Modern trucks are high-tech wonders, loaded with comforts that were once inconceivable in commercial vehicles. That comes at a cost to practicality, though, and at times, it’s embarrassing. Like when you find out a 1996 Ford Falcon Ute can haul a bigger payload than a brand new 2024 Chevy Silverado 1500, for example.
Now, that’s not to call the Silverado a slouch. It’ll gladly tow up to 13,300 pounds if you spec the right engine and the Max Trailering Package. But it’s in the payload stakes that it falls behind. Most V8 models get a max payload of 2,080 pounds at best, with the four-cylinders doing a touch better at 2,260 pounds. If you’re lucky, you might find a rare regular cab with the long bed that can haul a snifter over 2,500 pounds.
For the 1996 Ford Falcon Ute, though, heavy loads are no problem. That might come as a surprise for a unibody vehicle that was ultimately based on an ancient family sedan. And yet, this simple, no-nonsense design could best the Silverado’s payload numbers, no sweat. All this from a vehicle that weighs 3,350 pounds soaking wet!
Unibody Hauler
Ford offered the 4.0-liter straight-six Ute with the popular One-Tonne spec in 1996, which, with an automatic, would gladly haul over 2555 pounds, no problem. That was all down to uprated leaf springs at the rear, along with beefed up dampers and heavy duty wheels and tires to take the extra weight. Ford also fitted a different brake proportioning valve to ensure predictable handling with heavy payloads.
Even better, the panel van configuration punched that figure up to 2580 pounds. The Outback variants posted similar numbers, even with raised suspension and a heavy bullbar fitted. Meanwhile, the basic Falcon ute still acquitted itself well. It offered a healthy 1807 pounds of payload, though the sporty XR6 variant dropped that to a more humble 1230 pounds.
Amusingly, the XH Falcon Ute wasn’t even a contemporary design in 1996. It was still based on the XD Falcon from 1979, even as the sedan and wagon models had been through seven new generations since. Ford merely threw some new front panels on, and its latest EFI six-cylinder under the hood, while making minimal changes to the rest of the vehicle.
Ford wasn’t the only one playing in this space. In fact, Holden was the one that invented the category in Australia with the famous “One Tonner” Kingswood cab chassis ute. First built in 1971, it survived until 1985, winning favor with tradies across the land for its heavy-duty build and undeniable practicality.
Holden would later try to recapture the magic with a version based on the VY Commodore in 2003. The unibody Commodore didn’t have a frame, so Holden had to find a way to graft a cab-chassis rear frame on to the back of the passenger cabin itself. It was undeniably cool, and lived up to its namesake rating with a mighty payload of over 2750 pounds. However, it proved too complicated and expensive to build for its limited sales. Production ended after just over two years and 4,482 units built. It wasn’t a great success given the $55 million Holden spent on development.
Comparison’s Sake
In fairness, a lot of this comes down to optimization. The Silverado has, by and large, enough payload to satisfy its customer base. Plus, it’s a far better tow rig than a humble Falcon ute, which could safely haul 5,000 pounds at best.
You don’t actually need a big heavy truck to carry big payloads. A simple lightweight unibody vehicle like the Falcon ute can do the job, it just needs the right supporting equipment to do so. Suspension is the main thing, as the springs need to be able to support the load. Wheels, tires, and brakes are also upgraded on models with higher payloads, and transmission coolers and low gearing are often key players, too.
As our own Jason Torchinsky has explored previously, you don’t even need much power. The tiny Mahindra Jeeto has a single-cylinder engine with just 16 horsepower. And yet, it can carry 1,543 pounds, more than some variants of the modern F-150. [Ed Note: It’s worth noting: Most U.S. manufacturers rate their U.S.-spec vehicles by guidelines established by the Society of Automotive Engineers, with SAE J2807 detailing the requirements for establishing towing capacities and Gross Combined Weight Rating. It’s not clear if the Australian Utes or Mahindra followed those guidelines. Nonetheless, these are the official ratings for these vehicles as communicated to customers, so it’s still cool to see how huge of a difference there is. Especially since so many Australians actually loaded these things up to capacity. -DT]
Indeed, for many modern trucks, you’re better off with the lighter variants if you want more payload. Going for a two-door regular cab along with two-wheel-drive and a light engine is usually the way to get the most carrying capacity, even if you’ll usually give up some towing capacity in turn. Fundamentally, extra seats, bigger engines, and more differentials all add weight that takes away from the total payload your truck is able to carry.
Just remember—next time you’re shopping for a new American truck, what you really want is an ancient Australian ute with an upgraded suspension package. You’ll be able to haul more sacks of grain, even if there’s nowhere for your kids or dog to sit. But hey, that’s the game we all play.
Image credits: Ford, Holden, Mahindra, Chevrolet
This seems surprising until you realize there’s a whole new class of truck. I heard an advertisement for one of them. They’re called Large Light Duty Trucks. It’s basically them admitting they think what we want are progressively larger trucks but that we don’t like paying progressively larger sticker prices for them.
