Tow Vehicles 2013 and newer

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
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.)
 
Colby,

I have nothing about the pathfinder, but Ford is feeling the pressure to bring back the beloved Bronco. My son has my old 89 with a 351 - not a single major component has failed on that thing! If you don't remember the MPG on those, it gets 11 in town and 14-16 on the highway - not good! It does however, climb a tree.
 
Hey Sunbeam. Main reason I started looking was just the mileage turning 100,000. But the more I talk to folks, and knowing how I maintain my vehicles, I think I worry too much about nothing! lol. Of course the other reason is just a consideration for something with a little more room between tow capacity and actual towing. Colby
 
T.R. My 87 Bronco just had the 302 (5.0L), and I think it actually got a little better mileage than your numbers. But you are right, it could climb a tree. My favorite story/memory with it was in Kodiak AK. I had been up to Pillar Mtn a few times on a paved trail and wondered if there was another way down on the other side. So I asked some of my guys at the air station (I was in the USCG) if there was a trail for 4 wheelers down the other side. Now mind you, I used the term 4 wheelers to refer to 4x4. I think you know where this might be going. They said yes, just keep going past the pavement. Well, this was in late October with some snow / ice already on the ground. Once I started down, I realized the error of my communications, but no way in hell at this point I could turn around and get back up the hill. Came up to one tight spot with some boulders and ice and knew it was going to be dicey. Well, unfortunate luck won out and I hit one spot wrong and did a 180. Just about rolled it, but managed to stay upright. (By this time my twin 3 year olds were just having a grand time giggling and bouncing around in their seats. Mama had her eyes shut and fingernails into the seat!) NO way to turn back around, but figured I had to be close to the bottom, so began backing the rest of the way down, which fortunately was not very far. I was just about at the bottom, and then several enlisted station guys came up on their ATV's, looked at me and said "Sir there is no way you are getting that Bronco up this trail. I could barely muster out the words, no shit, I just came down it! :shock: Colby
 
colbysmith":30d2859h said:
Hey Sunbeam. Main reason I started looking was just the mileage turning 100,000. But the more I talk to folks, and knowing how I maintain my vehicles, I think I worry too much about nothing! lol. Of course the other reason is just a consideration for something with a little more room between tow capacity and actual towing. Colby
Click to expand...

Heck, my favorite vehicle to BUY is a one-owner, well-maintained example with only 100,000 miles on the clock :mrgreen: Seriously.

On the other considerations, understood.
 
Sunbeam":302ckfqt said:
colbysmith":302ckfqt said:
Hey Sunbeam. Main reason I started looking was just the mileage turning 100,000. But the more I talk to folks, and knowing how I maintain my vehicles, I think I worry too much about nothing! lol. Of course the other reason is just a consideration for something with a little more room between tow capacity and actual towing. Colby
Click to expand...

Heck, my favorite vehicle to BUY is a one-owner, well-maintained example with only 100,000 miles on the clock :mrgreen: Seriously.

On the other considerations, understood.
Click to expand...

In that case I might just have just what you are looking for. A 2001 Toyota Tundra with just tweak over 100K. Well taken care of and garage stored it's entire life. New tires, 4X4 and reasonable Gasser mileage.

Harvey
SleepyC :moon

January_2010_349.thumb.jpg
 
Following is my experience this past week towing a 22 Cruiser from Miramichi, New Brunswick, to Honey Harbour, Ontario.
The distance is about 900 miles.
Terrain varies, but is generally flat with mild hills [less than 4% grade].
Roads were in generally good repair and varied from 4+ lane divided to two lane blacktop.
This particular Toyota Tacoma is a 2010 V6 with factory 6500# tow package.
Boat has 90 hp Etec @ around 350#. No fuel or water in tanks. Usual amount of stuff like anchor &line, winch, galley items, but nothing outstandingly heavy.
Trailer EZ Loader tandem of about #1300 per mfgr.
General conclusion is that I would be happy to use that truck to tow in similar circumstances, but I would not use it to tow across the Rockies or, say, from MI to FL. I would use it to go from SE MI on I 75 to upper MI. It worked pretty hard going up relatively mild hills.
Mileage was from 10.5 in hills and on rough roads, to 13.5, or so, on interstate type highways [Hwy 401, 20, 30]
Bottom line: we made it! Boat is now ensconced in home marina.
 
