Silverado vs. Ram vs. F-Series

cottrell1 · May 2000

why you buy a Tundra, and if you do you'll be getting a weak motor and too little space in addtion. So we are back to waiting for the GM HD for all there worth and a great new Dodge let's just hope it doesn't look like the MAXXCAB.

cottrell1 · May 2000

Let's compare apples to apples

Ford V10 275 HP 410 Ft Pounds

Dodge V10 310 HP 450 Ft Pounds(10 less of each for rwd 2500)
and as I have said before remember that the Dodge came out in 1994 the Ford in '98.

modvptnl · May 2000

You're almost two years behind on your Ford V-10 numbers.

Ford = 310 H.P. 425 lbs. torque.

Dodge = -10 in California also.

eharri3 · May 2000

50 or so posts ago. Maybe other people have bad impressions of the Ford interior, but I found it comfortable for me. I was able to position the 60/40 front bench so that my 5/8 inch frame had plenty of strethout room in both front and back without any further adjustments. I'll gladly admit the seat could use more rake, but that seems the case in most pickups, except, according to most, the new Silverado. But I haven't driven it so I won't judge it. The Ford engines offer class leading torque almost across the board. Truck magazines(Not car magazines) have rated the Ford trucks as superior for towing and hauling due to that torque. A good example to check out is the recent Truck Trend comparison between the F350 and Chevy 3/4 ton. Comments such as "The Ford proves there is no substitte for cubic inches" and "This is proof torque is more important than horsepower" lead me to believe that for heavy duty work applications the Ford is the more capable truck. The Chevies dont have the low end power. The same issue, when referring to the Tundra, mentions that you could feel it resting on the bumpstops with a 6500 pound trailer in tow or about 1000 lbs in the bed. Not what I would call an ideal work truck. I'm not saying what is better, I'm saying the Ford seems to be the best for purely truck applications.

Rocles · May 2000

Hey Skippy,
Yeah you Ford30/Dodge20....run home to mommy, eh? .....pretty lame to claim Chevy copied anything from Dodge....

obyone · May 2000

You compare the F350 and the Chevy 3/4 ton...what kind of comparison is that? A one ton against a 3/4 ton...if you base the fact that a one ton can out haul a 3/4 ton...I really do hope that the Ford can do that, if not they are really in trouble. You have also stated many times that you haven't test drove a Silverado...so what's stopping you? Just jump in your Ranger and head down to the nearest dealer...your life will never be the same once you test drive the Chevy AND you can post your comparison. No procrastination...just do it!! And, of course, have fun!!

modvptnl · May 2000

The F250 and 350 are nearly Identical except for spring rates. I didn't see the test but I'm assuming they used the 3/4 Chev. because it's the new design.

cdean · May 2000

eharri3
You and Truck Trend should compare apples to apples. sure the F350 will outpull the Silvo 2500, the Silverado 2500 biggest engine is 50 cubes smaller than the 2500's.

You are comparing Ford's biggest engine to Chevy's medium engine.

either use GM's 454 or Fords 5.4 for comparisons. otherwise, its hooey.

cdean · May 2000

its not really hooey, but what i meant is, what did you expect by comparing engines of different classes?

modvptnl · May 2000

I'll disagree only because if you buy the top of the line trucks in their 3/4 ton configuration that's what you'll get. And my comment still stands that there's very little difference between a 250 and 350 Super Duty.

mgdvhman · May 2000

The comparison should be the 454...in a C/K series. The 8.1 will be out in the Silverado series soon...then I would imagine the C/K and the 454 will be history...

Chevy's HD line is in transition stages right now...and will soon be one line....instead of 2.

- Tim

cdean · May 2000

modv
You're still comparing the wrong ones!! The 2500 Silverado is LIGHT DUTY! biggest available engine is 6.0. Chevy makes a different 3/4 ton. The C/K.

At the time of your quoted argument, it was possible to get a C/K series truck (NOT SILVERADO) and get 454 or 6.5 diesel in 3/4 ton.

THAT would have been a fair comparison.

In September, the NEW GM heavy duties will be out. 3/4 and one ton trucks will get the 6.0 as a base engine, with upgrades to 8.1 gas, and 6.6 diesel. THESE trucks will be equal to the Ford you quoted.

Most manufacturers now have very little diff between their heavy duty 3/4 and one ton trucks. frames are the same. but, you get totally different springs, different hubs, different tires. including Ford. thats a big difference to me. if not to you, thats fine.

cottrell1 · May 2000

I think when you put the late '70's Dodge and Chevy next to each other you can see a vague styling likeness. The same is true with the current two. Beyond that their's no real similarity.

cottrell1 · May 2000

I think when you put the late '70's Dodge and Chevy next to each other you can see a vague styling likeness. The same is true with the current two. Beyond that their's no real similarity.

