Tow capacity help...
Printed From: CorrectCraftFan.com
Category: General Correct Craft Discussion
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Discription: Anything Correct Craft
URL: http://www.CorrectCraftFan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24468
Printed Date: June-24-2024 at 9:10am
Topic: Tow capacity help...
Posted By: oledb4
Subject: Tow capacity help...
Date Posted: December-23-2011 at 9:54pm
| I'm most likely going to be buying a new car and obviously need one able to launch my 86 nautique 2001...does anyone have any experience or know someone with experience with a 3.0 Ford Ranger Edge launching a boat? I believe the weight will be fine for towing, it has a tow capacity of just under 4k, I'm just worried about gettin the boat out of the water considering the extra weight for gas, water, and possible upgrades (tower, etc)....any advice helps. Thanks guys. |
Replies:
Posted By: oledb4
Date Posted: December-23-2011 at 10:18pm
| It is a 4x2 btw |
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: December-23-2011 at 11:29pm
|
Pulling is one thing....stopping is another. ------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 12:03am
|
How far do you plan on going? Is it an automatic? New or used? ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: oledb4
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 12:12am
| Wouldn't be more than 10-15 miles...it's used and it is an auto...I would not be on any highways or anything like that |
Posted By: eric lavine
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 9:49am
|
if you've ever experienced a trailer with good operating trailer brakes, then pulling it wouldnt even be a question, sn, points out the obvious, ------------- "the things you own will start to own you" |
Posted By: NCH20SKIER
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 10:23am
|
I used to tow my 83 with a V6 explorer which probably has a similar power plant - never an issue pulling out of the lake always used 1st gear (automatic trans). Slow to get up to speed from the lights and stops were planned / anticipated in advance ------------- '05 206 Limited '88 BFN |
Posted By: M3Fan
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 11:38am
From a stop, the car is going to use 1st whether it's in D or 1.  ------------- 2000 SN GT40 w/99 Graphics/Gel 2016 SN 200 OB 5.3L DI https://forum.fifteenoff.com |
NCH20SKIER wrote:Posted By: Tim D
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 12:58pm
|
I've seen Rangers spin trying to pull a Ski Tique out. Not enough weight over the rear wheels. ------------- Tim D |
Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 1:06pm
|
Being able to pull up the ramp is critical if you are executing the pullout by yourself. If you have another person, you can push with the prop to get momentum if you have to. If the wheels spin, the rig can slip downhill, not a good feeling!
------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: politicallycorrect
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 1:11pm
|
Maybe this will help you decide if the vehicle is good for boat launching... http://youtu.be/3goRfcrj1WA - explorer boat launch ------------- Skin grows back...fiberglass doesn't!! |
Posted By: Maximal691
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 1:16pm
| You will be fine just driving down the road as long as you use caution when coming to stops. I'd more concerned about getting the boat out of the launch being two wheel drive. There are plenty of factors that go into it though, the quality of your tires, steepness of the launch, and how slick the launch surface is. Does the ranger have limited slip? If not you only have one wheel actually doing the work. The last thing you want to do is be "that guy" at the boat launch on a busy saturday. |
Posted By: Maximal691
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 1:22pm
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6yVkGGwZG0&feature=youtube_gdata_player |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 2:55pm
|
I tow with a 2.9 liter dodge dakota with 200,000 miles. I have towed twice five hours to green lake. Last year I fought overheating on the way home in very hot humid conditions. Local is not much of a problem but trailer brakes would be highly recommended. I always go up the ramp in 4 low. Would not feel real confident with two wheel on the ramps. ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 3:51pm
|
I tow with a Jeep Liberty 4*4, which is not necessarily the stoutest 4*4, but it does the job. I can put it into 4Low, which is huge. Not just on the boat ramp, but maneuvering around some steep dirt grades nearby, especially from a dead stop.
If you're on a budget, you might be better off with a heavy rear wheel drive car, like a Caprice Wagon or something. My father used to tow a pretty heavy boat with an Electra wagon. Plenty of weight over the rear wheels, it never had any trouble on the ramp. |
Posted By: 8122pbrainard
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 4:06pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6yVkGGwZG0&feature=youtube_gdata_player - Youtube link ------------- /diaries/details.asp?ID=1622" rel="nofollow - 54 Atom /diaries/details.asp?ID=2179" rel="nofollow - 77 Tique 64 X55 Dunphy Keep it original, Pete < |
Posted By: P71_CrownVic
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 6:56pm
I think a Saturn Ion should do the trick! 
