• 2017 Ford F-250 Lariat 4×4 Test Drive: For When Size and Capability Matter

    Ford F-250 Super Duty CC LSF
    2017 Ford F-250 Lariat

    Obviously a lot of things are bigger than a breadbasket or box, but if a new Ford F-150 pickup just isn’t big enough to get your job done, there’s always a bigger Ford Super Duty. Let’s take a close look at the 2017 F-250 Lariat crew cab 4×4 in this test drive.

    Super Duty trucks come in many flavors, including the F250, F350, F450, F550, and on to F650 and F750 medium duty trucks for really heavy lifting. They’re work trucks of the first magnitude, but in the case of the F-250 Lariat crew cab, it’s also a powerful luxury vehicle.

    There are two engines available to power the Ford F-250. First is a healthy 6.2-liter SOHC 16-valve gasoline V8 that puts out 385 horsepower at 5,750 rpm along with 430 pound feet of torque at 3,800 rpm. The next choice is a 6.7-liter OHV, 32-valve Power Stroke® Turbo diesel that delivers 440 horsepower at 2,800 rpm, while developing a whopping 925 pound feet of torque. Got any stumps that need pulling?
    This diesel is using a TorqShift® heavy-duty six-speed automatic transmission with SelectShift® to gear motive force to either the rear wheels (4×2) or to all four (4×4).
    The new Ford F-250 Super Duty comes in five trim levels: the base XL, XLT with more goodies, Lariat, the King Ranch and a top level Platinum trim. The next top level Limited package is coming very soon for the 2018 model year. There are three cab configurations from which to choose: Regular Cab; SuperCab; and Crew Cab, with two available bed lengths: 6.75 ft and 8 ft.

    The exterior appeal of the F-250 Crew Cab is as attractive as any Super Duty truck can be. It is, after all, still a truck on the outside and should be to accomplish its mission statement. The interior ambience presents an altogether different image. The cabin both fore and aft delivers sumptuous and luxurious surroundings. In fact, if the Platinum version of this truck doesn’t have it, you probably don’t really need it.
    Standard features include: fog lamps, locking removable tailgate with lift assist, box tie-down hooks, spare tire and wheel locks, tow hooks, one-touch up/down driver and passenger windows, 10-way power driver and passenger heated and cooled front seats, 110V/150W inverter in IP, SYNC with My Ford Touch, tilt/telescopic steering column, electrochromic mirror, fixed interval wipers, hill start assist, manual locking hubs, power windows and locks, Powerscope power fold mirrors, power heated glass and signals, reverse sensing and rear view camera, Four/Seven pin trailer tow connector, Built Ford Tough® trailer hitch receiver, Integrated trailer brake controller Front stabilizer bar, Hill start assist, MyKey® Pickup box and cargo area lamps, Stationary elevated idle control2 SYNC®, trailer brake controller, trailer sway control, trailer tow package, 4-wheel ASBS, airbags and safety canopy, autolamp/ rainlamp, autolock/unlock, driver/passenger air bags, remote keyless entry and start, Securilock pass anti theft, Securicode keyless keypad and SOS post crash alert system.

    There were also the following options: Preferred equipment Package, 6.7 Power Stroke V-8 diesel, dual heavy duty alternator, 6-speed automatic transmission, LT 275/65 R20 OWL All-Terrain tires on Premium cast 20” chrome aluminum wheels, 3.55 Locking Axle, all-weather floor mats, chrome package, cab steps (running boards) with lights, Navigation system, remote start system, bodyside protection moldings, 10,000# GVWR Package, 50 state emissions, spare tire and wheel, 5th wheel hitch prep Package, jack, trans power take-off provision, upfitter switches, tough bed spray-in bedliner, Ultimate Trailer tow camera, Rapid heat supplemental heater, engine block heater, Lariat Value Package, FX4 Off-Road Package, with skid plates, tailgate step and Destination and Delivery charge.

    Safety and Security technology included: AdvanceTrac® with Roll Stability Control™, Driver and right-front-passenger airbags, Front-seat side airbags, Safety Canopy® System with roll-fold side-curtain airbags, SecuriLock® Passive Anti-Theft System SOS Post-Crash Alert System™, and Tire pressure monitoring. There are also several available packages to enhance personal use.

