Ike towing test - Gm does it again
- Thread starter joelykool
- Start date
I actually was surprised... by how poorly Ford did! They have some work to do on their calibration at high altitude, it seems.
Almost makes me wonder if the Ford was in regen or something? It used the most fuel and went up the hill the slowest. By the numbers, it should have been a dead heat with GM (5 HP is a rounding error), yet Ford got destroyed by everyone. Oh well, them's the breaks in the real world.
I will have to check out a L5P in person, but from the video, I actually liked the looks of the L5P interior less than the Ram. Though the Ram suspension would beat you to death in the prettier interior, I suppose.
Eh, ignore me, I'm the grumpy guy who thinks the 2003-2007 Classic GMT-800 interior was the pinnacle of design :hello:
Almost makes me wonder if the Ford was in regen or something? It used the most fuel and went up the hill the slowest. By the numbers, it should have been a dead heat with GM (5 HP is a rounding error), yet Ford got destroyed by everyone. Oh well, them's the breaks in the real world.
I will have to check out a L5P in person, but from the video, I actually liked the looks of the L5P interior less than the Ram. Though the Ram suspension would beat you to death in the prettier interior, I suppose.
Eh, ignore me, I'm the grumpy guy who thinks the 2003-2007 Classic GMT-800 interior was the pinnacle of design :hello:
I watched that last night. I was expecting the Ford to win by a small margin.
Also, remember the Ram and Ford are "rated" to tow ~30k lbs yet where pulling the same ~23k lb load as the chevy and still lost. That either says that Ram and Ford are not truly safe, rated or capable of handling more then the Chevy or that there is a lot more left in the Chevy to grow if they felt they wanted to play that game
Also, remember the Ram and Ford are "rated" to tow ~30k lbs yet where pulling the same ~23k lb load as the chevy and still lost. That either says that Ram and Ford are not truly safe, rated or capable of handling more then the Chevy or that there is a lot more left in the Chevy to grow if they felt they wanted to play that game
Until the GVW matches front and rear axle ratings of the truck. And until there's posted data for rear axle gcvw for a stated grade %
It's all marketing sceams
It's all marketing sceams
I wished they data logged each truck and compared sensor data, it would be interesting to know what's going on with temperatures, limiters, dpf status, etc., etc., while climbing - however, this would probably be worthless data to the average truck buyer/owner without giving an in-depth explanation on what they effect.
Although, I think does appear GM does better at fine tuning for different altitudes; but, GM also has some quirky shit going on at times in their tuning (rattling etc).
GM said the frame and brakes on the 17 are essentially the same as 11-16, so they were not going to increase the tow ratings. So they have the power to do it, but the rest of the truck isn't up to the engines ability. Dodge and Ford both improved the rest of the trucks to handle the extra weight. Keep in mind, it wasn't that long ago a semi rated to tow 80,000 pounds would only do 10-20 mph up grades like these. So it's not about having the power to run 70 up these grades that gives them the higher tow ratings, it's about having the frame and brakes to handle the weight when the poop hits the fan that matters.
And FORD has always lagged behind in the mountain tests, but done well at sea level and level ground.
I'd like to see the egt's also. If you're tuning for a 30k load it'll be a lighter tune than for 23k load.
Just goes to show even if you make more power on paper it's all about getting the power to the ground efficiently
that doesnt matter when they post HP and torque numbers. the truck is not adjusting power by its self based on load
I can't stand these tfl guys. Don't really know what they are talking about though the footage is cool.
We need an old school top gear show that does hilarious reviews with real number crunching and real world testing.
Glad the general was the winner though. I'm driving around a rental 16 f250 gas and I can't wait to get my ass back in my big red, this hoopdie is lack luster for sure.
We need an old school top gear show that does hilarious reviews with real number crunching and real world testing.
Glad the general was the winner though. I'm driving around a rental 16 f250 gas and I can't wait to get my ass back in my big red, this hoopdie is lack luster for sure.
that doesnt matter when they post HP and torque numbers. the truck is not adjusting power by its self based on load
I think he is suggesting that the ford and dodge have higher HP potential but were tuned back to keep them together with 30k behind them. The dmax can be cranked up a bit since it 23k will put less strain on the motor.
i see. Ferm gave a pretty good reason why GM didnt increase the load rating though and it may also be the fact the allison still only has 4 clutches for the c3's.
