Best tow vehicle?

I am new to this and need some direction...
Am looking to invest in a tow vehicle that will give me, fuel efficiency, tow capability, and driver comfort.
HELP,
JimK

 

That's a tough call, IMO. I think Cary could reply here with the top 2 or 3 tow vehicles they see when people come to pick up their trailer.

But everyone is different depending upon where they'll be camping, and what's important to them--maybe having lots of space in the tow vehicle for gear is important, vs. fuel economy is more important than gear.

That said... it seems like a lot of people happen to have a Subaru Outback. (I don't, but maybe that'll be my next tow vehicle, if/when I trade in).

 

Jim,

Sherry is right, there are some very popular vehicles we see here. The most popular by far is the Subaru Outback.
The number two is probably a Toyota Tacoma.
Then there are a bunch of the mid sized SUVs like Highlanders, Accuras, Honda Pilots, Chevy Equinoxes, Buick Enclave and Jeep Cherokees (what I use personally).
There are also a big group of the smaller SUVs like the Ford Escape, Toyota RAV4, Subaru Forrester and Jeep Wranglers.
The mileage champs are the Diesel Jetta Sportwagen and even a couple of the hybrids out the like the Toyota Highlander and Lexus 400 series.

All of these above vehicles we know to work excellent for this application. There are other too of course that we don't see as often but work great. Just shoot us an email with thoughts on what you might want to use.

Cary

 

Tow vehicles are a bit of a Goldilocks issue - the one that is "just right" will differ from person to person, because everyone uses their trailer differently, and some people need the tow vehicle to fulfill other roles that may be more important than or as important as towing.

Cary is right that some of the diesels can be very fuel efficient while also having great torque. Our Ford EcoBoost (turbo, gasoline) engine is pretty amazing - small displacement, good gas mileage and plenty of torque (Ford sells a diesel version, but not in the US). The important thing about it is that the power band for the torque is fairly flat - you get most of the torque available at low rpm, all the way through to high rpm. Whereas standard engines tend to deliver torque at the high end of the rpm range. The result of the latter is that your engine is working at high rpm when driving in the mountains or hilly regions. The former will run at lower rpm and when it is necessary to downshift it will result in a much smaller increase in engine speed (and less noticeable shift).

So, how will you be using your new teardrop? Weekends and a long summer trip? Full timing? Lots of long hauls, or shorter regional trips? Will you bring bikes, kayaks, BBQs or other gear with you? Will your camping trips be spent at one location or will you be spending multiple nights in different locations as part of a long road trip? Providing more information can help folks point you in a direction that might help meet your needs.

 

Cary - Yes, we have the 1.6l EcoBoost engine. I'm amazed by how it tows better in cruise control than our old Frontier with a supercharged V6!

Chuckwagon - We are getting 22.5-23 mpg. We rarely drive at freeway speeds, and stop every 5-20 miles. And that is with at least 500 lbs of gear in the cargo box of our van.

Fuel economy design is achieved mainly through aerodynamics and weight reduction. So carrying less gear should improve mileage, but it would have to be a fair reduction in weight to be very noticeable. With fuel costs the way they are, it's likely not worth buying lighter gear to reduce weight - it'd take for ever for the savings to recoup those costs.

I'll be anxious to see if our new mud flaps affect fuel economy. They might help, because they way they are installed on our van they create a wider slipstream for the trailer to sit in. Before installing them wind, rain, etc was thrown back almost directly at the fenders, that forced the slipstream up over the fenders, so the fenders were creating drag - probably more drag than with our previous tow vehicles. Time will tell.

 

I will second what Steve said about the Ecoboost Ford also. I mentioned the Ford Escapes. The newer versions of this vehicle with Ecoboost engine we are finding to be an exceptional tow vehicle. They have a great tow rating (much better than one would think for it's small size), and the mileage really is hard to beat, probably the best gas engine vehicle mileage I listed.

I am assuming that the Ecoboost is what you have in your van Steve? Nice!

That is a great point by the way about torque. The torque curve is very important for towing. This is one of the reasons the 4 cyl Subaru Outbacks work so well, they have a great torque curve for towing.

Cary

 

We have a 2010 Subaru Outback (4 cylinder)that can get 30mpg on the highway when not towing, but it only gets about 19-20mpg when hauling our 560. Is this about what others get towing their trailers? Can we do anything to improve the fuel economy?

