Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?

Peter

I have an older version VW Passat AWD and have owned other small vehicles. Generally, it is like the tail wagging the dog and can be a handful with gusty crosswinds and large vehicles passing.

We also own a Ford Flex wagon AWD and it does very well and has "reasonable" fuel economy.

Tom

On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 3:40:07 PM UTC-5, vontresc wrote:
> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
>
> Peter

My general consideration is.......
-The longer & heavier, the better!

On the low end of the scale was using a "VW super beetle" (mid 70's?) with a heavy wooden trailer for a ASW-15 (Basil Mott....RIP...... was the car/glider owner), empty trailer on the VW on flat ground I was hard pressed to maintain 55MPH..... I was always looking to draft anything bigger/faster to shorten retrieve times....

A weak engined car can get to "cruising speed" "eventually".

I would pay attention to trailer tongue weight and keep things snug in the trailer to minimize weight shift.

This comes up repeatedly. In Europe nobody has a heavy car, and glider trailers are more common than in the USA.
Proper CG of the trailer and avoiding fiberglass top trailers help.
Jim

On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 3:40:07 PM UTC-5, vontresc wrote:
> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
>
> Peter

I have a 06 Jetta Sedan with 1.9 TDI. I tow a 2000 lb Avionic clamshell with ALKO running gear (hydraulic surge), with an SZD55 in it. It is well-behaved on the highway and the mileage drops from 44 to 32 (USmpg) while trailering at 65 mph. No issues. Very stable on the highway. Another in my club has a JSW and tows a Lak-12 trailer with no issues (but the length). I tow to the Ridge and in upstate NY, so somewhat hilly. I use a Bosal hitch - the drawtites with their through-sheet metal attachments seemed a bit flimsy to me.
If your trailer doesn't have brakes, I'd look for something else.

On 2/13/2015 1:40 PM, vontresc wrote:
> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into
> a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or
> bad?
>
> Peter
>

Oh Jeez...another "religious topic" question! :-)

I'm guessing you're planning on towing primarily a Libelle (or maybe that Ka-6)?

I towed for 37 years with a 2600 lb, short-wheelbase, unibody car ('72 2-dr
Ford Maverick), primarily in the intermountain west, mostly - but not always -
towing 15 meter glass in a decent trailer (estimated total weight <2500 lbs).
Prolly tied for the heaviest was an HP-14 in a homebuilt wooden trailer, which
empty likely easily exceeded 2,000 pounds, and our club's 2-32 on a woefully
(and tongue-)heavy, dual-axled open trailer. Only the 2-32 trailer (surge
brake) had trailer brakes. The only modification to the car was the (didn't
fit/some welding required) "universal" Sears trailer hitch. Engine was a 302
V8, w. 3-speed manual transmission & 2.79:1 final drive ratio. The combo w. 15
meter glider/trailer regularly got ~21+ mpg out here. Car brakes were the
usual dismal drums all around of that era, w. about 80% of one panic stop in
'em for the nekkid vehicle, before serious fading and lateral imbalances
occurred. I can recall only two times being alarmed in towing situations, one
"flutter" from the (then) unbalanced HP-14 trailer, and the other braking
related (no alarm needed, in fact). Had the vehicle not gone to that Great
Rust Bucket in the sky, I'd never have sold it for its (3rd) engine in 2009.
Highest pass traversed w. trailer in tow was the Eisenhower tunnel (multiple
times) on I-70 west of Denver.

Brakes aside, I much preferred it to the 4WD, 6-speed manual, 2007 V6 Tacoma
that replaced it (and in which, exceeding 18 mpg pulling the 15-meter glider
trailer is a bonus...). But the latter vehicle is what my wife fell in love
with for her two-hole donkey-trailering needs (even though the Maverick did
quite nicely with that, too, distinctly aided w. electric trailer brakes).

Your mileage WILL vary...

Bob W.

