Economical Tow Vehicle

[Borden]

Wow I am slow at typing just finished my post from three prior posts

[Borden]

"The question is was is it legal, is it safe and yes it was"
"Will 4 cyl do the job for 13' boler and yes many can"

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by Borden

Carol H my setup is legal in Ontario Canada do not know if that would be the same in San Francisco. .

Thank you for highlighting the fundamental problem with this type of thread & why I posted the information on legal liability.

Over and over people here will say there are no laws stopping you from towing over your vehicles towing specifications so they wrongfully assume there cant be any legal problems in their future in regards to towing over the vehicles towing specs.

Borden I strongly suggest you find out what your trailer really weighs and read the laws of liability in Canada (believe you will find there isn't a great deal of difference between those in the USA) and then decide if the risk is worth taking.

[Mike Magee]

I see much alarm about "over-the-limit towing" posts with small vehicles, and I agree that disclaimers might be a good thing. So I have now added one to my signature. Anyone who posts about towing with a low-tow-rating vehicle might want to do the same if it will help some others feel better about things. After all, we don't want newbies to get the wrong idea; we aren't gurus to be followed literally, right? Happily, a disclaimer in the sig line will apply retroactively into all previous posts!

So now I can talk about towing a 32' trailer with a Fiat 500, and nobody can say that I'm misleading anyone!

[alan in alberta]

There has to be some good advice out there somewhere.

Any recomendations for a small SUV that can and should be towing up to 3500#'s??

i know my surfside is well under that but someday i may move up to a 17 foot escape so 3500# would suite my comfort level

toyota rav 4, escape , mitsubishi outlander ......Others ??? experience??

[screaminbuddha]

Mike M,

Great idea about the disclaimer. None of us are experts and can only share our own personal experiences and opinions...

John...
Disclaimer: I do not hold myself out as an expert on any subject. Thus my posts are not intended to be construed as advice and are for entertainment purposes only.

I am a drawing enthusiast, so come support my drawing blog at www.j-drwaingaday.blogspot.com

[Frederick L. Simson]

Originally Posted by alan in alberta

There has to be some good advice out there somewhere.

Any recomendations for a small SUV that can and should be towing up to 3500#'s??

i know my surfside is well under that but someday i may move up to a 17 foot escape so 3500# would suite my comfort level

toyota rav 4, escape , mitsubishi outlander ......Others ??? experience??

On the "Trailer Weights" spreadsheet, there is an Escape 17' plan "B" that I weighed 3 times over 3 years. It is being towed by a Toyota Rav4. The reason it was reweighed is that the owner made changes to reduce weight. These items on that spreadsheet are actually in reverse chronological order, but the spreadsheet is in increasing weight order.

Originally Posted by Frederick L. Simson

This is a spreadsheet of all of the weigh-in results that I have from the past several years.

Sorted 1st by TOTAL, 2nd by TONGUE, and 3rd by Length

Items 35, 42, & 50 are the same trailer, it was weighed 3 times

Items 50...... These ... trailers had a FULL fresh water tank up front

ITEM_LENGTH_MAKE_______MODEL________AXLE__TONGUE__ __TOTAL

35___17_____Escape_____Plan B_______2340_____320_____2660

42___17_____Escape_____Plan B_______2500_____340_____2840

50___17_____Escape_____Plan B_______2500_____500*____3000

[David Tilston]

Originally Posted by Carol H

Borden I strongly suggest you find out what your trailer really weighs and read the laws of liability in Canada (believe you will find there isn't a great deal of difference between those in the USA) and then decide if the risk is worth taking.

That may be true, but everyone in Canada is legally obligated to have liability insurance. I am not sure what the minimum coverage is, but $1000000, is what I have. The step up to the million mark was a trivial increase in cost.

If you get caught with no PLPD, (Personal Liability and Property Damage) then the fines are hefty.

Also, typically, the damage awards are lower in Canada.

This is based totally on conjecture. I am not a lawyer.

[BCDave]

Originally Posted by alan in alberta

There has to be some good advice out there somewhere.

Any recomendations for a small SUV that can and should be towing up to 3500#'s??

i know my surfside is well under that but someday i may move up to a 17 foot escape so 3500# would suite my comfort level

toyota rav 4, escape , mitsubishi outlander ......Others ??? experience??

Cannot speak with any authority, but neighbor tows regularly with a Suzuki Grand Vitara. He loves the Vitara as a tug, and prefers it to his new Mazda Pickup. I drove a Suzuki Sidekick for 12 years as a daily commuter and I gotta say that they are next to indestructible.

[jen b]

Originally Posted by Mike Magee

I see much alarm about "over-the-limit towing" posts with small vehicles, and I agree that disclaimers might be a good thing. So I have now added one to my signature. Anyone who posts about towing with a low-tow-rating vehicle might want to do the same if it will help some others feel better about things. After all, we don't want newbies to get the wrong idea; we aren't gurus to be followed literally, right? Happily, a disclaimer in the sig line will apply retroactively into all previous posts!

