Towing capacity of Sprinter motorhome

[HowellJourney]

My wife and I are evaluating the purchase of a 2015 Winnebago View or Itasca Navion 24J. They in essence are the same motorhome except for color schemes.

We previously full-timed for two years in a 42-foot Monaco Executive but sold the unit ten years ago to built a retirement home. We pulled a 2004 VW Jetta Station wagon TDI with a manual transmission. With the 500 hp Cummins diesel, you never knew it was back there.

We have gone the "big bus" route (which my wife refused to drive) and have decided to go with the Sprinter based Class C to RV on part time basis.

My concern with the Sprinter towing capacity. We are getting ready to trade our five year old Buick Enclave for a smaller vehicle that we can equip and tow four wheels down.

The GCWR of the class C RV we are looking at is 15,250. The GVWR of the RV is 11,030. The wet weight of the RV is around 9,900 lbs. The RV has a tow bar rated at 5,000 lbs.

It is our understanding that we can carry the difference of 11,030 and 9,900 or 1,130 before we are overloaded on the RV itself.

As far as the weight of a potential dingy, would it be the difference of 15,250 and 11,030 or 4,220 lbs? This seems to be very heavy load for this unit. We are currently looking at the 2014 Honda CRV (3424 lbs) or the Chev. Equinox (3777 lbs).

Any input would we appreciated. (If you happen to own a Sprinter based RV, we like to hear what you tow).

[Desert_Captain]

Wayne Dohnal wrote:
"My point is and always has been that there are better choices than an MB if you are going to tow."

That assumes that towing performance is the only decision point, and if it were, I would agree. Every RV is a compromise of features and capabilities and we try to make the best overall choice for ourselves. If the only decision point is MPG, MB is the choice. If it's cab comfort, MB is the choice. If it's driving on narrow roads, MB is the choice. If it's barely fitting through my shop door, MB is the choice 🙂

As to the statement "I have yet to speak with an MB owner who was satisfied, much less happy with towing.", 5 different Sprinter owners have said they are satisfied with towing on this thread, and another reported that he's talked with "many" Sprinter owners who tow and they were all happy with it, and he's followed several up hills and they had no problem.

At this time I suspect most of the Sprinter RVs are the 154 HP version, which is true of mine that climbs 6% grades, towing, at 47 MPH. The new 188 HP version must be a real screamer in comparison. As an aside, I have yet to speak with an Ford chassis RV owner who was satisfied, much less happy with towing. Yet I assume they probably are ok with it.

Yep, the first statement remains a fact that none here has come close to refuting. Read it again, I said there are "better" choices such as a big block V-8/V-10.


We are in complete agreement here on decision points. You may recall that I gave serious consideration to the MB because we had no plans to tow. There are a number of other decision points you neglected to mention:

The price of the MB being a serious consideration. If you want an MB it comes at a very steep price, one that will never be recouped in fuel savings unless you drive it hundreds of thousands of miles.

Service on the MB's is notoriously problematic with their service centers often being hundreds of miles down the road. Before you try to deny this one spend a little time reading about this as there have been many posts documenting this issue. A V-10 can be serviced just about anywhere at any one of the thousands of Ford dealers.

While storage varies widely from model to model the MB's are not known to be particularly voluminous. Head room is reduced, which at 5'9" was not a big issue for me it did feel somewhat cramped compared to the room we found in our conventional C (7' of headroom will do that). As far as cab room some folks rave about the Chevy and or complain about the Fords but much like your garage door that is a very subjective issue. Mine fits me just fine.

Now after all of this felonious thread drift permit me to return to the original thread topic. The purchase of any RV is of course a series of compromises, on that at least I think we can all agree. As noted several times I think the MB is a great engine and many of the MB equipped models have a lot to like. They were however not the right combination of features and performance I was seeking. But since the topic is and always has been, the towing performance of the MB Sprinters I made my comments (fully expecting dissenting opinions), based upon real world experience and facts that supported those observations.

I have seen too many Sprinters with a Toad struggling up grades, flashers on, creating safety issues for the rest of the folks on the road simply because when it comes to towing there are better choices. I know some want to have it all from the fuel economy to the more compact size found behind the stylish MB badge and are willing to sacrifice some towing performance to get there. Unfortunately when towing with less than an ideal TV it "can" quickly become a safety issue for others who have had no say in the equation. I think the problem is more acute for people pulling TT's and fivers with less than the ideal TV but the net results can be the same.