On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 2:45:41 PM UTC-8, Dan Daly wrote:
> On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 3:40:07 PM UTC-5, vontresc wrote:
> > Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
> >
> > Peter
>
> I have a 06 Jetta Sedan with 1.9 TDI. I tow a 2000 lb Avionic clamshell with ALKO running gear (hydraulic surge), with an SZD55 in it. It is well-behaved on the highway and the mileage drops from 44 to 32 (USmpg) while trailering at 65 mph. No issues. Very stable on the highway. Another in my club has a JSW and tows a Lak-12 trailer with no issues (but the length). I tow to the Ridge and in upstate NY, so somewhat hilly. I use a Bosal hitch - the drawtites with their through-sheet metal attachments seemed a bit flimsy to me.
> If your trailer doesn't have brakes, I'd look for something else.

I have a 2009 Volks TDI Jetta Sportswagon and tow a Cobra trailer with an 18m ship. It tows great. You forget the trailer is even back there sometimes.. With 3 people in the car and the trailer, I see 28-30 mph on the highway. And the back of the Sportswagon has plenty of room for all my "glider stuff", cooler, etc.

Just curious, what aspect of the fiberglass top makes it less desirable? More weight?

On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 5:26:52 PM UTC-5, JS wrote:
> This comes up repeatedly. In Europe nobody has a heavy car, and glider trailers are more common than in the USA.
> Proper CG of the trailer and avoiding fiberglass top trailers help.
> Jim

Avoiding fiberglass top?

On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 4:23:37 PM UTC-8, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
> On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 5:26:52 PM UTC-5, JS wrote:
> > This comes up repeatedly. In Europe nobody has a heavy car, and glider trailers are more common than in the USA.
> > Proper CG of the trailer and avoiding fiberglass top trailers help.
> > Jim
>
> Avoiding fiberglass top?

As pointed out to me by a kind RAS reader, I meant 28-30 mpg, not mph! My bad!

On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 9:40:07 AM UTC+13, vontresc wrote:
> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?

That's plenty of power. Stability is the only question -- and one that you can answer with a 15 minute test drive with your trailer behind (assuming you can find somewhere you can get to 60+ mph).

I tow the club's DG1000 behind my 165 HP Subaru Outback, including over mountains, and it's fine. Fuel economy gets knocked back from 32 mpg (uk) to about 25 or 26 i.e. fuel use increased from 8 l/100 km to 11 l/100km.

I tow a 18m motorglider in a Cobra fibreglass trailer with a VW Polo 1.9 TDI (100hp). Works perfect in all conditions, also over mountain passes and with gusty winds. Max trailer weight is 1200kg, the only limitation is the small max tow bar load of 50kg.

On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 3:40:07 PM UTC-5, vontresc wrote:
> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
>
> Peter

If you look through R.A.S. archives (search on Sportwagen rather than Sportwagon) you'll see this vehicle has come up several times.

Bottom line: I've towed an LS8-18 in an Anschau Komet trailer and more recently my ASG-29 with 18M tips in a new Cobra trailer with the 2010 TDI Sportwagen. Works great. Three things I did:

- Make sure you have a tow bar that lifts the hitch to the proper height; you'll be looking at about a 4" or 5" rise.
- I run the rear tires pretty much at max allowable pressure when towing.
- I installed Firestone Coil-Rite inserts (airbags) in the rear springs. I've since decided these weren't absolutely necessary.

If I was going to be using the vehicle to tow all of the time, I might want something a little bigger. I also tow with the family Honda Odyssey, and it's a little more capable tow vehicle. But the Sportwagen is a fantastic compromise considering I use it to drive back and forth to work 98% of the time.

Erik Mann (P3)
2010 Sportwagen TDI

Anyone towing with a Touareg TDI? Thoughts?

On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 10:16:04 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> Anyone towing with a Touareg TDI? Thoughts?

Pete,

Most of the time you will NOT be towing anything so you want a car that works well for your daily commute as well.
In my experience, the VW TDI engines do not like short drives at all. Anything less than 4 miles will leave you with gunk and carbon accumulating in all the wrong places. Even trying to burn that off on occasion will not always work. Have been driving VW Diesels since the 70's in Germany (50HP) and they are great at pedal-down on the Autobahn. However, don't get one for short-distance driving, especially in cold climates (Madison WI qualifies). Had a Jetta TDI for 5 years that was completely plugged up after some years of short commutes.

