Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-10-2013, 12:47 PM   #29
Rivet Master
 
2005 19' Safari
GLENDALE , AZ
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,440
What is the towing capacity of the Chrysler 300? Not knowing exactly which year or model you have, an Internet search seems to indicate a towing capacity of between 1,000 and 2,000 pounds, depending on the information source.

Since a 25-foot Flying Cloud probably weighs between 5,600 and 7,300 pounds (per specs), what modifications do you plan to accommodate the extra weight?

On the surface, the Chrysler 300 doesn't look like a good candidate for a tow vehicle.

Just wondering...
__________________

__________________
Phoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 01:03 PM   #30
Rivet Master
 
switz's Avatar

 
2014 31' Classic
2015 23' International
2013 25' FB International
Apache Junction , Arizona
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,799
Images: 8
I agree, the EU car/suv/sav brakes are designed to bring the specific vehicle at maximum load from maximum speed without a trailer to a safe stop. There was NO trailer in the equation or design at all.

The reason non-US trailers, especially EU trailers, are lighter is very simple. When they saw the cheaper, bigger and heavier trailers thinking of coming from the US with electric brakes and weight distribution hitches, the local chaps did not want to loose their gravy train and huge profits. They got legislation passed banning both electric brakes and weight distribution hitches. Simple solution to stifle competition. The EU trailers are much lighter and typically have tongue weights sub 400 pounds and surge brakes. Check out the UK Airstream website:

Overview - Airstream & Company

Thus no EU car makes have had to design their vehicles to support electric brakes and have support for heavier hitch loads and weight distribution hitches. What hitches that exist as an option are not up to the task of over 500 pound loads let alone the stress on the mounting points of a weight distribution hitch. A US person gets to spend a lot of time and money getting the light duty hitch reinforced for heavy duty loads the rest of the car was not designed to handle.

Since the EU cars are designed to their specifications in the EU and are modified with different emissions, brake lights and other small details to come to the US, they have no experience with heavy RV trailers and do not design for that reality.

How to tell if this is true. Was an auxiliary transmission cooler required to tow as the transmission overheated? Were different profile and load rated tires and perhaps wheels have to be installed to tow? The suspension components were not designed to support the higher side and braking loads imposed by the leverage and weight of the trailer.

Did the usual fuel mileage fall off? The drop in fuel milage results from the entire driveline having to work harder to move a car and trailer which exceeds the posted GVW of the car alone plus the additional frontal area wind resistance.

Thus the higher stresses of greater power generation on a continuous basis puts the engine under more stress and wear, the transmission was not rated or designed for this application so it wears out seals and bands, the differential(s), u-joints, suspension components are all under higher stress both accelerating, cruising and decelerating due to the increases in mass and weight.

There are safe design limits for aircraft that include weight, speed, and orientation in flight. These limits are fully detailed in the operations manual and a pilot must know these limits before operation of the aircraft and observe them during flight.

Cars and trucks acre designed with speed ratings, weight ratings and some with tow ratings. Also in the specifications are axle ratings, tire and wheel sizes and the number of legal seats.

Both the aircraft and vehicle will work optimally when within these specifications. Exceeding the numbers in an aircraft (or too slow) can have unfortunate results.

I wonder how folks think they can exceed the design parameters of a surface vehicle safely and attempt to do things with the vehicle for which it was not designed? Perhaps they are engineers and have access to the detailed drawings and component specifications of every part in the vehicle and have calculated which components have a safety margin they can exceed before it breaks.....
__________________

__________________
WBCCI Life Member 5123, AIR 70341, 4CU, WD9EMC

TV - 2012 Dodge 2500 4x4 Cummins HO, automatic, Centramatics, Kelderman level ride airbag suspension, bed shell

2014 31' Classic model 30 twin beds, 50 amp service, 900 watt solar system, Centramatics, Dill TPMS, disc brakes, 16" tires & wheels
switz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 01:10 PM   #31
3 Rivet Member
 
Pileus's Avatar
 
1985 31' Excella
Seguin , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 113
Images: 9
Adequate brakes

Don't expect your tow vehicle to be able to stop a fully loaded trailer using your tow vehicle's brakes alone. In an emergency situation, if the trailer brakes fail you could jackknife the trailer unless stopping in a perfectly straight line. A couple of years ago I made the mistake of borrowing my brother's lowboy trailer to haul about 9 yards of compost. The trailer did not have brakes. I drove slowly, about 35 mph. When I came to the first intersection on the way home, the light turned red. I hit the brakes. My F150 locked all four wheels and the load pushed me through the intersection burning 4 strips of rubber from my locked wheels. After that lesson, I will never again assume any vehicle can stop a heavily-loaded tow trailer on its own.

Drive safely!
__________________
Pileus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 01:27 PM   #32
Rivet Master
 
Vintage Kin Owner
N/A , N/A
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 995
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill M. View Post
I assume we have all read the comparison between towing a 34' Airstream with a Chrysler 300 and a Dodge 2500 in the winter 2013 Airstream life? Actual tests of stopping distance and speed through slalom course. Plus a lot of discussion about payload. The author of the article rates the Chrysler 300 as a better tow for the 34' than a Dodge 2500.