Sharon

 

We have a 6 cylinder Subaru Outback and towed our 560 From South Carolina to Washington without a problem. It towed great including some long grades in the Rockies. We have also gone up twice into the Blue Ridge mountains of North Carolina with its shorter but steeper grades than what found out West.

 

I would be cautious of a CVT (Continuously_variable_transmission) transmission vehicle.

Others may have them on here and can comment....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_variable_transmission


http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2012/05/should-you-buy-a-car-with-a-cvt-transmission.html

"Lastly, not all CVTs are well equipped to deal with towing.

 Additionally, the reliability of the modern CVT has yet to be tested. The Nissan Murano (seen above) was the first car Nissan offered with only a CVT, and it had some pretty serious problems. Some were so bad that the whole transmission had to be replaced."

 

Our 2010 4 cylinder Subaru Outback has CVT and it's been great for us. Provides even better fuel economy than a manual transmission.

 

We also tow with the 4cyl Outback with CVT. It is fine as long as you aren't climbing a lot of mountains. The 6 wasn't available with CVT when I bought mine and it got much worse mileage. If I were to do it again now, I'd get the 6 cylinder which gets better mileage with the CVT than it used to without it. More capable as a tow vehicle.

 

We tow with the 4cy; Outback with CVT - climbed mountains, snow etc and never felt like we needed anymore with the 550. However, we also subscribe to the idea that we are there to see the scenery so we don't drive much over 55mph

 

Tow with a Porsche Cayenne GTS 4.8L V8 420HP & average 21mpg on flat roads @ 65mph. Mileage suffers on grades & in town (maybe 15mpg) but no shortage on power.

 

Hmmm.... A $60K+ tow vehicle that gets under 20 mpg? That's the BEST tow vehicle? I'm sure it's a HUGE amount of fun when not towing, but the stock Triangle trailer tires on our 550 have a speed rating of only 65 mph. So where does all that power get used when towing?

There are plenty of awesome tow vehicles available new for under $30K that get the job done admirably, and the cost of ownership would be orders of magnitude less. Though I suspect the Cayenne has seating that most everyone would be envious of.

 

Not suggesting the Cayenne is best for everyone - but was right for us.
In Storage across our Great Country are plenty of large motor homes that sit 10 or 11 months out of the year (unused). Most cost $150,000 -$300,000 & get rotten milage to boot. We have downsized to the 560 & it fits in our garage. Also we prefer our National & State Parks that are small & without hookups.
Logic - the Cayenne is our daily driver, plus our setup costs less than half of a quality Motorhome. As far as gas mileage goes you are correct - but gas is cheap right now.
End result for us are the SPG'S (smiles per gallon).
TOWBERT

 

I'll take 40 sq ft vs. 40 feet long every time. The 40 footers (motorhomes and pickups with 20+ft long trailers) can be a good four season option vs the CI being a three season rig, but that's about the only advantage (Oh, and they also have a throne room, but who wants to clean another bathroom?).

There is no shortage of awesome vehicles that as an afterthought also do a great job of towing. After all, most vehicles on the road are capable of towing a teardrop trailer. But of those with a low cost of ownership, many aren't the greatest for towing more than occasionally (by that I mean they are close to maxing out the vehicle's load limit by the time you pile gear and passengers into the vehicle).

I found this technical bulletin about the Ford truck fleet's powertrains (I've never owned a Ford before now, so I'm no die-hard Ford fan, nor am I a gearhead or engineer). It explains some of the features of various Ford engines. The 1.6l engine is the smallest of the bunch (smaller than a lot of old air-cooled, gutless VW engines) and is found on plenty of their car models as well. It is the broad flat torque band that makes it a pretty exceptional towing powertrain for such a small engine displacement (and well worth the $800 upgrade over the conventional 2.5l engine that has just a tiny bit less horsepower and torque). If it were possible to do a long range test-tow of a range of vehicles with a low cost of ownership, I suspect most folks would quickly understand the real life benefits of that wide power band. It tows better than our old pickup's V6 with a 5000 lbs. load capacity (though it doesn't do as good a job of flying down the freeway at 90 mph, but then that's well beyond the speed rating of our trailer tires!).

https://www.fleet.ford.com/truckbbas/topics/2015/15_Powertrains_SB_Updates.pdf

So yeah, for less than the price of most Ford 350 pickup trucks (a typical tow vehicle for a large fifth wheel), we were able to buy an awesome camper and an awesome tow vehicle. And we can actually afford to tow it every day!

