Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-27-2003, 09:45 PM   #15
Moderator Emeritus
 
overlander64's Avatar
 
1964 26' Overlander
1978 Argosy Minuet 6.0 Metre
Anna , Illinois
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,396
Images: 183
Send a message via Yahoo to overlander64
speaking of towing with a car...

Greetings 59Toaster!

I have used the Reese Dual Cam Sway Control with my '64 Overlander for over 8 years and am completely satisfied with the setup. In over 50,000 miles of towing, I have encountered numerous semis thundering by as well as strong, gusty cross-winds and heavy thunderstorms with absolute stability.

The only issue that I can see that might impact your plan is with the spring bars. The spring bars utilized with the Dual Cam System and the regular Spring Bars aren't exactly the same - - the bars yes, but not the chains. When the Dual Cam System is installed on you coach, the chains on the spring bars are replaced with saddles that ride in the Dual Cam levers - - the chains are "permanently" mounted on the trailer via the Dual Cam levers.

Kevin
__________________

__________________
Kevin D. Allen
WBCCI (Lifetime Member)/VAC/Free Wheelers #6359
AIR #827
1964 Overlander International/1999 GMC K2500 Suburban (7400 VORTEC/4.11 Differentials)
1978 Argosy Minuet 6.0 Metre/1975 Cadillac Eldorado Convertible (8.2 Liter V8/2.70 Final Drive)
overlander64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2003, 10:17 PM   #16
Rivet Master
 
59toaster's Avatar
 
1959 22' Caravanner
Atlanta , Georgia
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,197
Images: 22
Ahhh ok then I need to figure out what parts I have. I have paper work for dual cams. I have reese Bars, I have a Reese friction sway. The draw bar is missing. We had a nice fun ride home with my standard 2 inch draw bar. We are going back to look for the draw bar one more time but I'm beginning to think my Fater-in-law may have left it in the receiver and somebody stole it. The bars were in the camper and the sway control in the van.
I'm still trying to find my tow rig so I'll do some more research before I buy. I know I want the second trailer and trying to figure out what I can get that is going to work with both so I don't have to shell out another $300 for hitch gear.
Thanks.


Now that I have totaly hijacked this guys post I did some research I had confused my old buicks. Regal is the same body they made Grand nationals out of. THose do have full frames. Some were available with a V8. I'd still be leary of the weight but it is a better platform for towing than a unit body car. Still not sure I would atempt to use it for a tow vehicl for that size of a trailer. Bambi...Yeah but a Bamby is a LOT lighter then the over 20ft trailers. My concern would be the beating the transmission would take. The V8 bas gear would be something around a 3.08. GM did some weird stuff in that time frame as well. They were sticking a 270 something gears in 4wd full size blazers and trucks around then trying to MPG up. They may have pulled the same stunts with cars. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a 2.70 in that car. I sure wouldn't attempt to pull that sort of weight with that low of gear. They would have to lock it into 2nd to get anywhere in a head wind. Those years of v8's were the not so hot 305 that was very prone to cracking heads.
__________________

__________________
1959 22' Caravanner
1988 R20 454 Suburban.
Atlanta, GA
59toaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 04:04 AM   #17
3 Rivet Member
 
68 Suburban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 104
Quote:
Originally posted by 59toaster
I'm pretty sure a 85 Regal was a front drive with a 3.8 liter motor.
I don't know if someone else corrected this later in this post, but the 85 Regal was a rear wheel drive car. They were rear wheel drive until 87. How about a Grand National Regal to tow that rig
__________________
Here is the link to Dingo's trailer:
1968 Avion T-22
68 Suburban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 10:18 AM   #18
Rivet Master
 
