cancel
Showing results forย 
Search instead forย 
Did you mean:ย 

Why a pickup?

jfkmk
Explorer
Explorer
We have a 17' TT that we tow with a mid sized body on frame SUV and it tows great. It's not going to win any drag races towing the trailer, but I've never been in a situation where it significantly slowed on any hills, and with the wdh and sway, never had sway problems.

That being said, were looking at replacing our current TT with something in the low 20' range. I don't want to overload the SUV, so I'm going out today to start shopping for a half ton. I'm really not interested in anything bigger than a half ton, as the low 20' range is the biggest TT we would get. We've been camping/rv'ing for years, from tents to pop up to class c to our current TT, so we know what we want in a TT.

The question is this. As I've read the posts on this forum, whenever someone mentions they are/want to tow with a SUV, everyone warns about the dire lack of payload. Yet whenever someone mentions towing with a 150/1500, unless the trailer is over 30', the general consensus is "no problem".

For example, in a recent post regarding a Durango, someone stated the Durango only had a 1600# payload capacity, and they were going to run out of capacity almost before they start. Yet from the inventories I've seen on line for the F-150, with the tow package and 3.5eb, the payload is typically 1680#. So why would 1680 be ok, but not 1600?

Additional, some recent posts regarding the Ram, folks post "you'll be fine" without even asking about payload. Another recent post shows payload for a Ram 1500 at about 1400#. So a Durango with 1600# gets dire warnings and a Ram with 1400 gets the thumbs up?

I'm not knocking anyone's responses to posts, this forum is usually a wealth of information. I'm just trying to understand the true advantage of the pickup if the payloads and tow capacities are similar. I fully understand body on frame v unibody construction, I would not tow with the latter.

Thanks!
59 REPLIES 59

Jarlaxle
Explorer II
Explorer II
RoyJ wrote:
Like everyone else just said: easier to repair != built better.

Just above every component on a modern truck is built way better than their 70's and 80's counterpart.

11.8" rear axle back then? Unthinkable. 50 - 70 ksi steel in a pickup frame? Only used in Kenworths and Petes. 6 - 10 speed transmission with 800+ lb-ft input ratings? Dream on. 6k lbs and 9k lbs front and real axle ratings? Unheard of. 350k+ mile gas engines and 500+ mile diesels? Maybe if you swapped in a Detroit 6-71. 15" disk brakes w/ ABS? Sounds like starwars tech. 7300+ lbs payload in a "1-ton"? Yeah, that'll be the day...


Actually, my 1979 F-350 had a massive 11" Dana 70 rear axle, probably due to being a Camper Special.

Comparing them side by side, I would expect the "lighter" (~5000lb rating) kingpin front Dana 60 Ford used to outlast the current ball-joint Dana 60, ratings notwithstanding.
John and Elizabeth (Liz), with Briza the size XL tabby
St. Bernard Marm, cats Vierna and Maya...RIP. ๐Ÿ˜ž
Current rig:
1992 International Genesis school bus conversion

JAC1982
Explorer
Explorer
jfkmk wrote:
JIMNLIN wrote:
The OP thread looks like a bash the Dodge/Ram topic with his own general opinion on who or how many has said what about a SUV or Ram pickup payloads.
Payloads back in the day were determined by the vehicles axle/tire capacities.

Why a pickup ?? Hard to tow my heavy GN and 5th wheel trailers with a suv.


OP here. No, I was not bashing Ram st all, if you read my original post, I was comparing answers from a post concerning a Durango v. answers concerning a Ram. It could have been Tahoe v. Silverado or Expedition v. F 150.

My question was why answers to csn i toe it posts seem to say your payload on a SUV will run out with only passengers on board while a pickup will tow it fine, even if payload is the same.

I appreciate everyone's responses, even if some of them were off topic.

I did pick up a 2018 F 150 with the 3.5 eb, and look forward to camping next year (camper is now winterized).

Thanks, guys and gals!


You'll love that EB. I have it in my Explorer and weeeeeee!!
2020 Keystone Montana High Country 294RL
2017 Ford F350 DRW King Ranch
2021 Ford F350 SRW Lariat Tremor

jfkmk
Explorer
Explorer
JIMNLIN wrote:
The OP thread looks like a bash the Dodge/Ram topic with his own general opinion on who or how many has said what about a SUV or Ram pickup payloads.
Payloads back in the day were determined by the vehicles axle/tire capacities.

Why a pickup ?? Hard to tow my heavy GN and 5th wheel trailers with a suv.


OP here. No, I was not bashing Ram st all, if you read my original post, I was comparing answers from a post concerning a Durango v. answers concerning a Ram. It could have been Tahoe v. Silverado or Expedition v. F 150.