    My test 2017 Ford F-250 Super Duty Crew Cab 4×4 was in Lariat trim, with the 6.7-liter PowerStroke V8 Diesel and 6-speed automatic. The exterior was sprayed Magnetic Steel gray metallic and featured a Charcoal leather interior with wood trim accents, and was base priced at $50,620, with the options elevating the final total to $66,945. Included were a 3-year/36,00 bumper to bumper warranty, a 5-year/60,000 powertrain warranty and a 5-year/60,000 roadside assistance program.

    SUMMARY: As a highly desirable example of a Super Duty hauler, Lariat 4×4 Crew Cab version of the Ford F-250 is a force to be reckoned with, whether serving as a work base platform or as a luxury ride to a stylish social function. Admittedly, it’s not as easy to parallel park as some smaller luxury sedans, but it provides at least the same level of comfort and convenience amenities and often more. In a word, the Ford F-250 is one big Mother – “humongous” or “ginormous”.

    The big 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel V-8 generates more muscle than one is likely to need on a regular basis, but it’s there if you need it.

    Once you’re inside (entry is a bit of a chore for vertically challenged individuals) the big Super Duty pickup envelops one in sumptuous surroundings, while serving up virtually all of the latest in technology with intuitive controls and switchgear. It is capable of being both a home office on a construction site, or doing super duty for a gentleman or lady rancher. The front seat could accommodate three people and features a fold-down center section that serves as a center console complete with storage, connectivity for personal devices and cup holders. The ride quality is smoother when carrying a load than with an empty cargo bed.
    Initially, the price may seem as big as the truck itself, but given its content, versatility and capability, the Ford F-250 Super Duty Lariat Crew Cab 4×4 is actually priced less than say, a new fully equipped Chevy Suburban or GMC Yukon Denali. The price is competitive when you consider the Chevy Silverado HD Duramax or the Ram HD Cummins.
    In the final analysis, this bigger than life, good-looking hauler is a vehicle for all seasons and reasons – it’s powerful and luxurious rolled into one elevated ride, but you might need to enlarge your garage to accommodate this ride.

    SPECIFICATIONS: 2017 Ford F250 Super Duty 4×4 Lariat Crew Cab

    Base Price:                       $50,620.
    Price as Tested:                  $66,945.

    Engine Type and Size:             6.7-literPower Stroke V8 Diesel (B20 capable).

    Horsepower (bhp):                 440  @ 2,800   rpm
    Torque (ft./ lbs.):               925  @ 1,800-2,000   rpm

    Transmission:                    TorqueShift® heavy-duty 6-speed SelectShift® automatic.

    Drive Train:            Longitudinally front mounted engine / 4×4 – 3.55 electronic locking axle.

    Suspension:            Front – Mono beam (narrow front track) with coil springs, shock absorbers and stabilizer bar                        Rear – Live axle with leaf springs, staggered shock absorbers and stabilizer bar.

    Brakes:                          Hydraulic power-assisted four-wheel vented discs with ABS and Hill Start Assist.

    Tires:            Michelin LTX – LT 275/65 R20 OWL All Terrain mounted on 8-spoke, 8-lug, chrome alloy wheels.

    Wheelbase:                       159.8 inches
    Length Overall:                  250.0 inches
    Width:                            80.0 inches – without mirrors
    Height:                           78.3 inches
    GVWR:                           11,400 lb. for single-rear-wheel trucks and 13,000 lb.for dual-rear-wheel trucks.
    Turning Circle:                  Not given
    Fuel Capacity:                    34.0 gallons
    EPA Mileage Estimates:            EPA Fuel Economy Ratings not required on this vehicle due to weight rating.
    Drag Coefficient:                 Not listed
    0 – 60 mph:                       Not tested

    Similar Articles

    89 thoughts on “2017 Ford F-250 Lariat 4×4 Test Drive: For When Size and Capability Matter

    1. Ford took twenty years to sort out its downhill performance? Finally, what the heck took them so long? Chevy and then RAM did it a long time ago.
      This is the first halfway decent Ford HD in twenty years!
      You know they put that long running board on that Ford to hide the exposed frame. What is wrong with the new frame and body design that the frame sticks out so badly, and the body is so high up? Mr. Truck keeps complaining about it too.
      And only towing 12,000 lbs? It better darn well be perfect for that price.

