After comparing, bought an F-550

[Dmace]

Nice Truck! :thumbsup:
I love the huge Radio Flyer, did you build that?

 

[Martian]

Nice Truck! :thumbsup:
I love the huge Radio Flyer, did you build that?

My father actually built it in retirement. 100% custom made from the frame to the pivot for the front wheel. Have had a lot of fun with it the last couple years going through parades and such. Turned into a real job as everyone has my phone number and is asking me to take it here and there. It's a lot of fun though.

 

[Builder]

Although no longer being built the GMC and Chevrolet medium duties were some of the best around. You could get everything from gas to the duramax to a cat engine in them with an allison automatic. Really like them. Have a GMC 4500 myself. Wouldn't trade that truck for anything as I bought it new but have put over 6 figures into upgrades into it. Haven't hauled anything that has challenged it yet. My only complaint is with the 4x4 you can't get a gooseneck into the bed. Which is a pretty big deal for some but I just have a tag trailer so it doesn't matter. You can find some good deals on them these days and I would be looking for a Topkick or Kodiak over a Superduty any day. Not to say they aren't good trucks. They are. I've just never had good luck with the Superduty's and have falling in love somewhere else.

Totally agree and I wanted one for years. The 4500/5500 are superior. Bigger frames, suspensions & axles, but IMO, GM dropped the ball with these trucks.
1st: They wouldn't rate them with a high enough GCWR for me. At 26,000lbs GM doesn't rate them high enough to tow the big gooseneck I will be pulling. GM should have done what was necessary to rate them at or over 33,000 to compete with Ford. They are built stronger than my Ford almost everywhere-especially frames, axles & suspension. I believe GM has always been too conservative in the way they rate their trucks compaerd to Ford across their entire lineup and that has hurt them.
Towards the end, GM began to offer the 5500 4x4 with a GCWR of ~30,000lbs. An improvement, but still short of Ford's 33,000lbs. Frustrating to say the least.
2nd: Discontinuing them. That hurt prospective buyers in the future. What will GM pull the plug on next?

When it came down to deciding, my main use was to tow a heavy gooseneck and Ford gives me 7,000 more lbs towing capacity than GM could offer, so I had to pinch my nose and buy the Ford. So far the truck has been awful, but at least it can legally (on paper) do what I want it to do. I just can't keep it out of the repair shop.

Otherwise, I'd have a 5500 4WD sitting at my shop.
The other frustrating thing is that no one has filled this niche with a replacement. Even IH's new terrastar looks disappointing. No 4WD (yet), and lower than expected GCWR's.

 

[Martian]

Can't argue with that. No doubt in my mind that I could pull that weight. I'm not pulling a whole lot with it. Just another one of those want to have's so I got it. Didn't need the extra towing capacity but would have been forced into a ford. Plus when they were building them the Topkick and Kodiak plant was about a stone throw away from my house so I thought I'd put the money back into my community.

 

[Builder]

Can't argue with that. No doubt in my mind that I could pull that weight. I'm not pulling a whole lot with it. Just another one of those want to have's so I got it. Didn't need the extra towing capacity but would have been forced into a ford. Plus when they were building them the Topkick and Kodiak plant was about a stone throw away from my house so I thought I'd put the money back into my community.

Excellent choice you made. If i didn't need a GCWR of 33K, 4WD, crewcab and the need to slide in under an 8' door, I'd be driving a Topkick or a IH 4xxx 4WD with airbrakes.
The 550 was the only truck that could meet all 4 "must-have" criteria.

 

[JESSE1]

As heavy built as the GM 4500/5500 trucks are it's hard to believe they weren't rated higher. I might have been interested in a Terrastar if a DT466 was an option. I considered an F-450 chassis cab with a hauler bed but didn't like the fact you can only get the de-rated 6.7 in it.

The 6.4 in my '08 F-450 pickup never gave me any problems except for high fuel consumption. So far the 6.7 diesel in my '12 F-450 pickup is getting about 4 mpg better mileage. Extreme amount of power in a stock engine.

 

[Builder]

As heavy built as the GM 4500/5500 trucks are it's hard to believe they weren't rated higher. I might have been interested in a Terrastar if a DT466 was an option. I considered an F-450 chassis cab with a hauler bed but didn't like the fact you can only get the de-rated 6.7 in it.

The 6.4 in my '08 F-450 pickup never gave me any problems except for high fuel consumption. So far the 6.7 diesel in my '12 F-450 pickup is getting about 4 mpg better mileage. Extreme amount of power in a stock engine.

There's another reason I avoided the new truck (plus the payments were really salty).
I know it's common practice, but WHY de-rate the truck that theoretically would be pulling & carrying the heaviest loads. It wasn't done with the 6.4L, so why with the 6.7L?

You are right about the fuel consumption. I didn't know fuel consumption could be this bad.

 

[JESSE1]

Actually, I believe the 6.4 is de-rated in your truck. It is rated at 350/650 in the pickups and 300/600 in the chassis cabs. I may be wrong on the torque but I do believe it's about 50 less than a pickup. I guess they do this because most of these trucks are commercial vehicles and they de-rate them for durability.

It's like the 220 Cummins in my '59 White. 743 cubic inches with only 220/650 torque will last a long time at full load.