My question was why answers to csn i toe it posts seem to say your payload on a SUV will run out with only passengers on board while a pickup will tow it fine, even if payload is the same.

I appreciate everyone's responses, even if some of them were off topic.

I did pick up a 2018 F 150 with the 3.5 eb, and look forward to camping next year (camper is now winterized).

Thanks, guys and gals!

falconbrother
Explorer II
Explorer II
bluepost wrote:
Most full sized SUVs use the same drivetrains and frames as their 1/2 ton counterparts. Toyota, Ford, GM. What is usually different is the suspension. Some knock SUV suspensions, but SUVs often have air suspension, which is a real plus.

Empty full sized SUVs also tend to be heavier than their truck counterparts, assuming the payload numbers work this can be an advantage too.

So to answer your question, in the sizes youโ€™re talking about, there isnโ€™t any reason why a 1/2 ton truck would tow better than a full sized SUV with similar payload capacity. It might even tow better.


My experience with a 9th gen Suburban 1500 is that the suspension is awesome (and I added SumoSupersprings). The 5.3 is the weak link. It does OK but, it's working to the edge of it's capability. To the beach on flat ground it's fine. Pulling steep mountains is where it's the weak link. The 1500 burb with more power would be perfect for what we do. As I understand it the 11th gen burbs have more power from the 5.3 (the newest model line). But, you gotta get your wallet out for one of those. I priced one with the tow package and it was nearly $80,000.00.

bluepost
Explorer
Explorer
Most full sized SUVs use the same drivetrains and frames as their 1/2 ton counterparts. Toyota, Ford, GM. What is usually different is the suspension. Some knock SUV suspensions, but SUVs often have air suspension, which is a real plus.

Empty full sized SUVs also tend to be heavier than their truck counterparts, assuming the payload numbers work this can be an advantage too.

So to answer your question, in the sizes youโ€™re talking about, there isnโ€™t any reason why a 1/2 ton truck would tow better than a full sized SUV with similar payload capacity. It might even tow better.

JIMNLIN
Explorer
Explorer
The OP thread looks like a bash the Dodge/Ram topic with his own general opinion on who or how many has said what about a SUV or Ram pickup payloads.
Payloads back in the day were determined by the vehicles axle/tire capacities.

Why a pickup ?? Hard to tow my heavy GN and 5th wheel trailers with a suv.
"good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment" ............ Will Rogers

'03 2500 QC Dodge/Cummins HO 3.73 6 speed manual Jacobs Westach
'97 Park Avanue 28' 5er 11200 two slides

mowermech
Explorer
Explorer
Jarlaxle wrote:
harmanrk wrote:
colliehauler wrote:
Actually car based utility vehicle's are CUV'S regardless that people call them SUV'S.


Crossover Utility Vehicle, is term that has been with us since 2008, when it was first introduced as a marketing term. Unibody SUV's were available several years before that. I know as early as 2001 the Escape/Tribute were Unibody SUV's


Try 1984, with the Jeep Cherokee!


Better yet, try the 1980 AMC Eagle. Station wagon, 4 door sedan, 2 door sedan, and, in later years, 2 door sport (SX/4). There was even a convertible conversion available! All with all wheel drive.
Body-on-frame goes even further back, like the 1940s, with the Willys Station wagons and Jeepsters
CM1, USN (RET)
2017 Jayco TT
Daily Driver: '14 Subaru Outback
1998 Dodge QC LWB, Cummins, 5 speed, 4X2
2 Kawasaki Brute Force 750 ATVs.
Pride Raptor 3 wheeled off-road capable mobility scooter
"When seconds count, help is only minutes away!"

falconbrother
Explorer II
Explorer II
My first tow vehicle was a 1977 F-150. It was low tech as all get out. I wouldn't want to go back to that. Yes, it was fixable in a parking lot with a screw driver and sandpaper but.. It also needed to be fixed in the occasional parking lot. The modern, computerized trucks and SUVs are far more reliable. If they breakdown it's entirely possible that they will need very specific parts and at least an OBDII reader to fix, or being towed to a shop. But, the likelihood of a breakdown is less.

ShinerBock
Explorer
Explorer
Powerdude wrote:


Well, I can tell you for sure that with less electronics and less power, and less gizmos, vehicles were easier to diagnose and repair than newer vehicles.

One NOx sensor can knock out an entire emissions system, and put a vehicle in limp mode now. You need a tow just to get home.

Alternators used to be simple to replace and were usually $69 bucks, and one belt to change. Fuel filters and/or most fuel pumps used to be in line on the fuel line. 10 minute job to change if you had a clog or bad gas. Now you have to drop the whole tank to change a fuel pump.

