• Can a Ford F250 Beat a Ram HD 2500 Up the Ike Gauntlet? Fully Loaded Towing Review (Video)

    2018 2017 ford f250 6.2L v8
    Ford F250: 6.2L V8

    This is a 2017 Ford F250 XL regular cab 2WD work truck with a 6.2L gas V8. It’s loaded with the same load as a 2017 Ram HD 2500 6.4L HEMI V8 Tradesman we recently tested on the Ike Gauntlet™. How do they compare on the world’s toughest towing test?

    This episode of Super Ike Gauntlet is brought to you by GenY Hitch. You can use the “tfltruck2017” to receive a 10% off discount on GenY Hitch products.

    Actually, the Ford is hauling a slightly lower weight because it’s equipped with a 3.73 rear axle ratio (not a 4.30). This limits the Gross Combined Weight Rating (GCWR) to 19,500 lbs, and we have to stay at or below this rating. For comparison, the Ram HD was configured with a 4.10 rear axle.

    You guys asked for this test, and we wanted to run the Ike Gauntlet in a gas-powered Super Duty for many months. It’s because Ford has updated the 6.2L V8 and gave it more torque. The power rating is 385 hp and 430 lb-ft of torque. Also, the 2017 F250 6.2L V8 uses a unique Torqshift-G 6-speed automatic transmission. This transmission is not as heavy duty as the one that is behind Ford’s 6.7L Power Stroke diesel V8. It has a lower torque rating, but it also weighs a bit less and allows the F250 a quicker acceleration and a bit more payload capability. This F250 is rated at a maximum payload of 4,200 lbs.

    We had a breakdown in this truck on our first attempt at the Ike Gauntlet™. We contacted Ford about it, and the root cause was identified as a “water pump” or coolant pump failure. The pump breakdown caused the serpentine belt to break, which broke the cooling fan, which punctured the radiator. We are glad to have the truck back and to run the maximum load towing test again.

    How do work trucks with gas V8s tow? Check out the video for all the numbers.

    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov is an Automotive Enthusiast, Producer, Reviewer, Videographer, Writer, Software Engineer, Husband, Father, and Friend.

    Similar Articles

    292 thoughts on “Can a Ford F250 Beat a Ram HD 2500 Up the Ike Gauntlet? Fully Loaded Towing Review (Video)

          1. He’s still stuck on thinking every truck needs an engine brake. Personally, I think only needing to apply the brakes 12 times over a period of 8 miles of steep gradient with 11k on the back is very good.

            1. I’m really irritated there are so many Jay’s on this site. I really wish there was a login because I have been posting here for over year as Jay S and all of a sudden there is another guy using Jay S. Even before this i switch from just Jay to Jay S because a bunch of other people started posting as Jay.

        1. Jay S – – –

          How many “braking events” would occur of they were able simply to downshift a 6-speed manual transmission? (^_^)…


          1. They actually can downshift manually the automatic transmission. But they do the test is full auto mode only.

          2. I don’t know how this transmission is setup but I drove a 2017 transit van last week with the 3.7L V6. When going down a hill it automatically downshifted for me to slow the vehicle. My Colorado does the same thing (though it is a Diesel). Seemed to work alright, though I only had couple thousand pounds of payload.

      1. Ford is an embarrassment. Good cameras though, and rust protection, and sheetmetal. At least the frame has been improved to not be completely embarrassing like they were for 20 years until this year. I give credit where credit is due. But engines and drivetrain is the most important. Oh, the front suspension is good in some off-road situations, but overall, the steering and such is junky. Since GM and RAM beefed up their front suspensions on their HD’s in 2011, the Ford just does not have the advantage they used to in their twin i-beams.
        Oh, any Ford guys that want to order the sunroof on their truck, just don’t do it. You will regret it. Look it up.

        1. Chris, Yeah you proved that your not too smart with the last statement. Twin i beam front ends are junk, there’s a reason they dont make them anymore. And FYI I have one if their “old” framed trucks WITH a sunroof and have had ZERO problems. Anytime you want to have a tow off let me know cause you’ll probably lose your shirt.

          1. Obviously, you cant order an old truck. The new trucks have the sunroof problem. If you can make a coherent argument as to the quality of a Ford powertrain vs. RAM and GM, we are all ears.. Otherwise, we assume you just resort to your above junior high tactics..

            And towing is much more about going down the hill than up it. But I would not expect you to get this. Nevertheless, the real pulling machines all go up it better than the new Fords.

            1. It’s interesting that the most ridiculous and biased comments on here are posted by people like you and then the op are quick to call peoples responses to their nonsense immature.
              You want a powertrain argument ok here you go. Of the three manufacturers of hd trucks the only one in the last 3 yrs that ive seen a tranny replaced in our shop is Ram or Dodge. As far as injector replacements, maybe its just a streak but Duramax’s have been about 10 to 1 compared to other brands. One Duramax complete new engine installed. 2 Fords, 1 6.4 & 1 6.0l new engines. 3 Cummins with engine swaps, one a 6.7l. Seen one 2013 Duramax with HPOP failure so needs an entire new fuel system, 3 cummins needing turbo replacement, 1 6.7 Powerstroke with turbo replacement. Yes the 2004-2010 Powersrokes were problematic but that’s why Ford doesnt do business with Navistar anymore.
              And news flash. ANY truck with a sunroof has the potential to leak, so quit singling out one manufacturer for it and ignoring others. Drom the looks of your post you know very little about vehicles and only care to spout nonsense on here, please think before you type or go somewhere else.

            2. Chris, you’re pretty much full of baloney. Modern trucks (and trailers) have the best brakes and braking systems they have ever had, and braking down long grades is rarely an issue. Ford Super Duty brakes are certainly competitive in stopping distance and fade with either GM or RAM; the F-450 has massively large brakes that are significantly larger than anything offered by GM or RAM.

              What is a “real pulling machine?” Considering TFL ran the Ultimate Ike at midnight with the new F-450 towing 30k lbs and it was able to make this run a full minute quicker than the RAM, I’m not sure how you find Fords to not make it up the hill at least as well as your “real pulling machines?” Just like this F-250 went up the hill better than the 6.4L RAM?

          2. Actually…Brewhaha…Ford continues to install the Twin I-Beam suspension on all 2WD Super Duty pickups. It may have improvements, but they still call it the same thing. It would be what’s under the front end of TFL’s test truck in this video.

            1. I am not the one paid by the auto industry. You are the one that need to go somewhere else to comment.

              This comment section is for independent voices.

              And here on TFL it was proven that the GM and RAM one tons are faster up the mountain than the Ford F350 one ton.

              But even so, the most important towing characteristic is towing confidence, and every independent tester of has given GM vehicles this award far more times than Ford for the last 20 years. And Ram second to that. Ford is at the bottom of the heap where it belongs.

              Going downhill with heavy loads needs good automatic engine brakes, which Ford just barely got. At least ones that work.

              And if and when Ford makes a better towing vehicle, I will applaud it.

          3. Brewhaha,

            They do have twin I-Beams. This truck in the video is twin I-beam.

            Yikes, Brewhaha. All on this site are getting to know you better.

          4. They actually do still use the twin i-beam suspension. Ford stated it in one of the 17 my announcement. I have a 95 f250 7.3 2wd with the i-beam and it handles excellent and ive never had issues with it apart from excessive camber.

        2. So you watch a video where Ford outperforms the competition and your leading statement is that “Ford is an embarrassment?”

          As to your last statement, I custom ordered a 2017 Super Duty…received it at the beginning of last October…and yes, it has the new (awesome) panoramic moonroof. It has been flawless. I use it all the time; has been through heavy rains, dozens of car washes, and New England winter. No leaks, no problems, no rattles.

          1. If you call faster time to outperform, it’s fine, but Ford pulled less than RAM and consumed more gas,so RAM outperformed Ford in those 2 categories.
            And it did it with one truck, not with 2.

