In reply to Docwemple :
I think you need to double check your Google search. There is a current 2024 7.3L F250, but it's not a diesel. It's a gas burner. The towing specs are about what you said.
The 7.3L diesels ended in 2001 and were not rated for that much.
The early 2000s 7.3 diesel F-250 / 350 was definitely rated to tow more than 9k lbs. 7.3s also were available until partway through 2003. Some time during the 2003 model was the 7.3 -> 6.0 switch. The hard limits were at 20k lbs GCWR and 10k lbs trailer weight for a conventional bumper pull trailer. For 5th wheel / gooseneck trailers they were rated higher. With the 7.3 diesel, depending on which body configuration, gearing, and transmission you optioned, Ford's towing guide for 2000 shows that an F-250/350 was rated to tow 10,000 lbs as bumper pull with any of the available options and anywhere from 12,600 to 14,000 lbs as a 5th wheel or gooseneck.
Those capacities never changed much until 2005 IIRC when they started increasing the GCWR limits on the super duty trucks. In those early years, the DRW F-350 didn't have any extra towing capacity over the SRW version (and often slightly less because it was a heavier truck), it only had extra payload capacity.
A section of the guide providing that information can be found here: https://rvsafety.com/images/pdf/FordTG2000.pdf
Worth mentioning in all of these comparisons, that tow ratings weren't standardized until 2008 when manufacturers began using the rigorous SAE J2807. And that procedure has been updated multiple times since it was adopted as well. So, unless you're certain that what you're seeing complies with J2807, it would probably be rated lower today than when it was originally sold.
STM317 said:Worth mentioning in all of these comparisons, that tow ratings weren't standardized until 2008 when manufacturers began using the rigorous SAE J2807. And that procedure has been updated multiple times since it was adopted as well. So, unless you're certain that what you're seeing complies with J2807, it would probably be rated lower today than when it was originally sold.
The unfortunate thing for older heavy duty trucks is that SAE J2807 is heavily influenced by horsepower, so even though a truck might be quite capable with a certain load, under SAE J2807 its rated quite a bit lower. Its not just safety.
I'm fairly sure some old trucks would fail the "Highway Gradeability" part with a utility trailer :)
rslifkin said:In those early years, the DRW F-350 didn't have any extra towing capacity over the SRW version (and often slightly less because it was a heavier truck), it only had extra payload capacity.
I did that same googling (the 1999 ford brochure including all the towing/payload specs is pretty easily found...peak tow rating is defintely more than 9k) and was also intrigued by this particular tidbit. I thought I saw that the payload capacity didn't change much either but maybe I misremembered. For comparison, in current times DRW is good for a 50% or more increase in max towing capacity.
dps214 said:rslifkin said:In those early years, the DRW F-350 didn't have any extra towing capacity over the SRW version (and often slightly less because it was a heavier truck), it only had extra payload capacity.
I did that same googling (the 1999 ford brochure including all the towing/payload specs is pretty easily found...peak tow rating is defintely more than 9k) and was also intrigued by this particular tidbit. I thought I saw that the payload capacity didn't change much either but maybe I misremembered. For comparison, in current times DRW is good for a 50% or more increase in max towing capacity.
In those years the DRW did increase payload rating, rear axle GAWR, and GVWR but it didn't change the GCWR. So you could handle more pin weight and carry more payload, but that wasn't generally the limiting factor in the tow ratings until later years when they started allowing a higher GCWR.
It's not actually about tow rating.
Let's keep in mind that this is a response to the opinion that modern F150s are nearly as capable as older F250s or F350s.
Regardless of the ratings or standard used, I think that statement is pretty solid. A modern F150 is a VERY capable towing machine, and older trucks had some pretty big issues.
I used to think my 7.3L F250 was a fantastic towing machine. My 2012 EB F150 is better. By far.
SV reX said:In reply to Docwemple :
Yep. I'm sure.
Are you sure sure? Like really sure?
Be careful about letting information "low energy required to acquire" crowd out truth "high energy to acquire". No worries, I'm guilty of it myself sometimes:
Wait?! What?? No diesel?!!