Seriously though...my 1986 weighs just under 4K pounds with fluids/fuel/trailer/etc. Keep that in mind. My Silverado will spin until the diff locks, then it will come out. ------------- |
Posted By: oledb4
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 7:25pm
is that with the original trailer or have you upgraded?? |
Posted By: oledb4
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 7:26pm
| and what about a 3.0 4x4 manual transmission...My thoughts are the 4x4 would def help, but not sure the effect manual transmission has on it... |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 8:08pm
|
My above mentioned Dakota is a manual. I have not had any issues with towing. It is the reason I always use 4 low. Rather than work the clutch in difficult situations I can let it out and creep along with plenty of time for fine steering adjustments. It has never stalled in 4 low no mater how bad my teenager might dump the clutch. A side issue is cell phone use. I loved driving my 88 accord with a manual, then my next vehicle was an automatic. After replacing the tranny on that one I though I would go back to a clutch when I bought the 2000 year vehicle new. In the interim cell phones became common place and although I would not advocate driving and using a cell I admit at times I answer it, and adding that in with steering and shifting is a bad deal. ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: oledb4
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 8:20pm
I read the tow cap on an '03 3.0 v6 ranger 4x4 manual was around 3200...I believe boat+trailer weight is above that...would the 4x4 make up for the difference?? or how does all that work?? |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 8:23pm
|
Someone else might have more insight on that. I don't know what it does for tow ratings, I just know it gives confidence at the ramp. ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: 8122pbrainard
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 8:42pm
Ok, you must have the 1/2 ton with the junk posi!!!!! The 3/4's use the good one!!! You should have purchased a 3/4. ------------- /diaries/details.asp?ID=1622" rel="nofollow - 54 Atom /diaries/details.asp?ID=2179" rel="nofollow - 77 Tique 64 X55 Dunphy Keep it original, Pete < |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-24-2011 at 11:11pm
OK, I just couldn't resist any longer. I took the bait. My wife prefers to use the Escape anytime she needs to tow an outhouse however!       ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: TX Foilhead
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 11:16am
|
4X4 would be preferable because of the slick boat ramps. Stick is even better, I used to have a V6 F150 with a stick, just stick it in 4 low and 2nd and it would drag anything it would tow right up a steep slippery ramp.
A V6 F150 might be worth looking at, I had 3 Rangers and an Explorer and got the same MPG as the full size V6, but it was night and day difference in the way it towed. They all could use some more power, but the full size never felt like the trailer might make it do something. Never had anything happen with any of them though. |
Posted By: TX Foilhead
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 11:22am
| If our boat ramps were as flat as John's, I think a I could probbably just use my golf cart at the. neighborbood ramp. |
Posted By: Maximal691
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 3:20pm
| Towing with front wheel drive cars is scary. No thank you. I tow the boat with a newer 4x4 Tacoma 6cylinder which isn't too bad, but you do know the boats there, unlike when I use our f550 diesel dump. |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 4:25pm
|
I have found that the CC trailers are very easy to pull and provide a good ride for the boat, even though they have leaf springs with no shocks. I am considering putting brakes on mine for the ultimate in towing comfort. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: Maximal691
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 4:43pm
| Brakes will help, I just don't like the idea of the car being so light. In panic situations the tail will end up wagging the dog. |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 4:47pm
A 4X4 is typically rated with a lower towing capacity than a rear wheel drive 4X2 of the same model. In terms of towing the only thing a 4X4 does for you is offer 4 wheels powered at the ramp. I have two 4X4s and have never put either into 4wd to get a boat out at the ramp (they are heavy vehicles). BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: quik225
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 4:51pm
Yes it will be in 1st, but with many transmissions, the advantage to using 1 or L instead of D when pulling up the ramp is the reverse band is applied for extra holding power. |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 4:53pm
|
I also disagree that a stick/manual is "better." It may or may not offer more power, but the fact is most people don't drive them well while parked on a steep, wet slippery incline. I watch people fry clutches almost every weekend.
Automatic is pretty brain dead. Even if I had to back the truck into the water, I can usually trust most anyone to put in in gear and drive out. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 5:06pm
|
4x4's towing weight is usually lower because the of the added weight of the 4wd,gross vehicle weight I think is the same.Automatics help pull because of the torque mulitplication of the converter. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 5:17pm
|
I agree that automatics work very well on traditional towing vehicles and I would prefer to have one if that is what I was interested in. Be sure it has a cooler. An automatic on my teeny weeny towing truckster, or anything like it, would last about 5 minutes. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 6:12pm
All the time. Not sure why the Ranger would be any worse than light trucks from Chevy, Toyota, or Nissan, but it sure seems like the Ranger is the worst for spinning the rear wheels. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: 8122pbrainard
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 6:18pm
Cecil, Could you expound on this statement? I'm not sure what you mean. ------------- /diaries/details.asp?ID=1622" rel="nofollow - 54 Atom /diaries/details.asp?ID=2179" rel="nofollow - 77 Tique 64 X55 Dunphy Keep it original, Pete < |
Posted By: oledb4
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 6:50pm
do you know why 4x4 has lower towing capacity?? And, not to be a prick, but I understand that a 4x4 offers you 4 wheels powered at the ramp, but how do you think a 4x4 manual transmission would handle pulling boat out of luanch?? especially considering the boat is either at, or most likely above, the towing capacity |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 7:33pm
|
I used to tow my quite heavy Excel with a 4x4 manual F150, with a 4.6.
I almost always pulled out of the launch in 4 low. I HAD to because of slipping the clutch. A ranger won't be any better unless you have some nice ramps compared to what we have here. If you buy a Ranger with a manual and 4x4, you should be able to get the boat out, but towing and stopping is another matter. Especially if you are launching the boat 4 times a week, that will take it's toll. You might be replacing brakes often if you do not have trailer brakes. I had surge brakes on my trailer, and I think the combination of surge brakes and a manual caused the truck to destroy u-joints pretty quick. |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 7:37pm
|
Traction is the name of the game at the ramp. It really takes very little power. Many marinas use small jeeps or tractors just to pull the boats out of water and pull around the yard at 4 or 5 miles per hour.
