Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand...

   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #21  
Not me...I don't look at Chevy trucks:laughing:


I have wondered why so many 4x4 pickups I see that have been "lifted" by their owners are higher in the FRONT. Just doesn't look right....like they always have 3 tons in the bed.

I agree. I hate this. This seems especially true on the GMs. People put "leveling" kits on them and then the front looks high. I think it looks like crap.

I have a '99 1500 ECSB 4x4 Silverado. It has always had a little rake to it with the back being high - but not much. Now that I've put the springs off a 2500HD on the back of it it probably has 3" of rake. Still doesn't look bad unloaded, but doesn't really matter any way. The only time it is ever out of the garage it is hooked to a trailer. Seriously, I bet we only put 4000 miles on it last year and I bet 3500 of them were pulling a trailer.
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #22  
I like the rake on the GMs. But the 2011 HDs are even more pronounced. And they have a very stiff ride in my opinion. Guess I'm getting soft. My father bought a 2011 back in November, and I think its an awesome truck, but you do need at least 1000 lbs in it, or a kidney belt.

The only 4x4 trucks that I see that have a steep rake is the GM HDs and F350 SRW. The F250, most half tons, and the Dodges sit pretty close to level. Actually most F250's I see seem to be dragging their tail. It looks like they sit dead level from the factory and age/loading cause them to sag in a few years. The F350s have those little lift
blocks that makes them look much better.
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #23  
Around 10 years ago some of the older farmers around here switched to GM because they could climb in easier with the lower front ends. It seems like the 2011 3/4 tons that have the larger wheel package sit higher than my '08 with the factory 245 tires.
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #24  
There are actually several reasons for this, based on performance issues. The principle reason is for the desire to have "level frame" when at a rated load. This keeps your load in the bed if the tailgate is open (which is common for 'builder loads' (ie lumber, shingles, long stuff, etc). Another reason is to have a soft initial ride rate for when you are empty. That includes partial fuel load. The springs are nonlinear in the rear: the more you load it, the spring RATE (lbs/in or N/mm) increases. Steel springs soften with use (yes they do) so the goal is to have a normal operating spring height when there is 20 - 40k miles on it.

Lastly, there is the SEMA effect (Specialty Equipment Manufacturers Association). They demand there be provisions and dimensions for aftermarket parts. This include oversized wheels and tires, camper boxes, light bars, snow plows, running boards, exhaust stacks, trailer hitches, etc. There are those owners who desire putting on the lift kits with Big Mudder Boggy Woggy Oscar Meijer tires with reverse wheels. They HAVE to fit into the wheelhouse without unfriendly tire contact by court order. A few years ago, I remember GM was sued by SEMA because it wanted to modify the 'standard' pickup box dimensions to accomodate larger loads and lumber sizes. Oh, NO claimed SEMA, that would put hundreds of cheezy camper box makers into bankrupcy because they would have to retool all their cardboard campers. GM lost the suit and now all the SEMA aftermarket crap has to be accomodated by the domestics. There were no Toyota or Nissan or Honda fullsized trucks at the time so they got off. BTW: were you all aware that Toyota approached GM to provide V8 motors for Tundra trucks? That's because they wanted to avoid having to pay for development and tooling for a truck motor. GM said NO and the now famous Toyota cast graphite iron V8 appeared. NASCAR fans ought to be able to tell you the advantage of a cast graphite motor over a conventional iron block. (No it's not pure graphite, its an expensive high carbon content iron, with huge cooling advantages when they drop the green flag). Not the greatest for longevity, though (just ask Kyle Busch, Denny Hamlin or Joey Logano).

Regardless of what you may think, the largest fraction of the GM pickup truck market is actually geared to the home construction segment of the economy. When pickups start selling again, that means housing starts are increasing. Don't ask how I know...
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #25  
I like the rake on the GMs. But the 2011 HDs are even more pronounced. And they have a very stiff ride in my opinion. Guess I'm getting soft. My father bought a 2011 back in November, and I think its an awesome truck, but you do need at least 1000 lbs in it, or a kidney belt.

The only 4x4 trucks that I see that have a steep rake is the GM HDs and F350 SRW. The F250, most half tons, and the Dodges sit pretty close to level. Actually most F250's I see seem to be dragging their tail. It looks like they sit dead level from the factory and age/loading cause them to sag in a few years. The F350s have those little lift
blocks that makes them look much better.