      1. Dale – – –

        Good points. Agree. Don’t quite understand this new Ford, nice as it is. Wonder what the 2017 Chevy 2500 specs are? My new 2017 Ram HD Crew Cab 2500 Cummins has a haul capacity of almost 3K and a tow limit of almost 17K. (Yes, I special ordered it as 2WD and Manual Transmission, but could those matter so much? The Ram HD has coils all around, and rides smoothly both loaded AND empty.)

        TFLT: “The price is competitive when you consider the Chevy Silverado HD Duramax or the Ram HD Cummins.”
        Really? The comparable Ram “Laramie” Cummins model is $61K, and did not balloon up to $67 K “as tested”. And the comparable 2017 Chevy 2500 Duramax “High Country” is $64K. Are we paying $3-6K for aluminum? Or perhaps for the brand name, “Ford”, since it holds the sales crown in the half-ton segment?


          1. Jimmy,

            J: “…did you actually build an identical truck..”
            Yes, as closely as I could, — probably not just perfectly. These things are hard to match up.


            1. You probably could not do it perfectly because each manufacturer adds things here and there and have niche options that others don’t. However from what I have seen in the bidding process is when you build trucks they match in price pretty closely. At least between GM and Ford. We don’t bid/buy FCA products.

          1. MTNMN – – –

            M: “Is your new RAM a manual?”
            Yes. See above, “I special ordered it as 2WD and Manual Transmission…”


            1. @Bernie so you ordered a Ram 2wd manual? You likely woke up that one guy on the assembly line thats 70 years old that comes into work to sleep all day. Lol

              Good luck with your truck

        1. @Bernie,

          The max-tow F-250 can conventionally tow 18,000lbs and that is without a weight-distributing hitch. To get that much capability you would be forced to buy a crew cab long bed 2-wheel drive diesel with the High-Capacity Towing Package.

          An F-250 Lariat Crew 4×4 diesel without the high capacity tow package but with the 3.55 axle ratio (like the one reviewed here) would be rated to tow 14,700lbs. Not sure where you got the 12k lbs; my figures are directly from the Ford towing guide for 2017.

          As for payload, the 3/4 ton trucks usually get bit pretty hard because they are limited to 10k GVWR but the truck itself weighs a lot. Add a diesel engine, crew cab, and luxury interior…you can end up with a payload capacity barely better than a half-ton. That doesn’t mean the truck isn’t heavy duty…it just means it is being limited by the legally-imposed federal truck class it is being built as.

          I recently purchased another 2017 Super Duty, this time an F-250 Crew 4×4 diesel in XLT Premium trim. Max payload is 2385lbs. That’s adequate, but barely. I plan to use this truck as a work truck and have already put a snowplow on the front.

          As for ride quality, I’m going to be perfectly honest. Last year, I rode in a friend’s 2016 RAM 2500 Crew 4×4 Cummins Big Horn trim. It had the rear coil springs. The truck was towing a light snowmobile trailer and we were on frost-heaved pavement. I did not think the truck rode well at all. I honestly felt my F-330 dually rode better. Coil springs should ride better than leafs, but they didn’t. Maybe it was the trailer, I don’t know. Otherwise, I really liked the truck.

          1. Troverman – – –

            Thanks. Good info.

            These Ford Super Duty’s are really great trucks, which is why I don’t understand the listings in the article:
            “10,000# GVWR Package” …and…
            “GVWR: 11,400 lb. for single-rear-wheel trucks… ”

            is there something goofy going on with this Lariat that we need to know about? Ford HD’s have always been much more capable than that (as you mentioned)….

            T: “Coil springs should ride better than leafs, but they didn’t.”