I had a friend who used to pull his 17 foot Bayliner out of the water with a Ford Escort. Sometimes, on a slick ramp, three or four of us would have to sit on the back of the car to get traction. The little four cylinder had no problem pulling the boat out of the water. It was all about traction. The Europeans use very small cars all the time. Obviously, 4 wheel drive can assist with traction. Presumably, the front wheels never get down into the water, or onto the slick part of the ramp. I'm no expert, but if I were going to have a manual transmission, I'd rather have the 4 wheel than the two wheel drive. This is only because when the tires start spinning most people just keep trying and smoke the clutch. At least with the 4 wheel, the front wheels should pull not break loose . If all 4 are spinning, you really have a problem like the video posted above of the guys trying to launch in the ocean. I see no advantage in a manual transmission when it comes to towing a recreational ski boat. Once out on the highway, different story than on the ramp. First, there is the matter of stopping. It's pretty simple - smaller cars have a harder time stopping big boats than do bigger cars. You can augment your stopping capability with trailer brakes, and some cars have bigger/better brakes than others. There is still nothing like weight to slow down a moving boat. Also in high winds, smaller cars will get whipped a lot easier than bigger cars. If you are only towing a few miles, and don't need to go fast, then perhaps this is not an issue. Then, you have the matter of the transmission. Even if the engine can pull the boat down the road at 50 or 60 miles and hour, the transmission on a small car is probably going to be working hard. You can ease the pain on the transmission by installing a transmission cooler. But, again, big beefy transmissions, with big beefy parts are better for towing than small transmissions. It just is, what it is. If you tow only a few miles, on flat terrain, that may not be an issue either. Engines are similar. Lots of engines will do the job. How hard they have to work, and how long they will last doing that job is another story. In terms of tow rating, you also have to consider the suspension. The car may have plenty of power, but if the ass end of the car is dragging, you're going to have a bad tow experience. Again, you can build up the suspension, or add air shocks or other lifting devices. At some point you have to ask, is it worth it? By the time you buy a light duty truck and beef everything up, you could have bought a hell of a lot of gas. So you see, you ask a simple question, with dozens of possible answers. How much is enough truck? depends up on your tow terrain, launch ramp, experience, skills, budget, appetite for repairs, etc. etc. etc. When I bought my first Ski Nautique, I was commuting 160 miles per day, and needed a new car. I could not afford two new cars, and couldn't afford to drive a 13 mpg truck back and forth. So, the answer was a new Honda Accord, and $500 68 Ford pickup. That pickup was my primary tow vehicle for over 4 years (and the primary dump vehicle for every one of my neighbors). Was ugly, but it towed just fine. BKH ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 8:15pm
Maybe that was why you had a lot of trouble ay the ramp. The Ford Escort was a front wheel drive car. Applying weight to the rear bumper would reduce the weight on the drive wheels. I find my Ion does quite well on improved ramps, just like most front wheel drive cars. The additional distance from the water to the drive wheels frequently keeps them clear of the sand and gravel that accumulate near the water line. Sometimes the ramp is even dry where the front wheels are positioned. I did quite a bit of towing with small cars over the years, here with a fully equipped Southcoast 22' sailboat, complete with ballast and a steel swing keel, and all rigging and equipment. This photo was in 1978 leaving for a day of boating on the Chicago Ocean (Lake Michigan) where we did most of our boating.  ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: TX Foilhead
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 9:30pm
|
The advantage to the manual tranny is control, sure you have to know how to use it but it allows you to get everything out of the tow vehicle. I'm sure its an aquired taste, but I've done it with trucks up to 2 1/2 tons and I'll take the manual everytime its offered. I found the 2nd gear launches up the ramp in 4 lo to be perfect, one foot on the brake the other on the clutch and I didn't have to touch the gas until it was moving. 1st was too much and caused wheel spin and bouncing and 3rd bogged momentarily.
I don't know if first on an auto causes anything different to happen, I always use 2 which I've heard Ford designed for towing on slippery surfaces. I don't know, but it works and doesn't spin at my ramp. |
Posted By: malibud
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 11:35pm
| So i am no expert but from experience you are better off with a manual tranny . 1. I have burned up 2 tturbo 350 trans towing in the mountains. 2. In a pinch you can always down shift to slow down. 3. If autos were better wouldn't the semi trucks be using them... Just my 2 cents... |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-25-2011 at 11:52pm
Semi trucks have been using them for years, but they are expensive and not popular with fleet operators for that reason. DENTON, Texas (September 9, 2004) – Drivetrain combinations of Allison automatic transmissions and all heavy-duty Cummins and Caterpillar engines are now available Peterbilt Motors Company recently announced. “The new combinations provide customers with a greater range of horsepower and torque ratings with the fuel efficiency and operating convenience of an automatic transmission,” says Bruce Ewald, Peterbilt Assistant General Manager of Sales and Marketing. “Increasingly, customers from both vocational and over-the-road markets are spec’ing automatic transmissions, and this expanded lineup of compatible engine options will hold even greater appeal.” 3.? If tug boats pull the hardest, wouldn't they be the perfect ski boats? I'm just having fun. I like manual trans for towing, but it's not for everyone.  ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: bkhallpass
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 12:30am
|
johnb. Don't I feel dumb. We may well have sat on the front of the car. Hell, maybe we did sit on the back of the car. Was 25 years ago, and a lot of drinking went on. Point remains, doesn't take a hell of a lot of power to get a boat out. What I do remember clearly is that he drilled a hole in the bumper, and stuck a ball in it. Did not even have a real hitch.
