Who's towing with a 1/2 ton?

[Silvertwinkie]

I agree Big Dee, you are in a whole 'nuther category. The issue for me is not the engine. I have towed our 6300lbs with the 5.7L sedan and have towed with a 6.0L 3/4. The 5.7L and the 6.0L have the power, to that there is no question. One if desired, could always go larger in an engine if they wanted, but it is not required at the 25' level IMHO (even in a Classic form).

The orig poster did not mention he was looking at a 1500HD, from the sound of it, he was looking at a GMC or Escalade and then fessed up, he was looking at the Escalade. My issue is clearly with the rear end, the 4L60E and the brakes (to a lesser extent).

I read where one guy chickened out at 20k. It took only one season for me to realize my trans was not going to make it more than a year or two without a major overhaul/upgrade. Even then, the sedan is just a bad tow for the 25' coach. Why? Because you can engineer and mod the tow capabilities as best as you can, however most sedans don't weigh 6300lbs, so in effect, the sedan gets moved around a bunch by the heavier coach...moreover if you get some good wind gusts, it's even more fun of a towing exp.

Though true, not all 1/2 tons are alike, most current 1/2 tons are rated for about 7k-8k and still do not have the more stout driveline that the 3/4s have. Matter of fact, most of the 1/2 tons GM sells are 5.3L, not even the 6.0L unless you get a 1500HD (which did I believe get the upgraded driveline), Caddy (which does not have the driveline upgrade, just the 6.0L engine), and the GMC, which is just like the Caddy, all engine, no driveline upgrade....all regardless of what GM says it can safely tow. Road King Moe has brought up time and time again, that the tow rating, is minus, passenger, cargo, etc. Our 3/4 ton Suburban is rated for 9600lbs w/ 4x4. I can tell you that the 4L80E and the larger rear end and gear/housing diameter are more than up to tow about 8500lbs. I would NEVER push it to the full 9600lbs. At that point, personally, I feel I'd be getting into the 8.1L area and/or diesel using todays current offerings.

The 4L60E and rear gear housing on the 1/2 tons and GM sedans are designed for about 5000lbs in an average senario. But as is the case with the request made by the thread starter, given the current info, the Escalade and or the seadan he is kicking around towing with, I stand with my current suggestion of a 3/4 ton.

Keep in mind I am talking fairly recent 1/2 GM trucks which is what the thread started was talking about. Additionally, it's been said that some folks live in another universe...I've been there, and the physics in that universe are different than this one.

[Big Dee]

Twink,

I agree with you. Everything in the 1/2 ton needs to be extra beefy. But 1/2 tonners can come with the same tranny and brakes as the 3/4 ton. So if a 1/2 ton has the same brakes and tranny as the 3/4 ton then it is a moot point. These would not be reasons to choose the 3/4 ton over the 1/2.

Regarding the engine, if the 6.0 can run up the tallest mountains at a good clip pulling a 25', than why choose 8.1? To waste more gas and money?

As to the weight issue, it is a misconception that TVs must be the same weight of the trailer, as I've seen written here before. Look at every semi truck on the road. The semi is a fraction of the weight of its trailer.

And yes, as I learned from Moe, tow ratings are a marketing gimic. The real tow rating is the GCVWR. I wish Detroit would just use the GCVWR as tow ratings. I don't understand why they keep this rating a secret. Frustrating.

With all that said, I must say the Escalade does not impress me as a TV, for the reasons you said. I wonder why GM doesn't beef up the Escalade for towing. They would sell even more of them.

[wildwoodrver]

Some great input!

"Fessed up?" Well, I guess so. We just stopped in the GMC store yesterday and drove the Escalade....kind of on a lark. But thanks to you I looked at the fine print and they don't get specific as to the transmission! The Denali/Yukon has the 4L65E and the 'Burb 3/4 has the 4L85E HD.

I assume the 4L85E is a beefier box. Any input here would be helpful.

Leaning back to the 3/4 Burb, 6.0L Vortec and 4.10 gears.

Either that or stay in the trucking business. Nothing wrong with pickups, but we kind of gave up on the fifth wheel so we could tow with a vehicle that is "nicer" to drive when "we get there."

[87MH]

Originally Posted by Big Dee

...... The real tow rating is the GCVWR.. .........

Therein lies the focus of all of the questions -- "Can I tow a 34'er with my Kia if I......".

!!LOOK AT WHAT THE INDIVIDUAL VEHICLE IN QUESTION IS RATED FOR!!

You can't use "general" data such as an "overall rating" website.

