Towing with a Tundra

[CADreamin]

Now that we've made it over several passes on our way home from Chilliwack, the highest being 1800', we're wondering what others are experiencing with their tow vehicles.

We have a 2004 Tundra, double cab, V8 with tow package, camper shell, 70k original miles and a tow capacity of 6200 lbs. We're pulling our 19', basically unloaded as we just picked it up, with OD 'off', Andersen WDH, and our Tundra was down to 45 mph coming up that 1800' pass. Tomorrow we're going over the Siskiyou Pass (4300') and plan on taking it slow and easy. Others on the forum have said they're pulling 19' or 21' foot trailers with Highlanders, Pilots and other such vehicles. Is our experience normal or are we expecting too much from our tow vehicle? Just curious as this is our first real "towing" experience.

[jamman]

Sounds like something might be off with your truck. We picked up our 19' this January with a 2005 Tundra V8 XtraCab. We drove the truck to pick it up (over) loaded with all our trailer gear from our previous trailer so we had our normal camping load on board. I had no problem running the speed limit (or over) coming back to Arizona.

[Brian B-P]

I'll ask the same question that I always do in this situation: when you were down to 45 mph, what was the engine speed... and did you have the gas pedal to the floor? Often, people don't use anything close to the full capability of their engine, and there's a big difference between "it wouldn't go any faster" and "I chose not to go any faster".

Also, what was the grade on that pass? High elevation (and 1800' isn't high) does reduce power, but it's the slope of the road that determines how much extra power is needed to climb (compared to flat ground at the same speed).

How did that speed compare to the big truck rigs on the same road? They're fast enough, and anything faster than that is gravy.

Finally, a recent Highlander or Pilot has as more power than a 2004 Tundra.

[Sally P]

In my 2009 Highlander, 45000 miles, towed 21 over the Siskyous at 45 keeping the rpms under 3000, never going into overdrive. Anderson hitch

[CADreamin]

Hi Doug and Brian. Thank you for both your replies. We had the Tundra serviced and checked before we left and the Toyota Dealer assured us we were mechanically sound (and we've never had a problem previously when fully/overloaded with "stuff"). Now, in answer to Brian's questions ... The engine speed was about 2600, we didn't have the gas pedal to the floor (my fault as I was leery about the transmission), the grade going up ?? but coming down it was 6%. To be honest, we thought we were going downhill right before we noticed our truck lagging, but then we also noticed that the big rigs were going really, really slow so we figured we must be climbing. Must be an Oregon vortex ...

We're both laughing at your last sentence as we have a 2013 Highlander at home and were wondering if it would do better than the Tundra ... We would just have to get an after market tow package.

Really appreciate your responses as it always helps to have insight from those who have been there before.

Jan AND John

[CADreamin]

Originally Posted by Sally P

In my 2009 Highlander, 45000 miles, towed 21 over the Siskyous at 45 keeping the rpms under 3000, never going into overdrive. Anderson hitch

Thanks Sally ... and you were towing a 21'! Good to have comparisons. Will see what happens tomorrow. Thankfully, it's not hot ... just rainy.

[Sandra L]

I tow my 17B with a 2005 Toyota Sienna and do 35mph over the Siskiyou summit. I can still do 45mph (which I used to do) I think, but I envision the gas getting guzzled. I also use engine braking to keep my speed down as well, so I don't have to ride the brakes. Also, if you have not discovered the ODOT (Oregon Department of Transportation) website, check it out. The pictures and info are very helpful. Good luck, at least you don't have snow!
P.S. I have the tow package.

[gharper]

I think the V8 in the 2004 Tundra has 240 hp and 315 lbft of torque (2005 has 280 hp & 325lbft). So less horsepower than the Highlander but more torque. I would think the 2004 Tundra would tow better than a newer Highlander. We have a 2011 Highlander and a 19 and in steep grade in the mountains it works hard and has to be pushed. Perhaps the extra weight of the canopy may impact performance in the mountains. Max torque for the 2004 V8 is at 3,400 rpm so you should see an improvement with a little higher rpm. If it was me I would tow with the Tundra and try it without the canopy, if it improves go with a lighter tonneau cover.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by CADreamin

... The engine speed was about 2600, we didn't have the gas pedal to the floor (my fault as I was leery about the transmission), the grade going up ?? but coming down it was 6%.

Although the 2004 version of the 2UZ-FE engine in a Tundra can put out up to 245 horsepower, it can't do it at 2600 rpm. I don't have detailed specs for that year of Tundra, but comparing to other applications of that engine, it might need 4800 rpm for peak power; using gharper's specs, it needs 3400 rpm for a peak torque of 315 lb-ft.

