2013 Light-Duty Challenge: Results

LDC Group 2 II

OK, we've been through the testing, we've put on the miles, and now we're just about ready to render our verdict.

We decided to judge these trucks both on their physical capabilities as well as other more subjective characteristics. Thankfully, we were able to get experts from RaceLogic and Popular Mechanics to help out. The end result is mountains of data and impressions collected, and one overall winner for our 2013 Light-Duty Challenge.

Scoring a test like this can be complicated. In the past, we used a series of formulas that weighted each category according to how important (or not) we thought those categories were. Not so this time. This year each winner of each quantitative test was awarded 100 points and all other competitors received whatever fraction of points their own score deserved when compared to the winning time or distance.

For example, if the winning truck accelerated a prescribed distance in 10 seconds and the second-place finisher accelerated in 11 seconds, the former would be awarded 100 points and the latter 91 (10 divided by 11= 90.9). Likewise, in stopping distances, if the winner stopped in 135 feet (100 points) and the fourth-place finisher stopped in 153 feet, the fourth-place truck got 88 points. (You can do the math.)

The only place where fractions were allowed into total scoring was in the qualitative section, where judges could award points in any way they saw fit. As you can see from our judges' impressions, each expert had his own biases and preferences, and each reflected those opinions in his scores. The fact that this particular section can be considered "fuzzy" motivated us to designate this section to be worth about half as much as the 13 objective categories.

Before we get to the final finishing order, we'd like to thank our third-party experts at RaceLogic (thanks Joe Lachovsky) who were responsible for collecting our test data and providing tons of helpful testing advice, as well as both original equipment manufacturer support teams that helped us use the Chrysler and GM Milford Proving Grounds to their fullest (Ford, it's your turn next time). And thanks also to our compatriots at Popular Mechanics: Your insights and driving skills were hugely appreciated. We've been told readers can look for PM's own half-ton challenge in the September issue, going on sale near the beginning of August.

For all our quantitative test and calculated data in one head-to-head chart, click here.


Sixth Place
2013 Nissan Titan Pro-4X | 1,605.5 points

Results Nissan II

(Nissan Scorecard)

Even though the Titan did not win a single category in our tests, the news is not all bad. The foundation of this truck is solid, and our judges seemed to have a soft spot for the Titan as the sportiest player in the segment. Sure, the engine and interior are the weakest links but there are some good qualities that Nissan can build off of when the next-generation Titan debuts, hopefully by 2015. The Titan was the last-place finisher in our quantitative testing, but our judges did not believe it deserved last place in interior and exterior scoring. At the end of the testing, the Titan was simply outgunned with more under-hood technology and firepower from the other trucks; it also is significantly in need of a new interior design. On a positive note, from what we're hearing, the next-gen Titan will offer many more powertrain options and cab configurations, something that all the players in this arena must have.


Fifth Place
2013 Toyota Tundra SR5 | 1,624.5 points

Loaded Accel Toyota II

(Toyota Scorecard)

The Tundra did not win a single one of our testing categories either, but it did perform well during our most extreme tow tests, thanks in large part to a relatively solid Max Tow Package that included 4.30:1 axle gears but no integrated brake controller (just like the Nissan). Unfortunately, the biggest weaknesses centered on the outdated gauge cluster and split center stack, as well as the underperforming tire choice. The 2014 Toyota Tundra is set to debut later this year with a new interior and exterior design, and since our judges scored the current Tundra in last place for our contest in both those categories, we'd say that's good timing. Our judges all liked the powerful sound that the Tundra's engine made when hauling and towing, but it somehow seems appropriate given the quality of the all-new or recently updated competitive powertrains that the Tundra finished fifth in our quantitative tests, fifth in our qualitative categories and fifth in total points. As a small piece of advice, we'd suggest giving some serious thought to updating and modifying this truck's powertrain and chassis choices soon.