Thanks Andrew. Mileage figures sound similar to mine in the Highlander. But I have towed over the Rockies with it, with no problem. After talking to several folks with V8's, I think I'm going to start researching SUV's with the V8. The Tacoma I test drove, was just a little too small for me in the cab. Felt like I was leaning up against the door with my leg. Colby
 
As I spend more and more time researching a tow vehicle that can do a little bit of everything, ie, decent towing, decent mileage, decent cost, decent passenger vehicle, etc, I've come to the conclusion, it doesn't exist! :( I also conclude that the towing ratings mean nothing, if curb weight and GVWR or payload is not included right next to the tow rating. So many of the manufacturers will list a serious tow rating, yet if one starts to look at payload you find that it would be very hard to tow up to the tow rating without exceeding payload. At 5,000 lbs on the tow, tongue weight of 7-10% (recommended for boat trailers) is around 350-500 lbs of tongue weight, which must be included in the payload. It's very easy to push 800-1000 lbs of passenger and cargo weight on a vacation. Add in the maximum 500 lb tongue weight, and with many of these late model SUV's/Trucks you are actually above the payload (GVWR), even if well below the tow capacity. I guess I don't understand how they are coming up with the numbers they advertise. Contrary to what some have suggested, I do not feel a Weight Distribution Hitch is prudent on a single pole style boat trailer. And while that might reduce some of the tow vehicles payload weight, it is doing it by increasing the payload weight on your boat trailer axles. I'm not really interested in increasing my trailer axle weight. There are also some cars and trailers that do not accept the use of WDH's.
I think with the case of the CD-22, where one is near, but less than the 5000lb/500lb limit many tow vehicles espouse, or even many hitches without WD restrict too, it comes down to the tow vehicle's payload as the limiting factor. With the light weight material and build of most modern small pickup's and SUV's, that payload limits the vehicles usefulness as a "workhorse".
End result? I'm still looking for an SUV with good reviews, but for now it really does look like my best bet is to keep maintaining my Highlander, be aware of it's payload numbers, and hope it continues to serve me well until I can find a good replacement.
Colby
 
colbysmith":3uu7pcx1 said:
I also conclude that the towing ratings mean nothing, if curb weight and GVWR or payload is not included right next to the tow rating.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the truth! I've towed my 22 with two different "large" vehicles, and while both are completely up to the task of towing my ~5,000# C-Dory/trailer (while staying inside ratings on GVWR, GAWR, etc.), they have both been "rated to tow" MUCH more. Ha, no way. Unless you either gutted the vehicle and/or went way over the ratings for rear axle, etc.

(First rig was "rated to tow" 7,500#; current rig is rated to tow 8,500#.)

I knew this going in, so I was able to make sure that 5,000# would be fine, but geez, NO WAY could I ever even come close to touching the "rated" towing capacity. I'm not talking just a smidge over, either.

This one was one of the big reasons I went with a 22 vs. the Cape Cruiser 23 (which has some nice features). I knew that the types of vehicles I wanted to buy and tow with would do just fine with my 4,500-5,000#, but another thousand pounds would not have worked well.

Anyway, back to your shopping...
 
Save that Highlander for now and take a look at the 2017 Honda Ridgeline set to be released this month.

It starts at 26,000+ in front, yes front wheel drive form and runs about 32k in AWD form all the way into the low 40k range for all the options.

Rated to tow 5000lbs and up to 600lbs hitch load and the payload for the vehicle is just under 1600lbs so you could actually use that 5k rating!

There are some early review out in the last few days.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmnsy54Ohmk

http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/the-2017- ... 1775023406

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/05/09/2017 ... ve-review/

I know we will be watching and considering as our Hyundai ages out of our possession.

