speaking of towing with a car...

[Chuck]

how/where would I find tow ratings for older vehicles? My in-laws are keen on the idea of borrowing my trailer, but I don't think their car is up to the task, and I don't want 'em taking off w/ my truck as well. They have an '85 Buick Regal. I bet something w/ a V-8 from that era might be do-able, but we should have some "facts" before persuing this.

They don't want a "truck". They're boxy sedan types. They do live in FL, where there is an abundance of older cars in decent shape....(remember when they made cars out of metal? ). What do you think would be a good choice in an older, cheap sedan that can pull a 4000lb+ trailer safely?

[59toaster]

I don't think it would be a bright idea despite the Intrepid post. My 59 22' was more than a 95 E150 full size van was happy with. Your camper probably out wieghs mine by several hundred pounds. I'm pretty sure a 85 Regal was a front drive with a 3.8 liter motor. Does a fin job moving the car but not sure it's up to moving the camper. If I'm thinking of the right body sytle it's a Unit body vehicle and I'm not sure your going to find a hitch even close to the weight rating.
Tell them to get a 90's Buick Roadmaster. Those would do fine. Most had a LT1 tune port motor with great HP and Torgue ratings. Full frame as well so a lot better tow platform without being a truck.

[Chas]

The Buick or similar bodied car, not sure of the GM letter designation, would be a good choice. They don't make them anymore. I have seen a lot of Buick Roadmaster wagons for sale, cheap too! Less than 7500 bucks but they are getting old and have a few miles on them. I am not sure of the actual tow ratings on them as Detroit has been monkeying around with the numbers a bit.

An even better recommendation is tell them to get their own A/S, unless you really, really trust them!! Lending out my A/S would be kinda like lending out my wife, doubt if it will ever happen. Almost the same as a buddy who always wants to "borrow" my boat, won't happen!!

Chas

[Chuck]

Well, its either they borrow my trailer, or they stay at my house!! Which would you choose? (remember, you don't know my in-laws. did you ever watch "Seinfeld"? think "george constanza's parents". no joke.).

Chas, I'm pretty sure that theirs is a rear-drive, full frame model. not unibody. I know it is only a v-6, though, so I'm guessing that it wouldn't be quite up to the task. Don't know what its exact displacement is.... the POs of my trailer used an older Crown Victoria to tow it for some time.

again, I'll just re-state my other question: is there a central repository for tow-rating info? I know "trailer life" publishes tow ratings for very recent vehicles...how about older ones?

[Road Ruler]

Originally posted by 59toaster
I'm pretty sure a 85 Regal was a front drive with a 3.8 liter motor. Does a fin job moving the car but not sure it's up to moving the camper.

A 3.8 toured across the Continent and dragged a 31 footer to the top of Independance Pass (12,000'). By comparison you would think it could tow a 23' and not even know it was there. If a V8 is a must how about a 90's Impala SS.

[59toaster]

Originally posted by Wayne F


This 1986, 3.8 toured across the Continent and dragged a 31 footer to the top of Independance Pass (12,000'). By comparison you would think it could tow a 23' and not even know it was there. If a V8 is a must how about a 90's Impala SS.

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.

[Road Ruler]

Toaster.. I was not aware of the hipo stall converter on the Impala SS. You would be right about the heat concern. On the other hand would the higher stall converter be an advantage for towing since it would get the engine up into its power range at launch time?? I saw a road report on the big Buick Roadmaster Wagon a few years ago when they came out. Their overall thoughts were " a sofa on wheels". For towing they have a hugh over hang and my guess would be boring rear end gears. You are probably right about options though. Maybe GM offered a trailer pkg or performance pkg that spruced it up.

My buddy across the street here works for GM. He pulls his cigarette boat ( powered by twin big block Chevy motors) with a 1984 GMC dually short box pickup. We live over 2 miles from the lake and can clearly hear him from our house when he runs flat out on Lake Ontario

Anyway we get into some great discussions on towing with the various formatts. Everytime we pull out of our driveway with the Safari in tow he scratches his head, still can't figure out how it all works. LOL LOL

[59toaster]

Originally posted by Wayne F
Toaster.. I was not aware of the hipo stall converter on the Impala SS. You would be right about the heat concern. On the other hand would the higher stall converter be an advantage for towing since it would get the engine up into its power range at launch time?? I saw a road report on the big Buick Roadmaster Wagon a few years ago when they came out. Their overall thoughts were " a sofa on wheels". For towing they have a hugh over hang and my guess would be boring rear end gears. You are probably right about options though. Maybe GM offered a trailer pkg or performance pkg that spruced it up.

