Cheap 4x4 tow vehicles, educate me?

BoxheadTim wrote: Any comments on this one? http://reno.craigslist.org/cto/2289799666.html

It's much like the one you already have

I've towed quite a lot of things with a 5.2L Grand Cherokee, including a trip through the rockies with an empty hauler and then back with a Starion on it. I found it fine. A trans cooler wouldn't hurt though.

This Expedition cost me $1800 and has 4x4 and the Triton 5.4, so far towing has been very capable.

Jay wrote: I've towed quite a lot of things with a 5.2L Grand Cherokee, including a trip through the rockies with an empty hauler and then back with a Starion on it. I found it fine. A trans cooler wouldn't hurt though.

It looks like the first gen Grand Cherokee has a very low towing limit (2000lbs?) and the WJ (which has a sufficient tow rating) is outside my budget out here.

BoxheadTim wrote: Any comments on this one? http://reno.craigslist.org/cto/2289799666.html

Get it! That year has the best grill and interior, plus no wood grain. It's obviously already set up for towing as well.

BoxheadTim wrote: Any comments on this one? http://reno.craigslist.org/cto/2289799666.html

Yeah, it'll probably be thirstier, slower, and less comfortable than a big block suburban.

In reply to ReverendDexter:

Y'know, Javelin seems to be much better at this enabling lark .

In reply to BoxheadTim:

2k is A Joke... with v8 it was 6500.......

ok what im finding is 93 through 98 with a 4.0 had a 5000 lb capacity assuming surge brakes on the trailer atleast.

In reply to KATYB:

Got a source for that? Not doubting you, obviously my google-fu wasn't that strong when I looked. If the 93-98 ones have a tow rating for 5000-6500lb then I'd much rather have a GC than a Suburban. As would my wife, because she'll find the Suburban too big anyway if she has to drive it.

ReverendDexter wrote:

BoxheadTim wrote: Any comments on this one? http://reno.craigslist.org/cto/2289799666.html

Yeah, it'll probably be thirstier, slower, and less comfortable than a big block suburban.

Maybe on Mars. AMC V8's aren't exactly known for their mileage, but I guarantee you that the GC will out-mileage a 454 'Burban. It'll be way more comfortable too, as you can swap in anything you want into that interior including powered leather buckets. Slow doesn't matter, it'll be way better on and off road and tow nearly as well, all for cheaper.

my towning of late has been in an '02 (i think) suburban 1500... while towing the s10 home it blew a (rear) tire... very little drama... honestly I looked in the rearview to see if i'd dropped the truck off the trailler as the truck wasn't acting weird at all...

you can tow with just about anything (heck I towed an aw11 mr2 home with a tow bar on my neon ACR (to do it again I would wait till I had a friend with a tow strap lol)...i had more oversteer than i've ever experienced without spinning... and that was at EVERY turn i took... also towed an mr2 home with a volvo 700 turbo wagon (funny thought thats the same engine i'm stuffing in an s10 now) on a tow dolly... slow going but did it just fine...

I guess i'm older now and would prefer to have a larger margin for error... also less need to worry about your weight distribution

Javelin wrote:

ReverendDexter wrote:

BoxheadTim wrote: Any comments on this one? http://reno.craigslist.org/cto/2289799666.html

Yeah, it'll probably be thirstier, slower, and less comfortable than a big block suburban.

Maybe on Mars. AMC V8's aren't exactly known for their mileage, but I guarantee you that the GC will out-mileage a 454 'Burban. It'll be way more comfortable too, as you can swap in anything you want into that interior including powered leather buckets. Slow doesn't matter, it'll be way better on and off road and tow nearly as well, all for cheaper.

Got any data to back that up? Or just making it up as we go? Let's look at the facts. THe burban's he's looking at all have OD transmissions and fuel injection and mor torque. The GC was carb'd, a PITA to start cold and runs a 3spd auto.

How again is that going to "out-mileage" a 454? having a Great aunt that raised Clydesdales, they would occasionally use their late 70's GC to haul a single one locally. THey got 7mpg usually. When they used the same trailer with their newer CC Chevy Dually which was still a carb'd 454 they got 9. When they went newer and got ONe with FI and an OD trans they got 11. Wasn't long after that they went diesel and got 16.... but that's for another story.

IMO, buying a 34 year old Jeep to use as a DD/Tow vehicle is ludicrous. But it's your money. My money would be on a Suburban or Tahoe. Things have REALLY progressed over the last 15 years, let alone the last 30.

Javelin wrote:

ReverendDexter wrote:

BoxheadTim wrote: Any comments on this one? http://reno.craigslist.org/cto/2289799666.html

Yeah, it'll probably be thirstier, slower, and less comfortable than a big block suburban.

Maybe on Mars. AMC V8's aren't exactly known for their mileage, but I guarantee you that the GC will out-mileage a 454 'Burban. It'll be way more comfortable too, as you can swap in anything you want into that interior including powered leather buckets. Slow doesn't matter, it'll be way better on and off road and tow nearly as well, all for cheaper.

