 |
 | 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 2007Tow vehicle - WB vs Tow rating
I'm looking at several different tow vehicles. I have read the opinions of most in the group, saying that wheelbase is the key. But what if a shorter WB vehicle is rated higher? I have a 27' Jayco Eagle 4800lbs dry. I am looking at older Expeditions, Tahoes, Suburbans. I would like to stay with 1/2 ton if possible. The Exps well equipped can tow between 7400-8000lbs. The earlier Burbs with the 5.7 are only rated at 6500lbs. The Tahoes with 5.7 are rated around 7000lbs. Looking for your opinions here. 5.7L Burb, Tahoe or 5.4L Expedition? "mgl" <mglsanchez@gmail.com> wrote in news:1168918267.644388.232580 @m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com: > I'm looking at several different tow vehicles. I have read the > opinions of most in the group, saying that wheelbase is the key. But [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Looking for your opinions here. 5.7L Burb, Tahoe or 5.4L Expedition? What's the GVWR of that trailer? The reason for the emphasis upon wheelbase is due to the "tail wagging the dog" situation whereby motions of the trailer unduly transfer to the tow vehicle. The longer the wheelbase the lesser the effect. Then, too, a LWB vehicle will provide a smoother ride, roomier interior, and, usually, more cargo space than a SWB vehicle. <G> FWIW, you may be gravely disappointed by the choice of a 1/2-ton tow vehicle, especially one that was not originally configured for towing: that trailer will be acting as a "drag 'chute" due to its frontal area and the stresses upon the tow vehicle are considerable. [My ex-boss got his money back on a Tahoe 'cause, although rated for far more weight than the GVWR of his trailer, the Tahoe went through a transmission and 2 differentials within less than a year - towing only on isolated weekends.] The problem is that most passenger vehicles are rated only for weight and NOT frontal area. [Ford, OTOH, claims that you have to have an F-550 to tow a high-profile FW. :)] The weight, as apparently envisioned, would be lead plate on a bumper-high trailer. :( IIWY, I'd forget the Tahoe and its clones and go with a 'Burb or one of ITS clones. >The reason for the emphasis upon wheelbase is due to the "tail wagging the >dog" situation whereby motions of the trailer unduly transfer to the tow >vehicle. > >The longer the wheelbase the lesser the effect. Very good points. A Burb is a far better tow vehicle than a Tahoe because of this. Also a 350 can move a lot of weight IF it is geared properly. THe problem is that most stock 1/2 ton burbs are not and a Burb 3.42 axle ratio is not a tow vehicle. You also want to make sure you have a aux tranny cooler because it will have a short life towing if it is not properly geared. Sometimes towing with taller axle ratio gives you a flase impression because the 4L60 used in that vehicle has a deep first gear (3.06 to 1) that will make it feel strong on take off at times even with a tall rear axle ratio but it will strain badly in drive and ride the upper end of converter stall a lot under load doing a slow bake of tranny and not helping your MPG either. When you choose and configure vehcile if max MPG solo is you game and you gear it as such towing will suffer. Make no mistake that you want at least a 3.73 or deeper in a 5.7 burb if you plan to tow. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com GVWR is 7500lbs. We are very aware of weight issues and consider the weight of items that we pack. I pulled this trailer last summer with a conversion E150 but sold it because it just wasn't enough pulling power. While it wasn't terrible, I spent most of the time towing in 3rd and I knew I would eventually destroy the trans. We want to do the right thing but also want to be safe. RAM? wrote: > "mgl" <mglsanchez@gmail.com> wrote in news:1168918267.644388.232580 > @m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > IIWY, I'd forget the Tahoe and its clones and go with a 'Burb or one of ITS > clones. mgl wrote:.......... We want to do the right thing but also want to be safe. I am looking at older Expeditions, Tahoes, Suburbans. I would like to stay with 1/2 ton if possible. I don't understand you wanting to stay with a 1/2 ton. (150-1500 series) You can buy an older 3/4 ton (250-2500 series) vehicle for about the same price and it will ride just as well the lighter duty one. If you "want to do the right thing but also want to be safe".....going with the 3/4 ton is the only way to go. You might even find a 1 ton (350-3500 series) truck for the right price. As mentioned here before.........I don't ever remember reading about someone complaining they had TO MUCH truck.  SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) Hi JerryD: Finding older 3/4 ton vehicles with low mileage is very difficult. In addition, the 3/4 ton Burb with the 5.7L is actually rated to tow less than the 1/2 ton version. Some background that perhaps I should share: I have contact with numerous Ford engineers who have been in the light/heavy truck business for 20+ years. To a man they are telling me that an Excursion or 3/4 ton vehicle is overkill for my setup. Again, these guys are in the business, so I am hesitant to just discard their advice. So I am taking their advice and looking at 1/2 ton vehicles. I don't mind getting a Burb, but the pre-2000 1/2 tons are only rated at 6500lbs or so. I can get a 5.4L Expedition 2WD that tows 8000lbs. This is probably my main issue here. The Exp is rated to tow 1500lbs more, the Burb has the longer wheelbase but I will be closer to the tow capacity. > mgl wrote:.......... We want to do the right thing but also want to be safe. > I am looking at older Expeditions, Tahoes, Suburbans. I would like to stay [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > As mentioned here before.........I don't ever remember reading about someone > complaining they had TO MUCH truck. > Some background that perhaps I should share: I have contact with numerous > Ford engineers who have been in the light/heavy truck business for 20+ [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > main issue here. The Exp is rated to tow 1500lbs more, the Burb has the > longer wheelbase but I will be closer to the tow capacity. It's a whole lot cheaper now to buy a little more truck than you need, than to have to go buy another truck when you decide to upgrade to a heavier trailer a little later on. You will have the expense of both a new trailer and a new tow vehicle. As Jerry said, no one ever complained about having too much