BKH P.S. Did Ford have another small care started with and E? Probably not. Oh well. ------------- Livin' the Dream |
Posted By: malibud
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 12:55am
| Very interesting on the tranny. but with a small truck wouldn,t the tranny burn up quicker with and auto than a stick... I think the tug boat would have a terrible wake and not enough cup holders... |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 3:32am
I am sorry if you thought I was being a smart alek. I didn't mean you weren't doing it right at the time. One thing about my sense of humor, it is assuredly offbeat, and I am constantly accursed of being very strange. I wear that like a badge of honor. I assumed it was a typo or that you had forgotten when you said rear bumper. If I didn't think the members here were intelligent informed people I wouldn't hang out here. I agree with you that pretty much anything can launch and retrieve a small recreational boat like these CCs on an improved ramp. I don't think there is a "right" answer to this tow vehicle question. I had vowed never to get involved in a tow vehicle discussion after I was whipped by other members about my tow vehicle. I kinda liked it though and got sucked in again, but only for a laugh. BTW, my neighbor retrieved my runabout with a Polaris 4 wheeler on my sand ramp once. The little Ion truckster is not much good on sand. It takes the Escape 4WD to pull out pretty much anything on the sand. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: SNobsessed
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 8:18pm
Yeah, but look at that tower!! ------------- “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” Ben Franklin |
Posted By: P71_CrownVic
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 9:49pm
Original. I guess I shouldn't have said "just under" 4K pounds. It's actually closer to 3700.
LOL... I'm thinking of getting the 3/4 ton clearance lights...so that should add 1K pounds to my tow rating.
HAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!! I'm just messing with ya... ------------- |
Posted By: P71_CrownVic
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 9:55pm
1. There has GOT to be more to that story. 2. You can do that in an auto as well. I have a "3", "2", and a "1" in my truck. 3. I drive a 60K+ pound fire trucks with an auto. All of our appratus have autos. These are beefy transmissions (usually Allisons). With todays technology, I wouldn't say manuals are any better than autos. ------------- |
Posted By: 67425ks
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 10:33pm
| IMO I wouldn't buy a ford ranger with the intentions of pulling anything. Nothing against a ford ranger, I used to have one in high school that took a major flogging and never missed a beat. I just don't like to run on the ragged edge of power and gvwr. last time I pulled a boat with my cummins I made 16mpg with 5 guys seated comfortably and nearly forgot I was pulling a boat. |
Posted By: quik225
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 11:33pm
When the shifter is in D and the trans is in 1st, there's a sprag (a one way mech clutch) that keeps the low gear hyd clutch housing from spinning. The sprag can be damaged while in 1st if the power is not steady. On and off the throttle can shock the sprag till it fails. When the shifter is in 1 or L, the reverse band applies around the low hyd clutch housing, holding it, so shock loads will not have to absorbed by the sprag. |
Posted By: OverMyHead
Date Posted: December-26-2011 at 11:47pm
|
My reasoning for the manual on the dakota was financial. I saved $1500 when the vehicle was purchased new. I have 201,000 miles on the truck currently. I have replaced the tranny fluid three times, and done the clutch twice at a cost of about 1 grand total. I am sure I would have done at least one $2000 automatic tranny replacement by now, and a few more auto trans tune ups so I figure I am up a minimum $2500 by now or 1 1/4 cents per mile ( not so impressive when you put it that way). The transfer case has only had fluid changes, The rear-end has had output bearings replaced twice and I am going to swap out the whole thing for a younger junk yard version soon. I did kill the motor at 188,000, also swapped for a junkyard motor with 80,000 miles and 140 psi on all cylinders for under a grand. I think the trailering has had some influence on the drive train, along with my 19 year old son who has been the primary driver the last three years. I still can't complain much. ------------- For thousands of years men have felt the irresistible urge to go to sea, and many of them died. Things got better after they invented boats. 1987 Ski Nautique |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 12:24am
|
That's pretty good service for that truck Overhead. MN winters are tough on vehicles. Salt for the body and serious cold for the engine & drivetrain. Add in a lot of towing and a young driver and you did very well! ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 12:32am
|
I would have to think the 4*4 Ranger would be much better than the 2wd. Not just because of the actual 4 wheel drive, but because of the low range. Further, the extended cab version would most likely be better, because the extra length would give you added stability.
As far as transmissions, at speed, the manual wouldn't have slippage, that causes heat and wear, once the clutch is fully engaged. On my auto, the book says to put in 3 instead of drive (4) when towing. I guess it won't or shouldn't do overdrive when towing. Also interesting the tow ratings for 4*4 Jeep Liberty are as follows: Automatic: 2,000 pounds Manual: 3,500 pounds Automatic with cooling kit: 5,000 pounds |
Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 12:49am
|
I wouldn't go with a 2WD light vehicle, you'll get stuck at a ramp sooner or later. I'm not arguing with those who've had success retrieving boats with 2WD and posi, I just have been on some very steep ramps (Lake Champlain at Burlington comes to mind) that, once wet, make a lot of vehicles struggle, even some 4WD.
