Jump to content

Why does anyone still make a 3/4 ton when you can get a 1 ton SRW with a gas motor?

UltimateToolReviews
 Share

Recommended Posts

UltimateToolReviews Enthusiast

UltimateToolReviews

Posted
Posted

Silly question, but my mechanic made this joke, what's the point of a 3/4 ton when you can option a 1 ton into basically exactly the same truck? Why still make 2500s? Just curious

  • Like 1
  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

rjgvt
rjgvt

I bought an 2500 AT4HD gasser even though I didn't need one. I didn't like some of the features on the new GMC 1500's and definitely didn't need a 3500 SRW. The 2500HD was a good choice for me. If the

Epsilon Plus
Epsilon Plus

Certain states still have weird parking laws and commercial registration costs for things with a GVWR higher than 10,000lb.   In the Ram world, the 2500 is on coils in the rear and the 3500

UltimateToolReviews
UltimateToolReviews

I feel like your the only answer here that is actually answering the question. Everyone else is lost, lol.

Posted Images

PBNB Enthusiast

PBNB

Posted
Posted

When we were looking for a truck to replace the crappy Tundra, we looked at 3/4 tons and the selection was very limited. The ones we saw were more like work trucks with cloth and minimal accessories.  We looked at Ram and GM mainly because of the big diesel offerings. The Ram dealership was too shady to deal with (bait and switch).

 

The 1 ton came with more options and was full of features that we couldn't find elsewhere.

AndrewF Enthusiast

AndrewF

Posted
Posted

Marginally better ride on the 2500s due to the 2nd stage being farther away from the main leaf pack vs the 3500s. But otherwise a legitimate question, there used to be a lot more differences between 1500/2500/3500 style trucks but since now the 2500s/3500s share the same frame and most everything else they’re pretty much the same truck.

Epsilon Plus Enthusiast

Epsilon Plus

Posted
Posted

Certain states still have weird parking laws and commercial registration costs for things with a GVWR higher than 10,000lb.

 

In the Ram world, the 2500 is on coils in the rear and the 3500 is on leafs, so there is ride quality implications.

  • Like 2
rjgvt Enthusiast

rjgvt

Posted
Posted

I bought an 2500 AT4HD gasser even though I didn't need one. I didn't like some of the features on the new GMC 1500's and definitely didn't need a 3500 SRW. The 2500HD was a good choice for me. If the choice was a 1500 or a 3500, I would have got the 1500 and would have hated some of the features.

 

In case you are wondering, I don't like the electronic console shifter, start/stop and cylinder deactivation. I never drove a 1500 with the console shifter but always like a column shifter. My last 1500 had a column shifter and cylinder deactivation, but did not have start/stop. My AT4HD is my first truck with push button start. I think some of the 1500 lower trims still had a column shift. Either way, free country and I can spend my money as I see fit! 😀

  • Like 3
chwilliams Enthusiast

chwilliams

Posted
Posted
On 7/26/2025 at 1:11 PM, rjgvt said:

I bought an 2500 AT4HD gasser even though I didn't need one. I didn't like some of the features on the new GMC 1500's and definitely didn't need a 3500 SRW. The 2500HD was a good choice for me. If the choice was a 1500 or a 3500, I would have got the 1500 and would have hated some of the features.

 

In case you are wondering, I don't like the electronic console shifter, start/stop and cylinder deactivation. I never drove a 1500 with the console shifter but always like a column shifter. My last 1500 had a column shifter and cylinder deactivation, but did not have start/stop. My AT4HD is my first truck with push button start. I think some of the 1500 lower trims still had a column shift. Either way, free country and I can spend my money as I see fit! 😀

 

The lack of a column shifter in the 1500 put me over the fence to the 2500.

 

Also, I don't like the squarish tile pipes.

  • Like 1
ledmircy New Member

ledmircy

Posted
Posted

They both have their place, I think.

 

3/4 ton is perfect for showing off and daily driving.

 

1 ton’s for when there’s real work to do.

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

I used 3/4 and one tons for work. I didn’t feel any difference between the two with my equipment in back or for the short periods empty. I switched to one tons for the dual wheels. When I quit hauling my own equipment I couldn’t get into a half ton quick enough. Now approaching 70 Im tickled to be in a small truck. I recently drove my brothers fully loaded Ford diesel one ton single wheel lariat. Loaded with a 100 gallon tank, tool box and an air compressor generator. Very nice truck. I guess you get used to them. No way I’d drive them if I didn’t need to work them. 

