New Smaller tow vehicle choices??

[brian dobbs]

L ets not forget the little land rover. now released as the LR 2 , my freelander gets my scamp off ever beach and mud hole.

[Elizabeth C.]

I tow my 16' Scamp with the Lexus RX350. It has the same stats as the new Rav4, has AWD and I can shift manually on these mountain roads. It came with a tow package, as was suggested by someone else. I broached the subject of smaller tow vehicles last year on the trailer life forum, (Pull up "Rav4" + "scamp") and there were quite a few responses from which you can gain insight.

My husband and I have had numerous Toyota vehicles over the past 15 years, and have only good things to say about them. (I just traded in our '98 4Runner...almost 200,000 miles on it...still ran great. Husband's 2000 Tundra is nearing 170,000.) My niece just totalled the 1990 4runner I sold....it WAS running great, too!

Meanwhile...good luck in your hunt....and pack lightly.

[Loren G. Hedahl]

I towed a 13ft Compact Jr. (fiberglass RV with pop-top) in the '70s with a Peugeot 404. The Peugeot had a 1.6 liter engine and 4.56 rear end ratio. It almost always got slightly over 20MPG towing and almost 30 solo. Also was long enough to carry a small Sunflower sailboat on top.

Also spent hours going up the Rockies in 1st or 2nd gear at 10 MPH. Once after stopped for road crew work, the road crew had to come push to get us started.

Would I tow with the smallest tow vehicle again? Sure, if that was all I could manage.

Would I get on an elevator with 34 people in it that had a sign "35 people max"? Sure, if that was the only way to get where I needed to go?

But if I were to think about it for awhile, I might just acquire some 'good 'ol Detroit iron' in the first case and wait for the next elevator in the second.

Yep! As they say, "You never know what that guy might do!"

Loren

[Patrick M.]

Until they repeal the laws of physics, such things as friction and momentum (mass times velocity) will suggest practical lower limits to tow vehicle size. I believe that most sane people will wish to tow a trailer that weighs less than the tow vehicle, probably by a significant margin.

So people towing with a Ford F-350 with a towing limit of 15,000# (19,200# for a 5th wheel) are probably insane? (Actually, I couldn't find the weight of the truck alone on the website but I assume it's about 8,000#?) http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/s...eatures/specs/

[Roger H]

So people towing with a Ford F-350 with a towing limit of 15,000# (19,200# for a 5th wheel) are probably insane?

In a word, yes. Well, not insane. Not necessarily anyway. But, having towed a 9,000 lb 34' Airstream with a 7,000 lb Excursion, I can tell you that it isn't any fun when the towed load wants to have its way with the tow vehicle, and the tow rating of the tow vehicle is irrelevant. Of course, you have to remember also that the mechanics of a fifth wheel being towed are significantly different from towing a travel trailer, and that's why the fifth wheel configuration is safely used on tractor-trailers weighing up to 80,000 for a towed load.

Any time the towed load weighs as much or is greater than the tow vehicle (towing a standard type trailer) and something goes wrong, it's going to go wrong very quickly and very dramatically. When the tow vehicle has a short wheelbase, it's going to go wrong even more quickly and more dramatically.

Having also had a fiberglass trailer (about 1500 lbs) jump the hitch at 65mph behind the Excursion, I can tell you that it's a very secure feeling when the towed load CAN'T exert enough force on the back of the tow vehicle to roll it.

Roger

[Brian B-P]

Yes, a fifth-wheel (assuming the conventional over-axle hitch location) is a different situation from "tag" (hitch on the back) towing. So consider the 15,000 lb trailer on that F-350:

• this is the truck-versus-car issue again; what was it designed for?
• perhaps a sane person wouldn't push that limit, but could still have 1,000 lb of cargo and a 12,000 lb trailer on that 8,000 lb truck
• an Excursion is on a F250 chassis, but even it is short in wheelbase compared to typical pickup trucks - SUVs may not be the best examples of the capabilities of large tow vehicles

So what are we calling "short" wheelbase? Just something to think about.

[Roger H]

So what are we calling "short" wheelbase? Just something to think about.

Exactly! Its a relative term. My Excursion's wheelbase was short in comparison to a 34' tri-axle trailer. At nearly 20' long however, it's more than enough for any of the fiberglass trailers, including my 25' Bigfoot. A Jeep CJ/TJ/YJ is too short for ANY camping trailer application. A shortbed standard cab F150 or Chevy 10 may not be enough wheelbase for many trailers, but would be adequate for most fiberglass RVs. etc. etc. ad nauseum.

Rog

[Brian B-P]

...A Jeep CJ/TJ/YJ is too short for ANY camping trailer application...

Yes (arguably), and now with the "Unlimited" stretched version of the new Wrangler (YJ replacement), the factory tow limit goes up from 2000 lb to 3500 lb, as they recognize the significance to towing of the longer wheelbase.

[Susan Tiller]

Female, but may I jump in here with a question?

I have a 2001 Toyota V6, pre-runner off road, with tow package. Mfg. says 5,000 tow with 500 on hitch. I put just the truck on the scale last week with just me (110 lbs.) in the truck and it weighed 3680.