Herb (1986 Mercedes Diesel, in great shape)

> Pete,
>
> Most of the time you will NOT be towing anything so you want a car that works well for your daily commute as well.
> In my experience, the VW TDI engines do not like short drives at all. Anything less than 4 miles will leave you with gunk and carbon accumulating in all the wrong places. Even trying to burn that off on occasion will not always work. Have been driving VW Diesels since the 70's in Germany (50HP) and they are great at pedal-down on the Autobahn. However, don't get one for short-distance driving, especially in cold climates (Madison WI qualifies). Had a Jetta TDI for 5 years that was completely plugged up after some years of short commutes.
>
> Herb (1986 Mercedes Diesel, in great shape)

Agree that TDIs are best for longer commutes, and that all short trip driving can be a problem with diesels. Clogged intakes/etc are really a thing of the past since Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel fuel was mandated in North America.. Towing the trailer really cleans things out, too! I am happier towing since I added an EGT gauge a year ago; in PA/NY hills, my EGT stays below 800F at Interstate speeds. I had worried it would be higher.

> wrote:
> On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 10:16:04 AM UTC-6, wrote:
>> Anyone towing with a Touareg TDI? Thoughts?
>
> Pete,
>
> Most of the time you will NOT be towing anything so you want a car that
> works well for your daily commute as well.
> In my experience, the VW TDI engines do not like short drives at all.
> Anything less than 4 miles will leave you with gunk and carbon
> accumulating in all the wrong places. Even trying to burn that off on
> occasion will not always work. Have been driving VW Diesels since the
> 70's in Germany (50HP) and they are great at pedal-down on the Autobahn.
> However, don't get one for short-distance driving, especially in cold
> climates (Madison WI qualifies). Had a Jetta TDI for 5 years that was
> completely plugged up after some years of short commutes.
>
> Herb (1986 Mercedes Diesel, in great shape)

I remember the old 1978 Mk1 Golf LD we had back in Germany. Hell we used to
tow a small trailer behind the thing to haul half a dozen sheep around. The
Autobahn was interesting in that beast though. About the only thing it
would be able to pass were the semi trucks ;-)

Pete

On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 8:16:04 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> Anyone towing with a Touareg TDI? Thoughts?

I have the V6 gasoline Touareg (2010). Before that I had a 2004 version of the same vehicle. It is the best tow vehicle I have ever owned or driven. I tow a Cobra fiberglass top with an ASW-27B inside and usually plenty of ground gear. It has enough power to get over the Sierra Nevada Mountains and will take the trailer at any speed you have the nerve for given the speed ratings on the tires without a wobble in all kinds of crosswinds and on 2-lane roads with semis coming the other way.

Secrets to good handling - decent vehicle mass, large tire contact area, short distance from rear wheels to tow ball and a long wheelbase.

9B

> I have the V6 gasoline Touareg (2010).
>
> 9B

What kind of mileage do you get when towing vs not towing? Do find there is enough room inside for all your gear?

On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 12:40:07 PM UTC-8, vontresc wrote:
> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
>
> Peter

I'm pretty sure the DSG transmission doesn't allow towing. I'm sure it WILL tow, but with a hitch on the back you may have warranty issues. If you're not under warranty, I wouldn't want to have to repair that transmission......I can't imagine how much that thing costs to repair.

I have a 2013 tdi wagon and love the car but have 5k left on the powertrain and it's making me nervous, and I don't tow.

On Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 9:23:20 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 12:40:07 PM UTC-8, vontresc wrote:
> > Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
> >
> > Peter
>
> I'm pretty sure the DSG transmission doesn't allow towing. I'm sure it WILL tow, but with a hitch on the back you may have warranty issues. If you're not under warranty, I wouldn't want to have to repair that transmission......I can't imagine how much that thing costs to repair.
>
> I have a 2013 tdi wagon and love the car but have 5k left on the powertrain and it's making me nervous, and I don't tow.