truck. SignatureFrank Tabor Happiness is a hard disk. >It's a whole lot cheaper now to buy a little more truck than you need, >than to have to go buy another truck when you decide to upgrade to a >heavier trailer a little later on. You will have the expense of both a >new trailer and a new tow vehicle. Yes and no. IF he gets a older SUburban (a 2000 or earlier) is has sturdier rear suspension that can be beefed up further yet with ease unlike the newer Silverado style one that lack a sturdy rear suspesion and instead use a soft riding coild setup. There was a time when even a 1500 burb was built like a truck, I know as I have a 89 GMC 1/2 4x4 burb that I bought new that has 5 leafs and a booster in rear on each side and rides a bit like a truck too. It has hauled many different types of trailers in its life with no problems especailly with stabilty. The tow ratings on newer models are greatly over rated mostly for sales. A new 1500 P/U is now rated to tow as much as my 2000 K3500 SRW truck and that is a joke. Take your pick either my truck with its 4 ton capacity rear axle with generous brakes ansd 10 ply tires and 9200 GVW rating is greatly under rated or the new 1/2 is greatly over rated. Tkae you pick. Properly equipped a older 5.7 Burb can easilly handle a 6 or 7 K trailer with 6 ply tires and proper axle ratio. The old 5.7 has more usuable torque below 3000 RPM where you need it towing than then new higher HP rated 5.3 in newer burbs. SOme will argue the point but there is not federal standards for tow ratings so Detriot is free to put what ever rating they want on them to help them sell. Itis the axle ratio that will make you or break you on towing power, not the claimed factory rating or a high HP ratingthat peaks above 5000 RPM. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>It's a whole lot cheaper now to buy a little more truck than you need, >>than to have to go buy another truck when you decide to upgrade to a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > unlike the newer Silverado style one that lack a sturdy rear suspesion > and instead use a soft riding coild setup. There was a time when even snipped a bunch of poop Will you stuff your advice where the sun don't shine, please. The guy is going to tow a trailer that will be a tough pull for the 1500 Suburban. He needs a 250/2500 if he's going to stick with an suv. If he was going with an extended cab pickup, he could use a 150/1500. The coil suspension used on the newer Subs can be "beefed" by using air bags. The point we're trying to make is, he can buy a 2500 Suburban so he doesn't need to get a 250/1500. Apparently he thinks he needs an suv. Heck, if he had the money, his best bet would be a Powersmoke Expedition. Even a V10 Expedition would do the job and might be easier to find. Hugh >Will you stuff your advice where the sun don't shine, please. The guy >is going to tow a trailer that will be a tough pull for the 1500 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Suburban so he doesn't need to get a 250/1500. Apparently he thinks he >needs an suv. FIrst coming from someone that thinkks 3/8 ton dodge with a Hemi is a great TV it not a reliable source on what a good TV is. Nothing wrong with a properly equipped older burb with a 7K trailer or so but you would know that IF you had ever owned one. Biggest load I ever towed with mine was about 8K and did it many times and without needing a WD hitch either. I would not dream of trying that with a new Silverado 1/2 ton burb regardless of factory rating with a 5.3. Like I said Burbs are in a class by themself. Properly equipped they can haul 8 or 9 people comfort and/or tow a heavy load too. No pickup made can match that. Trhough in dual heaters and dual A/C (and my old burb actaully pipes hot water back there) and you can stay comfortably warm throught vehicle even at 40 below. I know because I have done it several times. Sadly though the newer burbs become more car with each model change (like trucks too) and they are loosing there unique ablities. 91 was the lasts of the real truck like burbs and 2000 during change over to Silverado chassis was the end of what remained of the old truck heritage. My 89 has 182K miles and is still pretty cherry with no rust and I have no plans to replace it with a new "car" version of it. I need at least another 5 years out of it for kids to finish college and it will make that easy and then some. Your modern new burb would not fair as well at 18 years old as my old one has. Sure newer one rides better and has better creature comforts but it has a lot less meat to it and a lot more to go wrong with it too. I have had more trouble with my 2000 K3500 in 38K miles and 7 years than the burb hands down. They just do not build them for the long run these days. They build then to look pretty for a while and little more. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com > Yes and no. IF he gets a older SUburban (a 2000 or earlier) is has > sturdier rear suspension that can be beefed up further yet with ease > unlike the newer Silverado style one that lack a sturdy rear suspesion and > instead use a soft riding coild setup.<<<<<<<<<< Here we go counting leaf springs again. You can beef up the suspension all you want, even put a dual wheel axle in the truck and if you get into an accident and were towing more than the sticker says the truck is rated for.............a sharp lawyer will take everything you own. We are telling him to get a 2500 series truck/burb and you are telling him to get a 1500 series and beef it up. Let me see...............which do I want to do...........buy a truck already made to pull the weight or........buy one that is too light and beef it up.............hmmmmmm ???? decisions...decisions SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 10:41:52 -0500, "JerryD\(upstateNY\)" <jerryd@wherever.com> wrote: >Here we go counting leaf springs again. >You can beef up the suspension all you want, even put a dual wheel axle in [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >made to pull the weight or........buy one that is too light and beef it >up.............hmmmmmm ???? decisions...decisions Not if it is done properly and the capacities of the axle and tires is not exceeded. The grim reality here is that they are putting less suspension in newer ones than the older model to improve ride to better sell them though there are those such as yourself that want to beleive this is not happening nor that it has any impact or true load capacity.High tow rating on new LD SUV's are not realistic at all and strickly for sales hype. I have been towing for over 30 years now and I know what works and what does not and where BS starts and ends. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com > where BS starts With a Snoman post. SignatureFrank Tabor irony, n.: A windy day, when, just as a beautiful girl with a short skirt approaches, dust blows in your eyes. SnoMan wrote: I have been towing for over 30 years now and > I know what works and what does not and where BS starts and ends.<<<< You are missing the point of my post, which is........if you get into an accident and were towing more than the sticker says the truck is rated for, a sharp lawyer will take everything you own. What you did to the truck isn't going to mean sh.t. SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) > SnoMan wrote: I have been towing for over 30 years now and > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > What you did to the truck isn't going to mean sh.t. That may not be totally correct, what he does to the truck could be detrimental to his endeavors and he don't even know it. SignatureCan't we all just get along? BILL P. Just Me & DOG I ran the numbers -- even with an Expedition I am not exceeding ANY of the ratings, including GVWR, GCWR, axle, tow rating, etc. etc. The numbers for an F-150 wouldn't be that different. Leave the lawyer talk out of it...don't spread that FUD here. In choosing a 1/2 ton vehicle the numbers for most of them would be within an 80% safety margin. A notable exception would be the pre-2000 burbs with the 5.7....this is one of the big reasons I posted here. In fact, if a lawyer type were to run the numbers on a pre-2000 burb vs. a 5.4L 2WD Expedition, I could be in trouble with the burb but pass with flying colors in the Expy. I would rather buy the burb but don't want to get into that situation. I appreciate all of your input. Interesting to note that 9 out of 10 of the people I ask say that I would be fine with a 1/2 ton vehicle. These are Engineers for the Big 3, most of whom work with heavy/light trucks and have pulled campers in the past (almost everyone in Michigan has at one point in their life!) I do agree that a longer wheelbase vehicle makes sense and will attempt to choose my tow vehicle appropriately. > > SnoMan wrote: I have been towing for over 30 years now and > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > & > DOG I see where "mgl" <mglsanchez@gmail.com> growled: >I ran the numbers -- even with an Expedition I am not exceeding ANY of >the ratings, including GVWR, GCWR, axle, tow rating, etc. etc. The [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >choosing a 1/2 ton vehicle the numbers for most of them would be within >an 80% safety margin. Since you claim you "ran the numbers" and are convinced you know the answers, WHY do you feel compelled to argue with the folks here who KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE that lightweight pickups are NOT really satisfactory for towing even light TT's? Here is some more stuff to read - but please spare me further argument. Just do what you like - it's no skin off my nose: ========================== There is pretty general agreement that it is unwise and possibly dangerous to EXCEED maximum ratings, but many of us with long trailering experience have found that tow rating information is often misleading - or at least not applicable to everyone. 1. The tow rating is ALWAYS a maximum figure, and is as large as the manufacturer dares make it. They hope you will buy their stuff for towing. Their rating may or may not be right for you. Every maker has his own methods of setting tow ratings. Some are conservative and some are ludicrously over-stated (many Jeep Cherokees were rated at 5,000 lbs, and IMO are hopelessly overloaded at that figure). 2. MOST tow ratings (nothing personal or specific vs your brand) do not allow for long steep grades - up or (especially) down. 3. Most tow ratings make no allowance for bad road conditions. 4. Most tow ratings are accompanied by asterisks that call attention to special equipment "required". Your rig may not have those features. 5. Most tow ratings make no allowance whatever for emergency maneuvers. I assure you your vehicle WILL NOT turn or stop as fast or as safely with the maximum load as it will with a lot less. The difference can be dramatic. Don't believe me? Try a few tactics in a large parking lot. 6. Vehicle tow ratings make no allowance for the DRIVER'S "tow rating". No insult intended, but if you have to ask how much your rig will tow, you have neither the experience or the knowledge to handle the maximum load safely. IMO. 7. One of the most-overlooked factors in safe towing is a COMBINED maximum (GCWR = Gross Combined Weight Rating, often only found in a towing guide) that dictates a much lighter-than-maximum TOWED load. Most of the weight of cargo & passengers in the tow vehicle must be deducted from the permissible towed load to find the true rating. Some towing guides appear to gloss over this issue because the marketing types want to put the best possible face on their product. 8. What is reasonably safe and comfortable at 45 mph may well be a lethal weapon at 75. Tow ratings, IMO, do NOT reflect any respect for this hazard. 9. An internal combustion engine loses about 2 1/2 to 3% efficiency per thousand feet. You can easily lose 15-18% in the mountains unless you have a turbocharger or supercharger. 10. Regardless of weight ratings, SUV's and "1/2'-ton" pickups are mostly useless for serious towing. They will handle pop-ups and even some of the short "lite" trailers - and will haul yer big one out to the lake if you are careful. But competent handling of a large TT requires a long wheelbase & short overhang. Someone once wrote: "You can tow anything with anything - the question is how far, how safely?" BOTTOM LINE: IF you trust the experienced trailerists who have been there and done that and don't want to go back, you will not exceed about 75% of the rated maximum. The number is of course not writ by the finger of God on a stone tablet - it is merely an indication that you should stay well below the manufacturer's maximum allowance if you want a safe, comfortable trip. Some say the figure ought to be as low as 50 or 60%. But except for a few macho braggarts, most experienced folks agree in principle if not detail with these concerns. For example, go to http://www.popuptimes.com/archives/ruleofthumb.asp ======================= Will Sill Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. I appreciate all the input...I said as much in my last post. I did post to this group before I talked to the truck