Tow Vehicles 2013 and newer

[potter water]

Yes, a diesel can seem bigger than a full size truck, but I've owned a 1500 gas, 2500 V10 gas and now my 2500 2006 Dodge diesel that I bought for 25000 dollars with 52000 miles on it in 2007. Other than the weight bearing and tow capacity, the 2006 is easy for my wife to drive and park and she really likes being up where she can see. It is the 4 door cab model. My truck now has 150000 miles on it and the NADA private sale value is now 25,000. In other words, effectively, no depreciation according to NADA in the past 9 years. Of course, diesel trucks have hit a high in the popularity curve.

Many things go into the new and used and what to buy equation; how sustainable is the depreciation, sure a hit gets taken on a new one, but in the case of the Dodge Cummins diesel trucks after the initial hit, they are on a very flat depreciation curve. I can't comment on the chev or ford diesel depreciation.

My Dodge gets 19 MPG at 70 with my wife and I and baggage for a one week trip. It gets 17 MPG with my 2000 lb camper in the bed at 65 mph. It gets 14 MPG at 60 MPH pulling my 4000 lb boat and with the 2000 lb camper in the bed. It stays in overdrive on any hill up to 4% grade but kicks out of OD above that. I've never had to go into third gear on any highway or interstate grade.

Your use of a truck for only boat towing and not with a load in the bed, should make the 1500 eco diesel a great match. Pricey, but a great match to your needs.

[Chester]

We are happy with our '13 4wd F150 with 3.5l Ecoboost, 3.31 gears and 9,400# towing capacity. It does have the base tow package. When I baby it it'll get almost 23 mpg at 60 mph when it's warm. When I don't it goes like a bat out of hell.

[colbysmith]

So I took a new (2016) Dodge Ram 1500 Crew Cab short bed with Eco-Diesel for a test drive today. (Bighorn package). NICE truck. Showing a MFSR of $51,000, on sale for $40,000. I guess my only complaint, besides cost, was would it even fit in my garage. While it drove easy enough, it did appear to be a good bit longer than my Highlander. Which would probably relate to parking issues, etc. I also looked at and drove a 2016 Tacoma with the V6, crew cab. This was the SR5 interior level, rather basic. I think I've been spoiled with my last two vehicles, and since I make some long distance travel, prefer to have a little more luxury. Otherwise, the interior was much smaller than the Highlander or the other larger trucks. Just not quite what I want. Unfortunately, the new Highlanders don't impress me much. Just learned today while researching that around 2014, they went to a bit heavier body which cuts into the payload some. Still rated to tow 5,000 lbs, but with tongue weight and fully loaded putting my current Highlander right on the edge, the loss of payload doesn't sit well with me. I could still get a low mileage 2013 Highlander and have exactly what I have now. I still want to look a bit more at the Ford F150 3.5 EcoBoost V6. The new Ram 1500 Ecodiesel uses DEF. I'm starting to wonder if the increased diesel mileage over gas, is really that much of a cost savings with possibly increased maintenance costs?
I guess as of right this minute, the Ram 1500 with Eco-Diesel is sitting as the winner with what I've seen today. But not without some cons. I also looked at a Four Runner. Nice, but think it takes a hit in mileage. Colby

[T.R. Bauer]

If you like the Dodge a lot, don't bother driving the Ford - you'll end up with the ecoboost. It runs circles around the dodge as far as power and torque goes. The 2015 f150 also have awesome brakes and pretty good handling.

[colbysmith]

Been spending the last few hours on the laptop reading reviews. Now I'm not sure either of them would be worth it... Some concern of payload available, particularly with the heavier Ram, and of the 150's eco boost lacking in mileage with the boost in progress... I guess I need to have all the numbers available on both trucks, regarding GVWR, GCVWR and actual curb weight. At this very moment, I'm kind of back to really liking my current Highlander with just about 100,000 miles on it, or looking at some more SUV's. (I really don't need the back end bed area of a truck.) Time to give it a rest for the day. Mind is so muddled up right now with information overload... Colby

[thataway]

The reason I like SUV such as my Yukon XL is that they have the ride comfort as good as a car (for me). Very comfortable seats, and very easy to get in and out (important as you near 80).

