Anyone towing with a 2013 Ford Escape?

[Mike Magee]

Originally Posted by Jared J

If you were worried about it, I would contact ford directly. There's a big difference between a flat 30' square piece, and a pretty curved 50' square piece.

What makes you think that anyone at Ford would contradict their official, approved-by-lawyers manual?

I agree, there's a big difference. 50 square feet with a curve will resist wind far more than 30 square feet of flat. Curves do help, but not that much... not enough to offset a 67% increase in frontal area.

[Glenn Baglo]

All I can say about Ford is that I will never buy another one since they keep inflicting audio on me with the video ads I get on this forum. I have the audio on my computer turned up and perhaps the cursor travels across the ad and suddenly I'm hearing a chain saw at full volume ( and everybody near me also hears it ).

[honda03842]

Originally Posted by Brian B-P

You can also look for yourself - Ford publishes their owners manuals online, at Personalized Vehicle Owner Information. You don't need to own any Ford to use this site.

In the 2013 manual the towing section starts on page 190, and on the next page a table of weight limits are shown, plus a note in the text saying not to exceed 20 sq ft (1.86 m2) without the towing package, or 30 sq ft (2.79 m2) with the towing package.

It's hard to believe that Ford has this limitation. In the simplest sense it means that no trailer that one can stand up in can be towed by a Ford Escape. Basically all our trailers have a flat front with rounded corners.

When I compare towing our flat faced stick built trailer and our rounded corners Scamp the difference in MPG is about 2 miles per gallon indicating to me that there isn't much difference in their coefficients of drag (effective frontal area).

I wonder id there is a miles per hour factor attached to the frontal area.

Has anyone seen frontal area as a criteria for towing with any other vehicle?

[Raz]

It's hard to believe that Ford has this limitation. In the simplest sense it means that no trailer that one can stand up in can be towed by a Ford Escape.

I have to wonder if travel trailers are what any of the small SUV manufacturers have in mind. With many at a 1500 lb limit, I suspect the folks with the utility trailer for dump runs or a boat/snowmobile trailer is who they want to satisfy. The square foot ratings seems to confirm that. Raz

[frank_a]

Originally Posted by honda03842

When I compare towing our flat faced stick built trailer and our rounded corners Scamp the difference in MPG is about 2 miles per gallon indicating to me that there isn't much difference in their coefficients of drag (effective frontal area).

I wonder id there is a miles per hour factor attached to the frontal area.

Has anyone seen frontal area as a criteria for towing with any other vehicle?

First of all, I think 2 mph is huge! Of course, 2 is an absolute # so we don't know how relative it is to your actual towing mileage, but I would bet it's a decent percentage. It also shows that any of these frontal area numbers only talk about pulling a flat front, not a rounded corner front with no seams really. For instance, pulling our sleek vintage speedboat that weighs about the same as our vintage travel trailer is an amazing difference with our Subaru Outback (rated for 2700#s). Of course, there is basically no extra frontal area with the boat, so maybe that's not a good example. Also, the Outback has a CVT, which I don't think is the greatest for towing. That is one of the reasons why we bought the Escape with the 2 liter ecoboost motor and 3500# tow package. Given what other folks are towing with these same vehicles, I don't see any problem towing a ParkLiner (for instance). The folks at ParkLiner seems to think the Escape we got will work just fine.

I think these frontal area "limits" are for pulling flat stuff, not eggs. I guess we're gonna see, but probably not till next year.

Frank

[frank_a]

I agree Raz. Utility trailers and pop-ups.

Frank

Originally Posted by P. Raz

I have to wonder if travel trailers are what any of the small SUV manufacturers have in mind. With many at a 1500 lb limit, I suspect the folks with the utility trailer for dump runs or a boat/snowmobile trailer is who they want to satisfy. The square foot ratings seems to confirm that. Raz

[MC1]

Hummm... is the frontal area really a problem for the smaller vehicles in our neck of the woods?

[frank_a]

We owned a '79 Sunline Sunspot a few years ago that was short, small, and intended for towing behind economy cars of the day. I wish I had never sold it. It was basically a big comfortable bed on wheels.

Frank

[honda03842]

Frank,
We had a 1982 Sunline Trailer T-1550 that weighed 2200 lbs loaded for travel. We took it across Newfoundland, Labrador and Quebec followed by an 8 month loop of the United States. Over those trips we averaged 20 mpg.

On similar trips with our 1991 Scamp 16 that weighs about 2400 lbs we have averaged 22-23 mpg.

I think there's a towing difference between flat fronts and flat fronts with rounded corners but it's not overwheling. Admittedly the width of the Sunline is 4" greater than the Scamp though the Sunline is lighter. Same tires, same tow vehicle, same driver, same tire pressures, same routes resutling in a 10% difference in mileage per gallon.

I agree with you, regardless of the Parkliner's frontal area and the elevation, I don't see a problem either.

[frank_a]

Well Norm, as I think you know, our current travel trailer is an '83 Sunline T-1550. The Subaru has a tow capacity of 2700#s, my GMC a tow capacity of 2100#s, but it's all the Subaru can do to tow the thing! No problem for the truck. It's all about frontal area in that equation. Or at least, I think that's the deal...

One of the things I like about our new Escape is that it sits higher than the Subaru, and accordingly, the receiver is much higher. I have some incredibly high ball mounts for the Outback because it sits so low. I have yet to measure the height of the receiver, but ParkLiner says something like 20" to top of ball. I'm going to check that this weekend.

