Why is my tow rating so lame?

[davepl]

A current 1-ton truck can have up to something like a 22,000 pound trailer weight, but my 402 Longhorn, with a 1-ton frame (but 3/4 T suspension) is rated for only 7500, which is far less than a modern 3/4T as well.

Why were they rated so low? What's the "weak link" that the rating is protecting me from?

[tutone]

I am with you on this. I only have a theory so bear with me. I am currently shopping for a pull behind 1/2 ton towable camper. I first wanted to look at a 5th wheel and was told this, " your 2007 GMC 1/2 ton is not nearly as highly rated as a 2016 1/2 ton and the trailer industry is keeping up with the auto industry ratings" All that does in my opinion, is make any truck over 10 years old obsolete. But on the other hand, you HAVE to be able to stop what you are pulling. Some precautions are brakes on both axles, A good controller, Disc brakes on the pickup, and defensive driving on your part. I am not sure that the rating is set in stone, but if your truck is properly equipped to tow, then I would say you could find a happy spot that would not put you and others on the road in danger.

[Grumpy old man]

NO ABS DISC brakes , It's not that your truck can't pull it ,STOPPING it would be the concern .

[davepl]

Originally Posted by Grumpy old man

NO ABS DISC brakes , It's not that your truck can't pull it ,STOPPING it would be the concern .

That's a practical concern (though ABS doesn't stop you sooner, just allows you to steer) but doesn't explain the rating. They don't rate the new trucks higher -because- of ABS, I don't think. Its not that I want to tow some enormous load, I just want to understand how they arrive at these numbers.

[franken]

I'd wonder about the weight of a new vs old truck, as well as already mentioned, braking effectiveness. I'd imagine a heavier truck will be more comfortable with more load, and that newer will have better brakes.

[67ChevyRedneck]

50 years of evolution. Modern trucks have stronger frames, better brakes, literally almost 3 to 4 times the engine power in some cases, and better suspensions.

There is finally a "standard" that all manufacturers follow now, before this, who knows how they came up with the numbers.

http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/f...w-ratings.html

A New SAE Standard
Back in the 1990s the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) assembled a towing committee tasked with creating the very sort of standardized tow rating method that would give these figures the comparability and credibility they needed. The committee's members came from the Detroit Three automakers and the more prominent Japanese truck sellers, along with other interested parties.

The pace of their work was glacial, but in April 2008 the SAE finally unveiled a voluntary standard known as SAE J2807: "Performance Requirements for Determining Tow-Vehicle Gross Combination Weight Rating and Trailer Weight Rating."

The new standard lays out minimum performance standards for acceleration, braking and handling. There are parking brake tests and grade-launch standards. The trailers used to conduct all such tests are spelled out specifically, and they must be ballasted and connected in a specific way.

And J2807 sets a minimum speed for the truck-trailer combination when climbing a specific mountain grade — the so-called "Davis Dam" grade that climbs eastward out of the Colorado River valley at Laughlin, Nevada. Cooling systems must bear the strain of the 11-mile trip when the outside temperature is at least 100 degrees and the air-conditioner is set to full blast.

All the unrealistic test weight practices of the past that led to asterisks and fine print have been eliminated. Maximum tow ratings can no longer be based on a stripped base-model truck with a 150-pound driver traveling alone. Test trucks must now be equipped with popular options found on 33 percent (or more) of the configuration being tested. The 150-pound test driver is now accompanied by a 150-pound passenger.

Who the heck knows how they did it back then... they fudged the crap out of HP ratings... I'm sure tow ratings were embellished as well.

Best test is to hook up what you think would be safe and make a test run during off hours at lower speeds.

7500 lb is also a lot of weight. Cars were lighter back then, you could haul a 2000 lb trailer with a 67 Camaro on it and it would less than 5500 lbs.

Bigger trucks with better tow ratings have also lead to the bohemeth trailers we're used to today. A 15 to 20' airstream is nothing compared to some of the monster trailers you see being pulled today.

[hugger6933]

Have you looked at the frames on a newer truck? I have a 71 one ton that is setting in front of my shop I had just sold the flat bed off of it and last week I bought a 05[not that new I know] 2500HD also without a bed. That 05 frame looks like 5 times [or more] stronger and bigger than the old one ton

[davepl]

Thanks! I think it was about 5 years ago Dodge had an outrageously high tow rating but it was so close to the GVW that the driver had to weigh 130 pounds, I think...

[Alex V.]

