Ram Ups GVWR on 2500 CTD to 11,040 lbs

[H3LZSN1P3R]

I thought I had read that the SO was the cummins with the 68rfe (or whatever it's designated as now) versus the HO being a cummins with an Aisin?

That was correct up until 2025 now its all the same engine with the ZF powerline.

 

[Diputs]

Here in Texas I am able to register my 5500's at below their 19,500 lbs GVWR...

You can register below the max. But you know people won't realize it and pay an extra $145 per year for the 39 extra pounds.

 

[Jcschaff]

I bought my 2025 2500 in June 2025 and was built in March. I wish I knew about this then and would have waited to find a truck built after May 2025.
Anyone else in the same situation and wondering if there an any options to get recertified since nothing actually changed from March to May 2025?

 

[CumminsContender]

I still remember the day I put 2 pallets of 80Lb mortar bags on the bed with my tailgate open on my 2020. Easily 6k lbs. Drove about 20 miles like that. Did squat, but it worked and I got the job done.

 

[BlueOx2500]

Regarding the "coils are too weak arguemnt"...what about the facotry air 2500? Were / are the air bags too weak? No of course not.

I think you're missing the tree (the rear axle tree) for the forest. "Too weak for what" is the question.

We always knew the diesel 2500's payload rating was artificially low due to the curb weight, which is largely carried on the front axle and counts against the 10k administrative gross rating. We've known this for >25 years of HD diesel pickups from three different manufacturers. We also always knew the back half was strong enough to carry 6k, based on the factory rating.

The rear axle was always rated at 6k-ish. Nobody ever said the coil springs were too weak/soft to carry 6k. That's what they're rated for. This actually proves that Ram's opinion of the rear suspension hasn't changed in 12 years. 6000-6500 RAWR in 2014. 6000-6390 in 2020. Same in 2024. Same now. No change.

What you miss is that although the 2500 front plus rear sum was 12,040 (or even more), the truck was never tested (braking, stability, crash) at that weight, or against any different requirements for class 3 vs class 2. So it was never about the axle rating (weak coil springs) but about the gross rating. It was gross rated, tested, and certified at 10k. The truck wouldn't have been tested at 12k even if the combined axle rating was such. That said, it was low hanging fruit because the 3500 SRW with minor hardware differences was tested up the 12,400.

My 3500 is rated 6k front, 7k rear, 12,400 gross. We've never thought the rear was "too weak" for 7k just because 12,400 < 13,000.

Don't get me wrong, the updated GVWR is a good thing and if I was buying a new truck, I'd buy a 2500 6.7 megacab rambox with 11k rating and then add airbags to more comfortably roll at ~6k +/- rear axle weight.

Why not just get the 2500 with the factory air suspension?

 

[BlueOx2500]

I have to disagree with your premise that "Nobody ever said the coil springs were too weak/soft to carry 6k."

While knowledgeable people like you and I might understand the GAWR and GVWR specifics, the widespread, simplified argument among truck enthusiasts has always been that "Ram uses coils, so it can't haul as much" or "coils are weaker than leafs." That is the specific myth we are addressing.

You are correct that the rear axle's rating itself hasn't changed. But that fact doesn't diminish my point; it strengthens it. The consistency of the ~6,000 lb rear axle rating proves that Ram has been confident in that coil spring system all along.

The recent GVWR increase isn't "no change." It's Ram publicly acknowledging that the overall package, supported by that very same coil suspension, is far more capable than the old 10k sticker let on.

I agree many have made the argument that it was the coils limiting the GVWR to 10k. What do / did these folks say about the factory air suspension then?

People also say it's the whole picture of braking handling etc and no doubt that is an issue at some point, but 10k total weight was not that point. And this backs that up. It's an administrative derate.

And now that it has been administratively increased to nearly what a 3500 SRW is, if I were to get a new truck today I'd just stay with the 2500 factory air suspension since you gain very little by buying the 3500 SRW and you don't get an air suspension that will lower the bed with a 3500.

 

[johnmyster]

Regarding the "coils are too weak arguemnt"...what about the facotry air 2500? Were / are the air bags too weak? No of course not.

Why not just get the 2500 with the factory air suspension?

Too weak for what? The RAWR has not increased. Only the GVWR.

Because the rear air 2500 is a ride quality and suspension travel compromise. To each their own.

 

[Highcountry]

Does anyone else think that manufacturers hold back on ratings so they can publish new improved numbers over time with out actually having to change anything? It would seem like a prudent business move since we are always expecting newer to be stronger, faster etc.

 

[RebelForge]

Does anyone else think that manufacturers hold back on ratings so they can publish new improved numbers over time with out actually having to change anything? It would seem like a prudent business move since we are always expecting newer to be stronger, faster etc.

Well, it did work for me, as the increase put the Rebel payload just about in line with the Ford Tremor F-250.