Note. My current trailer is a much smaller pop up. It empty weight is >< under 2,000lbs. Easy to pull even with a Ford Edge at 70+. The Q’s on larger heavier trailers is futureproofing. I’d have zero qualms about a JL towing it.
Note. My current trailer is a much smaller pop up. It empty weight is >< under 2,000lbs. Easy to pull even with a Ford Edge at 70+. The Q’s on larger heavier trailers is futureproofing. I’d have zero qualms about a JL towing it.
ultraclyde said:Adrian_Thompson said:So, serious Q. With a stabilizing hitch and electric brakes, would you consider towing with a 4 door 118" wheelbase twine solid axle vehicle? Would you tow a 4-5K lb (empty) 20ish foot camper?
In general, no. Between the weight and the wind load on that trailer I would want something with a a couple more feet in the wheelbase. Can you, sure, but vacations are supposed to be relaxing. towing that would not be relaxing.
I agree. Travel trailers are billboards. Your solid axle likely has trailing arms instead of leaf springs. They are designed to center the axle under normal loads and take braking and acceleration torque, but not really handle trailer side loads. I would suggest a panhard bar or watts link to help.
I wouldn't mind towing the weight... like a flatbed with a Miata, fine. But a travel trailer would give you white knuckles hardcore and puts you on the edge of the vehicle being able to keep you out of a ditch
On the topic of manual vs automatic, I still prefer a manual. It does lower the tow rating usually - either because the manual isn't as beefy, or the clutch wasn't engineered to take it, but in my opinion that is squarely within the driver's jurisdiction, not a safety thing. My Fordzda Branger is a manual and its rated for 3500, but the exact same truck with an automatic is rated for 5000. I wouldn't hesitate to tow 5000 with mine since I know how to avoid damaging things, and even if it does get damaged it isn't a failure that causes death to myself and others on the highway.
The keys to a good tow vehicle are adequate axle weight and torque capacity, good LT tires with stiff enough sidewalls, adequate wheelbase so that the leverage the trailer throws at it has less effect on "wagging the dog," and (big one) ample means of keeping the axle centered. My truck has leaf springs that do a good job of that, but I plan on removing a couple leaves and putting in air bags... mostly to help the hideous ride quality. If I do that, I will likely need to add a panhard bar for towing since there will be less spring rigidity to keep the axle centered.
Don't overlook the rear axle's torque capacity. Weight has a huge effect on it. Take for instance a GM F-body with a 7.5/7.625" axle and a 300hp LS1 up front. The LS easily makes enough torque to blow the differential out of the cover, but the suspension and tires don't let it get enough traction to actually do it. I've seen them explode quite flamboyantly with just a swap to slicks. Same goes for towing. Your axle might be more than adequate for the 4500-lb vehicle, but when you tow 5k, you have much greater effective torque at the ring gear.
I use this analogy: Take an empty cardboard box with a string and tie the string to a toddler's waist. The toddler is the engine, the string is the driveline, and the box represents the weight you are trying to move. The string will last a very long time. Now replace the toddler with an olympic sprinter. The string will still last just as long because despite the "bigger engine" it isn't being asked to move much weight. Now fill the box with books and tie the string to the toddler. The string will still last forever because the toddler doesn't make enough torque to break it, but the box won't move. The real trouble is a box full of books and the sprinter.
Not towing, your JL is like the sprinter, string, and empty box. Towing, you're like the sprinter, string, and a full box. The driveline needs to be made of adequate string. The JLs come with a derivative of the Dana 35/44 rear axle (typically called a 3rd gen Dana) with a pretty small 200mm ring gear (7-7/8"). Not beefy. At all. Be nice to it. Bearings should last forever, and the axle tubes are nice, heavy, and large diameter, but that is a very small ring gear. Regardless of how much torque it is actually engineered to handle, the smaller the ring gear, the more helical the cuts have to be. More helix + smaller mass + smaller tooth count (meaning more frequent contact with a given tooth) = heat.
Adrian_Thompson said:P.S. Someone asked if the low tow rating was just for the 4 cyl. Funnily enough the V6 NA is the standard engine with the 2.0L turbo 4 banger being the upgrade even though it has less power (270hp Vs 285hp) but has more torque that comes in lower and has a wider band (295lb/gt vs 260lb/ft). Both have the same 3,500lb rating
Too many variables to know, but that suggests to me that the engine isn't the limiting factor. Engine output has very little to do with how manufacturers decide on a tow rating. At a 3500-lb tow rating, 125 hp is enough. I towed a GCW vehicle of about 40k lbs (26' box truck and 30' trailer) loaded to the gills with a 180hp I-6. It was slow, but still within GCWR.