When you say "new" do you mean new to you or brand new? If you're talking brand new, or relatively new, for that amount of money you can buy a much better used tow vehicle.

Peter got my attention right away. I'll look at the VW TDI AWD wagon if it's ever released.
Looking for one vehicle with great fuel economy, AWD, tow capable and International standard trailer lighting capable. Unfortunately Audi USA is very slow at getting the 2.0TDI engine into their Allroad, which has been very popular in Europe. Believe the 2.0TDI is only in FWD A3s. Incidentally the A3 will tow single seaters well.
The VW Tiguan TDI is unavailable in USA.
So is the Subaru Forrester TDI.
And of course Audi Allroad TDI.
All are available and used for towing gliders elsewhere.

Sorry about the hurried earlier post, my flight was about to leave: The fiberglass top Cobras have been discussed many times before regarding the aerodynamic qualities of the fin.
But it seems mostly C/G that will make a trailer difficult to tow.
Jim

On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 7:11:26 PM UTC+13, JS wrote:
> Peter got my attention right away. I'll look at the VW TDI AWD wagon if it's ever released.
> Looking for one vehicle with great fuel economy, AWD, tow capable and International standard trailer lighting capable. Unfortunately Audi USA is very slow at getting the 2.0TDI engine into their Allroad, which has been very popular in Europe. Believe the 2.0TDI is only in FWD A3s. Incidentally the A3 will tow single seaters well.
> The VW Tiguan TDI is unavailable in USA.
> So is the Subaru Forrester TDI.
> And of course Audi Allroad TDI.
> All are available and used for towing gliders elsewhere.

I know a few people here in NZ who have Korean SsangYong Rexton W SUVs with 137 kW (184 hp) Mercedes 2.7l turbo diesel engines and transmissions. I've driven one and ridden in a couple of others. They're no Audi, but they're roomy and comfortable, good power and acceleration, very good fuel economy, tow well (recommended maximum 7000 lb, 3200 kg). And cheap at NZ$48k (US$36k) with AWD
or NZ$40k (US$30k) with part time 4WD.

On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 12:44:29 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> > I have the V6 gasoline Touareg (2010).
> >
> > 9B
>
> What kind of mileage do you get when towing vs not towing? Do find there is enough room inside for all your gear?

Good room for the gear. All glider stuff fits in the back. I also have a low-profile roof rack, though I don't need the space for glider gear. It just keeps my luggage out of the back seat.

I haven't measured the mileage towing. On flatland maybe a couple MPG less than driving with no trailer. Climbing mountains, maybe a bit worse. It's 15-18 MPG with no trailer, mixed highway and city driving.

I've been towing my Ventus in a lift-top trailer with a 1.9 liter TTiD Saab and automatic transmission for the last couple of years, and extensively through the Alps. No problems with stability whatsoever, and the engine has lots of torque to accelerate beyond speed limits uphill towards a mountain pass. On the highway, I typically set the cruise control to 75-80 mph. 33 MPG.

It's a shame that the auto makers have been slow to introduce turbo-diesel engines into the USA, although the reasons are pretty obvious. Gasoline is a lot cheaper than diesel (in my home town right now, gasoline is $2 per US gallon and diesel is around $2.60) and diesel engines are also more expensive.

IMHO, the power and especially torque curves of the typical turbo diesel are absolutely superb for towing. I am now towing with a camper van based on the Mercedes Sprinter and find its towing and hill-climbing abilities to be superb. Fuel consumption is also not far shy of 20 mpg (that's 24 mpg for the Brits!) My other tow vehicle (Lexus with 5 liter gasoline V-8) is also superb, but it's a lot bigger, heavier and thirstier than most would like to drive around, especially in Europe.

