tow vehicles - Page 6

sam raynovic · 12-25-2002, 11:52 AM

I am towing with a 99 Dodge Dakota ext cab 4x4 318cubic inch 230 hp pickup ,the axle ratio is 410,the tires are 10.50X31x15 The truck has all the factory towing upgrades along with a k&n airfilter. I tow a 29 foot soverighn with this rig with no problems at all,I usually like to cruise between 60 and 65 mph, at these speeds I adverage 9 to 11 mpg. This rig has 80,000 miles on it and does just fine. My other truck is a 350 chev 4x4 ext cab it is a dog when it comes to towing but the milage unhooked is great it is a good stay at home truck. I have installed k&n airfilters on both trucks and really feel they added 20 hp to the vehicles.

**Action** · 12-26-2002, 11:17 AM

Sam,

I bet the Chevy has nothing close to the 4:10 axle of the Dodge. And your mileage statement kind of bears that out.

About 25 years agos an instructor in an automotive class I took stated he was sure that a 4hp Briggs and Stratton could be enough power to pull anything given a trans with enough gears and a torque converter.

In the 60's GM had a 2 speed auto trans. Now look at the state of affairs in transmissions. 5 speed automatics. Lock up torque converters. Axle ratios from 2.9's in the early 80's to the high 3's and 4's.

Gears, gears, and more gears.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Action

Road Ruler · 12-31-2002, 07:59 AM

Action.. Re Gears, Gears, Gears

Yes you are so right, to date, but times are a changing.

Nissan just introduced to North America the Nissan Munaro.

It has a new CVT (continuosly variable transmission) that uses a belt instead of gears in the transmission. The computer automatically selects the optimum ratio for the current demand of the vehicle. The ratios are infinite. The result is an ultra smooth running vehicle with great towing potential and unbelievable gas mileage for a 250 HP
3.5 engine. Its wide stance and very short distance between the rear axle and hitch ball is an added bonus.

The site listed here explains.

http://www.nissan.ca/en/vehicles/mur...rformance.html

**Action** · 12-31-2002, 10:39 AM

Wayne,

Thanks for the link. I had heard of that transmission concept back in the 70's. And I thought Honda was playing with a CVT. Didn't know Nissan had a vehicle to the market. I could not find a towing capacity on that site, so I am wondering if towing is recommended. The strength of the belt and how much it does or does not stretch is critical for that kind of trans. And towing puts a big strain on it. So even if it's not ready to tow yet, it will happen.

>>>>>>>>>Action

Road Ruler · 12-31-2002, 11:45 AM

Action..

I have looked at the Munaro in detail at the local dealer. Factory tow rating is 3,500 Lbs. The off road review I read on this vehicle was very impressive as far as its ability to climb on rough terrain under full throttle .
Apparently the transmission has been used and tested extensively overseas and proved to be durable and reliable. I doubt if Nissan would risk their rock solid reliability reputation on a lemon component. Time will tell whether it will withstand the stresses found in the towing arena. Hopefully an RV dealer will pick one of these up and use it as a demo vehicle. Would be interesting to see how it stands up and performs.

Rusty Bucket · 12-31-2002, 12:06 PM

Wayne,
Not to be contrary, but the $46,000 price tag on the new Nissan SE would put a feller in a fairly fancy crewcab diesel Ford, Dodge, or GM. Looks like the tow cap. on the Munaro is #3500. The big pickups fit my big fat self better too. 'Course the extra registration and operating expenses DON'T fit my wallet too well.
Howard

Road Ruler · 12-31-2002, 12:25 PM

Hello Howard;

The Munaro's start at 39,000 CDN

With your mighty US dollars you could buy 2 of these babies. One for towing and one for grocery getting.

Cheers

Rusty Bucket · 12-31-2002, 12:38 PM

Wayne,
I've got a bad problem with these mighty U.S. dollars-----"MIGHTY" few of them at my disposal. Best wishes to all in '02, Howard

**Action** · 12-31-2002, 02:11 PM

W,

You are right Nissan would not risk a bad rep to be 1st in the market place with a product that they did not feel was up to the task. (Not that an auto marker hasn't been silly enough to do that before- names will not be named) At least not in this day and age of suits and potential bad press.

And if the concept proves that it is durable enough, it merits attention for saved fuel economy. No wasted power between shifts. Cause, ahhhhhh well there are no shifts!

However, because of my own personal bias and prejudice I am not a player unless the vehicle has a blue oval some where. And then only after it's been road tested for a year or 2. I am not partial to rapidly depreciating assets

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Action

ddveaux · 01-17-2003, 07:50 PM

I'm thinking about buying a 22 ft Safari. If I do-will I need to buy another vehicle or will I be able to use my 86 BroncoII. Brocco manual says I'll be within the weight limits even with automatic and 6 cylinders.

davidz71 · 01-18-2003, 08:06 PM

If you were using a full size Bronco then I would say you would be ok; however, a Bronco II has an extremely short wheelbase and you are flirting with disaster.

J M Reed · 01-19-2003, 08:47 AM

Could anybody tell me if a 5.13 ratio is good or bad ??
Regards
Jason

Rusty Bucket · 01-19-2003, 09:58 AM

Jason, a 5:13 is an extremely low gear ratio. Unless you have a big overdrive your towing cruise speed will be very limited. Good ratio for pullin' stumps or other heavy work, but too low to live with on the road in most vehicles. Howard

RoadKingMoe · 01-19-2003, 12:19 PM

If your truck cruised at 2000 rpm at 70 mph in OD, and 2000 rpm at 50 mph in Drive, with 3.73:1 gearing, 5:13 would raise that rpm to 5:13/3.73*2000=2750 rpm. Not too hateful, especially with a little gas engine that gets its peak torque at 4,000 rpm.