I'm now driving a Jeep Liberty diesel. Tow rating is 5,000 lbs., and I've towed my Sport and a few other boats around 4,000 lbs., maybe a bit more with gear. It tows 4,000 lbs. very easily, not a problem holding any speed, climbing any hill I've found so far. At the ramp, or in sand (I launch on our local lake from my yard) you can put it in 4WD low and it will walk up with barely any throttle. I'm not saying this Jeep will take the place of a 3/4 ton pickup, but if you want a somewhat lighter, smaller SUV that can tow really well and get 28-30 mpg on the highway (not towing), you can't beat one of these. I'd find it hard to make any argument in favor of a manual tranny for towing, the only exception is holding speed on a downgrade. ------------- '63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique |
Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 1:26am
|
And I forgot to mention, the diesel Liberty has the 545RFE transmission, the same one they put in hemi pickups and Durango's. So, the 5,000 lb. rating is well below the capability of the tranny, though the stock torque converter needs to be replaced with a tougher one, a glitch in the design. ------------- '63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 1:51am
|
63 Skier, your namesake boat is fantastic. The photo of the young girl in front of it on your diary is priceless.
About the Liberty, that is seriously good mileage. It is easy to find the EPA ratings, but it is always good to hear from an owner. How is the mileage around town? Also, has it had any cold weather starting problems? It is not uncommon for the temp to be -25 at the cottage in northern Wisconsin. I have a ramp on the property, but its sand and the Ion will barely drive on sand without a trailer. My wife''s Escape has no problem with 4wd, but she's not always there. We were thinking of buying her a new Escape, but maybe we should take a look at one of these as well. She liked her Grand Cherokee we traded on the Escape, but the trans went at 60,000, and it was a real pig on gas. We never really towed with it except a few miles to the ramp a few times either. Maybe that new trans is much better. Her trans was a 42RE with a tow package (trans cooler). ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 2:08am
|
Thanks for the compliment, but in truth the boat doesn't look so good these days, I'm just not good at keeping up with the cosmetic work. That is my oldest who is now 17 and heading to college next year, so the pics are maybe 10 years old.
They only made the diesel Liberty's in '05 and '06 so don't bother looking for a new one. I'm not impressed with the 3.7 V6 gas motor. Like most diesels, you get the most out of them with aftermarket tunes, and I bought both an engine tune and a transmission tune that help it get that mileage. Around town it gets 25-26. So far no problem in cold, but we really haven't had any serious cold yet this year and I've only had it since late spring. ------------- '63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 12:00pm
|
Personally, I need 4wd where I launch and store the boat- and I never have to worry about encountering a rough or steep ramp. If you know where youre going to be launching all the time and can get away with 2wd, then thats a different story.
BTW, anyone who has a true 4x4 system and doesnt pull the boat up the ramp in 4Lo doesnt know what theyre missing! Way easier on the driver and the vehicle. As far as the Ranger goes, it will do just fine for short tows. Dad used an original ('91, 4.0L) Explorer for years. My buddy towed his 3000 lb Shamrock short distances with his 4.0L 4x4 Ranger with the 5sp manual and it did ok. The 3500 lb tow rating on that truck is lower because of the manual tranny for some reason- it must be the weak point, as the same truck with the 4sp auto is rated for 5000 lb. ------------- |
Posted By: Jllogan
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 12:08pm
|
to chime in on the liberty gas engine, I pulled my boat with my friends 06 liberty, it was terrible. Gutless wonder, and she gets aweful gas mileage. My sisters Rav4 with a similar is a different world though, much more impressed with toyota small SUV vs the jeep. Im sure the deisel would be great though.
We have always pulled pretty sizeable boats with tacomas. I think they much outperform their ranger counterparts. We pulled my parents 21 ft I/0 60 miles to the lake every weekend with my dads 96 tacoma for 8 years. That was with a 2.8 4 cyl. All freeway, and hilly freeway. It would downshift but it got the job done. He just sold it with 170000 miles on it for 6500$, still original automatic tranny and engine, no issues. The resale value of these vehicles shows how tough they are. He just bought a new one and its really nice too, hopefully it is built like the 96. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5792&sort=&pagenum=1" rel="nofollow - 1986 Ski Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 12:48pm
| It's kind of a bummer Jeep totally got out of the diesel business. They had that Grand Cherokee Bluteck diesel out for a couple of years too. They dropped them before they had a chance to really catch on. |
Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 3:46pm
I agree, don't like the V6. Jeep seems to have settled on a not-very-good powerplant in that 3.7 liter, not great power, not good economy, I'm not sure I get it. 3.7 V6 gas - 210 HP, 235 lb.-ft. 2.8 V4 diesel - 188 HP, 335 lb.-ft. (with aftermarket tune) Quite a difference towing with another 100 lb.-ft. of torque. I've thought about trading for a diesel Grand Cherokee, neat package but not sure I'll spend the money. ------------- '63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 4:01pm
|
The new Pentastar gets great reviews in the Grand Cherokee, and now the Wrangler. It would be nice if they brought it into the Liberty as well.
You'd have to find a Diesel Grand Cherokee before you can think about spending the money! |
Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 4:07pm
|
Found one about 45 min. away, only 33,000 miles on it, loaded, asking $26,000 but it's been for sale since I first saw it late November. At least I think it's still there, haven't checked in the last week.
