Wheelbase and bed type for 4500/5500

[Devocamper]

Looking into 4500/5000 trucks and wanted to ask here what would be the better crew cab wheelbase and what type of body do most go with when going to this size truck ,I think the ram has either a 60 inch or 84 inch back of cab to rear wheel center also if your tc has a rear overhang will it fit onto and clear a flatbed body this would be for a host mammoth TC thanks for the help.
Mike

[Devocamper]

Thanks for the help I am not sure if I would want to go with the the flat bed or the utility type body . Also can't seem to find The cost and weight of either type bodies . If the body is to heavy your losing part of the payload your gaining by going with the higher gvwr truck . Being on the east cost I am sure the cost of shipping a Douglass truck body across the country plus the cost of the body itself and the truck would make it more than i can spend to replace my current truck . I would think I may be able to find a 5500 crew cab 60 ca 173.4 WB all ready upfitted with a flat bed body locally . I was originally thinking A new 3500 with a 14000 gvwr and a 7000 payload rating but the extra capacity off the 5500 sure would come in handy and the Aisin is standard with gas or diesel . I also need to check on registration fees and insurance cost for a truck with the gvwr of the 5500. I do have time I need to sell the fifth wheel before replacing the truck.
Thanks again
Mike

[Kayteg1]

I special order my dually - mainly becouse all I could find on dealers lots were crew cabs and I wanted Supercab. Not only additional weight to carry, additional cost, but 1 foot longer wheelbase adds to turning radius and coming from 40' bus conversion, I want my camper to have better maneuverability.
I did follow Bedlam in his post as he was making wise decisions IMHO, but he build his truck with trailer pulling in mind, while my F350 carries my 5600 lb camper without modifications just fine and even if I want to pull light boat, I already spend 30 bucks on tubing that will make 3 foot stinger in my 3" receiver.

[Bedlam]

A utility body was not in my budget, so I looked at aluminum and steel beds. Without customization, none of the stock aluminum beds suggested using it to tie down the camper - This raised the cost too much for me and it approached base pricing of a utility bed.

I chose a stock steel deck with boxes hung under it forward of the axle. Once I have the Mammoth, I will decide whether to enclose the wings or just add additional boxes to fill the voids above the deck.

Regardless of bed choice, decide how and if you will tow behind it. None of the integrated receivers with the decks had the capacity to tow my heavy trailer on an extension, so I would have needed to customize or select a deck that would allow the SuperHitch to fit under it.

[Bedlam]

I'm happy with the 60" CA crew cab setup and would have chosen an extended cab if I had gone with the F550 instead of the 5500. For me, the tighter turning radius and shorter overall length is what drives this preference. Coming from a short bed extended cab to a 9' bed with crew cab was enough length gain for me. Wheelbase has never been an issue for me with loading or towing, so I may not be as sensitive as some are to a short wheelbase or have just hit a stable combination that rode well. Having a heavy diesel up front allows the front end to unload some and still give you good steering response and geometry where a lighter gasser may prove to give you more problems. Overall length is an issue in some campgrounds and on the water ferries we use when I have my enclosed trailer in tow, so keeping the length down gives me more site options and less ferry fees.

If I had a custom frame/bed setup, I would have chosen the 84" CA, but would have dropped the frame rails behind the axle to allow the rear camper overhang to fit directly behind the rear wheels. This would allow towing without an extension and keeping overall length the same. Turning radius would not be as good but heavy hitch weight handling would be better with the axle pushed 2' farther back.

[Reality_Check]

Personally, longer is better. I'd rather have the 202/203"WB. Smooths the ride out even further, as more weight is centered. Axle's can handle the weight just fine, but the front ends are light with the shorter WB's.

[mike_kellie]

5500 and 60" is the norm. With the weight of the utility body being built, it sacrifices payload. Don't know if the link will work but check out douglass truck bodies. I am not getting the tall storage sleeper looking cabinet behind the cab.

http://www.douglasstruckbodies.com/newsite/truck/?id=38984&type=13&make=&chassis=&color=&workready=0&keywords=&unit&pager=1