cancel
Showing results forย 
Search instead forย 
Did you mean:ย 

V-Nose Towing Theory

Gorky
Explorer
Explorer
New member, old question. Is it easier to tow a V-Nose or Flat Nose trailer?

In context, I'm planning on a custom travel trailer made out of the hull of a cargo trailer and I probably will have to decide between a V-Nose or a Flat-fronted cargo trailers. Since my tow vehicle is tentatively a 6-cyl SUV, and since I plan to live in the trailer and tow it 20000+ miles per year, ease of towing is important not only for the gas savings but for the longevity of my engine and tranny (I.e, big $$).

As such, I've been reading everywhere (including here) the various resources ranging from aerodynamics in theory, 2nd-hand observations, marketing materials, actual towing experience, etc. So here is kind-of my summation of the topic to cover the bases and submit it for the review of all the minds here.

1. Shape of trailer's front-end is only a small portion of the total trailer tow-ability equation. Other considerations include: good tires, running gear, and well-balanced load so the trailer doesn't bounce, wag, and provides least rolling resistance. Smooth sides, bottom, and top. Drag-reduction at the rear end. Size of mirrors. Weight. Etc. Road speed is the biggest determining factor, but we can't expect to go 45 mph everywhere. Speed limits on some 2-lane roads here in Montana are 75-80mph, slow gets dangerous.

2. Cargo trailer sales people say a V-nose tows better but should not be expected to noticeably increase mpg. Other people say arrows and knives cut better than bricks, so V of course will cut air better than U.

3. In a wind tunnel, a V-fronted trailer allegedly performs the same or worse than a flat trailer of the same size. The V in front does split the air instead of pushing it, but the split air adheres to the larger frontal area of the V itself, the sides of the trailer, and creates more drag at the square back-end, so the overall friction and drag is the same or slightly worse. I assume the test was done without any TV in front of the trailer but I haven't been able to find any info from the actual testers, just hearing 2nd-hand from other posters.

4. At highway speeds, the size/shape of the TV and the amount of gap between a trailer and TV has more impact than the shape of the trailer's nose. Turbulence coming off the back of the TV will obviously have no impact on the front of the trailer if there is no gap between, and increases the wider the gap until it's virtually the same as if the trailer were stacked on top of the TV instead of behind it.

5. Aerodynamics can be counter-intuitive. A TV with a rounded rear has less drag. A trailer with a rounded front has less wind resistance, on its own in a wind tunnel. But, a TV with a rounded rear towing a trailer with a rounded front means the air will sweep down the back edges of the TV and hit the trailer's full frontal area instead of being deflected over it. That's why lots of folks are disappointed by the mpg they get pulling a lightweight R-Pod vs. a longer and heavier Airstream; the sloping "tear-drop" front of the R-Pod just increases the gap (and therefore turbulence) between the rear ceiling of the TV and the front ceiling of the R-Pod. A cargo van pulling a square cargo trailer actually has less overall wind resistance, although drag at the back of a flat-backed trailer may negate most of it.

6. The gap between a trailer and TV means the air flowing off the back of the TV may try to go all the way across the front of a trailer, increasing resistance and friction. That's why some aerodynamic modifications (especially of big rigs) include a cross flow plate; vertical plate along the tongue between TV and trailer, or a series of smaller vertical fins that discourage air from crossing horizontally front of the trailer.

7. The nose of the V-fronted trailer is usually advanced into the tongue area between TV and trailer. In other words, a flat front is not chopped off at angles to make the V; instead a V is added onto the front of a the flat so the overall interior length at trailer center increases; the gap between middle of TV and nose of V is less than that of a flat trailer.

Therefore, I would expect that a V-nose pulled behind a big squarish TV would perform very slightly better (as advertised) than a flat-front trailer with the same length of tongue. The V nose slightly reduces the gap between trailer and TV (at-least at the centerline) and the V will act like a weak cross flow prevention plate, reducing turbulent air flow across the front of the trailer. Since a V-nose by itself does badly in a wind tunnel, the less drag you expect from your tow vehicle (i.e, sloped back end) or the shorter it is comparatively, the more air will hit the V-nose and the worse its affect will be for aerodynamics overall compared to a flat-front.

But if you must have a minimum distance between TV and front of trailer, to be able to open a rear hatch for instance, it would be much better to have a flat-front at the same distance from the TV as the tip of the V-nose.

Since tongue distance, TV shape, and driving speed are variables determined more by utilitarian necessities (i.e, if you need to turn sharply or can't afford a different tow vehicle) and these will all determine if the V-nose will help or hurt, I would agree with what trailer sales are saying: DON'T choose a V-nose to get better mpg. They're designed to have more cargo space, not better aerodynamics.