GM should offer a special Silverado package that makes truck not look like a Silverado.
Delete like seven or eight unnecessary grilles, tone down the lumps and bumps and humps, add a big injection of less hideousness. That’s a good truck right there.
And with a limited slip diff…you barely missed the lack of 4wd.
I always wanted to have an australian car as a kid. No matter which brand…just an australian car for being different.
Well luckily I got the chance to stay in New Zealand for a longer period. So I went ahead and got myself the australian all wheel drive version of our beloved Opel Omega: A Holden Adventra.
So at least one life goal fulfilled, even though it was of course no UTE.
And the ’63ish VW single cab enters the chat with a one ton payload.
Another cool car that americans will never get.
I’m here for the Longreach GLi.
Maybe if F-Ramerados dropped the the oversized bodywork, excess seats, doors, sound deadening, carpet, AWD – they could haul more significant weight too.
Makes since. 80% of truck buyers use their truck as a shiny Prius. 1 person and an empty bed. I’m shocked (at least here in San Jose) when I see a truck actually doing truck things.
Come to Europe and you will see very close to zero pickup trucks. They are useless even for doing truck things, get poor mileage, and are hard to park. Enclosed smallish vans are much more practical for tradespeople and framers. If you really need to haul dirt or gravel around or tow something huge, an actual truck is used. Makes sense that they are actually getting pretty useless in the US too since they are just a fashion accessory made practical only by deeply subsidized gas and extremely lax environmental regulations.
Leaf spring suspensions: functioning until the heat death of the universe.
Did they use the same method to payload rate these?
Looking at the Australian website the Silverado is rated at 757kg/1665lb payload for a dual cab LTZ model. Not sure how the rating standards have changed in the last 30 years however.
Yeah. No-one down here expects a Silverado to actually carry anything. Or at least anything more than a Ranger or a Hilux.
what’s curious is the Ranger in North America is only rated for up to 820kg while the rest of the world rates the Ranger for up to 1.1 Ton with the same configuration (4 dr, 2.3 liter Ecoboost, etc).
So my bet is no, the method MFRs use to determine the payload is not the same here and there
It would be interesting to see a scatterplot of payload vs. curb weight for modern pickup trucks and other more utilitarian vehicles such as this ute
RWD, standard cab, long bed- might as well go looking for a unicorn that lays golden eggs and does the Charleston.
A relatively small vehicle can be made to haul a lot, but the compromise is that it will be miserable when unladen. It’s gonna be geared all wrong, and it’s going to bounce around like an ox cart. Modern day “half ton” trucks ride and drive almost equally well when empty or fully laden, and *that’s* what people want.
If you’re ever hankering for the old-timey feel of a wooden rollercoaster, take a ride in an empty Ford Transit 350. Curb weight below 6000 pounds, payload rating 3500 pounds, and it feels like every bump will launch you into the stratosphere.
I think this is part of the reason why Aussie utes do such great burnouts. Basic rear suspension with little grip when there’s no load in the bed.
Which makes you wonder why my VW Transporter ute from the turn of the century with coil rear suspension and AWD didn’t catch on here. Oh yeah…TDi is not conducive to burnouts.
That’s not a knife … this is a knife.
thats a spoon
I see you’ve played knifey-spooney before!
Modern trucks need to be family vehicles these days while also having the capability to do work. They are the ultimate dad vehicle, room for the whole family and works for the hobbies and projects. At least that’s how I use mine.
So what’s wrong with a station wagon?
I wouldn’t want to tow 10,000lbs with a station wagon
Why Not?
Grandpa used to tow his Airstream with his LTD Brougham –
Folks tow big trailers with Suburbans and Excursions.
Those are just jacked up station wagons.
Enter the Peugeot 504 pick-up. 1.3 tons without breaking a sweat: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ0bPxgfhl6KcnBF8fj6SGzA1JBps8bgkmreg&s
Damn I’ve wanted one of those since the mid 90’s. Technically, it’s possible to import one from Europe.
You may try to import one from Argentina, they were made until 1997 or so. I don’t know about the cost of shipping, but it might be lower.
This. No qualifiers necessary. Failing my ability to get that, I’d take a good tray in lieu of the modern pickup bed.
I see the rental trucks at Home Depot and get very jealous of the tray beds. Fold-down sides? Hell yeah.
I’m going to choose to assume that these parts will bolt onto a GTO. Mostly because it’s hilarious.
Without the accompanying article I would have assumed the pictures were of a render or a one-off concept. The Aussie divisions truly did some wild stuff.
The idea of a GTO with a tray is absolutely fantastic.
I think a cab-chassis GTO conversion would be hilarious. Ultimate obscura.
Holden Maloo Ute factory specs were 6.1 litre v8 with 577bhp / 546 ft lb torque
At some point, the primary function for the truck in the US shifted from hauling things to just being a comfy tow pig. I’d be curious to know approximately when and why that shift began.