            Yeah. Mine did quite well. But I compared a Ram 2500 with a Ram 3500, whose only real suspension difference was Coils vs Leaf springs, — and measured the difference with (of all things!) a sound meter on the same standard pothole filled street. The difference between Leaf’s and Coils was more a matter of ROUNDING the onset the spring-depression profile. Coils phased in the bounce more gradually; Leaf’s more quickly. But they each showed acceptable overall “ride”. Am not convinced that coils are the “end-all-and-be-all” of suspensions for HD trucks. And Ram’s air spring suspension did not necessarily provide a smoother ride either: it just help level the load.

            Full disclosure: In pickup trucks IMO, there is nothing that coils can do that appropriate, LONG, multi-leaf spring-packs can’t do, — except maybe provide greater articulation for intense off-road use. Chevy trucks have been noted for a good ride for years, and have always had rear leaf packs…


            1. Bernie Kressner
              November 8, 2017 at 1:14 pm
              Troverman – – –

              Thanks. Good info.

              These Ford Super Duty’s are really great trucks, which is why I don’t understand the listings in the article:
              “10,000# GVWR Package” …and…
              “GVWR: 11,400 lb. for single-rear-wheel trucks… ”

              That has always been a weird option. It adds no cost either way.

              I also agree that coils do add for better articulation when the rest of the suspension is set up for it. For me, I dont care either way as long as it does it’s job.

            2. I believe all F250s have a GVWR of 10,000. The 350 by default has a GVWR of 11,400, but there is an option to derate it down to 10,000. Nothing mechanically changes on the truck. It’s just the number printed on the sticker. I believe this is for states where registration and/or insurances rates change on vehicles above a certain GVWR. It seems like a 350 with the 10,000 option would be the same as a 250, but you still have a beefier rear axle, suspension, and transmission (gas models).

              Troverman could probably provide some good input here.

            3. If you option a F250 you have the ability to check 9900 lb GVW. I believe you are correct about the fleet side because our trucks need different inspections if they are over 10,000 GVW. So you can still get a F250 but it has a lower rating to help with companies that are required to have their trucks state inspected.

        2. The new F350 Has the HIGHEST tow rating of ANY SRW HD on the market, at over 20k pounds in a gooseneck, 18kin a fifth wheel (limited by receiver max), and 15k-18k conventional towing depending on configuration.
          So before you bash the F250, for $1500 more get a 350 and leave everything else in the dust.

          As for the frame protruding from The body there’s two things to remember:
          1: this frame is massive which allows for control under best in class towing (F350/f450), and don’t forget it’s fully boxed
          2. They used the f150 body, this saved on production costs and weight (leaving more room for cargo). The perks outweigh the drawbacks.

          1. Superduty fans have always trashed the fully-boxed frames until the 2017’s finally dropped the ladder frame. They said the flimsy ladder frame was superior because semi trucks use ladder frames. Is that no longer true now that the new Superduty is fully boxed?

            Hopefully the Superduty’s box uses thicker aluminum than the half-tons. My 2015 F-150 had a couple cracks in the bed. Had a cheap bed liner sprayed over the cracks it before I traded it in.

            1. HAHA yep! Funny how they dissed fully boxed frames when Ram and GM showed just how weak and flimsy the Superduty ladder frame was. They wanted nothing to do with a fully boxed, dropped-center frame. They bragged about the ladder frame (even though it was so flimsy it would chew up body mounts and cause cracked radiators. Now they don’t see any problem with the Superduty using the same frame type.

            2. Translation: Ford fans (myself included) knew the C channel frame would twist more when subjected to the twist tests. Knowing in real life these trucks are built for towing on roads and highways that do not twist like that, we said the C channel was sufficient, which it was. Did the C channel frame hold it back on any tow ratings? No. And trashing fully boxed frames? Don’t think so. F150 has been fully boxed for a long time now, so why would Ford fans bash a boxed frame?

              Why must everyone exaggerate to try to bash other people simply because they drive a different brand of truck?

            3. IowaFord…so super dutys pre 2017 were designed for on-road use only, and never should drive off pavement? I’m from Iowa too, and even here, there are plenty of scenarios where we drive through waterways and washouts or ditches that cause severe frame twisting. Ask the guys who crinkled their super duty tailgates if C-channel was sufficient. It was good for upfitters, but not much else.

