Tow rating

[jobar]

I know this isnt a ranger but, you guys have been really helpful on here. I need to know the towing capicaity of a 1980 f150?

Ive looked in alot of places and cant seem to find it. I looking at buying it to haul my new trailer but have no idea what the towing on it is.

Thanks in advanced.

[mrbbbaggins]

Saw your question here. I can't give you an exact answer about this one, because I don't know the exact options package, but from previous experience I would say your towing capacity is somewhere in the 5000-6500lb range. The 1980 F150 is usually rated as a half ton pickup so rated towing capacity probably won't exceed the trucks weight plus max onboard payload. One other thing you should know, you should look into an aftermarket hitch. It's usually a bit safer than pulling with the original bumper hitches on most trucks, no matter the make or model. Hope that helps a little.

[jobar]

From what the guy told me its a 302 5.0, automatic, its bumper pull but I was planning on getting a hitch anyways.

[mrbbbaggins]

Well..., although not exactly what we're looking for, that does help a little. Since he just gave you truck specs, and no package name, it suggests that this is a basic model. Therefore you shouldn't expect it to be comfortable with more than 5000lb in stock trim. If your trailer is right around 5000lb or under, happy towing. If your trailer is heavier than that, I would suggest one of the following courses of action. First if you are intent on using this particular truck, invest in; overload springs, a transmission cooler, an oil cooler, and possibly a bigger radiator. You may also want to go to the next lower(numerically higher) axle gear ratio, to avoid taxing your engine too much. If you are not set on this particular truck, find a good 3/4 ton truck. I'm afraid that's all I can offer you for assistance without getting into guesswork. Once again, I hope it helps.

[jobar]

It does, im not set on this truck, it was one that I came across. I need at least 7000lb in towing, so the search continues. I will look into a 3/4 ton. Thanks for helping.

[07rangersport]

It does, im not set on this truck, it was one that I came across. I need at least 7000lb in towing, so the search continues. I will look into a 3/4 ton. Thanks for helping.

You should be able to get 7000# in a half tonne. But you would have to get a newer one.

[jobar]

Yea, im trying to stay away from newer ones because, im only useing it for towing. I use my ranger for daily driving.

[Will]

I'd get a truck with something over 7,000# GVWR. I hate using the generic 1/2, 3/4, 1-ton etc.. It's stupid because any modern 1/2 ton weighs more empty tan the full loaded weight of a mid 60's 1/2 ton. A well equipped modern 1/2 ton is much more capable than a 70's or 80's 3/4-ton. I would look at the GVWR and judge it from that--just like you do on a big truck. Something around 7,000# GVWR would qualify as a 3/4-ton in the 80s and a heavy half-ton in the modern era. That's what you need. A truck with less grit is too soggy in the rear and would need too much work to give you a good feeling with 7,000# on the bumper. Also, get as much wheelbase as you can. It matters a lot.

[jobar]

Also, get as much wheelbase as you can. It matters a lot.


Are you saying I need something like a dually?

[Will]

No, wheelbase--like an extended cab longbed is better than a Regular cab longbed.

I haven't found a dually to feel more stabile than a SRW truck. The extra tires are on there for weight carrying--a standard 250/350 truck tire is a 235-85-16 and is rated for 3,042# at 80psi. Any HD SRW truck will have a 6,084# rear axle rating. The springs are about the same width apart and the motion of the trailer is around the springs, not the tire contact. But think about the ratio of the distance between the hitch and the rear axle and the front axle and the rear axle. The rear axle is the teeter-toter point that the weight on the front and the tongue weight wrestle around. The longer the lever arm of the truck the less action the trailer ha son it. This is why a gooseneck is so stable--the hitch has zero or even negative lever arm so the trailer doesn't have any power to thrash the truck with.

[jobar]

I see what your saying, thanks for that. I did'nt even know, learn something new everyday.

[rusty ol ranger]

That 1980 F150 will handle 7000lbs no problem.

Get a set of 3/4 ton leaf springs and put under it and a bigger trans cooler you'll be fine.

I pull 6700lbs with my 96 4x4 pretty regular (there isnt much difference between a 80 and 96) and its got a 300 with an auto, all i did was put in 3/4 ton leafs in back and it handles it just fine.