I don’t know, but I love the related observation by a lot of knowledgeable types here (i.e. V10omous) that it’s next to impossible to put things into the beds of contemporary trucks without lowering the tailgate and sliding them in that way. There’s no way you can easily lift them over the side anymore.
To be fair, I have a 4×4 1 ton truck with big tires that sits higher than most. And I’ve also stated that the benefits in ride height, ground clearance, larger brakes and the associated larger wheels are worth a bit of inconvenience unloading the bed to me.
I don’t think the problem is quite as widespread as some here make it out to be. Plenty of smaller trucks are more accessible than mine.
My theory is cost, changing priorities/uses. When people had multiple cars, it was easy to have the work truck that did work things and that was it. Now more people are trying to do more with one vehicle, so the 2x a year they need a truck means they buy a truck as the daily rather than having multiple cars. The wealth in the US also means more people have toys, and need a truck to haul said toys. You want to go boating? You need something to tow it with, same for a trailer or side by side or anything like that. Motorized toys mean you need a truck. The fact that it’s almost common to drop 6 figures on a truck now also contributes to the fact that a lot of people need it to be a do everything vehicle because it’s too expensive to have something else sitting alongside the truck.
I think you raise some good points, but I think the EPA footprint rules absolutely play a part as well, incentivizing automakers to aim for them rather than smaller stuff.
Very true. I forget about that.
EPA: “Hey automakers, please make stuff more efficient”
Automakers: “Make stuff bigger and heavier so we can suck down the dead dinos? Got it!”
EPA: “Wait what? Oh well, too late to fix our mistake now. Have fun.”
All spot on, I’d merely add that the accelerant to the change was the decline/demise of full-size sedans and large truck-based SUVs.
When other vehicle types couldn’t “do it all” anymore, the only alternative left was crew cab trucks.
That too. I remember as a kid my dad laughed at anyone who didn’t have at least a 6 ft bed as having a fake truck, now it’s hard to find those.
Say what? Decline of full sized gas guzzling body on frame truck based SUVs?
Lessee:
Lincoln Navigator
Chevy Tahoe
GMC Yukon
Lexus LX
Cadillac Escalade
Ford Expedition
Chevy Suburban
Toyota Sequoia
Nissan Armada
Mercedes G
Toyota 4Runner
Infiniti QX80
Lexus GX
Toyota Landcruiser
And probably a few more
https://carbuzz.com/cars/body-on-frame-suvs/
The Land Cruiser, GX, 4Runner, and G Wagen are not large.
Compare the sales of the rest to where they were in the 90s and early 00s, and you will see a serious decline for pretty much all of them.
Examples:
2002 Tahoe: 209K sales, 2023: 110K
2001 Suburban 151K, 2023: 52K
1999 Expedition: 233K, 2023: 73K
2002 Sequoia 70K, 2023: 22K
etc etc etc
The large SUVs are still offered for sale, but since 2008 or so they have been consciously marketed as upscale luxury options, with base trims absent or limited, while CC trucks continue to be sold from the low to high ends of the market. Sales have responded accordingly.
Funny how the same people who can afford so many toys can’t afford a car AND a truck.
For me space would be an issue first. But then yeah it’s priorities, why have a truck and a car when you can have a truck and toys?
Because adulting? Or is that too much of an ask these days?
GMT400. First truck (to my knowledge) to combine a short bed (6′-6″) with an extended cab and a usuable backseat. Overall length was about the same as a regular cab 8′ bed, but could haul 5 people. It also introduced a more modern interior and better handling IFS suspension, both attracted non traditional truck users.
Dodge was the first to introduce a factory extended cab in 1973. Ford followed in 1974 and GM didn’t introduce one until 1988 with the GMT400 you mentioned. Crew cabs appeared even earlier, starting with International in 1957. As to who introduced the first short bed (6′-6″) crew cab, I would guess Ford in 1980.
Yeah, but to my knowledge they weren’t combined with a short bed, that to me was the key to the GMT400 (along with more comfort overall), being popular with non traditional truck owners.
Looking into it, Dodge was the first to have a 6′-5″ bed combined with an extended cab, starting in 1973.
I do agree though that the GMT400 was the beginning of pickups being more comfortable and likely what attracted more buyers.
You may be right, I’ve never seen one. I think dodge extended cabs (up to ’94) used the inward facing seats, so not as appealing as a family hauler. Ford had forward facing seats, but I don’t think combined the extended cab with a short until the early 90’s (although I could be wrong).
Crew cab’s with 6 1/2′ beds I don’t remember until the 90’s and then only on HD’s, but again, they may have existed, but just weren’t popular.
Ford had an extended cab with 6.75′ bed in 1980. Crew cabs were only for heavier duty trucks and even then it’s rare to find one with a short bed. They were also the first to go all in on the family truck in 2001 with the SuperCrew F150 and its very short box.
IMO, the full-size Blazer and Bronco filled the role of family pickup even earlier and did it better. You have rear seats for the kids but when you need to haul something you fold (or remove) them and take the top off to have a bed.