Mike

On Mon, 16 Feb 2015 07:57:21 -0800, Mike the Strike wrote:

> IMHO, the power and especially torque curves of the typical turbo diesel
> are absolutely superb for towing. I am now towing with a camper van
> based on the Mercedes Sprinter and find its towing and hill-climbing
> abilities to be superb. Fuel consumption is also not far shy of 20 mpg
> (that's 24 mpg for the Brits!)
>
You're right: that sounds thirsty to me.

I use a 2002 Ford Focus 5-door estate with 4 speed automatic transmission
and a 2 litre petrol engine to tow my Libelle in a fairly old alloy-
skinned box trailer. Its stable up to 60mph though I won't tow faster
than 65. This gets around 28mpg on long runs, e.g. from Harlow in Essex
up to the Lake district or to Portmoak (20-30 miles north of Edinburgh,
so about 23 miles/USAian gallon. Its excellent on hills: I had no problem
towing that trailer up through Church Stretton and over the moors to The
Mynd or going down the same way.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

At 15:57 16 February 2015, Mike the Strike wrote:
>It's a shame that the auto makers have been slow to introduce
turbo-diesel
>=
>engines into the USA, although the reasons are pretty obvious. Gasoline
>is=
> a lot cheaper than diesel (in my home town right now, gasoline is $2 per
>U=
>S gallon and diesel is around $2.60) and diesel engines are also more
>expen=
>sive.
>
>IMHO, the power and especially torque curves of the typical turbo diesel
>ar=
>e absolutely superb for towing. I am now towing with a camper van based
>on=
> the Mercedes Sprinter and find its towing and hill-climbing abilities to
>b=
>e superb. Fuel consumption is also not far shy of 20 mpg (that's 24 mpg
>fo=
>r the Brits!) My other tow vehicle (Lexus with 5 liter gasoline V-8) is
>al=
>so superb, but it's a lot bigger, heavier and thirstier than most would
>lik=
>e to drive around, especially in Europe.
>
>Mike
>
I'm using a BMW e61 520d, and you can hardly tell that our Discus trailer
is on the back. I've also had 42 mpg (UK gallons) on runs up to Scotland,
again with the trailer.
Dave

As stated in earlier threads, VW is quirky (to put it mildly) regarding towing specs for their cars in the US. The TDI powered Golf Estate (aka Jetta Sportwagen here) with the 2.0 Liter diesel and DSG 6 speed transmission in the UK is rated for towing 1600KG with a braked trailer. That indicates to me that any limitations here are not "technical".

While I don't know that I'd plan on using this vehicle to tow really long distances across the western US (e.g. from NJ to Hobbs), I've used it extensively through the Mid-Atlantic and New England including some pretty significant hill work. Have never even seen it labor even on long inclines.

That said, I wouldn't want to speculate on what would happen if there were to be a warranty claim. I'm already over 5 years and 60,000 miles, so I'm outside that window. Never had a single non-routine even thus far.

FWIW, my previous VW was the larger V6 Passat with 4 Motion (AWD). Thing was bullet proof up until about 120,000, then it started to blow up left and right. Bailed on it when the next repair bill was going to be over $1,000.

P3



On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 12:23:20 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 12:40:07 PM UTC-8, vontresc wrote:
> > Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
> >
> > Peter
>
> I'm pretty sure the DSG transmission doesn't allow towing. I'm sure it WILL tow, but with a hitch on the back you may have warranty issues. If you're not under warranty, I wouldn't want to have to repair that transmission......I can't imagine how much that thing costs to repair.
>
> I have a 2013 tdi wagon and love the car but have 5k left on the powertrain and it's making me nervous, and I don't tow.

On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 2:54:46 PM UTC-5, chipsoars wrote:
> The VW TDI is not rated for towing in the US. You may get away with with it, but it will certainly void the warranty. Towing and warranty certainly seem different.
>

Perhaps true for new ones, but 2006 TDIs are rated for 2,000 lbs (unbraked) or 1,000 (braked) for the 5 speed.

