4Runner as tow vehicle for 19'

[erikcampbell]

Originally Posted by sturski

Fwiw, I've used a 2009 Tacoma to pull a 19' nearly 6,000 miles since March. It does just fine, even in Colorado.

I use the Anderson hitch and would recommend a WDH of some sort; but I really haven't had any towing issues or concerns.

Is your 4Runner a V6 or V8?
I think I'll be fine either way and I'm getting the WDH.

[Leisure Lee]

Originally Posted by erikcampbell

Is your 4Runner a V6 or V8?
I think I'll be fine either way and I'm getting the WDH.

I have a 2010 4Runner with the 5 speed transmission and towed our 19 to Eastern Canada this summer. Lots of grades above 7% and one extended grade of 17%. I do have a wdh and two adults in vehicle- but no problems towing. On both incline and decline, tow vehicle and trailer seemed well matched. I'm very happy with both.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by T&R

The 4Runner uses a coil sprung rear end which means a nice ride, but put any weight in the back and it squats quite a bit.

True, it has coil springs, and I'll believe it's soft, but it's not soft because of the coils. You can have soft leaf springs, or stiff coils.

Fortunately, the coils make adding air bags relatively easy:install Coil-Rite or AirLift 1000 bags, which is cheaper and simpler than Ride-Rite or the equivalent AirLift for leaf springs. Unfortunately, the 4Runner installation is not nearly as easy as it is for some models, where the bags are just stuffed into the coils.

[Klem]

Our 2004 4runner SR5 V8 tows the 19' sweet. Just returned from AZ with 4200 miles and it towed like a dream. I tow on the ball so I can release the trailer quickly anytime I need to. When you have 4runner 4WD fulltime .. you can push or pull the trailer anywhere you want!

The rear on it drops a couple inches when hooked up to the trailer and we've never thought of the rear end as soft ... it's harsh without the trailer, we had custom seat cushioning installed.

[GRINGOandTICA]

Original poster here. Just hauled my wife, daughter, some gear, and the 19' over the Snoqualmie Pass on I-90, going West to East today. We are heading home from Chilliwack. Didn't break any land speed records, and might have be tempted to if I had more power.

[Fox hunt]

Why is the highlander rated for towing more pounds then the new 4Runner? the 4Runner seems like a very sturdy vehicle.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by Fox hunt

Why is the highlander rated for towing more pounds then the new 4Runner? the 4Runner seems like a very sturdy vehicle.

I'm sure the 4Runner - which is based on the Landcruiser Prado chassis - is sturdy, but structural strength is only one of many factors in towing ability.

If trying to guess towing capacity, I would look at factors such as wheelbase and rear overhang for stability, transmission cooling and durability, engine power and cooling, vehicle weight, and rear suspension and tire capacity. Although they are coincidentally identical in wheelbase and width, and the 4Runner would be expected to be superior in some other factors, the critical limiting factor (whatever it is) may favour the Highlander. Weight may be a bit of an issue, since the body-on-separate-frame construction of the 4Runner makes it hard to keep weight down and some 4Runner variants are a bit heavier than a Highlander, taking drivetrain capacity instead of leaving it for trailer weight. There is little difference in engines (slightly different sizes of the same engine family).

Toyota isn't guessing - they test their vehicles' towing performance against the SAE J2807 standard, which is based on the performance of the vehicle while towing a trailer in various conditions. The vehicle must pull and stop and control the trailer, while meeting performance targets (such as time to accelerate, and speed maintained up a grade) and not overheating or otherwise failing.

SAE J2807 specifies a reasonable hitch weight of 10% of the trailer weight (rather than the huge loads some people favour), so the ability to withstand high load downward on the hitch may not be a big factor.

Finally, although the ratings of the two vehicles are different, they are very close.

[nautracer]

I'm of the opinion. "there's no replacement for displacement". I have done lots of towing. we moved out of our diesel rig so my 24 Kodiak had to be sold. now with a 19' Escape coming soon, my Chevy Silverado 5.3 liter should barely be adequate when fully loaded in the hills.

[steve dunham]

Originally Posted by nautracer

I'm of the opinion. "there's no replacement for displacement". I have done lots of towing. we moved out of our diesel rig so my 24 Kodiak had to be sold. now with a 19' Escape coming soon, my Chevy Silverado 5.3 liter should barely be adequate when fully loaded in the hills.

I have the same opinion .Towed through the mountains on I 90 yesterday.(Bozeman Mt. to Coeur d'alene Idaho) Found my Ram 1500 truck with the 5.7 liter Hemi V8 , 8 speed tranny and 3.92 rearend barely adequate. From what I experienced yesterday ,I would never attempt crossing the mountains with a 4 or 6 cylinder vehicle towing a trailer (Ford Ecoboost being the exception)

[gbaglo]

Problem must be expectations.
I've had no problem towing my 17B to Alberta ( more than once ), down to Idaho and back through Washington, with a 6 cyl.

[steve dunham]

Originally Posted by gbaglo

Problem must be expectations.
I've had no problem towing my 17B to Alberta ( more than once ), down to Idaho and back through Washington, with a 6 cyl.

You are correct. My vehicle did not meet my expectations when towing in the mountains.
For me that is a problem . I want to feel in control of my vehicle when towing and yesterday l did not feel in control .If you feel your 6 cylinder is adequate ,that's great but I felt my V8 was barely up to the task. If I cross the mountains again ,it will be with a 3/4 ton diesel truck,
I am only stating my opinion not making law,

[rbryan4]

Originally Posted by nautracer

I'm of the opinion. "there's no replacement for displacement". I have done lots of towing. we moved out of our diesel rig so my 24 Kodiak had to be sold. now with a 19' Escape coming soon, my Chevy Silverado 5.3 liter should barely be adequate when fully loaded in the hills.

