Tow vehicle for Escape 19

[Brian B-P]

Toyota's towing preparation package seems to me like a better way to get the features needed for reliable towing or hauling (mostly related to cooling) than aftermarket add-ons; I'm glad my Sienna has it. Although I like my OEM hitch, aftermarket is often the more cost-effective route to towing equipment, especially for those wanting a 2" receiver when the OEM is 1.25".

Originally Posted by cpaharley2008

Let me understand this, the original OEM would not allow WDH so you had an aftermarket hitch installation to allow WDH set up?

The only reason the aftermarket hitch is needed for WD with the RAV4 is that WD systems are available only in the 2" receiver size, while the OEM RAV4 hitch is 1.25". The 2" hitch makes no difference to Toyota's recommendation: WD is still not recommended for the RAV4.

[Rossue]

Glenn- the package included on my '13 Highlander SE specs a class III receiver. For a substantial heavy duty hitch that sits at the proper height not two inches below, go with the OEM on newer Highlanders. I did after lots of research and you can't go wrong with spending the little extra money for this vehicle. Also, no prohibition on WDH mentioned in owner's manual.

[gbaglo]

With 63,000 kilometers ( 39,000 miles ) on this 2008 RAV4, I'm hoping not to buy a new vehicle for some time.
When that time comes, it will be a Highlander, I guess, if I have to.

[Rossue]

Your feeling my pain. Traded in my 2011 Murano (34K mi) that we really liked for the Highlander and ate a bunch of depreciation. Life- but fortunately its only money(-;

[Vermilye]

Originally Posted by gbaglo

With 63,000 kilometers ( 39,000 miles ) on this 2008 RAV4, I'm hoping not to buy a new vehicle for some time.
When that time comes, it will be a Highlander, I guess, if I have to.

Be sure to drive one before you leap to the Highlander. Compared to driving my 2010 RAV4 Sport, the 2014 I drove felt like a "squishy" tank. If you want a SUV, I'd look at a FJ or 4Runner, or switch to a Tacoma...

[Vermilye]

Originally Posted by Brian B-P

The only reason the aftermarket hitch is needed for WD with the RAV4 is that WD systems are available only in the 2" receiver size, while the OEM RAV4 hitch is 1.25". The 2" hitch makes no difference to Toyota's recommendation: WD is still not recommended for the RAV4.

It depends on the year & model RAV4. Nothing in my manual for my 2010 Sport mentions not using a WDH. I tow close to, but under the 350 lb tongue weight limit of the RAV4, and the few times I've towed short distances without the WDH bars connected, the front tires were so unloaded that is was unsafe.

Both my dealer & I agree that the WDH is necessary with my combination.

[Rossue]

Highlander is a Crossover like the RAV 4 which is much more comfortable than a SUV like the FJ or 4 Runner. Have previously owned a '03 Sequoia, '08 Enclave and '11 Murano. The Highlander has tight steering, perhaps due to the 4WD/AWD(whatever), and has large seats that provide good thigh support both front and rear. My Enclave was a country club tank, however had so-so fit & finish, including using tape instead of paint on exterior around windows and had pretty small rear captains seats. The Acadia with the bench is much better; perhaps the Chevy Transverse has this also. Average 17-18 towing and am able to stay in OD quite a bit without hunting. Low stress.

[lefttee]

Hotfishtacos...in response to your question yesterday...We had a 2011 AWD Traverse when we picked up our 19 in Chilliwack last July. We are now thinking 5.0 TA and will pull the trigger when Reece can tell me it's less than 9'6" tall so I can get it into my enclosed garage. I do a lot of back country Idaho stuff and realized the Traverse isn't designed for that. My new Silverado is more than adequate for either trailer and so far I'm amazed at the gas mileage. The Traverse was just plain comfortable...NO STRESS about tongue weight, equalizer hitch, high winds, overloading the suspension or transmission, mirrors, extra room for groceries or a cooler, etc. It was rather "doggy" at 10,000 feet crossing the Rockies west of Denver but otherwise would tow the 19 all day at 65-70 mph. Despite it's weight and size, it really does feel like a car...maybe not a Sube or RAV or CRV...but I always felt like I was in control of the trailer without going to a truck, Suburban, Tahoe, etc. With my medical career, I was taught to avoid getting too close the edge of my training or ability. I'm just more comfortable standing 30' from the edge of the cliff. The Silverado is definitely overkill for the 19 (?and 21?). I didn't want to wait for the mid size diesel pickups due out in the next 1-2 years which I bet will cost as much or more than my Silverado. I believe you have to get the AWD option on the Traverse to get the tow package but it really met our needs with the 19. I'm not a GM freak and I apologize if this is TMI. Lots of options out there.

[kstock11]

After seeing the 19' Escape last April, I rushed out and purchased the GM Acadia,2 wheel drive with tow package. Have been very happy with the drive and the way the car is set up. Glad to hear that we made a good decision! We'll pick up our Escape on May 2 and can't wait!

