Airstream Forums

Airstream Forums (http://www.airforums.com/forums/)
-   Tow Vehicles (http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463/)
-   -   How is this possible, same manf, almost same frame, diff GVWR (http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463/how-is-this-possible-same-manf-almost-same-frame-diff-gvwr-122548.html)

carl2591 07-14-2014 02:05 PM

How is this possible, same manf, almost same frame, diff GVWR
 
case in point.

2003 Ford F-250 SD with 7.3L PS diesel pickup, extended cab, long bed, 158" wheel base. VIN tags show Gross at 8800.. but the axles weight, front 5200, back 6084 = 11284 LBS, is quite a bit higher than gross..

now look at this.

2003 Ford Excursion with 7.3L PS diesel SUV, 137 Wheel base, VIN gross 9200, front 4700, back 5250 = 9950 LBS, which is just slightly above gross on tag..

What gives..

On SD, vin shows transmission as 9, axle as C1,
excursion trans is a B and axle C1.

so why the big difference in gross and axle total weight.. too me it appears the SD is underrated on gross by 1000 lbs or better.. :huh:

info is from this SD, http://www.autowarehousesalesnservic...spx?id=4545377

and this excursion, http://www.autowarehousesalesnservic...spx?id=4666199

87MH 07-14-2014 02:54 PM

First off, you're comparing a superduty pickup to an excursion - two different vehicles.

I have an '05 Excursion and a bit later 250 PU. The suspension is very different - especially on the front end.

Different spring codes call for different ratings.

Transmission cooling capabilities will effect gross.

Best to stick with the Manufacturers rating - many expensive engineers have thrown many hours at the ratings - they would not downrate any vehicle without a solid reason.

jcl 07-14-2014 03:04 PM

When they spec'd heavier axles for the pickup, they would have allowed more headroom for not knowing where the owner would place the load, more fore or more aft. The Excursion would be designed for carrying the weight more between the axles.

No reason for GVWR to be the sum of the axle ratings unless you can control weight distribution between axles.

Also, as noted above, there are more considerations for GVWR than axle capacity.

BoldAdventure 07-14-2014 05:22 PM

They may also have completely different axles. Ford uses a number of axles and sizes. There are a number of contributing factors. As 87MH pointed out, the engineers know what they're doing.

dznf0g 07-14-2014 05:32 PM

Are you expecting FGAWR + RGAWR to equal GVWR? It doesn't work that way.

carl2591 07-15-2014 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikekey (Post 1482343)
They may also have completely different axles. Ford uses a number of axles and sizes. There are a number of contributing factors. As 87MH pointed out, the engineers know what they're doing.

i hear you on axle sizes etc.. if you look at a 2006 super duty the gross is 10,000

another point on the engineers know what they are doing,, then explain the 6.0L engine .. sorta make that something you make you go HUMMMMMM...

the axle code on VIN is same for both .. ???

BoldAdventure 07-15-2014 07:18 PM

What about the 6.0L engine? My 4 door Pontiac G8 GXP has a 6.2L v8 with 3.92 rear end, and produces 415hp & 409ft/lb of torque. They also put the 6.2L in the 2500HD's, but that doesn't make my Pontiac suited for towing. :)

dznf0g 07-15-2014 07:23 PM

no 6.2s in 2500s. Only 6.0l. 6.2 goes in high end SUVs and Max Tow 1500s.

I think he's talking about the Ford 6.0L diesel....which was problematic.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.