            1. Ford pulled 500 lbs less than RAM. It’s noteworthy, for sure…but RAM also had the more favorable axle for heavy hauling. The tiny difference in fuel economy is not noteworthy. Maybe if FCA had more faith in the 6.4L and would let it run continuously at wide open throttle, it would be faster…but also use more fuel.

            2. The difference in economy was due to the 30 mph difference in speed between the 2 trucks. If TFL dropped the F250 down to 29 mph like the ram, the F250 would likely have a much greater mpg number. That’s why I could care less about up hill mpg. They need to match speed to ascertain a comparable mpg number.

            3. Who says that RAM had a more favorable axle for towing. You ? I disagree. It might perform better with different axle and faster, if Power and Rpm is in sweet spot, like ford had it and it was 1,200 lbs difference, not 500.

            4. Then why did ram send over a truck with the lowest gear ratio instead of the 3:73 that the base ratio is? I’m sorry that the ram is heavier than the Ford but we all seen the ram sway like crazy and the Ford was straight as an arrow.

            5. Really? Really? Hey, the Ram went half the speed and probably had 1/3 of the air resistance to overcome, but the ford sucks cause it got worse MPG’s.

              Thats a stretch.

          2. Yes Brewhaha and Troverman,

            We all know you get paid by Ford.

            And if you don’t know about the aluminum body Ford sunroof problem, you will sooner or later. Since you already purchased, you don’t need me anymore. The Puddle in your truck will let you know, if not the scratching sound that will develop.

            1. That’s a false claim, Chris. I have zero affiliation with FoMoCo other than buying their vehicles.

              Being active on the FTE forum, I have heard of a *few* people having leak issues with their panoramic moonroof…both on the F-150 and the Super Duty which now share a cab. I wouldn’t find that extraordinary. These are large apertures which could end up with a fitment or alignment issue if the mounting brackets were even slightly off. Most have zero problems. The few that do should be able to have the problem rectified by their dealer.

    1. ford must of secretly installed the 6.2 raptor tune when they fixed the water pump. lower peak tq rpm helped it once it upshifted get into the hp band

      1. Lower peak torque was an important part of the 6.2L update for 2017. Maybe you were being facetious…

        1. yes there was sarcasm there. i saw this 2017 engine got a different cam resulting in torque lower down.

    2. That ford needs to be checked for a performance enhancing turbo…. at that elevation and that weight and a NA gas motor is pretty impressive what it accomplished. Almost as impressive how well ford’s tiny ford v6’s perform in the 1/2 tons. Seems ford has the gas engines figured out better then the competition

    3. Andre – – –

      Liked the Ford run. Good video. Glad the got the truck fixed: that goofy earlier breakdown could have happened to ANY truck, right? (^_^)…

      BUT: instead of just advertising a plug for “GenY Hitches” (which certainly is merited) why don’t you also give some acknowledgement and publicity to the fuel/scale station you guys have been using??
      (Like, who owns the disembodied voice of the female scale attendant on the intercom, for example…??)


      1. Have a 6.2 motor myself and have never had a problem (50k miles). Also never heard of this water pump issue before. So it’s probably a one off.

        1. Jeff – – –

          J: “Also never heard of this water pump issue before. So it’s probably a one off.”

          Agreed. But we all may be hearing a lot more of these failures in the future, if bean counters have their way. See my comment to Zviera down below (August 27, 2017 at 5:23 pm)


    4. Wow. New water pump destroyed the whole new engine. Are those propellers still plastic ,like before?
      Serious question to someone who knows.
      Another question, how water pump can fail to destroy everything like this? I’ve never heard about failure like this before,but it must be comon problem in Ford community, because no one even blinked.

        1. Did I miss something?
          I thought,that Ford managed to destroy the water pump, belt, fan , radiator, hoses …
          going on the way for testing.
          Ford is a loser.

          1. Man, ^^^^^this guy is really butt hurt 😭 $10.00 he is going to be up all night trying to bash Ford in this thread.

            1. Congrats to ford to finish the line.
              I am really relieved ford did it finally. It took just two month to pull it off.
              What an embarasement for RAM.

      1. Water pumps don’t have propellers,they have an impeller.Water pumps generally fail at the front,or rear,(if it has one) bearing.Or,the casing itself might not have been machined properly.

        In either case it cut the serpentine belt,and the fan went through part of the radiator.I believe that’s what they found on part one of the test.

      2. Haha, propellers. FYI the engine never failed. They stopped the truck when the pump failed and the engine never over heated. So you can keep on your fake bashing once again. Maybe you you watch the ram crawl up the Ike.

        1. No bashing. Just facts. Water pump gone, belt, fan, radiator, hoses .. all gone.
          They had no choice, when all those lights on cluster turned on like Chinese Christmas tree, but stop the truck and call towing company.

          1. Also just facts, Ram is ranked last in nationwide reliably based on hundreds of thousands of surveys and data. One water pump failure on the Ford is what it is. A one off weird failure.

            1. And don’t forget all tbose hundreds of thousands plastic impellers on diesel failed and modifications ford customers where fidling with, to make it home safely.

          2. @Zviera –

            As to the reference to the water pumps on the diesel engines that failed…agreed…it was a bad design. What happened was when the water pump bearings failed (mostly from high mileage, nothing unusual)…the shaft would run at an angle, causing the impellers to dig into the aluminum housing and eventually eat right through the housing. Unfortunately, the housing was cast into the cylinder head or engine block, and this allowed coolant to flow into the motor and mix with oil. In some cases engines were ruined, but in all cases the repairs were very expensive.

            The good news is that starting in 2011 with the Ford-built diesel 6.7L, Ford chose to use “floating” water pumps which are not cast into the engine block or heads. They are completely stand-alone…so if this failure happens again, the worst that will happen is coolant would leak on to the ground. And Ford does use two water pumps on each 6.7L engine.

            1. Maybe he would like to discuss the Cummins water pump failures. I bet he won’t want to bring that up.

      3. Zviera – – –

        Z: “Wow. New water pump destroyed the whole new engine. Are those propellers [sic] still plastic ,like before?”

        Yes. This is now common, especially for high-revving engines (which is why it makes little sense, — except economic — for any truck manufacturer to use plastic impellers/vanes in their water pumps, since we all don’t typically do max Rev’s in our engines!)

        Before I got rid of my BMW, we were sent a TIB for the E-90 (3-series) vehicles (2006 and later) that the water pump should be changed at 60K miles before it goes blooey and wipes out the $12K engine! Dumb, right?


      4. Zviera, I’ve seen MANY failures like this on ALL brands, granted not on a new truck but I don’t work at a dealership anymore either. And FYI the obly manufacturers I can think of off the top of my head that I’ve seen use plastic impellers are Jeep, Ram, and FCA products. Not saying there aren’t others out there using them but from what ive seen they’re the worst offenders and have replaced MANY of them. And you must be pretty ignorant about engines/trucks etc, because losing a water pump, belt and radiator is FAR from destroying the whole engine. Maybe if someone like you was driving and not paying attention etc….

      5. Zviera…serious answer. The impellers inside may be plastic (not sure) but they didn’t cause the problem…the bearings on the shaft that drives the water pump failed. Like on any engine with a mechanical fan, the water pump is driven by the fan pulley. So when the bearings in the water pump fail, it causes the shaft from the fan pulley into the water pump to lean at an angle. This angle caused the belt to come off and shred, and this angle also caused the fan blades (which are plastic) to hit the radiator fins which destroyed both the radiator and fan. Obviously, with no cooling, the engine cannot run or it would overheat. By the way, the engine was not “destroyed” at all since TFL shut it down before it overheated. Instead, the water pump was replaced, along with the radiator and fan and serpentine belt. Coolant filled up…all set. Although I’m disappointed to see a water pump failure on a brand new truck, this same type of failure would have caused the same result on any brand of vehicle. Having owned two 6.2L Ford Super Duty’s in the past, I had never heard of water pump failure, nor did I have any problem with mine.

