Tow rating

[jobar]

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

 

[Ozwynn]

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.

 

[Ozwynn]

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.

 

[Ozwynn]

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