Such a thing as a daily driver that tows?

[Jake]

Jeff, I'm sorry - you're truck is the best! And certainly a great choice for everyone. Oh, and Jeff - there's no reason to read any more of this post, it's not for you.

We did a test this year comparing Light duty (150/1500) pickups to Heavy Duty (250/2500) trucks with Diesels. There's no question that Diesels motors are more efficient than gas motors, but since the big three force you to buy a HD truck to the get the Diesel, the added heft of those trucks eliminates any gas savings. (and yes the fuel itself even costs more) So if you can get by with the towing and load capacity of the Light Duty truck, you'd be crazy to get the Diesel. (and there isn't an open trailer/race car combo that couldn't get away with a 150 or 1500 truck)

This is the first time we ever did this, and unlike the EPA, we don't exempt the big trucks from our instrumented fuel economy tests.

As for Jeff's brake data - I personally instrumented and tested the stopping distance of a Ram 2500 Diesel. From 60mph it stopped in 176 ft in the dry, and 205 ft in the wet. I believe that's the worst we've recorded in at least 10 years. For comparison, a Toyota 4Runner does the same in 132ft dry, 146ft wet.

[Jake]

Sorry, the link doesn't get you any data unless you are a subscriber (only free videos and an overview). For risk of getting a talking to from my boss, here's some data on the Dodge Rams...

Without a trailer, we got 19mpg at a steady 65 mph and 13 mpg in mixed driving in both the Hemi 1500 Ram and the Cummins 2500 Ram (both crew cabs). But the 1500 went 0-60 1.2 seconds quicker, stopped 23 feet shorter in the dry, rode better, was easier to get into, had full-time 4WD, stability control, traction control, cost about $10,000 less, etc., etc.

We only saw and advantage with the Diesel when with a big trailer. With a 7,400lb enclosed trailer we got 8mpg with the Hemi vs. 10 with the Diesel at a steady 65mpg.

[Jeremy Billiel]

Wow - we HAVE drifted OT - but I do want to address the "Diesel Trucks get great fuel economy" stuff.

Just to clarify, we did a test this year comparing Light duty (150/1500) pickups to Heavy Duty (250/2500) trucks with Diesels. There's no question that Diesels motors are more efficient than gas motors, but since the big three force you to buy a HD truck to the get the Diesel, the added heft of those trucks eliminates any gas savings. (and yes the fuel itself even costs more) So if you can get by with the towing and load capacity of the Light Duty truck, you'd be crazy to get the Diesel. (and there isn't an open trailer/race car combo that couldn't get away with a 150 or 1500 truck)

This is the first time we ever did this, and unlike the EPA, we don't exempt the big trucks from our instrumented fuel economy tests.

Jeff - you are welcome to call me an ass again, I have no interest in calling you names. But I do like to inform if I do have information. As for your brake data - I personally instrumented and tested the stopping distance of a Ram 2500 Diesel. From 60mph it stopped in 176 ft in the dry, and 205 ft in the wet. I believe that's the worst we've recorded in at least 10 years. For comparison, a Toyota 4Runner does the same in 132ft dry, 146ft wet.
[/b]

With brakes that big how does it take so long to stop? I know my Ford stops on a dime, even more so with weight on the back or in the bed. Perhaps I can see the longer times because the backs do struggle for traction.

[Jake]

With brakes that big how does it take so long to stop? I know my Ford stops on a dime, even more so with weight on the back or in the bed. Perhaps I can see the longer times because the backs do struggle for traction.
[/b]

Good question - yes the brakes are huge. But I think that's more about resisting fade when you load the bed to GVWR. The distances are most likely due to the tires. The big HD trucks need tires that can deal with the load and the pressures required to support that load. We're talking around 60psi or more. (BTW to get an idea of how bad these trucks ride - inflate your tires that high and you'll get a rough idea). Basically I think the tires are designed for load - not traction.

[dickita15]

I think the reason you have to but the HD and probably the reason for the stopping distance is the that diesel motor itself weighs so much more.

[Ron Earp]

but since the big three force you to buy a HD truck to the get the Diesel, the added heft of those trucks eliminates any gas savings.
[/b]

I complained about this ever since becoming "interested" in trucks when I started racing two years ago (or trying to race). But, maybe things like this will come to pass:

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2006/10...to_offer_d.html

I think there would be a fairly large market for diesels like these once US consumers get over their fear of diesels. Europe has long had powerful, quiet, and efficient diesels under 5L that are not as "industrial" as our large truck motors from GM, Dodge, and Ford (International, Cummins - great motors BTW).

One of the most enjoyable cars I have driven in Europe was a VW wagon with the V6 turbo diesel and a six speed manual. Taking a motor similar to that, maybe a tad larger for a bit more torque, and putting it in a small truck would be fantastic. Might even give up my Lightning for a F150 diesel....nah, I like my smokey burnouts and sleeper stoplight shutdowns too much.