        1. Well, it’s just your assumption.
          Bearings doesn’t fail, when new. The mechanical seal failed, and coolant took care of the bearings and rest of the engine.
          That’s why it took them 2 month to clean the mess inside the engine cooling chanels , make sure there is no any debris .

          1. This shows how little you know. Which is obvious. A bearing can just fail. It is not common but it can and does happen. You have no leg to stand on that it was just a seal failure. Since they heard no bearing noise until the failure, it shows that the bearing suddenly failed for no apparent reason other than a bearing defect.

            1. Bearings fail for a reason. They don’t fail running on nominal RPM and load. They survive at least double. Go check the specs. They failed, because of mechanical seal failed and bearings were flooded with coolant.
              I replaced thousands of bearings in my life, include ceramic ones in electrospindles and I still do that everyday as part of the cnc machines ( 5 axis) service I provide.

            2. You are very wrong. You can have a bearing that was machined wrong and that causes the failure. You can have the bearing pressed in wrong and that causes a failure. Those failures show up pretty quick to. Like this new F250 with very low mileage. Maybe if you installed the bearings correctly you would not be able to claim that you replaced thousands.

            3. You have no idea how bearings are made and checked, but it’s possible,that Ford used some garbage one . It’s Ford policy to find cheapest stuff and sell it as premium.

            4. Back peddling from what. That ford had a failure and destroyed half of the engine, because if garbage bearings ? Not at all.
              You are never happy, even when I agree with you, that ford bearings failed miserably.

            5. He’s just an ignorant troll JJ. Don’t waste time responding to his ignorance…. It’s just not worth it

            6. Zviera
              August 28, 2017 at 6:10 pm
              Exactly. I ignore people without a knowledge.

              Well you just gave JJ a huge compliment even if it is from you. You follow him where ever he goes.like a lost puppy. In fact you do the exact opposite of ignoring him.

            7. Yes I ignore people without a knowledge , but I am not going to watch them to post a false informations, but to correct them.
              You didn’t post any information. You are just a troll.

            8. Haha, Mike just took you to school and you once again back peddled like the normal liar you are. That was hilarious to read.

            9. You and Mike know nothing about bearings. They don’t fail for no reason when new and all components are checked several times during manufacturing process, assembly and final product, which is automated for centuries. All the big manufacturers has right equipment for that. There is an exception of course, if it’s made in the basement of the start up Chinese factory.

            10. Zombiera you really just proved yourself as a total retard. There are so many variable that could cause a bearing to fail and I just named a few. None of which you claimed as what happened. And this is why I am certain it was not a seal failure. Every water pump has a weep hole for coolant to drain down the front of the engine. If a seal fails, you will get coolant running out of the weep hole and my money is TFL would have noticed coolant on the ground. I have yet seen a case where coolant was not seen prior to bearing failure.

            11. Well, I know there is always a weep hole between the mechanical seal and bearings, but if seal failed on the way and after 3 minutes later coolant destroys the bearings, you would never be able to determine the cause.
              If bearings failed first, like you persist to say and I don’t completely disagree, then it must be bottom lowest end possible bearing from basement of Start up Chinese supplier without any quality control equipment at all.

            12. Looks like you don’t even understand the properties of coolant either. More of the very long list that you don’t know.

            13. As long as you understand,that new ford water pump failed on the way for testing, I am ok with that.

          2. Zviera, I didn’t speculate on what caused the bearing failure. I’m just saying that bearing failure caused the shaft to tilt, which is what caused damage to the fan, radiator, belt, etc. It could well have been a leaking seal which allowed coolant into the bearings area, stripping lubrication and causing a failure. Or, it could have just been a defective bearing. It didn’t take 2 months to repair the vehicle. All repairs were likely completed within a day. It certainly is not that hard to change a radiator, fan, water pump, serpentine belt, and maybe a hose. “Cleaning the coolant channels” involves simply removing the thermostat, setting the heater on full hot, and placing a garden hose into the upper radiator hose heading in to the thermostat. If the lower hose is disconnected, all the old coolant and any foreign debris will flow right through the heads, block, and heater core…and out into a catch bucket.

            The long delay could have been TFL finding the time to reschedule the IKE run and video shoot / editing, or the time it took Ford to collect the vehicle, transport it somewhere, and the time for the repair facility to schedule it in. Not the length of the repair itself. I think that would be quite obvious to anyone.

            1. Ot would be nice ,if Ford tell us, which part failed first. Bearings,or mechanical seal, so we can put this discussion to the rest. They probably don’t know either, which is not assuring for the Ford customers.
              We will see, if there is some recall going to be done in the future, or more customers will experience,what TFL did.

            2. You try so hard and being correct it is quite sad. You will always be wrong and you will always lose. That is your place in life so you need to deal with it buddy.

            3. Oh, as you agreed with my statement I have no problem believing you are wrong all the time and received the short end of the stick in life. We finally agree on something. Baby steps to your rehabilitation.

            4. Chris you apparently know nothing about bearings, I’ve been in Projective and Preventative Maintenance for 20 plus years,unfortunately bearing fail,anything man made,New or old will fail,as mentioned, milled incorrectly, do you have any idea of what the variance can be on this bearing that’s being at question, 0 no variance, bearing failure happens stright out of the package, again I rest my case,Carry on Ford!!!!!!!!!

    5. Andre
      What happened at the top of the hill it seemed like the truck’s transmission was not shifting out of second gear even though you were already on level ground inside the tunnel. Can you clarify? Otherwise a strong strong run indeed.

      1. In tow haul mode it will keep the low gear for an extended period of time if the programming suspects it may need to down shift again. This is pretty normal until a predetermined amount of time has occurred when the engine load is down. It will then yo shift.

          1. @ JJ:
            Question,since the trucks they test are new,don’t the transmissions have a ‘learning curve’ that they go through?

            And that brings up another question,doesn’t all these trucks,gas and diesel have to be broke in before going for max tow?

            1. Lohchief – – –

              L: “…doesn’t all these trucks, gas and diesel have to be broke in before going for max tow?”

              ANS: YES, absolutely! And it surprises me that when Ford (or any other manufacturer) gives TFLT a new “sample” truck for towing/hauling tests, that they don’t prohibit maxima for both cases, UNLESS the vehicle is already “broken in”.
              The dealership for my Ram 2500 Cummins diesel does not wants me to do the following until 7500 miles:
              1) No full-throttle acceleration;
              2) Hauling at ~2/3 max capacity or less (~2K lbs);
              3) Towing at ~2/3 max or less (~ 12K lbs).
              4) No interstate driving at constant high speed.

              What I am supposed to do is work the gears up and down from 0 to 65 MPH, under the partial load and empty.
              Don’t know if he is just being conservative, or if Cummins is a special type of diesel that requires this, or if ALL the Big Three diesels are supposed to be treated that way, or what.

              But I’m not sure I’d be happy about buying that Ford (or Ram or Chevy) after it was put under max conditions with 50 initial miles on the engine!


            2. As far as the transmission is concerned, there really is no break in. But there is an adaptive learn. When the TCM has its parameters cleared, there is a specific test drive that use be performed. It is done at the dealership if a repair is performed or done at the factory level. What this does is allows the TCM to adjust shift scheduling to the thickness of the clutch packs to the snap ring. The gap. This allows the TCM to know the travel and adjust for smooth shifting.

              On the owner side the TCM does alter shifting based on drivers habits. Also in tow haul mode. This is really why you want to use tow haul when you are towing or hauling because the schedule can be more aggressive due to the increased load. Plus it allows for more aggressive downshift when you tap the brakes for engine breaking. And it can “learn” based on the current conditions. If you are doing a lot of hills, you may find that the more you drive the longer it may stay in a lower gear. It is predicting the next hill and prevents an upshift.

            3. @Lohchief: during the shots of the instrument cluster, you could see this truck had 7800 miles on it or something like that. Most press vehicles have miles on them.

