Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-24-2013, 11:18 PM   #71
4 Rivet Member
 
Garfield's Avatar
 
2001 25' Safari
London , Ontario
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 298
Images: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by dznf0g View Post
Rick, we're actually not that far apart. GCWR,GAWR, etc ARE valid engineering established (with a small safety margin built in) numbers that, if exceeded regularly will, at a minimum, result in shortened lifespan of vehicle components.
With respect, have to disagree with this. I've never seen any evidence that regularly exceeding the tow rating shortens the life of a vehicle PROVIDED it's properly maintained, which usually just means changing the fluids more frequently.

As for GCWR, athough it "looks" official (like GVWR and GAWR which ARE official and in fact are the only numbers written into towing laws in North America for non-commercial vehicles), from my experience GCWR is simply arrived at by adding the GVWR and tow rating together. The real question is and has always been: how is the tow rating arrived at? Based on the tow ratings I've seen on different vehicles from various manufacturers, it doesn't appear to be a number that's based solely on engineering, that's for sure.
__________________

__________________
Gary & Debbie
2001 Safari 25 SS
2011 Chevy Traverse 3.6L AWD • Hensley • DirecLink • McKesh
Set-up by Can-Am RV
Garfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2013, 07:22 AM   #72
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,407
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garfield View Post
With respect, have to disagree with this. I've never seen any evidence that regularly exceeding the tow rating shortens the life of a vehicle PROVIDED it's properly maintained, which usually just means changing the fluids more frequently.

As for GCWR, athough it "looks" official (like GVWR and GAWR which ARE official and in fact are the only numbers written into towing laws in North America for non-commercial vehicles), from my experience GCWR is simply arrived at by adding the GVWR and tow rating together. The real question is and has always been: how is the tow rating arrived at? Based on the tow ratings I've seen on different vehicles from various manufacturers, it doesn't appear to be a number that's based solely on engineering, that's for sure.
And I also, respectfully disagree, after 29 years in the biz. This mindset is why I am not going to waste my time with the lengthy explanation of the process for all the specs. Please understand, I am not singling you out at all....this subject just starts to feel like a hitch thread. No sense in wasting my time.

If ay of your REALLY interested, enroll in this course....the technical one, not the sales one.

http://tmitraining.com/LT/ChevyLight.html

In addition to my undergrad, and professional GM training, I completed this coursework up through class 8 (back when GM had class 5 - 8).
__________________

__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2013, 12:33 PM   #73
1 Rivet Member
 
2013 30' International
etobicoke , Ontario
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Images: 1
hello fello streamers

This thread has devolved into the same old dichotomy, so my 2 cents are:

Powerwise, an f-250 diesel with 800lb ft of torque obviously has no problem tugging a massive 5th wheel TT with slide-outs, such as a Cougar 333mks, for example. Indeed, when manufacturer engineers determine towing capacities for publication, they must think about Joe Q Public who tows a big, square, top-heavy box using a pick-up without any of the features or design advantages mentioned below.
But, before insisting on reciting these published manufacturer tow numbers here on airforums (which seems kind of ironic to me) as the be all and end all and clinging to the “it has to be a pick-up” mantra, this promotional video (provided by airstream)
should be considered.

The video reveals the advantages of towing an airstream with a lower slung sport SUV with a powerful engine, using a class 4 weight distributing anti-sway device with an electronic brake controller. Most anyone would prefer one of these set-ups, if they could only afford it (not to sound snobbish), as compared to a more common pick-up and box trailer combo.
And with a higher centre of gravity, added drag and poorer handling, it seems to me that pick-ups will compromise safety and efficiency at the front of a set-up, in much the same way that a box trailer does at the back. By using a pick-up, it will somewhat offset or reduce some of the very advantages that an airstream has to offer.
In the past year, our family travelled to disney, the gaspe region of quebec, and around Ontario. We passed through the Appalachians on the way to florida and quebec, with hills in the gaspe hitting 12 – 14 degrees (the steepest 15 degrees) and drove in adverse weather conditions. The airstream design, based on improved aerodynamics, low centre of gravity and solidity of construction, seems to match up very well with our car (an 2005 Infiniti Q45), which has also been designed with those same airstream principles, to provide a safe (and thus enjoyable) all round rv travel experience.
__________________
aimcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2013, 01:24 PM   #74
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,407
Images: 5
I am not advocating a PU. As long as the trailer specs conform to the auto manufacture's specs and recommendations, I'm fine with anything pulling anything.
__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2013, 02:56 PM   #75
Rivet Master
 
andreasduess's Avatar
 
1984 34' International
Toronto , Ontario
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,496
Images: 5
Blog Entries: 1
I think one of the points aimcom made is that the car manufacturer's specification look at the lowest common denominator, i.e. box trailer with no weight distribution, brake controller, etc.