Part of me would like the nice interior and features of the loaded Grand, plus a bit more room. But, even with a tune the mpg would be 4-6 less than the Liberty so I'm not sure it really makes any sense. ------------- '63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique |
Posted By: Jllogan
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 4:13pm
|
plus deisel is gonna cost you more per gallon, so that also is a negative economical factor. I bet it would be a strong puller too. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5792&sort=&pagenum=1" rel="nofollow - 1986 Ski Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 5:10pm
|
Hey Justin (oledb4), have you made any decisions on the vehicle? ------------- '63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique |
Posted By: P71_CrownVic
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 7:40pm
|
Word on the street is that the new Jeep Grand Cherokee will feature a diesel option in the next few years. That will make the best American SUV on the market even better. ------------- |
Posted By: lewy2001
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 8:18pm
|
The Jeep Grand Cherokee has had a Mercedes 3.0L turbo diesel in Australia since 2005. The new model has a new VM Motori based diesel that has even better power and torque figures.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/131846/jeep-grand-cherokee-diesel-review/ - Diesel Grand Cherokee in Aus. ------------- If you're going through hell, keep going http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=2999" rel="nofollow - 89 Ski <a href="http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5685" ta |
Posted By: oledb4
Date Posted: December-27-2011 at 8:51pm
| I have not yet. I am looking into a 2003 ranger 3.0 v6 4x4 manual trans, and also have become interested in jeep wranglers. Does anyone know how difficult it is to install brakes on a trailer??? or if a 4 cyl 4x4 jeep could tow?? |
Posted By: Maximal691
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 1:50am
| 4 cylinder jeep is a no go. I've had pretty of jeeps, inline 6 or nothing. Wranglers are pretty bad for towing, too short of a wheel base. Look for a 6 cylinder Tacoma or a Toyota t100. They are they best midsize trucks you will find. Great re-sale, very reliable and easy to work on. |
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 2:21am
|
agree
------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 2:44am
A 5k option Mark ???? give me the v8! ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: ononewheel
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 3:46am
|
Wait, he is asking about towing a few miles right?
10-15 miles. And not on highways. Any 4x4 will do that. Jeeps too. Even escorts too apparently. Jeeps, especially the older or with lockers will get it out. Low range on a four cylinder jeep is really low. And you have n=been told about the stopping ability of smaller trucks. I think if you buy anything lighter than a f-150ish, you will be sacrificing long distance towing and stopping ability. In my old f150 the excel would push the truck in quick stop situations, and that is scary. A jeep, like a cj, would scare the crap out of me every time some teenager cut in front of me. Are you against a full size vehicle? Around here, for what you pay for a wrangler or a ranger you could find a full size for the same price. |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 4:52am
|
Isn't everyone against a full size vehicle? They are as sporty and fun to drive as a streetsweeper. That's why they are cheap! ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 10:58am
|
Will this be your primary vehicle? Or a second vehicle used less often (only when you need to tow)? Based on your original post, Im guessing the former... but please confirm. There are a lot of things to consider if youre looking for a vehicle that will do it all, if you plan to use it every day. Understanding what youre looking for (besides a tow vehicle) would give us some perspective. If youre looking for an inexpensive second vehicle that wont get used much, thats a different story. Things like reliability and fuel efficiency become less important if the vehicle wont get used much.
Full size trucks can make great tow vehicles- but theyre not necessarily better just because theyre bigger and heavier. They generally have beefy frames, which is a help, but they dont always have the best brakes- which is pretty important. There are several mid-size vehicles that come to mind that can out-tow their full size counterparts. Jeeps are fun and could tow a house- you wouldnt have a problem at the ramp. They dont stop well and their short wheel bases can make them darty at higher speeds with a trailer behind them, though. I would take a look at the tow capacity for anything youre considering... 2-door Wranglers are usually only rated for 2000 lbs. ------------- |
Posted By: Jllogan
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 11:11am
|
also, as far as adding brakes to the trailer they arent that hard to install but depending on the kit you get you may have to cut off the old tongue and weld on the new one with the actuator in it. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5792&sort=&pagenum=1" rel="nofollow - 1986 Ski Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 11:17am
|
No need to cut anything off- CC stopped welding on couplers in the early 70's. A trailer from the 80's should be bolted on.
Adding brakes isnt too difficult, but isnt cheap- you'll need a new coupler/actuator, hubs and lines. Probably ~$500, all said and done. ------------- |
Posted By: Jllogan
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 12:01pm
No cutting, then its EASY!!!! 500 bucks is cheaper than buying a bigger vehicle and the fuel if you are driving daily. I would like brakes on mine but I have been getting by without. You just have to be conscious to always stop early and drive a little bit like a grandma. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5792&sort=&pagenum=1" rel="nofollow - 1986 Ski Nautique 2001 |
Posted By: SN206
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 1:06pm
|
Trailer brakes won't help you backing down a steap wet ramp. I'm guessing that's how alot of submersible SUV's got started, and why limit yourself to towing locally? ------------- ...those who have fallen and those who will. |
Posted By: 63 Skier
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 1:27pm
John, take a look at this thread, the 2nd picture is the same "young girl" from this summer! http://www.correctcraftfan.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=22906&PID=287422&title=6-in-the-63--fun - 6 in the '63 Thread ------------- '63 American Skier - '98 Sport Nautique |
Posted By: Hollywood
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 7:41pm
Seriously, you should be fine in any Ranger (2wd, 4x4, auto, manual) going 15 miles down side streets provided you have good tires all the way around. I've had some butt puckers slipping down some steep, wet sandy ramps with bad front tires. Like SNobsessed said, if you do have trouble getting going on wet steep ramps use the boat to push a little. ------------- |
Posted By: oledb4
Date Posted: December-28-2011 at 9:33pm
| It will be my primary vehicle as well. I was trying to get by with a smaller vehicle due to gas, and the fact that I'm a realtor I do a lot of driving so gas is very important. But I'm not completely opposed to a bigger truck. |
Posted By: eric lavine
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 8:56am
|
the diesel age is beginning, 30 years late, but thats due to politics, anyways Chey Cruze will have the diesel option next year, the EPA i believe mandated 34 mpg, instead of 24 in the US I believe sarting in 2013...i think we'll see alot of changes in transportation the next few years......yes, I drive a foriegn jetta, only cause i bought it for 15 hundies, i got Kraut in the blood so i dont feel so bad.