Case in point - I purchased a new 1/2 ton Chevy PU in 2001 - a "commuter special". Lots of people pull with 1/2 ton Chevys.....this particular PU had a tow rating of 1800 lbs..........one thousand eight hundred pounds.

I couldn't even latch onto a Bambi with it.

These Forum questions and debates are great for "general" terms, but the ultimate answer of the question of tow capacity is found in the paperwork and documentation of each individual vehicle as it is delivered.

[jrkeef]

Hi folks, I'm new to the forum and this is my first message so cut me some slack if I did it wrong.....I don't know about the GM's & Chevy half tons but I have been successfully towing my 30" Excella with a Full Size 92 Bronco for sometime with no problems. The truck has over 200K on it but the 5L is fresh (started with a new Ford Motor Sports short block and had it built from there - roller cam - Roush heads - headers - etc. I upgraded the suspension and beefed up the tranny and away we go....

[Big Dee]

Dennis, I agree. Each TV needs to be judged on a case-by-case basis. Blanket assumptions that 1/2 tonners can't do the job are just wrong.

Wildwood, sounds like a good call- the 3/4 'Burb with 6.0 and 4:10 gears. I think that would be an awesome match for your AS.

jrkeef, welcome to the Forums!

[Silvertwinkie]

[QUOTE=Big Dee

"I agree with you. Everything in the 1/2 ton needs to be extra beefy. But 1/2 tonners can come with the same tranny and brakes as the 3/4 ton. So if a 1/2 ton has the same brakes and tranny as the 3/4 ton then it is a moot point. These would not be reasons to choose the 3/4 ton over the 1/2.

Regarding the engine, if the 6.0 can run up the tallest mountains at a good clip pulling a 25', than why choose 8.1? To waste more gas and money?"


Dee, that is where the issue is. The fact is that the Caddys and the GMCs that can get the 6.0L only get the 10 bolt rear end and the 4l60e. The don't get the 4l80e nor do the get the beefier hubs or 14 bolt rear end. Aside from the 1500HD that might. In fact that 1500HD is really no longer a 1/2 ton as it has most if not all the 3/4 ton parts. To get the 4l80e and the 14 bolt rear end (plus the bigger more robust wheel hubs), you gotta go 3/4 ton (or 1500HD if it is still around).

As for the 6.0L, I fully agree and put my money where my yack is..I bought a 3/4 ton Suburban with the 6.0L engine and the 4l80e with the 14 bolt semi (not full floating) rear axle and it comes with the more robust wheel hubs. This was not an option at all on the 1/2 Suburbans and is not an option for any of the 1/2 ton, with the possible 1500HD exception.

The only reason I'd go 8.1 is if I wanted more power and/or I towed a coach upwards of 9500-10k lbs. There, clearly, the 8.1L or Duramax would be a better option and only an option on a 3/4 ton. Personally, I don't need that right now, but if I got a 34' Classic or a Classic or CCD or 30' Safari that started to push my 9600lb tow capacity of my 6.0L Suburban, I'd go to the 8.1 or Duramax. In reality the 8.1L does not get that much worse MPG than the 6.0L. I know that is hard to believe, but it really is only about 1 to 2 MPG on average if you don't drive it like you stole it.

BTW--remember I am talking about current or very recent model year offerings by GM. So if you have Ford data to share, go for it. But since we are talking GM here, that's where I'm coming from having spent months looking into it before getting the '04 Suburban.

[Minnie's Mate]

Originally Posted by wildwoodrver

I will try to digest it and decide what is best for us.

You hit the nail on the head because that is ultimately, that is what you have to do.

[Big Dee]

Twink,

Always nice conversing with you.

Is the 14 bolt hub really necessary for a 25' AS? A 30'? I am not an expert but it seems to me the 14 bolt would be necessary for the really big loads of 5ers and the 34' AS and the 10 bolt good for the smaller loads such as a 25'.

As for the 6.0 Vortec, I think it is a monster engine that handles my 30' just fine up the hills, as I tested it hard last summer. I am skeptical about the 8.1 being only 1 MPG more than the 6.0, especially in the city. Hard to believe. Bigger block means more gas being ignited, right?

Anyway, I have learned much from these debates.

[Silvertwinkie]

Originally Posted by Big Dee

Twink,

Always nice conversing with you.

Is the 14 bolt hub really necessary for a 25' AS? A 30'? I am not an expert but it seems to me the 14 bolt would be necessary for the really big loads of 5ers and the 34' AS and the 10 bolt good for the smaller loads such as a 25'.