Fourth Place
2014 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LT Z71 | 1,715.75 points

Towing Chevy II

(Chevrolet Scorecard)

The only contest the new Chevy Silverado 1500 won was the fuel economy loop with the trailers in tow, scoring just a hair better than its GMC cousin. Beyond that one category, the Silverado was a solid middle-of-the-pack player, often getting close to joining the leaders, yet never threatening to join the bottom two. It's worth noting the Silverado is less than 34 points from third place and more than 90 points better than fifth position. Due to a few option differences with the GMC, the Chevy weighed 60 pounds heavier than its cousin, which generally hurt it most in performance and fuel economy (at least when empty). With our judges, the new Silverado was usually a top-three finisher, garnering plenty of comments about creature comforts and stellar ride quality; unfortunately, the GMC interior resonated with our judges just a touch louder. Finishing in fourth place after all the quantitative testing and calculations, and a strong third place in the qualitative portion, the 2014 Chevy Silverado just couldn't keep up with the better-looking and ever-so-slightly better-performing Sierra.


Third Place
2014 GMC Sierra 1500 SLE Z71 | 1,749.25 points

Autocross GMC 2 II

(GMC Scorecard)

If there was a surprise in this competition, it was that the all-new GMC Sierra 1500 won two of our 13 quantitative contests outright, and came in second in four others, all done without a maximum trailer package or the all-new 6.2-liter V-8 (both arriving later this year). Impressively, that put the GMC within striking distance of the Ford (only 55 points behind out of 1,300) after the quantitative section of the test. Unfortunately, the GMC made up less than 40 points in the judge's scoring, winning the exterior styling portion outright but finishing in second place to the Ram 1500 in both interior and overall value. Our judges were clearly impressed with the new material choices and gauge cluster layout inside the GMC but they weren't impressed enough to take away points from Ram or Chevy, both of which also scored well. As strong as the push was for the Sierra near the end (it was like we were watching a long-distance runner finish a marathon with back-to-back five-minute miles), it wasn't enough to overtake the hard-performing Hemi in the Ram 1500 or the monster-strong F-150.


Second Place
2013 Ram 1500 SLT Big Horn | 1,753.5 points

Towing Ram 2 II

(Ram 1500 Scorecard)

Watching the top two in a comparison test like this is more like witnessing King Kong wrestle a giant anaconda or a T-rex; you know you shouldn't be standing around watching the bloody battle, but it's just too dang mesmerizing to look away. Together, the Ford and Ram pickups won more than three-quarters of all the test events. In fact, the new Ram 1500 won five separate events (both autocross tests, both hill-climb events and the empty zero-to-60 run), as well as coming in a close second in three categories. Additionally, the new Ram was a strong player with our judges, winning both the interior and overall value categories, and finishing second in the exterior section behind the stylish GMC. If the Ram 1500 had one obvious weakness, it was in our calculated payload and towing capacity events. In those two categories, the Ram gave up the most points of any other competitor in any event, and with that huge distance to make up, it couldn't close the gap enough on the Ford no matter how well it performed in the other events. In the end, this truck missed the tape by a nose.


First Place
2013 Ford F-150 XLT | 1,765 points

Autocross F-150 II

(Ford Scorecard)

Say what you will about the F-150, but as the biggest-selling half-ton in the U.S. offering the most engine choices and trim packages in the class, you had to think this was the favorite from Day One. Although the F-150 hasn't won a PUTC comparison test since the 2010 V-6 Work Truck Shootout, we should note we're not counting last year's Ultimate 4x4 Shootout because the Ford Raptor is in a class by itself. The performance in this well-equipped XLT SuperCrew with its Max Tow Package was, quite simply, dominating. In the quantitative section of our test, with 13 different performance tests and max rating calculations, the Ford outdistanced the competition by a significant margin. It won five competitive events outright and came in second in six others. However, in the qualitative section of our testing, the Ford's domination fell short. In fact, even though the F-150 did not garner any harsh criticisms, the XLT interior was clearly not up to the levels seen in the new GM trucks and Ram 1500. After the judges' scores were sorted, the Ford never received higher than a third-place finish in this section, winding up in fourth place overall in our qualitative portion of the test. But this contest wasn't only about what a few experts think, so now that all the dust has settled on one of our most thorough and exhaustive half-ton pickup truck comparison tests, the 2013 Ford F-150 is PickupTrucks.com's 2013 Light-Duty Challenge Champion by 11.5 points more than the Ram and 15.75 points more than the GMC. Congrats to Ford and to all of our competitors, because this was one crazy, brutal battle royale.