I realize that, but Dodge is just being lazy. If they wanted kick Ford's into the netherworld when it comes it current engines they could and its another of my personal beliefs, that they will in the blink of an eye. The fact is that GM is behind the times, Ford is much better, but Dodge is the only manufacture who can among other things call their engines something that carries the weight of history like Magnum while others talk about nonsence like "Triton" and "Vortech". When you hear that name your mind goes not to engines, but the largest and most succesful and innovative Gunmaker in the history of the the world.
Smith & Wesson

dbhull · May 2000

Cottrell, I sure wish I knew what point you try to make.

As far as the torque of the Chevy trucks (5.3l), the new model Silverados only show the peak points. That does not at all mean that it has no torque until the peak. The torque curve is only about 15 lbs less than Ford (5.4l) at 1,200 rpm all the way to its peak at 4000 rpm. Flatter torque curve is more useful throughout the rpm range. The torque curve is higher than dodge up to about 2,200 rpm where Dodge starts to move up toward it's peak. I know a guy (here we go with the "I know a guy stories") who has a 2000 Ram with 5.9l, 3:55 gear diff. That thing has "sufficient" power below 55 mph, but get it out on the highway and it is constantly downshifting on the slightest hills, especially with cruise set. My Silverado never downshifts on the same hills with the cruise set. Tells me that HP "does" make a difference when towing at certain speeds and rpm.

Not saying any are better than the other. Depends on what you use it for. But the myth of the Silverados being undertorqued is just that, pure myth.

Rocles · May 2000

cottrell,

Been drinking? Where was your argument going? Are you stating that the "name" of the engine is of utmost importance when comparing them?? LOL!

BTW: Your argument of S&W is just as lame as your defense of Dodge. Ruger makes stronger guns and they don't sell out to Clinton and Brady.....

modvptnl · May 2000

I don't feel like arguing with you but you're wrong. The Silverado 2500 is as heavy duty as Ford by Chevy's own #'s. They claim a towing rating of 11,000 lbs. a max payload of over 3700 lbs.and a GVW over 8600 and do use many different components then the half tons, the better automatic for the 6.0 and dropping the rack and pinion from the 1500 is two of them. The C/K is a lame duck and who ever did this test obviously wanted new against new.

The test will be re-done with the new 8.1, I'm sure, and Ford better have something to compete or they'll be in trouble.

Lastly, the axles(Dana) hubs 8 lug, brakes etc. are the same on the Super Duties. The Silly 3/4 and 1 ton designations(I call them silly because both trucks will carry over 1 1/2 tons) are for spring rates(GVW) and dually configurations which are available on "1 ton" and not "3/4" ton trucks. The single rear wheel is also available on the 1 ton and I think some different cab/bed variation separate the two. Otherwise they are the same trucks.

modvptnl · May 2000

Magnum was the old designation of Dodge motors forever(60's ?) I think some people might associate magnum with a measure of liquor. I'm not naming names but like Roc said ........with a post like yours, maybe you had a couple magnums???

markcord · May 2000

Off topic I know, but, I'll agree that many wildcats are built around Ruger single action revolvers (since S&W doesn't make one as far as I know), and their double actions are stout, but the fact that Ruger's frames are cast makes them inherently weaker than S&W's hammer forged frames.
Hence the thicker top straps on Rugers. Sorry guys, but I love my Smiths. Let the banter resume......

cdean · May 2000

Well, I've got a Beretta I wouldn't trade for anything!

Modv
I understand what you're saying, and we just look at it differently. Maybe i've just heaped you in with everyone else that instantly compared the 6.0 to the v10, because thats whats out right now. when the 6.0 came out, everyone forgot about the 454, even though THAT IS Chevy's big block right now.

GM has been planning the 4.8 -> 5.3 -> 6.0 -> 8.1 engine progression for years. right now the 454 goes in the last spot.

if you want to discount that fact, then it slopes the field heavily in your favor, cuz 6.0 isn't meant to do big block work.

Oh, and I will pit my lameduck one ton with 350 and 4.10 gears against any other truck. with midsize v-8 or course.

quadrunner500 · May 2000

It's a Savage 24F combo...double barrel, break-over action, bottom barrel is 12 ga shotgun, top barrel is 30-30 rifle. Shotgun has choke tubes for full, mod, imp cylinder. Barrel is drilled and tapped for scope mounts. Has one trigger, barrel selectable from switch on hammer.

Varmints beware!

cdean · May 2000

I've heard of those, sound awesome!

modvptnl · May 2000

I think we're on the same page. My opinion only was if Chevy is going to rate the 2500 Silverado with the "big boys" the comparison was fair.

Rocles · May 2000

markcord,

S&W is a fine gun maker owned by scared Brits which are giving a true disservice to all makers. I sold my last smith yesterday. I want no part of them.
Second, I follow Jeff Cooper's beliefs that if left with only one double-action, it would be a Ruger. They may be cast(not all) but that frame is still overkill which I admittedly like the looks of.

Sorry folks....back to the subject!
Roc

quadrunner500 · May 2000

Since you mentioned Jeff Cooper, that's the other rifle I want, the Steyr Scout, Jeff Cooper package. Toooo much $$$$ though.

