What's new
By:
Ram Heavy Duty Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

GVWR Limitations on PW

T

tuckjack

Active Member
Messages
132
Reaction score
154
Points
43
Location
Louisville, CO
I have a few questions regarding the factors that contribute to the lower GVWR. The primary factor referenced is typically the softer springs. However, it seems there are multiple items that contribute and I wanted to see if I’m understanding clearly. So the following contribute to lower GVWR, yes?
  1. Springs - these are softer
  2. Tires - they have a lower load rating than other 2500 models (D vs. E)
  3. Articulink - the addition of the link and bushings to the radius arms in front
When looking at GAWR, the front axle rating on a PW is lower than a non-PW, but the rear GAWR is actually higher. Is the lower GAWR on the front more a reflection of springs or weakness in articulink? is the articulink a direct swap with fixed radius arms or are the mounting points different such that you alter the geometry? Not saying you would want to, just trying to understand the mechanics.

Thanks.
 
The suspension plays the biggest role in the GVWR of the PW. In the front both the articulink suspension and electronically disconnecting sway bar lead to the lower axle rating.

You can improve the load performance through upgrades in tires and springs and by adding airbags and while you could technically carry more load and tow more through those improvements you would still be over the stated GVWR of the vehicle.

The frame and axles are pretty much the same as regular 2500s

Power Wagon's are made for this out of the box:
8007a97add558e4cda822d9c765c517c.jpg


Even if you buy a regular 2500 and add the suspension that would let you do the same thing as a PW you likely would end up with the same GVWR even though the sticker on the truck lists more.

It comes down to what you want to use the truck for.

I personally use it to go anywhere I want on and off road and tow my 27ft Airstream that has a GVWR of around 7500#

I would feel comfortable towing more with it but not a fifth wheel.

I have seen PWs built for overlanding with slide in campers that have significantly improved their suspension with no issues.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
e912f853444561c88fa59fd197a39c34.jpg
 
Last edited:
I can’t say for sure, but I think the articulink control arms play the largest factor in the reduced gvwr. As noted above, the front axle gwr is far less than on a regular 2500; softer springs would reduce the gawr’s more equally, i would think. Especially since the rear suspension on a (regular) truck is designed to carry more weight over the rest axle when loaded, so I would expect the Ram engineers needed to “soften” the spring rates in the rear more than the front for desirable offroad performance.

idk, I’m not on the ram engineering team so I can’t say anything for sure.
 
btsbarton said:
I can’t say for sure, but I think the articulink control arms play the largest factor in the reduced gvwr.
Click to expand...
As a non-engineer, this is my impression as well, given that the rear end has softer springs too, but no decrease in GAWR.
pdavey said:
In the front both the articulink suspension and electronically disconnecting sway bar lead to the lower axle rating.
Click to expand...
Good call out on the swaybar.

Again, I'm not saying to do this, I'm just working on understanding the mechanics. It seems that if you had a Power Wagon and replaced the disconnecting swaybar with the factory Hemi one, replaced the articulink with solid, fixed radius arms, and replaced the springs with standard Hemi 2500 springs then you'd have a standard 2500 with locking differentials and a winch. Yes? (You'd still have a low GVWR sticker, but mechanically, you'd have a standard 2500 capability.). Or is there something else?
 
trucklanta said:
As a non-engineer, this is my impression as well, given that the rear end has softer springs too, but no decrease in GAWR.

Good call out on the swaybar.

Again, I'm not saying to do this, I'm just working on understanding the mechanics. It seems that if you had a Power Wagon and replaced the disconnecting swaybar with the factory Hemi one, replaced the articulink with solid, fixed radius arms, and replaced the springs with standard Hemi 2500 springs then you'd have a standard 2500 with locking differentials and a winch. Yes? (You'd still have a low GVWR sticker, but mechanically, you'd have a standard 2500 capability.). Or is there something else?
Click to expand...
I believe that is a good assumption. The actual GVWR would be higher but the sticker on the door would be lower.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 
I'm hearing rumors out of insiders from Detroit that Ram is working on a HD model to compete with the Ford Super Duty Tremor. Reason being is that Tremor has virtually all of Power Wagon's off-road capability, but doesn't lose the engine options or payload or towing capacity to do it and Ram is losing PW sales.

Obviously I can't confirm that rumor. But it sure is interesting!
 
I saw a head to head test of the PW, Tremor, and GMs entry on youtube.
PW had the more comfortable ride and beat the others on everything but gas mileage. But the other 2 were diesel powered.
 
Crusty old shellback said:
I saw a head to head test of the PW, Tremor, and GMs entry on youtube.
PW had the more comfortable ride and beat the others on everything but gas mileage. But the other 2 were diesel powered.
Click to expand...
Yeah...i do not think RAM is concerned much with the Tremor.

Have you seen how many 75th Anniversary PW they have sold...almost as much as the Whole Powerwagon team including the Tradesman Package did last year.

Put the Powerwagon and the Tremor Diesel in the Mud...

There is a reason the Tremor only gets a limited slip front
 
WXman said:
I'm hearing rumors out of insiders from Detroit that Ram is working on a HD model to compete with the Ford Super Duty Tremor. Reason being is that Tremor has virtually all of Power Wagon's off-road capability, but doesn't lose the engine options or payload or towing capacity to do it and Ram is losing PW sales.

Obviously I can't confirm that rumor. But it sure is interesting!
Click to expand...
The only reason payload suffers is the axle rating and the softer springs
 
I'm not engineer, but it seems like it would be pretty easy to put the locking axles, the winch, and the standard springs on any trim level, skip the articulink and disconnecting sway bar and you have an instant Tremor competitor without losing payload or towing from a standard 2500. Anyone buying that package isn't looking for max articulation. I'd be interested. Since it doesn't exist, I'll be getting a Power Wagon.
 
DevilDodge said:
Yeah...i do not think RAM is concerned much with the Tremor.

Have you seen how many 75th Anniversary PW they have sold...almost as much as the Whole Powerwagon team including the Tradesman Package did last year.

Put the Powerwagon and the Tremor Diesel in the Mud...

There is a reason the Tremor only gets a limited slip front
Click to expand...

Maybe it's regional. I'm about 5 hours from Detroit and no exaggeration, I see more Tremors on the road than Power Wagons by at least a 10:1 margin. Maybe more than that. It's RARE to ever see a PW.
 
I agree, i live in Colorado also, see tons of PowerWagons, but not Tremors. The Tremor is a half hearted attempt at a Powerwagon, no front locker, just a LS, not Swaybar discconnect and the winch you actually have to order, its not standard
 
WXman said:
Maybe it's regional. I'm about 5 hours from Detroit and no exaggeration, I see more Tremors on the road than Power Wagons by at least a 10:1 margin. Maybe more than that. It's RARE to ever see a PW.
Click to expand...
Must be regional. You need to move
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top