Overview | Judges' Impressions | 0-60 Acceleration | 60-0 Braking | Mileage Drive | Hill Climb | Autocross | Payload and Towing | Results


Dodge RAM will be taking over the #2 spot From Chevy! If PUTC put the WASTE of American Taxpayer dollars GovtMoCo truck over the Chevrolet, the writing is ON THE WALL! C-ya Chevy Silverado. And by default GovtMoCo Sierra. GM sure IS DUMB to SCREW Chevrolet like THIS! LOLOL!! NOBODY wants a CHEAP interior! Dodge is coming after Ford HARD.

The "real" scores and winner is the one you see here... the total of interior/exterior, value, towing/payload, braking, fuel economy, ride, and performance. The winner is F-150.

If you don't care about performance, and only care about interior and value, then pick your own winner. I would still pick the F-150 interior and exterior and value because I like it better.

Remember when they did this in 2008 and expert opinions gave the Ford the win and everybody cried foul? Now expert opinion gives advantage to the newer (not better) trucks from GM and Ram and again you are making excuses. Heres an idea for the next test, bloggers can grow a pair and stop whining. Whoever does it fastest wins the contest. Of course this will favor Ford also. Sorry.

If PUTC wants to give points for a maximal listed payload and tow amount, then the trucks should have been put through the wringer carrying a max payload and tow amount. If the F150 can really carry a bajillion tons in the bed, and tow a bajillion tons behind it without overheating brakes/transmission/breaking suspension components then giving points for this is fine.

But to just go by the manufacturer's rating? Really? Did you guys just go out of your way to create a set of criteria that would allow the F150 to win? I think if you're going to arbitrarily score things like that the Tundra should've won the entire shootout since it can pull a 50K+ lb space shuttle. That's like 5x the points for that category.

With regards to payload the Tundra looks to be the only one sagging under load in this picture.


The tundra is not under load, it's unloaded on take off.

The 2014 Tundra should have been here and would have won.

Really impressed with GM... This is their middle engine vs the competitors premium engines. Neither one had the max tow options and still did well... It makes me think that the 6.2 will be in another league honestly... And I'm a Ford guy. Anyway, all trucks performed well.

I actually disagree with Mark. I think the Silverado looks much better then the Sierra. Not so with the 900 models but now it's back to being the way it always was. The Silverado needs some wheelwell moldings still like the Sierra and my F-150 have. I'm somewhat shocked the Chevrolet finished fourth behind Ford and Dodge, even GM. With a brand new truck, I really expected a hardcore Chevy-Ford battle between first and second. This doesn't bode well for the future of Chevy. I've always stood behind Chevy when they deserved it and always stood behind their Chevrolet Smallblock engines. There was even a few days I contemplated looking at this new Silverado, most likely not now. They really needed to go all out here. GM just needs to pick 1 single truck and go with it all out instead of two so so trucks. I'm not surprised Ford won. Even if they were second to Chevrolet I wouldn't have been shocked. Our 150 has been a dream to own just like my 250. They had a winner right out of the gate with the 04 model till today.

The only thing I was willing to predict was several pages of whining because their favorite brand lost.
I did not expect the EB 3.5 powered F150 to win.
I had thought that the GM siblings would fare better. The 2008 shootout showed that one does not need to have the most powerful engine to win if a truck is able to do everything well.
These results are in many respects a vindication of Ford's choice to develope a V6 TT DI engine for a pickup.


