Chevy places first in HD pickup test

[haven]

Chevrolet challenged Ford to a test to find out which new HD diesel pickup was better at towing at high altitude. The results are in, and Chevy was a clear winner.

Pickuptrucks.com and Diesel Power Magazine conducted the test. A Ford F350 double cab Powerstroke diesel and a Chevy 3500 double cab Duramax diesel were chosen because they could be ordered with the same 3.73 to one final drive ratio. The vehicles were purchased from dealers. Dodge was not included because there is no RAM model that can handle the combined weight of truck and trailer used in the test.

The test was to tow a trailer weighing 18,000 lbs up the west side of I-80 to the Eisenhower Tunnel in Colorado. The seven mile long course has an average grade of 7%, and finishes at an elevation of close to 11,000 feet.

Result: Chevrolet's pickup towed the trailer up the hill in shorter time, and finished with higher speed, than the Ford.

So if you're towing heavy loads at high altitude, the Chevrolet is clearly better for 2011. How much these results mean at low altitude and on less challenging terrain is unclear.

Read more here
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/11/chevy-vs-ford-in-heavy-duty-rumble-in-the-rockies.html

 

[Kohburn]

interesting information on the performance of the exhaust brakes on each.

 

[LMarshall73]

Semi-related, but slightly off-topic, the new Chevy Max and Al commercials are pretty funny. :sombrero:

 

[bdbecker]

That is a pretty cool test. I wish they would have posted the MPG - WOT on a 5-7% grade for 8 miles moving nearly 15 tons of truck, trailer, and cargo! I guess I'll just have to look for the new issue of Diesel Power magazine and check it out then.

 

[jdinevens]

interesting to note that for every gear, the chevy has the numerically lower gear, aslo apears that peak hp is higher in the rpms...

so a taller gear + more revs =.......win?

..though i didnt bother to work in tire size....i dunno its too late to be doing math :sombrero:

 

[WildBill]

interesting to note that for every gear, the chevy has the numerically lower gear, aslo apears that peak hp is higher in the rpms...

so a taller gear + more revs =.......win?

..though i didnt bother to work in tire size....i dunno its too late to be doing math :sombrero:

actually on thier half tons 3.23 and 3.42 are more common than ever on v8 applications. the 6 speed auto tranni makes it to were you don't need a lower gear ratio and if you have the same four speed like i do your gunna wanna find one with 3.73 cause the "road gears" just plain suck. if the world was perfectly flat it would be fine. but besides they are climbing a hill! the more revs the better! revs my torque! also you have to remember the tires they are now putting on ALL makes and models of pickups are lots larger in diameter than they ever have been before, if you go have 8 to 10 years with 245s came on 3/4 ton chevys 4x4 or not.w

chevy has gotten away from 4x4 applications and is really leaning into the lux line of vehicles i think. i work for a chevy and ford dealer and i would have to say i am very impressed with the 2011 F250s with the new 6.2, i believe, V8. it's got good power, better throttle response, and isn't a slug like the old 5.4 3V, and it's still a SOLID FRONT AXLE

 

[unreng]

Interesting test, but who wants to own a Government Motors vehicle? I'd buy neither vehicle as it costs almost as much as a house.

Why did they not perform a chassis dyno on these vehicles? Taking the manufacturers advertised ratings is about as useful as boiled mayonnaise. From the following article (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/0...li-3500hd-and-2011-ford-f-450-king-ranch.html):

The Sierra Denali 3500HD's performance advantage over the Super Duty is about as stark as the difference we saw in the power curves on the dyno. We believe it’s because the Sierra Denali’s calibrations at altitude are dialed in almost perfectly to match engine output. However, it seems that Ford still has plenty of room in the future to tune the 6.7 to tap its full potential at high elevations.

So because the Government Motors package is better tuned for altitude, it's better everywhere? How many people drive above 8,000 on a day-to-day basis? How about conducting another test closer to sea level, where 90% of Americans live and drive? The Grapevine would be primo! Conway Summit would be a close intermediary.

And is conducting a test in sub-freezing conditions a true test of an engines performance? Why not during summer when the air charge is significantly warmer, which affects engine performance more dramatically (I know, I know, they probably didn't have vehicle availability during summer)?

