spoon059
Just north of D.C.
Senior Member
Joined: 10/03/2010
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
 Offline
|
Dave H M wrote:That is what I am talking about Rob.
I don't see how the 350"s can be advertised as big load carriers if the tires are the same E rating as 250's. ![[emoticon]](https://forums.goodsamclub.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/scratchead.gif "scratchead")
Your 17" wheels aren't rated to carry the weight that 18s or 20s rated to carry. I'm sure if you look at your axle ratings with 17s versus a same year 2500 with 18s then you will see several hundred lbs difference.
2015 Ram CTD
2015 Jayco 29QBS
|
Grit dog
Black Diamond, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 05/06/2013
View Profile
Offline
|
^Its actually the 17” tires that are low rated, not the wheels.
At least from previous research back when I had 17s under the truck.
But same difference. 17s are no good for heavy hauling anymore. Make nice off road wheel size though.
"Yes Sir, Oct 10 1888, Those poor school children froze to death in their tracks. They did not even find them until Spring. Especially hard hit were the ones who had to trek uphill to school both ways, with no shoes." -Bert A.
|
MFL
Midwest
Senior Member
Joined: 11/28/2012
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
 Online
|
Grit dog wrote:^Its actually the 17” tires that are low rated, not the wheels.
At least from previous research back when I had 17s under the truck.
But same difference. 17s are no good for heavy hauling anymore. Make nice off road wheel size though.
I agree, the OEM tires on Dave's truck are likely 3,195 rated, and he could purchase more capable 17" tires to improve real world capacity. The larger wheels likely have a higher rating than the 17s though. I think, in 2012, no matter the tires/wheels, or suspension, 6,200 was the max RAWR of the 250.
On edit: I searched for a higher load carrying 17 inch tire, than 3195, and didn't find any, so likely not an option.
Jerry
* This post was
edited 01/08/21 05:31pm by MFL *
.jpg)
|
Grit dog
Black Diamond, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 05/06/2013
View Profile
Offline
|
I got 3600lb rating data on the 17s I had on my old Ram. They're not weaker. Too much thinking about this. Truck wheels basically don't break unless damaged.
|
RoyJ
Vancouver, BC
Senior Member
Joined: 10/19/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
Grit dog wrote:^Its actually the 17” tires that are low rated, not the wheels.
At least from previous research back when I had 17s under the truck.
But same difference. 17s are no good for heavy hauling anymore. Make nice off road wheel size though.
I wonder why all 17 tires appear to be frozen at 3195 lbs weight limit, regardless of how big they are.
Starting at 245/75r17, all except the 37" are capped at 3195. Above a certain size, even the E rated are capped at 65 psi.
16s, 18s and 20s don't have this issue.
|
|
|
MFL
Midwest
Senior Member
Joined: 11/28/2012
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Online
|
RoyJ wrote:Grit dog wrote:^Its actually the 17” tires that are low rated, not the wheels.
At least from previous research back when I had 17s under the truck.
But same difference. 17s are no good for heavy hauling anymore. Make nice off road wheel size though.
I wonder why all 17 tires appear to be frozen at 3195 lbs weight limit, regardless of how big they are.
Starting at 245/75r17, all except the 37" are capped at 3195. Above a certain size, even the E rated are capped at 65 psi.
16s, 18s and 20s don't have this issue.
Found that out myself, after looking.
Jerry
|
Grit dog
Black Diamond, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 05/06/2013
View Profile
Offline
|
^No idea. It happened about 10 years ago.
I bought a set of 295-70-17s that were probably mfd in 2010 or so. They were around 4000lb cap.
But it doesn’t matter as there are now literally countless options in 18&20” so it’s a non issue.
16s are out now as well, as they won’t fit on pretty much any truck from the last 15 years or so. GMs excluded until maybe the last 10 years.
|
