New Tow Tug ,What to Buy? - Page 9

hayseed · 12-01-2021, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naddis01

The RAM 1500 Classic in the US has a payload of 1670 lbs which I think is around 750kg. So if I'm not mistaken, the Aussie ones actually have a higher payload rating.

Pretty sure the Aussie 2500's GVM is downgraded to 4490Kgs so it can be driven on a car licence here in Australia..
But happy to be corrected..

prydey · 13-01-2021, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hayseed

Pretty sure the Aussie 2500's GVM is downgraded to 4490Kgs so it can be driven on a car licence here in Australia..
But happy to be corrected..

This is correct and why the payload is poor for the Aussie version of the 1500.

naddis01 · 13-01-2021, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben73

Where would you find the info. On car sales it says they have 735-750kgs payload which is nothing. I find Carsales is usually quite accurate.

It seems way too low since all the Thai utes are good for about a tonne

The official RAM websites in both the US and Australia.

naddis01 · 13-01-2021, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hayseed

Pretty sure the Aussie 2500's GVM is downgraded to 4490Kgs so it can be driven on a car licence here in Australia..
But happy to be corrected..

I was referring to the RAM 1500

Gumboot · 13-01-2021, 09:07 AM

Also the new DT model Ram 1500’s ( Not the old DS models) that are being realised in January have higher payloads and bigger axle load capacities.

351LTD · 13-01-2021, 05:37 PM

especially when you put 3.5t of caravan on the back you are down to half that,fill it with gas and put the family.in and you will be lucky to have any any over to put anything in the tray!!

naddis01 · 13-01-2021, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hayseed

Pretty sure the Aussie 2500's GVM is downgraded to 4490Kgs so it can be driven on a car licence here in Australia..
But happy to be corrected..

It's hard to compare like for like through the offical RAM channels as RAM Australia hasn't released the new 2500 yet and the US doesn't have the Classic 2500 any more by the looks of it. However the new 2500 in the US has a 10000lb GVM which is a touch over 4500kg. RAM Australia would be mad not to reduce that slightly here for licencing reasons.

The 2500 has a 6500T towing capacity in the US.

smoo · 17-01-2021, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naddis01

It's hard to compare like for like through the offical RAM channels as RAM Australia hasn't released the new 2500 yet and the US doesn't have the Classic 2500 any more by the looks of it. However the new 2500 in the US has a 10000lb GVM which is a touch over 4500kg. RAM Australia would be mad not to reduce that slightly here for licencing reasons.

The 2500 has a 6500T towing capacity in the US.

That is a good enough excuse to keep it over 4500kg is it not..
I think it’s bad enough now anyone can jump in a modern 4wd and put 3.5 T behind it without knowing the basics.
If they drop the 2500 under 4500kg that means it can be loaded with a 5th wheel to bring GCM over ten tonne but can be legally driven on a car licence?

This video is relevant to the thread. And relevant to those who denigrate the Ram 1500s spec in comparison to the Thai specials. At the end of the day physics trump optimistic on paper figures that are used for marketing purposes.

roKWiz · 17-01-2021, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoo

That is a good enough excuse to keep it over 4500kg is it not..
I think it’s bad enough now anyone can jump in a modern 4wd and put 3.5 T behind it without knowing the basics.
If they drop the 2500 under 4500kg that means it can be loaded with a 5th wheel to bring GCM over ten tonne but can be legally driven on a car licence?

This video is relevant to the thread. And relevant to those who denigrate the Ram 1500s spec in comparison to the Thai specials. At the end of the day physics trump optimistic on paper figures that are used for marketing purposes.

Yep, spot on. Something common bl**dy sense should be telling us and not marketing bs.

naddis01 · 17-01-2021, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoo

That is a good enough excuse to keep it over 4500kg is it not..
I think it’s bad enough now anyone can jump in a modern 4wd and put 3.5 T behind it without knowing the basics.
If they drop the 2500 under 4500kg that means it can be loaded with a 5th wheel to bring GCM over ten tonne but can be legally driven on a car licence?

This video is relevant to the thread. And relevant to those who denigrate the Ram 1500s spec in comparison to the Thai specials. At the end of the day physics trump optimistic on paper figures that are used for marketing purposes.