Me, I am keeping my Dodge 2500. And if I need to carry something heavy I put it in the back of the truck or the front of the trailer. I rebuilt the drawer under the gaucho so my wife would not break to the bottom with coke, water, tea, and other liquids where she wants to carry them.
A Chrysler 300 is rated to tow 1000#. A 34 ft Airstream weighs about 6000# to 7000#, loaded. Its impossible for Chrysler 300 (in its stock form) to tow such a trailer. I suspect the Chrysler was modified, which brings me to my point:

It is meaningless to compare a modified Chrysler 300 with a stock Ram 2500. I could modify Ram 2500, compare it to a stock Chrysler 300, and get a Completely different results.
__________________
rostam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 01:32 PM   #33
Rivet Master
 
SteveH's Avatar
 
2005 39' Land Yacht 390 XL 396
Common Sense , Texas
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by rostam View Post
A Chrysler 300 is rated to tow 1000#. A 34 ft Airstream weighs about 6000# to 7000#, loaded. Its impossible for Chrysler 300 (in its stock form) to tow such a trailer. I suspect the Chrysler was modified, which brings me to my point:

It is meaninglemess to compare a modified Chrysler 300 with a stock Ram 2500. I could modify Ram 2500, compare it to a stock Chrysler 300, and get a Completely different results.
I have a weight ticket that says an empty '08 34' weighs 8820, not including tongue weight carried by the TV.
__________________
Regards,
Steve
SteveH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 02:21 PM   #34
Rivet Master
 
Denis4x4's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari FB SE
Currently Looking...
Durango , Colorado
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,111
switz said, "I have had a no trailer brakes scenario develop one time towing a heavy trailer. The truck brakes stopped the rig because the brakes were designed to stop a 20,000 pound combined weight vehicle."


Just for drill, I checked on curb weights of the 300, Grand Cherokee and Ram 2500. Too, I got the disc brake diameter and it surprised me.

'12 Ram 2500 crew cab 4x4 diesel 7403 curb weight 14.2"rotor
'13 Grand Cherokee 4850 curb weight 13.8" rotor
'10 Chrysler 300 3803 12.6" rotor

Further more, you can purchase Porsche quality high performance brake components for the Grand Cherokee and 300. The aftermarket brake components for the Ram are limited to vented and cross drilled rotors.

From my perspective, late model sedans and SUV's are equipped with brakes that are up to the job of safely towing an Airstream. Too, there are plenty of options to upgrade the brakes not always available to PU owners.

Let's take the subject of car vs. truck braking off the table.
__________________
Denis4x4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 02:42 PM   #35
Rivet Master
 
mstephens's Avatar
 
2013 25' Flying Cloud
Cat City , California
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by switz View Post
Cars and trucks acre designed with speed ratings, weight ratings and some with tow ratings. Also in the specifications are axle ratings, tire and wheel sizes and the number of legal seats.

I wonder how folks think they can exceed the design parameters of a surface vehicle safely and attempt to do things with the vehicle for which it was not designed? Perhaps they are engineers and have access to the detailed drawings and component specifications of every part in the vehicle and have calculated which components have a safety margin they can exceed before it breaks.....
I understand this argument and its flaws. Here is the flaw: You are assuming that when the manufacturer puts a rating of "1000 pounds towing" that it means the car has been tested and can tow no more than 1000 pounds safely. That is a faulty assumption. The cars with these nominal tow ratings were not testing for towing, and therefore not marketed for towing, or vice versa.

The actual condition is this: we don't know what the tow limits would be if tested. But, we do have empirical data by the ton load. And, the empirical data says it can easily tow a 30 foot Airstream. This empirical data is far more important and meaningful than the manufacturer's nominal tow rating. Why is this? Very simply because you are assuming every model of car has components that are only designed for that model. Bad assumption. Transmissions, engines, drive lines, brakes and many other parts are shared across many models. This is quite different from the airplane world where each type must be certified with its own components.

The 300 uses the same 3.6L V6 and 8-speed transmission found in the Durango with a tow rating of 6200 pounds. Same motor and same transmission. Now sure, the axles are different. But I am giving you an example of why you can not assume too much about the components' "worthiness."

The proper discover about all this would be to fully test the vehicle against some specific consistent standard. But, we don't have that. In its place we have the empirical data.

And, let's not forget that hot rodders have been getting more out of manufacturer's products for 100 years. Nothing unusual is going on here at all.
__________________
mstephens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 02:46 PM   #36
Rivet Master
 
mstephens's Avatar
 
2013 25' Flying Cloud
Cat City , California
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by rostam View Post
A Chrysler 300 is rated to tow 1000#. A 34 ft Airstream weighs about 6000# to 7000#, loaded. Its impossible for Chrysler 300 (in its stock form) to tow such a trailer. I suspect the Chrysler was modified, which brings me to my point:

It is meaningless to compare a modified Chrysler 300 with a stock Ram 2500. I could modify Ram 2500, compare it to a stock Chrysler 300, and get a Completely different results.
Yes, the Chrysler was probably modified in a couple ways. I THINK (I don't want to speak for Andy) I think that the tires were changed out, and the hitch was custom installed, and the shocks had airbags added. That's been the recipe I have discussed regarding my own C 300.

