speaking of towing with a car...

[Silvertwinkie]

Ouch! That's even worse!

Math was never one of my best subjects!


Thanks for the clarification!

Eric

[Pick]

After you folks get your car all set up to tow that 34 Limited, give it a test run down I77 through West Virginia in a rain storm, and report back to us. If you survive.

[Chuck]

keep listening to advice about towing a 34' AS with something like a Honda Civic, and soon you will be talking about your late in-laws !!!! Make sure they are well unsured.

Hmmm....you raise an interesting perspective.....

That might not bode well for my trailer, though. Oh, well. there's an old joke:

"definition of "mixed feelings": your mother in law driving over a cliff...............in your mercedes". DOH! (we can substitute A/S for the Mercedes here...)


Seriously, though....my original question was for a "suitable" car that would pull my moderately sized trailer safely .

I looked back over the thread and I guess I also forgot to add: is there an index or database out there that lists the tow-ratings of cars? all you can find on manufacturers sites is info on what they're currently selling; not on what they used to sell. I'd like to be able to compile a list of all the cars that are capable, and otherwise suit their needs, then present those choices to the I-L's.

[femuse]

I don't want to sound to redundant, Chuck, but (I wil l!!!)

Being able to pull is not the same as handle & stop

Mike used to be a mechanic, and I think he has a better technical grasp of that than I do: he explained it to me that way:

A lot of people will tell you that the trailer brakes alone should stop it. should is the word. Reality is something a lot of people seem to want to ignore:

When the brakes are cold, say you just start, somebody at an intersection goes through a red light in the rain, any case where you have to make a hard stop in an emergency, there is a good chance you will overshoot your stop.
Second: let's say in the mountain, let's say I-77, then East on I-64, your brakes get warm and they will fade.

These are only 2 of the many cases were you want to make sure your tow vehicle can take over in stopping the trailer.

Don't forget, you have this 3 to 5 tons "silver suppository" ready to rear end you...... If this happen, that wont be a pretty sight.


Chantal

& Mike (his motto: better safe than sorry....or is it sore butt ?)

[Chuck]

Being able to pull is not the same as handle & stop

I understand that. and that's just what I mean by "suitable", and "safely"....both for pulling, AND stopping. Is there such a car on the road today capable of handling a 5500lb (gvw) trailer? seems like from the responses here, the answer is yes, unless I'm misunderstanding.

There are a few pictures of tow vehicles in my 73 owner's manual; all cars. they don't even mention the word "truck", and I don't think anyone had yet coined the term "SUV". Were those "cars" not rated to handle the weight? (did they have "tow ratings" back then?). I'm just looking for a modern-day equivalent. Actually, there probably isn't a current equivalent, because Detroit can't legally sell anything like that without it being classified as a "truck"....but you know...a few years old is actually preferable in this case, both for $$$ concerns, as well as the fact that we probably have to go back at least a few years to find such a vehicle. At the same time, such vintage vehicles (mid 80's to early 90's) are still readily available on the used market.

[RoadKingMoe]

Cars are not engineered the way they used to be, with full, heavy frames that had a lot of inherent strength regardless of what you did to them.

They are now unit-body construction made with lightweight sheet metal engineered to provide strength for specific purposes in specific directions. While reduced body and chassis flex may be an issue from both a handling and durability standpoint, one of the primary issues is structural integrity of the passenger compartment, and controlled crush of other areas, from varying impacts in different directions.

A goal for any vehicle with an EPA fuel mileage sticker is its contribution to Corporate Average Fuel Economy. To allow for sales of the popular, larger SUVs, those which have replaced the big old station wagon of the past, cars have to be engineered to get even better mileage to make up for SUV sales. There's no point in adding weight for reinforcement for adding a hitch for towing, when a fraction of one percent of cars or minivans will see tow duty, especially of more than perhaps a jet ski or two.

Even the Ford Crown Vic is down to a tow rating of 1500 lbs. I often wonder if it's due to a lighter rear end, and that might be at least partially to blame for fuel tank fires in a rear-end accident. Was it too attractive because of the number of units sold for fleet duty? Did they go too far to improve its mileage?

The truck, and now the SUV, has taken the place of the big V-8 cars and station wagons capable of towing a larger trailer like an Airstream. That's just the way it is these days.

[Silvertwinkie]

Chuck,

From my own personal exp, get a B-Body car from GM.