While a bit lively at times this discussion has been civilized and for anyone considering towing with an MB lots of good info, both pro and con, has been shared. I will continue to chat up MB owners seeking new perspectives and would love to meet any of the dissenters who took the time to post.

:C

[Wayne_Dohnal]

"My point is and always has been that there are better choices than an MB if you are going to tow."

That assumes that towing performance is the only decision point, and if it were, I would agree. Every RV is a compromise of features and capabilities and we try to make the best overall choice for ourselves. If the only decision point is MPG, MB is the choice. If it's cab comfort, MB is the choice. If it's driving on narrow roads, MB is the choice. If it's barely fitting through my shop door, MB is the choice 🙂

As to the statement "I have yet to speak with an MB owner who was satisfied, much less happy with towing.", 5 different Sprinter owners have said they are satisfied with towing on this thread, and another reported that he's talked with "many" Sprinter owners who tow and they were all happy with it, and he's followed several up hills and they had no problem.

At this time I suspect most of the Sprinter RVs are the 154 HP version, which is true of mine that climbs 6% grades, towing, at 47 MPH. The new 188 HP version must be a real screamer in comparison. As an aside, I have yet to speak with an Ford chassis RV owner who was satisfied, much less happy with towing. Yet I assume they probably are ok with it.

[Desert_Captain]

EsoxLucius wrote:

Desert Captain wrote:
Wayne, I stated that I had never met an MB owner who was satisfied/happy with the towing. That was a fact then and it is still true. I expected dissenting opinions to be posted and frankly yours barely qualifies as such. Your rig gives you serious problems going both up and down but if that makes you happy/satisfied it is OK with me. Your MB works harder when towing, it's just simple physics.

My point is and always has been that there are better choices than an MB if you are going to tow.
:C

Give it up, you have never met me either.

Welcome to the discussion, better late than never. :B

Glad you love your rig, most of us do but my last sentence remains a fact that is not altered by throwing large sums of money (like: Koni Shocks front and rear, Hellwig 7254 swaybar, SumoSpring SSF-160-40 front, SumoSpring SSR-335 rear), at the problem.... and the Nile is not just a river in Egypt.

:W

[EsoxLucius]

Desert Captain wrote:
Wayne, I stated that I had never met an MB owner who was satisfied/happy with the towing. That was a fact then and it is still true. I expected dissenting opinions to be posted and frankly yours barely qualifies as such. Your rig gives you serious problems going both up and down but if that makes you happy/satisfied it is OK with me. Your MB works harder when towing, it's just simple physics.

My point is and always has been that there are better choices than an MB if you are going to tow.
:C

Give it up, you have never met me either.

[Dakzuki]

Olddud wrote:

Wayne Dohnal wrote:
There were about a half-dozen instances where other vehicles engaged in IMO unsafe passing around me with oncoming traffic or approaching a curve. A few of them resulted in uncomfortable close calls with the oncoming traffic. In one case, there was an unsafe passing incident approaching me that led to me nailing the brakes and hitting the shoulder.

Good info.

Your unsafe passing comments reminded me of several drives on some of the heavily used 2 lanes in mountainous Colorado. It appears that a lot of people there think nothing of passing on double yellow blind curves, especially at rush hour times.

Two words. Dash camera. I have one and wouldn't be without it. I've had it for a year and a half in the RV. I only had it a few months and recorded an accident.

[Gonzo42]

Which reminds me of a phenomenon that I have seen repeatably here in SO. CA: During rush hour, when the #1 lane slows down, drivers will slam into the HOV lane with no ceremony whatsoever. Invariably they are single occupant vehicles. I'm amazed not to have seen fatal accidents as a result of this habit. While on my motorcycle this is very scary.

If I happen to be in the HOV lane I try to not go any faster than about 15 MPH than the other traffic as a precaution.

[Olddud]

Wayne Dohnal wrote:
There were about a half-dozen instances where other vehicles engaged in IMO unsafe passing around me with oncoming traffic or approaching a curve. A few of them resulted in uncomfortable close calls with the oncoming traffic. In one case, there was an unsafe passing incident approaching me that led to me nailing the brakes and hitting the shoulder.

Good info.

Your unsafe passing comments reminded me of several drives on some of the heavily used 2 lanes in mountainous Colorado. It appears that a lot of people there think nothing of passing on double yellow blind curves, especially at rush hour times.

