Dodge 3500 SRW payloads?

[gearhead]

I've picked up on this forum that Dodge owners claimed pretty high payload capacities. So today while waiting for the forecasted monsoon that never happened, I did some internet research. I saw some 3500 crewcab 4x4 longbed single rear wheel configurations that showed around 4,000# capacities. Dang. So I did the website "search for similar trucks near you" thing. Found a similar truck at a dealer about 30 miles away. So heck, I called them. Got the salesman Travis on the line. Hey guy, go out there on the lot and look at that yellow sticker inside the drivers door that has the payload listed and call me back. He called back...4407 pounds. Ah come on. You sure it's not a dually? Yep, single rear wheel. It's not a fully tricked out model but leather and heated seats can't weigh that much.
So, you folks driving Rams, if you know your payload capacity, shoot me back a reply. The longbeds seem to have about 200# more capacity than shortbeds. The Rams aren't running the horsepower of the Fords, so if anyone has towed similar loads with current model Ram and then stepped into a Ford, let me know your opinion. I'm talking a diesel here.
I have 3265# payload with the Ford and I'm right at that with the Montana. I don't want to have to go to a dually.
My son is itching to buy my Ford. Anyone have proven successful strategies for breaking this kind of news to their Secretary of the Treasury ?

[Stro1965]

My '15 Ram 3500 cc has a 4,070 payload capacity. I went from a newer Ford F-250 PSD into the Ram 3500 CTD. The Ford pulled it fine but I was over payload so I traded. A little less felt power with the Ram but it does great too. The only things I miss about the Ford are the tow mirrors and the better braking (in my opinion).

[ncrzrbk]

2014 Ram 3500 CCLB Big Horn. Payload is 4400#. The biggest difference is 3.42 rear end is only available on SRW Rams. Mine has the standard transmission not the Aisin. Higher torque with Aisin and lower gears but slightly lower payload. It pulls our 15,500k rated Mountaineer well. Would prefer 3.73 but I keep 6th gear locked out most of the time unless on flat roads.

Can't answer on Ford. Never owned one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gearhead]

Originally Posted by ncrzrbk

2014 Ram 3500 CCLB Big Horn. Payload is 4400#. The biggest difference is 3.42 rear end is only available on SRW Rams. Mine has the standard transmission not the Aisin. Higher torque with Aisin and lower gears but slightly lower payload. It pulls our 15,500k rated Mountaineer well. Would prefer 3.73 but I keep 6th gear locked out most of the time unless on flat roads.

Can't answer on Ford. Never owned one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I saw that combo of higher HP and torque with the Aisin. Not sure if I want it bad enough to spend $3K on it. I was thinking 6th would have to be locked occasionally. I do that with the Ford too....3.55 gears.
I am just surprised at the higher Ram payloads. I had the Cougar XLite when I bought the Ford. Payload wasn't an issue.
Are you OK with the ride when unloaded?
Sounds like I need to visit a dealer.

[gearhead]

Originally Posted by Stro1965

My '15 Ram 3500 cc has a 4,070 payload capacity. I went from a newer Ford F-250 PSD into the Ram 3500 CTD. The Ford pulled it fine but I was over payload so I traded. A little less felt power with the Ram but it does great too. The only things I miss about the Ford are the tow mirrors and the better braking (in my opinion).

Which model do you have...Laramie, etc? 4x4?
What are you pulling?

[Javi]

I know I ought to keep my mouth shut, but being an opinionated and often inappropriately vocal old fart is my failing.
Just buy a dually and get it over with. They ain't as scary as some would have you believe. After you tow with one and drive it around a week or two all the scary goes away and you realize that it isn't any different than that SRW since the fenders are still inside the mirrors.

[gearhead]

Originally Posted by Javi

I know I ought to keep my mouth shut, but being an opinionated and often inappropriately vocal old fart is my failing.
Just buy a dually and get it over with. They ain't as scary as some would have you believe. After you tow with one and drive it around a week or two all the scary goes away and you realize that it isn't any different than that SRW since the fenders are still inside the mirrors.