My F-350 SRW does not have any rake to speak of and I keep hearing you guys talking about the lift blocks. I have had 2 F-350 SRW trucks and neither had blocks. Axle strait to the spring pack. Both 4x4 diesel. One was a regular cab and the current one is a extended cab with the highest GVWR package (11,500#) and 18" wheels.

Chris
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #26  
There are actually several reasons for this, based on performance issues. The principle reason is for the desire to have "level frame" when at a rated load. This keeps your load in the bed if the tailgate is open (which is common for 'builder loads' (ie lumber, shingles, long stuff, etc). Another reason is to have a soft initial ride rate for when you are empty. That includes partial fuel load. The springs are nonlinear in the rear: the more you load it, the spring RATE (lbs/in or N/mm) increases. Steel springs soften with use (yes they do) so the goal is to have a normal operating spring height when there is 20 - 40k miles on it.

That right there pretty much sums up what I have always been told.

And I will throw out that it isnt just the new 3/4ton and 1 ton trucks either.

Remember the chevys of the late 80's and early 90's. Especially the 2wd versions. They had some SERIOUS rake to them.

And even the dodges of 2003-2005 in the 1/2 ton versions. They had some pretty good rake to tehm as well, allthough nothing like the older chevys. My wife had a 2003 dodge 1500 4x4. My parents had a 2005 dodge 2500 4x4. With the two trucks parked side by side, the rears were the same height, but the front of out 1/2 ton was a good 2-1/2" lower. Cranking up the torsion bars made it level. And with the two trucks side by side, there was no difference at all front or rear.

And dont forget about the rake that developed on the late 80's and early 90's F-150's with the twin i-beams in the front. When the springs started to wear out, it wasn't just the rake that made it ugly, but the serious camber in the front as well:confused2:
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #27  
And dont forget about the rake that developed on the late 80's and early 90's F-150's with the twin i-beams in the front. When the springs started to wear out, it wasn't just the rake that made it ugly, but the serious camber in the front as well:confused2:

I hated them trucks. It was a strong design but just did not work. I can not tell you how many of these old trucks now with solid axles under them. What a stupid design. I would rate this worse then the GM torsion bar front end.

Chris
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #28  
My F-350 SRW does not have any rake to speak of and I keep hearing you guys talking about the lift blocks. I have had 2 F-350 SRW trucks and neither had blocks. Axle strait to the spring pack. Both 4x4 diesel. One was a regular cab and the current one is a extended cab with the highest GVWR package (11,500#) and 18" wheels.

I wonder if its the high GVWR that you have on those trucks? Every one I've seen in the dealer lots have the lift block (looks to be about 1.5-2" tall) and the exact same spring packs as the F250s on the lot. Maybe to get the GVWR above 11,000, the springs are larger packs like the duallys? Would explain why your 350 hauls better than your 250. And like I said before, the Supers around here have the exact same spring pack (by number of and thickness of leaves).
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #29  
I wonder if its the high GVWR that you have on those trucks? Every one I've seen in the dealer lots have the lift block (looks to be about 1.5-2" tall) and the exact same spring packs as the F250s on the lot. Maybe to get the GVWR above 11,000, the springs are larger packs like the duallys? Would explain why your 350 hauls better than your 250. And like I said before, the Supers around here have the exact same spring pack (by number of and thickness of leaves).

If I recall right my 04 F-250 with 10,000# GVWR has 2 less springs in the rear pack that my 06 F-350 with 11,500# GVWR has.

I make sure I order all my trucks the way I want. Highest GVWR package is first on my want list.

Chris
 
   / Ford vs Chevy - No, it's not about your favorite brand... #30  
would rate this worse then the GM torsion bar front end.

What's wrong with Torsion bars?

Seem to work well on some pretty heavy stuff.:D
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

Quick Attach 6' Snow Blade (A50515)
Quick Attach 6'...
Agco 8200 Flex Grain Platform (A50514)
Agco 8200 Flex...
Ford 641 Workmaster (A50514)
Ford 641...
2015 DODGE RAM 1500 CREW CAB TRUCK (A51406)
2015 DODGE RAM...
FORD COBRA REPLICA RACING CAR (A51222)
FORD COBRA REPLICA...
2016 JLG 3248RS 32ft Electric Scissor Lift (A50322)
2016 JLG 3248RS...
 
Top