So, are we saying that a 2022 F-150 EB can out-tow a 1999 F-550 Super Duty? If I believe the info I've read on here and go by the book I've shown for the Super Duty then yes it can. Do I actually believe that? Not for a second. Even F-550, if I'm reading it right, is only good for 10,000#.
Could it be that modern tow rating wars are kind of like the old gross hp race of the 1960's? "Hey, they're advertising 350. Can we make 360?". "Yeah sure. Print up some new decals and change the owner's manual. We could have ran some richer jets and got to 360 on our dyno pulls. It's all good". Not trying to say the modern trucks can't tow more. They surely can. But I also suspect that today's numbers aren't apples to apples with 25 years ago.
A 401 CJ said:So, are we saying that a 2022 F-150 EB can out-tow a 1999 F-550 Super Duty? If I believe the info I've read on here and go by the book I've shown for the Super Duty then yes it can. Do I actually believe that? Not for a second. Even F-550, if I'm reading it right, is only good for 10,000#.
I wouldn't be surprised if the F-150 can tow more than a 20 year old F-350 from a performance perspective, but probably not the F-550. An F-550 will be able to handle a lot more pin weight, so it'll handle a wider range of trailers, especially once you're into goosenecks. And I'd expect the F-550 to be more durable if towing fully loaded on a regular basis.
Keep in mind, the 10k lb limit shown in that book is for a bumper pull trailer, as the hitch installed on those trucks was only good for 10k. The 1999 F-550 shows a 26k lb GCWR. Assuming it's a bit heavier than the smaller trucks, we'll say the truck might weigh 9000 lbs with a driver as a worst case. That would leave 17,000 lbs that you can tow as a gooseneck (which is more than a modern F-150). Fully load each truck and I'd bet the F-150 is significantly faster than the older F-550. Probably has better brakes too, although trailer brakes help mitigate that.
In reply to SV reX :
Having personality towed, in the last week, with my 03 7.3 and a 24 Ram 2500 Cummins, I can say that for the main issues I worry about, mpg, stability, usability and pulling power, the Ram was only better on pulling power. It was worse on mpg and usability, and didn't impress me on stability. On usability, I sometimes get into situations where I need 4wd. The modern trucks have too much power. Further, honestly, if you're exceeding the max on my 03 (14k) on a regular basis, you should be into the 550s or even a full size (650+). Just my 2c. Plus, I really like a truck that I can still work on. As an aside, as I said before, my truck had a better ride. Honestly!
In reply to SV reX :
The 7.3 ended in 03. And the version used in the International, T444e, was used from 94 to 03 as well.
Docwemple said:In reply to SV reX :
The 7.3 ended in 03. And the version used in the International, T444e, was used from 94 to 03 as well.
I have one I'll sell 
In reply to Docwemple :
Right. Typo. My bad. Still doesn't change the truck.
In reply to A 401 CJ :
Even if it's 10,000, it doesn't match my EB F150 @ 11,400. 😉
ALL I'm saying is that a modern crew cab short bed truck is perfectly capable of doing truck things. Mine outperforms my old F250 in every way.
I WORK my trucks. Every day. You couldn't pay me enough to make me drive an old longbed truck again.
There's a lot of weird pent-up energy here. Eight-foot beds are great. Modern gas engines are great. Old diesels are old diesels. If you have kids or friends who need to be with you, get extra doors.
Here's a fun stat: My 2021 Ram 2500 weighs the same as my 1997 Dodge 2500 did (yet is perversely larger); all specs are the same short of the newer one being a gasser and the old a deezel. As for towing abilities, refer to higher posts . . .
Docwemple said:Having personality towed, in the last week, with my 03 7.3 and a 24 Ram 2500 Cummins, I can say that for the main issues I worry about, mpg, stability, usability and pulling power, the Ram was only better on pulling power. It was worse on mpg and usability, and didn't impress me on stability. On usability, I sometimes get into situations where I need 4wd. The modern trucks have too much power. Further, honestly, if you're exceeding the max on my 03 (14k) on a regular basis, you should be into the 550s or even a full size (650+). Just my 2c. Plus, I really like a truck that I can still work on. As an aside, as I said before, my truck had a better ride. Honestly!
Hm. Comparing my '07 Silverado LBZ Duramax and '21 F-250 6.7, the Ford is better is pretty much every way. 20% better fuel economy while towing, more stable, more power, quieter, and WAY more comfortable inside.
