Towing a 25 footer in the mountains with a Suburban

[Silvertwinkie]

BTW, I've gotten as high as 13.9mpg towing our '04 25' Safari and on average towing 11.9. It seems to get better MPG as the car ages. I've only got 6500 miles on it now.

I agree with what was said here, try both and see what you like, and what the cost differences are. I think you'll find that operating costs are darn near the same and the marginal cost of going 3/4 ton as I've said is somewhat moot. Those of us that have been on both sides of the discussion (towed with 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton) know what the outcome would be 8 times out of 10.

[Alumaholic]

Greetings Terry,
You are asking the right person if you don't do what I did.
From 1996 until May 2005, I kept looking for marginal improvements in towing while balancing
fuel consumption not towing.
1996: 1995 2-WD Surburban with pre-Vortec 5.7 liter (350 cu in), 3.73 rear end, pulling 1976 Airstream Safari 23'.
This wasn't a bad combination in coastal Carolina and the east coast where we lived at the time, but it didn't do well in the mountains of NM. (11 mpg towing and 17-18 mpg combined).
2001: 1999 4-WD Surburban with Vortec 5.7 liter, 3.73 rear end pulling 2000 Airstream Safari 27'.
The added power of the Vortec engine was offset by increased weight of 4-WD and larger trailer. Performance in mountains was marginal. Non-towing average MPG was lower than 1995 Suburban. (11 mpg towing and 15-17 combined)
2004: 2003 4-WD Z71 Suburban with Vortec 5.3 liter, 3.73 rear end pulling 2000 Airstream Safari 27'.
The advertised increase in horsepower of the 5.3 over the 5.7 is great for non-towing, interstate highway cruising; but a big disappointment for towing. The extra horsepower comes at higher RPMs and results in less torque and marginal towing performance on mountain grades.(12-14 mpg towing and 17 combined)
2005: 2005 4-WD Silverado 2500 HD with Durmax Diesel pulling a 1976 Sovereign 31’. A towing machine, but not a very good vehicle for driving around town, so I bought a 2005 Pacifica for city driving.
What you need. I need 4-WD, but if you don't otherwise need 4-WD, stick with 2-WD. That gives you 500 pounds of additional towing capacity and improves your non-towing gas consumption by about 2MPG.
If you want a tow vehicle that must double as your non-towing, take the kids to soccer practice, family car; the 1500 Suburban 5.3 liter is a nice compromise vehicle if you can find one with a 4.10 rear end. If you want to optimize mountain towing, look for a 6.0 liter with 4.10 rear end. If you want a towing machine, and you care naught about MPG, get the 8.1 liter and the 3.73 rear end.
Bottom line... you will never be satisfied with 5.3 liter and the 3.73 in the mountains, but it's the most fuel efficient combo Chevy offers (12-14 mpg towing and 17-18 mpg combined maybe better with 2-WD and keeping your speed below 62 mph.
The 4.10 rear end behind the 5.3 will make you less unhappy, in the mountains and may be all you need. The 6.0 liter with a 4.10 will make your heart sing in the mountains, but make your heart will ache at the gas pump (11 mpg towing and 13-14 mpg combined).
Another option is to buy a beater car to drive around town, and buy a dedicated towing machine for your road trips.
Hope this helps.
Ken

[jcanavera]

While I'm not a Surburban person, I can attest to the difference in a 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton GM van. I pulled a 27' 6000 lb Safari with both vehicles and discounting the differences caused by engine and rear axle sizes, the 3/4 ton vehicle had a much better presence in towing, both from being a heavier vehicle and the fact that it's built to carry much heavier loads. Towing brings about forces not usually noticed when you are carrying dead weight. The larger shocks, springs and frame handle those pitches in the roads, and other road irregularities that just send 1/2 ton vehicles bouncing.

As Eric pointed out the price difference is very minimal, and you get so much more, a bigger transmission, normally more engine options, larger wheels (16" vs 15" on my vans).

If you tow with both, the difference is noticable.

Jack

[raybell27]

Klevan, I agree with what your statement. You were able to express it better. Semper Fi

[Alumaholic]

Thanks, Ray.
If I hadn't come home to New Mexico after the USMC, I'd be very happy pulling any Airstream up to 27' with a 1500 Suburban. I loved my 2003 Z71, but I hated lugging these mountain passes at 45 mph with engine screaming. The 5.3 liter in front of a 3.73 rearend is marginal at best, especially when you add 4-WD, which I need to get in and out of the back country.

I miss my Z71 Burban until it comes time to tow something heavy somewhere fast; then, I love that Duramax. Call me fickle.
Semper Fi,
Ken

[MarkExc500]

Originally Posted by terry & pat

I have a 1969 25 ft Trade Wind with and empty weight of 4340 lb. I am considering buying a new Suburban with a 5.3 liter gas V8 to pull it. I would like comments on how well the Suburban will do while towing across the rockies. Will I be slowed to a 20 mph crawl or just down to 45 mph or so? Also, do you recommend that I get the 4.10 rear end or can I get by with the 3.42?

A lot of good info has been posted in reply to your question.

My thoughts are that I would rather have a little too much power than not enough, especially where my family's safety is a concern.

Mark
1978 Excella 31' (5800 lbs. Dry)
2006 F250 CC 4X4 Powerstroke Diesel

[basecamp]

Maybe when Terry & Pat asked about the Suburban it was because they liked the functionality of the Burb over a pickup. Maybe a pickup is not what they want. I think the Avalanche is a better buy than a pickup and I love it's functionality. Well this fall the 2007 Av will have a 6.0 . GM is dropping the 3/4 Avalanche from what I have read. If GM came out with a 3/4 ton Av with 6 speed and Duramax that would be something but GM can't figure that one out. You have to make a compromize with GM. "I like this truck but I can't get the option combinations I want". Frustrating...

[Airstream25]

Originally Posted by terry & pat

I have a 1969 25 ft Trade Wind with and empty weight of 4340 lb. I am considering buying a new Suburban with a 5.3 liter gas V8 to pull it. I would like comments on how well the Suburban will do while towing across the rockies. Will I be slowed to a 20 mph crawl or just down to 45 mph or so? Also, do you recommend that I get the 4.10 rear end or can I get by with the 3.42?

Funny how your personal bias affects what you think you read.
The first time I read through this thread, I thought the comments were running 90-10 for something bigger.
Upon re-reading & counting (trying to eliminate the repeat posters) I got only 13 posts for something more vs. 8 posts for the lesser TV.

I have towed a later model 25' Excella first with a 5.3 liter 3.73 Yukon and currently with an 8.1 liter 3.73 Yukon XL. My opinion is having a little extra TV is better than not quite having enough.

The first TV did OK on flat and smooth roads. However, even very small grades commonly encountered on New Mexico's Interstate highways had the first TV spending a lot of time in a lower gear. On secondary roads that are not as smooth as Interstates the Airstream would bounce and push the first TV around in a way that could easily get disturbing.

The current TV feels much more stable on undulating secondary roads and has the power to maintain legel speeds almost all the time with little downshifting on the Interstates.

[JFScheck]

My Toureg TDI back in the day used to pull my 25FB Classic over the Colorado & Utah mountains with zero issue. Maintained speed limit up and over no problem. That engine (granted turbo so not as much loss of power at altitude vs normally aspirated engine) made 240hp & 406lbs torque.

Hope this helps… ;-)