UltimateToolReviews Enthusiast

UltimateToolReviews

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 7/26/2025 at 12:36 PM, AndrewF said:

Marginally better ride on the 2500s due to the 2nd stage being farther away from the main leaf pack vs the 3500s. But otherwise a legitimate question, there used to be a lot more differences between 1500/2500/3500 style trucks but since now the 2500s/3500s share the same frame and most everything else they’re pretty much the same truck.

I feel like your the only answer here that is actually answering the question. Everyone else is lost, lol.

  • Like 2
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
On 7/26/2025 at 10:47 AM, UltimateToolReviews said:

Silly question, but my mechanic made this joke, what's the point of a 3/4 ton when you can option a 1 ton into basically exactly the same truck? Why still make 2500s? Just curious

 

 

GVWR, GVWR and GVWR.  You can order a 2500HD de-rated to 10,000 GVWR for DOT purposes.  Can't order a de-rated 3500HD.  

 

On 7/26/2025 at 12:36 PM, AndrewF said:

Marginally better ride on the 2500s due to the 2nd stage being farther away from the main leaf pack vs the 3500s. But otherwise a legitimate question, there used to be a lot more differences between 1500/2500/3500 style trucks but since now the 2500s/3500s share the same frame and most everything else they’re pretty much the same truck.

 

 

2020-current HD does have some frame differences in the rear half.  Extra crossmember or two that the 2500 does not get UNLESS you order a 2500HD with the NHT max trailer which gets you the 3500HD frame and 12" axle.  

  • Like 2
AndrewF Enthusiast

AndrewF

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, newdude said:

 

 

GVWR, GVWR and GVWR.  You can order a 2500HD de-rated to 10,000 GVWR for DOT purposes.  Can't order a de-rated 3500HD.  

 

 

 

2020-current HD does have some frame differences in the rear half.  Extra crossmember or two that the 2500 does not get UNLESS you order a 2500HD with the NHT max trailer which gets you the 3500HD frame and 12" axle.  

Ah for some reason I thought they were the same frames other than the perches for the extra springs.  Makes sense being different though, I'm assuming the dually frame has even more differences.

Chuck FB Enthusiast

Chuck FB

Posted
Posted
On 7/26/2025 at 2:11 PM, rjgvt said:

I bought an 2500 AT4HD gasser even though I didn't need one. I didn't like some of the features on the new GMC 1500's and definitely didn't need a 3500 SRW. The 2500HD was a good choice for me. If the choice was a 1500 or a 3500, I would have got the 1500 and would have hated some of the features.

 

In case you are wondering, I don't like the electronic console shifter, start/stop and cylinder deactivation. I never drove a 1500 with the console shifter but always like a column shifter. My last 1500 had a column shifter and cylinder deactivation, but did not have start/stop. My AT4HD is my first truck with push button start. I think some of the 1500 lower trims still had a column shift. Either way, free country and I can spend my money as I see fit! 😀

Some of the items you list off are also reasons why I debated between a half ton and an HD, I did not want stop/start ( yes with some gimmick it could be turned off ) and I certainly was not wanting the the cylinder deactivation due to its potential of failing and they certainly can fail. I also wanted a reasonably low ( numerically higher ) diff gearing and the two speed transfer case and GM has cluster fd up that so bad with most models not being able to have a two speed transfer case AND the max tow package with the lower diff ratio. The half tons are rather sad at carrying a load which of course also means they ride better because of it, can't have it both ways unfortunately. Console shifter I would not have minded but the electronics is just one more potential problem I saw it as. Also the half tons theme unless its a trail boss etc is low to the ground and I like being able to fit under the truck to service it without having to jack it up for every little thing. My insurance rate is actually somewhat lower on a one ton than either a half or 3/4. Will I use the one ton in the future for what it was designed, perhaps as in towing a trailer, maybe even some farm equipment, and possibly a slide in camper although the short box is a limitation there ( by rights a long box dually for the campers I prefer is the correct truck for that theme ). I like sitting up decently in traffic and the newer HD trucks certainly check that box vs feeling like driving a car. 

 

The downside is my truck is a bit longer than its half ton twin but I have slightly more box length. The ride certainly isn't there but with my running low pressures I am finding it an acceptable compromise. The fuel mileage, well that certainly isn't of any benefit with the gas engine HD anyway. Never the less so far I am not regretting my decision to have gone with an HD truck and it opens up options of things the truck is capable of that a half ton just was never made for and yet I see some trying to do with a half ton because that is what they own.