Tonight the new Escape gets washed with dish detergent (something I rarely do). Then tomorrow all the black trim gets taped off and I will apply a paint sealer I get from a buddy that works for a Mopar garage. It's called MasterShield Paint Sealant, and is made for new paint surfaces. As if the Ruby Red doesn't already "pop" enough...

Frank

[MC1]

For sure the larger the frontal area on the trailer more it will impact drag.

But other considerations involved are the shape of the rear of the trailer, the shape and size of the TV. Where one does their towing (windy areas or hills) etc. That is why these blanket numbers are not that accurate.

This is the best explanation of drag differences I have come across.

Can-Am RV :: HH 38-1

[honda03842]

MC1

I have read the Can-AM post before and recall their percentage improvement in mpg was similar to mine, about 10%. Rounded seems better.

[Mike Magee]

Typical eggs are not only rounded, they present less frontal area than most (any?) conventional trailers. They tend to be lower height, the roof slopes, and they are usually narrower (6.5' is pretty typical, vs. 7' or 8' for boxy TT's).

But if frontal area were equal between a rounded trailer and a squarish trailer, 10% difference does sound about right. So hypothetically a 30 square foot max could be interpreted as allowing a 33 square foot max (110% of 30) on a rounded trailer, perhaps?

What I said earlier was that I would be concerned about the Escape's longevity for my situation, wherein I tow 25K miles/year. For the occasional tow or for those who drive slower than average, it may work out fine.

I wish it were possible to find some Ford engineers who could tell us what Ford perceives the limiting factors to be in the Escape's design. Are they concerned about the constant high demand on the turbo? The tranny heat? The brakes? The strain on the receiver attachment points? Something else? We don't know, but it would be really good to know. For example, we know that on the 4 cyl Tacoma the weak point is the rear differential.... a component that is not too difficult to replace/upgrade. For the Escape, forewarned would be forearmed.

(...said the guy who once towed a CT 2000 miles with a Dodge Omni 2.2L.... am I getting cautious in my old age, or what? )

[Mike Magee]

Originally Posted by MC1

For sure the larger the frontal area on the trailer more it will impact drag.

But other considerations involved are the shape of the rear of the trailer, the shape and size of the TV. Where one does their towing (windy areas or hills) etc. That is why these blanket numbers are not that accurate.

This is the best explanation of drag differences I have come across.

Can-Am RV :: HH 38-1

It would have been interesting to see the fuel economy results if they had also taken the customer's popup trailer out for a run. I would guess that the much lower popup may have returned 17-18 mpg. Back to frontal area...

[rabbit]

There was a post a couple weeks back in which the poster stated that his Mazda CX5 has a maximum frontal area of tow of 32 sq. ft. First I had heard of this "barn door" parameter. The gentleman wished to tow a Burro 17WB with both probable curb wgt. and frontal area well above manufacturer recs for his vehicle. The only real constant in these discussions of tow capacity for vehicles with small displacement 4 cyl. engines is the coefficient of wishful thinking.

jack

[frank_a]

The "small displacement 4 cyl. engines" in 2 lter ecoboost Escapes puts out 230-240 hp. I would suggest in today's new automotive world that just looking at displacement is very misleading. The 6.7 liter motor in my hot rod doesn't even make twice the hp the Escape does, but by golly, it sure has big displacement!

Ford's towing guide also makes this suggestion when it comes to frontal area: Selecting a trailer with a low-drag, rounded front design will help optimize performance and fuel economy.

I can't wait to get an egg and let you guys know how we're doing. I don't think we're going to have any problems towing any egg up to 16', maybe even 17, with this car.

If it does become a problem, I'll be the 1st to admit it, and get me a V-8 big truck to tow my egg. Displacement...

Frank

[Brian B-P]

Frontal area is a relatively common limitation. Of course it should be expressed as the product of frontal area and coefficient of drag, with an offset for the effect of the tug, and speed-based compensation, but does anyone seriously think that owners would even understand that, let alone do the calculations?

At least Ford explicitly states this value. A few years ago Honda published two trailer weight limits for the Odyssey: one for trailers in general, and a substantially higher one for boats. I doubt anyone thinks it matters to towing whether or not the towed object can float, but it seems reasonable to assume that a small powerboat will have relatively small frontal area and low coefficient of drag compared to a travel trailer of similar weight. The boat is also likely to be shorter and to have its mass concentrated around the engine area, which are good for stability.

I think Raz has an excellent point: typical towing applications for small SUVs may be assumed to be utility, small enclosed cargo, and tent trailers. A 5x10 U-Haul enclosed cargo trailer, for instance, has a maximum loaded weight of 2800 pounds and about 25 square feet of frontal area.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by MC1

... But other considerations involved are the shape of the rear of the trailer, the shape and size of the TV. Where one does their towing (windy areas or hills) etc. ...

This is the best explanation of drag differences I have come across.
Can-Am RV :: HH 38-1

The Can-Am article is interesting and has lots of good content, but as mentioned above there are other factors. The article completely disregards the effect of pulling mass up an extended grade; not surprising, since there are no significant extended grades anywhere near London Ontario. The manufacturer's ratings need to account for the case of an owner hooking up that massive trailer and heading up a 7% mountain pass at high speed - a recipe for engine and transmission overheating.

[rabbit]

Unfortunately, the 2 litre 4 banger in the Mazda CX5 developed 155 ponies. For those who gave done their homework, a question. Is 250hp the typical output of 2 litre 4s without forced air?

jack

[honda03842]

For the tow rating religious, does the Ford Escape's frontal area limits mean that one can not tow a travel trailer with a Ford Escape?