Chevy vs F350 payload -- any increase for SRW 3500?

[cody47]

I am looking for a larger fifth wheel and want more payload than my 2002 Chevy 2500HD offers. The 2005 F350 has the capacity, but I have really liked my Chevy and would like to get another -- but do not want the dually option as I drive the truck daily when not towing. The single wheel 3500 does not offer any real improvement over my 2500HD.

Any word on if Chevy is going to come out with an answer to the F 350 in the near future?

Many thanks!

[More Power]

The 3500 series single-rear-wheel one-ton pickup truck is rated at 9,900-lb GVW. This is an increase of 700-lbs above the 2500HD's GVW of 9,200-lbs, but is 500-lbs below the dual rear wheel 3500's 11,400-lb GVW.

MP

[6 2 Carl]

Any word on if Chevy is going to come out with an answer to the F 350 in the near future?
[/QB]Unfortunately I am sure it will be at least a few years before GM decides to answer to Ford. Gm really can

[DmaxMaverick]

but it sure would be nice if GM did something first and let Ford play catch up for a change. I think you got the corps before the hearse with that statement.

GM IS slow to respond to oneupmanship. True. However, they started it when it comes to light trucks. Read the timeline.

1978--GM introduces the Diesel cars and pickups(all pickup ratings, not just HD types).

Ford follows many years later, then ups the power, N/A, with the 6.9 N/A.

GM ups the N/A power. Ford follows the next year.

GM introduces the 6.5 N/A. Ford doesn't follow with much, and falls short on power for a year or two, then matches the power with a much larger, and more troublesome (at first), less economical engine (7.3)

1992--GM introduces the 6.5TD. More power.

1994--Ford can't follow with power N/A, so introduces the 7.3 IDI. Still just up to the 6.5, only uses much more fuel for less power.

1994.5--Ford introduces the Powerstroke (G-1). More power (but not much), more noise, less economy.

2001--GM introduces the Duramax. Over the top. The REAL power wars begin, and brings us up to date.

Ford has yet to include a reliable auto tranny. Anything after the C-6 are disposable in most cases.
Suspension has always been poor (except for the SFA that some like). Ford has always had less economy with larger displacement. Most of the rest of Ford's shortcomings are preference related stuff. We could also argue the shortcomings of GM's equipment, but that's not where I'm going with this.

Don't hold me to the exact dates of things, but the scope is correct.

GM falls well short when it comes to the "timely" end of the race. I think they have more bean counters than beans to count, and waste dollars saving nickels. Just poor management, IMO. Good products, just later than they should be, or in some cases, too soon.

[6 2 Carl]

I agree that overall GM makes a nice truck, but they are really hurting themselves in the details. Most of the things that I listed in my post can/could have been easily rectified, but instead GM forces the customer to make compromises, instead of catering to each individual customer.

When I was shopping for a truck last spring, I would have like to have gotten a GM, but they couldn