actually as we speak im doing a complete engine swap, (short block) on a 2009 6.4 ford f-250, what a fcn nightmare, pulled the cab to remove the engine, only 107k on it, pulled it down and it blew a push rod. its not so bad paying 4 bucks a gallon for diesel when you get 50 mpg, gotta adapt and get use to it, now a diesel hybrid, damn good idea, they done want to push 80mpg on you just yet ------------- "the things you own will start to own you" |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 11:29am
Eric, Im with you on the diesels... Great torque and mileage- whats not to love?
Like it was alluded to above, smaller doesnt always translate into greater fuel efficiency. Just like how bigger vehicles dont always tow better. If reliability and fuel efficiency are 2 important factors, Id throw the Ranger option out the window. My buddy bought his 4.0L 4x4 5sp brand new in '04 and it gave him headache after headache- and he took real nice care of it. He just replaced it with a new Tacoma and couldnt be happier. So long as it fits your other (non-towing) needs, Id check into an older Toyota pickup. Im partial to 4x4 for towing, but like HW said, you can probably get by without it if you have good tires and know which ramps you'll be using. A basic 4cyl, manual transmission truck would do just fine for shorter tows over flat terrain. ------------- |
Posted By: Morfoot
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 11:37am
|
I too would throw out the Ranger as an option. I had a 89'SB Ranger with a 2.9 V6 in it that I used several times to pull my Procraft F/S 180 with it and she did not like it one bit. Almost got stuck on a wet ramp once as I was burning up the clutch trying to get up the ramp. Decided right then that I needed a bigger truck. ------------- "Morfoot; He can ski. He can wakeboard.He can cook chicken.He can create his own self-named beverage, & can also apparently fly. A man of many talents."72 Mustang "Kermit",88 SN Miss Scarlett, 99 SN "Sherman" |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 12:42pm
|
[QUOTE=TRBenj] Eric, Im with you on the diesels... Great torque and mileage- whats not to love?
QUOTE] I'm courious on how far Eric drives every day. You guy's might remember I had a VW,great for driving to Florida,I got 60mpg on the road, the rest of the time a nightmare.Could always get to work since it was plugged in at home,anywhere else forget it.I bought it brand new barely got 100K out of it.Had to get to day care after work,and when it was cold I would think all day,hope it starts.Finally discovered that if you pulled it, it would start right up.If I had to do it all over again I should have left it running on those below 0 days,the worst that could have happened is that it was stolen- then it would have been their problem . For the last 33 years I have only been 7 miles from work- not far enough to even warm them up- they are not for everyone.------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 12:47pm
Holy crap, no wonder it died an early death! If I was 7 miles from work, Id be riding a bicycle! Cold starts and the warm up period are the most brutal on an engine... and even more so on a diesel since they have so much more mass to get warm. Sounds like yours lived a good portion of its life in that high wear zone. ------------- |
Posted By: Gary S
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 1:02pm
|
I would have been a good candidate for a electric car. Just turned 70K on the '01 Jeep. ------------- http://www.correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=1711&sort=&pagenum=1&yrstart=1966&yrend=1970" rel="nofollow - 69 Mustang HM SS 95 Nautique Super Sport |
Posted By: Bri892001
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 1:07pm
| Until recently, I could always get to work on the subway. It certainly had it's downsides, but I didn't spend much on gas or put many miles on my vehicle. |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 1:08pm
|
Wow, Im jealous. 115k on my '07. ------------- |
Posted By: Riley
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 1:10pm
I've been looking for a multi purpose vehicle for years that meets my towing, personal and business needs and doesn't use a lot of fuel. It doesn't exist. I've yet to find a small truck that gets much better mileage than a big truck, or a decent car that's good for towing even though I seldom tow more than a couple miles. The best I can do buying a deisel VW for work and owning a truck for personal use is break even compared to having one decent full size truck for everything. |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 3:36pm
|
I suspect VW diesels have improved over the last 40 years. My friend and my father each bought diesel VW Rabbits in 81 or thereabouts. My friends was delivered and leaked oil. It had a small hole in the block and the rear main seal installed incorrectly. They replaced the engine, but it would never start in the winter so he didn't keep it for a second winter. My dads made it just over 100,000 miles, but about 10,000 of those were accumulated being pushed by my mothers Olds or my P/U, and coasting down the parking garage ramp in downtown Chicago trying to get it started. The garage had a spiral exit ramp and he used to park above the 10th floor and he would push it to the ramp, hop in, and coast in 2nd till it started. When he got home on a cold day I would guess what floor it started on. It got around 40 mpg on the highway though and for some reason he liked it. He got new Beetles about every 2 years from 1957 before the Rabbit. I think the diesel fumes went to his head. The morning push was the talk of the neighborhood and great entertainment for the neighbors. ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: vondy
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 3:52pm
|
My neighbor has a VW Getta Wagon TDI and loves it, she has over 100K on it with no problems and plans on keeping it till the wheels fall off. They say the TDI engines just start breaking in around 100K. I believe they have come a long way, her's is the previous model.