The towing capacity is similar to most pickups. They are trucks--not cross overs.
I like that we can take the back row of seats (only necessary if you want to transport more than 5 people), out, and have a full 8' x 4" bed area. For me this means I can sleep back there as Marie drives. If necessary we both can sleep in the back (with air mattress.--still room for air mattress, food chest, gear porti potty, tools, and it is secure--not like in a truck, where it is in the bed. We can get up to 22 mpg on the highway (at 55 to 60), and towing we average 13 to 14 mpg. Not too much off what the diesels are getting. With the tow package, you have plenty of reserve beyond the weight of the C Dory 22. Also, there is some weight in the back so that tracking out of the ramp is good (but we do have 4 x 4 with low range, so off road or sand is OK...

Each of us has to weigh all of these factors and make our personal decision. In many ways I would rather have a diesel, (and have for the 25 and 255), but for the 22, the gasser is fine.

A few years ago, it was time for Marie to get a "new" car. Many times in our lives, this as been a low milage 2 to3 year old car, but currently we are able to get anything she wanted. She drove a number of cars, and her choice surprised me, but it was what she wanted--and she is happy. I don't like to drive her car, and it is not comfortable for me--but again--it is what each of us likes which is important.

[gulfcoast john]

Colby,
Tell her I said you should narrow it down to your favorite 3, and buy all 3 to drive on different days.
Also, a HD2500 diesel truck is great if for instance, you need to go to Lowe's to buy some light bulbs.
Hope that gets you a bigger budget for this.
Always wanting to be helpful!
John

[colbysmith]

John, I think you read something into my post from somebody else. lol. My wife said she supports what ever I decide to get. Of course talking cars with her is like her trying to talk eyeliner with me. (Probably because she knows I won't be able to figure it out in the end and just keep what I have.) Colby

[colbysmith]

Bob, tell me more about that Yukon. The last couple of 8 cylinder SUV's I owned got no where near 20 mpg. More like 17-18 maybe. And not towing. Colby

[thataway]

Colby,
Certainly the newer trucks get better mileage than they used to. I remember borrowing a friends 150 a few years ago, and getting about 8 miles a gallon.

The way you drive, has a lot about the mileage . We have a Scan Gauge G hooked up to the OBD port, and monitor the instant mileage and average mileage, Gallons per hour etc. Lower speed, easy acceleration and letting the truck coast can make a lot of difference. There is the feature of cutting off 4 of the cylinders--I don't know if it helps much. You can have the dash read out if it is running on 4 or 8 cylinders. Mostly on 4 if coasting, or very level and low speeds. The "Tow Haul" mode is similar in most of the trucks--moves the shift points up, and I believe leaves off the top gear, unless you are going down hill. Nothing magic about the Yukon vs the Chevy Suburban or similar large SUV.

[colbysmith]

Ok. Thanks. Actually after posting my last comment, I googled the Yukon. Looks to be priced higher than the trucks I'm looking at. Another "con" I'm seeing with the eco-diesels is the addition of DEF. While it's not really that expensive, it is one more item that has to be looked after. Also my brother shared that the problem many of his friends see with these newer diesels is all the "environmental" stuff that is making the diesel motor more like a gas motor, and questions if they will really last as long as the old diesels. I may still end up in a light truck, either the Ford or the Dodge, but right now I'm still trying to figure out just exactly what I would gain over my Highlander (besides very little more tow capacity when you weigh in all the payload numbers!). As for the small and large V-8's, I just haven't had good luck with good mileage on them. Of course the last big SUV I had was the Excursion with the V-10, and I averaged 9 towing, while only 14-16 at best traveling with nothing in tow. Colby

[T.R. Bauer]

I have a suburban too (a good old 99 5.7) and we have logged 185,000 miles on her so far. It gets 19-21 on the highway and 15 putting around the house (country driving). While towing a loaded 22, it consistently gets 12 and I have towed a lot with it. I wish it had more powerful brakes and a firmer suspension; but it tows well enough. Regardless of what the Consumer Reports say, these things last and last when taken care of. My friend had a 2001 with a 5.3 that went nearly 300,000 when he sold it. Bob isn't telling stories with the mpg on these; that is about what they get.

