tow vehicle suggestions
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tow vehicle suggestions
I would say they look to the engineers for their designed
strengths. As a builder of homes look to the blue prints to see what
lumber is needed to go up a second story. Your tires are probably eight
ply rating running 45-60 pounds, on eight lug rims, with floating
bearings, and of course leaf springs. Now compare that to a bouncing
coil sprung Dana 35c TJ.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
"T. Greening" wrote:
>
> Bill, I said before I drive an F-250 Super Duty. I do know why it can tow
> more than a cherokee. (And actually, it rides pretty damn good for a 3/4
> ton truck. Surprised me anyway). One thing I WAS out of the ballpark on
> was it's towing capacity. I mentioned it before as being 20,000# when in
> fact that is it's GCWR. Even still, it can haul a load twice it's own
> weight. I'm just wondering what the actual determining factors are when
> detroit comes up with their tow ratings.
strengths. As a builder of homes look to the blue prints to see what
lumber is needed to go up a second story. Your tires are probably eight
ply rating running 45-60 pounds, on eight lug rims, with floating
bearings, and of course leaf springs. Now compare that to a bouncing
coil sprung Dana 35c TJ.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
"T. Greening" wrote:
>
> Bill, I said before I drive an F-250 Super Duty. I do know why it can tow
> more than a cherokee. (And actually, it rides pretty damn good for a 3/4
> ton truck. Surprised me anyway). One thing I WAS out of the ballpark on
> was it's towing capacity. I mentioned it before as being 20,000# when in
> fact that is it's GCWR. Even still, it can haul a load twice it's own
> weight. I'm just wondering what the actual determining factors are when
> detroit comes up with their tow ratings.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tow vehicle suggestions
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:24:15 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
wrote:
> It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
>
> I mean a 3000 lb towing difference just with an automatic? Man that is
> one major jump, well over double.
>
> Maybe the auto has different brakes too?
No, the drive train - axles, brakes, everythig - except the tranny -
are identical, at least on the 88. There is a difference in the
differential ratio - manual has a 3.07 and the auto has something like
a 3.53 or 3.73 - but that's it. The more I look at it, the more I
think that what we are calling the tow rating is really more of a
rating of what it can practically pull. In that light, the difference
is pretty reasonable. Also, when you read the owner's manual it is
very specific about the tranny and engine requirements when it calls
out the towing limits. My FSM set is the original 94 manual with
suppliments to cover the 87 changes made for the 4.0 and the numbers
are all tied to engine and tranny combos. I don't think the 4-banger
is rated to even pull the hat off your head, for example.
With the longbed MJ I have several inches - right at 122 inches - more
wheel base than your XJ and the factory step bumper hitch is rated at
3500 pounds (optimistic, yes!). With a class 3 hitch, I had no
problem pulling a huge farm load but that was across the fields in
4-LO never getting above a slow trot. With the brakes it has, I'd
hate to try stopping any appreciable load on the road. Even a 4x12
U-Haul full of furniture was interesting. Start off was fine, pulling
on the road was about as good as could be expected from the crap
trailer but stopping was definitely an exercise.
Funny, I can load the bed almost to the bumpstops with dirt and none
of it is an issue but drop that same load in a utility trailer and you
sure feel the difference. I would not classify the MJ as an ideal tow
vehicle in any way.
--
Will Honea
wrote:
> It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
>
> I mean a 3000 lb towing difference just with an automatic? Man that is
> one major jump, well over double.
>
> Maybe the auto has different brakes too?
No, the drive train - axles, brakes, everythig - except the tranny -
are identical, at least on the 88. There is a difference in the
differential ratio - manual has a 3.07 and the auto has something like
a 3.53 or 3.73 - but that's it. The more I look at it, the more I
think that what we are calling the tow rating is really more of a
rating of what it can practically pull. In that light, the difference
is pretty reasonable. Also, when you read the owner's manual it is
very specific about the tranny and engine requirements when it calls
out the towing limits. My FSM set is the original 94 manual with
suppliments to cover the 87 changes made for the 4.0 and the numbers
are all tied to engine and tranny combos. I don't think the 4-banger
is rated to even pull the hat off your head, for example.