      2. I believe the speed limit in the tunnel is 45 mph. If they were slowing down at the top of the hill to enter the tunnel, there would be no need to up-shift.

    6. 4.30 gears would have done better would have allowed it to pull 3rd gear. if u buy crew cab 4×4 do not get the 3.73 gears

      1. The 3.73 allowed the truck to hit the perfect 5500 rpms at 60 mph in 2nd which is close to max hp. 4.30 gears may have done worse since it would have needed to shift to 3rd at 60 mph to prevent over revving. 3rd gear is only around 4200 rpms even with the 4.3 gears.
        The truck slowed down to about 50 mph at the top since it did not have enough power to hold 60 mph.
        The 4.30s may have done a little better at the end since 50 mph would be stronger in 2nd compared to the 3.73s but overall, this setup was perfect for the run.

        1. Very well thought out Nihilus and most definitely the case.

          Only difference would be the 4.30’s would hold 3rd longer before needing 2nd. Then you would loose speed waiting for it to go slow enough to hit 2nd.

          Then your right again, it would be rpm limited before hitting 60mph in 2nd.

          With those stock tires 3.73’s probably worked the best on this test.

        1. Nope, engine is fine. Water pump severed a belt and damaged the fan/radiator. none of that is the engine.

          Seriously do you know nothing about vehicles?

          1. I don’t know any car or truck engine without a water pump, belt, fan ,hoses and radiator.
            The engine was fine you say, it just took ford 2 month to fix it. LOL.

    7. I figured this truck would do pretty good but I was impressed for sure. Sure looks like the GM and Ford make strong trucks.

      1. Ford is very strong. Except the water pump, belt,fan, radiator and hoses. Otherwise very strong truck. Congrats to ford to finish the line finally.

        1. Zviera,

          The belt, fan, radiator, and hoses were side casualties of the water pump failure. Same as would occur on any vehicle. You seem to be implying its pretty normal for a new Super Duty to have engine parts failing routinely. Obviously, that is not the case.

          1. The plastic impeller was failing constantly on the ford diesels before. You needed to get aftermarket one to take care of this issue.
            They might learned the lesson and used metal ones, but I can’t confirm that.

            1. Then why are you shouting off crap like it is fact. In fact all your post are false comments. But you are a FCA employee that is paid to troll sites and bash other brands while trolling fiat products. You don’t know anything and you are a liar.

            2. Zviera,

              It is extremely common in the auto industry to use plastic impellers inside a water pump. I’ve owned many vehicles over the years, and I’d say its more common to use plastic then metal. Plastic impellers cost less, they weigh less, they take less engine horsepower to drive them because they are nominally lighter, and when the pump bearings do fail and the shaft tilts, the plastic is less likely to eat through the housing. Many water pumps are not stand-alone units, but are rather set directly into a cavity in the engine block and may be driven directly by the timing belt rather than the serpentine belt.

            3. Troverman, I worked on a 4.0L Jeep with a water pump failure. Plastic impeller. The head and freeze plugs needed to be removed to get out all the pieces. For some reason Jeep thought it was good to put the water pump in the block instead of a housing. There were pieces all the way around the #6 hole. If those pieces were left, it would have likely taken out the new water pump with a plastic impeller.

          2. I look at this whole thing in this prospective, GM only love GM,same as for Dodge and Ford owners,there all good Trucks,anything can happen to a new one or no trouble at all,so everyone needs to let these statements roll off or suck it up and go buy a new FORD, Just joking,its just which ever one a person prefers,right gentlemen?????

    8. would be interesting to see with the gassers how much engine vacuum they pull while engine braking ( something you can check with obd2 reader)

    9. I’d like to hear “Mr. Truck’s” comments on the engine responsiveness of the 2017 truck vs. his own earlier model (6.2L) truck?

    10. It does seem like the ram trucks with the newer 6.4 motor do not perform as well as the older 5.7 hemi trucks. Looking at ram ike gauntlet runs from 2015 or older it seems the gas powered rams from those times performed as well as any other brand. I hope FCA improve the 6.4 trucks soon. Be it a problem with the engine or transmission or computer programming or whatever else. It’s beginning to look like they just don’t care!

    11. Congrats to ford to finish the line with second truck 2 month later.
      What a technology marvel in 21st century.

      1. “Have something happen” that is. Loving the iPad issues tonight. Anyway, we get the point. Anything made by anyone can break.

        1. Common Moondog. Don’t be silly to start a recall war.
          I smell Ford water pump recall soon.
          Or maybe not. Ford customers will suck it, like many times before.

          1. No, not being silly. Anything can break and we both know that. The Ford issue was a freak occurrence and I’m sure Ford was embarrassed over it because it’s a bit of a PR issue. They did right by getting the truck back to TFL. The Ford smoked this test so give them their due. If I recall correctly that Ram HD diesel did quite well too. Hard to argue with results. I think we would all admit, Ram fan or not, that the 6.4 needs to be improved or replaced soon. I also look forward to seeing what engine tech FCA has in store for Ram’s future lineup. I’m intrigued by the inline engines.

            1. We all know the Ford broke down. That was obvious. What I’m saying is anything mechanical can break. The truck was fixed and then performed exceptionally well. As you know, we can go to any forum and find issues with any brand vehicle, including something just like this, very easily. The truck did exceptionally well. Numbers don’t lie.

            2. He is not just a super fan. He is a FCA employee who is paid to troll sites like this and others to spread propaganda. He is doing what he is paid to do.

            3. I don’t work for FCA anyway. You must think I have a superfan and super water pump in my RAM, because it didn’t break like ford’s yet.

            1. Nah, ram is going to be a
              Chinese brand by end of the year. LOL. Z is currently brushing up on his Chinese now.

            2. No. I am very happy. No engine, transmission, brakes master cylinder recall for my RAM. My water pump, belt, fan, radiator didn’t break either.
              Keep reading consumer reports and leave real life experience for professionals.
              Or maybe ask TFL, to make a consumer report for their first test attempt, to see, how happy they were to lose engine in heavy traffic and call a towing company for loaded truck and trailer.
              Here is a consumer report, if you missed that. They seemed stressed to me. I don’t need that.


            3. Are you implying, that TFL faked that ford engine failure ?
              It’s hard evidence bro and it will stay on internet forever.

            4. I can believe that, you have a fiat propaganda program on a tv in your cubicle keeping you brain washed.

            5. I never said anything about a fiat in this thread.
              Ford water pump failure we are discussing in here. I work for Citroën, remember?

    12. I went back to the other videos.
      Chevy with 360 HP 10 min 20 sec
      Ram with 410 HP, 13min 20 sec
      Ford with 385 HP 8 min 53 sec.

      If it was a 16 sec spread like the diesels it would be pretty even in my book. But the Ford and Chevy did really well considering being the lesser powered trucks.

      1. I agree. This wasn’t even close. I would like to hear more of what Mr. Truck (Kent) thinks about that very fast Ford run. That was a nice run. The Chevy did well too with a very proven and tried and true engine. It’s time for Ram to update their HD gasser for sure. I think they have some new engine tech in the works but am not completely sure. The 6.4 just doesn’t do as well as it should.

    13. Impressive result. As a GM fan, I’m glad to see the Ford pull ahead. I hope this drives GM to up the capability of their Gas HD’s a bit. Overall I like GM’s 6.0 L, but it does lag in the performance realm a bit. Although it’s definitely a double edged sword… up the performance and you may effect longevity. Either way, the gas HD’s are definitely making a stronger case over the diesel HD’s.

      1. I am a mixed bag as to who I pull for or don’t. My comments and thoughts seem to lean Ford but my buying habits are clearly mostly GM as it relates to fullsize trucks and family vehicles. I’ve been a Tacoma guy for many “moons” now but I have owned a bit of everything over the years. Having said that, it is OK to be second sometimes. That 6.0 GM engine may be their most bulletproof engine. When you are on the job you need something that is proven and that works and that doesn’t break down. Leave the impressive 0-60 runs with someone else and so what if someone out tows you so long as your truck will tow what is needed. Reliability and ability matter. Having the most ability does not matter so long as your equipment meets your needs. If you dunk a basketball it gets you two points. If you dunk it and in the process do a spinning 360, it is still only two points.