            4. Can they go off road? Sure. That’s just not their primary design. And don’t get me wrong, I believe a boxed frame is better than a C channel. What I am saying is it would have been stupid for “Superduty fans” (as claimed above) to bash boxed frames. Anybody who did was a moron fanboy. The old C channel got the job done, but the new boxed frame gets the job done better. That’s what it boils down to.

            5. You can go into any of the Superduty message boards and read what the SD guys thought about Ram and GM having fully boxed frames. They defended flimsy C channel frames until they were blue in the face. Like Rusty mentioned, Ford stuck with their open C frame for the benefit of upfitters only. Even If it meant wrinkled tailgates, worn out body mounts and cracked radiators.

            6. Well as I said, anybody who bashed boxed frames was a moron fanboy. The only exception would be if that particular person was regularly doing upfitter work. C channel is easier for that, and you could argue it is better at preventing rust since water can’t get trapped inside and the metal tends to be a much thicker gauge, but it is obvious that boxed frames are superior in strength and stiffness. I just get tired of all the baseless bashing that goes around from fans of all truck brands.

      2. 12,000 lbs. the specs shows much higher than that and when you count a 4×2 like Bernie’s, it can be as high as 21300 lbs.

          1. This topic comes up every time a 3/4 ton diesel article or test is posted. The reason for the lower tow ratings is payload capacity. Opt for the exact same truck, but as an f350, and ratings go up significantly because it can carry the payload. Hitch weight is payload and must be accounted for as such.

            1. Right because J2807 requires a minimum 10% tongue weight for conventional and 15% for a 5th wheel plus the weight of the hitch and 300 lbs of passengers. If you get an F250 diesel crew cab 4×4 it is going to be around 2000 lbs or less payload so it will be limited by that.

          2. Not True Rambro’s Bro. I could pull 18,000Lbs with my Tacoma but it preferred first gear at 5500RPM on a 7% grade. So it was a problem.

            1. Just wait until the Tacoma goes all-electric. Electric motors make MASSIVE torque and the earth is happier because no emissions.

      3. Dale H – 20 years to sort out downhill? That’s quite a claim. I will be the first to acknowledge that GM and Ram had effective exhaust braking before Ford, but let’s not pretend it was 20 years ago. Ram was the first with a factory exhaust brake in 2007. GM added the factory exhaust brake in 2011. And Ford’s exhaust brake has been extremely good since the 2015 model year. So Ford was 8 years after Ram and 4 years after GM. Not 20. And all of them are very good now.

    2. TFL CREW
      This “article” is not a review, it is a Ford ad. Pure and simple. And you guys are better than this. Next time please put this under SPONSORED CONTENT!

      1. I thought the same thing, especially after 2 advertisements for the new expedition. Did is definitely doubling down on it’s sponsored content.

        But on the other hand if we want Ford to give them trucks to drive up the gauntlet, Ford needs to make sure they get a return on investment. To that end, can’t be too upset about a couple of these articles every now and again.

            1. Not to mention the former editor of ‘that other site’ later took a job at Ford, just as readers started calling him out for questionable reviews and testing decisions that typically gave Ford trucks the advantage where it normally wouldn’t have one.

        1. I dont think they listen to us anymore, if you see how busy they are at TFL car and the amount of videos they make, I doubt they sleep much. The only time they may read our content now is if one of them is constipated on a toilet and they use their phone to surf and turf at the same time.

          They are celebrities now lost to the red carpet. Maybe I will go back to Netflix and potato chips. Lol

      2. Also, TFL has failed to report on the 1.3 million F150’s and SD’s that have been recalled.
        Every one else was all over this story 3 weeks ago, on Oct18. I’m not mentioning this to unfairly criticize Ford, but it is newsworthy.

            1. Maybe you should have a tinfoil suit on. Ford’s are famous for burning to the ground and even if Ford did issues a recall (they’re pretty legendary for not recalling safety defects, especially all the Ford’s with fire-related defects), you surely wouldn’t learn about a Ford recall on TFLT or so it seems.