engineers locally...I started out with an open mind when I posted here...where I left the reservation is when some clown started to talk about "lawyers" and how they would take all my money if I got in an accident. That is pure BS. In addition...since I have "run the numbers" on a number of 1/2 ton vehicles and am within 75-80%, how is this a bad thing? Most of you claim/cling to this percentage in addition to GCWR (which I pointed out I was within the safety margin as well)....outside of the wheelbase argument (which I agree with), I am within all of the specifications that you and this group point out! Look at it from my perspective - I posted to this group asking for your opinions (thank you all), I have run the numbers (shows that I would be OK with a 1/2 ton, even within the margin of error), and ask others that I respect (most of whom have towed trailers in the past AND KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE). I think I have done my due diligence and will choose my TV accordingly. BTW, 50-60% margin of error is ludicrous..... > I see where "mgl" <mglsanchez@gmail.com> growled: > >I ran the numbers -- even with an Expedition I am not exceeding ANY of [quoted text clipped - 83 lines] > Don't worry about what people think, they don't do > it very often. I see where "mgl" <mglsanchez@gmail.com> contributed: >I appreciate all the input... Sure. You're welcome. Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill posted here...where I left the reservation is when some clown started to talk about "lawyers" and how > they would take all my money if I got in an accident. <<<<<< That was me that said that, and it's the truth whether you belive it or not. I assume you will not take anyone here's advice about anything because you already had your mind made up which truck you were going to get before you posted here. 25 poeple here have said "get a 3/4 ton truck" and you are still going to get a 1/2 ton. All you are doing is wasting everyone here's time. > BTW, 50-60% margin of error is ludicrous.....<<< Another opinion from someone who thinks he knows everything. Since you know so much, you should be here TELLING US what to drive, not asking us. SignatureJerryD(upstateNY) JerryD: I apologize if you took my comment as a personal attack. I probably shouldn't have written it that way. Also, 25 people locally whom I personally know and respect have told me otherwise. Like I said, I appreciate all of your input on this. I specifically posted here because I wanted to find reasoned arguments for buying a 3/4 ton vs. 1/2 ton. Sooo.....two questions that have not been SPECIFICALLY answered: (1) If I stay within all of the stated limits of the vehicle (more specifically the safety margin), how will a lawyer come after me? I am willing to listen to a reasonable argument on this.... (2) If I stay within the safety margin specs as defined by this group, outside of the WB argument, what is the difference? If I am within the safety margin, doesn't that negate the brakes, stopping, etc argument?? Again, I am open to explanations. > posted here...where I left the reservation is when some clown started to > talk about "lawyers" and how [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Since you know so much, you should be here TELLING US what to drive, not > asking us. > JerryD: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > safety margin, doesn't that negate the brakes, stopping, etc argument?? > Again, I am open to explanations. You're okay on both points and are showing patience with some of the posters. Keep in mind some here don't take kindly to folk who don't buy the Dooms Day picture. I'll share a true story. Fellow camper had an Expedition ('99 IIRC) and also had a Hornet, double slide pull behind. The trailer was something like 33' or more long. He was towing from Ohio to central Florida and had done so for several years. Two years ago we all convinced him he needed a Hensley Hitch and he bought one. Got it set up correctly and towed his trailer home that year. Last winter he showed up and couldn't say enough good about the setup. This year I got here and asked where Hank was, home was the reply. Seems he'd tangled with a tractor trailer not far from his home and destroyed the trailer. His wife won't let him buy another rv so poor Hank is stuck in frozen Ohio till Hell freezes over <g>. Moral is, having more than enough tow vehicle is never bad. Having more than enough power is good, it lets you relax and enjoy the ride. Your plan may be adequate but it won't be ideal. Best you can do is stiffen the rear suspension enough to make a stable towing platform. You still will be compromising the ride by sticking to plan. You won't break any rules or laws but will be disappointed in the results of your decision. You have a choice now as nothing has been purchased yet. Give these guys a break, they really are trying to help you. Hugh (1) If I stay within all of the stated limits of the vehicle (more specifically the safety margin), how will a lawyer come after me? I am willing to listen to a reasonable argument on this....>>>>>>>> You will have no problem if you stay "within all of the stated limits of the vehicle". We have one guy here who thinks that if you put 3 extra leaves in your rear springs you can carry an extra ton or so. I just wanted to make it clear that even if it feels OK, you should not exceed the stated limits of the truck. If you are above the limits and have an accident, that is when the lawyer scenerio comes in. (2) If I stay within the safety margin specs as defined by this group, outside of the WB argument, what is the difference? If I am within the safety margin, doesn't that negate the brakes, stopping, etc argument?? Again, I am open to explanations.