        Because I’ve had so many issues with my GM products (I’ve had great ones prior to 10 years ago and not so great ones afterwards) over the past 10 years, I would buy Ford, Ram, Toyota, GM, and Nissan last in that order for LD trucks. For HD gassers, it would be Ford, GM, and then Ram because that 6.4 does not perform like it should. For diesel, leave Ford first and then replace GM at the two spot with Ram.

        Moondog update: I must say that our latest replacement Yukon XL is growing on us since we had a few initial quality and mechanical issues worked out. I might even say I like it now, or have the potential to like it absent any more issues, but please don’t tell anyone. :). I reserve the right to whine and complain about it later if it starts giving us trouble again. :). Peace to all and goodnight….

        1. I agree moondog. It is not always the first up the hill that we want. Reliability is key and the GM 6.0L is a good workhorse engine. We have several in our fleet and non of them are perfect but they are great engines. The same as the Ford 6.2L we have in our Superduty’s. While I have not had any issues with any of them, I know at some point we will have to have a repair done. The same as our Superduty’s with the 6.7L. They just work. We have people fighting over who gets to drive them because they like the power they make. I have the benifit of seeing the cost of ownership numbers and see what brand is the cheapest to own over the course of 250,000 and more miles. Ford and GM are pretty close and it really comes down to bid price and wanted features. “Other” brands don’t even come close. In fact around 150k they are just to expensive to maintain and keep.

            1. Your correct. Ford is cheap for ownership for Fleets. Less cost of ownership and less down time. Good job zombiera you are finally getting it.

    14. Kind of hard to compare the three times, TFL doesn’t make all the data easy to find. Best I could tell…

      Chevy: 11.5k trailer, 2k in bed, 13.5k total
      Time 10:20 with 2.3 mpg.

      Ram: 11.9k trailer, 2.5k in bed, 14.4k total
      Time 13:20 with 2.9 mpg

      Ford 11.4k trailer, 2.5k in bed, 13.9k total
      Time 8:53 with 2.6 mpg

      1. Ford suckers doesn’t read all the data you posted. Not even how many brakes has been applied down the hill, or how many trucks you need to finish one test. To much information.
        They see just one number. Time.

        1. Well, all three trucks had the same downhill brake applications. You once again you are mute in point.

        2. Way to miss the whole point!

          Point is Ram had the heaviest load and Chevy had the lightest. Overall spread of 900 lbs. That’s doesn’t take into account vehicle weight differences. I didn’t research it. It’s possible that 6.4 Ram was trying to push a whole lot more weight up the hill than the other two.

            1. If you caught the weight, then by all means please pitch in to the discussion. I didn’t and I disclosed that.

            2. Daniel, they said is was several thousand pounds under gcwr. That puts it it at where the max gcwr of this F250 was at 19,500.

          1. Daniel
            If you want to make the comparison even more confusing, I looked up the base curb weights of the three trucks.
            6052 – ford
            6303 – Ram
            6334 – chevy
            Although I don’t believe the order of finishing times would change if all trucks were at the same GVCW, I must admit it looks like the ram 6.4 was pulling about 1100 lbs. More up the mountain. Everyone can draw their own conclusions, I suppose.

            1. Lol, you are drunk.
              The point is, Ram WAY over rates the capacity of the 6.4L. At max GCWR, the Ram so sliw it becomes a road hazzard.

            2. Semi trailers are also huge and lit up like a Christmas tree. Vehicles were flying past the poor Ram like it was standing still. The only way they saw it in time was from all of the sway it was doing.

      2. Daniel – – –

        Excellent piece of research work! And you’re right, it is hard to dig out previous TFLT results for a comparison. But even then, test conditions may not be the same (Temperature? Humidity? Air pressure? Any current precipitation?) So that would have to be known too. (We already know its high elevation, so that is constant, but what we don’t know is whether sea-level testing would affect each engine similarly.)

        Two points:

        1) Maybe what we can ask TFLT to assemble period review articles, or, better, an ongoing data table (like then old “Road&Track” used to do for car-performance parameters). The we all could access that as a separate link int heir tool-bar section up above (“HOME TRUCK NUTS BOOK TFL GEAR LOOKUP IKE GAUNTLET NEW TRUCKS CONTACT US TFLCAR.COM”)

        2) Max HP and Max Torque of any engine are NOT the most relevant hauling/towing parameters in real-world applications, — especially when new! What I believe we need to see are HP and Torque data along the way, at a few chosen RPM settings, like 2000, 3000, and 4000 RPM. Yes, it would be nice to see what you get right off idle (say, 1000 RPM), but most dynamometers I know won’t work well that low.

        BTW: In your data above, the Ram was slowest, but had the heaviest trailer, towed/hauled the largest total weight, and yet also had the best fuel mileage, by 25% over the Chevy. So, I guess there is no perfect world: there are trade-offs all over the place.
        And sometimes, engines that will perform well when new may not do as well with 150,000 miles on them.


        1. You are right. Just cold air makes a huge difference with NA engine when towing. My HEMI has more power I can feel when pulling my trailer early morning.
          Different gasoline without ethanol, extra bottle of nitro provided by Ford ” for injectors cleaning”…

      3. Thanks for the comparative info, Daniel. I think the base weight numbers of the truck are largely irrelevant since you cannot change that. Each manufacturer needs to supply an engine capable of moving the static curb weight of their vehicle, PLUS a competitive amount of trailer and payload weight. So in this case the RAM did move 500 lbs more weight up the hill, which is noteworthy. However, it did have the optimal axle for towing while the Ford did not. But I have this sneaking suspicion that if you loaded 500 more into the Ford it would not have made any difference.

        1. Marketing dept cares nothing for curb weight. Horsepower is horsepower in marketing. In the real world, curb weight is incredibly significant. A fully loaded pickup doesn’t perform near as well as the plane-jane base model.

          When Ford went aluminum body, they could have banked the weight savings and logged potentially significant gains in acceleration and economy. Instead (particularly in the Super Duty) they “spent” their weight savings in reinforcements to boost capability. They targeted max-tow and max-haul numbers for advertising. I can’t help thinking they should have given the F250 a significantly lighter duty frame for even more weight savings.

          1. They could have given it a lighter frame but really at what cost. They could have to have manufactured another set of frame options for each wheel base. It would likely be to much money to go through that just to give it a few extra pounds of capacity.

          2. I actually prefer a heavier truck since in general they handle a trailer better. But part of the “weight” game is GVWR. Federal truck classes and limits come heavily into play here, which is in part why the F-450 always has less payload than a comparably-equipped F-350 dually. A lighter truck can remain in its federal Class and increase payload without changing GVWR. Since I own a 2017 F-350 dually, I’m well aware of how Ford increased the strength of a variety of items. The frame is now fully boxed instead of just back to the firewall. The rear axles are mostly all new. Suspension seems better. The body certainly seems more flimsy in spots, but I’m willing to trade that off for the added rust protection of aluminum.

        2. Troverman, it does appear that the ram did go up with an extra 500 lbs but as you said, it would have made no difference in the 5 minute difference in time up the Ike. The Ram also did not have a full tank of fuel. I did not see how much the Ford had in it.

    15. This has to be one of the best all-time uphill performances by a truck relative to its peers. The only other tests that come to mind are the EcoBoosts in the half ton trucks, but there isn’t a true competitor in the market for those trucks right now. For the heavy duty, N/A gas V8 market, where the Big 3 all compete, Ford just destroyed the field. Very impressive. And the best thing about it is that GM and Ram will respond and try to out-perform the Ford 6.2. Capitalism at its best!

