How long a camper can I (should I) tow?

Delete

blt2ski wrote:
THe reason the OEM's use a low drag trailer, is the SAE specs DO HAVE a max frontal area for the trailers, depending upon the GVWR of the truck and combo. 80SQ ft IIRC for the full size rigs.

For someone to say, frontal area and wind drag is not important, they have the head somewhere where the sun does not shine! It is more important in most cases IMHO than actual weight!

Marty

I said more than once, frontal and side area is important...and IMO more so than weight. SO I hope this reply was not for me.

You also site things that no longer exist, so I'm not sure how that helps us here.

Third, you join the crown in posting inaccurate information. Its not that the SAEJ2807 spec doesn't mention frontal area, its that they state "MINIMUM's" on their standard trailer list and they are only used as "CONSIDERATION" (its a required consideration actually) propulsion testing. They do not apply to dynamic tests, this is stated multiple times in the spec.

Here's the definition of the standard trailer direct from SAE2807, and they go on to list some examples...but none of which are required to be used for any given test;

THe reason the OEM's use a low drag trailer, is the SAE specs DO HAVE a max frontal area for the trailers, depending upon the GVWR of the truck and combo. 80SQ ft IIRC for the full size rigs.

At one time Ford had a poster that some RV dealers had up. I recall seeing one when I bought a TT in 92. Max trailer at the time for fords BB and diesel motors was 10K lbs up to 80sq ft. 81-100 it was reduced to 7500 lbs, and 101-120 down to 5000 lbs max lbs of trailer. Over 121sqft it was not recommended you tow with your F series truck! For the Ranger Aerostar, max was ~5K up to 60sqft. 61-70 reduced to 4000 lbs, 71-80 reduced to 3000lbs, OVer 81sqft it was not recommended you tow with a 4.0 V6 motor.

Semis when speced, get a max trailer wt for a given chassis gvw. Then you spec the drive train to the type of useage. An OTR rig with get a higher HP rig than a equal total lb rig doing city work. Gears will be overall lower for the city driver, taller for better MPG on the road for the OTR. FRONTAL AREA is a VERY IMPORTANT number, along with the how aerodynamic a rig is as to how much HP a rig with have. A typical 18 wheeler will have a rating of 1. A FUll aero pkg rig will be .7, and a car hauler will be a 1.3! If you need say 100 hp for the typical 18wheeler, the aero setup will need 70hp to move the same wt, the carhauler 130hp.

For someone to say, frontal area and wind drag is not important, they have the head somewhere where the sun does not shine! It is more important in most cases IMHO than actual weight!

Marty

Terryallan wrote:

RinconVTR wrote:

coolbreeze01 wrote:
Weight matters more than length.

I am not sure anyone picked up on this within 4 pages of tread, but this is one of the debates here.

I believe in the complete opposite. I could easily tow DOUBLE any given weight rating of any 1/2 ton truck out there more safely than pulling a very long enclosed trailer within all weight ratings. Any day, any time, any condition. (just look at what they use in the new SAE towing standard to gain a clue!)

In short, weight is NOT everything. Length (side profile) and frontal area (air resistance) is the biggest factor towing travel trailers comfortably, and controllably. These factors are absolutely NOT part of towing ratings today, be it new standard or old marketing fudge.

Don't be fooled thinking because you are within given ratings, all is well.

IF you look at Ford's towing guide. You will see that in fact frontal area is indeed figured into their towing capacities. Again. you will run out of weight before you run out of length.

I didn't reference Fords guide did I? But since you brought it up, what you claim is not at all accurate.

Ford, nor any other OEM tow ratings, DO NOT factor in the frontal area of any trailer. Ford mentions "Front Area Considerations" and states "Selecting a trailer with a low-drag, rounded front design will help optimize performance and fuel economy."

Ford doesn't even provide calculations to reduce the trucks tow rating per frontal area of a trailer. And think about it? How would you accurately calculate the fontal area of highly curved traiers? How about 5th wheels with highly curves top halves, but flatter bottom halves, which may or may not become a factor based on how much any give truck and trailer line up and air gets around. TOO MANY VARIABLES.

And to Ron's question, look into that they use for trailers when testing to the SAE standard. They are not enclosed, they are flat beds with weights added.

I find no mention in the standard that specifies using an enclosed trailer with and number of ft2 frontal area. And I can see why. Doing so would ruin the standard because there are too many variables. From hundreds of trailer designs, all OEM's would need the exact same. Even then, the relationship between tow vehicle and trailer, and the gap in between is vastly different. SUV's have a better opportunity to get air flow up and over the trailer compared to trucks. And most importantly, wind direction and speed any give day could greatly throw off the results. TOO MANY VARIABLES.

nomad297 wrote:

95jersey wrote:

Terryallan wrote:

95jersey wrote:


I use to do 70-80mph over hundreds of miles for years without even a hint of an issue.



.

That right there makes you a VERY LUCKY man. If it was a travel trailer you were towing. the tires were only rated for 65 mph.

BTW. I didn't say you couldn't tow your new TT. I only said ALL the tongue weight stays on the ball in one way or another. Yes little weight is transferred thru the hitch to the TT, and a little is transferred thru the hitch to the front axle. But it ALL still on the hitch. You will be overloaded.

It was a car hauler, not a travel trailer.

Regardless, you were still running on ST tires.