59toaster's Avatar
 
1959 22' Caravanner
Atlanta , Georgia
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,197
Images: 22
Quote:
Originally posted by 68 Suburban
I don't know if someone else corrected this later in this post, but the 85 Regal was a rear wheel drive car. They were rear wheel drive until 87. How about a Grand National Regal to tow that rig
Owners manual on the Grandnat, GTA, Typhoon, Cyclone, GNX all said NO TOWING. Cyclone and Typhoon had an amazing max cargo rating of 500lb ( four 200lb adults were in excess of it's max LOL ). I had friends that owned all of those but the Typhoon. The Grand nat my buddy owned was poping low 12 consistantly on the stock turbo. He was a Turbo swap away from being a GNX clone and he would have been in the 11's. Then a woman blew a stop sign and totaled it out.
__________________
1959 22' Caravanner
1988 R20 454 Suburban.
Atlanta, GA
59toaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 10:33 AM   #19
Patriotic
 
Chuck's Avatar

 
1973 23' Safari
North of Boston , Massachusetts
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,533
Images: 260
I know that this 85 buick in question is a rear-drive full-frame car. Father-in-law is the type that thinks anything invented after 1960 is "crap". even though this car was made after that date, it uses technology that goes back to the '40's, so its ok. I wasn't suggesting that the in-laws tow with their current buick(but I suppose if you subscribe to the "intrepid/can-am" school of thought, it might do it ). Its just an illustration of the "type" of car that my folks prefer, that's all. I'm thinking I can convince them to get their own tow vehicle, if we can find one thats "like" what they have now. (old, cheap, boxy, rolling couch-type american sedan/boat that gets poor gas mileage, needs frequent repairs, has drum brakes so it doesn't stop well, no antilocks so it goes out of control on ice, a carberuator so it doesn't run real efficiently or start reliably and is prone to flooding....you know, like they made 'em in the old days!).
__________________
Chuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 11:51 AM   #20
Rivet Master
 
Road Ruler's Avatar
 
Currently Looking...
St. Catharines , South Western Ontario
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,364
Images: 39
Quote:
Originally posted by 68 Suburban
How about a Grand National Regal to tow that rig
A Grand National

Now that gets my heart rate up! I was following one last summer and the guy let it go through the gears. Made my day to see one in action.

Since I am a fan of small powerplants I made some inquiries about small turbo engines for towing. The problem is that when towing the turbo would stay on much longer than it should be. The risk is burning the exhaust valves.
A buddy had a turbo 4 cyl Chrysler Le Baron years ago. Towed his boat on a long highway drive with a headwind at night. When he stopped for gas and check the oil level he noticed the turbo was glowing ( red hot ). It was cooked! The turbo was working all the time and that is not what they are designed to do at a passenger car level.
__________________
Airstreams..... The best towing trailers on the planet!
Road Ruler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 12:12 PM   #21
Rivet Master
 
59toaster's Avatar
 
1959 22' Caravanner
Atlanta , Georgia
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,197
Images: 22
Quote:
Originally posted by chuck
I know that this 85 buick in question is a rear-drive full-frame car. Father-in-law is the type that thinks anything invented after 1960 is "crap". even though this car was made after that date, it uses technology that goes back to the '40's, so its ok. I wasn't suggesting that the in-laws tow with their current buick(but I suppose if you subscribe to the "intrepid/can-am" school of thought, it might do it ). Its just an illustration of the "type" of car that my folks prefer, that's all. I'm thinking I can convince them to get their own tow vehicle, if we can find one thats "like" what they have now. (old, cheap, boxy, rolling couch-type american sedan/boat that gets poor gas mileage, needs frequent repairs, has drum brakes so it doesn't stop well, no antilocks so it goes out of control on ice, a carberuator so it doesn't run real efficiently or start reliably and is prone to flooding....you know, like they made 'em in the old days!).
ahahahaha Sounds like my kind of guy!
The one technologicaly advance car in my stable is the one giving me the most fits right now. It's a 1989 Toyota Supra. Lets see...Diff went and I'm trying to find a used one for less then $300 to my door, the switch in the lock on the door for the alarms systems is bad and 1 out of 5 times I unlock the car the alarm goes off, cracked fog light lens and you can't buy just the lens anymore you have to buy the assembly at $200, Just replaced the rear wheel bearings at $240 just for the PARTS then took the better part of the day to dissassemble the suspension haul the hub assemblies over to my buds that has a 30 ton press to install them then put the car back together.
My wifes 79 Blazer and my 75 Jimmy are dead reliable. When they do break down it's what we call a 35er. Give me $35 so I can go to the parts store and get a part. It's no joke either. I haven't done a repair on either of those vehicles in years that cost me more then that for a single part. New Master cylinders are $22, Loaded calipers are $17, I did do one but it was a pair. Rotors were beyond turning so I had to replace them, $32 each. LOL.
Sorry Technology equals more to break and harder to figure out what broke in the first place. I doubt I'll ever buy another vehicle newer then early 90's The first thing I will do when I buy the right 89-91 Burb is unplug the ABS. GM really fouled the ABS up. It's single channel so if ONE wheel looses traction it realeases ALL wheels till that one wheel is spinning again. My 95 company service van has twice almost got me into accidents with that. I had a rear wheel slip on some loose stuff near a curb. It tripped the ABS and just about had me roll through the intersection I was approching. If the ABS had not been on the vehicle it would have stopped in 10 ft if it didn't have ABS. It took me 30 when that happened. There are a BUNCH of lawsuits over this.
__________________
1959 22' Caravanner
1988 R20 454 Suburban.
Atlanta, GA
59toaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 01:09 PM   #22
Patriotic
 