Denis means the same truck, only ten years later. We all know the over hyped Eco boost will not be able to compete in the same manner, if at all. I like that durability has been mentioned. For People who use their trick as a truck, this is important. Ford's turbos and Rams airbags will be long replaced or dead in five years.

The picture above shows 3rd place losers in front of two 1st place cruisers. How fitting. The Sierra does not belong. Same truck as the Silverado. I bolt the things together!

@Devon, you need a new job then bud. Two trucks from a single company is retarded. Most sane people have always laughed at GM and/or Chevrolet over this. DUMB.

Congratulations Ford and Ram. Dissapointing results for the new Sierra and Silverado. Pathetic showing by Toyota. After 8 long years it only has a refresh coming? No surprise for the Titan but I expect huge improvements for the next gen Titan. Nissan generally gives customers what they want. Toyota gives customers what Toyota wants which is why the Tundra is quickly becoming a joke.

Sorry but if a mid trim level Ford XLT wins this competition over other brands upscale & new trucks all I can say is the Best Never Rest! Yes Ford Makes The Best Trucks On The Planet People Period!

To those saying just add Max Tow or a 6.2, I wish you could.

You can't add Max Tow to a 5.3 with 4 full-size doors.

The MT with a 6.2 is only on LTZ and High Country which is more than $45k. If the goal is for trucks that the the genral public will buy, that aint it. The minority will buy that combo.

EcoBoost F-150 sells to over 50% of buyers and this shootout proves why.


I am sick and tired of your comments. It's no wonder you didn't want the new Tundra in this shootout. Despite it performing well during the most extreme tow tests, it got dinged for its body and interior. Now that that the body interior been addressed, you've got reason to be scared. And rightly so!

Braking is not done by brakes! Braking is done by tires!

I don't see how people can say that towing shouldn't be weighed as heavily...? In a truck, that SHOULD be the number ONE factor. Everyone is different, so i understand that, but seeing how this is a test for the consumer ranging from me, a small business landscaper, to the accountant who tows his 2 jet ski's every other weekend, i think they did a fine job. Congrats to both ford and ram, i would consider it a 2 way tie for first imo. GO FORD :)

I am sorry, I thought this was a POS test.

No off-road?! But an f'ing autocross?!

Also, there are no SPEEDS only times, so you don't see the real picture of WHY things occured.

The takeaway for me was--Ford builds a pretty solid pickup. The Ram is a car with a bed--which is the reason why it did well in many of these test--because it is running 20" dubs that will aid in braking and handling but be USELESS when used as a real pickup or offroad.

Secondly, the Ram has a car suspension (along with car tires) that allow it to really squat and accelerate well when empty, but when the other pickups can actually get some traction (once again, where are the SPEEDS)!, it is slower. The pickups that actually have a truck suspension are penalized for being truck. A better test would have been something like a 5-80mph test to remove any launch variables and replicate merging from an on ramp to an interstate.

Finally, how can a pickup with the most gears get the WORST mileage when actually used like a pickup?

So, this is the brand new, 2014 model, GM trucks that are supposed to raise the bar for everyone else to try to catch up to... and they take 3rd and 4th out of six! GM best keep an eye on the rear view mirror in the sales numbers.

You make a mistake it was dodge the monster strong pickup if y look your test.???

Wow, don't know what Dave is going on about, a gas non turbo engine, developed over two years before Fords Ecoboost, kicked the Ecoboosts ass.

Dave, if you don't get it, the 3.55s can tow just fine, and are REALISTIC, where as Ford and GM just throw numbers out there. They can realisticly tow alot better with these 3.55s and they don't need the 3.92s but they are required because RAM rates them harder then GM and Ford. A Ram with 3.55s and 265/70 r 17s (smaller tire) will beat the Ford as well, and it will tow better, but it is not rated better. Realistly, it is.

So once again Dave, go cry with johnny doe.

