#1 The F-150 is fine to tow that trailer, its well within the 150's payload and towing capabilities. Their is a big difference between a 1/2 ton and a 3/4 ton... However, unless you need the additional payload that a 3/4 ton offers the 1/2 ton should be fine.
#2 Without knowing what engine is in the 250 its impossible to compare gas mileage. A diesel will get better mileage, a similar gas engine will get worse.
#3 You are probably going to take a HUGE financial hit trading in a brand new truck.
If you have specific questions I would suggest one you either search through the forums and find the answer yourself (I guarentee you that you will find more information than you could ever possibly need if you simply looked through existing posts) or ask specific questions for which you need specific answers. Your post doesn't make sense or ask a specific question, nor does it provide sufficient information to answer any questions.
Best of luck.
I've never really been a Chrysler fan based upon family experiences with them just falling apart. That being said, this new Ram looks incredible and really raises the bar for competition. I hope that this Ram is durable and kicks the other makers in the butt and makes them step up their game. Highest payload, highest towing, adjustable (and aggressive) exhaust braking are awesome.
I look forward to real world feedback.
I've never stayed there but I've driven past it a lot of times. Its essentially a parking lot underneath the Indian River Inlet bridge. I wouldn't object to staying their, but I would avoid the hotter months of the year. From what I recall they don't have too many trees and I'm sure it gets pretty warm.
That being said, it is right on the water, a short walk to the ocean, decent rates and quick access to Bethany/Dewey/Rehobeth beaches.
In case you all are wondering ?? GM sells the most autos in the USA than any other manufacturer. They must be doing something right !! and now they are even leaner and meaner ! I follow the stats from goodcarbadcar.org and month after month GM is the top seller. FACT !
It certainly helps that Obama has mandated that the federal government buys GM products whenever possible. Thats almost 750,000 vehicles just their...
"Air bags are meant to support "in bed" payload, such as a 5th wheel hitch or a pickup truck load of gravel or something"....
all that payload weight you say the air bags "support" is directly transferred to the axle, wheels and tires, thus air bags really support nothing.
No additional capacity is gained by the use of air bags, and other than to be able to level the truck (improve ride) when heavily loaded, they serve no purpose.
I never said that the airbags provide additional payload or capacity. All I stated was that airbags help keep the vehicle "level" when their is increased payload. I am aware that the weight is transferred to the axle, bearings, wheels, and tires. The airbags take the weight off the leaf springs, allowing the truck to ride higher rather than "squat" due to weight on the springs. In the future, please take the time to read my whole post before you try to "fix" what you "think" is wrong.
I would guess you don't really need them. Air bags aren't meant to support weight for a traditional bumper pull trailer. Thats what a weight distribution hitch is for.
Air bags are meant to support "in bed" payload, such as a 5th wheel hitch or a pickup truck load of gravel or something. Unless you have a lot of gear in the SUV or heavy passengers, you should be managing your weight with your WDH.
To the OP, 5th and 6th gear are essentially overdrive gears. My suggestion is that you place your transmission in S mode, click it to 5th gear and put it in tow/haul mode. Perhaps S mode locked out tow/haul in earlier trucks, but I know my 2010 still allowed use of tow/haul in S mode.
By putting it in 5th gear it keeps the trans from shifting into 6th gear, which is a very high ratio gear. This prevents your trans from constantly shifting between 5th and 6th gear. That keeps your trans heat down, keeps wear and tear on the drivetrain down and helps improve your fuel economy.
When approaching a steeper incline I like to manually downshift before the hill and get my rpm's up prior to the hill.
I have a 1998 Nash 22H and pull it with a Tundra. Any half ton will be perfectly capable of towing this trailer. Obviously you can't put 1500 lbs of gear in the bed while towing, but you should be able to put an average family in the truck, firewood, chairs, bikes, etc in the bed and still have enough payload left over to pull the trailer on most weekend trips.
At any rate, in order to change the capacities, towing or payload, they would have to have changed the suspension, axles, brakes, rear end, or some combination of those, and there's nothing I read that indicates any of that.