On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 1:11:26 AM UTC-5, JS wrote:
> Peter got my attention right away. I'll look at the VW TDI AWD wagon if it's ever released.
> Looking for one vehicle with great fuel economy, AWD, tow capable and International standard trailer lighting capable. Unfortunately Audi USA is very slow at getting the 2.0TDI engine into their Allroad, which has been very popular in Europe. Believe the 2.0TDI is only in FWD A3s. Incidentally the A3 will tow single seaters well.
> The VW Tiguan TDI is unavailable in USA.
> So is the Subaru Forrester TDI.
> And of course Audi Allroad TDI.
> All are available and used for towing gliders elsewhere.
>
> Sorry about the hurried earlier post, my flight was about to leave: The fiberglass top Cobras have been discussed many times before regarding the aerodynamic qualities of the fin.
> But it seems mostly C/G that will make a trailer difficult to tow.
> Jim

Mercedes GLK-250 BlueTec is available in the USA with 3500 lbs towing capacity and great mileage. It tows very well an 18 m trailer.

On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 10:57:23 AM UTC-5, Mike the Strike wrote:
> It's a shame that the auto makers have been slow to introduce turbo-diesel engines into the USA, although the reasons are pretty obvious. Gasoline is a lot cheaper than diesel (in my home town right now, gasoline is $2 per US gallon and diesel is around $2.60) and diesel engines are also more expensive.
>
> IMHO, the power and especially torque curves of the typical turbo diesel are absolutely superb for towing. I am now towing with a camper van based on the Mercedes Sprinter and find its towing and hill-climbing abilities to be superb. Fuel consumption is also not far shy of 20 mpg (that's 24 mpg for the Brits!) My other tow vehicle (Lexus with 5 liter gasoline V-8) is also superb, but it's a lot bigger, heavier and thirstier than most would like to drive around, especially in Europe.
>
> Mike

The issue with Diesels in the US are mostly related to emissions/EPA. It's expensive to certify diesels here (additional hardware required to pass EPA testing), thus not as common. Couple that with gas being cheaper (compared to other parts of the world) than diesel fuel and automakers have little incentive to bring diesels to the US market.

In the '70's, I towed a pilot's trailer with a diesel Rabbit/Golf, 0-60 was measured using a calendar.... Sigh.....

Very good.
I've looked at the GLK250 Bluetec. Great specs including economy, feels solid.
Jim


On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 2:00:51 PM UTC-8, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
> On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 1:11:26 AM UTC-5, JS wrote:
> > Peter got my attention right away. I'll look at the VW TDI AWD wagon if it's ever released.
> > Looking for one vehicle with great fuel economy, AWD, tow capable and International standard trailer lighting capable. Unfortunately Audi USA is very slow at getting the 2.0TDI engine into their Allroad, which has been very popular in Europe. Believe the 2.0TDI is only in FWD A3s. Incidentally the A3 will tow single seaters well.
> > The VW Tiguan TDI is unavailable in USA.
> > So is the Subaru Forrester TDI.
> > And of course Audi Allroad TDI.
> > All are available and used for towing gliders elsewhere.
> >
> > Sorry about the hurried earlier post, my flight was about to leave: The fiberglass top Cobras have been discussed many times before regarding the aerodynamic qualities of the fin.
> > But it seems mostly C/G that will make a trailer difficult to tow.
> > Jim
>
> Mercedes GLK-250 BlueTec is available in the USA with 3500 lbs towing capacity and great mileage. It tows very well an 18 m trailer.

On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 12:22:17 PM UTC+13, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> In the '70's, I towed a pilot's trailer with a diesel Rabbit/Golf, 0-60 was measured using a calendar.... Sigh.....

The first time I visited the USA, in 1989, I hired a car to tour California, Nevada, Utah, and Arizona. They offered me a Chevy Cavalier with I think a 2.2 or 2.4 engine. That sounded adequate on paper. However it was an absolute pig. At one point on a quiet road somewhere near Las Vegas I actually measured the 0-60. It was a full, seemingly never ending, thirty seconds.

The next few times I went to the US I insisted on 1.6 Corollas. Infinitely better.