If you'd believe everything the manufacturers say, we'd still be selling the Ford Pinto.
__________________
andreasduess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2013, 03:04 PM   #76
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,407
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by andreasduess View Post
I think one of the points aimcom made is that the car manufacturer's specification look at the lowest common denominator, i.e. box trailer with no weight distribution, brake controller, etc.

If you'd believe everything the manufacturers say, we'd still be selling the Ford Pinto.
And I maintain, from experience, no they don't look at lowest common demonitor. And yes product quality, materials, manufacturing processes, safety standards, etc have moved light years since those days....and so have the correlating specs. Not a valid argument, nor a reason to go any further beyond current specs on current product any more than a reason to go beyond old specs on an old products. Not a valid argument IMO.
__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2013, 06:04 PM   #77
1 Rivet Member
 
2013 30' International
etobicoke , Ontario
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Images: 1
the thing is...

my car is rated at 1000lbs. I imagine the infiniti engineers who calculated that number would be intrigued by my setup, which is just a tad heavier
__________________
aimcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2013, 06:08 PM   #78
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,407
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by aimcom View Post
my car is rated at 1000lbs. I imagine the infiniti engineers who calculated that number would be intrigued by my setup, which is just a tad heavier
I would guess that "intrigued" would not be the response, if your implication is received correctly by me.
__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2013, 02:18 AM   #79
1 Rivet Member
 
2013 30' International
etobicoke , Ontario
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Images: 1
no, actually i just mean "intrigued" in the most basic sense

because, i can't imagine they have airstreams and hensleys in japan.

on the other hand, if they saw our ever more super-sized pick-up trucks over here, towing these ungainly box trailers (that pretty much convert into full sized houses) down our highways and then watch as someone glides past in a tidy car/airstream combo...they'd cotton on pretty darn quick, after all -- improved aerodynamics, low centre of gravity, build quality -- these are fundamental design principles that the Japanese have been using for many years to successfully export their vehicles to us here in north america and around the world...and the beauty of comprehending design aesthetics is inherent in all of us.

In a bigger sense, I can't help but reflect how fortunate we are here in north america to be able to experience and enjoy nature's vast, open, pristine and "serene" beauty in all of it's glory. I'm sure our Japanese friends would really appreciate that also.

happy streaming everyone!
__________________
aimcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2013, 07:07 AM   #80
Rivet Master
 
Vintage Kin Owner
N/A , N/A
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 995
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by andreasduess View Post
I think one of the points aimcom made is that the car manufacturer's specification look at the lowest common denominator, i.e. box trailer with no weight distribution, brake controller, etc.

If you'd believe everything the manufacturers say, we'd still be selling the Ford Pinto.
This is incorrect. A quick call to your car manufacturer will verify this.
__________________
rostam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2013, 07:14 AM   #81
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,407
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by aimcom View Post
because, i can't imagine they have airstreams and hensleys in japan.

on the other hand, if they saw our ever more super-sized pick-up trucks over here, towing these ungainly box trailers (that pretty much convert into full sized houses) down our highways and then watch as someone glides past in a tidy car/airstream combo...they'd cotton on pretty darn quick, after all -- improved aerodynamics, low centre of gravity, build quality -- these are fundamental design principles that the Japanese have been using for many years to successfully export their vehicles to us here in north america and around the world...and the beauty of comprehending design aesthetics is inherent in all of us.