R

[joeg]

Frankly, what we do for a hobby doesn't make any economic sense, so why not have a big diesel pulling an open aluminum trailer?

I do and it is the most comfortable least strenuous towing I have ever had in thirty years.

Merry X-Mas.

[Jake]

Dick's right. The current crop of Diesels are huge, heavy, and adopted from commercial vehicles - that's why they can't be used in the smaller trucks.

That article is old. The 3.6L is too small for our market, they'll enlarge it before they sell it here.

Actually there will be smaller Diesels in a year or two on all the Big Three's light duty trucks. - And they look GOOD. Expect them all between 4 to 5 liters and with excess of 500lb-ft of torque!

We've been on their case about putting Diesels in those trucks for years - I'm glad it finally looks like it is going to happen!

[Ron Earp]

Frankly, what we do for a hobby doesn't make any economic sense, so why not have a big diesel pulling an open aluminum trailer?
[/b]

You are precisely correct!

Out of all the things we do worrying about our economics of towing is probably not the low hanging fruit in the grand scheme of racing. I'm about to drop $600 on a race prepped head so I might go a tiny bit faster. I'm sure more training would make me go faster as well, so, I'll spend money on both!

[Jake]

Frankly, what we do for a hobby doesn't make any economic sense, so why not have a big diesel pulling an open aluminum trailer?
[/b]

If you are just using it for towing – sure. But it’s not JUST about economics if you don’t need one and want to use it for a daily driver.

Along with the convenience issues (terrible ride, horrible to park, noisy, big climb to get into, etc.), you also are putting your family into a less safe vehicle. They have much longer braking distances, terrible emergency handling, no full time 4WD, no stability control, and lack other safety features that you can get in the light duty trucks or SUVs.

[Greg Amy]

>>> Such a thing as a daily driver that tows?

Allow me to jump into the fray, and offer some direct experience.

First off, there's no "The Answer". If you were to sit down with me at a bar and ask me that question, I'd spend at least 10 minutes trying to find out what your "mission" is. I'd find out what you drive daily, where you drive to and from 90% of the time, and what minimum needs you need for everyday life. Then I'd ask you the same questions about your "racing mission", in terms of where you go and what you do, and what your plans are for the next 5 years. Then, I'd give you my opinions as to what would minimally fit your "needs".

In my case, 7 years ago I was at a crossroads. I had just started thinking about getting back into racing, but my plans were to simply "participate", with real expectations of actually driving the IT car to the track as I did with Showroom Stock in the early 90s(!). At the same time, I had taken a new job that required I have a 5-years-old-or-newer four-door car for taking customers around (and the company was giving me a $500/mo expense stipend to do it with). Since I had no expectations of grandeur towing, I took my "free money" and bought myself a new Audi S4.

Fast forward 7 years, and you'll see that I've gone from driving the car to the track and borrowing my brother-in-law's Dodge Caravan for carrying tools; to buying a 5.0L V-8 Ford cargo van to do that job; then to buying a well-used two-axle open trailer, which we soon found the van really couldn't handle (not enough power on the older engine); to buying a new two-axle trailer that towed nice; to buying a well-used non-turbo diesel cargo van which pulled the trailer fine but couldn't carry the wife and others that wanted to join us; to a V-10 Ford 15-passenger van which pulled the two-axle nicely; which soon led to coming across a great deal on a 24-foot enclosed trailer, which the V-10 was minimally-suited for; to buying a 28-foot enclosed and a Ford diesel Excursion.

All while these trucks were sitting in my driveway most of the time, I'm driving around a very nice Audi S4, but paying $1200/yr in insurance and up to $800 per year in property taxes (not to mention the $500 per month payment nut), all while it was depreciating in value quicker than a bar of lead through water.

Last night, as my wife and I were driving to a party in the S4, we both agreed that in hindsight it would have made a HELL of a lot more sense had I purchased a brand-new year-2000 $50,000 (?) Ford diesel Excursion to begin with, as we'd have lost no more in depreciation, but we'd have spent a hell of a lot less in insurance and taxes, and we'd have an Excursion with half the miles. Sure, I have REALLY enjoyed the S4, but it probably wasn't worth the money I spent on it.

So, there's two lessons in this tale of morality:

1) If you stay in this hobby very long, you *ARE* going to want more truck and trailer as time goes on, and
2) It makes absolutely ZERO economic sense to own both a towing vehicle *and* a daily driver, even if the towing vehicle cost more to drive in fuel.