Some day they will test these Fords at the max. Wait, that's what Edmunds did with the Ford 3.7, and the trans OVERHEATED at 99% GVWR.

So because GM and Ford choose to throw trailer tow ratings in that are bs, they get this one. Whatever.

Only thing I got to say bad about Ram, they need to get the most out of the air suspension. It's there, the payload will probably be upped next year, like they upped trailer tow in 2010, as it was extremly low in 2009.

Believe whatever $#*+ you want to, Dave. This plainly shows the 3.55s handle it just fine, as opposed to other trucks with higher ratings.

Gotta wonder if some of you folks ever heard about progressive rate coils?

@johnny doe: I will give the GMs credit for the brakes and running with the Tundras though! I think all but the Nissan (too far behind) have alot of great qualities, when you look at how close some are on braking and autocross with load.

Pickuptruck gm pickup whit the 3.73 gear is conning in q4 do you do another test later this year,apple whit appel...and the big winner is dodge ram,,,,,remember Toyota was truck of the year whit all the engine quality problem you just did the same whit ford???

Fuel economy.

I'll also add that the Ram with stop/start, active grilles, 8 speed, fuel shut off, more aero, and air suspension couldn't beat the old EB 6 speed combo in fuel econ loaded or unloaded.

As for the EPA numbers being way off or based on some weak gear ratio, EcoBoost EPA rating 21 mpg. 22.3 mpg as tested. This just proves these folks wrong and illustrates that Ford was right.

Big shock, a Ford site picked a Ford as a winner.

@Kyle (I know this is late) I have an '11 F150 SC FX4 EcoBoost with the 6.5' bed and max tow. I pulled a 10,800 lbs toy hauler, four adults weighing ~200 lbs each, and their gear (in the bed) weighing about ~500 lbs. This setup would go down the highway at 72MPH in 6th gear. It also pulled this to the top of Powder Mountain in northern Utah. Last six miles are a 14% grade. I was THE only 1/2-ton up there with anything more than a single-axle utility trailer.
Make no mistake, the F150 is more than capable of pulling the stated loads. It's no wonder it won this contest and the 2015 F150 will leave no doubt.
Truck and trailer:
Article on steepness of that road:

Dav: the one with most gears got the worst mileage towing because, drumroll, they were towing through flat Michigan. If you had seen that they used tow hall, and if you had a clue that tow how on Rams always eliminates the top gear, so it was towing with basically a 2.98 gear, while the GMs tow with a 2.28, and even when you figure the shorter tire of the GM in there is about 4.5% more turns the 2.28 into a 2.40, which if you are going 65-70 on a flat highway with a trailer as low in wind restantance as these, you don't need all that gear. They coulda just put it in high gear. With the GMs gear/tire combo coming out about the same in top gear, and more torque to pull with at a lower rpm, of course it woulda pulled it fine.

Dav, you are just belly aching cause your Tundra did poor. Lets see, so so empty braking, the worst with aload. And you talk all the smack about capacity and working a truck like a truck? Lets see, the GMs out pulled it.

You are right, Dav. This test needed an offroad test! So the Tundra, (which the only thing that has any clearance on them is the front end, no air dam) can drag it's low sitting ass. Like it did last time. While the Ram air suspension lifts it higher. The last time they did the offroad with this group, the Ram did good cleared obstacles, but the crawl ratio sucked. It's fixed now. I have measured these trucks underneath, and the Tundra is quite the low rider! The frame, control arms, fuel tank, muffler, crossmember.....

I beleave the Tundra had street tires not worth a crap offroad as well?

Tell me how air suspension squats Dav?

The frame will handle anything the Tundras crummy frame can handle. Just that somebody needs to remind Ram to change the GVWR another 200 pounds for 4x4s which add 200+ plus pounds to the FRONT of the truck.

Damn, Dav, blame the Ram all you want, the Tundra lost in braking, towing, poor mileage towing as well (but it towed in 6th gear!, woulda sucked worse in 5th gear) EMPTY mileage, lol! Autocross.