Chevy Caprice Classic (Sedan/Wagon)
Chevy Impala SS (hurts to put a hitch on such a beast)
Buick Roadmaster (Sedan or Wagon)
Cadillac Fleetwood (D-Body car)

Find one with an LT1 engine (plenty out there for under $10k) and the H08 option code (except Impala SS, not availible). That code is heavy duty cooling and will have a mechanical fan primary and electric fan secondary.

All LT1s have a trans cooler. All cars, even the Impala will pull between 5500 and 6500 lbs even though Chevy will not openly say the Impala will pull more than 2500lbs, it does. The rest are factory rated between 5000 (sedan) and I think the 6500-7000 range (wagon and Fleetwood).

You can also go Ford with the Crown Vic or the Mercury equiv, but the Chevy has more horses and torque than both, even in the Marauder package. The LT1 pulls like a beast and can stop on a dime (with your 2 1/2 tons behind you).

These options are some of the least expensive options around. You can go SUV or truck too, but most will cost a bit more since they are holding thier values better and cost more when new.

Regards,

Eric

[Chitown AirStreamers]

O'kay O'kay O'kay!!!This whole subject has my head spinning!! We just brought home our 66AS with my buddies truck(02chevy w/the tow/haul mode)AWESOME! I really don't want to sink money into my 96 ImpalaSS(20,000 miles) so that it will be okay to tow with. What am I looking at to upgrade the Impala to tow 4,000 + lbs.???? I may sell her to buy a truck! Still debating.........

[Silvertwinkie]

There is very little you need to put into the Impala SS to be able to tow up to 5000lbs (besides a hitch and brake controller).

Here are just a few of the mods I made (none of which are required, but me being a bit excessive compulsive...well you know where I'm going....):

160 degree thermostat- $20
Trans pan upgrade- $80
Switch to Mobil 1- $23
Switch to UPF-52 Oil filter- $6
Added a torque converter "ram air" shroud- $60

Fun having my LT1 on vacation- Priceless

Sorry, I couldn't pass that up....

The SS has 3.08 gears although better than the 2.93 I have currently, 3.42s or 3.73 would be better. HOWEVER, the factory 3.08s will do just fine!

If I had the $$$ with 25k miles on the ODO (depending on the color), I'd take your SS in a second to tow my Bambi and be my new daily driver. My Caprice has 70k on it right now.

Eric

[59toaster]

Originally posted by Silvertwinkie
There is very little you need to put into the Impala SS to be able to tow up to 5000lbs (besides a hitch and brake controller).

Here are just a few of the mods I made (none of which are required, but me being a bit excessive compulsive...well you know where I'm going....):

160 degree thermostat- $20
Trans pan upgrade- $80
Switch to Mobil 1- $23
Switch to UPF-52 Oil filter- $6
Added a torque converter "ram air" shroud- $60

Fun having my LT1 on vacation- Priceless

Sorry, I couldn't pass that up....

The SS has 3.08 gears although better than the 2.93 I have currently, 3.42s or 3.73 would be better. HOWEVER, the factory 3.08s will do just fine!

If I had the $$$ with 25k miles on the ODO (depending on the color), I'd take your SS in a second to tow my Bambi and be my new daily driver. My Caprice has 70k on it right now.

Eric

Unless you have a custom tailored chip in the ECM you need to put a 195degree thermostat back into your car. It will play hell with the ECM to have that low of thermostat and you may actuall cause a overheating problem. the 195 regulates the coolant floow and you can and I have seen this happen several times flow the water too fast and not alow enough time for heat transfer. The other problem is the car may go back into open loop if it's running too cool and start getting lousy millage and fouling the spark plugs.

[Silvertwinkie]

Toaster,

Not true at all. With the 160 stat instaled the car goes into closed loop at 147 degrees and never even in the coldest of Chicago winters of well below zero has it once gone back into open loop. The cars have a PCM will adjust fuel to air ratios without any problems. I have had this mod now for almost a year and there have been zero issues with it. Additionally, hundreds of members of The Herd and Impalassforum have had this mod in place for years now with no ill effects whatsoever.

All this is with a stock GM PCM with no mods done to it. A modded out PCM program will yield even greater performance.

The LT1 cools the head first. GM called it reverse cooling since in prev designs the heads were cooled last. Racing water and all the problems associated with pre LT1 small blocks are not an issue here.

As a matter of fact, the person who modifies the PCM, Bryan Herter (pcmforless.com), suggests the 160 degree stat and the LT4 ESC.