Often times the more limiting factor is radiator efficiency, transmission capacity, axle capacity, etc. I could see how a vehicle that had the option of 200hp or 250hp might have a lower tow rating in the bigger engine because the radiator wasn't able to take the heat of the bigger output.
The Jeep rear suspension should be fine design-wise (IIRC the JL still uses a 4 link + panhard), it's mostly an issue of low spring stiffness.
FWIW, my aluminum center D44a (about an 8.5" ring gear) in my ZJ has survived quite a few uphill WOT highway merges at 11k lbs combined weight behind significantly more engine than a JL has. So I wouldn't worry too much about hurting the axle unless it gets shock loaded hard.
Tire stiffness is a very good point as well. Mushy tires make things feel unstable.
For the most part, the lower the center of gravity on the trailer, the more naturally stable (tandem axles, more distance from hitch to first trailer axle), less windage, etc. will all make a given trailer less demanding on the tow rig. A given vehicle (drivetrain limitations aside) can typically tow much more weight in open car trailer than it can in high windage, tall camper trailer before things start to get sketchy.
One of the motorcycle adventure companies around I've seen at my local BMW / Triumph dealer tows and enclosed triple axle behind a slightly lifted JK Rubicon. It's supercharged but centrifugal --doesn't help much with torque. I have no idea what that trailer full of motorcycles weighs but when I inquired about it they said it towed just fine since it had good trailer brakes.
they are in the "adventure" business after all.
In reply to Adrian_Thompson :
I've pulled my 23 foot 3900ish lbs dry hard side camper with my 2012 xterra. Loaded for a week long trip from Michigan to North Carolina was just shy of 5,000lbs.
The short wheel base made for a slight rocking feeling in the back seat the entire drive. On wet roads and sharp turns it set a ABS trouble code because the tail was wagging the dog. The engine and trans was up to the task, though lots of revs was typical. Electric brakes with weight distribution hitch as well as helper airbags on the rear axle was my setup. I wouldn't call it unsafe, but it wasnt comfortable. High winds sidelined us for a day in the mountains as it just wasnt worth the stress of pushing through. It was a constant, high attention to what the trailer was doing type of drive. I sold the Xterra and switched to an Armada the following year.
Can a similar sized wrangler do it? Yes. Will it be worth the risk and stress of having a insufficient setup? No.
rslifkin said:The Jeep rear suspension should be fine design-wise (IIRC the JL still uses a 4 link + panhard), it's mostly an issue of low spring stiffness.
FWIW, my aluminum center D44a (about an 8.5" ring gear) in my ZJ has survived quite a few uphill WOT highway merges at 11k lbs combined weight behind significantly more engine than a JL has. So I wouldn't worry too much about hurting the axle unless it gets shock loaded hard.
Good to know it may already have a Panhard. The new ones don't get the D44a unfortunately. If they did it would be pretty easy to up the ante with 8.8" gears. Unfortunately the new 3rd gen Danas get a 200mm ring gear which specs out to about 7.874". It might be adequate. Ring gear size isn't always an indicator of strength, but research should be done on that frontier before putting much weight behind it.
Furious_E said:I never tried to tow anything with my XJ, but solely on the basis of driving it with the back completely full of E36 M3, I can't imagine towing anything close to 5k.
XJ handling and brakes were woeful even in regular driving, in my experience. The thought of even putting a smallish trailer behind one is scary.
I think I'd rather tow with my old Olds Intrigue than a Jeep Wrangler.
Curtis said:Good to know it may already have a Panhard. The new ones don't get the D44a unfortunately. If they did it would be pretty easy to up the ante with 8.8" gears. Unfortunately the new 3rd gen Danas get a 200mm ring gear which specs out to about 7.874". It might be adequate. Ring gear size isn't always an indicator of strength, but research should be done on that frontier before putting much weight behind it.
Is the JL rear axle different than the JK D44? If not, then it's a strong axle. The JK44 was basically my D44a but with an iron center and a little bit more beefing up. Significantly stronger than an older D44.
Edit: A little quick research indicates that a JL gets either a 200mm or 220mm axle depending on how it's optioned.
So, this thread is telling me that the Wrangler would be fine for out current trailer, but not for a hard side in the future. Well a Wrangler isn't imminent as I need to find a new job first (see the downsizing thread).