  • Like 1
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Chuck FB said:

Some of the items you list off are also reasons why I debated between a half ton and an HD, I did not want stop/start ( yes with some gimmick it could be turned off ) and I certainly was not wanting the the cylinder deactivation due to its potential of failing and they certainly can fail. I also wanted a reasonably low ( numerically higher ) diff gearing and the two speed transfer case and GM has cluster fd up that so bad with most models not being able to have a two speed transfer case AND the max tow package with the lower diff ratio. The half tons are rather sad at carrying a load which of course also means they ride better because of it, can't have it both ways unfortunately. Console shifter I would not have minded but the electronics is just one more potential problem I saw it as.  Will I use the one ton in the future for what it was designed, perhaps as in towing a trailer, maybe even some farm equipment, and possibly a slide in camper although the short box is a limitation there

 

 

What's funny is, you could have had all of that in a 1500 High Country.  1500 HC comes with the 2 speed transfer case no matter what.  You can option in NHT Max Trailer, and as far as engine goes, 5.3 and 6.2 and if you paired it with the Range DFM Module would have disabled DFM, and the 3.0 Duramax would have no cylinder decativation at all.  Stop/start?  There's a button on the dash for that.  

  • Like 1
Chuck FB Enthusiast

Chuck FB

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, newdude said:

 

 

What's funny is, you could have had all of that in a 1500 High Country.  1500 HC comes with the 2 speed transfer case no matter what.  You can option in NHT Max Trailer, and as far as engine goes, 5.3 and 6.2 and if you paired it with the Range DFM Module would have disabled DFM, and the 3.0 Duramax would have no cylinder decativation at all.  Stop/start?  There's a button on the dash for that.  

Don't take any of my comments as negative in regards to your comment, its only my experiences as well as other engine failures of those I know personally that steered me in the direction I chose for my current truck. 

 

You may be right as far as the two speed, however the GM website does not show the two can be mated up with anything other than the 6.2 if both max tow and two speed are desired. Also when I talked to the salesman who has been in the business for years and is the commercial sales manager, he was saying the same thing but he may have been wrong as well. The button on the dash, yes that one that always has to be remembered every time one starts the engine at every store and business, I have heard my brother curse his Jeep Rubicon so many times because of that stop/start and I knew I would have had to find a way to defeat it. But speaking of the DFM, I have heard of them piling up even with a module being used, I really didn't want that potential issue being in the engine at all and yes that left me with the 3.0 choice and I certainly thought about it but with our winters the emissions issues of diesels really rear their head then as far as DEF for sure and a diesel engine period for starting when forced to without the ability to plug in a block heater, -40 weather and colder ( and does not have to even be that cold ) and its a real struggle with diesels. I would have bought a 6.6 Duramax as that was actually my first choice in a truck but again the cold weather we struggle with and the emissions issues that are very real, I just felt it would make life easier to go gas and not deal with gelled fuel issues, and emissions failures. I've had past experiences with older technology diesel vehicles ( and plenty of equipment ) and granted they never were made to start as well as the newer ones but I did not like how the block heater was literally my umbilical cord life line to using the vehicle and add in two diesel vehicle engine failures or one on its way out and the other a true engine failure and both vehicles in question were basically sold at give away prices, that is hard to erase out of ones mind. 

 

There is one other factor around here that gets the check mark for a larger/taller truck and that is the very real fact of life of hitting wild life, not that driving an HD truck means survival either but being bigger helps

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Chuck FB said:

Don't take any of my comments as negative in regards to your comment, its only my experiences as well as other engine failures of those I know personally that steered me in the direction I chose for my current truck. 

 

You may be right as far as the two speed, however the GM website does not show the two can be mated up with anything other than the 6.2 if both max tow and two speed are desired. Also when I talked to the salesman who has been in the business for years and is the commercial sales manager, he was saying the same thing but he may have been wrong as well.

 

There is one other factor around here that gets the check mark for a larger/taller truck and that is the very real fact of life of hitting wild life, not that driving an HD truck means survival either but being bigger helps

 

 

 

6.2 and 3.0 Duramax in a High Country come with the 2 speed case no matter what, and can both be combined with NHT max trailer.  This is achievable right in the build and price on chevy.com.  