My buddy across the street here works for GM. He pulls his cigarette boat ( powered by twin big block Chevy motors) with a 1984 GMC dually short box pickup. We live over 2 miles from the lake and can clearly hear him from our house when he runs flat out on Lake Ontario

Anyway we get into some great discussions on towing with the various formatts. Everytime we pull out of our driveway with the Safari in tow he scratches his head, still can't figure out how it all works. LOL LOL

Yeah the stall will help it get moving is true but once it's moving is the issue. The extra slip is going to make short work of the fluid. I supose you could run a pair of tranny coolers to over come it. So the pros and cons to the high stall converter could go either way.
Yeah it has a long overhang but wouldn't some of that be negated by the low center of gravity?
As far as the overhang goes....Well sometimes it's something you have to live with. THe ideal location for the ball of the hitch would be within a foot of the rear axle. Short of a fifth wheel that's not going to happen.

[overlander64]

Greetings Chuck!

My advice would be don't consider trying the '85 Regal/TradeWind combo. I had a very similar Pontiac "G" Series Bonneville which rode on the same chasis with a 4.2 liter carbureted V6. The car was special ordered for towing and supposedly had the highest rated tow package for a V6 at 3,000 pounds. With the optional V8 (California only for the Pontiac at that time) the tow rating was upped to 5,000 pounds. When I had my Bonneville, I was towing an 18 foot Nomad (single axle) light-weight special travel trailer that weighed 3,000 pounds on its best day or closer to 3,800 pounds loaded for a typical vacation. The Pontiac was unable to exceed 45 MPH on even the flattest of highways unless given 10 or 20 MILES to build speed.

I would even be a bit leary of trying this with my '85 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale Brougham Luxury Sedan. It was special ordered with the heavy duty trailering package rated at 5,000 pounds. The package included the 5.0 Liter (307 cubic inch Oldsmobile HO V8) and 3.23 differential gears. For towing in flat areas lacking severe grades, it would probably work; but on grades I would question the adequacy of the available power.

When I was researching tow vehicles for my Overlander four years ago, I wanted a car rather than a truck based tow vehicle. What I learned was that the highest trailer tow rating for fairly recent manufactured cars was the Cadillac Brougham d'Elegance with the 5.7 Liter V8, fuel injection and heavy duty factory trailer package - - I believe when equipped with this package its trailer tow rating was 7,000 pounds (varied a little from year to year) and these cars were available from 1988(?) through 1995(?) - - I don't have my notes close at hand but I believe the above range to be fairly close. The Buick Roadmaster also shared similar trailer tow ratings during part of that same time period, again if it was equipped with the heavy duty factory tow package and 5.7 Liter V8. My research indicated that Chevrolet did not recommend the Impala SS for towing any more than 2,500 pounds; while the Caprice was rated up to 5,000 pounds with 5.0 Liter (305 cubic inch Chevrolet V8) - - I was never able to get a consistent answer about the Caprice and towing with an optional 5.7 Liter V8. I finally gave up on the idea of a modern car as a tow vehicle as I wanted at least 20% excess towing capacity which for my Overlander translated to a trailer tow rating of 7,800 pounds.

Kevin

[RoadKingMoe]

Aside from the leverage it gives sway over the tow vehicle, longer overhang is a GOOD thing. It's one of the things that make travel trailers superior to fivers.

Know what the major complaint of new fiver owners is? How slowly it turns when backing. A behind the bumper pivot is MUCH more responsive to steering and makes the trailer turn sharper and quicker with less effort.

And the longer the overhang, the closer the trailer wheels follow the tow vehicle wheels in a turn, so you don't have to swing as wide to keep the trailer wheels from hitting the curb.

This is where a Hensley has a good advantage. The Hensley both eliminates sway AND increases the overhang significantly.

If you want a trailer to pivot near the rear axle, get a Pullrite hitch... and have the slower steering of a fiver when backing AND a trailer that follows the tow vehicle much more to the inside of the turn.