One thing, both myself and my wife like to make, shall we say good progress, on road trips. Because up until now we got a enw company car every year, I have a massive load of draw bars for different vehicles. I can basically do level, +/-1" and +/-2" so I can pretty quickly dial in the right height and load. Messing about with tongue weight and hitch height I took pulling our current pop up (Pictured behind our old Explorer, just because it was the only handy pics) from being nasty at 65mph behind a Ford edge to being rock solid at 80 behind the same vehicle. The words 'While it may pull fine, if anything goes wrong you'll never save it so stick to 65mph' have less than zero meaning to the spousal unit. I would certainly add whatever hitch and brake controller was needed to make it as safe as possible. I guess a future thread will be 'what's a good family SUV and trailer puller that works around town as a daily too keeping in mind my vehicle type and brand prejudices'!!
rslifkin said:Curtis said:Good to know it may already have a Panhard. The new ones don't get the D44a unfortunately. If they did it would be pretty easy to up the ante with 8.8" gears. Unfortunately the new 3rd gen Danas get a 200mm ring gear which specs out to about 7.874". It might be adequate. Ring gear size isn't always an indicator of strength, but research should be done on that frontier before putting much weight behind it.
Is the JL rear axle different than the JK D44? If not, then it's a strong axle. The JK44 was basically my D44a but with an iron center and a little bit more beefing up. Significantly stronger than an older D44.
Edit: A little quick research indicates that a JL gets either a 200mm or 220mm axle depending on how it's optioned.
Yes. Dana kinda quit the numbering system. The Gen 3 Dana they has some parts that interchange with a D35, but it's a whole new animal. I know very little about them, and in fact Jeep folks seem to know very little about them. Info is still coming out. Youtube has a couple videos of guys who ripped them out and dissected them to find out what they were.
It sounds like you want a pretty serious off-roader that can tow? How much off-road do you need? As someone mentioned, the things that make rigs good off road often make them bad tow rigs and vice versa. You'll have to find a middle.
Curtis said:It sounds like you want a pretty serious off-roader that can tow? How much off-road do you need? As someone mentioned, the things that make rigs good off road often make them bad tow rigs and vice versa. You'll have to find a middle.
Good point. If an off-roader and camping vehicle combo is desired, maybe it would be better to have a vehicle capable of camping that can tow the off-roader instead of trying to use the off-roader to tow a camper?
Adrian_Thompson said:Just had coffee with Reese (Hippywagon on here) and he pointed out it's not just the soft springs, but also two solid axles, although as buzzboy pointed out the old XJ's could tow 5,000lb.
Right now our pop up camper is 2K lb's empty, but probably at least 3k lb's full so it wouldn't be an issue. The thing is in the future I want to upgrade to a larger hard sided camper. The plan was a Bronco, but circumstances have changed that per my other thread.
So you are saying the new Bronco with have at least a 5000lb tow rating.
Seriously, have you spent much time in a Wrangler? The soft springs and crappy brakes make it a terrible choice to tow. I actually believe the solid axles are better for towing than IRS. My FJ Cruiser is rated for 5000lb and towing my 4000lb boat is all I would want to tow behind it. The boat pulls it around a bit. You definately need to be paying attention.
In reply to D2W :
Honestly and joking aside I don't know. But I'm looking at the tow rating of the T6 Ranger the Chassis is coming from (already announced to the public)
Well, it really depends on how serious your off-roading is. If you're crawling Moab and Rubicon every week, that would be a vehicle that doesn't tow well. If you need to get through some mud and go into the woods to get to a fishing camp, an AWD CUV would be plenty.
Many of the compact pickups you mention will do the trick and tow well. I have taken my Mazda B4000 in some pretty hairy offroad situations and it did brilliantly, and it will still tow 5000 cautiously. Mom had a Trailblazer that towed very well, and aside from only a modest ground clearance, it was very capable off road. I know those aren't what you want, but I'm just giving examples of vehicles that can do well off-road and tow well.
I think an honest assessment of what your off-road needs are is important. Then we'll see if we can find something that will do both for you.
How serious am I about off road? Certainly not the Moab crowd. More like the sand dunes, overlanding and hopefully back country camping of some kind. In truth an Explorer would work. We had an Explorer Sport we took off road. Great the looks you get blatting a brand new $50K SUV across the dunes! Power, torque and modern electronics overcome poor tires and a lack of ground clearance for what we we/could/have/want to do. I am really really kicking myself for not buying the Series 2 Disco at Christmas now as I knew it's history and service going back 7 or 8 years.