Whatever one wants to make of the comparison is up to them. I think the significance of the comparison is this: "Hey, a slightly modified sedan can tow better than a stock truck." That might be meaningful to some and meaningless to others.
__________________
mstephens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 02:54 PM   #37
Rivet Master
 
mstephens's Avatar
 
2013 25' Flying Cloud
Cat City , California
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denis4x4 View Post
'12 Ram 2500 crew cab 4x4 diesel 7403 curb weight 14.2"rotor
'13 Grand Cherokee 4850 curb weight 13.8" rotor
'10 Chrysler 300 3803 12.6" rotor
Correction to the 300 S

'12 Ram 2500 crew cab 4x4 diesel 7403# curb weight 14.2"rotor
'13 Grand Cherokee 4850# curb weight 13.8" rotor
'12 Chrysler 300 S 4083# 13.6" front/ 12.6" rear

My bet is of the three, the 300 S will have the shortest stopping distance.
__________________
mstephens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 02:59 PM   #38
Rivet Master
 
mstephens's Avatar
 
2013 25' Flying Cloud
Cat City , California
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
What is the towing capacity of the Chrysler 300?
Undetermined.

The manufacturer uses a nominal rating of 1000 pounds on anything they do not market as a "tow vehicle." But, that doesn't mean it was tested at 1000 pounds.

The drivetrain, tires, suspension, and dimensions suggest that with a few modifications, and of course proper hitch, it should easily tow 6000#, and this has been confirmed by a empirical real world testing.
__________________
mstephens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 03:14 PM   #39
Rivet Master
 
mstephens's Avatar
 
2013 25' Flying Cloud
Cat City , California
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 854
Back to the issue of sway. Here's an interesting list of factors in the ProPride literature: Trailer Sway Causes

QUOTE
Keep in mind that trailer sway is a multivariate condition. Any one of these causes may not cause a trailer to sway. However, when more than one of these causes is present, a trailer is sure to begin to sway unless acted upon by an opposing force.
...
When a weight distribution hitch is not adjusted properly it can cause your trailer to have either too much tongue weight or not enough tongue weight to avoid inducing sway.
END QUOTE

So, here is the idea that both too little AND too much tongue weight can cause sway. This implies there is some Goldilocks formula ofr having the tongue weight "just right."
__________________
mstephens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 03:41 PM   #40
Rivet Master
 
2005 19' Safari
GLENDALE , AZ
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,440
Definition: Empirical -- Relying on experience or observation alone, often without due regard for system and theory.

Just my opinion, but this sounds like a recipe for a potential towing disaster; or, at the very least, mechanical and/or towing problems.

Let us know how this works for you...

(Now, I'll be quiet...)
__________________
Phoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 04:07 PM   #41
Rivet Master
 
mstephens's Avatar
 
2013 25' Flying Cloud
Cat City , California
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 854
That could be one way to define empirical. The more typical definition as used in engineering is: Verified by direct observation, testing and experience. The phrase "without due regard to theory" isn't appropriate here, because all the "theories" of towing are being obeyed. e.g. Power, torque, weight distribution, hitch design, vehicle dynamics, and so on. What is being disregarded is just the manufacturer's specs, of which we know nothing about in theory or practice.

One of the primary reasons these cars don't get tested by the maker for a tow rating is that there is no convenient "bolt on and walk away" hitch solution. Each of these vehicles has to have a custom designed hitch, which takes some thought, some fabrication, some expertise to install. The current hitch market is a bolt-on only market. There is almost no welding gear at the hitch installers. They want a $8/hr kid to be able to follow the directions and bolt on your $229 Curt receiver. Now, you can't have Mom and Pop buying a car rated at 5000# towing showing up at U-Haul to get a hitch, and the U-Haul man says, "I ain't gots no hitch fer that!" Mom and Pop would haul their shiny new Chrysler back to the dealer and want a refund! This whole drama is primarily about the hitch. Funny, huh?
__________________
mstephens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2013, 04:14 PM   #42
Rivet Master
 
Vintage Kin Owner
N/A , N/A
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 995
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
Definition: Empirical -- Relying on experience or observation alone, often without due regard for system and theory.

Just my opinion, but this sounds like a recipe for a potential towing disaster; or, at the very least, mechanical and/or towing problems.

Let us know how this works for you...

(Now, I'll be quiet...)
Agreed. This is serious stuff. Your safety and the safety of people driving around you are at hand. Not a good idea to cut corners, or rely on unverified theories.
__________________

__________________
rostam 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



Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:07 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.