Tow 8,000+ lbs and get 30mpg when unloaded

Vigo wrote:

I've tried to merge and/or go up hills (and for many of us, hills are a regular obstacle. This isn't Iowa or Illinois) with low power tow vehicles. Not going to do that crap anymore. That's why my 8.1 liter is so nice for towing. Just doesn't care that there's 8000+ lbs back there if you have to merge, or get out of the way of someone ELSE who is merging without looking. So yes, it actually is about safety. Sorry, you are so misinformed.

If you tow a really heavy rig around a lot of hills and default to acceleration rather than braking while towing, then sure, you definitely need a 500 cubic inch motor to fit your driving style and towing choices. As i said, i tow CARS and i dont have a big enough trailer to tow 2 cars (8000+ lbs you say). Kind of amazing how so many UPS and FedEx drivers manage to drive through E36 M3ty situations all day long with even worse power/weight ratios than the ones that you cant be bothered with. I would like to see the UPS truck you would build. I dont tow for work, only for myself, and i've never intentionally towed anything anywhere that i actually needed a big engine to feel safe doing. I guess im just spoiled!

You've obviously never tried to merge onto an interstate on an uphill ramp with a semi barreling down on you in the right hand lane with an 8000 lb load on the back. I've done it a number of times and it's not fun with no power. And I'm not the kind of person that just says "screw it, all you asshats can wait on my slow ass to merge." I don't LIKE being a rolling roadblock like those UPS drivers you revere. And yes, it's a goddamn safety issue when you are one. YOU might only tow a damn small car around, but this is me nearly every weekend from the spring to the fall:

it's MUCH safer and MUCH more comfortable to tow than this combo was:

So yes, I want to be able to merge properly, get out of the way of other mergers properly, and keep up with traffic on hills so that I'm NOT the massive rolling roadblock that other large vehicle combos are.

"Default to acceleration rather than braking on hills?" Why would I hit the brakes going up hills?

xflowgolf wrote:

twolittlebroncos wrote:

curtis73 wrote: With extremely rare exceptions, diesel is ALWAYS the cheaper fuel choice in terms of cents per mile of fuel. I challenge anyone to dispute that using apples-apples comparisons.

Jetta TDI - 42 mpg highway Here are the gasoline equivalents depending on the gasoline/diesel spread: 20% spread - 35 mpg (pretty much every car in the class)

Nope. My mk6 TDI does in fact get about 42mpg, mostly highway, lifetime total average over ~20K miles now. Show me an equivalent gasser sedan that actually sees total average usage of 35mpg. There are very few modern equivalent gassers that I can drive like a normal car at 80mph on my interstate commute and see 35+ mpg overall average. I'm not saying they don't exist, but many are painful tiny motor econobox, and not really "every car in the class" when attempting apples to apples.

Our '14 Mazda 6 hits a consistent 32mpg in 50/50 mixed city/highway driving and it's possibly a nicer place to spend time than my house.

but I will grant you it's not 35 mpg

In reply to Chris_V:

You'll have to excuse Vigo. He gets this way sometimes.

As someone who has driven a lumbering roadblock of a vehicle for years I think I can speak for the UPS guys that they drive those trucks because they're being paid. Few would turn down more power. Or AC. Or a radio.

At one point the powers that be decided our buses should be repowered with Series 50 Detroits. With their original tune even getting out from the curb was a challenge. With a standing load some hills would become difficult if not impossible. It's embarrassing to have to ask half your customers to get out and walk to the top of the hill, and worse still when they beat you. There are really no times when a compentant driver will find he has too much power but too little can be frustrating at best and sometimes dangerous.

All the current UPS trucks around here have LS V8s in them. They phased out the diesels last year. The drivers love them. They had some major reliability problems with the diesels.

300hp and 10k lbs? Just guesses but doesnt sound any better than the slow towing i do.

You've obviously never tried to merge onto an interstate on an uphill ramp with a semi barreling down on you in the right hand lane with an 8000 lb load on the back.

That is correct, I ALREADY STATED THAT. YOU, sir, are the one who took my comment about towing ONE CAR, and then went on a rampage about 8000 lbs being unsafe when it's the same power/weight ratio i described in the first place. I do not tow TRAVEL TRAILERS with 150 hp. If you look at my original post you will clearly see the word CAR, and then after that you will see me equating 12000 lbs with the weight of THREE cars and stating that i dont tow THREE CARS AT A TIME.

My 150hp comment was clearly couched in the context of towing ONE CAR. So lets say im towing 4000 lbs with 150 hp and you're towing 8000 lbs, twice as much. And how much HP does your 8.1L make? Looks like about twice as much, smartass, except your truck is heavier so your power/weight ratio is WORSE than the one i am defending.

So learn to berkeleying read and do math. And don't listen to SVreX, he is just trying to prop up your propsensities for not reading or doing math.

Vigo:

It says 8000 lbs in the title.

Why are you getting all pissy because you would rather discuss a puny little compact car trailer?

He didn't ask for that.

xflowgolf wrote: Nope. My mk6 TDI does in fact get about 42mpg, mostly highway, lifetime total average over ~20K miles now. Show me an equivalent gasser sedan that actually sees total average usage of 35mpg. There are very few modern equivalent gassers that I can drive like a normal car at 80mph on my interstate commute and see 35+ mpg overall average. I'm not saying they don't exist, but many are painful tiny motor econobox, and not really "every car in the class" when attempting apples to apples.

My 11 Elantra has averaged 40 mpg every tank for 190K miles.