    16. the ram would have still been slower than the chevy and ford but it may have been a little faster with 3.73’s instead of 4.10’s. the reason is that the 4200 default rpm would have been around 5plus mph faster than the 4.10’s were in 1st at 4200 it would it least be interesting to see if it would and how much difference it may or may not make to have 3.73’s over the 4.10s. at the very least it could make another good video to watch.

      1. I’m not sure RAM offers a 3.73 axle for the gas 6.4L truck. Ford DOES offer a 4.30 axle for this same truck, but it was equipped with the base 3.73 axle for this test.

        As in the previous test, it appears RAM does not allow continuous running at wide open throttle with this engine, perhaps to protect it. Hence the slower times. I would be interested to see how a base 2500 5.7L Hemi performs.

        1. Troverman – – –

          T: “I’m not sure RAM offers a 3.73 axle for the gas 6.4L truck.”

          Checking the catalogue left over from my buying the 2500 in spring: Ram does offer a 3.73, but not universally for all gas engines. It depends on the box length and whether 2WD or 4×4.


          1. Thanks Bernie…I checked and you are correct. In fact, you can get a regular cab, 2WD long box 6.4L Hemi with the 3.73 axle. That would have been the most ideal comparison possible, but as we know, it is difficult for TFL to get trucks configured exactly the same.

    17. @ Bernie;
      That is some break in period/schedule.Now I’m really curious as to just how many miles are on the trucks that are tested,AND if they all went through the factory recommended breakin period.That would change all the times had they NOT been broke in properly. And on the diesels,that’s a serious thing.

      1. Lohchief – – –

        Yup. Exactly. Maybe that is one datum that the TFLT team should report every time they do an “Ike Gauntlet” test, — or whether the factory recommended break-in period and procedures have been officially completed.

        This affects not only towing, but braking. It takes a while to “seat” the pads and condition the rotors properly, and you don’t get max grip or lose “gabbiness” until many miles after “new”. So when they count the number of “brake applications” going down the Gauntlet, how would those change as a function of brake aging?


        1. I think it would be hard if not impossible for TFL or any other reviewer to determine if the break in period was followed. Unfortunately trucks are often provided by the marketing department and I have seen instances where a truck was delivered for a test with only 4 miles on the odometer. I have also seen them with 5,000 miles. The one with 4 miles was a Tacoma and Toyota actually has fairly strict break in procedures. 0-60 runs are certainly not included in those procedures but they were run anyway. That truck is a different animal acceleration wise once it is broken in. I would imagine other trucks could be the same. Our Yukon also had a period for adaptive learning for the tranny. I would like to see if some of these trucks say anything about towing during this period. I bet they do. Either way, these automotive journalists have to test what they get when they can get it and I bet the average marketing guy knows nothing of a break in procedure. I have seen them not be able to answer questions about their product that I bet over half of us could answer. Then again, I’m not sure we are normal truck fans. LOL.

          1. Moondog – – –

            Yes, you are, unfortunately, more than right (^_^).
            There are practical difficulties with what I was suggesting concerning “official” break-in.

            But there is nothing impractical about Andre checking the odometer and reporting that number before he starts towing. It may be the only way we could even get an estimate of how “broken in” in the truck is. I’m sure you would agree that a truck with 4 miles on the odometer would towing/haul differently from one with 5,000 miles on the odometer.


            1. Ford requires no break in other than a recommended “1,000 miles before towing” so the rear differential can wear in properly. They suggest trying to vary engine speeds, but there is no formal break-in. Engines have much tighter tolerances nowadays than they did yesteryear. In this case, the shots of the instrument cluster revealed the mileage of this truck to be 7,888.3 miles, seen at 2:01 in the video.

        2. Bernie,

          I took delivery of some freightliner M2’s with the Cummins 6.7L. There are some differences between the pickup truck engine and the medium duty truck engine but in the manual it clearly states no break in is needed and do not use any special break in oil. The manual has NOT in bold when it says it does NOT require breakin. However we have to do what we are comfortable with on break in periods.

          1. Jimmy – – –

            J: “in the manual it clearly states no break in is needed and do not use any special break in oil.”

            I suspect that the M2’s are geared properly in both transmission and differential to allow full-capacity work right out of the chute. And Freightliner may have pre-test/pre-run them ahead of time anyway.

            But a goofy private owner (like me) might have been temped to go drag-racing with my new Ram 2500 Cummins just to show off! No doubt the dealer’s break-in protocol was meant to discourage that…(^_^)…
            I’m sure that drag-racing a Ram 2500 with 4 miles on it might do more damage to the Cummins than any ordinary use of the M2’s. (And companies discourage horseplay with their vehicles…😃)

            BTW: No special break-in oil for me either. Just Shell Rotella 10w40 Diesel.


            1. Bernie, this is the Cummins supplement manual. They give this manual to all manufacturers that put their engines in a chassis. We do run max RPM’s around 2400. That is the fuel cut off. I suspect your Ram/Cummins combo maxes out around 3300 RPM. But I believe they run it up higher for the HP side. We have max HP at 260 and yours is over 300. Same torque I believe. 660TQ.

            2. Jimmy – – –

              J: “I suspect your Ram/Cummins combo maxes out around 3300 RPM. But I believe they run it up higher for the HP side. We have max HP at 260 and yours is over 300. Same torque I believe. 660TQ.”

              Yeah. For this Cummins, Max RPM seems to be a range, not a single number: it starts at 3300 (as you noted) and then goes up to 4500+.
              In that max range, HP = 350 and Torque = 660 (also as you noted), but only for the Daimler G56 manual: for the automatic transmission, they run the HP to 395 and the torque to (formerly) 900, but now 930, with the 2018/2019 models.

              If you have fuel cut off at 2400 RPM on the M2’s it is not surprising that no real break-in period is needed. That is already nicely conservative.


            3. Commercial diesels are destined for that reason.
              They in effect have a built in lifetime break in program. ;>)

            4. Bernie, does your Cummins actually rev that high? 4400 rpm or is that just the tach limit. 4400 seems really high for a stock diesel. Our Powerstrokes max shift point is around 3200 rpm. I would have to drive one again for the exact number but it is close to that.

            5. Bernie

              BTW: No special break-in oil for me either. Just Shell Rotella 10w40 Diesel.

              Double check that oil. I thought they wanted a 10-30 for most climates. I run full syn 5W-40 due to my oil analysis results and engine wear results (Cummins and international engines). It made a huge difference in what was being seen in the oil. That was originaly 10W-40 standard oil.

    18. I wish you guys would have summarized the results between the 3 trucks or at least the Ford and Ram at the end of your video since it was titled as a comparison.

      1. Jerame – – –

        Yeah, I was wondering the same thing myself when I watched the video. Where was the actual “comparison”?

        Tried to address part of this problem in a response to “Daniel” up above (August 28, 2017 at 9:47 am). It’s begging to look like TFLT needs a larger staff of folks to assemble all these tests into manageable and easily accessible comparisons.

        Guess, we all may have to pay for this website usage pretty soon: salaries for secretaries, etc…(^_^)..


        1. Buddy – – –

          B: “Cheers, I meant destuned not destined”

          Did you actually mean “detuned”, not “destuned”?
          Bad typing day? I have them all the time…(^_^)..


    19. Is it the same staff at TflTrucks AND TflCars? Personally,I have always found pickups to more interesting than any damn cars.My pickup days goes back to my youth on the dairy farm.

      Back on topic;I would like to know the actual mileage as received from the oem,before testing starts.

    20. You should have made a closer comparison of gc weight.
      The ram was loaded 3000 lbs more than the ford. That’s a big difference that should not have been glossed over.

      Please make ALL COMPARISON tests comparable whenever possible. You can’t control what the companies give you. But you can control what the weight they tow is.
      The trucks are rated using the Davis standard. No real need to test that.

      I have a 10,000 lbs trailer. I want to know how each engine and trans mission can tow that. I’m not concerned with top weight except when determining which class of truck to purchase. You should be doing like tests within that class.