So now I can talk about towing a 32' trailer with a Fiat 500, and nobody can say that I'm misleading anyone!

Nawww, I'm gonna keep believing everything I read on the internets.

[841K9]

Originally Posted by jen b

Nawww, I'm gonna keep believing everything I read on the internets.

Manbearpig is real!

I'm cereal.

[mcbrew]

Originally Posted by 841K9

Modern vehicles are no more efficient than vehicles built 20 years ago. They just have smaller engines.

Depends on how you look at it. Let's take the Toyota Corolla, for example:

1988 Corolla
Basic model had 74 horsepower
Weighed about 2,200 pounds
Basic model rated at 26/32 MPG


1992 Corolla
Basic model had 102 horsepower
Weighed about 2,260 pounds
Basic model rated at 24/30 MPG

1996 Corolla
Basic model had 100 horsepower
Weighed about 2,315 pounds
Basic model rated at 26/32 MPG

2000 Corolla
Basic model had 125 horsepower
Weighed about 2,430 pounds
Basic model rated at 27/34 MPG

2004 Corolla
Basic model had 126 horsepower
Weighed about 2,550 pounds
Basic model rated at 28/36 MPG

2009 Corolla
Basic model had 132 horsepower
Weighed about 2,725 pounds
Basic model rated at 26/35 MPG

So, in 20 years, they increased the weight by 24% and horsepower by 78%, but highway fuel economy was increased. I'd call that an improvement in engine efficiency.

In some cases you are correct -- where they are using much larger engines. For instance, the V8 in the new F150 is 6.2 liters!!! We had a 1969 Dodge 500 flatbed truck (18 foot bed) with an Anthony liftgate on it. We once had over 24,000 pounds of firewood on it. It had a 5.2 liter carbureted V8 engine. I doubt it was putting out more than 200 horsepower. That truck would still be on the road today if it hadn't rusted apart. There is no need for a 1/2 ton truck to have a 6.2 liter V8 gasoline engine other than for a quicker 0-60 time.

[mcbrew]

On legalities... It really depends on what happens in the courtroom. A guy was driving across the Chesapeake Bay bridge a few years ago when the home built trailer he was towing came off the coupler, he had never installed safety chains (a LEGAL requirement), and the trailer went into the oncoming lane and killed at least one person. I can't remember the details, but they let him off on manslaughter charges because (and I am loosely quoting here) he obviously wasn't trying to kill someone that day, it just happened. Now, personally, I thought it was more than just a little negligent to build and use a trailer without safety chains... But that's just my opinion.

[841K9]

Originally Posted by mcbrew

So, in 20 years, they increased the weight by 24% and horsepower by 78%, but highway fuel economy was increased. I'd call that an improvement in engine efficiency.

In some cases you are correct -- where they are using much larger engines. For instance, the V8 in the new F150 is 6.2 liters!!! There is no need for a 1/2 ton truck to have a 6.2 liter V8 gasoline engine other than for a quicker 0-60 time.

The VW rabbit diesel used to get 50mpg.
A Chevrolet pickup with a 5.0 (305) V8 used to get 22mpg.
An F100/150 with the 4.9 (300) L6 got 20mpg.
Remember the Fiero? 40mpg

Vehicles that get this kind of economy today do so with a smaller displacement engine than the prior model had.

The 6.2 is an unusual engine to see. Its really only common on the Raptor.
Most F150s have the V6 or the 5.0 V8. (The twin turbo v6 has more power than the V8 and tows more) I'm waiting for the "baby" Powerstroke V6 that everyone has been dreaming about.

[BCDave]

And the smaller Duramax!

[841K9]

Originally Posted by BCDave

And the smaller Duramax!

I miss the GM 1/2 ton diesels. Especially the last series with the 6.5 turbo!

[Mike Magee]

Originally Posted by alan in alberta

There has to be some good advice out there somewhere.

Any recomendations for a small SUV that can and should be towing up to 3500#'s??

i know my surfside is well under that but someday i may move up to a 17 foot escape so 3500# would suite my comfort level

toyota rav 4, escape , mitsubishi outlander ......Others ??? experience??

Tongue weight is what can get you on the Escape 17. 3500 lb. tow rating is enough, but 350 hitch rating may not be if you aren't very careful with the loading. I bought my Highlander (5000/500) mainly because of the 500 lb. hitch weight rating even though I only tow 3500 or less.