<<<<<<<< Most people in this group have 2-3-4 different RV's through the years. Many people (me included) started with a small RV of some sort and went to a larger one. Some only had a small RV for a short time before they traded up. If you buy a truck that will only tow a small RV and decide in 3 weeks you want a bigger RV, you have to buy a bigger truck, also. If you buy the bigger truck right now, you can upgrade with a lot less hassle. You will be surprised at how much weight you load into the truck and RV. Going over you maximum weight will be a lot easier than you think. -- JerryD(upstateNY) Guys: Thanks again. Agreed that a SWB SUV is not optimal. I just wanted to make sure that I understood the other points. BTW, that guy towing a 33' double slide with an Expedition was nuts. Now THATs something that I wouldn't do. > (1) If I stay within all of the stated limits of the vehicle (more > specifically the safety margin), how will a lawyer come after me? I am [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > -- > JerryD(upstateNY) > BTW, that guy towing a 33' double slide with an Expedition was nuts. > Now THATs something that I wouldn't do. Aw, that's nuttin'... A couple of years ago, I saw an Expedition towing a ~33-ft travel trailer with an 18-20-ft I.O. runabout (boat) on a tandem-axle trailer behind the travel trailer. During the "life" of my previous tow vehicle, I upgraded to a travel trailer that had the pickup RIGHT at the vehicle's rated maximum. I did the truck scale thing, the whole bit. The TT was RIGHT at the max when loaded. I did not, however, verify the tongue weight so I may have even been a bit over the axle limit for the pickup. Towing at the max, or even near the max, is a real drag (pun intended). There was NO using the overdrive. Forget using the cruise control Heck, there was no torque converter lockup. 55 was IT. My foot was against the downshift "detent" ALL the time. The only thing that "saved" us was that we had to stop every two hours for gas. I now have too much truck for the same trailer. But I'm sold on having too much, that's FOR SURE. The idea behind acquiring the monster truck was that I have plenty of upgrade options when the time comes. Towing with a vehicle that is near or at its maximum rating is VERY fatiguing from a driver's point of view. It also precludes any RV upgrade/up-size. Fuel consumption is beyond ridiculous. Signature:) JR 2000 Skamper Ultra 249 TT 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD Vortec 8100 - Allison 1000 >(1) If I stay within all of the stated limits of the vehicle (more >specifically the safety margin), how will a lawyer come after me? I am >willing to listen to a reasonable argument on this.... This one comes up regularly & it bugs me every time it does. Its dumb to exceed the mfr rating. I also think the so-called 75% guideline is needlessly cautious. But that's as far as it goes. I'm no lawyer but, unless your jurisdiction has enacted legislation giving legal status to the mfr ratings they are no more significant than any piece of sales literature. I repeat, I'm no lawyer, but I believe the test in most jurisdictions would be "what would a reasonable & prudent individual do?" or "what is the industry standard for this situation?" IOW, if you can demonstrate that it is a common practice then that is your defense. I don't recommend towing over the mfr ratings but I also don't pretend that it is a legal issue. SignatureR.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work) > I don't recommend towing over the mfr ratings but I also > don't pretend that it is a legal issue. I agree. Much like the [I've never heard of a gas station fire blamed on using a cell phone while refueling] anecdote, I have never heard of litigation where the RVer/defendant was found negligent due to vehicle overloading. However, with a lawyer now on every street corner, I certainly consider it possible if not particularly likely. Signature:) JR >JerryD: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >safety margin, doesn't that negate the brakes, stopping, etc argument?? > Again, I am open to explanations. Hi, If you are legal then you should have no problems with lawyers coming after you except to try and prove the accident, if you have one, is your fault. If you are illegal then they will find that out and use it against you if you have an accident, not only to prove it was your fault but that you were negligent in the operation of your vehicle. Same is true if you don't have the correct license for the weight of the setup as required by your home state. Would it happen for sure? Who knows but you technically are illegal and a good lawyer would find that out and use it against you if he needed to. Here is what I found out towing a little shorter trailer that weighed around 5200 - 5400 lbs. fully loaded with a 1500 pickup truck that was rated to tow 7500 lbs. The truck could tow the trailer and stop it too if the trailer brakes are working. However it was almost always working on the edge while towing. You had to keep it in 3rd gear on even the smallest hills, even on the interstates most grades would cause a downshift so the engine was almost always revved way up and LOUD. The truck was loaded only up to around 70% to 75% of its tow rating but I would not have even attempted to pull a heavier RV. It got terrible gas milage and worst of all it was not very stable while towing no matter what I did to try and correct it. When a semi would pass which was just about every one on the road you had to correct one way then another. It didn't handle side winds very well either. The only thing it did do well is come down hills because the trailer offered so much wind resistance that on some fairly steep hills I had to give it gas to get to the bottom. It was not fun to tow that trailer around with that truck. The 2500 are just a little more heavy duty and can handle towing and carrying loads better then the 1500. The 1500 would be fine for short trips to the lake once or twice a year but for extended travel, especially if you plan on taking it out west, the 2500 is a better choice. The 1500 truck was just about a year old when I traded to a 2500 HD truck and all those problems went away except certain shaped semi's passing would still require some slight steering correction, just the shape of the bow wave on those trucks I guess affected that trailer. Of course with the bigger truck, I ended up getting a much bigger trailer and a Hensley Hitch to help that truck handle the much bigger trailer :) You could get to heavy of a tow vehicle I guess but having one that is to small is much more cause for concern. Who and what you believe is up to you. You will find out one way or the other who was right for your situation, which is not the same as anyone else's for sure. Just be sure your engineer friends did do A LOT of towing of that size and weight RV with the particular tow vehicle you are looking at. Like I said weekend trips to the lake are a lot different then extended vacations half way across the country. Take care and Happy Campin... >> posted here...where I left the reservation is when some clown started to >> talk about "lawyers" and how [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >> Since you know so much, you should be here TELLING US what to drive, not >> asking us. SignatureRichA "We Get Too Soon Olde and Too Late Smart" MGL, I have stayed out of this because I was waiting