Also, Will thinks anything made before 97 (Unless its a 6.2L) is junk.

I will never believe a modern half ton is half as capable as a 70's-80s 3/4 ton.

later,
Dustin

[Will]

I will never believe a modern half ton is half as capable as a 70's-80s 3/4 ton.

later,
Dustin

I know.

[rusty ol ranger]

Becasue there not.

The only reason the GVW's are lower on the old ones are because of the braking systems.

The frame, axles, trannys, and motors were all stronger.

later,
Dustin

[Will]

That's not true. I can of course plaster the walls in this thread with documentation on it but you still wouldn't accept it.

[jobar]

I'll take WILL's word for it. He's help me out alot here on trs.

[BDAB]

79 F250 460/c6 auto 3.73 ratio 265/75/16 handles 7000 pounds no problem. 8mpg

1997 F150 4x4 S/C 4.6L auto 3.73 standard tire size handles 7000 pound no problem. 17mpg

[jobar]

79 F250 460/c6 auto 3.73 ratio 265/75/16 handles 7000 pounds no problem. 8mpg

1997 F150 4x4 S/C 4.6L auto 3.73 standard tire size handles 7000 pound no problem. 17mpg


True but have you read my previous post, im only useing the truck for towing, not a daily driver, thats what my rangers for. Im not going to spend 6000 for a 97 f150 when I could get a 89 f250 for 2000, and use it MABEY 2 times a month.

[BDAB]

PM me.

[rusty ol ranger]

Ok the new Trannys are stronger then a C6, an 8.8 that is stronger then a 9 inch, or a 5.4 that is stronger then a 351.....

Yeah they both will handle 7000lbs bdab, but which one will actually handle more.

I dont care about wha the factory rates them at, keep throwing weight at them till one breaks, it'll be the new one (assuming you compensate for parts wear, like rust etc, on the 79)

....and how many 08's do you think you'll see running around 30 years from now...my guess not many.

later,
Dustin

[Will]

You are wrong on every point.

[BDAB]

Ok the new Trannys are stronger then a C6, an 8.8 that is stronger then a 9 inch, or a 5.4 that is stronger then a 351.....

Yeah they both will handle 7000lbs bdab, but which one will actually handle more.

I dont care about wha the factory rates them at, keep throwing weight at them till one breaks, it'll be the new one (assuming you compensate for parts wear, like rust etc, on the 79)

....and how many 08's do you think you'll see running around 30 years from now...my guess not many.

later,
Dustin

my F250 was in better shape, had no rust being from eastern oregon all its life and had less miles. it was owned by the Olinger Oil Company in prineville Oregon. The minute I got it over 9000 pounds it had problems. The 97 F150 easily handled 9000. they would have been comparible ages when you factor in when each was purchased but the C6 tends to cook when you got alot of weight on it.

you can't compare a tow rating by what it will do once, because 1 time my Suburban handled 18,000. I would never do that again because it did damage to the transmission that later bit me in the ass with a 6000 poundd trailer and why it is sitting dead next to my Garage. but then again, I have never seen a 79 F250 do that, that C6 would have cooked before we made it 10 miles.

[86ford]

as much as a get teary eyed admitting the manual trans is a part of the past, the new automatics are actually more durable than the manuals in MOST 1/2, 3/4 and 1ton trucks. not to mention they are actually rated to tow more too. as for the older (70s and 80s) trucks being capable of towing more weight on a regular basis, no way. those old pigs take a beating like champs as far as wheeling and driver abuse on trails. the problem is that the transmissions are not built as well. just because many of those old motors and transmissions could run on little to no oil or ATF does not mean that they are better. sure you can neglect a old 351 without out it failing more than you can newer vehicles. the problem comes with the FACT that newer motors and transmissions offer more power and capacity purely based on technology. i HATE working on newer vehicles but they are better even if you have to be a contortionist to remove the spark plugs. when a computer is managing the fuel injection, shifts and brakes it WILL last longer than an old c6 cooking because of heat. new vehicles shutdown if they get to hot to prevent mass failure, old vehicles slowly weld the rings to the cyl. walls.

86