        1. Yeah I noticed the same thing. They reported on smaller recalls from Ram and GM just weeks earlier, yet not one peep about the much larger 1.3 million trucks Ford recalls. The “tin foil hat” guys, would be the first guys whining if they only reported on Ford recalls. It’s not like it’s a secret that Roman is a big Ford fan. Not mentioning a single thing about a HUGE Ford recall only throws shade on this website.

    3. @TFL, your “standard features” section is based upon the previous generation Super Duty and incorrect. The 110V outlets run at 400W, not 150W, and that rating is exclusive to Ford. MyFord Touch no longer exists…it is Sync 3 now.

    4. Surprised the Lariat trim has the same, ugly flip up center console/cup holder the XLT has. Looks the same as the 2010 F150 XLT my brother has. Worst part of the interior in my opinion.

      1. Probably because it was ordered with a bench seat, not the buckets. All Lariats(F150 and up) can be spec’d with either or. I would personally get the bench seat next time around so I have seating for 6.

        1. I understand the bench seat, which is much better than console IMO. But put a nicer cover on the flip up part for a Lariat at least and go away from the cheap cup holder material on the front (it is some sort of grippy rubber/plastic)

      2. The newer Lariat interiors are a lot cheaper these days. I remember when they were the nice interior. Now they are filled with brittle hard plastics and bad seats.

        1. Yeah the 2017 Lariats are VERY cheap compared to what they used to be. Hard seats, hard hollow-sounding plastics, creaks and rattles at low mileage. I think Ford cheapened out the Lariat to get guys to spend more money for the King Ranch and Platinum trims.

    5. The reason for the frame sitting low is ford has a flat load floor inside the cab. Less tunnel for the drive shaft and tranny. The Ram has a high tunnel in the cab. Ram has a fold out to create a flat cab floor.

      1. I 2nd that twice over. Looks like a new version of a 80’s pickup from the rear and the front is too big and looks like they built a step on the low hanging air dam to get into the engine bay that looks like an oversized chrome crate.

      2. Who cares what it looks like. The important thing is that it’s built tough enough to do real work with them. Ford , GM, and Ram all build 3/4 tons that are built to do real work. Hopefully the thicker Superduty beds hold up. The F-150 beds tear up and break rivets way too easily.

    6. I moved from a 4500Lb Tacoma to a 5800Lb Tundra and it is rather a waste for me. I use a truck almost every day but I could always get by with my Tacoma. The Tundra is great but it is overkill for the majority of the time, I cannot imagine moving into an 8000Lb vehicle as a daily driver. If the midsize truck market offered better power in the truck fleet like they do in the SUV market I would still be in a midsize truck today. For these one off camping trips that most people do, just rent a truck and save the pain. 1/2 tons are the best deals until they up the power in the midsize trucks.

      1. At least in the states it is hard to rent a truck with a hitch. Most rental companies don’t offer that. You have Uhaul where you can get a single cab truck with a hitch and then there is commercial lease companies. It is not easy to rent a truck with a hitch for towing.

          1. My guess it is too much liability. I this sue happy nation of ours, if something happens they sue everyone. Not sure if it is as bad in Canada where you live, but you have to cover your 6 at all times. For instance, at Uhaul, you have to bring in your tow vehicle to rent a trailer and they document that vehicle. If the tow vehicle is not rated as high as the trailer you can’t rent it.

      2. The Tundra gets about the same fuel economy as a 3/4-ton gasser, you’ll just have a much tougher truck with a 3/4-ton. I don’t think you’d notice the difference other than the stronger frame, stiffer suspension, and modern interior.

        1. Aldo the Tundra has better Power to weight ratio than the gasser 3/4 ton and my interior is just fine and actually preferred. Traditionally I will get better resale in two years and have less problems from a statistical standpoint. I believe new innovative trucks are coming by 2020 so I don’t plan to be in the Tundra for long.

          1. I’m curious on how some of us turned into girls about trucks and became concerned about gas mileage. It’s a truck and all of them are all pretty close. I could give a rats butt about fuel economy. I want, does it perform truck stuff i want. I still have to have a nice clean interior and due to my life style, leather is really needed. But fuel economy? I could care less about?

