Refreshed 2017 Pathfinder increases tow rating to 6000 lbs

Perhaps the pressure of international markets is making them more honest in their rating? The Explorers of world (and some others) will be forced to be more honest and up theirs, but I'll not hold my breath as the marketing incentive to keep the numbers artificially low to sell more expensive vehicles is so high.

I don't think vehicles are underrated. Some engineering must go into making sure the entire vehicle performs well. I hope it does, this would be a significant opportunity if you want an SUV and tow a smaller trailer.

Skelshy wrote:
I don't think vehicles are underrated. Some engineering must go into making sure the entire vehicle performs well. I hope it does, this would be a significant opportunity if you want an SUV and tow a smaller trailer.

So is SRT300, one of the most powerful cars on the planet and a solid towing platform when properly setup, really capable of only 0 pounds towing? No typo, 0. That's just an extreme but it's not the only absurdity by far. There are several places I have seen lists of identical cars rated in Europe and North America, 2 and 3 times the tow capability in Europe was typical and the overwhelming number of vehicles I saw on the road towing my last time to Wales would have been at double, or my more, the rated capacity of those cars in N/A. The same trend is there with smaller suvs, not as absurdly as customers do look at that spec. It's only the larger vehicles where engineering gets the upper hand in tow ratings, and sometimes even then there are some obvious discrepancies. Anyway, for those think there is substance to small vehicle tow ratings this is an opportunity, and as I alluded I'd hope other manufacturers will put out more honest ratings, but I expect to be disappointed given the hugely higher profit margins on larger vehicles and the lack of competition in the domestic market for the issue.

horton333 wrote:

Skelshy wrote:
I don't think vehicles are underrated. Some engineering must go into making sure the entire vehicle performs well. I hope it does, this would be a significant opportunity if you want an SUV and tow a smaller trailer.

So is SRT300, one of the most powerful cars on the planet and a solid towing platform when properly setup, really capable of only 0 pounds towing? No typo, 0. That's just an extreme but it's not the only absurdity by far. There are several places I have seen lists of identical cars rated in Europe and North America, 2 and 3 times the tow capability in Europe was typical and the overwhelming number of vehicles I saw on the road towing my last time to Wales would have been at double, or my more, the rated capacity of those cars in N/A. The same trend is there with smaller suvs, not as absurdly as customers do look at that spec. It's only the larger vehicles where engineering gets the upper hand in tow ratings, and sometimes even then there are some obvious discrepancies. Anyway, for those think there is substance to small vehicle tow ratings this is an opportunity, and as I alluded I'd hope other manufacturers will put out more honest ratings, but I expect to be disappointed given the hugely higher profit margins on larger vehicles and the lack of competition in the domestic market for the issue.

???? Translation???

Skelshy wrote:
The refreshed 2017 Nissan Pathfinder stands out from the crossover SUV competition with its 6000 lbs tow rating.

According to Autoblog, the increase was due to more available engine power and the addition of a transmission cooler.

According to Alex on Autos, the tow rating is SAE J2807 certified. (review)

OUTPUT: 284 hp, 259 lb-ft torque
CURB WEIGHT: 4,292 (Tacoma: 4180/4425 2WD/4WD)
Third gen CVT (!)

I looked at the online user manual and found it has factory wiring for a trailer brake controller. No word of ABS based sway control. The tow package is dealer installed.

No word on payload or GCWR. No word yet on actual tow experience - I hope TFLTruck runs it up I-70 soon!

Had a 2005 Pathfinder, 6000 lbs tow rating, 600 lbs tongue rating and 270 Hp and 291 lbs of torque. The worst tow vehicle I've ever owned thanks to it's lack of torque despite it's stellar published torque. Poor mainly due to it's ultra weak suspension. Replaced it with a 2008 Ford Explorer Sport Trac and what a difference despite similar torque ratings and rear axle ratings.

Mike Up wrote:

Had a 2005 Pathfinder, 6000 lbs tow rating, 600 lbs tongue rating and 270 Hp and 291 lbs of torque. The worst tow vehicle I've ever owned thanks to it's lack of torque despite it's stellar published torque. Poor mainly due to it's ultra weak suspension. Replaced it with a 2008 Ford Explorer Sport Trac and what a difference despite similar torque ratings and rear axle ratings.

I hear ya - I am keeping my expectations in check for now. However the Pathfinder was completely revised in 2015 and now is a unibody crossover.

We basically have a truck just for towing. If we can find a SUV that tows well, that's one vehicle less to pay for and insure.

We almost pulled the trigger on a 2016 Pathfinder for my wife to pull our 18" boat ~3000lbs. We started researching them, and read about a transmission issue that made us nervous. Some of them have a weird shudder. The thought of a possible tranny issue on a vehicle the we would tow with scared us away.

Readin, is seems the issue is being worked on, and was most common on '13-'14, some reports on '15's. Since is was the same tranny in the 16's we passed on buying it. It was by far our favorite of the vehicles we looked at, and we couldn't bring ourselves to spend a bunch of money on a distant second choice. My wife is still driving her 2003 Pilot. Hopefully the problem is fixed now, and we can revisit buying one.

Wife has the 2015 Explorer with 4WD and Tow package (haven't towed with it though) and we really like it. It's been reliable and if I were in the market, I'd buy another. It's tow rating is 5000 lbs, tongue rating is 500 lbs and it's "actual" payload on the yellow tread act door jam sticker is 1398 lbs.

Other than it's short wheelbase, it seems like it would be a capable tow vehicle for a smaller trailer.

BTW, we have had 2 200# boys in the 3rd row, 240 lbs of kids in the 2nd row, and 400 lbs of adults in the 1st row (wife small, I'm bigger), and the SUV has absolutely no squat at all.

My 2005 pathfinder had squat with anyone sitting in the 2nd row and poor squat with people in the 3rd row seat.

Explorer definitely has a much stronger suspension.

Explorer has 290 Hp @ 6500 rpms and lb.-ft @ 4000 rpms of torque. It really gets up and goes compared to the lethargic 2005 Pathfinder despite it's over rated 291 lb.-ft of torque @ 4000 rpm.

Also both my 2004 Nissan Titan and 2005 Nissan Pathfinder proved to be unreliable, only my 2000 Xterra was fair. All my Fords have proven to be much more reliable than the Nissan 3 except my 2010 F150 that had issues. The 4 Ford Trucks/Suvs have been good.

Good luck on your hunt.

Mike Up wrote:

Explorer has 290 Hp @ 6500 rpms and lb.-ft @ 4000 rpms of torque. It really gets up and goes compared to the lethargic 2005 Pathfinder despite it's over rated 291 lb.-ft of torque @ 4000 rpm.

2005 Pathfinder was a body-on-frame SUV that has nothing to do with the current unibody model.

Skelshy wrote:

Mike Up wrote:

Explorer has 290 Hp @ 6500 rpms and lb.-ft @ 4000 rpms of torque. It really gets up and goes compared to the lethargic 2005 Pathfinder despite it's over rated 291 lb.-ft of torque @ 4000 rpm.

2005 Pathfinder was a body-on-frame SUV that has nothing to do with the current unibody model.

Yeh, if they can't get it right on a SUV built off a truck frame, highly unlikely they can get it right on a SUV built off a car unibody.