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by mcbrew

On legalities... It really depends on what happens in the courtroom. A guy was driving across the Chesapeake Bay bridge a few years ago when the home built trailer he was towing came off the coupler, he had never installed safety chains (a LEGAL requirement), and the trailer went into the oncoming lane and killed at least one person. I can't remember the details, but they let him off on manslaughter charges because (and I am loosely quoting here) he obviously wasn't trying to kill someone that day, it just happened. Now, personally, I thought it was more than just a little negligent to build and use a trailer without safety chains... But that's just my opinion.

Jesse I agree IMHO he should have been found guilty. Just two days ago a very similar accident happened here in BC taking the lives of two people - one of them a member of a friends family :-(( It wasnt as far as I know a home made trailer though.

In the case you describe it sounds like he was being tried in criminal court if up on manslaughter charges - its much harder to prove someone guilty in criminal court than it is in a civil liability case.......just ask OJ about that! He was found not guilty in criminal court twice but he got hammered in a civil case brought on by his victims families. Its a pretty good bet that if someone faced manslaughter chargers in criminal court that they stand a high chance of getting hit with a civil liability case as well.

[mcbrew]

I think the issue here is that you are talking about vehicle fuel economy, and I am talking about ENGINE efficiency. Engines have gotten bigger, vehicles have gotten bigger, and in many cases, they get the same or better fuel economy. That's better efficiency. Unfortunately, trucks always seem to be in a battle for more horsepower. The Ecoboost seems to be something of a solution for this, albeit and expensive one.

The Rabbit diesel is a bad example, because it started with a 1.5 liter 48hp engine and weighed 2,145 pounds. A 2006 Rabbit (Golf) diesel has a 1.9 liter 100hp engine and weighs almost 3,000 pounds. Both cars get around 50 MPG. So, they added more than 800 pounds and more than DOUBLED the horsepower, and still get about the same fuel economy.

There are plenty of cars that get 40, 50, or more MPGs today... They just aren't sold here in the US -- even though many of them are MADE by American car companies! These cars are safer, more comfortable, and better appointed than econoboxes of the 80s and 90s, but they aren't pushing them here... Either because they don't think there is a market for them, or they aren't profitable enough, or because the EPA's standards are too hard to meet... Pick your reason.

Seriously, though... I have a van that is over 20 feet long and 8.5 feet high (6 feet of headroom), can (legally) haul over 4,000 pounds and tow 6,000 pounds here in the US... And gets 23 MPG, even with OVER 4,000 pounds of cargo in the back. Oh, and it is safer than typical American vans, too. And it does this with a 2.7 liter engine.

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by alan in alberta

Any recomendations for a small SUV that can and should be towing up to 3500#'s??

i know my surfside is well under that but someday i may move up to a 17 foot escape so 3500# would suite my comfort level

toyota rav 4, escape , mitsubishi outlander ......Others ??? experience??

Alan I am in the same boat and have been looking around. I would like a 17' Escape as well some time in the not to distant future and would luv to find a vehicle to replace my Outback with thats *really* good in the snow (p/u's are not the best in that regard) and good on gas.

As Mike has suggested there are a number of small SUV that can handle the total weight of 3500lbs but the tongue weight is the deal killer. Currently know all to well what a pain it is to have to worry about what you stow or dont stow or what additions you make to the trailer or dont make to keep it within a lower tongue weight. I know I would be much happier with something with more rather than less tongue weight cap.

I have talked with a few folks towing the 17' Escape with the RAV4 and the issue of the lower tongue rating has come up more than once. Some of those folks have made some changes to what they bring along or dont bring along to keep the tongue weight down - others have added air bags to the rear suspension and other equipment to help out. As much as I would prefer to keep to a smaller SUV having been there and done that for the past five years I personally would be happier not having to worry about going over tongue caps. The other downside to the RAV4 that I noted is you cant open the back door all the way if the trailer is hitched. It would for me be a pain to have to unhitch the trailer just to get my golf bag out of the back or get a *big* dog out.

So far I have only been doing a fairly casual look at my options - some high on my list to explore further are the Highlander and the Acura MDX (although good for 5000lbs I am still not really clear on its tongue rate). The Mitsubishi Oulander XLS-S-AWC has a tow rating of 3500lbs and tongue of 350lbs but again I just think the 350lbs might be to limiting. Honda Pilot is another within the tow cap but again Im not totally clear on the tongue weight or what addn package you may need to purchase with it to get a tongue rating over 350lbs. Suspect there are a number of others to look at as well.

Now if I were to win the lotto and think I might head straight over to VW and bring home a Touareg..... one of the models has a 7000lb tow cap and tongue weight of over 600lbs. A few other smaller SUV options are the Audi Q7 and BMW X5 and MB ML 350 all have tow caps over 6000lbs and tongue weights of 600 or more....

On the other hand if Subaru suddenly decided to bring to NA an Outback with much higher tow cap and tongue cap than what they currently offer that without a doubt would be my first choose regardless of having won the lotto or not

If you find some other options **please*** share with us what you discover.