The alleged 2000 lbs payload is news to me. I am hopeful that it is a sign that Toyota is realizing that they have a great truck and need a couple small upgrades to make it even better.
That being said, the combined axle ratings on my Tundra are 8150 lbs while the GVWR is only 7100 lbs. The axles have an additional 1050 lbs they can support.
The brakes are way oversized and I doubt they are the current "limiting factor" to the low payload on current Tundra models. Regardless, the Tundra has huge brakes and Toyota already has a TRD brake upgrade kit available that increases stopping power.
I am not familiar with how strong the rear axle is. I've never heard of a failed rear axle on the Tundra though. It is rated for towing 10,000 lbs though, so I would assume that it is also not the "limiting factor".
The suspension is something that is fairly easy. Hell, I've got airbags on my Tundra to level out when not towing. I put the bags on for less than $300. Toyota could maintain the gentle ride qualities with the same leaf springs but increase payload with factory bags and built in compressor at an upgrade price.
I think more about wheel bearings being sturdy enough, the frame being able to support an additional 1000 lbs, the crappy stock P rated Dueler tires, etc.
It seems plausible that Tundra could increase its ratings by 500 lbs with minimal changes. 500 extra lbs would be great, but 1000 extra lbs would bring the Tundra into a class of its own...
I have a 2010 with the 5.7 engine and E rated tires. The powertrain is fine and has plenty of power and the brakes have always felt solid. I love my truck and it tows my 6,000 lbs RV with ease. I love my Tundra and think it is a very competent truck for my current RV, as well as my next RV. Down the road I want a toyhauler with higher tongue weight. The current Tundra will not be able to meet my needs down the road, forcing me to buy a different manufacturer simply because Toyota chooses not to offer a competitive product. Depending on speed/wind/grade I get between 8-10 mpgs towing my RV.
Here are my suggestions;
Offer a HD half ton or true 3/4 ton option. Increasing the payload 500-1000 lbs would really open up possibilities with this truck. I think the gas 5.7 V8 and current 6 speed transmission are plenty strong for a 3/4 ton truck. Toyota could theoretically spend relatively low R&D dollars upgrading some components and offer a gas 3/4 ton and increase their market share. At that point, they could do some feasibility studies and decide if it is worthwhile to offer a diesel engine or a full 1 ton option. My axles are over engineered for the low GVWR, my brakes are plenty big, my engine has enough grunt, my E rated tires can handle the load. Their isn't too much else that Toyota needs to "upgrade" to safely gain 1000 lbs of additional payload.
Offer a larger gas tank. The 26 gallon tank is on the smaller side, but it feels even smaller because the low fuel lght kicks on with around 6 gallons remaining. I understand the logic, but I start getting stressed out when that light comes on and start looking for a gas station, even though I have 45-70 miles left. A 35 gallon tank at approximately 9 mpg allows for around 300 miles between fillups while towing, which would be a comfortable span for me. If the payload is higher, its easier to absorb the higher weight of that additional 10 gallons of gas.
In reference to the bed height issue, I don't mind the look... but I don't pull a fifth wheel. Newer pickup trucks have taller suspensions combined with higher bedrails, which provides less clearence between a fifth wheen and the bed rails.
One other thing that baffles me is that they chose not to incorporate direct injection in the 5.7 to squeeze out a couple more mpg's. I'll be honest, I am okay with 9 mpg's towing and 16-17 on the highway and accept lower economy for the fantastic power output of the engine. That being said, if DI could improve the economy for a minimal upfront cost and continued reliability, I would be willing to pay the price.
I sure hope Toyota takes the time to listen to their customers. I would love to continue to spend money at Toyota when it is time to upgrade my truck. If they fail to offer a heavier duty option though, I will be forced to buy from another manufacturer.
So at the beginning of your post, the way I read it I would be better towing with my Vette than my Ram? The Vette has 400hp and 400 lbft of torque, sits about as low as you can get, and has HUGE brakes. Damn and to think I bought my truck to tow with. Go figure.