As for the 6.0 Vortec, I think it is a monster engine that handles my 30' just fine up the hills, as I tested it hard last summer. I am skeptical about the 8.1 being only 1 MPG more than the 6.0, especially in the city. Hard to believe. Bigger block means more gas being ignited, right?

Anyway, I have learned much from these debates.

Dee. The hubs,most likely not. The trans and the 14 bolt rear end, without question, worth it. If I had to pick only one, the 4l80e hands down. Much more stout than the 4l60e (and remember I use to be one of the biggest 4l60e mouthpieces before I got my hands on the 4l80e). When I buy a new or pre-owned truck for towing, I buy based on what I can see and for some of that which I didn't consider (hint, hint another Airstream upgrade).

Bigger does usually mean more gas and it does in the 8.1L's case, however, the difference is pretty low. My main gripe besides losing about 30-40 miles a tankful comparted to the 6.0L is the fact that a good number of folks that have the 8.1L have what I would consider above normal oil consumption. GM of course calls this within spec. I have never (so far) owned a car (or truck w/ a 454) that ate 1 quart every 3000-4000 miles.

I too enjoy our conversations.

[takenitez]

Don't mean to interrupt your guys' discourse on your choice of GM tow vehicles, but I have to respond to JRKEEF's post. While the full size Bronco 5.0L has plenty of power (used to own one myself), it has an awfully short wheelbase for towing 30' of AS.
Please make sure your truck has a premium sway system installed, a Reese dual cam being the minimum, IMHO. Let's be safe out there.

Bob

[Pick]

This "1/2 ton"/"3/4 ton" nomenclature is quite blurred these days. My neighbor has a 1500HD Crew Cab Chevy. At first glance one would assume this is a "half ton" truck., because of the "1500" designation. BUT, it has an 8600 GVW rating and 8 bolt wheels. One could assume without the 1500HD on the door that it is a "3/4 ton" truck.

My current 2500HD has a 9200 lb. GVW, and most call it a "3/4 ton" truck. My old 2000 model year 3500 single rear wheel was considered a "1 ton" truck because of the "3500" on the doors, but it also had a 9200 GVW rating. Clear as mud?

I think they should use the GVW as the model number on the door and that would make things less confusing.

[rseagle]

I have a '97 Ford F-150 X-tra Cab 4x4 with the 4.6L engine and the 3.73 Axle ratio. It has a GVW of 6000 lbs. It's rated to tow 6600 lbs. GCVW is 11500 lbs.
With a truck cap, my daughter, myself, a full tank of gas and hitched weight of my 22' CCD, the truck weighed in at 5540 lbs. on the scales. I can only load another 460 lbs to gross out the truck.
My trailer with no water, full gas bottles and standard household items (pots,pans, linens, blankets, etc) weighed in at 4860 lbs. Gross for the CCD is 5600 lbs. Thats about 740 lbs of additional capacity.
This equates to about 90% of my GCVW. This is OK in the flats, but it is a struggle in the mountains.
For the time being, my wife and other daughter take the VW Beetle with extra stuff. This is not a long term solution. In the future I'll upgrade to an F-250 Fx4 or GMC 2500HD Sierra for longer trips.

Bob

[Big Dee]

Yeah, Bob the short wheelbase on the Bronco would be worrisome. I understand the wheelbase better now after getting my 30'. Having those wheels far apart really makes it stable and able to handle the pressures of the trailer.

[jrkeef]

Originally Posted by takenitez

Don't mean to interrupt your guys' discourse on your choice of GM tow vehicles, but I have to respond to JRKEEF's post. While the full size Bronco 5.0L has plenty of power (used to own one myself), it has an awfully short wheelbase for towing 30' of AS.
Please make sure your truck has a premium sway system installed, a Reese dual cam being the minimum, IMHO. Let's be safe out there.

Bob

You are right Bob the short wheelbase can be a problem. I have good stablizers and anti-sway bar. I am in the market for a longer wheelbase diesel as we get closer to retirement and longer trips. The old Bronco is fine for our short trips out of Lafayette, LA. Usually we stay south of I-20 and it is pretty flat. I used to get pushed pretty good by the Semi's on the interstate when they pasted me at 75, but the sway bar seems to have cured that. Not knowing what the future will bring (how big an A/S I may have later) I am looking at older (96-97) F-350 duallies. I like the old body style.

Jay

[davidz71]

Dee,
I don't want to appear that I am stuck on the 3/4 ton trucks with 8.1 engine. If I were towing a 25' Excella from the 70's then I would have gone with the 2500hd with the 6.0 engine for better gas mileage while towing. In '01 the 6.0 was getting a terrible reputation for cold start knock and the debate still rages on about whether the engines displaying that characteristic are being harmed internally. I decided to stay clear and would have gone to the 1500hd but it was only available in the crewcab which I did not want.