Greg
 
Thanks Greg. I'll have to do that. Honda is another good product. I looked at the Pilot before, but didn't like the leg room with the center console. (Which is usually the case with many of the SUV's.).... Perhaps the Ridgeline will have more room. I really don't like paying for a new car, and seeing it depreciate as soon as I drive it off the lot. But still, maybe worth a look. Colby
 
Be careful with the depreciation worries. That factor in new car vs. used car purchases is not as clear cut as it may seem.

I am on vehicle #23 in 24 years (I drive a lot (~50k per year) and love it) so I get to think about this very regularly and weight the numbers.

How long you plan to keep the car can relate very much to the sting of depreciation as can warranty coverage or financing differences between new and used. The model year and timing of your purchase related to a model redesign can also severely steer the outcome. Brands and models also vary in the amount of depreciation which is something my father recently experienced as a diehard used car buyer. It went like this...

-I really want that new model Subaru Forester...(he drove mine and couldn't shake it)
-I will wait a bit and pick up a lightly used one...
-A year of looking for deals passes...
-Damn, I keep looking and all I can find is a low mile car without the warranty for a wopping few hundred less than new....
-I guess I can keep waiting or start enjoying what I want today...
-He bought new for the first time in over 40 years and has no regrets and plans to keep it forever (this is a muscle car guy!)

Or a slighted dated by relevant Toyota truck (low depreciation) example picked from an article on depreciation factors...

"For instance, the Toyota Tacoma, known for its strong resale value, suffers about $5,600 of depreciation in its first year, from a $19,205 sticker price (and a $18,200 market price). Allow $2,500 for repairs and maintenance in five years for the new 2010 Tacoma, versus nearly $5,700 over five years for a used 2008 Tacoma that costs roughly $14,000. This lower number for repairs and maintenance actually helps bring the total cost of ownership for the new Tacoma right in line with the used 2008 model, when you calculate it over five years: about $35,200 to $35,000, according to Vincentric. In this case, it certainly makes sense to start with the new one."

In contrast, one of my favorite personal examples was the first vehicle refresh (from our first lives) Cindie and I did before getting married.

She traded in her loaded 2004 Chevy SUV for 18,500 (paid 48k new!)
I traded in my mid grade 2004 Honda SUV for 18,200 (paid 22 new and had double the miles)

I think you can guess which one of us was upset.

Greg
 
As long as you were able to stay within its tow capacity the new Ridgeline makes a lot of sense. I really believe with front wheel drive there is no need for AWD/4WD for most users. You would get a tow vehicle with car manners and crossover MPG. Too, this is a vehicle you wouldn't feel piggish about driving to the soccer field or the store. Not too cumbersome to park, store, or drive in urban settings. I would expect reliability and resale value to be top notch. True it has no low gear range, but neither does the Highlander or any of the other crossovers. Maybe use the Highlander another year to see the Ridgeline prove its real world performance? I would not expect a significant discount buying used for this vehicle, as it will be exceedingly popular with a wider audience than most pickups. My prediction is that Honda has a real winner with this vehicle. Once one's tow weight climbs above about 5K pounds, however, I would still suggest a body-on-frame type truck or SUV as a tow vehicle. So many ways for a boater to spend his money!!
 
I believe that there is a lot common with the Honda Pilot and Ridgeline. Same chassis (unibody), same engine and transmissions. I owned a pilot for 10 years, and enjoyed it. (A nephew now has it, and it is running well with about 200K) I am sure that the latest versions, are imported over the 2003 model. I also towed the first C Dory 22 a few times with it. OK on the flats, and I did take it over the Cajon Pass, but I would not recommend it for a lot of long distance towing/mountain driving.

Not sure what the West Coast prices are on the Toyota Tacoma (tow capacity 3500#)--but around Pensacola they start at $27,000 reaching over $40,000 tricked out. The Tundra (Capacity 6400# on up) starts at about $32,000, and tops $50,000 in the local markets...
 
Back
Top