Yes... that is obviously what he meant. Great continuation of the thread.
Sounds like a nice truck! I almost can't wait until I am retired and can "get serious" about towing and get a 1 ton and a toy hauler. 14 more years til retirement... at least 17.5 until the kid is grown though...
Japanese to American. No brainer if you ask me.
Your Ram is actually Italian now. Majority of Chrysler is owned by Fiat. No brainer if you ask me.
Yep. No brainer.
You can have a red Italian 4-door sports car that carries 4-5 people, burns diesel and can tow 12k+ lbs with a pin weight of 2000+ lbs.
All powered by a Cummins, Made in USA engine, burning recycled dinosaur diesel.
Ain't life grand ?
It's a no brainer.
Yup, sure sounds like a decision made by someone with no brain...;)
My cousin has a 2011 250 with the 6.7 and LOVES it. He works on a sod farm and works his truck hard. He pulls too much, exceeds payload, drives hard on rough trails (all on the farm, mind you) and his truck has never even had a hiccup. He has about 80K trouble free miles though.
I can't believe folks are comparing a F150 (EB or not) with a 2500HD. It's starting to sound like some of those guys on the Tundra forums...
I can't believe someone who doesn't own or intend to own a Tundra reads the Tundra forums. Its starting to sound like someone just likes to troll and harass Tundra owners...
I would suggest you put it in tow/haul mode and slide the shifter into S shifting and leave it in 5. This limits the transmission from shifting higher than 5th gear. It seems counter-intuitive, but when its just left in D it tends to hunt for gears. When it hunts for gears it tends to downshift to 4th and have higher RPMs. Thats a lot of excess stress on the transmission and worse gas mileage.
I tow in 5th and if I keep it between 60-65 I can get 10 or 11 mpg's towing my RV on relatively flat roadway.
I'll throw my 2 cents into the mix. Living in a less expensive RV for 6 months will destroy it. The fabric on seats and couches will rip, climbing in and out of the bunk beds will quickly damage them, the shower/toilets/sinks aren't really meant to handle the workload you will be throwing at them. The fridge and freezer aren't big enough to handle food for a family of four for more than a day or two AND they don't really maintain a constant temperature which will cause food spoilage. You will have a terrible time trying to cook meals constantly on the small range and oven. You will use a lot of electricity trying to keep the trailer cool and then you have the unknown maintenance issues.
You are budgeting $14,000 for the trailer. That $14,000 over 6 months equates to $2333 per month just to pay for the trailer. I'm going to be honest, living in a cheaper trailer for 6 months will most likely destroy it unless everyone is exceptionally careful. Its a wonderful idea, but highly unlikely that it will work out the way you want.
If you estimate an additional $600/month for storage and "stuff" you are now around $3000/month to live in misery for 6 months and probably destroy the trailer. Its gonna cost you TWICE as much as renting a house and will be way less comfortable and convenient.
I'd think twice about this idea. By the way, testing an RV for a week is WWWAAAYYY different than living in one for a month. I remember going cross country with my family when I was 14. It was a miserable experience at the time and we only spent 6 weeks AND we were in a different location with new things to do AND staying in campgrounds with pools, playgrounds, basketball courts, etc etc.
Good luck, but I would strongly encourage you to reconsider.
I had an Isuzu with a GM 3.2 engine. I forget the exact details, but there was carbon buildup on oil drain holes and it would cause the engine to burn oil because it couldn't flow through the crusted up drain holes. I had noticeable oil burnoff. I researched it on a forum and people recommended using Seafoam through a brake booster hose to help clean up the carbon deposits. It made a horrible cloud of smoke behind the Isuzu for a couple minutes, but it seemed to clean up the carbon deposits. The next oil change I had ZERO oil burnoff. I did this about every 20,000 miles and never had another problem.
I don't think its a magic cure all, and I highly doubt it will increase mileage unless your engine is really filthy and not flowing right. For periodic "maintenance" I trust Seafoam.