I just purchased a 2004 17' Casita I will pick up on Saturday. I have not weighed the egg and Casita's site is a tad confusing, but I am guessing it will weigh in around 3500. Ya'll correct me if I am wrong, please.

Is this a do able tow without feeling like I am pulling two elephants behind me?

Thanks!

[Roger H]

Susan, I tow with an '02 Tundra with the same drivetrain. It towed my Scamp 16' Custom Deluxe pretty nicely. I definitely feel the difference with the Bigfoot 17'. Although the weights between the Bigfoot and Scamp were similar, I suspect that the Bigfoot's more square frontal area contributes to a greater drag.

The short answer to your question is that yes, you'll feel something behind you, but no, the Casita 17' shouldn't be a problem for your Toyota at all.

Have a ball!

Roger

[Chester Taje]

My Sonnomas wheel base is 123 inches.Fast measurement with tape measure.My Toyoto Rave 4 is 104 inches.

Rave 4 was bought to pull a lighter unit than my 17ft Boler also a smaller unit.

Still looking for what will be my last trailer.

[CD Smith]

The 17' Casita is closer to 3,000 not 3,500. Your problem may be hitch weight. My 17' Casita SD's hitch weighs in at 450 lbs. You can overcome this lack of margin by using a Weight Distribution Hitch. You should also consider some type of load leveling for you TV. air shocks or air bags depending on the what type suspension your TV has.

[Brian B-P]

...I just purchased a 2004 17' Casita I will pick up on Saturday. I have not weighed the egg and Casita's site is a tad confusing, but I am guessing it will weigh in around 3500. Ya'll correct me if I am wrong, please...

Congrats on the new acquisition!

The 3500 lb value on the 17 ft Casita web page is the [b]axle capacity - the most the axle can carry, so the [b]maximum total for the trailer would be more, because there is also the weight carried by the hitch. The good news is that is the maximum allowed, not what yours is likely to weigh as you use it.

The [b]Dry Weight (given as 2385 lb for the Deluxe) is the trailer with no cargo and nothing in the tanks (water or propane), and possibly no battery either.

The [b]real weight when you use it will be somewhere in between, depending on what optional equipment you get, how much water and propane are in the tanks, and how much stuff (cargo) you carry. CD's value of 3000 lbs matches about the loaded weight of my similarly sized Boler.

This seems like a reasonable load for the truck; it's no problem for my van, using air bags to assist the rear springs. The air springs for a pickup are a different style, but they may be worth considering for the same reasons I use the air bags: maintaining a level attitude and increasing suspension spring stiffness to control the load.

With or without air, you need to check that the truck's rear axle isn't overloaded, which is likely not a problem unless you carry a bunch of stuff in the truck while towing the trailer. The only fixes to axle overloading are getting rid of weight, or using a weight-distributing hitch to force the other axles to carry more of the load.

Susan, if you want some axle load calculations done, I'd be happy to take a shot. What I would need (in addition to the total weight you've already got) is the separate weights of the front and rear truck axles, the wheelbase (distance between front and rear wheel centres), and the distance from the rear wheel/axle centre to the hitch ball.

This is a thread about [b]small tow vehicle choices, and the Tacoma (assuming it's a Tacoma, not a Tundra) is small as trucks go, but still much larger and more capable than many of our tugs... but the Casita 17 is twice the weight of many eggs. Seems like a reasonable match to me.

[CD Smith]

I have done the calculations for my RV/TV combination.


WDH_Complete_Weight_Analysis.pdf


You can use this to do your own calculations to see how you RV/TV combination works.

[Patrick M.]

Wow, $49 to weigh an RV! Very nice analysis CD! You wouldn't be retired by any chance would you?

[Brian B-P]

Great stuff, CD!

I'm not sure why the weighing costs that much, since I am accustomed to getting my axle weights free at the highway scales, but it is a different program. Do we know how precise and how accurate the RVSEF weights are? I know that someone has to pay the costs, but it is interesting that a "safety education foundation" needs to charge this much.

The level of detail is impressive, and generally quite clear. I do have one concern, related to the (clearly stated) assumption:

Note 1: These weights assume the hitch weight is completely neutralized by the WDH and equallly distributed to the three axles

I believe that this is a common misconception, based on advertising by companies which claim that their WD system somehow re-writes the laws of physics and makes such equal distribution possible. In fact, the ratio between the wheelbase (EWB in the worksheet) and rear axle to trailer axle spacing (EBB + CMA) determines the distribution. The whole rig is a see-saw lever, pivoted on the rear axle, so the axle which is further away (typically the trailer axle, as in this case) picks up less of the load than the one which is closer.

In this case
EWB = 118" (Escalade Wheel Base)
EBB = 52" (Escalade Back axle to Ball)
CMA = 138" (Casita coupler to Axle)
so EBB+CMA = 190" (the Casita's axle is 190" from the Escalade's rear axle)
and EWB + EBB + CMA = 308" (front axle to Casita axle)

Of the load taken off of the rear axle by the WD system,
(190/308) = [b]62% will be transferred to the Escalade's front axle,
and (118/308) = [b]38 % will be transferred to the Casita's axle.
Any other distribution would mean a net change in the centre of mass of the system. I realize that this is acknowledged by this statement:

To be absolutely correct the the Escalade/Casita configuration should be weighed with the WDH bars in place.