Chuck's Avatar

 
1973 23' Safari
North of Boston , Massachusetts
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,533
Images: 260
you know, I think there was a rough period from the late 70's till the early 90's that American manufacturers went through. Took them a while to figure out how to go "high-tech". The last couple of vehicles that I had (and got a chance to put any serious mileage on) were pretty much trouble-free, most notable the 94 Taurus. We put 150k miles on it, bought one set of tires, did the brakes once. (it was "high-way miles"). Oh, I did have to replace the oil pan...that cost a few bucks. other than that...turn the key and it starts, step on the gas and it goes.
__________________
Chuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 02:04 PM   #23
Aluminut
 
Silvertwinkie's Avatar
 
2004 25' Safari
. , Illinois
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,334
Wayne F--

"If a V8 is a must how about a 90's Impala SS."

Bite your tongue man! :-)

I have an '96 Impala SS and it would be a crime to saddle old Haus up..... Kind of like doing it to a Mustang, Corvette, etc! I know because I bought one new with that in mind and when it came time to install the hitch, I just could not bring myself to do it! Had the hitch in my hands looking right at the car..........

So I bought a used '96 Caprice (same Vette LT1 engine/trans, trans coolers,- different wheels, gears, suspention and trim level) as well and saddled it up. The mechanical fan (H08 option) on the '96 Caprice is far better for towing and was not an option on the '96 Impala SS.

I will say this, both cars have gobs of horsepower and torque!

The B-Body is my ride of choice and has been for over 15 years. I am a total B-body car nut! :-)

By the way addressing the comment about the technology in the B-Body (like the Buick wagon). I also have a 1980 Olds Delta 88. Funny thing is that the undercarrige is so similar that most of the factory holes in the frame are almost 100% identical on my '96s. So I would not doubt that there is a vast amount of stuff that has moved up the line over the decades!

Not much going up the line now anymore since they killed the B-Body cars in '96. A tradgic mistake if you ask me. The B was one of the most well engineered, most reliable cars ever made. Cops, taxis beat them up very hard, and they just kept coming back. My '80 still runs like a top with 170,000 miles on it. However in about 10 more years, there won't be a body left on it! ;-)

Regards,

Eric
__________________
Silvertwinkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2003, 02:26 PM   #24
Aluminut
 
Silvertwinkie's Avatar
 
2004 25' Safari
. , Illinois
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,334
Quote:
Originally posted by 59toaster


Impalla SS, Roadmaster, Caprice in the early 90's are all essetially the same car. The SS got the LT1 performace version. The Caprice got a varaity of engines and could for the most part be ordered as a SS without SS badging and paint and the motor a little detuned. Same with the Roadmasters. For some reasons the Buicks more often then not did get the Tunedport LT1 that was a little detuned like the Caprice. They don't call it GENERAL motors for nothing LOL Lots of badge enginering. The problem with the SS is the Tranny. GM put a high stall converter in those cars. Great for performance but that makes heat and towing may lower the life expecatancy of the transmission.
Not entirely true. The cars are very similar and do whore out parts among each car in the B-body lineup, however some of the info is not correct.