[lefttee]

I really like the looks of the Acadia. The Buick Enclave has too much "bling" for my tastes. Hope you enjoy yours as much as we did ours. The mileage should be a bit better with the 2 wheel drive as well.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by Vermilye

It depends on the year & model RAV4. Nothing in my manual for my 2010 Sport mentions not using a WDH.

I was just taking Baglo's information at face value. Of course, this can vary by year... but changing the receiver still changes nothing about Toyota's recommendation, as they are well aware that an aftermarket receiver can be used.

Originally Posted by Vermilye

I tow close to, but under the 350 lb tongue weight limit of the RAV4, and the few times I've towed short distances without the WDH bars connected, the front tires were so unloaded that is was unsafe.

Really? 350 pounds of tonque weight would remove about 140 pounds from the front axle, leaving at least a ton (2200 lb or 1000 kg) on the front axle... that's maybe 94% of the starting axle load, so I don't think it is meaningfully unloaded at all. It may be tilted nose-up, mostly due to almost 500 pounds of extra load on the rear axle, leading people to think that the front axle is unloaded. The driving feel may be undesirable, but again the front axle is still carrying lots of load.

Originally Posted by Vermilye

Both my dealer & I agree that the WDH is necessary with my combination.

Why? Is the rear axle overloaded? Is this a stability issue?

[Vermilye]

As a non engineer, I can only go by experience. I have no idea what actual percent of the weight is taken off the front wheels, but without the WDH, they spin, forcing the vehicle into 4 wheel drive, the front wheels lock when braking, and the steering feels much lighter than normal.

Again, I wouldn't use my model of the RAV4 without a weight distribution hitch unless I was pulling a much lighter trailer.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by Vermilye

As a non engineer, I can only go by experience. I have no idea what actual percent of the weight is taken off the front wheels, but without the WDH, they spin, forcing the vehicle into 4 wheel drive, the front wheels lock when braking, and the steering feels much lighter than normal.

Thanks for the clarification, Jon.

The front tires would be much more likely to spin under acceleration with the trailer, even if there were no load transfer at all. Accelerating (or just moving, especially uphill) the rig takes much more force because the rig is much heavier than the RAV4 by itself, but there's no corresponding additional load on the front tires to help them stick, so traction is more of a problem. The same thing would happen if you pulled a trailer with no tongue weight... or an anchor or a parachute. Even a heavy load of cargo and passengers has the same effect. The front tires are not spinning because they are unloaded, but because they don't have increased load to go with the increased demand.

[Jubal]

Real world experience with particular equipment provided by a knowledgeable individual is much more valuable than speculative theory proposed by an individual that does not own the same equipment.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by Rossue

What I meant to say is that it is full-time 4WD Also, from a little more research it seems that no matter what Toyota marketing labels this it is really AWD.

Sure, because AWD is 4WD (in the case of 4-wheeled vehicles), and AWD is usually used to suggest that the 4WD system is active full-time, so there's no conflict between the terms at all. On the second-generation Sienna, the same system was used in every year, but in some years the badge on the back said "4WD", and in other years it said "AWD". It's all just marketing.

Thanks for the Edmunds descriptions; they are not bad.

[gbaglo]

I've only driven a short distance towing without the WDH. Towing with the WDH feels much more comfortable and secure.
That's all I need to know, really.
As for Toyota "not recommending" a WDH, they warn not to steer excessively ( see pix from manual in previous post ).

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by gbaglo

As for Toyota "not recommending" a WDH, they warn not to steer excessively ( see pix from manual in previous post ).

Umm... not quite. They warn of an overheating risk - a rational person might thus avoid rapidly turning to steering extremes while not moving, just as they would have avoided this when steering was manual. A rational driver might also consider what towing conditions are suitable for this vehicle (likely not working in a trailer dealership rearranging the lot). This is a real issue, and the reason that many vehicles with hydraulic power steering have power steering fluid coolers... sometimes as part of a towing package.

In the WD case, they say (in some years) that it is not recommended for the RAV4, but they don't say why. I have my guesses, but I assume they decided it isn't worth trying to explain. If you crank the WD system enough that the front tires (of a 2WD or AWD with only the front normally driven) never slip with a couple of tons of trailer attached, you will likely overload the front axle... my guess is that would be one of the reasons. Of course, if you use the WD properly (something Toyota certainly can't assume), there should be no problems.

[gbaglo]

Yup. Toyota doesn't want to explain. I can confirm that. They don't even respond. And, there is nothing posted anywhere.

[Bcdonaher]

Back to original post on the Grand Cherokee and AZ Jack's comments, we had a 2011 Grand Cherokee V8 which we were very happy with but like all V8's it was pretty thirsty. We will be putting our deposit down shortly on a new 19 (given up waiting for used one with A/C & insulation) so traded the GC for a new Grand Cherokee Eco Diesel - could not be happier, tons or torque for towing, very smooth new 8 speed tranny and great gas mileage - recently drove from Salt Lake City to Phoenix on one tank (just)
With the V8 we would have to fill half way. This car should be an excellent TV.

[Rossue]

Looks very nice, a "torque monster". if I win the Lotto its my new TV; they run nearly $60K!