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.
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'.
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.
horton333 wrote:GrandpaKip wrote:
Remember that if the camper is loaded and weighs 4500 lbs., you are looking at about 520 lbs. of tongue weight. You will need to subtract that from your payload sticker and then figure out the rest of the weight in your vehicle. You may find that you are getting uncomfortably close to max payload.
Get all the numbers for all the weights and do some figuring.
Good luck.
So assuming 520# that's ~925# left for people and cargo - and of course extensive cargo should be put in the trailer anyway. What about that is that makes you 'uncomfortable'?
horton333 wrote:Huntindog wrote:horton333 wrote:Huntindog wrote:
You have an opinion there.
Actually I gave directly relevant experience and measurement.....that is more than opinion.
Not at all. There is good experience, bad experience, and lucky experience. Doing something that one should not, and being lucky with no breakdowns (yet) or other problems can delude one into thinking that the TV is capable of more that what the engineers that designed it think.
That doesn't mean that the next person that attempts it will fare as well.
You either believe in following the numbers or you don't.
I do not have a problem with that... I do have a problem with someone recommending that a newbie ignore the numbers.
The numbers say it's ok, easily actually. Beyond that I've used a similar vehicle to pull larger and significantly larger trailers for something like 60,000 km pulling since 2003, it's not marginal. I go in all kinds of weather, never any trouble with pulling and reliability: it's over 300,000 km total now and I still think nothing of taking it out of province on a regular basis. Ya it will go in a year or two as the inside is shot, but that's not bad service. That is fact, and it's not luck and there are lots of others who have the same experience.
My background was as a design engineer for 30 years. I really don't accept these emotional replies of insult like saying I "delude" myself, I'll stick to the physics. Enough said.
GrandpaKip wrote:With WD hitch?
Remember that if the camper is loaded and weighs 4500 lbs., you are looking at about 520 lbs. of tongue weight. You will need to subtract that from your payload sticker and then figure out the rest of the weight in your vehicle. You may find that you are getting uncomfortably close to max payload.
Get all the numbers for all the weights and do some figuring.
Good luck.
Huntindog wrote:horton333 wrote:Huntindog wrote:
You have an opinion there.
Actually I gave directly relevant experience and measurement.....that is more than opinion.
Not at all. There is good experience, bad experience, and lucky experience. Doing something that one should not, and being lucky with no breakdowns (yet) or other problems can delude one into thinking that the TV is capable of more that what the engineers that designed it think.
That doesn't mean that the next person that attempts it will fare as well.
You either believe in following the numbers or you don't.
I do not have a problem with that... I do have a problem with someone recommending that a newbie ignore the numbers.
horton333 wrote:Huntindog wrote:
You have an opinion there.
Actually I gave directly relevant experience and measurement.....that is more than opinion.