I would have an opinion, but instead I have experience. 2.7 liters of twin turbocharged displacement tows my fully loaded 19 EASILY up very steep grades - such as Rocky Mountain National Park, the Canyonlands or the Socorro Mountains of NM. Absolutely no problem, and power to spare. Displacement is the cardinal rule - but turbocharging and other technologies sometimes change that rule. I pay way more attention to HP, torque and towing capacity than the number of holes in the block.

An F150 Ecoboost V6 does a fine job of towing a 19 in any conditions - and there are other vehicles which do so too. Ever tow with a VW Touareg?

[sturski]

Originally Posted by rbryan4

I would have an opinion, but instead I have experience. 2.7 liters of twin turbocharged displacement tows my fully loaded 19 EASILY up very steep grades - such as Rocky Mountain National Park,

Same for me.

I live in CO at 8600' and tow my Escape 19 up and down a mountain every time it moves. My 4.0 liter, 236 HP V6 Tacoma has no problem.

If I were buying a vehicle strictly to tow, I'd go with a full size truck; but the Tacoma better fits the 95% of my life when I'm not pulling a trailer.

[T&R]

Originally Posted by nautracer

I'm of the opinion. "there's no replacement for displacement".

This is true, and turbocharging an engine does not change that (I realize you're not saying it does). A larger displacement turbocharged engine will (usually) always put out more hp & torque than a smaller displacement turbocharged engine. Displacement wins.

So saying "there's no replacement for displacement, EXCEPT when turbocharging" doesn't really make sense (to me).

[Norseman]

We have a 2003 V8 4 Runner and pulling the Highway to Hell up the Coke into Kamloops it tops that grade doing 120. The stock rear air ride sits the Escape 19 2" high. The mpg is 14.5ish imperial. The only trade I would do is a 06-07 Dodge diesel standard so I could haul 100 gallons of fuel not 18. Get lost a lot and need fuel to find my way out of the bush...

[GRINGOandTICA]

6,000+ miles on the road this month, and still have about 700 to go. I have yet to see a broken down Toyota on the road, but have seen my fair share of SOBs. LOL!

[Donna D.]

But a turbocharger sounds so totally cool

Old skool vehicle driver

[steve dunham]

Originally Posted by GRINGOandTICA

6,000+ miles on the road this month, and still have about 700 to go. I have yet to see a broken down Toyota on the road, but have seen my fair share of SOBs. LOL!

It's sad that you find joy in other peoples misfortune.

[alanmalk]

Originally Posted by sturski

Same for me.

I live in CO at 8600' and tow my Escape 19 up and down a mountain every time it moves. My 4.0 liter, 236 HP V6 Tacoma has no problem.

If I were buying a vehicle strictly to tow, I'd go with a full size truck; but the Tacoma better fits the 95% of my life when I'm not pulling a trailer.

I'll second that...

Living in Denver, we have to drive (west bound) from 5000 feet to 11000 feet just to get started. With my plain vanilla 6 and a manual tranny, I don't feel like I'm holding anyone back when I pull the 21'. And like Sturski, my truck is a daily driver 95% of the time.

(Now, if Toyota had offered a reasonable turbo option (not the do-it-your-self kit), or even better, a diesel, I would have jumped on it.)

--
Alan

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by T&R

This is true, and turbocharging an engine does not change that (I realize you're not saying it does). A larger displacement turbocharged engine will (usually) always put out more hp & torque than a smaller displacement turbocharged engine. Displacement wins.

Wins what? Would anyone in this forum be happy driving a huge truck that doesn't fit in any parking spot, powered by a 15-litre engine that they need to fuel and maintain? Oh, wait, that's not big enough... there are bigger engines in ships...

Bigger doesn't even mean more power, if the engine can't turn fast enough. No on-the-road heavy truck has as much power as the most powerful cars in the showroom with one-third of the displacement. Yes, I know, only the truck is suitable for continuous operation under heavy load.

How about an engine with suitable power for the job, that isn't excessively heavy and bulky, and can be reasonably maintained?

Originally Posted by T&R

A larger displacement turbocharged engine will (usually) always put out more hp & torque than a smaller displacement turbocharged engine.

How much smaller or larger? The 2.7L EcoBoost® V6 available in a Ford F-150 stomps the 3.5L Ti-VCT V6 available in the same vehicle: 43 more horsepower, 122 pound-feet more torque than the bigger engine.

A traditional formula in car racing is that turbocharging counts as a 1.5 multiplier of displacement. The ratio in street use is less extreme.

Originally Posted by T&R

So saying "there's no replacement for displacement, EXCEPT when turbocharging" doesn't really make sense (to me).

It makes sense to me. Power output is determined by the rate that air (and fuel in proportion) is processed by the engine. Increase the air density by 50% by pushing it with a supercharger (such as a turbocharger) to 1.5 times atmospheric pressure and you can produce 50% more power.

I suppose you could say "there's no replacement for displacement multiplied by boost pressure ratio", but it doesn't have the same ring.

I think it's hilarious that so many people dismiss turbochargers, yet sing the praises of diesel engines... but every diesel engine in a vehicle depends on one or more turbochargers to be able to produce adequate power. Those 6.7L diesels in big pickup trucks wouldn't be so impressive without their turbos... the displacement fan would need a 10-litre!