But if there had been a Porsche Cayenne Cargo Van, we might have given it a good, hard look. ;-)

 

I love this thread, sharing experiences and information. The selection of a tow vehicle is a highly personal decision, based on what you do with it when not towing, as well as its towing prowess. Personally I think the not-towing characteristics are the most important as long as it tows safely and comfortably.

We pull our 560 with a Nissan Xterra Off-Road. The reason we use it is not because of its towing (it hardly notices the 560) but because of what we do when we are not towing, but a big part of the reason we tow: getting to interesting places that are hard to get to any other way. Our Xterra is well equipped for adventures, 12 speed manual gearbox (plus 2 reverse), 4 wheel drive with locking differential, high clearance, 1/4" steel plates on the bottom and rock slider bars on both sides, reinforced differential, etc.

We generally will go to an interesting area, drop the trailer (often boondocking) and set up camp, then go off exploring.

 

I agree with Rotus8. Which is why my original reply was to get more information about how JimK plans on using both the tow vehicle and the camper. As you point out, if you need 4WD, that leads to one set of answers. If you just need AWD (perhaps for a little more peace of mind on slick winter roads), that also narrows the field down. When not towing, will you want the ability to carry a certain number of passengers now and then?

JimK -
Keep in mind that with a teardrop you'll be spending more time outdoors than the typical RVer. You can try hanging out at the picnic table found at most campsites, but most folks don't find that comfortable for very long. So at a minimum you need a place to carry a couple of chairs. It is possible to store those in the teardrop, but rain or a heavy dew can convince you that the tow vehicle is the better place to store them. Most people have things that they'll be doing while camping - guns, bows, bicycles, boats, games, extra coolers, fishing gear, etc. So what you take with you will determine how much space you'll need for all that. And while some of that stuff could go on a rooftop rack, those things have a big impact on fuel economy and further burden the drivetrain when towing uphill for long distances, especially if you are looking for an economy car.

There is no shortage of vehicles that can tow a teardrop. But some are much better suited for towing than others, if towing is the primary concern. Just like there is broad continuum of cost of ownership among vehicles. What is important for how you plan to use both the car and the vehicle?

 

One of the best points made in this thread is related to the towing capacity of the TV. Being near maximum with loaded TD isn't too bad on the flats, but does become noticeable uphill. If you notice I list 2 TV's. The jeep has much more towing capacity than the Honda. Both will pull the 560, but in hilly terrain I would say the jeep does a much better job.

Bob

 

I've already disclaimed that I'm no expert on any of this, so take this for what it is worth. To me, the issue of towing with a vehicle where the towing capacity is nearly maxed out is that there will be more wear on the drivetrain (engine and transmission), especially in the hills, driving into a headwind, etc. When you only tow occasionally or short distances, it shouldn't be much of an issue. But if you tow a lot, I suspect you may be tempting fate.

The major difference between the Jeep and the Honda is torque, which you want more of if you'll be towing in the mountains. The Jeep is made for offroad, where steep grades are fairly common, so it has plenty of torque. Most Hondas are optimized for fuel efficiency and most models have less torque than a Jeep.

The main point I've been focusing on is that simply looking at the torque rating is not an accurate comparison. Our 3.3l V6 pickup had a maximum of 200 ft-lbs of torque and a 5,000 lbs towing capacity. Our 1.6l 4 cylinder van has 184 ft lbs of torque, a 2,000 lbs tow capacity + 1,700 load capacity. You would think that the V6 would tow better, but our experience is that the 4 cylinder tows better because it has a much broader power band.

There are vehicles today that come with tiny engines that have pretty impressive performance, especially the European manufacturers like Audi and Mercedes (our Ford engine is built in Europe). That's partly because cars there are taxed based upon engine displacement. Small engines are cheaper to own, but folks there still want the performance of a larger engine. Today more than ever before it is possible to get a very capable powertrain in an economy vehicle, if you know what to look for.