Might be a dumb question but why can one engine out perform the other in this criteria? They are merely resistance factors.

Don't understand why the Ecoboost is shy of the Coyote in the arena.

 

I believe payload is just the carrying capacity of the truck alone. How much can the springs, axle, tires take over the basic weight of the truck. If the truck itself weighs less and the springs, axle, and tires stay the same then payload goes up. Perhaps the 5 L engine weighs less, or the net dry weight of the truck is less?

Towing factors in the power required to pull a trailer up a hill so is more engine power dependent. You are still limited by the weight the trailer transfers to the truck as payload though, so you have to consider both.

However for practical purposes in towing, I think you have to be very aware of how much power and torque the engine has at normal highway speeds and engine rpm. That is what will make it feel like the trailer tows easily. That is where the EcoBoost has the big advantage. Has much more power and torque in the 2000 rpm range.

 

I imagine you must mean the 2.7EB since the 3.5 has higher towing capabilities than the 5.0. Anyway, since the towing tests are standard now, maybe the 2.7 came out lower or maybe marketing decided they needed a little more differentiation between the two engines so they sandbagged the 2.7. Just because the test shows a certain number does not mean that is the number they publish, they certainly can publish a lower number if they wish to do so.

 

I assume the question is in relation to the leaked specifications below. In the 4x2 regular cab for example the 5.0 is rated at 3300 max payload while the 3.5 EB is rated at 3270 lbs. I would suggest it is because the base weight of the EB is 4530 lbs while the 5.0 is 4500 lbs.

 

Trying to figure out the Ford payload specs is impossible. Look at the regular cab in Ron's post above. The last three rows.

Explain that one. The 5.0 has a higher gvwr by 350, yet payload only goes up 200 or so. In other sets the 5.0 has the same gvwr yet has way more payload vs the eco. It has been this way with Ford since I first looked at my 2012.

I think they assign payload determinations to the interns.

Sometimes the difference between payload for identical trucks with different engines and gvwr is 40 lbs. Others 20.

 

That or they have to fudge numbers to help sell the 5.0. Flame suit on.

 

EcoBoosts ore for girly-men!!

 

Fixed it for you.

 

I *think* the question comes down to why there is such a range of GVWR for different configurations, because payload is just GVWR minus curb weight, and the changes in curb weights with different engines and body styles seems pretty reasonable.

So why is the GVWR of the Reg Cab 4x2 3.5V6 Ti-VCT only 6100# and the GVWR with the 3.5L EcoB 7050# ?? (Ignoring the HD Payload numbers). That's a big 950# difference.

Or in the 4x4 example, why does the 5L get 6400# and the others only 6050# GVWR?

Is it just the HP difference of the engines or is Ford changing the suspension and other stuff? I don't think the truck's GVWR can be just made up by the marketing department. Don't really know how it is determined, but I do know Ford is can tune the suspension differently with different springs and shocks. Maybe marketing tells engineering they need a certain GVWR, and they "make it so" with suspension changes and such.

 

Can't say I understand how Ford does their payload calculations
I have a 6 passenger truck w/payload of 1,250 lbs
So If I have 6 passengers that weigh just over 200 lbs each I can't carry anything else ??
Or tow a trailer no matter how light ?
Right.........