With the longbed MJ I have several inches - right at 122 inches - more
wheel base than your XJ and the factory step bumper hitch is rated at
3500 pounds (optimistic, yes!). With a class 3 hitch, I had no
problem pulling a huge farm load but that was across the fields in
4-LO never getting above a slow trot. With the brakes it has, I'd
hate to try stopping any appreciable load on the road. Even a 4x12
U-Haul full of furniture was interesting. Start off was fine, pulling
on the road was about as good as could be expected from the crap
trailer but stopping was definitely an exercise.
Funny, I can load the bed almost to the bumpstops with dirt and none
of it is an issue but drop that same load in a utility trailer and you
sure feel the difference. I would not classify the MJ as an ideal tow
vehicle in any way.
--
Will Honea
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tow vehicle suggestions
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:24:15 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
wrote:
> It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
>
> I mean a 3000 lb towing difference just with an automatic? Man that is
> one major jump, well over double.
>
> Maybe the auto has different brakes too?
No, the drive train - axles, brakes, everythig - except the tranny -
are identical, at least on the 88. There is a difference in the
differential ratio - manual has a 3.07 and the auto has something like
a 3.53 or 3.73 - but that's it. The more I look at it, the more I
think that what we are calling the tow rating is really more of a
rating of what it can practically pull. In that light, the difference
is pretty reasonable. Also, when you read the owner's manual it is
very specific about the tranny and engine requirements when it calls
out the towing limits. My FSM set is the original 94 manual with
suppliments to cover the 87 changes made for the 4.0 and the numbers
are all tied to engine and tranny combos. I don't think the 4-banger
is rated to even pull the hat off your head, for example.
With the longbed MJ I have several inches - right at 122 inches - more
wheel base than your XJ and the factory step bumper hitch is rated at
3500 pounds (optimistic, yes!). With a class 3 hitch, I had no
problem pulling a huge farm load but that was across the fields in
4-LO never getting above a slow trot. With the brakes it has, I'd
hate to try stopping any appreciable load on the road. Even a 4x12
U-Haul full of furniture was interesting. Start off was fine, pulling
on the road was about as good as could be expected from the crap
trailer but stopping was definitely an exercise.
Funny, I can load the bed almost to the bumpstops with dirt and none
of it is an issue but drop that same load in a utility trailer and you
sure feel the difference. I would not classify the MJ as an ideal tow
vehicle in any way.
--
Will Honea
wrote:
> It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
>
> I mean a 3000 lb towing difference just with an automatic? Man that is
> one major jump, well over double.
>
> Maybe the auto has different brakes too?
No, the drive train - axles, brakes, everythig - except the tranny -
are identical, at least on the 88. There is a difference in the
differential ratio - manual has a 3.07 and the auto has something like
a 3.53 or 3.73 - but that's it. The more I look at it, the more I
think that what we are calling the tow rating is really more of a
rating of what it can practically pull. In that light, the difference
is pretty reasonable. Also, when you read the owner's manual it is
very specific about the tranny and engine requirements when it calls
out the towing limits. My FSM set is the original 94 manual with
suppliments to cover the 87 changes made for the 4.0 and the numbers
are all tied to engine and tranny combos. I don't think the 4-banger
is rated to even pull the hat off your head, for example.
With the longbed MJ I have several inches - right at 122 inches - more
wheel base than your XJ and the factory step bumper hitch is rated at
3500 pounds (optimistic, yes!). With a class 3 hitch, I had no
problem pulling a huge farm load but that was across the fields in
4-LO never getting above a slow trot. With the brakes it has, I'd
hate to try stopping any appreciable load on the road. Even a 4x12
U-Haul full of furniture was interesting. Start off was fine, pulling
on the road was about as good as could be expected from the crap
trailer but stopping was definitely an exercise.
Funny, I can load the bed almost to the bumpstops with dirt and none
of it is an issue but drop that same load in a utility trailer and you
sure feel the difference. I would not classify the MJ as an ideal tow
vehicle in any way.
--
Will Honea
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tow vehicle suggestions
Will Honea wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:24:15 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
> >
> > I mean a 3000 lb towing difference just with an automatic? Man that is
> > one major jump, well over double.
> >
> > Maybe the auto has different brakes too?
>
> No, the drive train - axles, brakes, everythig - except the tranny -
> are identical, at least on the 88. There is a difference in the
> differential ratio - manual has a 3.07 and the auto has something like
> a 3.53 or 3.73 - but that's it. The more I look at it, the more I
> think that what we are calling the tow rating is really more of a
> rating of what it can practically pull. In that light, the difference
> is pretty reasonable. Also, when you read the owner's manual it is
> very specific about the tranny and engine requirements when it calls
> out the towing limits. My FSM set is the original 94 manual with
> suppliments to cover the 87 changes made for the 4.0 and the numbers
> are all tied to engine and tranny combos. I don't think the 4-banger
> is rated to even pull the hat off your head, for example.