No, don't keep your mouth shut! I'm an opinionated old fart too. I understand. It's not really a scary thing. Our Class C was a dually and pretty wide, I didn't have any problems with it.
There are several issues. I'm kinda obsessive about keeping my toys clean and standing tall ready for inspection. I'm usually washing vehicles as soon as the streets are dry after a rain. The 2007 Corvette has been caught in one brief summer shower. If there is a cloud in the sky it stays in the garage. It has the original windshield wiper blades on it. It also has only 20,000 miles on it! I usually spend 4 hours cleaning the boat after a fishing trip. It lives in the garage as well.
But, I have had 2 back surgeries and have a titanium plate in my neck. That arm and back pressure while washing a vehicle kills me. The Vette is no issue it's so small. But me hand washing a crew cab long bed truck ain't gonna happen very often. A hand held wand type carwash won't get much of anything clean. So I'm forced to use the full service drive through type car washes. I'm not crazy about the brushes and high pressure water beating up the vehicle though. Big problem: dually's don't fit the car wash "tracks" and I assume have rear fender clearance problems. I have asked the local detail shops how much they charge to hand wash and $25 is the best I found. The drive thru washes are $10-15. So it's a money issue, and it's not, depending on much I could keep my clean obsession under control. I always park away from any other cars so no issue with a dually there.
The current Ford was bought slightly used and sits in the driveway. I know if I buy a brand new truck, dually or SRW, I will hate leaving it outside. So that raises the issue of selling the Vette and then being able to garage the new truck. I have been saying for 2 years I was going to sell it. The wife says no. She correctly suspects it could be replaced by a 2 wheeled vehicle.
I think I have too much time on my hands!
Javi, how much do you charge for this therapy session?
You take Medicare & United Health Care??

[JRTJH]

I agree with Javi, on the part about the fenders not being any wider than the mirrors and after driving it a while, it's not as daunting as it first might seem.

Here, however is my question about "marketing" and "capacities"...

The GVW/Payload/Vehicle Weight are "supposed to be" simple math. What I mean is that the payload is a direct result of what the GVW "minus" the vehicle weight calculates to be.... So, if the GVW of a Ford is 11,400 and the GVW of a RAM is 11,400, if the payload of the RAM is 1000 pounds more than the Ford, that "has to mean" that the vehicle weight is 1000 pounds less than the Ford.

What does that mean in terms of "reliability or durability"? Does it have any impact on frame twist, ride comfort, etc? I don't know the answers to any of those or to other questions that might arise. My question is simply: "How does Chrysler advertise their payload to be 1000 pounds more than Ford unless they are 1) increasing the GVW or 2) reducing the vehicle weight?"

I don't want my comments to "turn this into a better than/worse than" discussion. I used Ford and RAM because that is the two brands the OP used. I suppose the same GVW/Payload/Vehicle weight "math problems" would be exactly the same "compromise" with GMC/Chevrolet superimposed where either Ford or RAM is used.

Isn't the bottom line simply that payload equals GVW minus Vehicle weight? One has to "give" to increase another, so with regards to RAM payload, what gives (if anything) and what advantage/disadvantage does it present?

[gearhead]

Originally Posted by JRTJH

I agree with Javi, on the part about the fenders not being any wider than the mirrors and after driving it a while, it's not as daunting as it first might seem.

Here, however is my question about "marketing" and "capacities"...

The GVW/Payload/Vehicle Weight are "supposed to be" simple math. What I mean is that the payload is a direct result of what the GVW "minus" the vehicle weight calculates to be.... So, if the GVW of a Ford is 11,400 and the GVW of a RAM is 11,400, if the payload of the RAM is 1000 pounds more than the Ford, that "has to mean" that the vehicle weight is 1000 pounds less than the Ford.

What does that mean in terms of "reliability or durability"? Does it have any impact on frame twist, ride comfort, etc? I don't know the answers to any of those or to other questions that might arise. My question is simply: "How does Chrysler advertise their payload to be 1000 pounds more than Ford unless they are 1) increasing the GVW or 2) reducing the vehicle weight?"

I don't want my comments to "turn this into a better than/worse than" discussion. I used Ford and RAM because that is the two brands the OP used. I suppose the same GVW/Payload/Vehicle weight "math problems" would be exactly the same "compromise" with GMC/Chevrolet superimposed where either Ford or RAM is used.