The combination of heavy duty parts in your truck will make it last longer, brake with more authority and give you all the power you need. It works for you and would do just fine with my '77 Excella 31' trailer. I do know that my shortbed '92 Chevy Z71 1500 4X4 with 5 sp. manual trans was a dog when pulling my trailer from AZ. where it was purchased. It could have been helped with 4.10 rear gears, an auto transmission, Vortec heads (introduced in '95 or '96) and an extended cab but this is another reason I jumped on the current truck I purchased. I didn't feel the need for a 3500 dually either. By the way, I just returned from a 385 mile solo trip to Land Between the Lakes and managed 14.5 mpg traveling 71 mph on interstate and maybe putting 10 of those miles on back roads. Sure, 18 mpg would have been better but I can't complain.

[Big Dee]

Originally Posted by davidz71

In '01 the 6.0 was getting a terrible reputation for cold start knock and the debate still rages on about whether the engines displaying that characteristic are being harmed internally.

On my research on the Denali before purchase, I missed the knock problem on the 6.0 on the pre-'02 models. Thank god GM fixed it. This was serious as I read after the fact.

But I got to say GM fixed it right. My 6.0 is so dam smooth and quiet that it continues to amaze me. And when towing, man is it a great engine. So much power. I love this engine!

[wildwoodrver]

OK....now what is the difference between the 4L85-E and the 4L65-E?

When the brochure omits the transmission designation, and just says, "heavy duty" what does that mean?

Know a web site with GM tech information?

I guess after my trusty old Dodge gave up its original gear box at 108,000 miles, many of them towing a 12,000 # fifth wheel, I am concentrating on that part of the drive train. I want a box that will keep its cool climbing some of those 7 and 8 percent grades I experienced in Colorado this year

[Rodger with a D]

Hola


We have a 1970 27' InterNational and I have used either a '63 Le Baron or the "66 Le Baron ( ... that's an up-graded Imperial). Both cars do a good job of pulling the trailer. ( And I do drive as if I'm in no hurry.) Around here the city is about 6200+ feet with some well known hills so I never have been above 18 mpg running w/o the trailer any ole way. And in about two weeks I'll add a '77 Dodge Custom ( w/ collector plates ) as another TV. For get up and go the pick up has the 360 and a New Process 4 speed. The front sway bar is a HD unit and the rear springs are the same. For comfort the truck has the correct era AM/FM stereo and the OEM dual bucket seat option.

I say this 'cause as I read about what others are using I feel that some must be on the 108 month payment plan for the TV.

If you are ever in the area and want to go for a test drive, just let me know. Maybe by then I'll have the '56 De Soto engine in the '47 De Soto.

Rodger & Gabby

[Silvertwinkie]

Not sure specifically what the difference might be, but I do know that any trans with the L8 in it is the more robust transmission. I do not know the difference between the 4l80e and the 4l85e. I do know that folks on some of the car club forums swear by the 4l60e as a better choice than going to a 4l65e. However, most forums that talk about towing talk about using 4l80es. You can go to:

www.thedieselplace.com and look at the gasser section

www.ls1.com and look at the truck section

www.gm-trucks.com and look at the whole site

www.impalassforum.com check out the driveline section

All these will in detail give you some good reading about GM transmissions.

Older Dodge might be ok, but I've been reading here(I believe) and other truck forums where the new Dodge truck transmissions are literally chewing themselves up to pieces. Some with less than 10k on the clock.

As for towing with a Desoto or LeBaron, I doubt that anyone would question that they have the power to tow successfully old vintage coachs as they weigh less than newer coachs of today (which is what the thread was talking about). I also believe that though they do have under the hood what is needed for the older coaches, I am not sure that they would be a good choice for longer coaches of say more than 20' if the wheelbase was not long enough. I further believe that if one were to try to tow a newer style Airstream, it would be an all out bad idea given that a 20' something Airstream today, weighs a good deal more than the 20' Airstreams of yesterday.

Sure these old cars do well in a straight line as some of the musclecars of the 60's did. Try to make a manuver and most folks would find the suspension shortcomings of the older cars fairly quickly.

I have great respect for the old cars being a car nut myself, but I think, though correct that newer cars/truck cost a lot, there have been some significant improvements and understanding that has come since the days of just pure horsepower making some of these newer tow vehicles a far better choice. As has been said here....there is towing well and towing safely.