I'm just supplying the method for doing the calculation using the dimensions we already have, and thus not needing the assumption.

The assumption that WD systems do something which they cannot probably leads people to apply too much spring force, and load front axles more heavily than they intended. In this case, taking 300 lb off of the rear axle would not add 150 lb to each of the trailer and front axles (as assumed); instead, it would add 186 lb to the front axle and 114 to the trailer. Only a few pounds, but crank those WD bars up and the problem is magnified.

Why wouldn't the RVSEF charge cover weighing the rig with and without WDH set, so the RV owner could learn to adjust it properly?

One interpretation question: can I assume that the grey-backgrounded values in the LOAD MEASUREMENTS box (e.g. 1575 for left front tire) are for the unloaded tug (without trailer), and the others for the same points (e.g. 1525 for the left front tire) are for the complete rig (tug while trailer is attached)?

[CD Smith]

I agree that the weighing should not be that expensive. I did not have a WDH at the time I had my TV/RV weighed. It was due to the resulting weights that I adapted a WDH I used back in the late '70s to use with the our Casita. I don't know if RSEVF weighs TV/RV with and without WDH. Their primary purpose of providing weight measurements is to alert those individuals that are exceed the weight ratings of the TV or RV. My understanding of their results are that about 30% of the rigs on the road (all classes) are overweight.

The fact that many users of WDH put to much tension on the spring bars is not that they are trying to evenly distribute the hitch weight. They use to much tension attempting to conteract the rear axle loaded weight of their TV. This is not what a WDH is designed to do. Without an auxiliary method of leveling the TV after it is loaded, but before the hitch load is added (such as helper springs, air shocks, or air bags) they end up exceeding the rating on their WDH. This is most common with those using a single bar WDH rated at 300 lbs.

Yes, the shaded numbers are for the loaded TV without the RV.

Thanks for the added incite into the calculations of weight distribution. I will verify them as soon as I can make some additional weight measurements.

My position about all this and the reason I posted the analysis was to get people to think about the weight distribution of their TV/RV and how it affects their safety driving down the road.

[Brian B-P]

I agree that the weighing should not be that expensive. I did not have a WDH at the time I had my TV/RV weighed.
...I don't know if RSEVF weighs TV/RV with and without WDH.

That makes sense. I didn't realize that this weighing was done before the WDH was installed.

Their primary purpose of providing weight measurements is to alert those individuals that are exceed the weight ratings of the TV or RV. My understanding of their results are that about 30% of the rigs on the road (all classes) are overweight.

Unfortunately, I can believe that statistic.

My position about all this and the reason I posted the analysis was to get people to think about the weight distribution of their TV/RV and how it affects their safety driving down the road.

A worthy goal, and thanks again for your contribution, CD. I'm looking forward to the next update.

[Joseph Domingos]

Personally I have a 2001 Honda CRV with the automatic transmission. It's rated for 1500lbs, and I have a 1973 Compact II. I've heard differing opinions on the actual weight of my trailer, and have yet to actually get it weighed. I installed the hitch on my CRV myself, since from my research there doesn't appear to be anything else 'tow package'-wise that Honda installed on them from the factory.
I haven't been on many trips with it, so I don't have a TON of towing experience, but reading through this posting has got me thinking. It does seem to do okay towing-wise, though I can't (and don't think I should!) fly along at 75mph when Im towing. I usually keep down to 60-65mph max. The trailer doesn't feel like it's beating the TV to death, nore do I feel like it's crying it's death nell after a trip. I usually get the auto trans serviced (drain & fill I think) after a trip, to keep it happy and healthy.
I KNOW I'm not quite on subject for this particular post, but I was just curious to see what anybody has as far as input/suggestions/ideas. I LOVE my CRV, love the fuel economy it gets when not towing, and would like to stick with it. I'm learning more and more about my Compact II, and enjoying it as well. Thanks!

[Brian B-P]

Joseph, I think you're on-topic, as the CRV is good example of a "smaller" tow vehicle, and your Compact-towing experience is valuable input. The CRV has been updated since 2001, so anyone looking at new options should consider that.

I am not surprised that there seems to be no factory-installed hitch. I would not expect a factory-installed on any Honda or Toyota (except perhaps Toyota trucks), since the official original equipment hitches are specific to the vehicle and endorsed by the manufacturer, but normally installed by the dealer. For instance, my Sienna has the Toyota hitch, and I bought it as an option on the van as a new vehicle, but it was installed by the dealership - the same as the converter for the trailer lights. I have no concerns with the alternative of installing the hitch yourself.

The Element seems to be the common small Honda towing choice in this forum, but the CRV seems to me like the more capable choice as a tug due to its longer wheelbase. Of course, every two vehicle choice is driven by a mix of factors, and towing performance is only one of them.