[Wayne_Dohnal]

I took written notes this week on a round trip from central Oregon to Mt. Rainier N.P. crossing several mountain passes and the Columbia River gorge. So here's some careful data instead of pulling things out of memory. I measured grades with the combination of odometer and GPS elevation data. I need to make one major correction, the prior comment about running at redline in 3rd gear is actually running at redline in 2nd gear which gives 43 mph. That's the worst case low speed for any grade I've traveled when not needing to slow for curves or other traffic. 6% grades are easily run in 3rd gear. Here are the grades I recorded along with the "pedal on the floor" speeds:

4.7% - 55 mph
5.2% - 52 mph
6.0% - 47 mph
6.3% - 47 mph
6.5% - 45 mph (3rd gear)
7.9% - 42 mph (2nd gear part of the time)
8.8% - 42 mph (2nd gear part of the time)

I passed 8 semis on the upgrades. Could have passed more but I don't pass them near the top because they end up on my tail going down. On the 6% downgrades, 3rd gear holds me at 60, so if it's not curvy I go down at 60. On steeper or curvy downgrades I'm running about 40 in 2nd gear.

I didn't count how many vehicles passed me going uphill, but it was fewer that the 8 semis I passed. What is the huge traffic-related problem for me is on the flat roads where I'm running at 55 to 60. There were about a half-dozen instances where other vehicles engaged in IMO unsafe passing around me with oncoming traffic or approaching a curve. A few of them resulted in uncomfortable close calls with the oncoming traffic. In one case, there was an unsafe passing incident approaching me that led to me nailing the brakes and hitting the shoulder.

These are just the facts, I've already stated my opinions and interpretations. I think the worst climb I've made, overall, pulling the car was on Utah 12 climbing Boulder Mountain going north. This was a 2nd gear redline affair that seemed to go on "forever". It was curvy enough that I wouldn't have been going much faster on most of the climb even if I could have, but listening to the engine scream for that long was not pretty.

[Desert_Captain]

Wayne, I stated that I had never met an MB owner who was satisfied/happy with the towing. That was a fact then and it is still true. I expected dissenting opinions to be posted and frankly yours barely qualifies as such. Your rig gives you serious problems going both up and down but if that makes you happy/satisfied it is OK with me. Your MB works harder when towing, it's just simple physics.

My point is and always has been that there are better choices than an MB if you are going to tow.
:C

[Dakzuki]

I'm not a redline when climbing (even with the toad). Yeah, I get slowed down to 50 over Snoqualmie Pass but it's no slower than I was going in my 460 Ford. I go easy on the equipment but I'm still passing the tractor trailers. I pulled my toad over the Utah 12 hogsback last year. It wasn't fast but nobody was going fast. BTW, at altitude I'm doing pretty well with the turbo making up for the lack of atmospheric pressure.

[Wayne_Dohnal]

Well Desert Captain, it's pretty hard to debate a moving target. You first asserted that none of the Sprinter owners are satisfied with towing. When a few Sprinter owners contradicted that, the subject changed to the consequences of tying up traffic. After I responded to that the subject changed to running at the 4,200 rpm redline. The "car not slowing it down" physics are simple, in the gear I run up the steep grades, the engine will pull to the redline, car or no car. Next higher gear, it won't go as fast, car or no car. The Sprinter is peppy in the lower gears, and gutless in the higher gears.

Here I am defending the Sprinter and I didn't even want to buy one in the first place! I first assumed Ford was the answer, then found I couldn't live with the horrible in/out access around the doghouse. The passenger side footwell IMO is a joke. But the killer was that I could not find a single Ford class C where I could put the driver seat back far enough with the slide pulled in. A slide was on our list of must-haves. Then I set my sights on a Chevy chassis. The doghouse isn't quite as obnoxious, the passenger legroom is a bit better, still a joke IMO. I could have lived with it, but all the ones I tried out had the same problem with the driver seat not going back far enough. All that was left was the Sprinter. The no-doghouse roomy cockpit is a joy, and the seat will go back way farther than I need it to.

I hated to spend the extra money, really like the comfort, handling, and fuel economy, and fear horribly expensive maintenance items that have hit a small percentage of Sprinter owners. There's no common ground here, we'll just have to live with me being satisfied with the towing performance, and you thinking I've made all your points about what a bad choice it is. I'm heading out over the mountain pass again tomorrow, with car hanging on the back.

