J2807 for smaller vehicles

[easycamper]

As far as I know, only Toyota and Ford currently apply the SAE J2807 standard to rate towing capacity of vehicles that aren’t trucks.

What do you think? Can we believe these numbers? I would like to think so, since the standard is being used.

I’ll take the current Ford Escape as an example. The earlier generations of the Escape were, I believe, generally considered less capable as an RV tow vehicle than their 3500-lb rating suggested. The 2013-14 model with the 2.0L EcoBoost engine is rated at 3500 lbs using J2807.

[easycamper]

Yep I would think the hitch is the weakest link. Probably the easiest for the end user to overcome though with a custom setup.

I have a Class III Mopar hitch on my 08 Grand Caravan rated for 3800 lbs with weight distribution.

[Fixed_Sight_Tra]

easycamper wrote:

Fast Mopar wrote:
All minivans are miraculously rated for 3500 lb max, which cannot be true.

I agree. I also don't see how a small SUV like a 2014 Ford Escape with curb weight of 3600 lbs and a 106" WB is equal in capability to a Sienna which is 4400 lbs and 119".

Automakers are motivated to test trucks to their maximum potential because towing capacities are a marketing tool.

I would imagine for something like a Sienna, they just pick 3500 lbs and test to that, rather than pushing the limits to see what the vehicle is truly capable of.

So, I don't believe that J2807 has done anything for vehicles other than trucks.

Just guessing here but is it possible the minivans won't take a class 3 hitch because of the clearance or unibody construction? They may be limited by the hitch.

[blt2ski]

Actually, the more you know about how to spec the correct truck for the job at hand, the more you realize that the J2807 specs are pretty meaningless. useless etc too!

One, 35 mph min on a 4% grade. Yeah at 100F with AC on, but that is still 5 mph below my states min speed on an interstate, which can be as steep as 6% for long stretches, short bursts to 8%. 40 mph on a 6% grade would be more meaningfull, at least then I am still at legal speed.

Min start is 12% grade. My sister lives on an 18% grade road. My old drive way was 20%, and a road I had to go up was 24.5% in the north end of Seattle. I also had a client with a 33% grade driveway off of lake Washington. That 12% minimum does not get you up the steepest of side streets if you have to around the greater Seattle area at sea level to 1000' elevation! 20 min, with a known deduction at 30 and 40% would be better so those of us that are more in the local road mix doing contruction would be better off than a hwy only user as the current spec is set for.

The frontal area is 60 sq ft for rigs under 8K IIRC, and 80 Sq ft for rigs over 8K. How many of you have rigs over 80sqft? probably most of you, so what is the deduction for those of you with front bedroom slide 5w's with 110-120 sq ft of frontal area? At one time, Ford had for full sized pickups, the ratings were up to 10K and 80 sq ft, 81-100 was deducted to 7500 lbs, 101-120 was 5000 lbs of trailer, no trailer over 120sq ft was recommended to be pulled by a full size F series pickup! Where is the equal deductions?

So yes, in a nutshell, the spec from a we are all equal is good! but from an end user that pushes the limits, total useless and meaning less numbers!

Marty

[easycamper]

Ron3rd wrote:
Didn't mean to imply I don't understand it, it's just meaningless to me as I use other criteria.

Yes, unfortunately it is rather meaningless.

[Ron3rd]

easycamper wrote:

Ron3rd wrote:

I have a Tundra and don't even know what SAE J2807 is. I just look at the payload rating, gross rear axle rating, GCWR, etc, and take it from their. "Tow Ratings" are meaningless to me.

SAE Standard J2807: Performance Requirements for Determining Tow-Vehicle Gross Combination Weight Rating and Trailer Weight Rating.
http://standards.sae.org/j2807_201205/

It's supposed to be used to determine GCWR. Too bad it's applied so unevenly.

Didn't mean to imply I don't understand it, it's just meaningless to me as I use other criteria.

[easycamper]

Ron3rd wrote:

I have a Tundra and don't even know what SAE J2807 is. I just look at the payload rating, gross rear axle rating, GCWR, etc, and take it from their. "Tow Ratings" are meaningless to me.

SAE Standard J2807: Performance Requirements for Determining Tow-Vehicle Gross Combination Weight Rating and Trailer Weight Rating.
http://standards.sae.org/j2807_201205/

It's supposed to be used to determine GCWR. Too bad it's applied so unevenly.

[TurnThePage]

APT wrote:
I said drivers, not RV towing drivers. And still, even among naturally aspirated gas engine owners, WOT is uncommon. 5000rpm+ on a "big V8" scares many people. 🙂

I realize that not everybody tows in the mountains, but there are enough of us that "they" have to take that into consideration when they create those standards. With that said, WOT definitely does not have to mean 5000 RPMs. There have been times that I found myself down below 2000 RPMs with the pedal squished to the floor.

[easycamper]

Well, now that we got that whole WOT thing clarified... 🙂

Fast Mopar wrote:
All minivans are miraculously rated for 3500 lb max, which cannot be true.

I agree. I also don't see how a small SUV like a 2014 Ford Escape with curb weight of 3600 lbs and a 106" WB is equal in capability to a Sienna which is 4400 lbs and 119".

Automakers are motivated to test trucks to their maximum potential because towing capacities are a marketing tool.

I would imagine for something like a Sienna, they just pick 3500 lbs and test to that, rather than pushing the limits to see what the vehicle is truly capable of.

So, I don't believe that J2807 has done anything for vehicles other than trucks.

[Ron3rd]

easycamper wrote:
As far as I know, only Toyota and Ford currently apply the SAE J2807 standard to rate towing capacity of vehicles that aren’t trucks.

What do you think? Can we believe these numbers? I would like to think so, since the standard is being used.

I’ll take the current Ford Escape as an example. The earlier generations of the Escape were, I believe, generally considered less capable as an RV tow vehicle than their 3500-lb rating suggested. The 2013-14 model with the 2.0L EcoBoost engine is rated at 3500 lbs using J2807.

I have a Tundra and don't even know what SAE J2807 is. I just look at the payload rating, gross rear axle rating, GCWR, etc, and take it from their. "Tow Ratings" are meaningless to me.

[APT]

I said drivers, not RV towing drivers. And still, even among naturally aspirated gas engine owners, WOT is uncommon. 5000rpm+ on a "big V8" scares many people. 🙂

[Bumpyroad]

45Ricochet wrote:

goducks10 wrote:
With 340HP and 800TQ my pedal never sees the floor:)

LOL I was thinking the same thing.
Might I suggest that 5% comment be something like " less than 5% of diesel RV pullers run WOT and a much higher percent with a gasser run WOT" :W

x2
bumpy

[45Ricochet]

goducks10 wrote:
With 340HP and 800TQ my pedal never sees the floor:)

LOL I was thinking the same thing.
Might I suggest that 5% comment be something like " less than 5% of diesel RV pullers run WOT and a much higher percent with a gasser run WOT" :W

[APT]

I'm one of the 5% club. I know what vehicles sound, feel, drive, and therefore look like when doing so. I know what my passengers say when I make the engine go over about 2/3 of redline in any vehicle.

Mountain passes while towing, maybe 20% of passenger vehicle owners use WOT. But much of the population never tows up mountains ever!

[Cummins12V98]

goducks10 wrote:
With 340HP and 800TQ my pedal never sees the floor:)

Hey don't forget those 10 ponies. Its 350hp!