>
> With the longbed MJ I have several inches - right at 122 inches - more
> wheel base than your XJ and the factory step bumper hitch is rated at
> 3500 pounds (optimistic, yes!). With a class 3 hitch, I had no
> problem pulling a huge farm load but that was across the fields in
> 4-LO never getting above a slow trot. With the brakes it has, I'd
> hate to try stopping any appreciable load on the road. Even a 4x12
> U-Haul full of furniture was interesting. Start off was fine, pulling
> on the road was about as good as could be expected from the crap
> trailer but stopping was definitely an exercise.
>
> Funny, I can load the bed almost to the bumpstops with dirt and none
> of it is an issue but drop that same load in a utility trailer and you
> sure feel the difference. I would not classify the MJ as an ideal tow
> vehicle in any way.
>
> --
Mine is an 88 too, so is my owners manual.
The heavier and longer auto must toss the center of gravity more to the
rear wheels or something I am guessing.
The tail wagging the dog syndrome....
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:24:15 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
> >
> > I mean a 3000 lb towing difference just with an automatic? Man that is
> > one major jump, well over double.
> >
> > Maybe the auto has different brakes too?
>
> No, the drive train - axles, brakes, everythig - except the tranny -
> are identical, at least on the 88. There is a difference in the
> differential ratio - manual has a 3.07 and the auto has something like
> a 3.53 or 3.73 - but that's it. The more I look at it, the more I
> think that what we are calling the tow rating is really more of a
> rating of what it can practically pull. In that light, the difference
> is pretty reasonable. Also, when you read the owner's manual it is
> very specific about the tranny and engine requirements when it calls
> out the towing limits. My FSM set is the original 94 manual with
> suppliments to cover the 87 changes made for the 4.0 and the numbers
> are all tied to engine and tranny combos. I don't think the 4-banger
> is rated to even pull the hat off your head, for example.
>
> With the longbed MJ I have several inches - right at 122 inches - more
> wheel base than your XJ and the factory step bumper hitch is rated at
> 3500 pounds (optimistic, yes!). With a class 3 hitch, I had no
> problem pulling a huge farm load but that was across the fields in
> 4-LO never getting above a slow trot. With the brakes it has, I'd
> hate to try stopping any appreciable load on the road. Even a 4x12
> U-Haul full of furniture was interesting. Start off was fine, pulling
> on the road was about as good as could be expected from the crap
> trailer but stopping was definitely an exercise.
>
> Funny, I can load the bed almost to the bumpstops with dirt and none
> of it is an issue but drop that same load in a utility trailer and you
> sure feel the difference. I would not classify the MJ as an ideal tow
> vehicle in any way.
>
> --
Mine is an 88 too, so is my owners manual.
The heavier and longer auto must toss the center of gravity more to the
rear wheels or something I am guessing.
The tail wagging the dog syndrome....
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tow vehicle suggestions
Will Honea wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:24:15 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
> >
> > I mean a 3000 lb towing difference just with an automatic? Man that is
> > one major jump, well over double.
> >
> > Maybe the auto has different brakes too?
>
> No, the drive train - axles, brakes, everythig - except the tranny -
> are identical, at least on the 88. There is a difference in the
> differential ratio - manual has a 3.07 and the auto has something like
> a 3.53 or 3.73 - but that's it. The more I look at it, the more I
> think that what we are calling the tow rating is really more of a
> rating of what it can practically pull. In that light, the difference
> is pretty reasonable. Also, when you read the owner's manual it is
> very specific about the tranny and engine requirements when it calls
> out the towing limits. My FSM set is the original 94 manual with
> suppliments to cover the 87 changes made for the 4.0 and the numbers
> are all tied to engine and tranny combos. I don't think the 4-banger
> is rated to even pull the hat off your head, for example.