The Roadmaster, SS, Caprice and Cadillac Fleetwood all have a 1,400 to 1,600 (depending on engine torque output) stall converter. I don't think that this is a high stall converter. I also belong to the Impalassform and most of the people there also consider the 1400 stall very, very low. Most consider 2000 and above high and unsuitable for pulling. Moreover, you don't pull in overdrive anyway due to the lower RPM band that causes the converter to not lock up and that is where the heat is that can kill any trans.

Also the paint codes and colors were used on all models.

The LT1 engine in all B-Body cars (Roadmaster, Caprice, Impala, Fleetwood) that had the LT1 are 100% the same, unless you got a Caprice, Roadmaster or Fleetwood with the HO8 (heavy duty cooling option) that included the mechanical fan instead of the dual eletric fans-- but that is the ONLY difference. The H08 mechanical fan was not an option in the Impala SS. If the LT1 was placed in ANY B-Body it was the absolute same with iron heads and was a bit detuned compared to the "F" body LT1 that was placed in the Camaro and Firebird and used aluminum heads and a few other slight mods compared to the LT1 that was placed into a B-body vehicle.

If you got the H08 option, the car was rated at 250hp compared to the 260hp since the mechanical fan took 10hp to drive.

By the way I qualify my remarks because I am a total B-Body a holic and have pulled with my '96 Caprice (LT1 with the 1400 stall converter) now for about 7 years and have owned B-body cars since 1988. Further data on the LT1 B-body line can be obtained from:

theherd.com

or

impalassforum.com

Kevin, the station wagon LT1 powered Caprice/Roadmaster and Caddy were rumored to be able to pull "around" 7,000lbs if they got the HO8 option. The H08 is in essence the only item that made up the trailer package. They used the same LT1 engine and all had same trans coolers. The Impala was rated at only 2500lbs, and that could have been due to the dual electric fans and possibly the soft aluminum 5 spoke rims.

The Caprice and Roadmaster sedans were rated at 5000lbs pulling capacity with the H08 cooling package. The Caprice came with 3.08 or smaller gears and in most cases the Roadmaster came with 2.93 gears or less. All Impala SSs came with 3.08 gears. Most people that I talk with do pull and have pulled over 5,000lbs cross country with the Impala and the Caprice LT1 without issue. I think Caddy and the wagons have more metal in the rear making it more rigid (but don't quote me on that one). I plan on upgrading my rear gears to 3.42s or 3.73s and also upgrading my factory LT1 trans cooler (that all LT1s got) from the 14,000lb rating to a B & M with a rating in the 20,000lb+ range since the stock trans cooler is mounted behind the bumper and does not have a direct shot at the passing air. I have also changed the thermostat to the Hypertech 160* stat and the car's coolant does not get warmer than 175* in summer pulling 5,000lbs.

Now if I could only get better than 12mpg pulling! :-)

Regards,

Eric
__________________
Silvertwinkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2003, 08:23 AM   #25
Rivet Master
 
Road Ruler's Avatar
 
Currently Looking...
St. Catharines , South Western Ontario
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,364
Images: 39
Quote:
Originally posted by Silvertwinkie
Wayne F--

"If a V8 is a must how about a 90's Impala SS."

Bite your tongue man! :-)

I have an '96 Impala SS and it would be a crime to saddle old Haus up..... Kind of like doing it to a Mustang, Corvette, etc! I know because I bought one new with that in mind and when it came time to install the hitch, I just could not bring myself to do it! Had the hitch in my hands looking right at the car..........