[pnichols]

D.C.,

Your above comments were nicely worded and right on ... just don't try making them over at the TC forum where any anti-diesel talk - logical or otherwise - gets heavily roasted, with power generation and/or conversion physics pretty much falling prey to pure emotion.

My BIL recently traded in his high end Sprinter based Airstream Class B motorhome for a variety of reasons. He's in the middle of switching to a new pickup truck and TT combination. The pickup he chose was a big gas V8 with an eight-speed box for superb towing but with one twist -> it also gets "diesel-type" mileage. How ... it's Dodge's new variable cylinder count V8. On the level when cruising his big V8 runs on only 4 cylinders. (Hopefully a lot more reliably than Caddilac's attempt at this back in the 1980's.)

Wouldn't an eight-speed box and adjustable cylinder count be a great addition to the V10?!

[Desert_Captain]

Wayne you make my original point very well:

"You must know something I don't about the Sprinter, because on mine the car on the back does not make it slower going up. With or without, I'm redlined in 3rd."

Any RV that is redlined in 3rd getting up a 6% grade is a poor choice to tow anything and as I originally stated if towing is the equation a V-8 or V-10 is a far better choice. As far as there being no difference in performance between towing and not, the laws of physics would have to change for that to be true. Adding 3,000 to 5,000# to the rear end of an RV does impart additional load that 188 HP must deal with. Folks can "think torque" all they want but without sufficient HP the work just does not get done.

I like the MB's, seriously considered one when we were shopping for our C. Since we wanted a 24' coach and had no plans to tow they were given serious consideration. We opted for the V-10 which gives us far better performance, reliability and more options should our needs change down the road.... for a lot less money.

As always.... Opinions and YMMV.

:C

[Wayne_Dohnal]

Desert Captain wrote:


If you are doing 35-45 I doubt you are "flying" past the semis. If you were not overloaded with your Toad you likely could/would get up those 6% grades at 50-55 which would be far safer not only for you but for everyone else on the road. By your "so what" response I gather you just don't care and that is troubling.

Less Toad and/or more motor would eliminate this problem. As you point out your current rig puts you (and others), in jeopardy going down as well as up and yet you are "satisfied and happy?" :h

Just to be clear,
- I did not say 35-45, I said 45.
- You must know something I don't about the Sprinter, because on mine the car on the back does not make it slower going up. With or without, I'm redlined in 3rd.
- I know this is repeating myself, most of the time I'm going up a long grade I come up on a semi going less that 45, which I either pass, or slow down to stay behind. I can't say I've never been the bottleneck, but it's not all that common.
- More motor would mean I'd lose the 16 mpg (pulling the car) fuel consumption. I'm willing to lose a few minutes of time for that. Sorry it creates such a hazard for you, but like I said, I usually deal with exactly the same problem with the semis.

[Desert_Captain]

Wayne Dohnal wrote:

Desert Captain wrote:
I have yet to speak with an MB owner who was satisfied, much less happy with towing. A 10,000#+ coach with a 3,000 to 5,000# Toad is asking a lot of 188 HP. Wish I had a dollar for every MB with a Toad I have seen lugging up a 6% grade at 35 to 45 with their flashers on.

I am an MB owner who is satisfied and happy with towing, a bit over 19,000 miles. So what if I'm going up the 6% grades at 45? More often than not, I'm flying past the semis if there's a passing lane.

The big problem for me is going down those steep grades. Engine braking on the Sprinter is pathetic. On a long downgrade I have to choose between 3rd gear at 55 to 60 with frequent braking, or 45 in 2nd gear with little or no braking. I go down the long steep grades at 45, and that's when the semis want to crush the little Sprinter insect in front of them.

If you are doing 35-45 I doubt you are "flying" past the semis. If you were not overloaded with your Toad you likely could/would get up those 6% grades at 50-55 which would be far safer not only for you but for everyone else on the road. By your "so what" response I gather you just don't care and that is troubling.

Less Toad and/or more motor would eliminate this problem. As you point out your current rig puts you (and others), in jeopardy going down as well as up and yet you are "satisfied and happy?" :h

When I'm stuck behind someone who can't get up the hill at a reasonable speed it places a very large bulls eye on the back of my rig and that is my concern.

:E