Author Topic: The 2 trucks you need (or not)  (Read 3980 times)

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2671
  • Location: Canada
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #50 on: July 07, 2017, 02:19:54 PM »
What passenger cars are rated to 3500?

Well here's the first Google search result for "cars with towing capacity": https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/top-10/top-13-best-cars-for-towing-for-2013.html At least 4 passenger cars (e.g. not classified as light truck) that tow 3500 or more. Or, how about some minivans since these are popular on MMM: Honda Odyssey 3500 lbs, Toyota Sienna 3500 lbs, Nissan Quest 3500 lbs, Chrysler Town & Country 3600 lbs. Shall I go on?

The minivans are something else entirely.

And that list of cars. Hmm. All 'foreign' cars, presumably global ones where there is nothing much to do in terms of saying.. yes, this car is rated for X in European markets, it's the same car. The Lincoln doesn't count.

Corolla at 1500 lbs. Above that is either a Volvo, almost-SUV (Toyota Venza), or really expensive (Porsche, which is very cool).

Meh.
Lending Loop - Peer to Peer Lending for Canadians - $25 sign up bonus

My current yield is about 13%, but who knows. Loans do go bad. Caveat Emptor and all that.

FINate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 634
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #51 on: July 07, 2017, 02:32:52 PM »
What passenger cars are rated to 3500?

Well here's the first Google search result for "cars with towing capacity": https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/top-10/top-13-best-cars-for-towing-for-2013.html At least 4 passenger cars (e.g. not classified as light truck) that tow 3500 or more. Or, how about some minivans since these are popular on MMM: Honda Odyssey 3500 lbs, Toyota Sienna 3500 lbs, Nissan Quest 3500 lbs, Chrysler Town & Country 3600 lbs. Shall I go on?

The minivans are something else entirely.

And that list of cars. Hmm. All 'foreign' cars, presumably global ones where there is nothing much to do in terms of saying.. yes, this car is rated for X in European markets, it's the same car. The Lincoln doesn't count.

Corolla at 1500 lbs. Above that is either a Volvo, almost-SUV (Toyota Venza), or really expensive (Porsche, which is very cool).

Meh.

You didn't say it had to be domestic. What does it matter as long as it's sold in North America?

Modern crossover SUVs are basically cars that sit a little higher and have AWD...they're essentially minivans w/o sliding doors.

Cars that can tow a lot, handle like a car, and have good fuel economy are expensive because it's not cheap to combine these features. The midsize SUV I'm selling back to VW (dieselgate) drives like a car and rated to tow 7700 lbs and gets about 30mpg...but it was $50k new and apparently they had to cheat on emissions to achieve this.

And just because you don't like the options/price point for cars with towing capacity doesn't mean it's some grand conspiracy. This is not a good reason to just exceed the towing capacity on cheaper cars.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2017, 02:34:32 PM by FINate »

Prospector

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9805
  • Location: The sunny side of the street
  • The late worm misses the bird.
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #52 on: July 07, 2017, 02:48:00 PM »
If the Lincoln doesn't count, then I guess the Dodge Magnum didn't either, right? (3800 lbs)
Illegitimi non carborundum

Follow along in The Oasis of Positivity.

Camp Mustache Canada 2017 Organizing Committee member - Accepting names for standby list.

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2671
  • Location: Canada
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #53 on: July 07, 2017, 04:21:32 PM »
What passenger cars are rated to 3500?

Well here's the first Google search result for "cars with towing capacity": https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/top-10/top-13-best-cars-for-towing-for-2013.html At least 4 passenger cars (e.g. not classified as light truck) that tow 3500 or more. Or, how about some minivans since these are popular on MMM: Honda Odyssey 3500 lbs, Toyota Sienna 3500 lbs, Nissan Quest 3500 lbs, Chrysler Town & Country 3600 lbs. Shall I go on?

The minivans are something else entirely.