Eric
Eric....you are so right. The delema of taking a "special" car and putting it under stress is a deed that I wrestle with all the time.
Although if money was no object think of the fun we could have.
I was brought up in St.Catharines, Ontario, a big GM town. The talk of "B-body" etc terminology is common place. If I could own 10 cars, an Impala SS would be one of them. Hard for me to say because I like a smaller car, but GM got the SS right! Oh....I also like the 1964 GTO with the 389 & triple carbs.
__________________
Airstreams..... The best towing trailers on the planet!
Road Ruler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2003, 09:51 AM   #26
Aluminut
 
Silvertwinkie's Avatar
 
2004 25' Safari
. , Illinois
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,334
Wayne,

That 64 "Goat" was a very sweet ride. I too wish I had the real estate to store more cars, but the SS sits in the garage with 4,700 miles on it and it gets the total pamper treatment. Some people tell me I'm nuts and they could be right. But when you have the car bug and you do what I do, you don't do it for the money and you don't do it as an investment. Just seeing it in the garage with the cover off, with those big meaty tires, knowing what is under the hood, as the paint just gleams and sparkles in the light simply feeds my soul! You could eat off the engine block and swear the car just came off the assembly line yesterday. Heck, she's still got the total new car smell too!

The '96 Caprice is the one I have a ton of fun modding out, I've spent countless hours doing performance upgrades to it since it is almost exactly like the SS. Heck, I've even done some cosmetic "SS" upgrades too. Being that the car is the Dark Cherry Metallic, it always gets people confused. They always say man I wish I had that SS....and if the roles were reversed, I'd be saying the same thing to them! :-)

GM is notorious for just getting it right and killing it. The list goes well beyond the B-Body/ Impala SS. The thing that really has me peaved is that GM is bringing back the SS designations with front wheel drive and a V6 (Impala SS, Monte Carlo SS-- remember the "quad-4 442?). That is very painful to see being such a car enthusist.

On a side note, someone on the Impalassfourm said Mercury nixed the Maruauder. They said it was in the newest MotorTrend. This car was a total Impala SS rip off that went bad mostly because the car was priced at about $34k (far higher than any cost of inflation between the $24k Impala SS over about 6 years), had less power with the 4.6. In 3 years, Chevy sold over 60k Impala SSs alone from word of mouth with "1" printed ad and the pre-production auto show circuit.

Now to keep this A/S related, I think I would have saddled up a Marauder if I were ever to loose my mind and buy a Ford. Even with the 4.6, it could have hauled something. ;-)

Regards,

Eric
__________________
Silvertwinkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2003, 10:45 AM   #27
Rivet Master
 
Road Ruler's Avatar
 
Currently Looking...
St. Catharines , South Western Ontario
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,364
Images: 39
Quote:
Originally posted by Silvertwinkie
Wayne,

GM is notorious for just getting it right and killing it.
Eric
Amen!! Bring us back the 63, 427 Corvette.

cheers... wayne
__________________
Airstreams..... The best towing trailers on the planet!
Road Ruler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2003, 10:49 AM   #28
Aluminut
 
Silvertwinkie's Avatar
 
2004 25' Safari
. , Illinois
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,334
Quote:
Originally posted by Wayne F


Amen!! Bring us back the 63, 427 Corvette.

cheers... wayne
Man, do not get me started. I love that car too! Was that the year with the 2 piece rear window?

Eric
__________________

__________________
Silvertwinkie is offline   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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another towing question ipso_facto Our Community 34 08-28-2010 04:47 PM
Some towing Q & A for newbies femuse Towing, Tow Vehicles & Hitches 3 08-24-2004 09:05 AM
Just found-great towing guide! maxandgeorgia Towing, Tow Vehicles & Hitches 0 03-21-2004 09:19 PM
Airbags and Towing with Car mcostanzo Tow Vehicles 0 07-02-2003 03:40 PM
towing a car or trailer tom c Airstream Motorhome Forums 8 04-17-2002 10:01 AM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:00 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.