Any opinions on the new trailer-towing standard coming out in 2013? J2807

Charlie

I think it will be great to have some standardized testing. There will be some good evaluations in that standard, including some fairly tough tests.

From what I've read, Toyota has already started to comply now, voluntarily. They have actually reduced some of the tow ratings after testing, to meet the standards. I'm sure it will affect all the companies, but to what degree, we'll not know until each one steps up and notes their compliance data and date.

The testing itself is still to be done by each OEM; no different than HP and Trq ratings, etc. But they do have to comply with the test standards to be able to make the claims, once the standard is in place, if they want credibility. They can choose to ignore the standard, but then they would not be able to use it in any advertising or comparisons, etc.

Agreed, anything that brings some common sense to the truck-wars of late is a good thing in my books. As mentioned, Toyota was the first to utilize the testing and as a result the tow ratings on the Tundra were lowered - I suspect when the standards come into play you're going to see the ratings on a LOT of half tons (and perhaps some 3/4 tons) fall.

I read an article at RV.net a while back where the author questioned the fact that some 1/2 ton pickups were rated to tow MORE than the 3/4 ton models above them. Clearly, some shenanigans are at play, artificially inflating the actual abilities of half tons in this case simply to move product.

The market claims of any product are often (perhaps always?) exaggerated to sell product; been done since the dawn of sales.

I, for one, greatly welcome the standard.

I presume it's been discussed, but I'd like to call attention to the new DieselPower magazine article comparing/contrasting the Ford and Chevy in the Colorado tow test.

If you watch some of the adds for both products, each would claim superiority over the other. But the article in the magazine clearly showed the "better" pulling power of the Chevy; it was a waxing and there's no other way around it. The GM tromped the Ford. And (full disclosure here) I used to work at Ford, and it kind of hurts to see Ford get stomped. But, I believe the test was fair (presuming that all facts were accurately reported), and credit is due where it was clearly earned. The GM is superior at towing both up and down hill! On the plus side, that will hopefully only drive Ford to improve their product yet again. Overall, ALL products get "better" from competition.

The reason I bring up the towing article from that magazine is because, if you think about it, the clarity of partial versus full scenarios becomes apparent. We already have SAE tests for torque and horsepower; the GM and Ford and Cummins are rated on a fair playing field. So, if one believes the engine tests, the GM and Ford should have been very closely matched. But the real towing test in that article clearly showed the GM smoking the Ford. Want to know why? Because the horsepower of the GM is 200rpm higher than the Ford. The HP ratings for the Ford and GM are effectively equal; 397 vs 400 is within 1%. But it's the RANGE of the power that makes a difference. 200 rpm does not sound like a lot, but it makes a BIG difference in a race. And that is what the uphill test was; an uphill 8 mile long race. While a 3HP difference and 200 rpm difference mean pratically nothing in a 1/4 mile drag race, that small difference is greatly magnified over 8 miles. "Power" is correctly and accurately described in the physical world as "work per unit of time". The GM makes the same amount of "power" rating at the engine, but it does so at a higher RPM; therefore it can go work at a faster pace. Give those two trucks only a1/4 mile to run, and the differences would be reduced to driver reaction, traction, etc. But give them 8 miles to run, and the GM can come up to full peak power and climb faster. The "work" done was the same in that uphill test; they both pulled the same load over the same distance. "Work" is force x distance. "Power" is work per unit of time. The GM climbed the hill MUCH faster, because it was able to rev the engine higher, and produce more torque at a higher rpm, thereby moving the same load over the same distance, but in less time. The LML basically rev'd it's way to the win. And, if you really want to gloat, consider that the Cummins is so far down on power and torque that it was not even included in the test, as it was a "given" that the Ram had no chance of being competitive.

However, let's not forget what was NOT tested in that uphill 8 mile drag race. There were no considerations given for heat loads, etc. The GM certainly spanked the Ford, but who's to say that it would have been able to do that after 50 times in a row in the dead of summer? The tests were run 3x for the GM and 4x for the Ford. Each successive test result was 'better' than the last. But perhaps the GM would have raced itself to an early grave? I am NOT suggesting the GM is inferior; I'm saying that heat loads were ignored, because the test was run when the OATs were in the low teens last month in winter. Had this been done in summer, perhaps the Ford would have run the same numbers, while the GM would have overheated? We don't know because the test was run in winter. The GM may have floundered in summer, or it may have still spanked the Ford; we don't know because that was not part of the test. Yet again, that is why the new towing SAE tests are important. The SAE tests are designed to consider temps, as well as gradients of inclination.

My point is that if you looked at some HP and Torque numbers in a TV commercial or on-line add, you'd presume that the Ford and GM were equally matched. But the real world scenario is different. But only for those conditions that the magazine chose at the time.

Why do I bring this up? Because the new SAE tow testing will hopefully level out the towing claims by providing a fair, consistent, realistic situations where advantages and weaknesses are laid out for all to see. This will "prove" what is credible and what is bunk. FOR YEARS I have been trying to get people to understand the relationship between torque and power. These standardized towing tests will help bring the towing differences to light. The standards will level the playing field, and give consumers a much better understanding of product capabilities.

The SAE is typically very good at trying to consider a large variety of situations, and apply as much consistent testing as practical. That will REALLY tell us who's the towing king for any given vehicle class.