And that list of cars. Hmm. All 'foreign' cars, presumably global ones where there is nothing much to do in terms of saying.. yes, this car is rated for X in European markets, it's the same car. The Lincoln doesn't count.

Corolla at 1500 lbs. Above that is either a Volvo, almost-SUV (Toyota Venza), or really expensive (Porsche, which is very cool).

Meh.

You didn't say it had to be domestic. What does it matter as long as it's sold in North America?

Modern crossover SUVs are basically cars that sit a little higher and have AWD...they're essentially minivans w/o sliding doors.

Cars that can tow a lot, handle like a car, and have good fuel economy are expensive because it's not cheap to combine these features. The midsize SUV I'm selling back to VW (dieselgate) drives like a car and rated to tow 7700 lbs and gets about 30mpg...but it was $50k new and apparently they had to cheat on emissions to achieve this.

And just because you don't like the options/price point for cars with towing capacity doesn't mean it's some grand conspiracy. This is not a good reason to just exceed the towing capacity on cheaper cars.

It's not the *being* domestic that matters; it's the fact that they are sold elsewhere and hence have sensible ratings for their size. I'm saying stuff that is ONLY sold here, they put ludicrously low ratings on.

I'm saying it's bullshit; I'm saying it's bullshit because a *Honda Civic* sold in the UK is rated to tow more than a much larger, more powerful, body on frame vehicle here.

I'm not suggesting exceeding anything. I'm saying that the car companies are marketing deceptively, to their own benefit, to push people into buying vehicles that are much larger than they actually need.

Again, look at the EU ratings for the same/similar vehicles. They rate vehicles for twice the amount. (And don't come back with "but America is bigger", doesn't matter, if you're towing for a few hours across mountainous France or Spain or whatever, it's comparable).
Lending Loop - Peer to Peer Lending for Canadians - $25 sign up bonus

My current yield is about 13%, but who knows. Loans do go bad. Caveat Emptor and all that.

Syonyk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2733
    • Syonyk's Project Blog
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #54 on: July 07, 2017, 04:26:18 PM »
I'm not suggesting exceeding anything.

Yeah.  You are.  You are suggesting ignoring the tow rating in the United States for a particular vehicle because in another country, a vehicle sold under the same name has a higher tow rating.

Good luck with that argument in court if you get into an accident while towing.
My random project blog - ebikes, DIY, fans, and more: http://syonyk.blogspot.com

Clean Shaven

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 568
  • Location: Wild Wild West
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #55 on: July 07, 2017, 04:42:59 PM »
There's plenty of reading anyone can do on "U.S. vs. Europe tow ratings" if you google that, and want to learn why there are differences.

Here, for example:

http://oppositelock.kinja.com/tow-me-down-1609112611

FINate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 634
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #56 on: July 07, 2017, 05:09:46 PM »
There's plenty of reading anyone can do on "U.S. vs. Europe tow ratings" if you google that, and want to learn why there are differences.

Here, for example:

http://oppositelock.kinja.com/tow-me-down-1609112611

Wow, thanks. Great article (except for confusing MPH and KPH)

To boil it all down, the reason that American vehicles are rated to tow less is based on a difference methodology for tow safety.

I would also add that somewhere upthread someone mentioned differing road standards. And pulling a trailer through the UK countryside is quite different from the challenges of towing in the mountains of Utah or anywhere else in the US mountain west.

And as Syonyk pointed out, there's a liability issue. Even if exceeding capacities wasn't the primary cause of an accident, it would be rather uncomfortable to explain this to a judge or jury.

Exceeding a vehicle's stated capacities is pennywise and pound foolish.

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2671
  • Location: Canada
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #57 on: July 07, 2017, 05:10:33 PM »
I'm not suggesting exceeding anything.

Yeah.  You are.  You are suggesting ignoring the tow rating in the United States for a particular vehicle because in another country, a vehicle sold under the same name has a higher tow rating.

Good luck with that argument in court if you get into an accident while towing.