When you are a car company and your aim is to sell vehicles, I think you would lower the GVM by the 30kg to open up your market to sell more. Regardless of what some people might think of the licensing system.

351LTD · 17-01-2021, 07:23 PM

Watched the video a few days ago,one of the first i watched that actually says that towing anything over 2.5t with a double cab ute is getting into a problem area unless modified and you should not really tow anything over 3t with one. The love of the bigger v8s came thru especially the petrol ones!! Have got a couple of quotes for the small Hino s ,they have a new one that looks good 5lt 205hp and a converter auto but are still waiting for isuzu and iveco to get back to me with there quotes and then i will take a day off work and go for a drive.Does anyone have real fuel figures for these small trucks with and without anything on the back and towing a 3.2t caravan.Keep coming back to the v8 Patrol in my heart and clips of them with a after market exhaust on is not helping.I suppose if i sell the ltd and now that i have given up drinking ,I will need something !!!!

XR Martin · 17-01-2021, 10:00 PM

Best economy from a little Hino while empty would be somewhere around 15L/100km.
While towing or loaded, around 20-25L/100km

prydey · 17-01-2021, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoo

This video is relevant to the thread.

I don't see how. So much misinformation in there it's not funny, not to mention some info that is just plain incorrect.

It's an opinion piece and a plug for a couple of businesses, nothing more.

Franco Cozzo · 18-01-2021, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR Martin

Best economy from a little Hino while empty would be somewhere around 15L/100km.
While towing or loaded, around 20-25L/100km

Makes you wonder why those little Jap trucks are so gutless but still use a ****load of fuel.

I'm not sure if this comes in 4x4 but may be worth an investigation

https://www.caradvice.com.au/909717/...hybrid-review/

Alternatively this can be optioned with Allison 5sp torque converter auto

https://www.caradvice.com.au/723999/...17-4x4-review/

300 series has just undergone update where the interior is much nicer.

roKWiz · 18-01-2021, 06:52 AM

[QUOTE=Franco Cozzo;6536622]Makes you wonder why those little Jap trucks are so gutless but still use a ****load of fuel.

franco, only 4x4 ones. don't know why you believe this crap applies to all.

These trucks are made to work, no one would buy them if the return on investment was lower than its outgoing cost, been that way for decades now.
Remember they are not cars doing the quarter.

All of my Jap trucks will maintain hwy speeds fully loaded returning good fuel economy.

smoo · 18-01-2021, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

I don't see how. So much misinformation in there it's not funny, not to mention some info that is just plain incorrect.

It's an opinion piece and a plug for a couple of businesses, nothing more.

They expose the myth of the Thai special towing and rear axle weight specs - Ram has similar tow/payload specs but tows something like that a lot easier.

Tassie f100 · 18-01-2021, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

I don't see how. So much misinformation in there it's not funny, not to mention some info that is just plain incorrect.

It's an opinion piece and a plug for a couple of businesses, nothing more.

They are actually backing up what a lot of us already knew,to be safe don’t tow anything heavier than the tow vehicle on a rear mounted towbar,tail wagging the dog is not a great idea.By the way what do you consider to be misinformation?

prydey · 18-01-2021, 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tassie f100

By the way what do you consider to be misinformation?

Well, for a start, stiffer rear springs does not reduce the weight coming off the front axle. The aftermarket industry love to tell people half truths. They need people to believe their products are essential.

The 2L ranger does not have less torque than the 3.2L. There is a power and torque graph overlay floating around these forums comparing the 2 engines outputs through the entire rev range.

I don't wish to turn this thread into another ute bagging thread as the OP has already established they aren't suitable for his requirements.

I will add though that their overall message is probably correct but they could have come to the same conclusion by just using the legalities around vehicle ratings and shortfalls and left the opinions and aftermarket marketing exercise out of it.

Franco Cozzo · 18-01-2021, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roKWiz

franco, only 4x4 ones. don't know why you believe this crap applies to all.

These trucks are made to work, no one would buy them if the return on investment was lower than its outgoing cost, been that way for decades now.
Remember they are not cars doing the quarter.

All of my Jap trucks will maintain hwy speeds fully loaded returning good fuel economy.