I have also bypassed the coolant that flowed through the throttle body. There were those that said in the cold winters the throttle body would get ice, frost and bind etc. Never happened either. Cooler I admit can be bad in some cases if not done correctly, however on the LT1, it's a whole different beast than the legacey small blocks that came before it.

Eric

[59toaster]

Originally posted by Silvertwinkie
Toaster,

Not true at all. With the 160 stat instaled the car goes into closed loop at 147 degrees and never even in the coldest of Chicago winters of well below zero has it once gone back into open loop. The cars have a PCM will adjust fuel to air ratios without any problems. I have had this mod now for almost a year and there have been zero issues with it. Additionally, hundreds of members of The Herd and Impalassforum have had this mod in place for years now with no ill effects whatsoever.

All this is with a stock GM PCM with no mods done to it. A modded out PCM program will yield even greater performance.

The LT1 cools the head first. GM called it reverse cooling since in prev designs the heads were cooled last. Racing water and all the problems associated with pre LT1 small blocks are not an issue here.

As a matter of fact, the person who modifies the PCM, Bryan Herter (pcmforless.com), suggests the 160 degree stat and the LT4 ESC.

I have also bypassed the coolant that flowed through the throttle body. There were those that said in the cold winters the throttle body would get ice, frost and bind etc. Never happened either. Cooler I admit can be bad in some cases if not done correctly, however on the LT1, it's a whole different beast than the legacey small blocks that came before it.

Eric

Learn something new every day. Temp switch must be lower in the LT1's. It plays hell with pre Votech 350's and 454's to run that low of stat in them.

I'm tinkering with the 454 in the burb right now. Locked out the preheat deal in the air cleaner. Looking at bypassing the TBI coolant passage as well. Glad to hear your not having problems with that up north. I should be able to get awya with that year round down here.

Looking into the TBI riser plate to increase the torque that Turbocity sells. Trying to talk the local Dyno into working with me on a Tow rig write up I have in the works for www.CK5.com Goin to pull out the old restrictive bead style converter and replace it with a free flowing honeycomb style. Trying to get the MPG up to 14 hwy unloaded and see what sort of gains a few of these mods will make. Need to get a Base line dyno run down so I can see what I really gain. Then pull the cat and replace it with some straight pipe and see how much HP the cat was sucking up. Then see how much it makes with the new cat.

I hope to get 14mpg out of the old gal and get it over 400lbft of torque at around 2,000rpm. Stock it's rated 385 at 1900 so I should be able to do it without hurting the driveablility and reliablility with just some TBI and Exhaust tweeking.

I'm told even with the factory 3 inch exhaust it came with that the muffler is also restrictive and necks down to 2.25 ID inside. So going to see about swaping that as well. Just trying to find a quite free flowing 3inch muffler right now. I guess I'm getting old and can't handle the noise now LOL.

After I get the upgrades done I may run it back by Ira's house and let him take it for a ride. He tickled me to death when he took me for a ride in it. He layed the hammer down in it a couple times. He's a very reserved gentleman and didn't expect him to lay into the skinny peddle that hard LOL.

[Silvertwinkie]

You know, I am not sure on this, but if you have the beaded converter on that, I used to have a similar GM one on my '80 Olds w/307. There should be a half dollar sized plate under there. What I did was opened the plate up, evacuated all the ceramic beads in the converter so in essence is became hollow and replaced the opening with a GM part that was a direct replacement for the half dollar sized opening.

In GM land, things are frightenly similar.

The LT1 dual exhaust that came with the car, has the same issue with the mufflers. Instead of finding a muffler combo I liked and then have to hack into the existing 2.25 (non- mandrel bent) factory pipes, I just bought the ATR quad cat-back system (really stainless steel down to the clamps compared to the factory psydo stainless mixures). Totally free flowing without being obnoxious (I'm getting a bit older and the raspy sounds are not as much a turn on as they used to be).

At any rate, if you have the plug on the bottom of the converter, give that a try. I did not get any better MPG, but the response went up (of course that is seat of pants talking). By the way, the car still passed the tail pipe emssions test here without the beads in the converter. I just drove it on the highway to the testing center, it got to temp and pass, pass, pass for several years. Even when they looked under with the mirror, looked stock because it was! Made me wonder why the darn converter was even on there really. Years later, I put duals on it and added one honeycomb converter per side. Still got a kick out of the emissions test with the beads gone though.....

Eric