No. I'm not. I'm saying the ratings are shit; I'm not suggesting breaking them. Because, as we all know, being sued in America isn't cheap.
Lending Loop - Peer to Peer Lending for Canadians - $25 sign up bonus

My current yield is about 13%, but who knows. Loans do go bad. Caveat Emptor and all that.

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2671
  • Location: Canada
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #58 on: July 07, 2017, 05:17:15 PM »
There's plenty of reading anyone can do on "U.S. vs. Europe tow ratings" if you google that, and want to learn why there are differences.

Here, for example:

http://oppositelock.kinja.com/tow-me-down-1609112611

Wow, thanks. Great article (except for confusing MPH and KPH)

To boil it all down, the reason that American vehicles are rated to tow less is based on a difference methodology for tow safety.

I would also add that somewhere upthread someone mentioned differing road standards. And pulling a trailer through the UK countryside is quite different from the challenges of towing in the mountains of Utah or anywhere else in the US mountain west.

And as Syonyk pointed out, there's a liability issue. Even if exceeding capacities wasn't the primary cause of an accident, it would be rather uncomfortable to explain this to a judge or jury.

Exceeding a vehicle's stated capacities is pennywise and pound foolish.

Yes, very interesting read.

But as I mentioned, driving through the UK might be one thing... driving the mountains in France and Spain vs the Rockies or whatnot? Yeah.

I'm not suggesting breaking any rules here.

I find the safety stuff slightly plausible but no doubt overdone. There are fewer accidents in the UK than US per mile driven, significantly. So all those caravans on the road might well be pissing old Jeremy off, but they are not leading to a significantly unsafe country in terms of driving.
Lending Loop - Peer to Peer Lending for Canadians - $25 sign up bonus

My current yield is about 13%, but who knows. Loans do go bad. Caveat Emptor and all that.

FINate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 634
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #59 on: July 07, 2017, 05:34:13 PM »
I find the safety stuff slightly plausible but no doubt overdone. There are fewer accidents in the UK than US per mile driven, significantly. So all those caravans on the road might well be pissing old Jeremy off, but they are not leading to a significantly unsafe country in terms of driving.

Accidents per mile driven (which is for all vehicles) is different from accidents per mile driven with a trailer. Towing a trailer is always more dangerous so the question becomes, What is an acceptable amount of increased risk? This comes down to an engineering and policy decision. Hence those of us here saying: a) Towing capacity exists for a reason, are not arbitrary, not "ridiculous." b) There's no conspiracy by auto manufacturers to force people into larger vehicles. c) Please don't exceed the limits determined as safe by engineers - you put yourself and others at risk.

The author added this in the comments section:

Though since Iíve wrote this I have talked to several engineers from GM, Toyota and Chrysler about the idea of this safety factor and they all admit to me in one for or another that these margins arenít as big as people think and that the weakest link in the system may be REALLY thin margins.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2017, 06:00:10 PM by FINate »

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2671
  • Location: Canada
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #60 on: July 07, 2017, 06:14:07 PM »
I find the safety stuff slightly plausible but no doubt overdone. There are fewer accidents in the UK than US per mile driven, significantly. So all those caravans on the road might well be pissing old Jeremy off, but they are not leading to a significantly unsafe country in terms of driving.

Accidents per mile driven (which is for all vehicles) is different from accidents per mile driven with a trailer. Towing a trailer is always more dangerous so the question becomes, What is an acceptable amount of increased risk? This comes down to an engineering and policy decision. Hence those of us here saying: a) Towing capacity exists for a reason, are not arbitrary, not "ridiculous." b) There's no conspiracy by auto manufacturers to force people into larger vehicles. c) Please don't exceed the limits determined as safe by engineers - you put yourself and others at risk.

The author added this in the comments section:

Though since Iíve wrote this I have talked to several engineers from GM, Toyota and Chrysler about the idea of this safety factor and they all admit to me in one for or another that these margins arenít as big as people think and that the weakest link in the system may be REALLY thin margins.