At 2600 rpm, it would put out significantly less than its peak torque, and thus significantly less than 156 horsepower (my guess is about 130 hp)... and with the throttle not even all the way open, it was producing even less.

As a general rule of thumb, non-turbocharged engines run most efficiently at speeds around their peak torque, so at least that speed would be reasonable for sustained hill-climbing. Since the engine's peak torque is 315 lb-ft at 3400 rpm, it could put out 204 horsepower at that speed.

There was lots of power in reserve on that climb.

Originally Posted by CADreamin

To be honest, we thought we were going downhill right before we noticed our truck lagging, but then we also noticed that the big rigs were going really, really slow so we figured we must be climbing. Must be an Oregon vortex ...

I've noticed this on various highways myself... wondering why it is taking so much power on a flat section, then realizing I'm climbing. There's a place in New Brunswick called "Magnetic Hill", where people stop, put their vehicle in neutral, and let it roll backward in what appears to be uphill. The illusion results from changing grades: the road climbs, then climbs less steeply, then climbs more steeply again. On the less-steep portion, it looks downhill to most people due to the relationship to the other sections.

So, if the trucks were "going really, really slow", the Tundra must have been outclimbing them with the Escape, even using half or less of its peak power. That sounds like more than enough performance to me.

(Above was edited to use gharper's engine specs for the 2004 Tundra)

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by CADreamin

We're both laughing at your last sentence as we have a 2013 Highlander at home and were wondering if it would do better than the Tundra ... We would just have to get an after market tow package.

Aside from power, the Tundra has advantages in wheelbase, suspension capacity, structural strength and the capacity for the drivetrain to operate reliably at high power levels... although it is heavier itself so it has to work harder.

I'm not a fan of adding components aftermarket that the manufacturer does better - usually that's transmission cooling. In the specific case of the 2013 Highlander, it has Toyota's 2GR-FE engine; when that engine is used in the Sienna, the towing package includes an engine oil cooler which would be very expensive and difficult to add aftermarket. I would check out the engine oil cooling situation before I considered working the Highlander hard for extended periods by towing.

Originally Posted by gharper

I think the V8 in the 2004 Tundra has 240 hp and 315 lbft of torque (2005 has 280 hp & 325lbft). So less horsepower than the Highlander but more torque. I would think the 2004 Tundra would tow better than a newer Highlander.

Torque at the wheels matters, but at the engine output shaft it doesn't matter whether you have higher torque at lower speed or lower torque at higher speed. The Highlander engine would need to spin faster, but if you are willing to use the required engine speed the end result at the wheels would be more pull with the more powerful engine.

Originally Posted by gharper

Max torque for the 2004 V8 is at 3,400 rpm so you should see an improvement with a little higher rpm.

Absolutely - good point.

Originally Posted by gharper

Perhaps the extra weight of the canopy may impact performance in the mountains.
...
If it was me I would tow with the Tundra and try it without the canopy, if it improves go with a lighter tonneau cover.

Although the tonneau would be lighter (better for grade climbing and acceleration), the canopy may result in less air drag when combined with the trailer, thus requiring less power to maintain speed, and leaving more for climbing and accelerating at highway speeds. Anyone willing to experiment?

[CADreamin]

Thank you all again. I'm going to have hubby sit down and read your responses.

I should have also mentioned the weight/specs of our trailer as indicated on the tag ... 1818 kg plus 336 kg cargo. Guess I should have paid more attention to the weight of the options ... A lesson to those working on their build sheets.

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by Brian B-P

Aside from power, the Tundra has advantages in wheelbase, suspension capacity, structural strength and the capacity for the drivetrain to operate reliably at high power levels... although it is heavier itself so it has to work harder.

I'm not a fan of adding components aftermarket that the manufacturer does better - usually that's transmission cooling. In the specific case of the 2013 Highlander, it has Toyota's 2GR-FE engine; when that engine is used in the Sienna, the towing package includes an engine oil cooler which would be very expensive and difficult to add aftermarket. I would check out the engine oil cooling situation before I considered working the Highlander hard for extended periods by towing.


Torque at the wheels matters, but at the engine output shaft it doesn't matter whether you have higher torque at lower speed or lower torque at higher speed. The Highlander engine would need to spin faster, but if you are willing to use the required engine speed the end result at the wheels would be more pull with the more powerful engine.