Dav, your ol truck is just outdated!

Too bad for Chevrolet and the Silverado C/K truck. Not only does Pickuptrucks.com rate them 4th, GM does too. Those GM jerkoffs haven't cared about Chevrolet or it's trucks for years and it shows. It's showed for so long they're about a joke now.

All I see are 2 red bloody turds or tampons right up the center. The 80's ballad I Saw Red comes to mind. "I don't think I want to love you anymore". Gotta love Government Motors Corp. The Sierra is about as gay as the 80's hairbands. You'd think the oh so tough Silverado would have taken first place, apparently not. I'm about to agree with that Mopar idiot, what a waste of our federal tax dollars on two trucks. These idiots can't even get a #1 or #2 spot with a truck that debuted this month????? The Dodge came out in 2009, the Ford in all reality in 2004 except for the turbo's on the motor. It's 2013 Chevrolet! Or GM. Whichever you refer to them as. They do need to just make one truck. What a waste on two. Sad to see the Silverado like this honestly. Even I have love for old things with a Bowtie..


The new Ram 1500 won five separate events (both autocross tests, both hill-climb events and the empty zero-to-60 run) AND had best interior!


if people would learn how to drive turbocharged vehicles there would be nothing to worry about. turbos have been around for ever

I will still take the truck that will last longer and cost less to own and drive. GM trucks!!!

Its so sad that after the ford was best or second best in 10 of 13 test you still have people who claim there truck won the shoot out.

If you can't understand the test results and understand that nothing came close to beating the ford you need some personal help .

The ford won by 50 points before the personal points where add so actually the testers did the others a favor for even letting it get closer then the results actually where.

In straight up testing the ford not only beat the dodge it stomped it and bent the chevy over and had its way with it.
The tundra would have finished next to last no matter the model because its the same truck as the old one with a revised uglier grill if possible and a ford looking dash.Same weak floppy chassis!

Its time to admit it.Nothing came close to the ford and that v6 stomped the v8s easily.Ford durability test has shown that the ecoboost can go 250 thousand easily.Its nothing for turbo's on a diesel to go 400 thousand so the ecoboost turbos should be no different.This is 2013 not 1973 and ford as always is ahead of the game while the rest of the pack looks to be 5 yrs behind.

Be a man and admit it.The ford won easily!

I told you Ford would win.

Did I mention ford sucks. well they do. and anyone who owns one.

What a sham. RAM should have won this comparison test. I'm amazed that the Eco Bust finished the test without breaking down. I know I don't trust mine as far as I can throw it. Heck I'd even take a Silverado over this pile of dung.

No points for cost of ownership

No points for Warranty Coverage

No points for Ride and Handling (Subjective)

No points for safety systems

No brake test till they fade, Ford would lose this one too

No mention of Chassis Strength, GM would easily win this

No mention of cooked payload and hauling numbers, ford makes up umbers and won't submit to SAE.

No mention of EGOboost lawsuits

No mention of Egoboost need for Prem fuel when towing, trailering, hauling

No mention of how much the Egoboost turbos cost when they blow up.

No mention of Meddling, Mike Levine, ex PUT.com editor, no FORD employee.

I like that Mark Williams set a price cap at below $45k.

That will stop any of these Max Tow 6.2L LTZ Hight County Denalis that few people buy from being used in the testing.

It will also block Ram from adding a very expensive diesel engine to their next shootout or they will have to get rid of some content or go with a lower trim level if possible.

A cap should be set for all shootouts.

Well, maybe BAFO is right--many of the folks on here use their 1/2 tons like cars.

I used to have a G-body El Camino track "truck"--it was basically a stockcar with a bed.

It would have DESTROYED these pickups and most any others on the road in an autocross, braking, and loaded/unloaded acceleration. Hell, it must have been the best truck ever!!