I'm saying I disagree with b. The people at the car companies have every reason to want people to buy the larger vehicles.

/shrug
Lending Loop - Peer to Peer Lending for Canadians - $25 sign up bonus

My current yield is about 13%, but who knows. Loans do go bad. Caveat Emptor and all that.

SwordGuy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3189
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
    • Flipping Fayetteville
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #61 on: July 07, 2017, 06:28:43 PM »
I'd suggest just getting one of the trailers from Harbor Freight. You can even hook those up to a smaller car like a Camry.

Works like a charm on even smaller sedans!

I could buy the trailer, all the wood and bolts to add a bed and railings, have a trailer hitch put on my car, and buy a forever license plate for the trailer for less than $1000.   

No insurance cost for the trailer.  :)

Now, if I was a construction worker going to the hardware store to pick up big stuff every day, I would want a pick up truck.

But as a person who only owns 6 houses and does much of the renovation and improvements to them all, this little trailer is a champ!



FINate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 634
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #62 on: July 07, 2017, 06:36:55 PM »
I find the safety stuff slightly plausible but no doubt overdone. There are fewer accidents in the UK than US per mile driven, significantly. So all those caravans on the road might well be pissing old Jeremy off, but they are not leading to a significantly unsafe country in terms of driving.

Accidents per mile driven (which is for all vehicles) is different from accidents per mile driven with a trailer. Towing a trailer is always more dangerous so the question becomes, What is an acceptable amount of increased risk? This comes down to an engineering and policy decision. Hence those of us here saying: a) Towing capacity exists for a reason, are not arbitrary, not "ridiculous." b) There's no conspiracy by auto manufacturers to force people into larger vehicles. c) Please don't exceed the limits determined as safe by engineers - you put yourself and others at risk.

The author added this in the comments section:

Though since Iíve wrote this I have talked to several engineers from GM, Toyota and Chrysler about the idea of this safety factor and they all admit to me in one for or another that these margins arenít as big as people think and that the weakest link in the system may be REALLY thin margins.

I'm saying I disagree with b. The people at the car companies have every reason to want people to buy the larger vehicles.

/shrug

Sure, auto manufacturers want people to buy higher margin vehicles. But the auto industry is also extremely competitive. If one auto maker set towing capacity unnecessarily low in an attempt to force people into SUVs or trucks, then another company would swoop in for that market share. Imagine the marketing possible with a small car with great gas milage and the ability to tow a 4000 lb trailer. Subaru would have a field day with this! It makes a lot more sense that they are setting the capacities where they can for US standards, and it's simply more expensive to build vehicles that can tow more.

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2671
  • Location: Canada
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #63 on: July 07, 2017, 06:49:02 PM »
I find the safety stuff slightly plausible but no doubt overdone. There are fewer accidents in the UK than US per mile driven, significantly. So all those caravans on the road might well be pissing old Jeremy off, but they are not leading to a significantly unsafe country in terms of driving.

Accidents per mile driven (which is for all vehicles) is different from accidents per mile driven with a trailer. Towing a trailer is always more dangerous so the question becomes, What is an acceptable amount of increased risk? This comes down to an engineering and policy decision. Hence those of us here saying: a) Towing capacity exists for a reason, are not arbitrary, not "ridiculous." b) There's no conspiracy by auto manufacturers to force people into larger vehicles. c) Please don't exceed the limits determined as safe by engineers - you put yourself and others at risk.

The author added this in the comments section:

Though since Iíve wrote this I have talked to several engineers from GM, Toyota and Chrysler about the idea of this safety factor and they all admit to me in one for or another that these margins arenít as big as people think and that the weakest link in the system may be REALLY thin margins.

I'm saying I disagree with b. The people at the car companies have every reason to want people to buy the larger vehicles.