Because you started this topic, I'm assuming you agree with Lesson Number Two. However, I strongly caution you to seriously consider Number One, and buy truck more than you think you need today. As in my case, if there's ANY chance you'll expand your program in the future, it's a smart decision; you just enver know what opportunities you will come across or what needs you'll have 5 years from now. No one has ever complained about buying more truck than they need, but many - myself included - have ended up spending a lot more in the long run from not buying enough. - GA

[Campbell]

Greg, thanks for the insight!! what a progression.

I have been towing with a dolly for 10 yrs now.. First out of necessity (all I could afford!) and recently for convenience - really don't have room for a trailer or a tow only vehicle. The dolly hides nicely behind some bushes so the neighbors can't see it.

Last season it finally happened, I had an accident at Road America and the car was not towable on the dolly, fortunately there was another racer (a really great guy like most all racers are!!) who was kind enough to put my car on his trailer and I towed his car on the dolly. It was a long ride home... and out of the way for him. Such is the drawback of using a tow dolly.

I commute 34 miles each way on a mixture of highways and back roads - mostly stop and go on each. I am space limited and don't want a tow only vehicle. So for my daily commute I need something good on gas that can also tow 6 weekends a year (1 hr to 4 hr tows). I will have to figure out where to park the trailer. I think I will find an open aluminum trailer to tow my approx 2000 lb ITB and some wheels. The tools will go in the back of the tow vehicle.

The thought of an enclosed trailer is really cool but just not part of my equation right now. I think I will look into a 6 cyl mid size SUV or 4 dr pick up that isn't too bad on gas.

Thanks for all your comments, they have been very helpful.

[gran racing]

Last season it finally happened, I had an accident at Road America and the car was not towable on the dolly, fortunately there was another racer (a really great guy like most all racers are!!) who was kind enough to put my car on his trailer and I towed his car on the dolly. It was a long ride home... and out of the way for him. Such is the drawback of using a tow dolly.[/b]

Swap out RA and insert Lime Rock, then that's me! LOL Poor Ray & Stephen towing their Audi on the dolly back to NH from CT.

[Jeremy Billiel]

To echo Greg's point, I have done the math and it does NOT make sense to own a tow vehicle and a daily driver. But Jeremy it gets better gas mileage, But Jeremy its cheaper to run...

Do the math. When you factor in insurance, registration, etc the total cost of ownership is significantly less to compromise and buy a larger vehicle that is bigger than most and can tow. I bought a 2006 Ford F350 diesel in 2006 and it was just too big and too harsh. So I compromised and just bought a diesel excursion.

This is my compromise and it will save me money over having 2 cars. Yes I have to park outside at work and yes its a pain in the ass, but its cheaper.

[JLawton]

it does NOT make sense [/b]

And Racing does??

I used my tow vehicle as my daily for 10 years, a 1500 and an F150...... Once I paid off the F150, I said screw this, time to commute in a nice car. Yup, it doesn't make sense financially, but much more enjoyable to drive!!

Unfortunately, you can't get EVERYTHING you want. Gas mileage? Size? Power? Comfort? It's all a compromise.

[tom_sprecher]

Greg's post made me think of why I went with a large truck. If Campbell owns a subchapter S I have some advice which I posted over in the sandbox a while back.

At the time I had a '96 STS that the trans went out on at 96k that prompted a quick fix and was traded in on something new. I did not have a race car at the time but I knew it would happen in a year or two.

First of all try to only borrow money when it will make you money.

For example: I wanted to buy a $45k truck and was fortunate to also have that much in some investment making 6-7% a year after taxes. The manufacturer was offering financing at 2%. As a bonus the truck was purchased by my company and since it’s over 6000# qualifies for the Section 179 depreciation schedule (100% and now). As a sub S that deduction rolls over to me against earned income. If you're making some decent bucks Uncle Sam can get 50% of it if your stupid about it.

So instead of paying for the truck out right I take Ford up on their offer, borrow the $45k at 2%, and make 4-5% just by doing it. Plus, I keep the $22.5k that Uncle Sam wanted but won’t get due to the 179. Is that beautiful or what? FWIW: the flat tax or fair tax - screw both of those fantasies!

It’s not always about how much you make as much as it is how much you get keep. If you're self employed buy a truck over 6000# and pay half price.

[JeffYoung]

Shouldn't have called Jake an ass, sorry for that, but let me make clear what is going on here.

Jake - you work for Consumer Reports correct? That's that mag that thinks the 4 cylinder Camry is the end all be all in the history of transportation, so we just need to be clear on the perspective from which you are coming.

You have an agenda here, which you and CR generally believe smaller and lighter vehicles are inherently "better." You use your numbers to support that -- that's fine, until the move from opinion being offered as opinion to opinion being offered as fact.