Absolutely - good point.


Although the tonneau would be lighter (better for grade climbing and acceleration), the canopy may result in less air drag when combined with the trailer, thus requiring less power to maintain speed, and leaving more for climbing and accelerating at highway speeds. Anyone willing to experiment?

I towed a 16ft Scamp and a Escape 19 and now a Bigfoot 21RB with a 2007 Tundra 5.7L V8 4x4 CrewMax cab it has plenty of power.
Chuck

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

I towed a 16ft Scamp and a Escape 19 and now a Bigfoot 21RB with a 2007 Tundra 5.7L V8 4x4 CrewMax cab it has plenty of power.

Just a note:
5.7L V8 (3UR-FE): 381 hp @ 5600 rpm, 401 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
4.7L V8 (2UZ-FE): 245 hp @~4800 rpm, 315 lb-ft @ 3400 rpm
A substantial difference.

[TAfraser]

I took my Honda Ridgeline and Escape 21 out for a test drive three days ago. The Ridgeline has a 3.5L V6 with 255 hp @ 5750 rpm and 252 lb.-ft. @ 4500 rpm. The Ridgelines tow rating is 5000 lbs. at sea level. I wasn’t able to weigh the Escape, but it was loaded with all our camping equipment (chairs, grills, ladder, tools, toiletries, bedding, kitchen stuff, etc) and the truck had (fire pit, extra propane, camping games, covers, and another grill). The only things missing were the generator, bicycles, food and clothing. I didn’t want to take it too far so I only took it over two passes, Tiger, at 1200 ft and a 6% grade, and Snoqualmie at 3000 ft (I don’t know the grade). It did great, maintaining 60 mph at less than 3500 rpm. Engine breaking worked so well on the down hills, I had to turn it off because it was slowing us up too much. I then took a smaller hill while taking a friend home that was at a 10% grade. I started the hill at 40 mph (speed limit) and crested the top at 40 mph. The Ridgeline did have to go to 4000 rpm in order to maintain the speed. The engine temperature didn’t rise at all but I could smell heat from the converters when we stopped. Honda tells me that heating up the converters with a climb like that is normal. This summer I’ll be driving over many mountain passes with confidence (because of many talks with Honda reps) and apprehension (because I haven’t done it yet). But that’s me.

[paulw]

Thanks for the report Tom. We're taking our 21 out for a quick over night next weekend.
So far i've only towed locally, but the Chevy does really well... It's rated at 291 hp @ 6000rpm and 277 lb-ft @ 4800, so you have to be willing to rev it to get it.
It'll get it's big test on the way to Maryhill in May - Snoqualmie Pass, Manastash Ridge summit and Satus Pass. Then I'll see if/how soon I'll be shopping for a V8.

[TAfraser]

Paul, Norma, and of course The Girls, See you at Maryhill in May.

[Catchlight]

That's a very helpful report, Tom, for those of us anticipating towing an Escape 21 with a 5000-pound rated SUV.

It's encouraging to hear that you could maintain the speed limit on those grades.

And, your TV and 21' together make a good-looking rig!

[TAfraser]

Brent and Cheryl, thanks for the compliment. It's not that cute little Casita we use to own, but wow, what a nice trailer this is. I think Escapes look good behind any tow vehicle.

We'll know for sure after this summer about the towing. We're going from Seattle to south of Frisco on I5, then up 101 to the northern border. From there we're heading north east to the Three Sisters area, west across the mountains to the Tillamook area, then to Mt. Rainier and on to Sequim. We're either going to prove it's capable of towing the 21, or we're going to kill it. I'm hoping for the first!!
Tom

[CADreamin]

Hi all - Just an update ... we made it! Thanks to Brian's great detailed information, and the positive results from others, we set off from Ashland, armed with a new confidence. Our Tundra performed perfectly! In fact, we were up and over the 4300' summit before we knew it. After that, we laughed at upcoming hills .... (I think "newbie" apprehension and a steep grade on our very first hill got the best of us.)

John did a fantastic job of pulling a trailer for the very first time and was able to get out of some tight situations in parking lots and gas stations. Unfortunately, our narrow road at home, a tight turning area and both of our inexperience at backing up/spotting led to a broken tail light on the truck. But if that's the only mishap, I consider it a small one. (I'm calling a contractor tomorrow to have the parking area widened and graded .... )

Anyway, thank you all so much for your help and inspiration. Glad to hear those with 21'ers are experiencing good results as well.

[gbaglo]

Nowhere to go but up.