You could pull the distributor off, clean the points with a little sandpaper, and be on your way. Not anymore if an ECM module goes out, its $799 just for the part.

I'm not that old either, but I do remember buying a distributor cap for $5.99 and swapping it out in the parking lot. 10 minute job and I was on my way.


You are kind of pointing out only the best of what you do like and the worst of what you don't instead of making a true pros and cons comparison. I tend to call these type of comparisons "infomercial comparisons" since they do the same and like to take extreme worst cases and pass them off as normal to make their product look better. Truth is, there are plus and minuses of both.

True, they are harder to work on for most that do not have the proper equipment, but new engines last much longer, are much safer, have longer maintenance intervals, use less fuel, have more power, have longer warranties, and put out less emissions. These are all the reasons why these "gizmos" are on vehicles now.

People want longer warranties and their vehicles to last longer, so the manufacture has to monitor the vehicles and set programs to shut it down before it grenades. If one likes the peace of mind of long warranties, then they should not complain about the manufacturer adding sensors and programs to shut down the vehicle before it comes to a costly repair for them. People want better fuel economy and cleaner air, so they have to add emissions devices and have things such as NOx sensors put the truck in limp mode if something is out of spec. People want safer vehicles, so the auto makes have to add wheel speed and yaw sensors for the ABS and ESP systems to avoid collisions or rollovers. People don't want to be adjusting their carburetor for certain temperatures or altitudes, so electronic fuel injection is added to do it for them.

It is all a give and take and trading out some conveniences for other inconveniences. Both the new and old have their plus and minuses.
2014 Ram 2500 6.7L CTD
2016 BMW 2.0L diesel (work and back car)
2023 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon 3.0L Ecodiesel

Highland Ridge Silverstar 378RBS

mowermech
Explorer
Explorer
Why a pickup?
Because Dodge doen't make a station wagon with the Cummins engine!
CM1, USN (RET)
2017 Jayco TT
Daily Driver: '14 Subaru Outback
1998 Dodge QC LWB, Cummins, 5 speed, 4X2
2 Kawasaki Brute Force 750 ATVs.
Pride Raptor 3 wheeled off-road capable mobility scooter
"When seconds count, help is only minutes away!"

RobertRyan
Explorer
Explorer
RoyJ wrote:
Like everyone else just said: easier to repair != built better.

Just above every component on a modern truck is built way better than their 70's and 80's counterpart.

11.8" rear axle back then? Unthinkable. 50 - 70 ksi steel in a pickup frame? Only used in Kenworths and Petes. 6 - 10 speed transmission with 800+ lb-ft input ratings? Dream on. 6k lbs and 9k lbs front and real axle ratings? Unheard of. 350k+ mile gas engines and 500+ mile diesels? Maybe if you swapped in a Detroit 6-71. 15" disk brakes w/ ABS? Sounds like starwars tech. 7300+ lbs payload in a "1-ton"? Yeah, that'll be the day...

7300+ lbs payload in a "1-ton"? Yeah, that'll be the day...

Quite common here, but not 1-tons

RoyJ
Explorer
Explorer
Like everyone else just said: easier to repair != built better.

Just above every component on a modern truck is built way better than their 70's and 80's counterpart.

11.8" rear axle back then? Unthinkable. 50 - 70 ksi steel in a pickup frame? Only used in Kenworths and Petes. 6 - 10 speed transmission with 800+ lb-ft input ratings? Dream on. 6k lbs and 9k lbs front and real axle ratings? Unheard of. 350k+ mile gas engines and 500+ mile diesels? Maybe if you swapped in a Detroit 6-71. 15" disk brakes w/ ABS? Sounds like starwars tech. 7300+ lbs payload in a "1-ton"? Yeah, that'll be the day...

Jarlaxle
Explorer II
Explorer II
The plugs in my Caddy went 50,000 miles. I replaced them then, but honestly, they'd probably have gone another 25K easily. The car is a 1979, using a recurved stock distributor and a stock HEI ignition system.
John and Elizabeth (Liz), with Briza the size XL tabby
St. Bernard Marm, cats Vierna and Maya...RIP. ๐Ÿ˜ž
Current rig:
1992 International Genesis school bus conversion

colliehauler
Explorer
Explorer
The only real advantage of old point and condenser vehicles without electronics is if we have a nuclear war, they will still run if not destroyed. At that point I think we will have bigger problems.

I like old 50's trucks. If I had one I would put a modern frame and drive train in it. My first truck was a 55 Dodge truck. Talking about bare bones the only option it had was a tube AM radio.