I am interested in where you got the braking data. The data I looked at on the 2500 from a diesel truck magazine for an 04 2500 is:

At the track, the Ram's lighter weight and 325 hp enabled it to show its tailgate to the other trucks with a 0-60 time of 8.85 seconds and a quarter-mile run of 16.8 at 80.58 mph. The Dodge's brakes, which were by far class-leading around town in feel and stopping power, also turned in the best 60-0 braking distance of 138.6 feet - only 6 feet longer than the recently tested '04 Dodge Ram SRT-10, and a whopping 16 feet shorter than the GMC Sierra HD. The 30-0 braking distance with the trailer was also tops.

Can you tow an open trailer at say 2000 lbs for a steel one, half that for an aluminum (at double the cost) and with a 2500 lb car with a mid-size SUV? Sure you can. But you are nearly at the limits of the vehicle's capability in doing so. Your ability to cruise at more than 60 mph, to handle hills at a reasonable speed, to avoid overworking the brakes, to handle panic stops, etc. is minimal.

Towing in Europe is not a good analog for the US. Again, can you tow with a Volvo station wagon? Sure. And if you are towing 100 miles at 45-50 mph in flat areas, have at it. I'd love to see a lot of those Euro tow rigs go up I-40 over the Blue Ridge Mountains, or out in the open in Kansas. Good luck!

The bottom line is all of this is, for the most part, subjective, which is perhaps the point I was trying to make above before you jumped in with the "Diesel Trucks Suck" diatribe. For some people they do. "Ease of parking" is subjective. I have no problem. Does it take more time to park? Sure. "Hard to get into" is subjective. If you can't lift your fat a#$ (there's that word again) up a few feet into a cab of a truck, oh well.
Gas mileage. Did you test with a new diesel? If so, your data is (not surprisingly) completley off. The Cummins takes about 6,000 to 10,000 to break in. Mileage improves significantly in that time period. I get 20 mph around town/highway. Speed doesn't seem to affect mpg so much as RPM does. If I stay under 2k RPM, I get 20 mph. More revs, less mileage. Towing at 65 mph I get 14 mpg. That's with a 3000 lb enclosed and a 2500 lb car.

Your numbes are off. Imagine that!

I've towed with an 86 Jeep Grand Wagoneer, a 99 2500 Suburban, an 05 F150 Ford Lightning and the new Ram (an 07 2500 5.9 Cummins). The Ram and the Lightning towed the best by far, but even there, the Ram is better, for me. I can cruise comfortably at a higher rate of speed, and the Ram can carry five people. The Lightning is more fun to drive, smaller, and therefore easier to live with in some ways.

Last thing I'll say is that if you think "getting by" with a tow vehicle when towing is enough, then guess what? I hope I'm not in front of you after coming down a 10 mile stretch of steep grade with your "getting by" tow vehicle.

The bottom line is the choice of a Daily Driver/tow vehicle combo is subjective -- subjective! Having lived with one for a year now, I suggested -- suggested! -- to the original poster that modern diesels are quieter, more fuel efficient and more comfortable than even a few years ago, and that he should check it out and see if it fits his needs.

What we got back from you was not an opinion but opinion offered as fact based on a Consumer Reports diatribe on large trucks. Oh well....

To the Original Poster -- as you can see, a significant difference of opinon here. What that means is, you should drive a number of different vehicles, and tow with them if possible, and see what works best for you.

[Jake]

It's OK - I've been called an ass before, I have pretty thick skin. But I really didn't want to turn this into a "CR are communist idiots who get hard over Camrys" thread. I'm representing my views here - not those of my employer. Personally, I wouldn't be caught dead in a Camry 4 cyl (although it does make a fine car for my brother in law!)

If you want to believe our testing is flawed and your Diesel Truck mag who gets their test cars from manufacturers is perfect - there's nothing I'm going to be able to do about it. I can only tell you about our broken-in trucks that we purchased at dealerships and tested on our own test track that is monitored for a consistent coefficient of friction. You believe what you want. I'm always happy to answer technical questions about our testing - but this thread is wrong place for that.

On another note - my previous job was with General Motors, where I (among other things) was involved in setting and testing towing capacity. The max capacity is really a factor of powertrain cooling more than anything else. We routinely would pull at the maximum capacity up very long climbs in Death Valley at well over 100deg ambient. It's really not about having a "weak engine", it's about being able to cool it. And as for brakes, I truly hope your trailer has some!

And I DON'T mean to say that "Diesel Trucks Suck". They just suck as an everyday car. I like Chicken, but they make lousy house pets. HD Diesel's rock at towing big loads. And Greg - very good point about planning for the future. If there's a chance you might be towing a big load, it would be better to get the muscle now than upgrading in steps. (kinda good advice for many car go-fast parts too)

[lateapex911]

jeff and jake would get along fine over a beer...this is just one of them semantics deals, I bet.

[Greg Amy]

jeff and jake would get along fine over a beer...this is just one of them semantics deals, I bet.
[/b]

No, I don't think they're both Jewish...