      I’m also wondering about the value of the ram 4:10 axle on this climb.

      Extended Higher RPM may have caused problems with emmitions programming.

    21. Like I’ve mentioned before the ford did very well.But the true winner was the Chevy it had an old 6.0 with alot less hp and TQ,made it up the hill with respectable time ,beat the slow swaying Ram and the ford that finally did make it after repairs were made.Because in all fairness if it was Ram or Chevy that puked out we would never hear the end of it from some these whining pride first reliability 2nd ford fans ..imo ,Chevy only needed 1 attempt ..☝

      1. The Chevy is a good rig, AM. But it wouldn’t hurt GM to give it a little more zip, though…right?

          1. In all honesty, I don’t see a reliability advantage for any of the gas-powered heavy duty pickups. I’ve seen GM 6.0L trucks go 300k, Ford 6.2L trucks go 300k, and RAM 5.7L trucks go 300k. That’s excellent reliability in my book. The GM trucks with the 6.0L are absolutely the easiest to work on in terms of space around the engine and simplicity of design. But all three will run high mileages with little more than oil changes. After that, you look at things like suspension, brakes, rust, cab comfort, price, etc. I know a lot of fleets that bought Fords because they needed a 450 or 550 cab and chassis. For a while, nobody else offered that. Now RAM does, and I guess next year or so GM will start offering those trucks again. I know of fleets that bought Fords for years because the Super Duty changed so little over a period of 16 years. The expensive truck bodies could just be moved to the new truck. That has now changed. But a lot of the 450/550 fleet trucks used by the telecom industry are Fords, rather than RAMs, because the V10 is definitely a superior choice than the 6.4L Hemi. Of course you can get a Cummins, but a lot of fleets are not buying diesel anymore because whatever fuel economy advantage there was has been largely negated by much more expensive maintenance costs and upfront engine option cost.

      2. AM you are full of crap. If you remember the chevy that was supposed to be at this test had 2 failures at the other site so this one was sent in its place. Nobody brought it up that I know of till you decided to make claims that are not true.

        1. Hey JJ dont get butt hurt its my comment,if you dont like it,you can go back to the hotel with zviera lol,sorry I hurt your feelings,you know you dont have to troll and comment on everybody..You buddy are a compulsive annoying Knatt ,take a vacation go away for awhile instead of you worrying about everyone’s comments..now I know your a fruitcake..

          1. Another thing JJ,mrs knat ,get your ass to work instead of commenting all day everyday on this website,slacker..Lol,I am specifically commenting on Tfl ,you must be on other website knatting away other comments.get a life pest..Lol

            1. I do work and I bet my left nut that I make more money than you based on national average wages.

              I can tell you got your vagina hurt when I brought up the truth. The truth is you don’t know squat. You make stupid assumptions and when you are called out on it you start off with an attack. Basic social behavior for a spineless internet troll.

            2. JJ,on your rag arnt you.haha money does not make a person ,its character.You are a classless knatt..You need to go away fruitcake..

            3. Just like your brother zivera. No idea on nothing and when challenged you attack on a personal level first. A sign of a classless uneducated liberal. I’m sorry that I don’t agree with you but feel free to break down my comment and show me where I was incorrect when you attacked first. My guess is you won’t because you won’t understand the words and you know your wrong that the original chevy did not make it to TFL and no one even cared. So based on your comment does that disqualify the chevy? The like challenger did not even make it to Colorado. This was a back up truck. Maybe you want to go back and read how I felt the chevy still did really well. You probably won’t do that because it doesn’t line up with your agenda. Funny how facts backfire in your face.

            4. Lots of ‘haha’, LOL, and Fruitcakes in your comments. JJ did indeed strike a nerve and you showed a very nervous twitch.

            5. So basically, only RAM didn’t have any failures and pulled most for less gasoline.
              Ford and GM are losers and not reliable.

            6. Please, do tell, how many minutes then.
              Don’t forget to calculate for 1,200 lbs more and better Mpg and 2.9 Mpg instead of 2.6 Mpg.
              I am waiting for your clear answer backed up by the scientific calculations.

            7. Don’t we need to only calculate for the extra trailer weight of 500 lbs. the water tote was 2500. We cannot help that the beefed up F250 is lighter and stronger than the ram.

            8. Should we also calculate that the ram claims more HP than the Ford to? Plus it has a bigger displacement engine. Should we calculate that in there too?

            9. Yes, make all the calculations necessary. Calculate even , that RAM was finished 2 month ago and Ford needed 2 trucks to perform one test.
              Ford is 2 month late up that hill, so RAM did it 2 month faster.

            10. The F250 pulling an extra 500 lbs equates to 9 min 12 sec with a 3 second variance. 1200 lbs calculates to 9 min 23 seconds with the same 3 second variance. 4 minutes faster than ram with over rated hemi.

            11. 2 month slower and few key components shorter than RAM.
              So the right time would be 2 month 9 min 23 seconds. Not bad for a ford. LOL.

      1. No the Ford and Ram pulled the same trailer, same truck and same water tote. They were within 500 lbs of each other. It would not have made up the 5 minute difference.

        1. Jj I’m sorry if you got upset didnt mean to hurt you,I will send flowers..c mon man lets be friends, fyi a troll is someone who follows and replies to everything,sounds like JJ..lol

          1. Aren’t you doing that my butt hurt friend? Like I said, feel free to show me where my facts are not correct.

            1. If it makes you happy your right im wrong ,how about that friend,c’mon man flowers are on the way ..

            2. Not sure about the man flowers but it’s all in the past if you want. I’m over it if you are.

      1. That was not the weight pulled. They were going off GCWR. The Ford is 19500 and the ram was 22800. But they pulled similar weight. If TFL had the F259 with 4:30 gears the GCWR jumps up to around 22K. Would have to look it up for the exact number.

        1. Ram 6.4: GCW pulled was 20,700 (11.9k trailer, 2.5k in bed, 6.3k truck)
          Time 13:20 with 2.9 mpg

          Ford 6.2: GCW pulled was 19,500 as shown on video.
          Time 8:53 with 2.6 mpg

          So difference of right around 1,200 pounds. Ford was 10% less efficient while pulling 6% less weight, but was 33% faster. It is a big time difference.
          I think Ram has a clear PCM thing holding it back and it would be nice to know if that is on purpose or just poor programming.

          1. A year or so ago TFL asked Ram why that happens. The reply was it is in their programming. Engine preservation.

            1. Wonder if anyone has a RAM 6.4 with an unlocked PCM (chip/tuner) they would be willing to loan to TFL to test…

            2. Ford would break something else instead of water pump, belt, fan, radiator and hoses. You are right about that.

            3. Yeah and part of the 1200 lbs is from the extra weight of the Ram. Is the Ford suppose to carry dead weight beyond the load ti make it ‘fair’. The Ram clearly haf a power issue and Ram even admitted it wgen they did the Ike with the quad cab Ram 2500.

            4. Like you said in your post before, Ford had an axle ratio in a sweet spot at the maximum power for the second gear.
              Who knows how RAM would perform with same axle ratio. Doesn’t matter anyway.
              Ford is 2 month late up that hill, so RAM did it 2 month faster, carrying 500lbs more for less fuel.
              That’s only what counts.

            5. Same with 350/3500 and above commercial vehicles.
              They are in fact detuned considerably. And speed limited.

              This is for the commercial owners protection also.

          2. Rusty,in the less efficient equation, in order for it to be equal, they would have to slow down the F250 from 60 mph down to 29 mph. Because the F250 was faster it had to consume more fuel for the extra power it was producing. That’s why I really don’t like the mpg test up hill. In order for it to mean anything, all weights need to be equal and speeds matched. It would be much harder to do IMO.

          3. Rusty, it is ridiculous to include the weight of the heavier (RAM) truck in the equation. Its nobody’s fault the RAM is heavier. You cannot count the weight of the truck itself being moved up the hill. Only the payload added and the trailer towed. If Daniel’s statistics posted earlier are correct, then the RAM had 500 lbs more on the trailer. Both had the same weight in the bed.