            1. JJ I’m concerned about fuel economy but not to the point where it just gets silly. For example, I am not going to bat an eye when one vehicle gets 4.7 and another 3.8 or so when towing up something extreme like the Ike because honestly both of those numbers suck. I’m not going to get offended if my truck only averages 20 and someone else gets 22. To me these differences are negligible for a daily driver and I’d rather drive what I want and if it gets a couple of mpgs less than so be it. But, if we are talking about a fleet of company trucks chalking up huge miles a year then those figures matter but we also know we need to factor in other ownership costs before ruling something out on mileage alone.

            2. Fuel economy is a mark of a well engineered machine. If they are sloppy with combustion engineering, they are sloppy with the rest.
              And long term cost and range are a big time consideration. A few mpg can cost 10s of thousands of dollars over the lifetime of a well made truck.

            3. Moondog. You are very correct about some fleets aND economy but they also look at the overall cost to operate. Including maint cost. However when it comes to trucks, my money is the vast majority don’t run straight highway. Yes there are that do, but I see a ton of trucks idling all day and hopping from jobs it to job site. I still rather have a truck that is everything I want aND need vs what gets 1 mpg better.

            4. Pete, IMO if they have sloppy engineering then they will have a hard time meeting emmisions. Emissions are really key with current EPA standards. And take the truck that has the worst mileage out of all the 1/2 tons. In every article and review I have seen the Tundra is the worst. However that truck historicaly will out last any of the big three. They are well engineered and built to last. I know a few people with them and quite honestly they don’t have the latest and greatest stuff inside but they start everyday.

            5. “I’m curious on how some of us turned into girls about trucks and became concerned about gas mileage. It’s a truck and all of them are all pretty close. I could give a rats butt about fuel economy.”

              Exactly, which is why Ford went to the extreme when it comes to fuel efficiency. Ford started it all when they decided to prioritize turbocharged gas engines that chew up timing chains, blow turbos, and even throw rods (conveniently just outside the warranty). Then they took it a step further and went all in on aluminum beds that are so thin you can’t do any real TRUCK work WITH THEM. Any truck built in the last 50 years is more durable than the latest and “greatest” F-150. Ford supposedly built the Superduty boxes to be thicker and stronger but they should be ashamed for selling these aluminum F-150’s and claim they’re still “Built Ford Tough”.

              I wanted to trust Ford to do the right thing with the aluminum F-150, but watching them slowly weaken the F-150 over then last 10 years broke that trust. I’m glad I held onto a decently clean 87 F-150 all these years. I know Ford can’t build a truck that can stand up to it anymore.

            6. Case, I can tell that you are a troll but I will answer your post anyways. Manufacturers have to meet federal standards for fuel efficiency. They will do what it takes to be compliant. We as consumers don’t have to buy into it. When it comes down to it, they are all trucks and they all get similar fuel economy. But who cares. The real thing is, does it do truck stuff well. That is what guys should be more concerned about.

              As far as your propaganda about blown turbos rods whatever. We can pick out that stuff all day long with any engine brand. Ecodiesel for one. It is known for engine failures and is is waiting for a software upgrade to meet emission requirements.

            7. To Jimmy Johns, anyone that has had a bad experience with a ford is a troll. Which of course means, most people are trolls to Jimmy John.

            8. Haha yep. Not one single person has ever had a problem with an Ecoboost. Just thousands of trolls out there posting about fake problems they had. The F150 Ecoboost forum is litterally nothing but trolls.

            9. The best thing I ever did was lemon law my Ram with the Hemi. It was countless times at the dealer for check engine lights. They turned it off but it always came back. They finally figured out the problem when a rod went out the block. I am so happy to be out of that pos 2016 Ram. My Tundra has been flawless for 6 months now.

            10. I had an Ecoboost once. Never again. Not as all out terrible as the 5.4 Triton, but a very very close 2nd place.

            1. Sure be nice if someone built a truck about the size of the old Tundras, just a bit bigger than a Tacoma like what we were saying before a few days ago. I like the V8 but its too much truck and I dont want to go back to midsize without a V8 option preferably a turbo 8 cylinder. If you seen TFL car on what they did with the new mustang it is rather amazing. I sure hope Ford fires their F150 engineer and hires Carl Windmann to take over, he would have turned the Raptor into a beast. Hopefully they jam a V8 Coyote into the Ranger but they would have to have Carl in charge in order for that to happen.