Isn't the bottom line simply that payload equals GVW minus Vehicle weight? One has to "give" to increase another, so with regards to RAM payload, what gives (if anything) and what advantage/disadvantage does it present?

I agree 100% and wonder the same thing. I need to go to a dealer and look at the specific tags. I don't favor one brand over another. In the past I leaned towards GM. Right now I have a Chevy, Ford, and Jeep GC. They all have their different issues that come and go with model years. Chevy's had oval cylinders and soft cams. Ford had the International Harvester diesel problems. I saw Dodge pickups at work with the frame bent behind the cab. My son has been rebuilding his Dodge front-end since he bought it, well used. I heard they are now better.
I don't know how Dodge hits those numbers. It's like that story that never goes away...a 350 is the same as a 250 except the tag. I don't know. What I do know is what that yellow tag says. That is what the state trooper will go by. And for sure that is what the lawyers and insurance companies will go by.

[Javi]

Originally Posted by gearhead

I agree 100% and wonder the same thing. I need to go to a dealer and look at the specific tags. I don't favor one brand over another. In the past I leaned towards GM. Right now I have a Chevy, Ford, and Jeep GC. They all have their different issues that come and go with model years. Chevy's had oval cylinders and soft cams. Ford had the International Harvester diesel problems. I saw Dodge pickups at work with the frame bent behind the cab. My son has been rebuilding his Dodge front-end since he bought it, well used. I heard they are now better.
I don't know how Dodge hits those numbers. It's like that story that never goes away...a 350 is the same as a 250 except the tag. I don't know. What I do know is what that yellow tag says. That is what the state trooper will go by. And for sure that is what the lawyers and insurance companies will go by.

Exactly.. that's why I am once again driving a dually..... (6062 lbs of payload) after a few years and thousands of dollars in trading up loses I went back to enough truck.

[GaryWT]

Usually I hear and see that Ram gas low payloads, lower than most but maybe that is just the 1,500. My Ford has a payload of over 4,000 but it is not a diesel. As for SW or DW, in Mass anyway, I can register mine as a non commercial vehicle since I do not use it commercially and it is my daily driver. If I had DW I would not have a choice so my registration would be higher as well as my yearly inspections and who knows what else. Happy to have what I have.

[Javi]

Gary, I believe you are correct that historical the Ram trucks have a deficit in payload when compared apples to apples across the models. That shouldn't be a problem as long as the appropriate payload is chosen.

Sorry about the registration issues in Massachusetts with duallys. We also pay a bit more for the extra payload (about $100 a year ) but don't register as commercial unless the truck is used for business. My plates were $140 give or take.

[ncrzrbk]

Originally Posted by gearhead

I saw that combo of higher HP and torque with the Aisin. Not sure if I want it bad enough to spend $3K on it. I was thinking 6th would have to be locked occasionally. I do that with the Ford too....3.55 gears.
I am just surprised at the higher Ram payloads. I had the Cougar XLite when I bought the Ford. Payload wasn't an issue.
Are you OK with the ride when unloaded?
Sounds like I need to visit a dealer.

The unloaded ride is ok. A little rough but not too bad for a truck.

The GVW of the truck is 12,000. The GVWR is 25,000. I weighed the rig on a recent loaded trip. No water but all the family and headed for week long vacation. Scaled at 23,200.

I have never towed with a dually only test drove a couple. For me at this time in my life, the SRW made more sense for the fuel economy vs DRW. Round trip from NC to Arkansas and back, I averaged right at 21 MPG. All unloaded miles. When we retire and take longer trips, I will switch to a dually just for the added stability.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[ncrzrbk]

Originally Posted by gearhead

I saw that combo of higher HP and torque with the Aisin. Not sure if I want it bad enough to spend $3K on it. I was thinking 6th would have to be locked occasionally. I do that with the Ford too....3.55 gears.
I am just surprised at the higher Ram payloads. I had the Cougar XLite when I bought the Ford. Payload wasn't an issue.
Are you OK with the ride when unloaded?
Sounds like I need to visit a dealer.