Now, at the end of the day, personal preference, bias, style and prejudices come in to play in almost any automotive decision. While I/we will NEED a vehicle that can carry 4, 5or even 6 people in relative comfort for up to 1,000 miles at a time, while not murdering the wallet on fuel. It must be able to tow, at the very very least, our current pop up camper pictured up thread with ease, make that disdain. There are certain non negotiables. These include:
As I say, these are MY preferences and prejudices. Something else could do what I want, but it wouldn't' be what I want. Things that hit my WANT buttons are:
You get it? Truly capable full size SUV's The problem is, what I will be looking for (once I get a new job) is something new, or no more than 5 years old that costs less than $30K (Yes a Bronco would probably have cost over $40K if I was still at Ford by the time it came out) but that is my thinking #. So what's out there can still meet my seating, fuel, towing etc. requirements?
BTW, there is a new JL 4 door Sport in the Studio right now. I hopped in it this morning and while it is certainly a quantum leap forward from the JK, I was still disappointed in the space and quality of materials. Obviously didn't drive it, but I know it's magnitudes better than the JK on ride, on road handling, noise, refinement etc.etc.
Yes, I realize some of my needs and wants may appear to be contradictory, but that's life. I want my cake and to eat it too.
Well, after reading you prejudices....you're just wrong. But that's why you called them prejudices, right?
For what you want to do and want to tow, a late model Grand Cherokee makes a lot more sense than an JK/JL. The trailhawk trim is surprisingly good offroad and will tow what you want. Just harder to take the top off.
Incidentally, you're wrong because I sold a lifted Jeep that I was doing all of your activities with because it didn't tow as well as I'd like. I bought a 4dr F150 that does all of those same activities better AND tows. The idea that you can fit the Jeep places you can't fit the F150 is valid, the rest is just prejudice. But you know that.
Everybody I work with has a Wrangler - "Because Jeep". Most of them are lifted and customized - "Because Jeep". Most of them never actually drive off the paved roads - .... If you want a comfortable full size SUV that can tow 7,700 lbs find the newest, lowest mile Porsche Cayenne that fits your budget. Diesel, Turbo, or S are the other budget modifiers. The brakes, the power, and the ride are all good. I have pulled a trailer with a car on it and forgot that I was hauling anything.
In reply to ultraclyde :
You are right, that's why I listed them as my Prejudices.
That makes a lot of sense. I have a friend with a new ish one and another who had an SRT8 for a couple of years. Lot's to like. Should have been on my list.
Bah, lifting any real SUV is pure vanity for 99.99% of people. Yss, 0.01% of people do activities that need a lift. But every single bit of off roading I've done, am ever likely to do, or ever likely to be done by anyone with any modern Jeep can be done at stock ride height. Hell, I've seen write ups where people have taken stock LR4's through (over?) Moab. Lifting to me is the Jeep equivalent of Hellaflush hardparking. Rant over.
Hmm, another question just popped into my head. What's the relationship between places you expect to take the vehicle off-road and places you expect to take the camper? If any significant off-road camping is in the mix, I'd think a 3/4 ton or 1 ton pickup (crew cab long bed) with a slide in camper in the bed might be a better option than a trailer. Might be a small sacrifice in camping space and the truck won't go as far off-road as the Jeep would, but the truck + camper would likely go further than Jeep + trailer.
Yeah, I told him the other day what he really needs is a JGC. His British heart burns for Land/Range Rovers, though. 
Adrian_Thompson said:Hell, I've seen write ups where people have taken stock LR4's through (over?) Moab. Lifting to me is the Jeep equivalent of Hellaflush hardparking. Rant over.
I used to be a trail leader at the Land Rover National Rally in Moab, so I think I can speak to this. During training, we learned how to deal with stock vehicles and there are a bunch of interesting trails they just can't do. Moab has hundreds if not thousands of miles of trails, so saying that a stock vehicle has been used there doesn't tell you much. Some offroaders are lifted for a reason! I know we're talking about a small minority, but remember that the hellaflush looks are all exaggerations of functional modifications made for performance too.
The above has very little to do with towing, but I do agree that the attributes of a good offroader and a good towing vehicle are in conflict. That's one reason I'm such a big fan of airbags for tow vehicles, they allow you to stiffen the suspension easily for towing use without extracting a penalty when you're unhooked.
Adrian-I was less than impressed with the towing capability of my diesel JGC. Worked fine for our pop-up (about the size of your camper) and had the towing rating of 7,700 lbs-power was not the problem- but left me feeling a bit uneasy when towing a 20' enclosed trailer as well as an open car hauler. Seemed a bit squirrely. A friend at ZF (formerly TRW) who does brake calibration also towed his Miata on an open trailer behind a JGC to Michigan International Speedway for an autocross event and was less than impressed. Just my $0.02.
You'll need to log in to post.