>
> With the longbed MJ I have several inches - right at 122 inches - more
> wheel base than your XJ and the factory step bumper hitch is rated at
> 3500 pounds (optimistic, yes!). With a class 3 hitch, I had no
> problem pulling a huge farm load but that was across the fields in
> 4-LO never getting above a slow trot. With the brakes it has, I'd
> hate to try stopping any appreciable load on the road. Even a 4x12
> U-Haul full of furniture was interesting. Start off was fine, pulling
> on the road was about as good as could be expected from the crap
> trailer but stopping was definitely an exercise.
>
> Funny, I can load the bed almost to the bumpstops with dirt and none
> of it is an issue but drop that same load in a utility trailer and you
> sure feel the difference. I would not classify the MJ as an ideal tow
> vehicle in any way.
>
> --
Mine is an 88 too, so is my owners manual.
The heavier and longer auto must toss the center of gravity more to the
rear wheels or something I am guessing.
The tail wagging the dog syndrome....
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
>
> On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:24:15 UTC Mike Romain <romainm@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either.
> >
> > I mean a 3000 lb towing difference just with an automatic? Man that is
> > one major jump, well over double.
> >
> > Maybe the auto has different brakes too?
>
> No, the drive train - axles, brakes, everythig - except the tranny -
> are identical, at least on the 88. There is a difference in the
> differential ratio - manual has a 3.07 and the auto has something like
> a 3.53 or 3.73 - but that's it. The more I look at it, the more I
> think that what we are calling the tow rating is really more of a
> rating of what it can practically pull. In that light, the difference
> is pretty reasonable. Also, when you read the owner's manual it is
> very specific about the tranny and engine requirements when it calls
> out the towing limits. My FSM set is the original 94 manual with
> suppliments to cover the 87 changes made for the 4.0 and the numbers
> are all tied to engine and tranny combos. I don't think the 4-banger
> is rated to even pull the hat off your head, for example.
>
> With the longbed MJ I have several inches - right at 122 inches - more
> wheel base than your XJ and the factory step bumper hitch is rated at
> 3500 pounds (optimistic, yes!). With a class 3 hitch, I had no
> problem pulling a huge farm load but that was across the fields in
> 4-LO never getting above a slow trot. With the brakes it has, I'd
> hate to try stopping any appreciable load on the road. Even a 4x12
> U-Haul full of furniture was interesting. Start off was fine, pulling
> on the road was about as good as could be expected from the crap
> trailer but stopping was definitely an exercise.
>
> Funny, I can load the bed almost to the bumpstops with dirt and none
> of it is an issue but drop that same load in a utility trailer and you
> sure feel the difference. I would not classify the MJ as an ideal tow
> vehicle in any way.
>
> --
Mine is an 88 too, so is my owners manual.
The heavier and longer auto must toss the center of gravity more to the
rear wheels or something I am guessing.
The tail wagging the dog syndrome....
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tow vehicle suggestions
Safety regulations here at any rate state that you don't tow more than 70%
of the vehicle's weight, and Cherokees are lighter than Wranglers.
Common sense tells you that if you don't want the tail to wag the dog, you
have a LWB vehicle (think of a fulcrum in physics). The strength of the
drivetrain isn't really the determining factor.
--
Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0309291324.2423944f@posting.google.c om...
: Take manufacturer recommendations with a grain of salt. Remember they
: are writing that owner's manual with a battalion of liability lawyers
: looking over their shoulders. If the vehicle can safely tow 6,000
: lbs, they probably divide by 3 and put "don't tow more than 2,000 lbs"
: in the manual to cover their butts.
:
: There is no way that towing is such a one size fits all business. If
: you're towing on flat ground and have an 8-cylinder engine and heavy
: duty transmission, and keep it under 55mph, there is no reason a
: cherokee can't tow 5,000 pounds or possibly much more. However if you
: want to drive at max speed and haul something over the continental
: divide that is another matter entirely... so scale your expectations
: accordingly.
of the vehicle's weight, and Cherokees are lighter than Wranglers.
Common sense tells you that if you don't want the tail to wag the dog, you
have a LWB vehicle (think of a fulcrum in physics). The strength of the
drivetrain isn't really the determining factor.
--
Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0309291324.2423944f@posting.google.c om...
: Take manufacturer recommendations with a grain of salt. Remember they
: are writing that owner's manual with a battalion of liability lawyers
: looking over their shoulders. If the vehicle can safely tow 6,000
: lbs, they probably divide by 3 and put "don't tow more than 2,000 lbs"
: in the manual to cover their butts.