Bruce

Car hauler, flat bed whatever....same trailer tires same ratings. I saw this idiot from Michigan this morning towing a wrecked lexus sedan on a Uhaul dolley going 80mph. He was using a highlander hybrid yota. Anyway I honked at him and pointed to the fenders. 55mph max in 4" letters. I shook my head in disgust and powered on to work in jersey.

IndyCamp wrote:

APT wrote:
Locate this sticker for your truck's as equipped payload. Note what yours has where mine says 2051:

How many times over the years do you think you have posted that picture? You must have a shortcut somewhere on your desktop so you can pull it up easily. ;)

Not being a smart ass or anything. I actually think it is very helpful to show the picture so people who are new to the hobby know exactly what everyone is talking about. :C

Keep in mind that sticker is LESS than HALF the story on carrying capacity!! If the allowed payload EXCEEDS the margin on the rear axle you could exceed the rear axle rating and still be within the GVWR!! This is very true of the F150 Max tow, where total GVWR is within about 400# of the total GAWR.
To get the full picture you need to also look at the VIN Sticker that has the GAWR for both front and rear and total GVWR. The Tire Loading sticker doesn't have any of that information.

The VIN sticker has far more useful information, you need to know what each end can carry.

PLEASE NOTE: the correct pressure is also listed on the VIN sticker. I would love it some new TV buyer would Take their TV straight to a CAT scale from the dealers lot with a full tank of fuel and see just how close that Payload sticker is!!

Indycamp, I have it bookmarked. Wish I uploaded it at 640x480 resolution, though.

blt2ski wrote:
A number of years ago, some RV consumer group came out with a WB/trailer length ratio recommendation. I seem to get it wrong everytime I try to post it, but none the less......went something like this

110' for the first 20', then 1' more trailer for every 4" of wb. so with this in mind. 140 less 110 = 30/4 = 7.5 plus 20 = 27.5'

They also did not recommend towing with a rig under 110", which I find totally ludecrist, for me I would suggest lowing the length a foot for every 4" less!

So with this in mind, another figure I did one time for some trailers I towed. My TT was 15K total, 90sqft of frontal area, this was about 135HP needed at 60 mph. My equipment trailer when at 15K and 70sqft was 105hp. So a big hp difference with just frontal area being different. My ET with bobcat was 18K total, and about 115HP. If you have a 25K rig at 70sq ft, you need the same HP as the 15k/90 rig at 135HP. Difference would be on a grade. The 15K rig needs about 40HP to hold ea additional % of grade, the 25K rig in the low 50HP range.

At the end of the day, to say that a single rating, number etc is the MOST important. That is hogwash, one needs to look at MANY of the numbers and figures to see if a given trailer or combo will work for you.

By the way, for my 6500 lb loaded TT with 750 lbs of hw, I needed a typical 8 lug DOT class 2 rig with a 9200-9900 gvwr and 2400 lbs minimum payload to tote it around. As my family weighed 1200-1300 lbs when my 4 kids were teenagers. So the rig the OP has, would be at gvwr with my family loaded in it, leaving me with ZERO, NADA, NO trailer wt options assuming I had the typical 10-15% HW to tow said 6500 lbs trailer. For me that was around 700-750 lbs depending upon how the trailer was loaded.

Marty

Dang Marty, you cipher purty 'gud there ole good buddy:B

Jim

APT wrote:
Locate this sticker for your truck's as equipped payload. Note what yours has where mine says 2051:

How many times over the years do you think you have posted that picture? You must have a shortcut somewhere on your desktop so you can pull it up easily. ;)

Not being a smart ass or anything. I actually think it is very helpful to show the picture so people who are new to the hobby know exactly what everyone is talking about. :C

A number of years ago, some RV consumer group came out with a WB/trailer length ratio recommendation. I seem to get it wrong everytime I try to post it, but none the less......went something like this

110' for the first 20', then 1' more trailer for every 4" of wb. so with this in mind. 140 less 110 = 30/4 = 7.5 plus 20 = 27.5'

They also did not recommend towing with a rig under 110", which I find totally ludecrist, for me I would suggest lowing the length a foot for every 4" less!

So with this in mind, another figure I did one time for some trailers I towed. My TT was 15K total, 90sqft of frontal area, this was about 135HP needed at 60 mph. My equipment trailer when at 15K and 70sqft was 105hp. So a big hp difference with just frontal area being different. My ET with bobcat was 18K total, and about 115HP. If you have a 25K rig at 70sq ft, you need the same HP as the 15k/90 rig at 135HP. Difference would be on a grade. The 15K rig needs about 40HP to hold ea additional % of grade, the 25K rig in the low 50HP range.

At the end of the day, to say that a single rating, number etc is the MOST important. That is hogwash, one needs to look at MANY of the numbers and figures to see if a given trailer or combo will work for you.

By the way, for my 6500 lb loaded TT with 750 lbs of hw, I needed a typical 8 lug DOT class 2 rig with a 9200-9900 gvwr and 2400 lbs minimum payload to tote it around. As my family weighed 1200-1300 lbs when my 4 kids were teenagers. So the rig the OP has, would be at gvwr with my family loaded in it, leaving me with ZERO, NADA, NO trailer wt options assuming I had the typical 10-15% HW to tow said 6500 lbs trailer. For me that was around 700-750 lbs depending upon how the trailer was loaded.

Marty