What folks on here fail to understand is that, using only these tests, the gas (and maybe even diesel) HD version of the Ford/Fiat/GM would have all lost and would be considered the "lesser" truck? What makes those actually better TRUCKS are stiff suspension, big axles, big bearings, etc. All of the "calculated" specs are pure BS. While it would never happen, I would love to see more extreme tests to see who REALLY has the toughest 1/2 ton: lets load 2000lbs in the bed--and now go off-road. Lets hook up a 15,000 trailer--and head to Davis Dam... and more.

I hear ya FordTruKs1. It seems that you and I aren't the only ones that feel this way. I was speaking to our old friend
AmericanCheVrolet earlier. Ironically he feels the same way that we do. Heck, you could even say that we are all the same person because we think so much alike!

You can get the 5.3 with the max tow package... Where are yall getting this imformation from?

One just have to look at Mark Williams' column on Ford's score card.
Here is how I will describe it.
Ford's puppet.
One guy gave Ford 115 the other two were in 120s and his is 141. LOL.
Adjust that properly and Ford drops to 3rd.

Performance scores and so called "EXPERT" scores should never had been added together.
Max Payload and Towing "Calculations"?
Who "calculated" these? What a joke.
Ford got 100 points for both because Ford SAID they can tow and haul an X number of lbs? WOW! Really?!
And can someone break down "Overall Value" category? How did Williams come up with 95 for Ford there and other guys had 75?

Williams is what ruined this entire shootout and made it worthless.

The price cap also rewards companies for keeping a package with a premium engine priced more reasonably.

If you have to spend thousands more to get the premium engine with max Tow and 4 doors in a GM product, most do not want to spend that much on a half ton. You should be penalized and blocked from doing that in the shootout and rightfully so.

"You can get the 5.3 with the max tow package... Where are yall getting this imformation from?"

John, NOT with four full-size doors. Max Tow will be available in the 5.3 later but only in a double cab. They wanted crewcabs - 4 full-size doors for testing.

Max Tow CrewCab on GM product is on the 6.2L LTZ OR HIGH COUNTRY ONLY.

Source: PUTC and GM

Ford did very well in performance tests. As it should. EB is a very capable engine and Ford's best. But overall truck isn't worth first place.
On "experts" score cards Ford was (even with Williams' bias) distant 4th. Ford was closer to last place Titan than to first place Ram!!!

I must say I'm actually very impressed with GM's trucks. They took on competitions BEST with it's own middle of the line up motor and did extremely well! This 5.3L motor is going to be sweet everyday performer.
Don't forget. Ford (3.5EB), Ram (5.7), Toyota (5.7) and Nissan (5.6) sent their best engines out there. GM's top performer is still to come.
"Experts" like them as well. :)

Anyone else want to see a shootout with everyone's top dog engine and tow package? You have got to admit that the cards were stacked in this test. I think the new GM trucks done very well considering... I can definitely see a new 6.2 Sierra in my driveway this fall!

"We should note that although the Ram 1500 only offered a calculated maximum towing capacity of 8,350 pounds, it did all our towing tests and fuel economy loops with the 8,500-pound trailer with confidence and control."

So, even though it "did all (y)our towing tests.. with confidence and control," and in fact did so at higher than its rated weight, you dinged it for it's stated weight? Mind you, that's not mentioning that it *topped* your acceleration and hill climb metrics while towing too.

I don't know about you, but where i'm from that's called punching. above. your. weight.

And where are your loaded trailer braking results?

You need to completely rewrite the section on towing and hauling, or re-score it in my opinion. It completely failed to mention how the individual vehicles handled their loaded trailers or how confident they were. As written, the entire towing and hauling section is based on the manufacturers published figures. Really? That's what you're hanging your reputation on; manufacturers stated results? Fuel economy figures are published but you still tested and rated for that. Why not discuss the individual vehicles loaded acceleration, braking, handling, confidence, sag sway, squat, whether or not the tail wags the dog, etc etc etc.

Ram won this as I see it. It's been said there's a Ford bias amongst the editorial staff, and i've always ignored it but now I can't.

Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In