Anyone tow with a Nissan NV 3500 van?

I would swag that even with the cummins V8, it will still be a DOT class 2 van, will ALL the same limitations as far as how big a trailer etc it can haul and tow. Yes more hp/torque give you better performance. BUT, at the end of the day, ANY rig with a given gvwr will be limited in how big a trailer you can tow, by the chassis strength. IE when I learned to tow, there was NO such thing as a gcwr as it is sold today. The max trailer recomended behind a given rig was 2x the GRAWR. So if you have as noted, many vans with 6000-6800 grawr's, the biggest trailer no matter the engine was 12-13K or so. I am sure a NV3500 will tow a trailer of this size with out issues.

I've towed a 12K trailer behind my 96 K3500 with a 6100 grawr/9200 gvwr, and a whopping 12K gcwr. NO WHITE KNUCKLES driving at any point in time. Same chassis with a larger higher hp motor, upwards of 12K. So I was a little slower up hills! Big deal.

Same with the sprinter I drive at work, similar specs to the nv3500, gm and ford full size vans. I'd tow upwards of 10-12K behind. Not much more for various and sundry reasons. REality is, 6-8K is about max considering the HP/torque of the motor.

Folks have to remember, the motor is not the end all be all of a given rig from a towing standpoint. Then as far as FL goes, I am sure they are looking for a cheaper motor than the B5.9/6.7 I 6, that will power rigs to upwards of 26K gvwr/gcwr. Just as GM did with the dmax when it came out. The class 6 5500 with gvwr's from 19501-26K had a 26K gcwr. That was all that motor was designed to go up to, either pulling max or hauling/carrying. They want to compete with Ford in the F550/650 relm, and Navistar with the 4000 series rigs with IHC V8 motors. Many of those rigs have gvwr's no higher than the gvwr! My old 92 4600 with a 175 IDI 7/.3 is the same way. GCWR is 18000, gvwr is 18K, but I run down the road upwards of 26K. again, a bit slow, but overall safer than a smaller rig chassis rig.

Marty

I had never considered the Nissan NV 3500 until now. A quick search in my area has about 20 available...May have to go luck just because I can.

blt2ski wrote:
So in reality how many of the van manufactures truly build what "I" would call a 1 ton van....ie a DOT class 3 truck with a gvwr of 10001-13500? most of the vans being discussed here are DOT class 2, ie between 6001-10000 gvwr, or you can split this what I call 3/4 ton category into the LD and HD with under 8400 LDuty and over heavy duty.

Seems to me the NV3500 is a pretty decent van from a gvwr/engine standpoint. No it will not as of yet do what the E350 with a V10 will do, but if you look at this from a gvwr badging standpoint, it is in the mix of ALL the other manufactures of vans with similar engines and remainder of the drivetrain.

Marty

Are ANY of the big vans over 10K? I thought even the E350 and GM 3500's were in the 9000-9750 range?

You should not be surprised that the Titan has a lower axle rating, as they use the use same axle in Frontier, which is a modified Dana 44. One of the Titans major weak spots is the weak rear axle, front axle to for that matter.

John,

MB's sprinter has a 2500 that is around 8500, a sw 3500 at 9900 IIRC and the DW version around 11K. Not sure ANY of the other van manufactures build a stock dually in a solid van configuration. Most are cut away's where you have to add the body to get something larger than 10K.

The new Ford vans may have a stock dual version, but I would not quote myself, but they should to keep up with the MB van in the cargo part of the van sales equation.

Marty

skyhammer wrote:
You should not be surprised that the Titan has a lower axle rating, as they use the use same axle in Frontier, which is a modified Dana 44. One of the Titans major weak spots is the weak rear axle, front axle to for that matter.

The OP is talking about the NV3500 van, not the Titan. Not sure which axle the NV3500 has, but with 8 lug hubs and a 5800 lb rating, it's not a Dana 44. Maybe a Dana 60 or 70?

Jarlaxle wrote:


Are ANY of the big vans over 10K? I thought even the E350 and GM 3500's were in the 9000-9750 range?

GCWR of the E350 goes is 18,500 with 4.10 gears, or if you go by the commercial truck guide 22,000 with 4.56 gears. The diesel had a GCWR of 20,000 pounds. A cargo van is only about 5500 pounds, and an XLT wagon about 6500. The 10k rating is due to the stock receiver. And if all the seat are full, that only leaves about 1,000 pounds for hitch weight which is why I had to convert mine to a dually. Since Ford publishes all the detailed spec's of the chassis, I know that the E350 extended frames have the same strength (tensile & modulus area) as the 14,050 GVWR E450, so I'm hardly concerned about running heavy.

Anyways... I don't see any reason why the NV3500 wouldn't be a good tow vehicle as long as the user know its limitations and understands badges (350/3500) don't translate across brands. I do wish Nissan would publish all the detail chassis data so we could find out just what the weak points are... i.e. is the RAWR tire limited? Or are they using something smaller than a D60? And what's included in the "tow package" besides the receiver, since there's a big change in numbers w/out the package, and I suspect most dealers aren't stocking wagons with the tow package (just like the other 3 vans).

bl2ski wrote:
Same with the sprinter I drive at work, similar specs to the nv3500, gm and ford full size vans. I'd tow upwards of 10-12K behind. Not much more for various and sundry reasons. REality is, 6-8K is about max considering the HP/torque of the motor.

They are actually limited to slightly over 4000lbs here. So I am interested in real towing figures of other US Vans? Hard to judge performances.

rjstractor wrote:

skyhammer wrote:
You should not be surprised that the Titan has a lower axle rating, as they use the use same axle in Frontier, which is a modified Dana 44. One of the Titans major weak spots is the weak rear axle, front axle to for that matter.

The OP is talking about the NV3500 van, not the Titan. Not sure which axle the NV3500 has, but with 8 lug hubs and a 5800 lb rating, it's not a Dana 44. Maybe a Dana 60 or 70?

You obviously did not read the OP's post. Twice he mentioned that he was surprised that the Titan had a lower axle rating than the NV.

skyhammer wrote:
You obviously did not read the OP's post. Twice he mentioned that he was surprised that the Titan had a lower axle rating than the NV.

My apologies. I did see that a few pages in. I don't know why anyone would be surprised at the Titan having a lower rating than the NV3500, the F150 has a lower rating than an E350.