to see how the thread burned down. You have the right plan....... As a professional (not unlike those here in town that you must have spoken to) in the passcar/light truck group of a major manufacturer for many years, I can tell you that the largest single component of the trailer tow rating is based in the warranty prospects. The major consideration there is the driveline. There are three main components of a towing capability: Driveline capability (this is trailer weight and air drag) Brake load capability (where the trailer better have brakes) Acceptable hitch vertical load component (tongue load) The tongue load can be managed with an equalizing hitch if you don't have surge brakes (many work trailers and boat trailers still do), but if you bend the frame or damage the suspension, the dealership will have a factory rep there the same day to start the confirmation that you loaded the vehicle over the stated limits and voided the warranty. If you tow something too heavy without brakes of its own (and survive) and blow up the brakes, the dealership will have a factory rep there the same day to start the confirmation that you tried to stop with the vehicle loaded over the stated limits or drove with the left foot on the brake pedal and voided the warranty. If you are too stupid to take it easy with a heavy GVW and smoke the trans, the dealership will have a factory rep there the same day to start the confirmation that you loaded the vehicle over the stated limits and voided the warranty. This used to be the hardest one to prove. All the dealership had was the burned up trans full of stinking burned AFT. With the modern ECU, it MAY record over limit conditions. This give the factory rep all the evidence he needs to void the warranty. Notice a running theme here? Notice Please - If one is capable of firing synapses in the correct order, all of these conditions can be avoided. Unfortunately, the manufacture must protect the organization from those that can not. That is exactly why the the tow capability is now sooo looww with a manual trans vehicle. Case in point - I used to tow a 6000# MORC class boat/trailer to regattas with a 1965 Jeep Gladiator with a 230cid engine and power nothing. As the boat was over the axles, it is easy to balance to a tongue of 300-350 and it towed just fine there. The trailer has surge brakes on all four wheels and you can stop and never know it's there, but getting it going could cost a clutch if you did not use a lot of sense. Pulling the boat out on a steep ramp still didn't need slipping the clutch - that is what the low range is for. This also worked for getting it started up hill, but that was a lot like running a split shift and I worked hard to avoid the case. I also didn't burn up any road while towing. Did I go very far? Not usually more than 300 miles (six hours in the old Jeep). I got to be too much of a project to keep going. So, I gave it to a grandchild of the original owner (got it from his son). Any time some little thing needed replacement, it could take a week just to find one. I still miss it - Sort of. I don't have a replacement yet. Matt Colie > I appreciate all the input...I said as much in my last post. I did > post to this group before I talked to the truck engineers locally...I [quoted text clipped - 106 lines] >>Don't worry about what people think, they don't do >>it very often. Hi JerryD: Finding older 3/4 ton vehicles with low mileage is very difficult. In addition, the 3/4 ton Burb with the 5.7L is actually rated to tow less than the 1/2 ton version. Some background that perhaps I should share: I have contact with numerous Ford engineers who have been in the light/heavy truck business for 20+ years. To a man they are telling me that an Excursion or 3/4 ton vehicle is overkill for my setup. Again, these guys are in the business, so I am hesitant to just discard their advice. So I am taking their advice and looking at 1/2 ton vehicles. I don't mind getting a Burb, but the pre-2000 1/2 tons are only rated at 6500lbs or so. I can get a 5.4L Expedition 2WD that tows 8000lbs. This is probably my main issue here. The Exp is rated to tow 1500lbs more, the Burb has the longer wheelbase but I will be closer to the tow capacity. > mgl wrote:.......... We want to do the right thing but also want to be safe. > I am looking at older Expeditions, Tahoes, Suburbans. I would like to stay [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > As mentioned here before.........I don't ever remember reading about someone > complaining they had TO MUCH truck. > Some background that perhaps I should share: > I have contact with numerous Ford engineers who have been in the > light/heavy truck business for 20+ years. To a man they are telling > me that an Excursion or 3/4 ton vehicle is overkill for my setup. > Again, these guys are in the business, so I am hesitant to just > discard their advice. They may be in the business, but are these "experts" actually towing RV's down the highway? If they are, then take their advice & leave this group alone. If not, you need to listen to those that say you need a full size vehicle to tow a travel trailer - any travel trailer. People posting to this group have hundreds of thousands of miles towin travel trailers over all types of roads and know the vehicles you are looking at are poor choices. I have over 200,000 mile on my current trailer with the last 90,000 miles being towed with a short bed pickup, which was a mistake. All my other tow vehicles were long wheel base and had a lot better ride and were more stable on the highway. I have had actual experience with both towing trailers. Again, have your experts in the business? Tom J > Hi JerryD: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > more, the Burb has the longer wheelbase but I will be closer to the tow > capacity. snipped Their advice is faulted. I found the following Suburban 2500 on cars.com; <http://cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp;?tracktype=usedcc&searchType=21&pageNumber= 0&numResultsPerPage=50&largeNumResultsPerPage=0&sortorder=descending&sortfield=P RICE+descending&certifiedOnly=false&criteria=K-%7CE-%7CM-_9_%7CB-14000%7CD-_105_ %7CN-N%7CR-250%7CI-1%7CP-PRICE+descending%7CQ-descending%7CZ-34715&aff=national& paId=218307834&recnum=17&leadExists=true> The free Carfax report doesn't list any damage and the pictures show a decent vehicle. Mileage is low enough to know there should be plenty of good miles left. It already has a tow package. As you don't have a tow vehicle yet, the Suburban 2500 makes more sense than any 150/1500 unit you could find. Better yet would be a club cab 250/2500 pickup with a short box. This would give you a longer wheelbase and would cost less to purchase. JMHO. Hugh HD in NY <hbdandvsd@nodamnspamyahoo.com> wrote in news:12qpvilc1slui18 @corp.supernews.com: > As you don't have a tow vehicle yet, the Suburban 2500 makes more > sense than any 150/1500 unit you could find. Better yet would be a > club cab 250/2500 pickup with a short box. This would give you a > longer wheelbase and would cost less to purchase. JMHO. Sound advice from the acknowledged Champion of "Light Trucks As Tow Vehicles". I totally concur on the 'Burb (or the Ford clone) but would advise against the short-bed if you go with a pickup - long beds carry more cargo and, usually, have a better resale. [They also give a better ride on long trips. :) ] BTW, Hugh, how's your 3/8-ton Dodge working out for you? snipped > Sound advice from the acknowledged Champion of "Light Trucks As Tow > Vehicles". [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > BTW, Hugh, how's your 3/8-ton Dodge working out for you? Terrific!! If I still had the '88 HR the Hemi wouldn't even know it was there <g>. Averaged over 9 mpg coming south this year and the trip was uneventful (as usual). We are making a change this year. The trailer is going to be stored in Florida as gas costs and the need to buy an additional month in a park, make the storing deal better. Plus, we are changing parks next year and are going to make Holiday Travel Resort in Leesburg our winter home. Clerbrook is changing with Encore at the helm. Most changes are for the good like getting rid of the eyesore units. Lon will be glad to hear the "Bud" guy is gone. They are making some changes for the better but the damn blue tarps are still in place. Holiday has a lot going for it, two pools both heated, one indoors restricted to adults only. No one allowed to stay long term with kids 18 or younger. That will keep families out. Kids can come down for two weeks, then have to leave. Lots of stuff going on all winter season long and they have free WiFi <g>. We've enjoyed Clerbrook for the past seven years but are looking forward to staying at Holiday for many more. Our best friends from Michigan have bought a park model there, that's the driving force behind our decision. Hugh >Better yet would be a >club cab 250/2500 pickup with a short box. This would give you a >longer wheelbase and would cost less to purchase. JMHO. And have less people space and be harder to manuver in tight places too. A crew cab can NEVER take the place of a burb as they are in a class all themselves and properly equipped make one of the finest tow vehicles out there for pull type trailers. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>Better yet would be a >>club cab 250/2500 pickup with a short box. This would give you a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com Horse sh.t. Hugh >Horse sh.t. You comment shows your total ignorance on this topic. 454 burbs where the undisputed pull type trailer tow kings for almost 30 years long before you animic Hemi and 1/2 ton CC's was even dream of. Heck I want to see your truck after 18 years and what my burb has been through or even ten years. The drive train is all factory original still and even has original starter too. (the small cheap starter on my 2000 gave up the ghost last year) Better still I like to see you truck take hlf the abuse my 79 J20 did and it still runs with a factory original drive train too. You pick on some trucks and SUV's because you have never owned a real one. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>Horse sh.t. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >----------------- >TheSnoMan.com BTW I new a guy that had a old newyorker with a pre smog 440 in it that used to tow a 35 ft air stream all over the place until late very late 70's. THat car would have wasted a hemi SUV towing big time and so would a lot of other big block powered lead sleds back then. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>>Horse sh.t. >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com You do go on dontcha <g>. Hugh >>>> Horse sh.t. >>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > You do go on dontcha <g>. > Hugh He really does. It's starnge that 440 was pulling a 35 ft Airstream in the 70's when there were none made then?????? Tom J Tom J wrote: >>>>>Horse sh.t. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Tom J Bet it pisses you off when this happens. http://www.allpar.com/mopar/440.html Only one thing was missing at intro time in the fall of 1968: new mills. The Chrysler crew was pretty much resting on their laurels, but who was complaining? The 340 was a dynamite mini-mill; the 383 was great for the buck, especially in its hot-cammed Road Runner and Super Bee incarnations. The 440 was the quintessential street piece and had been markedly improved for '68, what with a new Carter AVS jug replacing 1967's smallish AFB. The Hemi had been tuned-up, as well, for '68, receiving a warmer bumpstick grind. What could Chrysler possibly do for an encore? SignatureCan't we all just get along? BILL P. Just Me & DOG >Only one thing was missing at intro time in the >fall of 1968: new mills. The Chrysler crew was [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >receiving a warmer bumpstick grind. What could >Chrysler possibly do for an encore? The 340 was a good mill but no tow engine. THe 440 was in it prime as designe with awesome low and mid RPM power back then. It was never a real strong Hi RPM performer like the 383 could be because of its longer stroke but then it did not need it to tow well. A LOT of motor homes were powered by 440's until Chyrsler stopped making them ----------------- TheSnoMan.com Tom J wrote: >>>>>Horse sh.t. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Tom J OH! Were you talking about the Airstream, well they certainly could have made a non production model, nothing out of the ordinary back then or now. SignatureCan't we all just get along? BILL P. Just Me & DOG I see where "Tom J" <tomnews@earthlink.net> contributed: > It's starnge that 440 was pulling a 35 ft Airstream in >the 70's when there were none made then?????? You mean my '79 Dodge "Adventurer" dually had an aftermarket 440 engine from J C Whitney? Will Sill The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill > I see where "Tom J" <tomnews@earthlink.net> contributed: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You mean my '79 Dodge "Adventurer" dually had an aftermarket 440 > engine from J C Whitney? No, I mean you couldn't buy a 35 ft Airsteam back then!!!! Tom J Tom J wrote: >>I see where "Tom J" <tomnews@earthlink.net> contributed: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Tom J The pdf file Hunter furnished awhile back lists the '82 as the first year a 34' model was offered. Previous to that they only had 31' as the longest size travel trailer. Hugh >He really does. It's starnge that 440 was pulling a 35 ft Airstream in >the 70's when there were none made then?????? I guess this guy built it himself huh? Most modern SUV particularly 1/2 ton one pale when comapared to some family sedans of the laters 60's and early 70's. I rmember back around 1970 when Popular Science set out to set a land speed record towing a large air stream trailer on salt flats. They used a factor option 427 powered Chevy Impala. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >You do go on dontcha <g>. Is that the best you can do when caught with your pants down?? Typical! ----------------- TheSnoMan.com >>You do go on dontcha <g>. > > Is that the best you can do when caught with your pants down?? > Typical! > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com You mix truth with scads of fiction dredged from the anus of your mind and expect reasonable people to buy it. Then you get ticked when those same reasonable, educated, knowledge oriented, experience possessing folk question your verbal diarrhea. I shouldn't be surprised though, you are consistent in your mis-knowledge. Be aware you are now filtered as "read". I won't wipe you from my computer as someone needs to keep an eye on your bad advice. Hugh Anecdotal evidence is worthless. If you can show that 67% of 18YO 'burb's' are still towing trailers, then you have something. My 1996 Exploder has 174K miles and still runs quite well. It rarely tows but I suspect it would still tow as it was designed to do. Leading me to a big, SO WHAT! >>Horse sh.t. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >----------------- >TheSnoMan.com Lol....I should post other topics here just to get you guys going.... I got the message regarding the 3/4 ton vs. 1/2 ton. It's still not that easy to find them around here (Michigan), but I suppose I can keep looking. So, did I hear someone say that a 1/2 ton ext P/U is an option? If I run into trouble finding a decent 3/4 ton burb, what about the 1/2 ton pre-2000 burb? I have found many of those in great condition locally. > Anecdotal evidence is worthless. If you can show that 67% of 18YO > 'burb's' are still towing trailers, then you have something. My 1996 [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >----------------- > >TheSnoMan.com > Lol....I should post other topics here just to get you guys going.... > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > run into trouble finding a decent 3/4 ton burb, what about the 1/2 ton > pre-2000 burb? I have found many of those in great condition locally. Here's a '96 2500 Suburban with low miles (for the year), has a clean Carfax report and has a 7.4L engine. Asking price is $7,995 and is less than 200 miles from detroit, MI; <http://cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp;?tracktype=usedcc&searchType=21&pageNumber= 0&numResultsPerPage=250&largeNumResultsPerPage=0&sortorder=ascending&sortfield=M ILES+ascending%2CPRICE+descending&certifiedOnly=false&criteria=K-%7CE-%7CM-_9_%7 CB-14000%7CD-_105_%7CN-N%7CR-250%7CI-1%7CP-MILES+ascending%2CPRICE+descending%7C Q-ascending%7CZ-48101&aff=national&paId=217039246&recnum=27&leadExists=true> I see no reason you can't find a suitable tow vehicle, within your price range and within a reasonable distance from you. If you really must have an suv, make it the Suburban and make it a 2500. If you can get by with a pickup, an extended cab 1500 with a short box will suffice. Reason it will work is the difference in wheelbases. The Sub is ~131" and the pickup is 142.5". I've towed a 26', 4600# Holiday Rambler travel trailer with two different year GMC extended cab pickups. Put a fiberglass cap on the pickup and it makes a good tow vehicle for two persons. Hugh >> Lol....I should post other topics here just to get you guys going.... >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > persons. > Hugh Here's 4x4 2500 burb with a 454 and a hightop roof. http://www.cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp;?tracktype=usedcc&searchType=22&pageNum ber=0&numResultsPerPage=250&largeNumResultsPerPage=0&sortorder=descending&sortfi eld=PRICE+descending&certifiedOnly=false&criteria=K-2500%7CE-ANY%7CM-_9_%7CG-900 00%7CB-12000%7CF-10000%7CA-1000%7CH-%7CD-_105_%7CN-N%7CR-250%7CI-1%7CP-PRICE+des cending%7CQ-descending%7CY-_2004-2003-2002-2001-2000-1999-1998-1997-1996-1995-19 94-1993_%7CX-popular%7CZ-49224&aff=national&paId=133771779&recnum=0&leadExists=t rue >"mgl" <mglsanchez@gmail.com> wrote: >I'm looking at several different tow vehicles. I have read the >opinions of most in the group, saying that wheelbase is the key. But [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Looking for your opinions here. 5.7L Burb, Tahoe or 5.4L Expedition? We towed an 18 or 19 foot trailer that weighed 5,000# loaded with our 2000 Expedition. It towed fine, but I don't think I would want another 2,000# back there. We used the hitch that came on the Expedition from the factory. No equalizer, Hensley, etc. SignatureDD > I'm looking at several different tow vehicles. I have read the > opinions of most in the group, saying that wheelbase is the key. But [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Looking for your opinions here. 5.7L Burb, Tahoe or 5.4L Expedition? I have done what you are considering. When I got my first trailer, a 26 ft., I towed it with a Tahoe with a 5.7 L. The trailer had a GVWR of 7000 lbs and an actual scale weight of 5600 loaded for camping. The Tahoe handled it but not well. Short of power for big hills and a tendency to sway when passed by trailer trucks. Had to pull out of Overdrive. I now have a Jayco 29 ft that weighs about 7000 loaded. I pull it with a 2004 Suburban 3/4 ton with an 8.1 liter. (Nobody has ever complained of having to much power, either) There is really no comparison. This is a solid rig. Absolutely no sway. I would not atttempt to pull this trailer with the Tahoe. Part of the reason is the wheelbase, and part is due to having leaf springs, rather than coils on the rear. A Suburban with a tow package has auxilliary tranny and oil coolers. Have never had either heat when pulling in the Rockies in 90 degree heat. Also, note that Jayco's are heavy on the tongue. Mine is over 1000 lbs. Ron
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.