            2. No V8 anytime soon for our midsize trucks my friend. Look for small diesel options or smaller turbo gassers.

            3. No V8 Moondog but I might have Workhorse or Bollinger to fall back on in a year and a bit. I would trade a V8 for electric drive. Even without a service dealer near by Ill do it anyway. Im so fed up with the truck industry it will be a breath of fresh air and a big F you to their stagnated product. A workhorse or a B1 will be an advertising billboard all its own and I will get that little guy that psses on everything, pssing on junkyard full of Ram, Ford, Toyota, Nissan, GM and the Ridgeline trucks air brushed on my back window.

    7. So When we look at the 2017 Ram 2500 and we look at the towing specs we see that the 2017 RAM 2500,crew cab,4×4,3:42 rear axle,will tow in a 5th wheel or gooseneck 17,080.Thats almost 2000 pounds over 2017 Ford F-250.

      1. Rams 5th wheel towing shouldnt be that high since they claim that they calculate it to SAE J2807. J2807 requires a 15% tongue weight and a 250 lbs hitch. 15% tongue weight on a 17080 lb trailer is 2562 lbs and then another 250 lbs is 2812. This is way beyond a Crew cab 4×4 cummins payload rating of 2380 lbs and doesnt even include the driver yet.

        17080 may be the conventional tow rating, but in that case the F250 crew 4×4 is rated for 17600 and beats the Ram.

    8. Jay S so when we look at 2017 Ford SD towing chart 5th wheel/ gooseneck we find under 160 wheelbase,crewcab,6’4 bed,4×4,GCWR 23,000 we see Ford’s SD 250 rated only for 15,400.This was also confirm by a Ford fleet sales officer.Are you referring to a conventional class 5 receiver limit. My typo on the 2017 Ram’s 2500 is 17,210 for 2017.

      1. For a F250 4×4 crew 6.5′ diesel I see 14,700 for a 5th wheel and 17600 for a conventional trailer. Ram only shows 17,210 and doesnt specify what kind of trailer.

        My point was that J2807 requires the MFG to calculate the maximum allowable trailer weight based on a 10% tongue weight for a conventional trailer and a 15% pin weight for a 5th wheel. It also requires that they account for a 75 lb conventional hitch weight, and 250 lbs for a 5th wheel hitch. Also, 300 lbs of passengers.

        Because of this, the 3/4 ton diesels generally have a lower 5th wheel rating than conventional rating because they run out of payload. A ram 2500 crew 4×4 diesel only has 2380 lbs of payload MAX. This means at most it can tow 12,200 lbs without exceeding its payload.

        Ford and Ram both use this same calculation method now so the 17210 lb tow rating on the Ram can only be for a conventional trailer with the lighter tongue weight.

      1. They really cheapened out the Lariats for 2017. I think Ford is trying to make guys that want quality interiors fork out even more money for the King Ranch and Platinum trucks.

    9. Jay concur J2807 rating of 3/4 and 1 ton trucks.Ram rear axle GAWR is currently 6000 pounds verus Ford rear axle GAWR of 6340.Your towing quote for the Ford is some what suspected here due to the GCWR of a truck we selected.The Ram 2500 GCWR is set at 25,300.The Ford’s is set at GCWR at 22,500.Ford has a lower GCWR by 2500 pounds Jay. Ford also states that this towing number must not exceed the rear GAWR or the GCWR.

    10. Jay we then look to the tire’s recommend load rating to see if our pin weight is exceeding the load limit of the tire for Ram I will used as a example the Firestone Transforce AT 275/80/18 with a E rated load range of 3640lbs.

    11. Jay I gave a Rear axle GWAR for the 2017 Ram 2500 at 6000,that is the front GWAR rating the Rear GAWR for this truck is 6500 pounds. This number is higher than the 2017 Ford F250 by 340 pounds.So we see 2 numbers which impact these numbers 1)GCWR 2)GWAR. I made a call to a fleet RAM sales office and they said there is just one number for bumper pull and one number for 5th wheel/gooseneck/class 5.

    Leave a Reply