Unloaded ride is ok. Not bad for a 1 ton truck. Rides on 20" wheels and has 12,300 GVR with 25k GVWR. Loaded with camper,kids and all for a long camping trip weighed 23.200#.

I would have gone dually but at this point in my life, I do more unloaded towing. Recent trip from NC to Arkansas and back I averaged right at 21MPG all hand calculated. When I retire,I will switch to a dually for the added stability.

So far, this is my 2nd ram and I am impressed with the Cummins engine and love the exhaust brake.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[ncrzrbk]

Sorry for the double post. Didn't think the first one went through


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gearhead]

Here is a link to a 2015 Ram 3500 crew cab 4x4 Cummins. It's a hard to find SRW. It's a Tradesman so not top of the line.
http://www.bayshorechryslerjeepdodge...b65a854f57.htm
My Ford weighs 8420# per CAT scale with me, the 5th hitch, and a full tank. Take 400# off my weight for me and my 5th hitch.
Looks like the Ram weighs 7825#. So this Tradesman model isn't too much lighter than mine. Assuming all the numbers are correct.
Note the Ram payload of 4480#.
My GVWR is 11,500# vs. the Ram at 12,300. Maybe that's the difference.

[Stro1965]

Originally Posted by gearhead

Which model do you have...Laramie, etc? 4x4?
What are you pulling?

My 3500 is a CC Big Horn 4x4.

[gearhead]

Originally Posted by Javi

Gary, I believe you are correct that historical the Ram trucks have a deficit in payload when compared apples to apples across the models. That shouldn't be a problem as long as the appropriate payload is chosen.

Sorry about the registration issues in Massachusetts with duallys. We also pay a bit more for the extra payload (about $100 a year ) but don't register as commercial unless the truck is used for business. My plates were $140 give or take.

I just got my registration renewal...$73.
How much is the safety inspection?...$14? I think?

[bsmith0404]

Not trying to throw a wrench into the discussion, but noted you were concerned about unloaded ride quality. Since you are not brand specific and still in the shopping mode I'd take a look at the GM trucks as well. According to the specs I can find, a 3500 SRW crew cab duramax has a GVWR of 11600 with a 4200 payload. Obviously that'll drop with options. GM changed the rear suspension on the 2015 models and they ride like a 1500 when not loaded. From what I could tell when comparing it to my 2011 was that they gained the better ride by going to more overload springs. My 2011 has a typical multi leaf (5 if I remember correctly) rear suspension with an overload leaf that kicks in when weight is added. The new truck uses fewer springs for everyday driving with multiple overload springs that kick in as needed when weight is added. The ride is amazing.

On another note, I am actually surprised how many car washes can fit a dually now days. I have seen many signs advertise that they can wash a dually. Most of them are the touchless variety. I know they are not as good at cleaning, but I use them in between hand washes. I do auto detailing as well and refuse to use a brush car wash. One trip through and any polishing/waxing is defeated.

I love NM, same plates for truck regardless of weight as long as it's 26k or less, 26,001 is commercial. They do charge different amounts based on weight, I have mine registered for 26k. Since I'm a disabled vet the registration is free so I don't know what the cost difference is for different weights.

[gearhead]

^^^^Throw a wrench in all you want! More info the better. LOL
I have no brand preference at this point. If/when I get real serious I will do some test drives to see if anything jumps out at me that is a deal breaker. I wish Ford and Chevy would provide access to specific truck payloads like Ram does. Of course I may not be looking in the right place. That Chevy rear suspension sounds good. I'll definitely look at it. I was looking for a Chevy when I bought this Ford. There just weren't any available.
I live in a small town of 8,500. We have one pull through full service car wash and 3 stationary washes, one with no brushes. I use the no brush one frequently. I don't think it will take a dually but I should double check.
I'll be hitching up today for a little 4-5 day trip. We won't be packing for a month long trip, but should be close enough to maximum weight. Depends on the wife's shoe count. I don't think I have CAT scaled the rig since we have installed the washer/dryer. I'll do that again and try to get an accurate weight of my 5th hitch and roll-up bed cover. I may be slightly under weight, or over weight. Either way it's not a good feeling.