I'll put my 1/2 ton 4x4 91 4x4 Suburban up against that Wagoneer any day. I LIKE Wagoneers too, but the Suburban like mine with FI and overdrive is miles ahead of it.

Bobzilla wrote:

Javelin wrote:

ReverendDexter wrote:

BoxheadTim wrote: Any comments on this one? http://reno.craigslist.org/cto/2289799666.html

Yeah, it'll probably be thirstier, slower, and less comfortable than a big block suburban.

Maybe on Mars. AMC V8's aren't exactly known for their mileage, but I guarantee you that the GC will out-mileage a 454 'Burban. It'll be way more comfortable too, as you can swap in anything you want into that interior including powered leather buckets. Slow doesn't matter, it'll be way better on and off road and tow nearly as well, all for cheaper.

Got any data to back that up? Or just making it up as we go? Let's look at the facts. THe burban's he's looking at all have OD transmissions and fuel injection and mor torque. The GC was carb'd, a PITA to start cold and runs a 3spd auto. How again is that going to "out-mileage" a 454? having a Great aunt that raised Clydesdales, they would occasionally use their late 70's GC to haul a single one locally. THey got 7mpg usually. When they used the same trailer with their newer CC Chevy Dually which was still a carb'd 454 they got 9. When they went newer and got ONe with FI and an OD trans they got 11. Wasn't long after that they went diesel and got 16.... but that's for another story. IMO, buying a 34 year old Jeep to use as a DD/Tow vehicle is ludicrous. But it's your money. My money would be on a Suburban or Tahoe. Things have REALLY progressed over the last 15 years, let alone the last 30.

I don't doubt that newer FI/OD equipped 'Burbs will put everything in this thread to shame, but the ones we are discussing here are the C/K 73-91 generation. The 454's in those were carb'd all the way up to around 87, though I've never seen a running TBI 454 anyways. They have a TH400 trans, just as an archaic frame, and weigh a good deal more than the GC. And again, there's no way a carb'd 454, heavier, 'Burb is going to out-do a GC on anything but carrying more crap.

Now if we are talking GMT400's (92-99) I will absolutely agree with you, but good luck finding a good one of those with 4x4 and a 454 at Tim's price range.

Cotton wrote: I'll put my 1/2 ton 4x4 91 4x4 Suburban up against that Wagoneer any day. I LIKE Wagoneers too, but the Suburban like mine with FI and overdrive is miles ahead of it.

Nice truck Cotton, but it's a 1-year only wonder boy. How is Tim going to find one? The OD trans was 91-only, and a TON of those trucks were converted back to carburetors because the TBI "sucked power".

Actually the 'burb I linked to earlier in this thread is a GMT400 and TBH I don't really want anything much older as they tend to have stupid miles on them out here. If I can find another grand there appears to be a nice Vortec one at a dealer in Reno.

Oh, and regarding the Grand Cherokees, it looks like the regular ones have a 2k lbs towing capacity but if I can find one with the factory tow package, that seems to go up to 6500lbs. Good luck finding one, though.

Spend more, get more. The GMT400 is a very nice truck. I got to drive a 350/2WD one in Florida and it towed with aplomb. You are obviously going to spend more money though.

I was a die hard OBS/GMT400 truck guy for years. Then we bought our GMT800 and I have no idea why I resisted for so long. It is, without a doubt, 15x's the truck the 400's were. All my experience is with 2wd trucks and wow.. the R&P steering is such a huge difference.

In reply to Bobzilla:

Trouble is that those are so far out of budget that even postponing the purchase of my track & "fun" vehicle by a month or two won't allow me to scrape together the cash. GMT400 is probably the newest I can afford atm.

What about old '70s Ford trucks?

BoxheadTim wrote: In reply to KATYB: Got a source for that? Not doubting you, obviously my google-fu wasn't that strong when I looked. If the 93-98 ones have a tow rating for 5000-6500lb then I'd much rather have a GC than a Suburban. As would my wife, because she'll find the Suburban too big anyway if she has to drive it.

called and asked my dad he uses a 97 4.0 to tow his and my stepmoms bikes up to canada and back everyyear(they spend thier summers in nova scotia) 2 goldwings on a trailer. looking in his manual thats what he said it said. tow package is needed(tranny cooler) thats it.

In reply to KATYB:

Cool, that's the kind of source I was after. Now only to find one with a factory tow package...

In reply to 93EXCivic:

Lack of rear seats might be an issue. I love the looks of those, they're not that hard to find out here but I'd think twice about towing 5k lbs with them, given the wonderful 70s brakes they have.

I've had tow older Wreckers, a 76 F250, and 79 F350. They had enough brakes for the most part, but the twin I beam front ends had some odd handling, especially when the bushings started to wear out, which is generally about an hour after they are installed. Your also not going to win any mileage contests with them.