/shrug

Sure, auto manufacturers want people to buy higher margin vehicles. But the auto industry is also extremely competitive. If one auto maker set towing capacity unnecessarily low in an attempt to force people into SUVs or trucks, then another company would swoop in for that market share. Imagine the marketing possible with a small car with great gas milage and the ability to tow a 4000 lb trailer. Subaru would have a field day with this! It makes a lot more sense that they are setting the capacities where they can for US standards, and it's simply more expensive to build vehicles that can tow more.

Maybe you're right, today. I just find it a bit much. Perhaps we're both right; the push happened and was lucrative, now nobody wants to risk losing share in the SUV segment.
Lending Loop - Peer to Peer Lending for Canadians - $25 sign up bonus

My current yield is about 13%, but who knows. Loans do go bad. Caveat Emptor and all that.

FINate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 634
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #64 on: July 07, 2017, 07:32:38 PM »
I find the safety stuff slightly plausible but no doubt overdone. There are fewer accidents in the UK than US per mile driven, significantly. So all those caravans on the road might well be pissing old Jeremy off, but they are not leading to a significantly unsafe country in terms of driving.

Accidents per mile driven (which is for all vehicles) is different from accidents per mile driven with a trailer. Towing a trailer is always more dangerous so the question becomes, What is an acceptable amount of increased risk? This comes down to an engineering and policy decision. Hence those of us here saying: a) Towing capacity exists for a reason, are not arbitrary, not "ridiculous." b) There's no conspiracy by auto manufacturers to force people into larger vehicles. c) Please don't exceed the limits determined as safe by engineers - you put yourself and others at risk.

The author added this in the comments section:

Though since Iíve wrote this I have talked to several engineers from GM, Toyota and Chrysler about the idea of this safety factor and they all admit to me in one for or another that these margins arenít as big as people think and that the weakest link in the system may be REALLY thin margins.

I'm saying I disagree with b. The people at the car companies have every reason to want people to buy the larger vehicles.

/shrug

Sure, auto manufacturers want people to buy higher margin vehicles. But the auto industry is also extremely competitive. If one auto maker set towing capacity unnecessarily low in an attempt to force people into SUVs or trucks, then another company would swoop in for that market share. Imagine the marketing possible with a small car with great gas milage and the ability to tow a 4000 lb trailer. Subaru would have a field day with this! It makes a lot more sense that they are setting the capacities where they can for US standards, and it's simply more expensive to build vehicles that can tow more.

Maybe you're right, today. I just find it a bit much. Perhaps we're both right; the push happened and was lucrative, now nobody wants to risk losing share in the SUV segment.

SUVs didn't really become a thing in the US until the 1980s-1990s. Before the 1980s people very often towed trailers with cars - lots of great old photos of vintage cars towing Airstreams. Cars and trucks were very similar in those days, but they also had terrible fuel economy and deplorable lifespans. My guess is de facto standards for towing in the US were set through trial and error during 40s, 50s and 60s (weight distribution, tongue weight, speeds, etc.). The market for cars and trucks split as concerns about fuel economy and overall cost of ownership became a thing in the 1970s with gas shortages and stagflation. Trucks started being designed specifically for hauling/towing and cars started were designed lighter and more economical. I suppose it's possible that car companies lobbied to keep laws in place to limit the towing capacities of passenger cars, though I've not seen a shred of evidence for this.

Prospector

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9805
  • Location: The sunny side of the street
  • The late worm misses the bird.
Re: The 2 trucks you need (or not)
« Reply #65 on: July 07, 2017, 07:44:55 PM »
Agree with FINate - the one vehicle that you could argue has always been an SUV is the Suburban - but even it started as a station wagon. (And wasn't always a Checy - at one time it was just a reference to a bodystyle)

https://youtu.be/eQ39lgRzmX0
Illegitimi non carborundum

Follow along in The Oasis of Positivity.

Camp Mustache Canada 2017 Organizing Committee member - Accepting names for standby list.