesmen model wasn't such a high priority, as the new half-tons are hitting their production stride next year and the Ram HD models are going through their own next-gen redesigns. (We have to believe the HD interiors will mimic what we've just seen on the light-duty versions.) I suppose we should be thankful we had the work-biased pickup for as long as we did.