In a bigger sense, I can't help but reflect how fortunate we are here in north america to be able to experience and enjoy nature's vast, open, pristine and "serene" beauty in all of it's glory. I'm sure our Japanese friends would really appreciate that also.

happy streaming everyone!
Nissan of NA (as well as Toyota, Honda, et.al) Have products built for North America which have never nor will see Japan. They are specific for our market. As well, they have a rather large American field force who have seen everything you have...and more.
I interact with personnel from many other automakers quite often....their processes specs, etc are little different than the rest of us.
__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2013, 06:49 PM   #82
Top
Always learning
 
Top's Avatar
 
1972 29' Ambassador
1962 19' Globetrotter
1951 21' Flying Cloud
Central , Texas
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,779
Images: 24
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to Top
Towing with an old truck vs a modern SUV

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrUKToad View Post
A general question, does anyone know how a vehicle's GCWR is typically arrived at?
I have no idea how they come up with GCWR. It is something I'd like to understand, however.

What I can do is share with you my towing experience towing a 1972 Ambassador with both a 1970 Chevrolet C20 Custom Camper and a 2002 Toyota Sequoia SR5 2WD.

The '72 Ambassador weighs #5,710 with full propane tanks, full fresh water tank, empty holding tanks, loaded with the camping gear that is always in the trailer. No food or clothes.


My C20 has a 350/TH350 and 4.10 rear end ratio. It has both front and rear HD springs and front and rear stabilizers. It weighs #5,140 unloaded with me in it and full of fuel. Its GVWR is #7,500. FAWR is #2,700 RAWR is #5,200. I have no idea what its "tow rating" is and can't find it anywhere. I don't think it was something they published back then. I found this hard to read chart for the '69 model year on the net that shows the GCW as #10,250.
Click image for larger version

Name:	towratesized.jpg
Views:	65
Size:	29.5 KB
ID:	194257
I wasn't able to find one of these charts for 1970, but I don't think it would be any different.
So if I subtract the curb weight of the truck from the GCW I can tow/haul
10,250 GCW
- 5,140 Curb weight
= 5,110
So as you can see I'll be exceeding the GCW by #600 when towing my nearly empty '72 Ambassador with my 3/4T C20. I do tow with this combination occasionally. Mostly weekend trips around Texas usually by myself. I stay off the big roads and so far, everything is fine. The old drum brakes have to be regularly adjusted. It is not a comfortable tow compared to the Sequoia.

The '02 Sequoia has a 240HP V8 with an auto trans. It weighs #5,320 unloaded full of fuel with me in it.
Ratings-
GVWR #6,500
GCWR of #11,800
Max gross trailer weight #6,500
Max tongue weight #650
I use the Sequoia to tow the Ambassador with the whole family of five. Fully loaded this combo weighs #12,680. 880 pounds above the GCWR of the Sequoia. It is a great setup that I feel very comfortable with.

Along with Toyota publishing a GCWR of #11,800 in the owner's manual, they also state "Do not exceed 72 km/h (45 mph) or the posted speed limit, whichever is lower. Because instability (swaying) of a tow vehicle-trailer combination usually increases as the speed increases, exceeding 72 km/h (45 mph) may cause loss of control."

So, there you have it. '02 Sequoia owners may only tow at 45mph.

For the Airstreamer's out there that are very concerned with braking, I would recommend you install disc brakes with an ABS module on your trailer.
Happy Streamin"!
__________________
Lance

Work is never done, so take time to play!
Top is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2013, 06:52 PM   #83
Rivet Master
 
Melody Ranch's Avatar
 
1956 22' Flying Cloud
1953 32' Liner
1955 22' Safari
Valley View , Texas
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,960
Images: 78
Send a message via Skype™ to Melody Ranch
You Guys remind me of an old Air Force expression....something about a monkey having sexual relations with a football.
__________________
"If it can't be reduced, reused, repaired, rebuilt, refurbished, refinished, resold, recycled or composted
then it should be restricted, redesigned or removed from production."
Melody Ranch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2013, 09:26 PM   #84
Moderator
 
DKB_SATX's Avatar

 
2017 26' Flying Cloud
1976 Argosy 28
Alamo Heights , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,401
Images: 1
Blog Entries: 7
re: that chart for the C20: I'll bet that sucker would HOWL at 65 mph with a 4:57 diff and a 400THM! That's how GearVendors makes money.
__________________

__________________
— David

Zero Gravitas — 2017 Flying Cloud 26U | Il Progetto — 1976 Argosy 28 Center Bath | WBCCI# 15566

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. — Sir Winston Churchill
DKB_SATX is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.