On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 5:49:38 PM UTC-5, BobW wrote:
> On 2/13/2015 1:40 PM, vontresc wrote:
> > Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking into
> > a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or
> > bad?
> >
> > Peter
> >
>
> Oh Jeez...another "religious topic" question! :-)
>
> I'm guessing you're planning on towing primarily a Libelle (or maybe that Ka-6)?
>
> I towed for 37 years with a 2600 lb, short-wheelbase, unibody car ('72 2-dr
> Ford Maverick), primarily in the intermountain west, mostly - but not always -
> towing 15 meter glass in a decent trailer (estimated total weight <2500 lbs).
> Prolly tied for the heaviest was an HP-14 in a homebuilt wooden trailer, which
> empty likely easily exceeded 2,000 pounds, and our club's 2-32 on a woefully
> (and tongue-)heavy, dual-axled open trailer. Only the 2-32 trailer (surge
> brake) had trailer brakes. The only modification to the car was the (didn't
> fit/some welding required) "universal" Sears trailer hitch. Engine was a 302
> V8, w. 3-speed manual transmission & 2.79:1 final drive ratio. The combo w. 15
> meter glider/trailer regularly got ~21+ mpg out here. Car brakes were the
> usual dismal drums all around of that era, w. about 80% of one panic stop in
> 'em for the nekkid vehicle, before serious fading and lateral imbalances
> occurred. I can recall only two times being alarmed in towing situations, one
> "flutter" from the (then) unbalanced HP-14 trailer, and the other braking
> related (no alarm needed, in fact). Had the vehicle not gone to that Great
> Rust Bucket in the sky, I'd never have sold it for its (3rd) engine in 2009.
> Highest pass traversed w. trailer in tow was the Eisenhower tunnel (multiple
> times) on I-70 west of Denver.
>
> Brakes aside, I much preferred it to the 4WD, 6-speed manual, 2007 V6 Tacoma
> that replaced it (and in which, exceeding 18 mpg pulling the 15-meter glider
> trailer is a bonus...). But the latter vehicle is what my wife fell in love
> with for her two-hole donkey-trailering needs (even though the Maverick did
> quite nicely with that, too, distinctly aided w. electric trailer brakes).
>
> Your mileage WILL vary...
>
> Bob W.

Bob,
I Hesitate to ask, but curiosity won out over prudence. WTF is two-hole Donkey-trailering? If it could have been in one of the scenes in 50 Shades of Gray, please don't answer.

SF
SF

> wrote:
> On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 12:40:07 PM UTC-8, vontresc wrote:
>> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking
>> into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
>>
>> Peter
>
> I'm pretty sure the DSG transmission doesn't allow towing. I'm sure it
> WILL tow, but with a hitch on the back you may have warranty issues. If
> you're not under warranty, I wouldn't want to have to repair that
> transmission.....I can't imagine how much that thing costs to repair.
>
> I have a 2013 tdi wagon and love the car but have 5k left on the
> powertrain and it's making me nervous, and I don't tow.

I'm pretty much limiting my search to manual transmission. This is going to
be dual use regular car with occasional Libelle towing duty (light trailer
with good surge brakes).

Still don't understand why one must use a full size truck to tow anything
;-)

Pete

> Still don't understand why one must use a full size truck to tow anything
> ;-)
>
> Pete

'murica thats why!

On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 7:25:52 AM UTC-5, Tony wrote:
> > Still don't understand why one must use a full size truck to tow anything
> > ;-)
> >
> > Pete
>
> 'murica thats why!

Because 2.4 liter Celebrity not racecar. :-)

I last shopped for a trash hauler in 2011. TDI wagon might have made the short list but for a few deal breakers.