My new 5.0 is getting 20-23 on the highway, 18-20 putting around the house, and I only have 600 miles of towing data, but 13-14 towing at 60 mph through mountain passes and using 4 wheel drive. It is flat between here and the PWS, so we will see what it gets when it is flat soon enough.

The 3.5 Eco will do better; but only slightly - you're right they have a lot of boost and not so much ECO. The 2.7 probably gets in town what my 5.0 gets on the highway. I have 3.73 gears though so things are not apples to apples.

If your highlander is still doing the job, I would keep it around like I have our old trusty suburban.

[colbysmith]

Thanks T.R. I have taken pretty good care of the Highlander since I got it at around 40,000 miles, and I'm pretty sure it was well cared for in that first 40,000, and was not used for towing. In my care, that includes changing things like Tranny and Differential oils annually as well. It's been a while since I owned an 8 cyclinder, and the last two big vehicles I had were the Excursion with the V10 and the Motorhome with a V10, so maybe not the best things to judge gas mileage from. I can't remember what I got with a long past Ram 1500 and Ford Bronco with the small 8's. Sounds like perhaps I shouldn't just rule out V8's like I have. I can live with the kind of mileage you are reporting. Really not that much less than my Highlander. However, I really do think my 2010 Highlander can continue towing for some time as long as I maintain it. And I really do like how it has done the job. The passenger comfort level along with it's proven reliability and stability in the towing I've done. Perhaps I need to look at some other SUV's that have V8's as well. I know a lot of folks really like their diesels, but diesel is not for everyone. My brother has the Ram 2500 with the bigger diesel, and it doesn't sound like his mileage is much different from my Highlander, for around town use, or even on the highway when neither rigs are towing. I did test drive a F250 with a V8 a few months ago, and besides feeling like a beast, the "spot mileage" on the gauge was not very impressive, only doing about 14-15 on the highway. I'm not sure how they get the weight ratings on the 1/2 ton trucks with the smaller engines. What they say is the towing capacity, doesn't always match up with available payload. When one starts seeing numbers like 1100 for payload, then you subtract from that 400+ lbs of body weight (assuming only two of you), couple hundred pounds of luggage and supplies for a vacation, and then try hooking up 400-500 lbs of tongue weight you've already overshot that payload allowance. As it is with my 2010 Highlander I'm already sitting right on my GVWR max when fully loaded with the boat hitched up. And the newer Highlanders increased their size ever so slightly wiping 300 lbs or more (I forget the exact number) off available payload. Maybe Ford needs to bring back the Bronco with the 302 (5L). That was a pretty good SUV. Anyone have any experience with the Nissan Pathfinder? Colby

[Will-C]

We have a 2009 2500 HD Chevy 4x4 with a Duramax diesel / Allison transmission extended cab 8' bed. We don't travel light. It has 70,000 miles as I do not use it as a daily driver. We paid $44,000. It's still looks and runs good Kelly Blue Book still lists it today at being worth $27,000. It's on it's original set of brakes and only recently had the original tires replaced. It gets between 16+ around town with my lead foot and 11 to 13 mpg. pulling a 10,000 pound boat and trailer. If you look diesels usually having longer oil change intervals and the fact ours takes ten quarts of oil for an oil change three quarts more than a gas engine that was in our previous truck. Chevy's 2009 diesels did not use DEF fluid. Over the course of 50,000 miles getting 5 mpg better while towing can add up to a lot more than the extra upkeep costs. Plus you can easily tow at 65 to 70 miles hour up and down hills. Factor in the exceptional resale value and you can see you get what you pay for IMHO.
D.D.

[Sunbeam]

Reading through, it kind of makes me wonder why you want to replace the Highlander. Of course, you don't have to have any good reason, other than just wanting to. On the other hand, lacking any known reason otherwise, I'd think you could get many more years/miles from the Highlander, and I wouldn't necessarily expect issues. It seems that modern vehicles (unless a lemon or poorly maintained) are capable of running up to 200,000 miles or more fairly routinely.

I guess if it were me, if no newer vehicle was strongly calling to me, I'd stick with the Highlander. (But no reason you should do same.)