Not selling my S&W 586 revolver, no matter what Cooper says. It's a tack driver with the best trigger in shooting. Was sorry to hear they are foreign owned. It figures.

oldharry · May 2000

claims Chevy(?) copied Dodge! If he were to actually look at any trucks, he would see that with the Super Duty, Ford did not "copy" Dodge, but followed the same styling path. The Super Duty, in my opinion, got the look right.

Harry

f220swift · May 2000

Savage! Come on. I wouln't even set one of them up next to a missburg. I mean Mossburg.
Later: 220

eharri3 · May 2000

havent checked this post in awhile but it seems i started a whole new argument because of a typo. I meant to say truck trends compared the 3/4 ton models of both trucks. I havent driven a Silverado because there are no Chevy deales near me but I intend to soon. Thanks everyone for callin me on the mixup. The Chevy may well drive a little more comfortably than the Ford but the Ford still hauls and tows more effortlessly, and that for me makes it the more competent truck.

cdean · May 2000

I read on PUTC and heard about it, now read it in the newspaper that is was released at the New York International Auto show. The 2001 GMC Denali will have the 6.0 as the engine. 325 hp. Granted the Denali is not a high volume item.

But they also said that GMC Sierra pickup would be getting the 6.0! C-series. Apparently, that means the half ton. But said nothing about Chevrolet.

My opinion: GMC sales have not been boosted by the new model like Chevrolets were. looks like they are going to offer the 6.0 into GMC to get some sales boosted. offering in GMC only shouldn't hurt their CAFE too much since Chevy outsells GMC about 5 to 1 right now. Looks like marketing/sales trick.

mgdvhman · May 2000

I betcha GMC will sell a ton more all of a sudden..

- Tim

obyone · May 2000

thinking of trading my '00 in for one of those...

mgdvhman · May 2000

Get a 2500 and get all the other better goodies that go with it?

- Tim

obyone · May 2000

bigger motor in lighter truck=faster truck. Plus truck has been in shop for past 11 days working on vibrations.

Only problem is that front end grill on the GMC...almost as ugly as a Ford 150.

mgdvhman · May 2000

...but if you want fast...but a WS6 or an SS?

Trucks are not for performance...

- Tim

obyone · May 2000

Was thinking of the lightning but couldn't bring myself to do it (buy a Ford) plus need an extended cab. 6.0 in xcab 1500 w/4.10 would be fastest xcab around in stock version. I usually don't drive fast...it's good to know that I can if I wanted to.

Drove a friend's '00 Camaro SS. Felt like I was sitting in a coffin. Plus passenger legroom was nonexistant with large bulge on floor for catalytic converter. Also drove another friend's '00 Vette...If I had to drive a coffin...this would be the one.

mgdvhman · May 2000

F body's....the friggin' seats are 60's technology!

If the T/A had better seats....my wife would have one in the garage..

GRRRRRRR

I was going to mention the vette...but we are talking a different ballpark of moooolah there.

- Tim

quadrunner500 · May 2000

Seats from the '60s but how else are you going to get your butt that low to the ground? And you can't beat the t-tops.

Once raced and won against an older vette, while towing my motorcycle. The 350 LT1 was the genuine article.

mgdvhman · May 2000

seats are a drop down....and they don't feel like sitting in a hole...

- Tim

quadrunner500 · May 2000

I have to agree, my Mustang seats did not feel like sitting in a hole. They felt like Recaro seats. Very firm, generally a real nice seat. But you sat up higher in my Mustang than my Camaro. And the Mustang was taller also. And the Mustang had unspeakably terrible brakes, and spooky nervous handling at the limit. The F body, with the wide track, always confidence inspiring and begging for more. 'Cept you do sit in a 'hole.' Never thought of it that way...

mgdvhman · May 2000

I was going to say Recaro like.....so some one else shares my thoughts...

I love the F-Body.....but if I'm going to sit in a hole....it's gonna be a Vette.

...Course a WS-6 on the side might make you forget about the hole effect??

- Tim

Rocles · May 2000

But the real issue with sports cars are primarily looks. That is one subject that GM failed when they redesigned the Camaro. damn bastards...I think back to the muscle cars from 67-72 and all makes looked good.

cottrell1 · May 2000

The Choice is easy the 911 is by far the best. It also in Turbo form it's the quickest production car for sale in North America!

Rocles · May 2000

911? UGLY!!

mgdvhman · May 2000

....she will have one someday....probably sooner than I know!

- Tim

modvptnl · May 2000

Wouldn't you have to divorce your wife if she became communist and bought one of them fuurin' jobs? Or would you just make her leave your country?

mgdvhman · May 2000

we just will have to wait and see...

LOL

- Tim

mgdvhman · May 2000

..and I prefer she don't do that either..

What we do for love.....(least I think that's what is it??)

- Tim

cottrell1 · May 2000

What world are you living in?

Rocles · May 2000

The world of motorcycles...;) Come on! Why should everyone love a Porsche? I never cared for the hot-rod Volks look. Give me a Ferrari anyday!

mgdvhman · May 2000

The 911 is kinda lame looking..

Silverado vs. Ram vs. F-Series

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles