Subaru Outback enough to tow Scamp 13' ft.? - Page 2 - Fiberglass RV


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-01-2016, 12:06 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Name: jon
Trailer: Scamp 13
Washington
Posts: 28
scamp vs. subaru

hi,
i have been pulling our scamp 13 with a 2012 forester for 3 years. most of the time you can hardly tell it's back there. however, ours does not have the front bathroom. it was built with the separated room but without the toilet or shower. we just add a portapotty which does not weigh a lot.
__________________

__________________
jondsw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 12:53 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
M Scott's Avatar
 
Name: Marilyn
Trailer: 13 ft 2005 Scamp Deluxe; 2002 Subaru V6 Outback
Oregon
Posts: 175
Margaret - I love my Subaru Outback and 13 ft deluxe Scamp with bath. Best to get a 6 cyinder Outback. I have a 2005 3.6 and it pulls my Scamp throughout the Rocky and Cascade Mountains easily...no strain. The larger engine makes a huge difference.

If you're purchasing an Outback, go for the 3.6...the extra power will serve you well.
__________________

__________________
M Scott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 01:51 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Name: Margaret
Trailer: in the market
North Carolina
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Collins View Post
According to the Subaru website, a 2016 Outback has a towing capacity of 2700 lb and 200 lb hitch weight. Should be more than enough for a 13 ft.
Yes, but that doesn't include anything I'm carrying. Better safe than sorry, tho. I like the Outbacks a lot. Plus, I have no towing experience, and plan to drive in mountains.

Margaret
__________________
Lonely Road is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 01:53 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Name: Margaret
Trailer: in the market
North Carolina
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helena View Post
I opted for a 6 cylinder Outback as it has a higher towing capacity. (3000).
I think I'm better looking for 3500 or 4000.

M
__________________
Lonely Road is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 01:55 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Name: Margaret
Trailer: in the market
North Carolina
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbybe View Post
Jon is right, for my 2011, and I do not believe it has changed for later years. Here in Sacramento it is now getting up into the 100's. With my HC1 the tongue weight is not an issue, but with any of these trailers I think the 1350 in hot weather is harder to meet. I will find out soon how things will work out. It is into the 100's now here in Sacramento, though I did have a transmission cooler just installed. I am headed to the mountains tomorrow.


Don
Sacramento
Oh geez. No offense, but I'm glad I'm not there. I do visit Death Valley in cooler months.

Margaret
__________________
Lonely Road is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 01:59 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Name: Margaret
Trailer: in the market
North Carolina
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilles View Post
You know the link ..?

Trailer Weights in the Real World
I don't think so, but I'll def. open the link.

Thx., Margaret
__________________
Lonely Road is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 02:01 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Name: Margaret
Trailer: in the market
North Carolina
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbullivant View Post
I have an 07 Rav4 v6 that I use to tow a 4'x8' utility trailer. l recently helped a friend tow the trailer behind his 2015 4 cyl Outback to pick up two scoops of landscaping mulch (around 2klbs total). We were amazed that it was only able to creep up hills at about five mph. I realize this is a poorly documented anecdotal account but it was enough to convince me that I'd look elsewhere for a tow vehicle. Not sure whether the CVT is at fault or simply a lack of power. Or maybe I'm just used to the Rav.
Bill
Oh oh.


M
__________________
Lonely Road is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 02:01 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Carol H's Avatar
 
Name: Carol
Trailer: 22' Airstream Formerly 16' Scamp
British Columbia
Posts: 11,731
Registry
Having pulled with an Outback for six years I would like to suggest to the OP that as they have decided to purchase a deluxe 13' with a Front bath they are going to need to look at a different make of tow vehicle due to the tongue weight of the trailer they have picked.

NONE of the Subaru's regardless of the engine size are rated to carry anymore than 200lbs on the tongue!

With all due respect to some here I am going to suggest that we have a few folks who need to actually weigh their trailers. U-Haul 13's and Hunter Compacts are the only trailers that routinely weigh in at under 200lbs on the tongue.

On the Real World Weight Thread there are 5 - 13' Scamps NONE of them have a tongue weight of under 200lbs. 1 weighed (a standard ) 240lbs on the tongue and 3 Weighed in at 230lbs (2 deluxe and 1 standard) and only one came in at 200lbs.

The above really is not a big surprise. Most 13' Casita's, Bolers and Escapes that have been weighed correctly once loaded for camping more often than not weight in at over 200lbs on the tongue. That is assuming they have been loaded correctly for the most stable tow experience and they have propane and battery on tongue.

To see the most current xl sheet From the thread Trailer Weights in the Real World go to Lakeshoreimages.com/spreadsheets/weight.xls.
Carol H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 02:13 PM   #23
Commercial Member
 
Name: Jeremy
Trailer: Compact Jr and Teardrop Trailer
Washington
Posts: 93
I have a 2014 Outback 2.5L CVT. I used it tow my Compact Jr home when I bought it. It was a 300+ mile trip from Spokane WA to Marysville WA (North of Seattle). It was all highway driving over both flat land and a mountain pass. The trailer was empty except for a few item we brought that i put inside the trailer to increase the tongue weight. I weighed the trailer before we left Spokane and it was about 1100#. The Outback had not problem towing even over the mountains. That being said the gas mileage sucked.... Going over we averaged 30+ MPG. Coming home with the trailer we averaged 18.2 MPG. It was not the weight of the trailer, it was the wind resistance from the trailer was the issue. I could coast down a steep hill and the trailer would slow me down like I was dragging an anchor...

Since then I bought a 2015 Tacoma and found it tows much better. I get 17+MPG towing the trailer (18.5 MPG without).

If we were going on a local camping trip I would still use the Outback but most trip we will use the Tacoma.

Jeremy
__________________
rainjer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 02:58 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Name: Darwin
Trailer: 2002 19 ft Scamp 19 ft 5th Wheel
Posts: 3,030
Send a message via Yahoo to Darwin Maring
Trailer brakes make all the difference.
__________________
Darwin Maring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 03:10 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Carol H's Avatar
 
Name: Carol
Trailer: 22' Airstream Formerly 16' Scamp
British Columbia
Posts: 11,731
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darwin Maring View Post
Trailer brakes make all the difference.
Yup they do which is why the Subaru's max tow ratings only applies to trailers with brakes!

If a trailer has no brakes then the Subaru is only rated to tow 1000lbs.
Carol H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 03:15 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Name: Frederick / Janis
Trailer: Previously Scamp 13 2002,2016. Scamp 16 on order
Michigan
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainjer View Post
Coming home with the trailer we averaged 18.2 MPG. It was not the weight of the trailer, it was the wind resistance from the trailer was the issue. I could coast down a steep hill and the trailer would slow me down like I was dragging an anchor...


Jeremy

Yup. Folks everywhere in social media love the Subaru and small Scamp and Scamp-like trailers and about all that ever gets mentioned is trailering capacity. Tongue weights are largely ignored and even rarer is the discussion about how many frontal square feet of trailer does the auto maker recommend on any vehicle.

I know the front of the Scamp is round and smooth, but I agree with the anchor analogy. Get into a head wind at all and even the little 13 will indeed act as an anchor. I too have never quite understood those who gleefully exclaim that they "don't even know they're towing anything". I sometimes wonder if the TV is Peterbuilt.
__________________
bpfick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 03:35 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Name: JD
Trailer: Scamp 16 Modified (BIGLY)
Florida
Posts: 1,045
Standard ratings are for weight and 30 sq ft frontal area.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Fiberglass RV mobile app
__________________
redbarron55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2016, 04:10 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Carol H's Avatar
 
Name: Carol
Trailer: 22' Airstream Formerly 16' Scamp
British Columbia
Posts: 11,731
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by bpfick View Post

I know the front of the Scamp is round and smooth, but I agree with the anchor analogy. Get into a head wind at all and even the little 13 will indeed act as an anchor. I too have never quite understood those who gleefully exclaim that they "don't even know they're towing anything". I sometimes wonder if the TV is Peterbuilt.
Here is a news flash. In headwinds the same thing will happen regardless of what you are pulling it with. EVEN a truck

I have pulled my 16' Scamp with an Outback, a mid size V6 truck and a full sized V8 truck and I have with all 3 combos had occasion to have to use the gas while driving down a steep hill in a head wind. ;-) Have also seen the MPG's go south to the 6-7 mpg range while towing on the flats in a head wind with all 3 vehicles.

The funny thing is that some assume the Outback does not weigh much and as such the Scamp would be an anchor to the Outback. The Outback is not as light as some might think and in fact some years the Outback has out weighed the ever popular Toyota Tacoma!

I actually wish I could have a truck that provided as rock solid a tow in side winds as the Subaru did/does. I think it might surprise a few people as to how solidly some of the smaller SUV or Station Wagon vehicles can tow compared to a truck. Take a look at some of Can-Am's Youtube videos to see how well some of the set ups do.

If one has only ever pulled with a truck then I can see why they might not have ever had the feeling that they are not towing anything - even if only for a fleeting moment. Honestly I have never had that feeling while pulling with a truck either.

If I only owned a 13' Scamp standard & only travel with myself and another party in the car, I would not hesitate to tow it with an Outback taking care as to how I stowed it to keep the tongue weight down to 200lbs or less. Especially if I was only going to be towing with the Outback a few times a year.
__________________

Carol H is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
scamp


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MPG with Subaru Outback and Scamp 13 John Linck General Chat 5 04-13-2015 02:34 PM
Subaru Outback Towing a 16' Scamp? Parker Buckley Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 51 11-04-2011 11:04 AM
Subaru Outback + Scamp 16?? Doable, or a mistake? ElizabethM Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 25 11-02-2010 10:40 PM
Subaru Outback and Scamp 16SD Radar1 General Chat 4 08-02-2010 04:46 PM
2007 Subaru Outback + 13ft Scamp = 22mpg Mikeny Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 13 07-09-2008 09:18 AM

» Upcoming Events
No events scheduled in
the next 465 days.
» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.