 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / RVs / January 20064x2 vs 4x4
I want to get a tow vehicle for a 29ft fifth wheel. I have read a lot of posting about gas vs diesel and which auto maker to go with. I would like to hear what folks with experience have to say about weather to get a 4x2 or 4x4 diesel tow vehicle. >I want to get a tow vehicle for a 29ft fifth wheel. I have read a lot >of posting about gas vs diesel and which auto maker to go with. I >would like to hear what folks with experience have to say about weather >to get a 4x2 or 4x4 diesel tow vehicle. I have a 4x4 F-250 diesel. I would never buy a 4x2 to tow with. I use the 4x4 quite a bit to pull out of slick grass, sand and other places. Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" >>I want to get a tow vehicle for a 29ft fifth wheel. I have read a lot >>of posting about gas vs diesel and which auto maker to go with. I [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, > shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" Do you know the difference between a 2x4 and 4x4 in the bush when you are careless? In both cases you have great chances to be stuck, but with a 4x4, you will walk a lot more than with a 2x4 to get out of the bush. :o) Gilles jamesfick@comcast.net somehow found the right keys to write: >I want to get a tow vehicle for a 29ft fifth wheel. I have read a lot >of posting about gas vs diesel and which auto maker to go with. I >would like to hear what folks with experience have to say about weather >to get a 4x2 or 4x4 diesel tow vehicle. I've towed with two different 4x4s and two different Trailers. I wouldn't be without it. You take a little hit on the weight and the initial cost, but in the long run you will make the cost back on resale and you will find that it gives you a little more comfort in marginal situations.  SignatureFrank Tabor > I've towed with two different 4x4s and two different Trailers. I > wouldn't be without it. > > You take a little hit on the weight and the initial cost, but in the > long run you will make the cost back on resale and you will find that > it gives you a little more comfort in marginal situations. If you're towing where 4x4 is needed I suppose it could help. I love 4x4's and have always owned one of some sort. But for towing I can't see the majority of people ever having a need for it. 4-low might come in handy if having to start out from a stop on a steep dirt uphill road. When front hubs on 4x4's used to be unlockable I'd use 4-lo to start out on a steep paved grade. I'd love a new 4x4 truck with part time 4WD, manual locking hubs and 4-lo. Don't know of any new ones that exist. miles somehow found the right keys to write: >> I've towed with two different 4x4s and two different Trailers. I >> wouldn't be without it. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >out on a steep paved grade. I'd love a new 4x4 truck with part time >4WD, manual locking hubs and 4-lo. Don't know of any new ones that exist. They are still out there. Chevy uses a vacuum driven clutch on a short shaft. No hubs. Ford has auto/manual hubs that have been greatly improved. Ford has shift on the fly electronic and also still has the stick in the floor. I can't say what Dodge has, but you should still be able to manually shift some models. Nothing has changed on any of that. I don't tow normally where 4wd is required. But I do tow where occasionally it might snow, or heavy rains may create problems. I've been in a campground, on a flat site where rains made every other 2wd drive vehicle require some sort of tow to get their trailers out. 4wd allowed me to get out on my own. I don't know where you live, but my tow vehicle is a semi daily driver, and I get snow and ice. 4wd is a boon for this. SignatureFrank Tabor > They are still out there. Chevy uses a vacuum driven clutch on a > short shaft. No hubs. Ford has auto/manual hubs that have been > greatly improved. Ford has shift on the fly electronic and also still > has the stick in the floor. I can't say what Dodge has, but you > should still be able to manually shift some models. Nothing has > changed on any of that. I didn't know with current 4x4's you could unlock the front hubs when in 4wd. My 2001 Dodge Ram I believe is locked all the time. The disconnect is at the transfercase meaning the front shafts still turn. My 2004 Dodge Durango is AWD with a 4-lock and 4-lo modes. The fronts are always connected. >> They are still out there. Chevy uses a vacuum driven clutch on a >> short shaft. No hubs. Ford has auto/manual hubs that have been [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Durango is AWD with a 4-lock and 4-lo modes. The fronts are always > connected. The '01s can be fitted with a "2-LOW" kit that, when in 4WD, unlocks the front hubs so as to provide Low-Range with rear-only power. The '02-and-prior RAMs use a pneumatic/vacuum lock for the front hubs and these are NOT locked in 2WD under normal usage. There are a few manual-hub conversion kits starting to appear for the '03-and-later ["Third Generation"] RAMs. >>> They are still out there. Chevy uses a vacuum driven clutch on a >>> short shaft. No hubs. Ford has auto/manual hubs that have been [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >There are a few manual-hub conversion kits starting to appear for the >'03-and-later ["Third Generation"] RAMs. I have a 91 Dakota that has the same arrangement as the full size Chevys, and that's about the extent of my knowledge on Dodges go. I know it takes forever sometimes for the front shafts to lock in. Especially when it's really cold. SignatureFrank Tabor > The '01s can be fitted with a "2-LOW" kit that, when in 4WD, unlocks the > front hubs so as to provide Low-Range with rear-only power. That would be benificial. Starting out up a steep hill with a heavy trailer isn't easy and 2-low would come in handy. >> The '01s can be fitted with a "2-LOW" kit that, when in 4WD, unlocks >> the front hubs so as to provide Low-Range with rear-only power. > > That would be benificial. Starting out up a steep hill with a heavy > trailer isn't easy and 2-low would come in handy. Is your Cummins the SO or the HO? >>>The '01s can be fitted with a "2-LOW" kit that, when in 4WD, unlocks >>>the front hubs so as to provide Low-Range with rear-only power. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Is your Cummins the SO or the HO? HO. The problem is the hills I tow are forest service dirt roads over 8% grades. >>>>The '01s can be fitted with a "2-LOW" kit that, when in 4WD, unlocks >>>>the front hubs so as to provide Low-Range with rear-only power. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > HO. The problem is the hills I tow are forest service dirt roads over > 8% grades. As long as you're off dry pavement, why not just use your 4WD? Of course, my '03.5 HO/48RE 4WD "Doolie" is only towing ~7 tons and easily accellerates uphill either way. How much does your trailer weigh? > As long as you're off dry pavement, why not just use your 4WD? Oh I do when towing with my 4x4 anytime I'm on dirt. Point was that 4x4 really isn't needed by the vast majority of people towing. I see where miles <nope@nopers.com> contributed: > Point was that 4x4 >really isn't needed by the vast majority of people towing. The vast majority do not 'need' an rv. Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill > I see where miles <nope@nopers.com> contributed: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Will Sill > The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill Will someone please explain what Will's statement means? The quote was "Point was that 4x4 isn't needed by the **vast majority of people towing**." Hugh >>> Point was that 4x4 really isn't needed by the >>> vast majority of people towing. >> The vast majority do not 'need' an rv. > Will someone please explain what Will's statement means? Really? OK. Here goes... It begs the difference between "want" and "need". The difference is certainly subjective. It's in the same genre as advising someone trying to improve the fuel economy of a motorhome to SELL IT. Pretty plain to me... -- :\ JR I see where Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@redelfs.com> contributed: Somebody: >>>> Point was that 4x4 really isn't needed by the >>>> vast majority of people towing. Will, trying to make a point: >>> The vast majority do not 'need' an rv. HD in NY <error@error.com>, in a fog as usual: >> Will someone please explain what Will's statement means? JR: >It begs the difference between "want" and "need". >The difference is certainly subjective. HD may not Get It yet, Jim. But thanx. I _like_ 4wd/AWD and probably will not buy another 2wd vehicle. But "need" means essential, required, indispensible and all that. But I WANT the convenience and added capabilities. Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill snipped > HD may not Get It yet, Jim. But thanx. snipped > Will Sill > The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill No, neither of you "get" it. I'll post what Will wrote; >I see where miles <nope@nopers.com> contributed: **This is what Will quoted from the original post.** >> Point was that 4x4 >>really isn't needed by the vast majority of people towing. This is what Will wrote in response to the quoted post. >The vast majority do not 'need' an rv. >Will Sill Will's post has nothing to do with the quote he used from the original post. Everyone knows "the vast majority do not need an rv". The original poster was saying that most folks don't need a 4x4 as a tow vehicle. One is nice to have and is desirable for some situations. Of course the difference between want and need is subjective. That still makes Will's post silly. The problem with Will's post is; The presumption is the original poster is talking about someone with an rv to tow so, he *needs* a tow vehicle. The decision to have an rv has already been made. No one gives a rat's a.s whether he needed an rv in the first place, he has one and needs something to tow it with. Now, the decision to buy a 2x4 or a 4x4 is subjective, both will do the job with the 4x4 able to perform in more situations than the 2 wheel drive. This is why I thought Will's post didn't make sense. Hugh > snipped >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > why I thought Will's post didn't make sense. > Hugh Yup! Silly Willy LOL Geoff. >>>>Point was that 4x4 really isn't needed by the >>>>vast majority of people towing. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Pretty plain to me... > JR That doesn't make it. What Will wrote is true but doesn't fit the post. Hugh >> I see where miles <nope@nopers.com> contributed: >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > towing**." > Hugh The distinction is between "need" and "desire", Hugh. Only those unable to acquire/utilize alternative shelter truly "need" an RV. [Think FEMA trailers...(Especially those not in use due to FEMA's non-payment.)] >Only those unable to acquire/utilize alternative shelter truly "need" an RV. >[Think FEMA trailers...(Especially those not in use due to FEMA's >non-payment.)] I drove past a manufactured housing plant yesterday and noticed a long row of trailers with "FEMA" banners hanging across the back. A lot of good they're doing in the builder's parking lot. GB in NC >>Only those unable to acquire/utilize alternative shelter truly "need" an >>RV. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > GB in NC There've been stories on the boobtoob about the situation - undelivered trailers - but I haven't been able to tell just WHO is supposed to be paying WHOM for them. There was, also, quite a series of "flaps" over where to put them - mostly NIMBY stories. > The distinction is between "need" and "desire", Hugh. Trouble is, Bill is attempting to compare two uncomparable groups with his regards to want and need. To finish his sentence it would read 'The vast majority of people who tow don't need and RV'. That makes no sense. They can't tow without an RV!! I believe that was the intent of Hugh's question. >> The distinction is between "need" and "desire", Hugh. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > can't tow without an RV!! I believe that was the intent of Hugh's > question. Given that there was no specification that *only* RVs were being towed, Will's statement is correct in an additional way! <G> Your statement "They can't tow without an RV!!" is untrue since, worldwide, most towed vehicles are neither RVs nor towed by RVs. <VBG> > Your statement "They can't tow without an RV!!" is untrue since, worldwide, > most towed vehicles are neither RVs nor towed by RVs. <VBG> LOL, well ya, 'cept this is an RV group! >> Your statement "They can't tow without an RV!!" is untrue since, >> worldwide, most towed vehicles are neither RVs nor towed by RVs. >> <VBG> > > LOL, well ya, 'cept this is an RV group! Hmmm.. wonder where I fit.. I have BOTH a TT *AND* a utility trailer (non RV) that I tow ....., and live in another trailer that is parked perm and CAN'T be towed..... >>>I see where miles <nope@nopers.com> contributed: >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > [Think FEMA trailers...(Especially those not in use due to FEMA's > non-payment.)] Whatever :) Hugh > The vast majority do not 'need' an rv. Thanks, you proved my point. People may 'want' a 4x4, they don't 'need' it. >> The vast majority do not 'need' an rv. > > Thanks, you proved my point. People may 'want' a 4x4, they don't 'need' > it. Try pulling a 7 ton (or heavier) trailer with a doolie on damp grass from a standing start and you'll say otherwise. [Hint: Snow/Ice provide better traction.] BTW, you never DID say just how much your trailer actually weighs. Amazing. Reviewing this thread reminds me once again that we cannot intelligently discuss ANYTHING with people who don't know the meaning of words! WANT: To desire greatly; wish for. . . . NEED: A condition or situation in which something is required. . . We have rv'd for half a century with 2wd vehicles, and only ONCE used a 4wd. We never NEEDED 4wd, but it was Nice To Have on the ONE occasion when we'd have been inconvenienced without it, and Nice To Have on several occasions when negotiating steep terrain. The degree of importance one places on 4wd must necessarily derive from your travel plans. If you plan significant skirmishes into difficult areas or bad weather, you can probably justify telling wifey that you NEED 4wd. But keep in mind that when you get where you're going, you'll almost always find a lot of 2wd rigs there. Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill > Amazing. Reviewing this thread reminds me once again that we cannot > intelligently discuss ANYTHING with people who don't know the meaning > of words! Calm down Will, people understand the words. It's you that's trying to argue on semantics. It has been said over and over and over in this thread that 4x4 for towing is nice but not needed by the vase majority of people towing RV's. Then you come right back telling us all about the difference between want and need...well DUH!! Then you try to tell us that the vast majority of people towing RV's do not 'need' an RV. Pretty silly statement Will since they can't tow an RV without an RV! >Pretty silly statement Will since they can't tow an RV without an RV! I tow my RV with a pickup. Do you consider pickups to be RVs? Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" > I tow my RV with a pickup. Do you consider pickups to be RVs? Sigh..you missed the point. You can't tow an RV if you do not have and RV to tow. You have one to tow and you tow it with a pickup. >Sigh..you missed the point. <sigh> If I missed your point it's because your point wasn't clear. Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" > If I missed your point it's because your point wasn't clear. To you! >> If I missed your point it's because your point wasn't clear. > >To you! Who else? I can only respond for me. Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" > Who else? > > I can only respond for me. No you can't. You said you don't understand my statement, good grief!: You can't tow an RV if you do not have and RV to tow. You have one to tow and you tow it with a pickup. >> Who else? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > You can't tow an RV if you do not have and RV to tow. You have one to tow > and you tow it with a pickup. Wuddabowt those who tow pickups WITH their RVs? 'Owabowt those whose pickups ARE their RVs? Don' fuggeddabowt those who only DRIVE their RVs and don' tow ANYTHING! Fureggzampul: I've both a "B" and a 5er [both qualifying as RVs] and, although the "B" has a receiver hitch and the 5er doesn't while the 5er has its FW king-pin it has no rear hitch to let IT tow anything, neither is capable of towing the other. For "serious" towing I enlist the aid of a third vehicle that was specifically optioned to perform that function and, for my needs, has proven ideal: a 4WD Dodge Diesel Doolie with a limited-slip rear axle. Having BOTH the Limited Slip [aka "Anit-Spin"] AND 4WD has given me the opportunity to compare the merits of each individually and against each other. Each has its virtues (and faults) but, IMO, the combination works best of all. >You can't tow an RV if you do not have and RV to tow. I understand that. If you had said that in the first place we wouldn't be having this conversation. You first said, "................they can't tow an RV without an RV" Which I read to mean you need an RV to tow an RV..... IOW 2 RVs. The onus is on the writer to be clear. Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" >>You can't tow an RV if you do not have and RV to tow. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Hunter lol, it was clear if you followed the thread and context of discussion. The onus is on the reader to keep up with the discussion!! >lol, it was clear if you followed the thread and context of discussion. > The onus is on the reader to keep up with the discussion!! <sigh> Okay Miles... it was clear....... LOL Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" > lol, it was clear if you followed the thread and context of discussion. > The onus is on the reader to keep up with the discussion!! The onus is on the writer to be specific. Leaving it up for others to guess doesn't work. Relying on someone to see the previous messages often doesn't work on Usenet because of how messages propagate thorughout the Usenet system. Not all servers get all messages at the same time in the same order. SignatureJon JPinOH > The onus is on the writer to be specific. Leaving it up for others to guess > doesn't work. Relying on someone to see the previous messages often doesn't > work on Usenet because of how messages propagate thorughout the Usenet > system. Not all servers get all messages at the same time in the same order. Hogwash! Thats what proper quoting is for. Nonetheless the reader needs to follow a discussion before making incorrect assuptions when jumping in the middle. >> The onus is on the writer to be specific. Leaving it up for others to >> guess doesn't work. Relying on someone to see the previous messages [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > needs to follow a discussion before making incorrect assuptions when > jumping in the middle. You are correct, there may be more than one or two posts to complete a POV. It is correct that all messages might not arrive at the same time for separate readers, however each reader will receive the stream in the same order, conversation not broken. SignatureBILL P. Just Dog & ME >>> If I missed your point it's because your point wasn't clear. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Hunter It seems that by the third level of posts, no point is relevant to any point posted to that time. Get my point? > It seems that by the third level of posts, no point is relevant to any > point posted to that time. Get my point? Me and my Arrow... <sigh> Signature:) JR >Amazing. Reviewing this thread reminds me once again that we cannot >intelligently discuss ANYTHING with people who don't know the meaning [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >Will Sill >The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill Back in the early 80's a co-worker was talking about his 4WD Blazer. He said one of the justifications was so he could hunt up in the Four Peaks area, Northeast of Phoenix. Told the little lady how rough it was and primitive and all that. She wanted to go up there one weekend and they hopped in the ol' 4wd to head to the wilds. Well, when they got there he was rather non-plussed to see a small Winnebago class "A" sitting near the top of the road. Want - Need ... who knows? unk >Thanks, you proved my point. People may 'want' a 4x4, they don't 'need' it. I needed my 4 wheel drive just this morning. I could not have gotten my trailer in and out of its space, to go dump the black tank, without putting the truck into 4WD. Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" >>Thanks, you proved my point. People may 'want' a 4x4, they don't 'need' it. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, > but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" Did you attempt to tow in 2wd and it would not do the job. Or was it just to your estimation it would not have towed it in 2wd so you just selected 4wd because you had it. SignatureBILL P. Just Dog & ME William Boyd <williamboyd@cableone.net> wrote in news:42t83lF1kraiqU1 @individual.net: > Did you attempt to tow in 2wd and it would not do the job. Or was it > just to your estimation it would not have towed it in 2wd so you just > selected 4wd because you had it. I've often found myself in situations when 2WD only resulted in wheel-spin whereas 4WD got things moving. The predominant cause, for me, has been grass dampened by dewfall or rain. Yes, my truck *does* have a limited-slip differential that does a reasonably decent job on hard surfaces. Of course, if someone never takes their rig off pavement/gravel then they may be able to get by without 4WD. > Of course, if someone never takes their rig off pavement/gravel then they > may be able to get by without 4WD. I usually camp in the open forest. Just dirt and pine needles. If it rains hard it can get muddy but I've never needed 4WD. My current TV does have 4WD which does improve towing on dirt/gravel thats wet especially bad washboard. My other TV is 2WD and never got stuck in the same places. >> Of course, if someone never takes their rig off pavement/gravel then >> they may be able to get by without 4WD. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > especially bad washboard. My other TV is 2WD and never got stuck in > the same places. With a light enough trailer you may be better able to avoid the need. You never DID specify the WEIGHT of yours. > With a light enough trailer you may be better able to avoid the need. > > You never DID specify the WEIGHT of yours. 1998 Damon Challenger. Never weighed it on the scales but it isn't light. > William Boyd <williamboyd@cableone.net> wrote in news:42t83lF1kraiqU1 > @individual.net: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Of course, if someone never takes their rig off pavement/gravel then they > may be able to get by without 4WD. And that is the reason the question was asked to Hunter. I do not remember her ever saying anything about dry camping. In fact I remember something about her never having water in her fresh water tank. She does not camp where there would be any real 4wd requirements, I think. SignatureBILL P. Just Dog & ME I wasn't going to respond. I really wasn't... >> William Boyd <williamboyd@cableone.net> wrote in news:42t83lF1kraiqU1 >> @individual.net: >> Did you attempt to tow in 2wd and it would not do the job >> Or was it just to your estimation it would not have towed >> it in 2wd so you just selected 4wd because you had it. One is supposed DIG A HOLE in 2WD FIRST, then fall back on 4WD? You, sir, are a troll. > I remember something about her never having > water in her fresh water tank. I remember the same. > She does not camp where there would be any real 4wd requirements, I think. You are presumptious, I think. That the lady stays (mostly) quiet under such "assault" says "volumes". Signature:( JR -- :) JR >> She does not camp where there would be any real 4wd requirements, I think. > >You are presumptious, I think. > >That the lady stays (mostly) quiet under such "assault" says "volumes". Is that idiot Boyd referring to me? I use 4WD when I need it, not because I have it. As I have never camped with Boyd I seriously doubt he can judge where I camp. If it matters, yesterday I had to pull forward through deep sand, left from a construction project, then back the trailer up the hill through the same sand again....... Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" > If it matters, yesterday I had to pull forward through deep sand, left > from a construction project, then back the trailer up the hill through > the same sand again....... I've read your stuff. You camp in farmyards, backyards, open fields and the like. I find it amazing that you do it while NOT using your onboard water tank. Do you ever avail yourself of "honey wagon" service? I carry my own. Signature:) JR 2000 Skamper Ultra 249 TT 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD Vortec 8100 - Allison 1000 >I've read your stuff. You camp in farmyards, backyards, open fields and the >like. I find it amazing that you do it while NOT using your onboard water >tank.> I started using it this summer (c: As a matter of fact I'll be using it for the next few days while my kitchen sink is out.... I'm replacing my old counter and installing the new cooktop. >Do you ever avail yourself of "honey wagon" service? I carry my own.> I'm parked on a slight hill, just enough to make access to the sewer valve almost impossible. I just hook up and pull off to dump when it gets full. Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" > Is that idiot Boyd referring to me? I use 4WD when I need it, not > because I have it. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Hunter > -- So the once upon a time individual that I had envisions of being a lady has reared her true demeanor with slanderous name calling of me for no apparent reason. I am aware she has me in her kill file but would not have said any thing about her and have not. Some way she has come to the decision to act like the likes of who she must like the most such as Will and his lap dogs. So be it, I will reserve any harsh words as I have no intentions of joining them at that level of intellectual decency, as some one put it. SignatureBILL P. Just Dog & ME >> Is that idiot Boyd referring to me? I use 4WD when I need it, not >> because I have it. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >have no intentions of joining them at that level of intellectual >decency, as some one put it. What name did she call you? I see no names. Unless you can quote where she called you a name, that makes you, again, a f.cking liar. SignatureFrank Tabor >>>Is that idiot Boyd referring to me? I use 4WD when I need it, not >>>because I have it. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > What name did she call you? I see no names. Unless you can quote > where she called you a name, that makes you, again, a f.cking liar. Well if you cannot read the first line of what you posted you must be having a senior moment. YOU! Are not worth further discussion. SignatureBILL P. Just Dog & ME >>>>Is that idiot Boyd referring to me? I use 4WD when I need it, not >>>>because I have it. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >Well if you cannot read the first line of what you posted you must be >having a senior moment. YOU! Are not worth further discussion. What, idiot? Village Idiot is your name. Idiot. No foul there. Ask anybody. No apology needed. SignatureFrank Tabor >>> Is that idiot Boyd referring to me? I use 4WD when I need it, not >>> because I have it. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > What name did she call you? I see no names. Unless you can quote > where she called you a name, that makes you, again, a f.cking liar. Apparently, Frank, "Hopalong" was taking issue with the compliment paid to him/her/it by Hunter when she said "Is that idiot Boyd referring to me?" BTW, the word is "still" - not "again". <G> > I needed my 4 wheel drive just this morning. I could not have gotten > my trailer in and out of its space, to go dump the black tank, without > putting the truck into 4WD. Oh I'm sure I could find some places where 4WD would be required to get a trailer in. I haven't found a 'want' to take my trailer to such places. However, 90% of my RV'ing is drycamp boondocking. >> I needed my 4 wheel drive just this morning. I could not have gotten >> my trailer in and out of its space, to go dump the black tank, without [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > a trailer in. I haven't found a 'want' to take my trailer to such > places. However, 90% of my RV'ing is drycamp boondocking. Just make sure that you aren't parked on caliche or grass when the rains come. <G> > Just make sure that you aren't parked on caliche or grass when the rains > come. <G> The forests here don't have alot of grass usually. Sometimes they do but so far never anywhere I've parked the trailer. Tons of caliche here but always a few inches of topsoil on top. Caliches only been a problem when I need to dig a hole for a tree in the yard! This turned into an exercise in futility, I can go on and on.".people want to own a house, they don't need to; people want to have a pick-up, they don't need to; people want to have kids, they don't need to; people want to have a nice lawn, they don't need to; people want to live healthy, they don't need to........ > I get snow and ice. Same here. > 4wd is a boon for this. It should ALMOST be a requirement. When my pickup gets squirrley in turns, I just push a button, the front wheels hook up and the truck sticks like glue to the road. (Excellent traction and handling) Now I know why the 4x4 kids go so darned fast in bad weather: A 4x4 can instill a false sense of INVINCIBILITY!! It's an easy trap to fall into. :) JR Signature2000 Skamper Ultra 249 TT 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD Vortec 8100 - Allison 1000 <snip> : Now I know why the 4x4 kids go so darned fast in bad weather: A 4x4 can : instill a false sense of INVINCIBILITY!! It's an easy trap to fall into. Which is exactly the problem where I live (No Idaho). They can GO faster, but they sure can't STOP any faster than a 4x2. -Bob > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > -Bob Aha! A trick for ya, while I can go real fast straight (I live in N Idaho), I just flick it into 2 wheel drive and start spinning... It stops real quick... And if off the road, I just hit the 4wd low button and drive out of the snow/ice/mud/etc.... Seems to me that doing doughnuts/spins (in 2 wheel drive) makes it stop real quick..... >> <snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Seems to me that doing doughnuts/spins (in 2 wheel drive) makes it stop real >quick..... Kinda depends on what you dependably run into. A gravel truck makes a good brake. Little girls with kittens won't slow you down at all. www.arcatapet.net/bobgiddings >> I get snow and ice. > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > :) >JR Yeahbut, the Sobs won't stop any better than a 2wd on snow and ice. That's where the fallibility comes in. SignatureFrank Tabor >> I get snow and ice. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > JR Mine goes straight ( and turns in 4wd) real good, and then flip into 2wd, go fast, whip it into a tight turn, do doughnuts, and when I get tired of circles, hit the button for 4 wheel drive, and go straight... Just a warning, I did try it towing a trailer, and unfortunately, the force of the turn, made the cabinets open and everything fell on the floor.. While it's fun to do the doughnuts, unhitch the trailer first! > miles somehow found the right keys to write: > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > I don't know where you live, but my tow vehicle is a semi daily > driver, and I get snow and ice. 4wd is a boon for this. GM does not use a vacum driven servo on full sized trucks. (never did) It is motor driven on newer models and older ones (up to about 97) where driven by heated expanding gases that was not a long term success. (looked good in lab but not in the field) The disconnect is on the passanger side of front diff and Dodge 03 and later has no disconnect at all in front axle so you are always dragging it alone even in 2wd and paying a MPG penalty for it too. Personally I would not get a 2wd oil burner if I needed to leave pavement ever towing because that extra weight up front from it (500 to 700lbs depending on model) over "dead" axle is a great handicap when try to back up to trailer in wet grass or up a slope. Signature----------------- www.thesnoman.com I've got well over 100K miles on my 4x2, about half towing a 29ft Alpenlite. I haven't needed a 4x4, but that may be partly because I don't want to be on the road when I might start slipping around. I guess once or twice I've gotten onto some slippery grass, but have never needed to be towed, and the combined up-front additional cost of 4 wheel drive, together with the ongoing cost (more to break plus worse fuel mileage plus stiffer ride) just isn't remotely worth knowing (or rather hoping) I'll never need a tow. I'm getting ready to buy another pickup, and it will be 4x2 as well. > I want to get a tow vehicle for a 29ft fifth wheel. I have read a lot > of posting about gas vs diesel and which auto maker to go with. I > would like to hear what folks with experience have to say about weather > to get a 4x2 or 4x4 diesel tow vehicle. After four years, I finally have the title to my Silverado! <whew> The truck is used mainly as my daily driver. Fortunately, it's only 4 miles to/from work. Because I live in a climate that occasionally experiences low temperatures well below zero, I am still glad I bought the big block GAS engine. As for four-wheel drive... This is my first 4x4 and I am SOLD - hook, line and sinker. Unless I move FULL TIME into the sun belt, I will never be without a 4x4 from here on out. It is certainly worth the price for the option. Thanks to the Honda EU2000i generator, I now have a NEW, favorite and SECLUDED camping spot that is a mowed, undefined site. I tow the the travel trailer over grassy, soft riverbottom and the 4-wheel drive allows me do so confidently and with minimal impact. There are two, BIG advantages to a 4x2: Lower cost and entry height. Be advised, however, that, even with a limited-slip rear differential, 4x2s do poorly (at best) on slippery or loose surfaces, particularly if they are unloaded. Diesel? Yes, especially if you are going to do a LOT of towing and NEED a lot of pulling power. You might do as well or better if, in a colder climate, you get a big block gas engine. Either way, get 4x4. Good luck! :) JR >I want to get a tow vehicle for a 29ft fifth wheel. I have read a lot >of posting about gas vs diesel and which auto maker to go with. I >would like to hear what folks with experience have to say about weather >to get a 4x2 or 4x4 diesel tow vehicle. The popularity of the 4x4 used in towing has nothing to do with need, only testosterone. Little boys start out driving in the sandbox and their toys only get "bigger and tougher" from there. That said, you may have a need separate from towing. For instance, if you live in Maine, have a steep driveway that you can't get into with a 4x2 when it snows, consider it. But for towing? Only fools put themselves in towing situations that need a 4x4, and the vast majority of travel trailers are just "lawn ornaments" and get towed once or twice a year, if that. > But for towing? Only fools put themselves in towing situations that > need a 4x4, and the vast majority of travel trailers are just "lawn > ornaments" and get towed once or twice a year, if that. This is true and I've never understood it. People buy expensive trailers and then rarely use them. Last year I used my trailer a total of about 15 trips lasting from 3 to 7 days each. >But for towing? Only fools put themselves in towing situations that >need a 4x4, and the vast majority of travel trailers are just "lawn >ornaments" and get towed once or twice a year, if that. That's just not true. I have used my 4WD many times in slick grass and mud. Many campsites turn to mud after heavy rain. I don't want to sit there until it dries out. I hook up, throw in the 4 WD and out I go. At rallies, we park in fields. In Michigan the only people who parked themselves were those of us with 4x4s. The rest had to wait for tractors to tow them to their spot. I'd like statistics on the "vast majority" being lawn ornaments.... Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" >>But for towing? Only fools put themselves in towing situations that >>need a 4x4, and the vast majority of travel trailers are just "lawn [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > I have never been to a authentic camp ground where a 2WD would not be able to park a rig due to mud. Those that have 4X4 use it when in their minds they need it. And I agree with that but as for actual requirements I do not think they exist unless you are going out in a pasture or undeveloped location. This only applies when connected to your rig, when not connected and not having adequate weight over the rear drive wheels is another story all together. SignatureBILL P. 2004, 2500 SLT Quad Cab, Dodge Ram, SLT, SWB, 2WD, 5.9 HO Turbo Diesel, 48RE Auto Trans, Anti-Spin 3.73 Dif.Rhino Liner, Husky 16K. Voyager Controller 2005, 27RL Wildcat, DT/PC Wi-Fi. Dual EU2000i Hondas Just Me and Dog >But for towing? Only fools put themselves in towing situations that >need a 4x4, and the vast majority of travel trailers are just "lawn >ornaments" and get towed once or twice a year, if that. You mean situations like backing up hill around a corner into a camping site without burning up your transmission? Happens all the time. Low range is a very useful part of 4WD. www.arcatapet.net/bobgiddings >You mean situations like backing up hill around a corner into a >camping site without burning up your transmission? Happens all >the time. Been there, done that. )c: Hunter -- http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/roadtrip2005.htm Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy sh.t...what a ride!" >>I want to get a tow vehicle for a 29ft fifth wheel. I have read a lot >>of posting about gas vs diesel and which auto maker to go with. I [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >need a 4x4, and the vast majority of travel trailers are just "lawn >ornaments" and get towed once or twice a year, if that. Sound like you just can't afford a 4 wd drive, poor thing. SignatureFrank Tabor >>>I want to get a tow vehicle for a 29ft fifth wheel. I have read a lot >>>of posting about gas vs diesel and which auto maker to go with. I [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Sound like you just can't afford a 4 wd drive, poor thing. Ahh! The net a.s hole strikes again! I think you would find that where most folks that thought they needed a 4X4 engaged could have accomplished the task with out it. SignatureBILL P. Just Me and Dog >Ahh! The net a.s hole strikes again! > >I think you would find that where most folks that thought they needed a >4X4 engaged could have accomplished the task with out it. Why don't you go back to f.cking your dog, and leave Usenet alone. f.cking idiot. You can't even make the on you have work so quit trying to tell other folks how to. Moron. SignatureFrank Tabor >>Ahh! The net a.s hole strikes again! >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Moron. Frank Control yourself. Do you attack people that way face-to-face? > Control yourself. Do you attack people that way face-to-face? Do you always throw kindling on a dying fire? (Don't feed the trolls or become one yourself.) JR >> Control yourself. Do you attack people that way face-to-face? > >Do you always throw kindling on a dying fire? I don't know anything about your fire. Are you the nanny? >(Don't feed the trolls or become one yourself.) > >JR >>>Ahh! The net a.s hole strikes again! >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Control yourself. Do you attack people that way face-to-face? Morons like him, yes. SignatureFrank Tabor >>>>Ahh! The net a.s hole strikes again! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Morons like him, yes. WOW! Face to face, as the accepted comment goes "Bring it on". Wonders never cease to exist, just how some people can make it through life with such a mentality. I'll bet you set in the back of your class room and threw spit balls. ;-) SignatureBILL P. Just Dog & ME >>>>>Ahh! The net a.s hole strikes again! >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >such a mentality. I'll bet you set in the back of your class room and >threw spit balls. ;-) Frank . . . The Internet has a strange effect on some people. Because the guy on the other end is faceless and perhaps even non-human, he presents an easy target for venting ones anger, all the while hiding behind a computer. Reminds me of kids dropping rocks from an overpass. Fred I'll bet you set in the back of your classroom and threw spit balls. ;-) The usual way is to shoot them thru a straw from the lunchroom.... (can't imagine how you can throw em)... :) > I'll bet you set in the back of your classroom and threw spit balls. ;-) > > The usual way is to shoot them thru a straw from the lunchroom.... (can't > imagine how you can throw em)... :) I guess they would have to be big wouldn't they. Maybe just folded paper into airplane. ;-) SignatureBILL P. Just Dog & ME I see where Frank Tabor <ftabor@gmail.com> contributed concerning some illogical wailing from still another misguided soul: >Sound like you just can't afford a 4 wd drive, poor thing. Our RV (class B) does not have 4wd - and we don't miss it. But our other vehicles have 4wd or AWD. We've had at least one 4wd vehicle since the Hoover administration (OK, so I exaggerate a little), and I'll happily admit some of the early ones were fraught with drawbacks, including lousy ride, lousy handling, lousy reliability, lousy mileage and assorted related annoyances. Modern AWD and 4WD setups are vastly superior in all important respects. Though the individual's needs/wants (important to make a distinction) will vary, IMO 4wd is well worth having. Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill >The popularity of the 4x4 used in towing has nothing to do with need, >only testosterone. Little boys start out driving in the sandbox and >their toys only get "bigger and tougher" from there. Try backing up a 7.3 diesel on a gravel driveway up a steep hill without 4wd, and come back here and tell me how you managed it. > Try backing up a 7.3 diesel on a gravel driveway up a steep hill > without 4wd, and come back here and tell me how you managed it. The proponents of TWO-wheel drive enjoy several benefits not available to those that insist - and wisely so - on having four-wheel drive: Lower initial cost; potential for lower maintenance cost; lower overall vehicle height allows improved vehicle entry and exit for driver and passengers. The proponents of TWO-wheel drive IGNORE several things WE HAVE ALL learned over the last 20 years or so: FRONT-wheel drive or, even better, ALL-wheel drive is VASTLY superior - overall - than rear-wheel (only) drive. My biggest complaint of four-wheel drive is that it seems to REQUIRE what I consider to be an EXCESSIVE increase in vehicle height (ground clearance?). Does Chevrolet REALLY think I'm going to pay THAT kind of money and take it SERIOUSLY off road? On Monday, I hauled around my (~75-ish) mother-in-law and her elderly sister in my pickup. I keep a porter's step in the covered box that I provide for their CLIMBING into this truck. Given these passengers advanced age, I wonder which is worse for them: Climbing UP INTO a truck or UP AND OUT OF a Corolla? Neither is effortless. <sigh> Signature:) JR 2000 Skamper Ultra 249 TT 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD Vortec 8100 - Allison 1000 I see where Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@redelfs.com> contributed: >My biggest complaint of four-wheel drive is that it seems to REQUIRE what I >consider to be an EXCESSIVE increase in vehicle height (ground clearance?). IMO the only full size 4wd p/up without that problem is the nearly-forgotten Jeep truck. IMO tall trucks are not only impractical (NO increase in ground clearance at the axles) but look as goofy as a redneck Camaro grafted onto a Blazer chassis. Monster wooly booger tires add to the effect. Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill > IMO tall trucks are not only impractical > (NO increase in ground clearance at the axles) Exactly. <sigh> > but look as goofy as a redneck Camaro grafted onto a Blazer chassis. Aw, mine is STOCK and doesn't LOOK bad at all. > Monster wooly booger tires add to the effect. I splurged and replaced the tires with (stock size) Michelins. First, probably last, time in my life. It's fun. Signature:) JR 2000 Skamper Ultra 249 TT 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD Vortec 8100 - Allison 1000 >> Try backing up a 7.3 diesel on a gravel driveway up a steep hill >> without 4wd, and come back here and tell me how you managed it. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > cost; potential for lower maintenance cost; lower overall vehicle height > allows improved vehicle entry and exit for driver and passengers. You need to scratch "lower overall vehicle height" from your list, at least for GM vehicles. > The proponents of TWO-wheel drive IGNORE several things WE HAVE ALL > learned [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > consider to be an EXCESSIVE increase in vehicle height (ground > clearance?). My '01 Chevy 3500 Duramax crew cab long bed dually 2wd and my new '06 Chevy 3500 Duramax HO crew cab long bed dually 4x4 have the same bed height. I know, I measured it. I didn't measure the height of the first step into the cab, but both require running boards for comfortable entry by most people. > Does Chevrolet REALLY think I'm going to pay THAT kind of money and take > it [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Corolla? > Neither is effortless. <sigh> > You need to scratch "lower overall vehicle height" from your list, at least > for GM vehicles. > My '01 Chevy 3500 Duramax crew cab long bed dually 2wd and my new '06 Chevy > 3500 Duramax HO crew cab long bed dually 4x4 have the same bed height. What's WITH that, anyway? Silly... <sigh> Signature:) JR 2000 Skamper Ultra 249 TT 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD Vortec 8100 - Allison 1000 >> You need to scratch "lower overall vehicle height" from your list, at least >> for GM vehicles. >> My '01 Chevy 3500 Duramax crew cab long bed dually 2wd and my new '06 Chevy >> 3500 Duramax HO crew cab long bed dually 4x4 have the same bed height. > >What's WITH that, anyway? Silly... <sigh> The bed height is the same because they are getting on the borderline of being too tall to pull a gooseneck or fifth wheel. Ford actually had to issue a lowering kit for one year of the 4x4 dually because the bed height was too tall. It was all a springing problem, and it looks as if they got back to the basics with going with mild springs for light load, then only contacting the stiff springs with a very short bed movement. I don't think the truck makers are really concerned with the ground clearance on the heavy/super duty trucks. Most of them don't use 4wd for off road use, so much as for extra traction and pulling of heavier loads in less than optimum road conditions. SignatureFrank Tabor > Try backing up a 7.3 diesel on a gravel driveway up a steep hill > without 4wd, and come back here and tell me how you managed it. Locking or limited slip rear will do the trick. >> Try backing up a 7.3 diesel on a gravel driveway up a steep hill >> without 4wd, and come back here and tell me how you managed it. > > Locking or limited slip rear will do the trick. Not really, a LOT of dead weigh up front to drag up the hill made worse by the physics of weight shifting to downhill axle on a grade. In such a senerios you could easily have twice as much effective weight on dead axle as rear drive axle. Signature----------------- www.thesnoman.com > Not really, a |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message