Huntindog wrote:
horton333 wrote:
You said
"The OP IS new to this. The first thing he needs to know is that the tow ratings are essentially an advertising number. Few vehicles will actually be capable of that rating.". So much for accepting published numbers.
I used the published numbers, and someone else's estimate of hitch weight which seems as good as anything given no one knows the trailer to say
"The numbers say it's ok, easily actually." 7000 is larger than 4500 and 1440 carrying capacity and 800 hitch cspacity being enough for an estimated 520 vertical and leaving a reasonable margin for pasengers. When I point out the real world measurement confirms these published numbers, and in my case more, that is just adding informed observation to counter uninformed speculation about the published numbers that you assume are wrong for whatever unspecified reason.
I'd be happy to have a chat, and then little doubt a joimt chuckle, with the Magna engineers who worked on this about some comments in this thread. Hey they are just 10 minutes up the street from me.....Nah why waste people's time even if it would be so 'Annie Hallish'.
You previously said:
horton333 wrote:
There are lots of people who actually have these vehicles who diassagree with your assumption, based on their experience. Yes tow ratings are largely marketing numbers on smaller vehicles, but on smaller vehicles tow ratings tend to be *less* than the vehicle is capable of: to upsell customers to the more profitable, and for many people less useful, trucks.
I would think that you as an engineer would refrain from such remarks.
Just as a professional courtesy if nothing else.
I seriously doubt that you have ANY knowledge just what went into the Mercury's engineers (or any other vehicles) methodology in arriving at the numbers.
As an engineer, I bet you want others to take your profession seriously. Yet you do not want to reciprocate, as you "know" better.
You made a broad smear, saying their specifications are fraudulent and will not be met. Your reasons for ignoring their professional abilities: unspecified. Now that seems like.....well not taking seriuosly the people who published those numbers, at the least.
It is congratulations to the people who published the specifications to observe real world experience confirms their specifications, and indeed exceeded, and can be used with confidence as I did. This congratulations on a job well done you try to spin, with thinly veiled insult once again, as me somehow not taking seriously their professional abilities?? Wow.
Anyway too much time wasted already on distraction from the subject matter.