BTW, while fiver owners are quick to point out their in-bed hitch eliminates the mechanical arm in the yaw (sway) plane, they're also quick to ignore the leverage the highly mounted pivot gives the fiver to roll the truck side to side (a dually helps here) and pitch it fore and aft.

[59toaster]

Roadking:
That makes very good sense. I have been doing a lot of reading here and a lot of people refference some of the magazines road tests. Most indicate the long over hang is problematic according to those write ups. Is that just in reguards to the "see saw" effect over bad roads? I can understand where the extra distance would give the trailer more leverage over the tow vehicle. I guess it's a little bit of give and take.

Well you have made me feel better about the Tow vehicle I'm looking for. I'm trying to locate a 89-91 Suburban. Other posts on the subject had me concerned that I was not going to be happy with it. The burb just has the other things I need. This will end up being my daily driver. I need something that when I'm off on my own that can double as a one person camper (I'm over the tents LOL). I Need something that is going to have enough room to make everybody happy on long trips. I do plan some out west runs to CO and AZ. Having two kids in close contact that long only leads to them fighting.

Well I plan to get a 3/4 ton burb for two major reasons. The first is astetics. I like a truck that sits up a little. I'm looking for a 2wd and the 3/4 ton 2wd sits close to the same hight as a 4wd. The half ton 2wd burbs of that vintage just seem to sit on the ground. The other and more important reason is to get away from the Corp 10 bolt rear end. I know far to many people who have had them fail. The 14 bolt is a much stronger rear axle and for what I plan to do with this truck it's the natural choice.

If the see saw effect becomes a problem thing I can play around with the spring rates on the rear axle. Pull a couple leafes out to soften it up and then install a set of Firestone air springs so I can adjust the spring rates as conditions warrent. I think that in certain cases having a softer rear suspension may help over come some of these issue when coupled with a weight distribution hitch. That would let the rear axle float more between the front axle of the tow vehicle and the trailer axle. The other option this would open up is I could increase the spring rate with just some added air pressure and run without the bars and keep the ride hight correct, Still use a friction style sway contron as well. See what sort of results that provides.
That set up would also let me dump the rear presssure so that the truck would sag and raise the rear of the trailer. Helpful if I get into a situation where I may drag the rear of the trailer. Being able to drop the tounge hight 6-7 inches would raise the rear of the trailer a simular amount. I guess time will tell.

[RoadKingMoe]

Over the years, a large number of Airstreams have been pulled by Suburbans and the 3/4 ton is definitely the better choice. However, with the shorter wheelbase for the good overhang, it's not that sway resistant without a Hensley or Pullrite.

The closer you load the heavy stuff in the trailer toward the axles, the less see-saw effect you get. I'd think running a full fresh tank would help too, especially if its between the axles.

[59toaster]

Originally posted by RoadKingMoe
Over the years, a large number of Airstreams have been pulled by Suburbans and the 3/4 ton is definitely the better choice. However, with the shorter wheelbase for the good overhang, it's not that sway resistant without a Hensley or Pullrite.

The closer you load the heavy stuff in the trailer toward the axles, the less see-saw effect you get. I'd think running a full fresh tank would help too, especially if its between the axles.

My tank is right up against the front wall as far forward as it can go. If the wife is with me that tanks will have to stay full for her coffee especially if we go to Florida. Water is horrible there LOL. When we rent beach houses down there we bring about 6 -8 gallons of water with us strictly for Coffee LOL. I'll just make sure to keep the black water tank empty and maybe the water heater. both are in the rear.
What do you think of the dual cam Reese? Reason I ask is I have some of the parts already. This would also let me run a standard friction sway for the car trailer I plan to purchace in the future. Then I wouldn't have to mess with the cam set up but still use the draw bar and torsion bars on the second trailer.
I still have as yet to see this Hensley or pull right. Lots of folks speak highly of them.

[RoadKingMoe]

The dual-cam isn't really close to a Hensley or Pullrite, but if I could have neither of those, I'd go for the dual-cam over all the others.

[overlander64]

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

[59toaster]

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.

[68 Suburban]

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

[59toaster]

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.

[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!).

[Road Ruler]

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.