It doesn't really puzzle me, but the contrast between trucks of the same weight series of different eras has become more obvious to me as of late, particularly when I did quite a bit of work on my FIL's 1500HD. Having never been under anything more than a basic 1/2 ton truck of newer than mid 90's vintage, I was astounded how much raw beef it was obvious the chassis and drivetrain of that 1500HD had compared to my '85 1-ton. I compared some pertinent specs of the two trucks: mine's max trailer weight is 11K, gooseneck/5th wheel; 1500HD is 10,200 or 10,500, IIRC. GVW on mine is 9,000, I think the 1500HD is 8,600. The 6.0 in his truck has output numbers not too different from my 454 - at least torque output, the 6.0 is higher horsepower. TH400 vs. 4L80E, not too great a contrast there, either. I didn't look up spring rates or anything for the 1500HD, but, basically, that truck that was marketed as a model to fit between the light-duty 1/2 ton and full 3/4 ton models of the early 2000's was, on paper, a near match for my truck that was all but Chevy's biggest and toughest light truck 18 years, and two platform designs, earlier. While I haven't used the 1500HD for any heavy hauling or towing, the feel I get for it is that, basically, a load that would break or tax to the limit the '03 would have my '85 maxed out. Mine would squat less with the same load/tongue weight, but probably take a few - just a few - more feet to stop it. With identical trailers the '03 would beat me out of the hole, but we'd be neck-and-neck up long grades. Gas mileage will be at most 1.5 MPG better in his favor with any decent load in the equation, but that takes into consideration his truck weighs a few hundred pounds more (5,300 vs. supposed 5,800) and is a 4WD crew cab vs. my 2WD single cab. If you took not the equivalently-rated truck, but the equivalent model truck in the '03 lineup, and pitted it against my '85, you'd have a long-legged, low-slung Duramax/Allison that would pull both our trucks on a trailer at 70 MPH without even really being taxed, getting 15-18 MPG? with a few thousand pounds capacity to spare. In that respect, I think it's just the general trend of the auto industry - every manufacturer in a given segment is always looking to advertise the best options, highest capacities, etc. Look at the evolution of the Honda Accord, for example - in the late 80's it was a 100 horse? 5-passenger sedan that weighed 2,500? pounds and was much physically smaller than a Civic of today, which sees the Accord as a generously-sized sedan that's barely in the mid-size category. For Chevy it went from Vega, to Monza, to Cavalier, to Cobalt, to Cruze, which is now an "economy" car with standard A/C, power windows, and a 153HP turbocharged engine that runs as fast a 1/4 mile as some late 70's Corvettes. Forgive my digression, but I think it's just a continuous cycle of competition that can't reverse, always driving ratings up, demanding heavier chassis and higher output drivetrains to keep from being the consistent and ever-greater "little dog" that eventually gets weeded out.

[FirstOwner69]

Let's see...

You have a 2015 Z06 Vette, and I have a 1958 245 HP dual quad solid axle Vette . Which do you think would be most capable of meeting the Vette performance objective?

Your Longhorn probably weighs about the same as a new Colorado. My 2015 Duramax crew cab dually weighs about 75% more than your Longhorn. Weight is a factor. Then there's the frame, suspension, axle, powertrain, etc.

Almost 50 years of progress in the construction of purpose built vehicles.

[special-K]

The fact is, you can toss all those ratings out the window and haul anything that fits in that Longhorn and it will get it there. No marketing stategy involved, just a truck you can load to the snubbers and get on down the road. That's what trucks did before truck wars in auto marketing. The new trucks will break when overloaded, too. I've seen beds wanting to fall apart from hauling in newer trucks. These old truck just say thank yu for making me work so hard. New trucks are also much heavier empty. Also, I've never heard of a spring going up through the bed due to a busted spring hanger on one of these trucks, but have on newer ones. Quite a few in fact. Back in the day you got a bigger truck for these bigger loads. Now, if hauling all they claim they can, you are required to run through the scales, register at the higher GVW, and are restricted from many roads and bridges with a 5t limit. The roads and trucks have been built to the 5t standard. Back then, only dual rear 1Ts had to hit the scales or fall under the scrutiny of DOT. Now it looks like most all are technically required. Screw that! Better not be looking loaded to capacity next time you run by a scale.

[davepl]

Whoops! How do you delete a post again? I can never find it...

[AnotherWs6]

Originally Posted by special-K

The fact is, you can toss all those ratings out the window and haul anything that fits in that Longhorn and it will get it there. No marketing stategy involved, just a truck you can load to the snubbers and get on down the road. That's what trucks did before truck wars in auto marketing. The new trucks will break when overloaded, too. I've seen beds wanting to fall apart from hauling in newer trucks. These old truck just say thank yu for making me work so hard. New trucks are also much heavier empty. Also, I've never heard of a spring going up through the bed due to a busted spring hanger on one of these trucks, but have on newer ones. Quite a few in fact. Back in the day you got a bigger truck for these bigger loads. Now, if hauling all they claim they can, you are required to run through the scales, register at the higher GVW, and are restricted from many roads and bridges with a 5t limit. The roads and trucks have been built to the 5t standard. Back then, only dual rear 1Ts had to hit the scales or fall under the scrutiny of DOT. Now it looks like most all are technically required. Screw that! Better not be looking loaded to capacity next time you run by a scale.

I had a spring hanger let loose on my 2000 Silverado a few years ago basically due to rust. Sounded like a shotgun went off and then the truck was leaning funny. Drove it the last few miles to work and then 20 miles home that night with the spring end resting under the bottom of the bed which it dented LIGHTLY.

New trucks are built like brick S-houses compared to old ones. 1,500 pounds worth of junk in the back of the bed is no problem brake, power or handling wise.

The amount of things I have hauled in 310,000 miles is a extensive. Including loaded car trailers with no brakes hookd up. And I'll pull steep hills at near 3,500 in 3rd to cruise along at highway speed for miles on end, over and over. I don't think I'd load up my Suburban with well over half a ton of people and equipment, strap a trailer to it and expect it to perform the same. It would be a ridiculous thing to do.

Liking old trucks is fine. I imagine we all do. Saying new ones are no good because we ONLY drive old trucks is not a fair thing to say.

And like a couple of people have commented on already, just look at the frame of a new truck versus an old one. I was shocked to see how rinky-dinky the frame on my Suburban was after having been working on my Silverado for more than a decade.

Nothing to be proud of, but I rear-ended a car during a snow storm 7 or 8 years ago. It was a Jeep SUV actually, traffic had stopped on a long off ramp. I buckled the quarters on the jeep, pushed it into the car ahead which ruined the back of that car and the front of the Jeep. Me? Dent in my steel bumper. It's still there, right in the middle. Just bought a new license plate frame, straightened the plate out - DONE. No other repair needed. My Suburban would be in sorry, sorry shape had I been driving it.