We looked at the current model for my wife, they are really nice cars, the build quality is superb compared to other cars of the same price range. We will probably go with a Subaru Forester for her though. The sale man said Subaru has an award winning diesel engine, but of course, not in the states. My first vehicle was a 1984 Toyota Diesel pickup. Talk about a rare bird. Used to fill up with my dad's farm diesel, that was back when it was legal to do so, never paid a dime for fuel. 0-60 was a whopping 28 seconds. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=4645&sort=&pagenum=1 - 69 Mustang HM |
Posted By: vondy
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 4:00pm
|
If your looking for an all-around vehicle, the Xterra is not a bad option. I get about 18 mpg in the city I would guess. Fill up every two weeks, around 300 miles.
It's a great driving vehicle, very quite on the highways, good stiff euro style steering. It does a decent job at towing the Mustang. You do have to watch your stopping distance. Every year we take a few 4 hour trips with her in tow, once your on the highway, you'd never know the boat was there. Mine is a 6 speed 4x2, I would definitely get a 4x4 or auto if I got another. Low speeds at the ramp or parking at my house is tough on the clutch. I believe the tow rating is 4000-4500 for the 4x2. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=4645&sort=&pagenum=1 - 69 Mustang HM |
Posted By: TRBenj
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 4:32pm
Careful! Dont confuse "fit and finish" or "initial quality" with reliability. VW's issues over the last 10 years or so have been well documented. They have beautiful interiors and drive really nicely (they are German, after all) but Id think twice about buying one without doing your research first. Ive seen more than one be a real headache. Im not sure what your pricerange is, but I have had great luck with my 4th gen 4Runner- its a terrific all around vehicle. I have had zero problems, and neither have my friends/family who own one. I was strongly considering the new Xterra back around ~2005, and thats not a bad choice either. A few buddies have had great luck with their new (2005+) Tacomas as well. It seems that both the V6 and V8 Taco/4Runners get similar mileage... mid-high teens around town and can touch 20mpg on the highway (all are 4x4). ------------- |
Posted By: john b
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 4:43pm
|
From a happy owner at an terra site.
mt_100 Member Poor gas mileage So after running a tank through the XTerra I calculated my gas mileage and it isn't good. 100% stock 2001 SE 3.3 automatic. I filled it up the first time and again this time at the same station. 13.4 MPG. Needless to say I'm not overjoyed about it but hoping it can be a bit better. I read that resetting the ECU can help a lot, does that consist of disconnecting the battery and waiting for a bit? Only the ground need be disconnected correct? ------------- 1970 Mustang "Theseus' paradox" If everyone else is doing it, you're too late! |
Posted By: Maximal691
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 4:53pm
| Trbenj gets it. Toyota Tacomas/4 runners are going to be your best bet for an all around vehicle. I had a first gen Tacoma, and I have a second gen now. I was in the same situation. Looking for good fuel economy, room for four adults and 4wd and the ability to tow. I looked at touregs, x5's, f150s and Honda ridge lines and the Tacoma is what I ended up with. I have numerous vw / audis and the newer they get the bigger headache they are. Unles you're under warranty, or have vagcom I would stay away. The x5's are awesome, a car in the shape of an suv, I thought one would be cool to go with my m3, but the first gens suffer from way too many electrical gremlins and I didnt want another vehicle that requires new suspension components every other drive. The f150 was just too much truck, didn't really want a full-size. The ridgeline was nice, cool features, reliability and good amount of room. They get bad mileage though and are underpowered. The Tacoma had everything I wanted and I'm very happy with it, the second gen is much roomier and powerful than my first gen, but still has a Tacoma feel. I strongly suggest one. |
Posted By: vondy
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 5:07pm
That has always been my concern with the VW's, especially the Gettas of the early 2000's. It seems they have gotten better in the reliability area. Either way, I'm sure we will go with the Subaru. Legendary reliability there. Plus safety, all wheel drive, etc. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=4645&sort=&pagenum=1 - 69 Mustang HM |
Posted By: vondy
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 5:10pm
The 2001 was a whole different vehicle and engine from the 2005 on. I have an 05. I did have a friend at the time who had a 4runner and it got better mileage than the X. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=4645&sort=&pagenum=1 - 69 Mustang HM |
Posted By: Jllogan
Date Posted: December-29-2011 at 5:14pm
|
my dad gets 22 on the freeway with his 06 tacoma 4X4 with a v6. Has power to spare while towing. ------------- http://correctcraftfan.com/diaries/details.asp?ID=5792&sort=&pagenum=1" rel="nofollow - 1986 Ski Nautique 2001 |