Hi everyone! Any additional thoughts welcome!
21 REPLIES 21

LarryJM
Explorer II
Explorer II
SoCalDesertRider wrote:
Let's face it. Practically all box cargo and RV travel trailers have the aerdynamic charistics of a giant cardboard box going down the road. Small modifications to the shape are not going to make massive differences in mpg or how they tow. Pick the trailer you like, pick a truck with more than enough balls to tow it, and be happy.


IMO that's a pretty good analysis and outlook on all this. Biggest mpg gains will be in the TV engine/drivetrain efficiency mainly gas vs diesel and rear end ratio and tow speed. All the rest will be down in the weeds so to speak.

AFAIK about the only aerodynamic improvement might be the use of "air tabs" as mentioned by ACZL in the post above, especially on the rear, but I haven't seen enough documented facts to even WAG at a payoff of long term costs.

Larry
2001 standard box 7.3L E-350 PSD Van with 4.10 rear and 2007 Holiday Rambler Aluma-Lite 8306S Been RV'ing since 1974.
RAINKAP INSTALL////ETERNABOND INSTALL

ACZL
Explorer
Explorer
To look at this another way. Cabover semi or slope nose conventional semi? Don't see many cabovers anymore from any mfr. Everything is conventional via very sloped nose. Most long haul semis try to close the gap as much as possible between cab and trailer. If not, cab is equipped with big 'ol air fairings and on some trailers a "bubble" on the front to aid in reducing wind resistance.

Not being scientific here, but seems to me a "V" would be more aero than a flat front or even a angled flat front.

In response to the post about the "wings" on back of semis. they are called "Trailer Tails". Supposed to do just as you said in reducing the drag or draft effect coming of rear of trailer. Have no idea how much they cut down on drag VS cost, but if going cross country, then I could see it saving money. If local, not so much. Another product one could try (have seen a few RV's w/'em) is "Air Tabs". They adhere to flat sides of a truck or trailer. They to are supposed to reduce drag at end of unit.
2017 F350 DRW XLT, CC, 4x4, 6.7
2018 Big Country 3560 SS
"The best part of RVing and Snowmobiling is spending time with family and friends"
"Catin' in the Winter"

SoCalDesertRid1
Explorer
Explorer
Let's face it. Practically all box cargo and RV travel trailers have the aerdynamic charistics of a giant cardboard box going down the road. Small modifications to the shape are not going to make massive differences in mpg or how they tow. Pick the trailer you like, pick a truck with more than enough balls to tow it, and be happy.
01 International 4800 4x4 CrewCab DT466E Allison MD3060
69Bronco 86Samurai 85ATC250R 89CR500
98Ranger 96Tacoma
20' BigTex flatbed
8' truck camper, 14' Aristocrat TT
73 Kona 17' ski boat & Mercury 1150TB
92F350 CrewCab 4x4 351/C6 285 BFG AT 4.56 & LockRite rear

Bumpyroad
Explorer
Explorer
when I bought my cargo trailer, they had a rounded bull nose type of jobby that mounted on the top half of the front that was supposed to improve aerodynamics. don't know if it did anything however. I remember there was a TT that tapered slightly with the rear a lilttle wider than the front.
bumpy

Chuck_thehammer
Explorer
Explorer
have you looked at the newer stuff hanging off the rear of semi-truck/trailers... panels attached to the rear/back of 40/48 foot box trailers...

similar to the engine covers used on the space shuttle when attached to there 747 aircraft to return to Florida...

its the Flat back ends of trailers that adds lots of drag. like all trailers.
trying to PULL air behind trailer.. need to break the vacuum/backdraft or whatever they call it.

keeping under 60 mph helps a lot with gas mileage..

BarneyS
Explorer III
Explorer III
I agree with your last two sentences. ๐Ÿ™‚
"DON'T choose a V-nose to get better mpg. They're designed to have more cargo space, not better aerodynamics."

Good analysis.
Barney
2004 Sunnybrook Titan 30FKS TT
Hensley "Arrow" 1400# hitch (Sold)
Not towing now.
Former tow vehicles were 2016 Ram 2500 CTD, 2002 Ford F250, 7.3 PSD, 1997 Ram 2500 5.9 gas engine

jmtandem
Explorer II
Explorer II
Hi everyone! Any additional thoughts welcome!


I think you did a pretty good job of delineating the issues of a V nose trailer. Two things I would add. How much compromise inside the trailer will the V nose create and can you live with it? And, where I live the wind blows all the time (almost) and to tow with a V nose there will almost always be a frontal area that the wind is hitting unless the wind is from the rear. So, for me a V nose is not in the cards.

In a no wind situation rolling resistance is more important than wind resistance up to around 40-45 miles per hour. The time spent over 40-45 mph is when wind resistance becomes important. So, the nose shape is not that much of an issue under 40-45 mph.
'05 Dodge Cummins 4x4 dually 3500 white quadcab auto long bed.