Vigo:

You are smart enough to know that hp has virtually nothing to do with how much load an engine can pull.

It's about torque, and gearing.

There are a lot of 80,000 lb tractor trailers rolling down the road with only a 300 hp CAT engine (though it pulls 1500 lb/ft of torque).

UPS trucks are geared a teeny bit differently than your Aries.

Ya gotta love a forum where a speculation about the state of towing technology can turn into a flame fest.

In reply to xflowgolf:

I had a TDI and I get what you're saying. You can drive a TDI all out all the time and still get good mileage. Whereas the average gasser car has to be handled with kid gloves to hit its EPA figure. And that virtue isn't fleshed out in the EPA figures. (see Top Gear Prius vs. M3 example)

I'd love to see a study that proves that diesels perform better against the EPA ratings than gas engines, but until then the EPA figures are still on the only consistently applied measure that I am aware of and still the best measurement tool.

Vigo: It says 8000 lbs in the title. Why are you getting all pissy because you would rather discuss a puny little compact car trailer? He didn't ask for that.

If he wants to reply to the OP he should do that. He was replying to MY post which is about whatever the berkeley i want, by getting his panties in a wad in response to a topic that he apparently actually agrees with me about.

You want to talk about being off topic, how about the political content in this thread? At least my E36 M3 was about towing. And really, if you pretend ChrisV doesnt exist and just go back and reread my first post about not needing that much power to tow safely, i doubt you will find ANYTHING you actually object to.

Or if you do, go ahead and tell ChrisV he is doing it wrong too, because as far as i can tell, we both described the same power/weight ratio.

docwyte wrote: VW Touareg TDI tows 7700lbs and gets 30+ MPG unloaded on the freeway.

I can only imagine the costs of owning something like that.

Still pretty rad, though.

Vigo wrote: People on this forum scare me with their desire for more power for towing with. i really dont think power is much of a factor except as the scapegoat for an impatient personality. Safety first! But also hard acceleration while towing! Both! FOR SAFETY.

Vigo, this is the ignorant, judgmental crap I objected to. Your own egotistical and insulting behavior when discussing those of us that want a bit more power to safely tow properly, just because YOU think you can tow your little goddamn cars slowly with a low power tow rig and don't care how you affect everyone around you. We're discussing, from the title of this thread, TOWING A LOT MORE THAN YOUR PISSANT LITTLE CAR!

When towing safely, it's much better to have more and not need it, then need it and not have it. In braking, spring rates, and yes, POWER.

The 2015 Grand Cherokee Diesel is close to meeting these specs. The 2WD is rated for 30mpg highway but it will only tow 7400lbs. From what I can tell on the Jeep and Dodge websites, the cheapest GC diesel is about $42,000, while the cheapest Ram diesel is $44,000.

Schmidlap wrote: ...while the cheapest Ram diesel is $44,000.

Ram 1500 Tradesman, 4x2, standard cab, 8' box, with the EcoDiesel starts at ~$31k MSRP.

As I'd option it, that Ecodiesel Ram bumps up to ~$33.5k. Similarly equiped, the 2.7 Ecoboost F150 ends up at ~$31k.

I have been towing recently with a 96 Dodge 3/4 van... with a 3.9... So what? 180hp at the MOST...

It has no problems keeping up or merging with traffic with 6000 lbs of trailer.. and a van full of tools...

it don't get 30mpg though...

Wait.. what was the question?

In reply to Vigo:

My only objection in this thread is to your attitude. It sucks.

I enjoy your knowledge and intellect, but am really sorry that you feel the need to prove yourself by being such an ass at times.

Dial it down, dude.

ultraclyde wrote: Ya gotta love a forum where a speculation about the state of towing technology can turn into a flame fest.

It usually does...

Driven5 wrote:

Schmidlap wrote: ...while the cheapest Ram diesel is $44,000.

Ram 1500 Tradesman, 4x2, standard cab, 8' box, with the EcoDiesel starts at ~$31k MSRP.

Thanks for pointing that out, I had only checked the engine options for the default 6'4" box since I had assumed you could get the same engines as with the long box. I wonder why they won't put the diesel in the regular cab/short box combo (or am I an idiot who doesn't know how to work the "build and price" thing and it is possible)?

In reply to Schmidlap:

No, no idiocy on your part. No diesel for short trucks. Although last I had heard was a 1 year waiting list for the diesel(according to a coworker that asked about them when she bought a Jeep 2 months back)

I thought about this thread a couple of nights ago when I filled up the diesel Suburban for $2.78/gal. I'm very relieved to see diesel prices getting a bit closer to gas in this area.

Toyman01 wrote:

Vigo wrote: ...Kind of amazing how so many UPS and FedEx drivers manage to drive through E36 M3ty situations all day long with even worse power/weight ratios than the ones that you cant be bothered with. I would like to see the UPS truck you would build. ...

All the current UPS trucks around here have LS V8s in them. They phased out the diesels last year. The drivers love them. They had some major reliability problems with the diesels.

Our local guys hate the new gassers.....even though they now get power steering and automatics.....but they seem fragile and the 4 drivers I know are becoming annoyed at having to offload all their packages into another truck due to breakdowns. One want's his diesel manual back, the others all just want sprinters/transits.

In reply to yamaha:

Damn. PS and autos? When I drove for the brown back in the late 80s/early 90s they were straight six manuals with no 1st gear syncros and no hydraulic clutch. You had to be a man's man or a really butch lady to hustle one around with a full load on. The high-seniority guys got the new ones first so I always drove the ones with no compression and the "shakes" under braking.