Since the powertrain is relatively the same in 2016 to 2017 Super Duty trucks (ie they added 45 ft lbs and use the same trans), can we imply that the tow ratings and GCWRs on the 2016's were overly conservative? Unless the brakes are improved considerably?


F-350 4x4 6.7 SRW CC gooseneck towing:


2016 - 15,700


2017 - 20,600

 

Nope. Completely different frame. That was one of the big reasons for the frame change. There are larger brakes and stronger axles too in the 17's... Of course opinions are like A$$HO!&$ Everyone has one and some are bigger than others.

 

Frame and a new rear axle play into those number jumps.

 

Since we're speaking of the SAE test, can anyone confirm the Super Duty is actually CERTIFIED SAE J2807? I've read where Ford states SAE J2807 "Compliant", but compliance is not certification. I'm here to learn, so can anyone confirm (with source)? I looked and cannot find any certification.

 

I have looked for this as well. And even on Ford's fleet site it only shows that the 6.2L engine being SAE compliant, so the numbers on the 6.7L are using Ford's homegrown test methods?

 

1. The tq numbers are at 925 so that's a 65ft lbs increase.

2. It takes a lot more than hp and tq numbers to get high tow ratings. It's all about the frame, suspension, brakes, trans, axles, etc....

 

I think you might be splitting hairs here in terms of language. Ford is complying with the standard. (COMPLIANT)

The vehicle itself either passes the SAE J2807 towing test at the given GCWR rating or it doesn't. There is no gray area.

 

I'm not so sure about splitting hairs, especially when it comes to companies (not just Ford) who spend tens of millions of dollars marketing their product. Words matter. But it's why I asked the question, and asked for sources that indicate Ford passing the test. And you are correct, there is no gray area there. Either Ford passed or not. If they did, where does it state that?

I would look for this information for any truck I'm researching to buy, especially with the wild "one-upsmanship" going on in the diesel truck market, and the even wilder truck prices. It's puts everything in context, as compared to the other truck offerings in particular.

 

Redford is correct. Semantics.

 

The brakes are not larger at all...except on F-450 pickups.

The transmission has been revised. There is also a new transmission cooler.

The biggest thing was the new frame and rear axles, as Josh stated.

 

It sounds like Ford has a better legal team. The word compliant seems much more accurate than certified (there is no certificate...if a manufacturer says they are certified...ask to see the certificate). It is a standard, just like headlights (they are not certified, they are compliant to the standards). So, the manufactures create products and test them to the standard. At that point, they will be compliant or non-compliant....they don't get a certificate. From what I have researched....there is no governing body to 'certify' the tow ratings, just the SAE standard that the manufacturers are supposed to comply to.

Maybe someone can elaborate, but the above is my interpretation.

 

Thanks. I tried to do some more poking around the net and it seems the above (redford and troverman too) is pretty close to the explanations I've found. "Compliance" is the coined term of choice.

 

The 2016 F450 pickup ratings were compliant in 2016 per the Ford towing guide, it was rated at 40,400 gcwr. The 2017 F450 pickup is compliant and its rating is 41,800 gcwr. So the 65 ft lbs and chassis redesign has increased the gcwr marginally, 3%. When the SRW trucks were evaluated using the SAE standard for 2017 the gcwr increased approximately 5,000 pounds, 22% (from about 23k to about 28k).

My take away is that the SRW 2016 and prior trucks were probably conservatively rated by Ford. Also, there might be a weak link in the prior trucks that Ford knew about, so they chose to not test them under the standard until the weak link was resolved. One weak link might have been the parking brake, since it has to hold the gcwr on a 12% grade.

 

It's not the parking brake. The 2017 brake is identical, at least on 250 and 350 trucks, including duallys. The dually 350 is very close to the 450 on specs.

The 2016 truck was not conservatively rated...it was at the top of it's chassis capabilities. The difference is that the 2017 is at the bottom of its chassis capabilities right now. The stronger frame and larger rear axles, trailer hitch, and upgraded suspension (and brakes on the 450) are all capable of doing much more. Ford engineered this platform with room to expand. The question for Ford is "when" and "how much?" The 450 needs to be moved to Class IV if it wants to grow. The 350 dually might need to be as well. Adding power and more transmission capability is relatively easy. Ford needs to carefully time when they add more power, more transmission, more payload, and more towing in response to the competition. Let it all out right now, and you will have nothing left to work with after your competitors top you with a new redesign. Then you have to redesign. Seriously cuts into profits. This 2017 platform will be around for probably 4-5 years. It might see a mid-cycle freshening of the interior and a couple of exterior tweaks. There might be a slight bump in horsepower and torque. Some ratings might move up. But during that period, you have to be able to do that. Remember how old the 2016 Super Duty really was? That chassis was at the top of its game. It was a good truck, but I don't think it was rated terribly conservatively. GM is running into the same problem with their chassis now - tons of output from the new L5P but not enough chassis / axles / brakes / suspension to up the towing.

 

Just to jump in here, the SAE doesn't perform the tests and provide a certificate when the truck passes. All the SAE does is create the testing methodology and set the performance required to consider a vehicle to have "PASSED" it.

So, it's a bit like a student marking it's own work, but it's something that would be easy to test or disprove, so I seriously doubt that any manufacturer would cheat on this.