            1. Troverman, I disagree. These Ike “comparisons” are all about how fast one truck made it up the hill vs another and its a test of engine/drivetrain components. To compare one drivetrain to another the total weight moved needs to be accounted for. I’m not saying Ram was somehow disadvantaged because it was heavier, I’m just saying it makes a difference in this type of comparison. You also HAVE to count the weight of the truck when calculated GCWR and making sure you (or TFL in this case) are not overloaded. Otherwise, what’s the point of max GCWR? Ram’s design (and by default, it’s weight) is what is allowing it to be rated at 22,800 GCWR…so to say the tow vehicles weight should not be taken into consideration when we are required to take it into consideration to tow legally doesn’t make sense.

            2. The point is to compare truck capability, not drivetrain. Its not like you can stuff the Ram drivetrain in a GM.

          4. Again, extra weight would have required the ford to makes a second trip.

            That destroys mpg and trip time.

    22. We had this same discussion with ram vs chevy.
      Ram towing, hauling more.

      My point isn’t exact weights.
      Or spec weights.
      I’m just suggesting equal weights. And with the water totes that should be simple to accomplish.

      1. If you are referring to total scale weight of truck and trailer then I understand what you are saying. It should be easy to match pound for pound.

      2. I agree. If we want to know how well X motor is at pulling the Ike, we would want to keep Y (overall GCW pulled) and the gear ratios as equal as possible. That way we see which under performs vs advertised or which is most efficient at doing similar work or which has worst parasitic losses, or which is matched to best transmission or is better programmed, etc.

        1. Rusty, that would be interesting for seeing an outright “which motor is the strongest” but kind of silly in real life. When you buy a RAM, Ford, or GM truck…you are stuck with whatever curb weight that truck is. You can’t change it! And the engine must move that load no matter what. If I need to pull a 12k lbs trailer up the IKE gauntlet, that’s great that one truck is heavier so its ‘actually’ moving more weight up the hill. However, that does not benefit me needing to move a 12k trailer up the hill in any way. In reality, a lighter truck could use a less powerful engine that might end up lasting longer or using less fuel. Those aren’t bad things, necessarily.

          1. I see what you’re saying, but in this scenario “can a F250 beat a Ram 2500” and more specifically, comparisons of gas V8 motors, which I think is TFL’s goal, the total mass that motor has to move matters. Obviously, this is were effort on weight savings or newer designs will pay off, as just like you described, the motor would have to do less work to move the tow vehicle itself. That’s all I’m saying, the 6.2 was pulling 1200 less pounds. It was able to do so much faster, but was slightly less efficient.

        2. Tfl just needs to keep the towed trailer weight and hauled weight the same in these test!

          They can just use more or different passengers to make up for different curb weights.

          It’s very frustrating as you can tell by this thread to use different weights to try and compensate for each manufacturers gcvwr!

          Same weights towed and hauled from now on – please?

      3. It’s not going to happen. Ford horde would go nuclear on the thread. Look , what happens , when Ford engine brakes on the way for testing.

          1. He used improper oil, biofuel which dilute oil and engine modifications.
            North America runs on garbage fuel in general compare to Europe.

    23. I don’t care about the weight of the truck.
      What I would like is that the weight of the water tote in the bed. And the weight of the loaded trailer should be the same for all the trucks.

      Determine what load you want to tow.
      Determine what load you want to carry.

      Make sure this does not exceed the gvwr or the gcvwr. Or the payload rating of any truck in the comparison.

      Take into consideration the max rating for the lowest rated truck. For each

      I believe this was done on the 3500 test.

      No more 450/s in the one ton tests.

      Nissan test was great. Borrow Bernie’s manual dodge and run it up the hill. Offer him a six pack of Mugs Root Beer. :>)

      Repeat that long route mpg test with more vehicles.

      And test some 450 and 4500’s. Lots of talk of how nice they are with a custom utility bed and pickup camper.
      Lots of talk of them with flatbed also.

    24. Now my say

      I do have one observation. Over 250 comments so far for ford I don’t recall ram or gm to have that many. This is not about if you dislike Ford or not but that the fact is gets the most attention then the other 2 is quite remarkable or impressive. That is something ram and gm hasn’t been able to do. That folks equiels sales in the show room.

      Now the test. Lot people on this site are squabbling over the weight that each 3 had to tow up the MTN. All 3 max out and ford seem to go up the MTN faster than the other 2. You guys are going to not pick this to death , but what for? People look at the image and don’t take the time to dive deep in to the numbers to see why. Maybe you guys shouldn’t either.

      Now since I owned 3 v-10 s how does this compare to the v-10? Since tfl hasn’t tested one we will never know.

      Nit pic. Mr Kent said that ford increased the hp on the 6.2, no they did not! They only increased the tq. We confuse hp with tq and they are not the same.

      I’ve said before 3:73 is the way to go some of you guys tell me I need 4:30 gears, why? Here is dam proof that you don’t need 4:30 gears. I believe 4:30 gears probably would’ve hurt it’s chances of being up the MTN quicker than the other 2.

      You guys make way to much of the water pump failure. Warranty would’ve covered all this.

      Sometimes I like to see what is being said before for I have my say.

      1. They make way too much of the failure because it gives them something to pick at. Read any forum out there and you will see at least one instance of someone’s truck failing while brand new. I’m a Tacoma guy but ask some Tacoma owners about their CPS issues and watch them cringe. It happens. Do we want to talk about Hellcat recalls and catastrophic engine failures? I’ve seen numerous Ram owners complain that their trucks stay in the shop more than on the road. That doesn’t mean all Ram trucks are like that but likely just a few. GM has their fair share of them too. Ask me how I know? All of them do. I like my chances better in a fullsize Ford than I do anything else but mechanical things can fail. If the Ford trucks are so terrible why do so many people keep buying them?

          1. This has got to be the stupidest statement I’ve ever read – where to the other 64% go then Zomberia?

            1. Yup, isn’t it nice to know that business of hard working Americans paying taxes and employees are buying the best truck possible? They enjoy little to no down time, efficiency and productivity. Ford, supporting America by providing quality trucks for American businesses.

    25. Well put Marc.

      Some are still confused as to why the RAM did so much worse. Remember, when it went into pu$$i mode, it would not go past 4k rpms. Since 4k rpm is very close to where max tq of 429 ft/lbs, we can calculate hp: (429 × 4000)/5250 = 327 hp or about 230 hp at 10k elevation. Embarrassingly, that is not much better than a N/A V-6!

      1. Wonder who is going to be 1st of the big 3 on putting a force induction on v-8 heavy duty pick up. (Gas)

      2. That mode you mentioned was experienced by Ford. It leaked all over the road.
        RAM will do that slower, but with more weight, less gasoline consumed and over and over again.

        1. You forget one thing. Actually many things but in this case a few things. Ford was faster by 30 mph with 500 less load. Slow the Ford down to the ram and the mpg would have been Mich higher over ram. 2nd is Ford sent a base work truck with base engine and base rear end ratio. Ram sent the optional engine with optional rear end ratio. So the max rating is higher with the options. BUT, if Ford would have sent the optional gear ratio the max towing would be with the optioned up ram. So, when the rubber hits the road, the ram cannot do any better. The Ford still has options left for increased performance.

          1. Ford sent high performance one already. You remember? A 2 month ago, the one which leaked all over the Hwy.

            1. Nope, base model with base rear end. It is nice to know that Ford owners can enjoy a base truck with no options will outperform a ram with all the performance options. And if they really want to put do the rAm, they just need the 4:30 gear and put an even larger gap between the crawling ram and the Ford.

    26. I see you don’t monetize your website, don’t waste your traffic, you can earn additional bucks every month because you’ve got hi quality content.

      If you want to know how to make extra money, search for: Mrdalekjd methods for $$$

    Comments are closed.