 

Was just looking to add some facts/details to this for others reading who may be thinking of NHT vs HD if they'd rather steer towards the NHT setup and don't need the HD capability.  

 

As for the "vehicle surviving wildlife", once you've spent time at a body shop you realize it doesn't really matter.  They are all designed to crumple.  

 

Edited by newdude
  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      I hope to high heaven this is wrong. My Chevy farm trucks frame is lasting way longer than a newer Nissan Titan XD I got for a steal, and it only pulls trailers. A decade younger and it's frame is already way rustier than the waxed Chevy I drive across longs and ditches. Also, hasn't Ford been having tones of troubles with rusted frames? 
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      Batteries don’t always show signs of a few years ago my vehicle started fine in the morning and took me to work. After work the battery was completely dead and I needed a jump. No, I didn’t leave anything on and the battery was only a couple months old. It was replaced under warranty. 
    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • NDKoze
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By NDKoze · Posted

      If his battery was that bad I would think it would have been showing signs before this that were ignored. Stinks that it happened the way it did in rush hour traffic, but this seems like a pretty fringe scenario. I don't mind it that bad and never turn it off. The only slight annoyance for me is the slight delay between brake to gas, but I have gotten used to it and figure if it can save a little gas why not.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a good correction. I think “severity” was probably the wrong word for what I meant. What I really mean is closer to event priority, relevance, and actionability — not “this code is severe” or “replace this part.” I agree that a truck can have a lot of trivial or historical communication codes, and if the product starts pushing alerts for every stored or low-value event, people will ignore it very quickly. So the alert logic would need to be filtered. For example, I would not want a random old communication code to generate a push notification by itself. A useful alert would probably need to be based on things like: - new vs historical - active vs stored - repeated vs one-time - duration of the event - whether it happened near the driver-marked symptom - whether it happened together with voltage drop, reset, bus-off, misfire, oil-pressure change, etc. - whether the same pattern repeats under similar conditions So instead of saying “severity,” maybe the product should organize events by affected system and priority. For example: Misfire event: Show misfire counts / roughness first, then fuel trims, RPM/load, DFM/AFM state if available, coolant/oil temp, voltage, and related DTCs. Oil-pressure event: Show oil pressure first, but only in context — RPM, load, oil temperature, coolant temperature, DFM/AFM state if available, voltage, and baseline comparison. Communication event: Show which module/network/message dropped, whether voltage dropped, whether the recorder reset, whether it was active or historical, and whether it repeated. Voltage/reset event: Show battery voltage, crank/wake/sleep state, module reset, communication dropouts, and what came back online first. That also solves the display-order problem you mentioned. The main report should not always show the same fixed list first. It should show the system that appears abnormal first, and then the supporting values for that system. I also agree that the truck already has an oil pressure gauge and MIL. The point would not be to duplicate those. The value would be in showing what else was happening before and after the warning or symptom. For example, if the MIL comes on for a misfire, the truck already told the driver there is a problem. The useful part would be: - which cylinder or bank looked abnormal first - whether it happened after an AFM/DFM transition - whether fuel trims were already moving - whether oil pressure or voltage changed at the same time - whether the same pattern happened previously without a MIL On the OBD port point, I think you may be right for a consumer-facing version. OBD is much easier for the average owner: - easier install - easier removal - inside the cabin - easier phone connection - easier data download - easier to include a pass-through port for another scanner OBD is also the right place for DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration information, Mode 6, and normal scan-tool parameters. The reason I was looking at ECM-side recording is that some events may be gone by the time someone plugs in a scanner, and some powertrain-side network evidence may not be available the same way through the DLC. But I agree that if an OBD-based version can capture enough useful evidence for most owners, that is probably the cleaner consumer product. Maybe the split is: - OBD/DLC version for most consumers - ECM-side version only if it proves it adds evidence that the OBD version cannot get - shop/pro version if deeper powertrain-side event evidence is actually useful So I would not want to force the inline approach if the OBD workflow solves most of the real-world problem. Your last point is probably the key product requirement: the report should be specific to the system showing the abnormality. Not “here are 50 parameters.” More like: “Misfire-related event detected. Here are the misfire/fuel/DFM/context values.” or “Oil-pressure-related event detected. Here is oil pressure compared with RPM/load/temp/baseline.” or “Communication event detected. Here is what dropped, when, and whether voltage/reset happened first.” That is a much better way to think about the report.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...