2011 Ford V8/5.0 TT Package 3.73 31ft Cougar lite 7800 max

I am writing you one more time because I got excellent info from your responses to my questions. It looks like (with the help of my wife) we have settled on a Keystone Cougar TT. It is 27ft. long, dry weight: 5910 lbs. Load limit 1820 lbs. I have run the numbers with your process and I end up here: Trailer 7730 lbs. X .13 = 1005 lbs. X .8 = 804 lbs.+ 600lbs.(truck load) = 1404 lbs.. The truck weight is 5563 lbs. - 7200 lbs. (GVWR) = 1637 lbs. From all of that this is what is left 1637 lbs. - 1404 lbs. = 233 lbs. As you can see based on your process it is CLOSE. My yellow card on the drivers door says 1412 lbs. No gas is included in the truck calculations. I would like your opinion. I am looking forward to hearing from you all.

Baitboy

baitboy wrote:
Sorry that I have been so slow about getting back to you all---We have been looking hard at different trailers. I really value your input. We are now looking at trailers that are 28ft or less and with a dry weight of 5200 lbs or less. Based on your input that is where I ended up. I feel like I can control the gross weight and keep it around 6500 lbs. Like I said you all have been great. Am I closer to the trucks capability?
.

My opinion is worth what you pay for it but I say you will be fine for power. Just be sure the hitch is set-up properly and watch your payload after you deduct the tounge wt.

I wouldn't hesitate to pull that weight with the drive train but don't be afraid to let it rev a little. 4k rpms won't hurt a thing.

Sorry that I have been so slow about getting back to you all---We have been looking hard at different trailers. I really value your input. We are now looking at trailers that are 28ft or less and with a dry weight of 5200 lbs or less. Based on your input that is where I ended up. I feel like I can control the gross weight and keep it around 6500 lbs. Like I said you all have been great. Am I closer to the trucks capability?
.

missionman wrote:


The 5.0 drivetrain will get the job done but doesn't really feel comfortable towing/hauling at its towing/payload limits, YMMV.

sure sounds a lot like...

Mr Biggles wrote:
I pull a TT with a GVWR of 6250 lbs. I would not go higher than that.The truck does okay , but I would not want to tow a heavier TT.

this.

To the OP: your truck and situation are very close to mine (no dog though). I pull a TT with a GVWR of 6250 lbs. I would not go higher than that. I max out my payload with just me and the wife and 100lbs in the truck when the TT is attached. I've towed the Alberta/B.C Rockies. The truck does okay , but I would not want to tow a heavier TT.

missionman wrote:

Mvander wrote:

waltah wrote:

Mvander wrote:
The 5.0 has the same HP as the eco(minus 5) but you will have to access it differently.

quite the gap in torque across the entire rpm range. the engines arent comparable, they were built for different purposes. The 6.2 is more comparable to the EB than the 5.0

Lot of threads about HP VS. Torque. If you stomped on both of them with a similar load the results wouldn't be much different at the top of the hill. The eco would run generally lower rpm though.

There can be lots of threads about anything, I have owned both trucks with each of the drive trains that are in discussion.

Riddle me this, on the same 7% grade highway under the same load and weight. Why does my EB hold 65mph in cruise control and my 5.0 downshifted multiple gears and slowed to 40mph for the entire climb? Your argument is as ridiculous as the guy saying his 5.0 doesn't downshift on hills in 40mph winds. I don't live in indiana, I travel and camp the Adirondack, finger lake, white mountain, and Appalachian regions.

I've owned both, I've hauled heavy loads in the bed with both, I've towed heavy with both, I've towed the same highways with both.

Have you?

I don't know why your 5.0 truck couldn't keep up speed. Maybe you didn't push the gas pedal hard enough. Makes sense that it down shifted though, that's what its supposed to do.

Not knocking the eco boost. I really like them and have driven many granted I have not done the back to back testing. Both those motors do the same amount of work over time (or very close) in different ways. The eco boost feels more relaxed because its not spinning quickly. The driver doesn't feel or hear the increased cylinder pressures like they feel and hear the higher RPM of the V8.

These charachteristics make some people feel like the truck is pulling "effortlessly" when really it is working just as hard to do the same work just in a more pleasing way to some drivers.

Mike Up wrote:

missionman wrote:
Your argument is as ridiculous as the guy saying his 5.0 doesn't downshift on hills in 40mph winds.

I call BS. You don't know what my truck does when I tow. You obviously have something wrong with yours as I pointed out, and used that as an excuse to buy a new truck. Pickuptrucks.com blah blah blah

Go ahead and call BS, I towed with the same truck as you, heck mine was even lighter being an extended cab so it probably did even better than yours. I think it's hilarious that you claim something was wrong with my 29k mile 2011 truck considering you constantly comment on how problem free the 5.0 is and problem ridden the EB is.

I'm sure others reading this can see where the fairy tales are coming from.

missionman wrote:
Your argument is as ridiculous as the guy saying his 5.0 doesn't downshift on hills in 40mph winds.

I call BS. You don't know what my truck does when I tow. You obviously have something wrong with yours as I pointed out, and used that as an excuse to buy a new truck. I've hauled and towed with many trucks and this 5.0L is excellent at towing. Pickuptrucks.com did some extensive tests with towing on grades and the 5.0L does excellent towing 9000 lbs compared to the Ecoboost. Yes, the Ecoboost does a bit better but the 5.0L does a good job as well.

Sounds like the EGO-boost ramblings on the F150 forums I'm sure you're from.

Mvander wrote:

waltah wrote:

Mvander wrote:
The 5.0 has the same HP as the eco(minus 5) but you will have to access it differently.

quite the gap in torque across the entire rpm range. the engines arent comparable, they were built for different purposes. The 6.2 is more comparable to the EB than the 5.0

Lot of threads about HP VS. Torque. If you stomped on both of them with a similar load the results wouldn't be much different at the top of the hill. The eco would run generally lower rpm though.

There can be lots of threads about anything, I have owned both trucks with each of the drive trains that are in discussion.

Riddle me this, on the same 7% grade highway under the same load and weight. Why does my EB hold 65mph in cruise control and my 5.0 downshifted multiple gears and slowed to 40mph for the entire climb? Your argument is as ridiculous as the guy saying his 5.0 doesn't downshift on hills in 40mph winds. I don't live in indiana, I travel and camp the Adirondack, finger lake, white mountain, and Appalachian regions.

I've owned both, I've hauled heavy loads in the bed with both, I've towed heavy with both, I've towed the same highways with both.

Have you?

waltah wrote:

Mvander wrote:
The 5.0 has the same HP as the eco(minus 5) but you will have to access it differently.

quite the gap in torque across the entire rpm range. the engines arent comparable, they were built for different purposes. The 6.2 is more comparable to the EB than the 5.0

Lot of threads about HP VS. Torque. If you stomped on both of them with a similar load the results wouldn't be much different at the top of the hill. The eco would run generally lower rpm though.