Perhaps the Ram just sucks? :)
In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
It could be the Ram just sucks. Honestly, though, I'm surprised by your experience. I find tge LBZ to be the highwater mark for GM. Again, though, I look at trucks as tools. I will say, though, Ford does pride itself on its diesel fuel economy. But, I also doubt the 6.7 will do the miles that LBZ is capable of.
Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) said:Suggestion: We have permanent sticky threads for "What is a real truck?", "Should anyone buy an EV?", and "I hate new technology" so that we can keep those discussion in those threads. Because we reiterate the same discussions over and over. Honorable mention to "Cars are too heavy these days".
We don't need a thread for "what is a real truck", we can just call it "the bed is just too damn high!"
I toe 15+k daily for work. In my experience, weight of the tow vehicle matters more than hp/tq or anything else.
I don't care how long it takes me to get from 0-60. I care about how long it takes me to go 60-0. In my experience, the heavier truck always wins that battle. So if a 90's 350 weighs more than a modern 150, I'll take the 90's f350 any day
Duke said:SV reX said:I get that many of you don't like trucks. The good news is that you don't have to buy one.
I don't buy trucks, but I don't begrudge anyone who wants to buy a truck. I fundamentally believe that people have a right to do things I don't or wouldn't do. But I am very dubious of fads, and this smells like a fad.
I don't - or didn't (well, still don't, really) - understand what's driving the positively massive increase in size and overall bulk. It seems to me that if the design brief is for a 3/4-ton truck, it should be capable of hauling about 1500 lbs. It doesn't suddenly need to haul 3000 lbs. And given the incredible increases in packaging efficiency, why is the front of that newer truck so huge?
The giant increase in height really seems to come at the cost of usability of the bed. And that's completely ignoring the twi... errr, fine citizens who then see fit to make them even taller.
About the packaging efficiency - that might be true in electronics, but it hasn't really changed that much in the physical world. Hot stuff still gets hot, powertrains still move around - there's a lot MORE stuff under the hood now than there used to be. It's packed in tighter than it was in the past but you get to the point where you've reached maximum density. So when something new like a DPF or a larger radiator needs to be stuffed in there, the engine bay has to get bigger.
There are styling aspects to it as well, for sure. The stylists want trucks to look as big and as intimidating as possible. But that's just emphasizing the size of the nose instead of increasing it, it's fully packaged.
They are getting pretty big, though, when they make a 60's Cadillac look small...
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Wow. Impressive pic! 60s Cadillacs were absolutely massive and it looks tiny there.
Docwemple said:It could be the Ram just sucks. Honestly, though, I'm surprised by your experience. I find tge LBZ to be the highwater mark for GM. Again, though, I look at trucks as tools. I will say, though, Ford does pride itself on its diesel fuel economy. But, I also doubt the 6.7 will do the miles that LBZ is capable of.
That's possible, although my Duramax was a lot less reliable than everyone says they're supposed to be for only having 150K on it when I sold it.
My truck is a tool. A nice comfy one, but it's not a DD and I basically only drive it for race-car related stuff (pulling the trailer, going between hotel and track, tires to the tire store, stuff like that). I have no idea what the fuel economy is unloaded because I've never done an entire tank without hooking up the trailer. :)
TravisTheHuman said:STM317 said:Worth mentioning in all of these comparisons, that tow ratings weren't standardized until 2008 when manufacturers began using the rigorous SAE J2807. And that procedure has been updated multiple times since it was adopted as well. So, unless you're certain that what you're seeing complies with J2807, it would probably be rated lower today than when it was originally sold.
The unfortunate thing for older heavy duty trucks is that SAE J2807 is heavily influenced by horsepower, so even though a truck might be quite capable with a certain load, under SAE J2807 its rated quite a bit lower. Its not just safety.
I'm fairly sure some old trucks would fail the "Highway Gradeability" part with a utility trailer :)
IIRC this is why the Escape Hybrid (the older one) is only rated to tow 1000lb. It will easily tow more than that, chassis wise, but it does poorly on part of the test that requires reversing uphill. Escape Hybrids have no reverse gear in the trans, it's all electric.
You'll need to log in to post.