Must be the drivers that are the problem them because the ones out here are flat out doing 80km/h on our highway and when they come to the first hill they slow to a crawl

Franco Cozzo · 18-01-2021, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

Well, for a start, stiffer rear springs does not reduce the weight coming off the front axle. The aftermarket industry love to tell people half truths. They need people to believe their products are essential.

The 2L ranger does not have less torque than the 3.2L. There is a power and torque graph overlay floating around these forums comparing the 2 engines outputs through the entire rev range.

I don't wish to turn this thread into another ute bagging thread as the OP has already established they aren't suitable for his requirements.

I will add though that their overall message is probably correct but they could have come to the same conclusion by just using the legalities around vehicle ratings and shortfalls and left the opinions and aftermarket marketing exercise out of it.

Didn't real world towing tests show that the 3.2L I5 with 4 less gears pulled a real world load better than their fancy bazillion turbo 2L job?

https://www.whichcar.com.au/reviews/...anger-tow-test

That's the thing with numbers, graphs on paper and engineers, all three are full of ****.

Put the latter in front of their customer and watch them melt

prydey · 18-01-2021, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Didn't real world towing tests show that the 3.2L I5 with 4 less gears pulled a real world load better than their fancy bazillion turbo 2L job?

https://www.whichcar.com.au/reviews/...anger-tow-test

That's the thing with numbers, graphs on paper and engineers, all three are full of ****.

Put the latter in front of their customer and watch them melt

google is full of examples of comparisons that go the other way. depending on your stance, you can find an article to back it up.

interestingly, most people that bag the 2L do so under the assumption that changing gears more means its struggling more or working harder. Yeah, super logic that. Who would've thought a 10sp would change gears more than a 6 speed.

anyway, that discussion has been done to death.

Franco Cozzo · 18-01-2021, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

google is full of examples of comparisons that go the other way. depending on your stance, you can find an article to back it up.

interestingly, most people that bag the 2L do so under the assumption that changing gears more means its struggling more or working harder. Yeah, super logic that. Who would've thought a 10sp would change gears more than a 6 speed.

anyway, that discussion has been done to death.

Yeah because it creates NVH issues when it's banging up and down gears at the slightest hint of a hill and it's perceived as 'struggling' by the person who bought and drives it, regardless of what some poindexter in a lab coat and safety glasses tells them with their graph and lines which apparently overrules lived experience.

'Customer experience' is a phrase that the propeller hats don't have in their dictionary

roKWiz · 18-01-2021, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Must be the drivers that are the problem them because the ones out here are flat out doing 80km/h on our highway and when they come to the first hill they slow to a crawl

Sounds like the old Diahatsu Delta I had with the huge gap in ratios between 3rd and 4th gear. Yeah, That was a dog.

Franco Cozzo · 18-01-2021, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roKWiz

Sounds like the old Diahatsu Delta I had with the huge gap in ratios between 3rd and 4th gear. Yeah, That was a dog.

See, if only you had 10 gears so it could bang up and down from 3rd to 10th and still crawl up

roKWiz · 18-01-2021, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

See, if only you had 10 gears so it could bang up and down from 3rd to 10th and still crawl up

But Franco I do have 10 gears, proper gears you shift manually.

wodahs · 18-01-2021, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roKWiz

But Franco I do have 10 gears, proper gears you shift manually.

pft .......

get a real truck roKWiz !

it aint real if it aint got 18 and non syncro

or even better twin or tri stick

GCRXR6 · 18-01-2021, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

Well, for a start, stiffer rear springs does not reduce the weight coming off the front axle. The aftermarket industry love to tell people half truths. They need people to believe their products are essential.

The 2L ranger does not have less torque than the 3.2L. There is a power and torque graph overlay floating around these forums comparing the 2 engines outputs through the entire rev range.

I don't wish to turn this thread into another ute bagging thread as the OP has already established they aren't suitable for his requirements.

I will add though that their overall message is probably correct but they could have come to the same conclusion by just using the legalities around vehicle ratings and shortfalls and left the opinions and aftermarket marketing exercise out of it.

You're right about stiffer rear springs. Any weight rear of the rear axle, applies rotational force about the rear axle. The fulcrum is the rear axle. That force transfers to an upward force on the vehicle, forward of the fulcrum.