:
: There is no way that towing is such a one size fits all business. If
: you're towing on flat ground and have an 8-cylinder engine and heavy
: duty transmission, and keep it under 55mph, there is no reason a
: cherokee can't tow 5,000 pounds or possibly much more. However if you
: want to drive at max speed and haul something over the continental
: divide that is another matter entirely... so scale your expectations
: accordingly.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tow vehicle suggestions
Safety regulations here at any rate state that you don't tow more than 70%
of the vehicle's weight, and Cherokees are lighter than Wranglers.
Common sense tells you that if you don't want the tail to wag the dog, you
have a LWB vehicle (think of a fulcrum in physics). The strength of the
drivetrain isn't really the determining factor.
--
Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0309291324.2423944f@posting.google.c om...
: Take manufacturer recommendations with a grain of salt. Remember they
: are writing that owner's manual with a battalion of liability lawyers
: looking over their shoulders. If the vehicle can safely tow 6,000
: lbs, they probably divide by 3 and put "don't tow more than 2,000 lbs"
: in the manual to cover their butts.
:
: There is no way that towing is such a one size fits all business. If
: you're towing on flat ground and have an 8-cylinder engine and heavy
: duty transmission, and keep it under 55mph, there is no reason a
: cherokee can't tow 5,000 pounds or possibly much more. However if you
: want to drive at max speed and haul something over the continental
: divide that is another matter entirely... so scale your expectations
: accordingly.
of the vehicle's weight, and Cherokees are lighter than Wranglers.
Common sense tells you that if you don't want the tail to wag the dog, you
have a LWB vehicle (think of a fulcrum in physics). The strength of the
drivetrain isn't really the determining factor.
--
Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0309291324.2423944f@posting.google.c om...
: Take manufacturer recommendations with a grain of salt. Remember they
: are writing that owner's manual with a battalion of liability lawyers
: looking over their shoulders. If the vehicle can safely tow 6,000
: lbs, they probably divide by 3 and put "don't tow more than 2,000 lbs"
: in the manual to cover their butts.
:
: There is no way that towing is such a one size fits all business. If
: you're towing on flat ground and have an 8-cylinder engine and heavy
: duty transmission, and keep it under 55mph, there is no reason a
: cherokee can't tow 5,000 pounds or possibly much more. However if you
: want to drive at max speed and haul something over the continental
: divide that is another matter entirely... so scale your expectations
: accordingly.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tow vehicle suggestions
Safety regulations here at any rate state that you don't tow more than 70%
of the vehicle's weight, and Cherokees are lighter than Wranglers.
Common sense tells you that if you don't want the tail to wag the dog, you
have a LWB vehicle (think of a fulcrum in physics). The strength of the
drivetrain isn't really the determining factor.
--
Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0309291324.2423944f@posting.google.c om...
: Take manufacturer recommendations with a grain of salt. Remember they
: are writing that owner's manual with a battalion of liability lawyers
: looking over their shoulders. If the vehicle can safely tow 6,000
: lbs, they probably divide by 3 and put "don't tow more than 2,000 lbs"
: in the manual to cover their butts.
:
: There is no way that towing is such a one size fits all business. If
: you're towing on flat ground and have an 8-cylinder engine and heavy
: duty transmission, and keep it under 55mph, there is no reason a
: cherokee can't tow 5,000 pounds or possibly much more. However if you
: want to drive at max speed and haul something over the continental
: divide that is another matter entirely... so scale your expectations
: accordingly.
of the vehicle's weight, and Cherokees are lighter than Wranglers.
Common sense tells you that if you don't want the tail to wag the dog, you
have a LWB vehicle (think of a fulcrum in physics). The strength of the
drivetrain isn't really the determining factor.
--
Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
"Joshua Nelson" <spam_box@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:b102b6e4.0309291324.2423944f@posting.google.c om...
: Take manufacturer recommendations with a grain of salt. Remember they
: are writing that owner's manual with a battalion of liability lawyers
: looking over their shoulders. If the vehicle can safely tow 6,000
: lbs, they probably divide by 3 and put "don't tow more than 2,000 lbs"
: in the manual to cover their butts.
:
: There is no way that towing is such a one size fits all business. If
: you're towing on flat ground and have an 8-cylinder engine and heavy
: duty transmission, and keep it under 55mph, there is no reason a
: cherokee can't tow 5,000 pounds or possibly much more. However if you
: want to drive at max speed and haul something over the continental
: divide that is another matter entirely... so scale your expectations
: accordingly.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