Decent first attempt, but really lacking overall. Makes you wonder why Government Motors challenged Ford. Did Government Motors purposefully program the computer for high altitude performance knowing that Ford hasn't tuned for high altitude? Who knows.

 

[haven]

I'm happy with the test conditions. That stretch of I-80 is brutal, and the trucks were equipped as equally as you can make them off an order sheet.

If Ford thinks their truck would perform better at low elevations or in other conditions, then they should hire an independent test crew to conduct another test using vehicles purchased from a dealer (that is, not using vehicles provided by the manufacturer).

I think the take-home lesson here is that both trucks performed at a level that was almost inconceivable a few years ago.

 

[dsw4x4]

Just a side note I-80 does not go through the Eisenhower Tunnel it does not even go through Colorado it goes through wyoming. I am a little confused as to where the test was even at colorado or wyoming?? I agree the climb on I-70 is brutal I tow up that all the time you have to watch egts like a hawk doing 75 towing 7g behind a 8g rig. I 80 has a few long climbs that your egts will creep up on you to when towing.
Derek

 

[howell_jd]

Wow. Great review and a very close comparison overall. I guess ultimately with the history of the Duramax engine there is more certainty what can be done while the new PowerStroke is only in its first production year. Always hard to keep building extra capability into the same platform though - conceptually at least the PowerStroke could leap ahead quite easily in the upcoming years.

I think it's great to see the competition driving innovation and bringing greater reliable capability to the public. Having seen many overheated trucks by the roadside trying to do too much these trucks are a big improvement!

Jonathan

 

[chasespeed]

I am confused about something with the test... it said the Ram wont "handle" the combined weight? I am ASSuming they are refering to GCVW, since they wont "overload" any test on a public highway?

I am not slinging Cummins Coolaid... I dont care. Just a little confused. I am more confident beating on my Cummins ram, than any of my Fords(not that I didnt hammer on them), or our Dmaxes at work... BUT, I also know, that I am at 9900lbs GVW, while the equivalent Chevys and Fords are over 10K(A big deal in a state where a DOT inspection is required for anything 10k or over now)....

Chase

 

[howell_jd]

For the test, they used a gooseneck trailer and 3.73 rear differential gearing.

The 2011 Chevy Silverado 3500 has a GCWR of 29,200lbs
http://www.chevrolet.com/assets/pdf/en/overview/Silverado_HD_charts-rev051310.pdf

The 2011 Dodge Ram 3500 has a GCWR of 24,000lbs (or 26,000lbs with optional 4.10 rear differential package)...of note is the fact that Chevy gives Dodge credit for 25,400lbs on their comparison page, hmm...
http://www.dodge.com/bodybuilder/2011/docs/cc/ddmlup3500cc.pdf

The 2011 Ford F-350 has a GCWR of 29,000lbs (or 33,000lbs with optional 4.30 rear differential package)

In this particular case, they could have included all vehicles towing at the Dodge's GCWR limit of 24,000lbs but I think the test was to showcase near maximum capability so the Dodge was out by exception.

Jonathan

 

[chasespeed]

Thats what I figured. But, its funny, I see more Dodges hauling heavy, than Strokes or Max's combined. Dont get me wrong, I know they all will do it... I was just curious. Though, I do like the brakes (particularly the parking brake) on the Chevy, better. No big deal, thanks...

Chase

 

[chp-sk8]

pulling

I say to each his own on this. I have a 2008 f350 quad cab lifted on 38's Front and rear fab four bumpers and 16k waren plus a load of other expo stuff...bottom line...it is heavy. I pulled my toyhauler( 15k )from bama to seattle. I also have a sparten 210 tune with some othere goodies, the truck makes good power, enuff to break the 38's loose from a slow roll. It dosent matter what truck is pulling what, when you are almost maxed out the truck is gonna be working hard and your going to know your climbing a long grade, or bucking a strong head wind. These trucks excel at differnt things, the chevy climbs better on this test. I want a ford with a chevy interior, and a cummins motor....then I will have it all. just my 2c.

 

[poriggity]

I'm with Chase on this one... I'd rather give up a little weight rating in order to have a relaible truck, myself. The Pstroke and Dmax are not NEARLY as reliable as the cummins motor.. just my opinion though.