If I were on the market for a diesel, I would research fuel system reliability *hard*. VW has had issues I would not be prepared to put up with.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

On 2/16/2015 7:40 PM, SF wrote:
> On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 5:49:38 PM UTC-5, BobW wrote:
>> On 2/13/2015 1:40 PM, vontresc wrote:
>>> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking
>>> into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship?
>>> Good or bad?
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>
>> Oh Jeez...another "religious topic" question! :-)
<Snip...>
>>
>> Brakes aside, I much preferred it to the 4WD, 6-speed manual, 2007 V6
>> Tacoma that replaced it (and in which, exceeding 18 mpg pulling the
>> 15-meter glider trailer is a bonus...). But the latter vehicle is what my
>> wife fell in love with for her two-hole donkey-trailering needs (even
>> though the Maverick did quite nicely with that, too, distinctly aided w.
>> electric trailer brakes).
>>
>> Your mileage WILL vary...
>>
>> Bob W.
>
> Bob, I Hesitate to ask, but curiosity won out over prudence. WTF is
> two-hole Donkey-trailering? If it could have been in one of the scenes in
> 50 Shades of Gray, please don't answer.
>
> SF

Ha ha! The critter trailer is simply a short, double-horse-wide, enclosed,
dual-axled horse trailer commonly seen throughout U.S. critter country. It
easily holds my wife's 3 donkeys (one full-sized; two minis) and associated
paraphernalia, as well as occasionally - in the truck - 'her real jackass'
(me). Compared to most glider trailers ever pulled, judging from
Maverick/Tacoma fuel mileage, the critter coach pulls 'real heavy.'

Regards,
Bob W.

P.S. Hope what my mama used to say ("Curiosity killed the cat; satisfaction
brought it back.") works for you!

On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 9:23:42 PM UTC-6, vontresc wrote:
> Still don't understand why one must use a full size truck to tow anything
> ;-)
>
> Pete

I know someone that towed his glider with his Honda CRX. Routinely at 80 MPH. Yes, the trailer weighed more than the car. And as I recall, the trailer did not have brakes.

> I know someone that towed his glider with his Honda CRX. Routinely at 80 MPH. Yes, the trailer weighed more than the car. And as I recall, the trailer did not have brakes.

- Done that with 05 Accord, 80 MPH with no trailer brakes, no problems of any kind ever with the car, trailer or the transmission. Other than the European sentiments, not sure why would anyone want put themselves through the turbo diesel in US. Modern diesel engines are overly complicated - high pressure fuel pumps, turbos, injectors, dfp filters, mass wheels etc. Please google Audi/VW diesel fuel pump issues and the uncontrolled bio-mass-diesel fuel purity, especially in the corn producing bio-fuel lobbing states like IL. Just recently, after several lawsuits, VW/Audi actually admitted that they will be honoring warranty coverage for the biomass clogged fuel pumps...

On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 9:23:42 PM UTC-6, vontresc wrote:
> > wrote:
> > On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 12:40:07 PM UTC-8, vontresc wrote:
> >> Looking at getting a new vehicle this spring, and am currently looking
> >> into a Jetta Sportwagon TDI. Any of you guys use one to tow your ship? Good or bad?
> >>
> >> Peter
> >
> > I'm pretty sure the DSG transmission doesn't allow towing. I'm sure it
> > WILL tow, but with a hitch on the back you may have warranty issues. If
> > you're not under warranty, I wouldn't want to have to repair that
> > transmission.....I can't imagine how much that thing costs to repair.
> >
> > I have a 2013 tdi wagon and love the car but have 5k left on the
> > powertrain and it's making me nervous, and I don't tow.
>
> I'm pretty much limiting my search to manual transmission. This is going to
> be dual use regular car with occasional Libelle towing duty (light trailer
> with good surge brakes).
>
> Still don't understand why one must use a full size truck to tow anything
> ;-)
>
> Pete

'Cuz we can? If you have ever towed with a long wheelbase full size 'Murican Pickup Truck, you will never want to use anything else!

Well, of course, until you have to put gas in it.

Kirk
66

Yep did 5000 miles with a friend in his 3/4 ton Chevy last fall. A little over half was pulling a monster cobra. Sure was glad he was buying the gas!

On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 6:25:20 PM UTC-5, JS wrote:
> Very good.
> I've looked at the GLK250 Bluetec. Great specs including economy, feels solid.
> Jim
>
>
> On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 2:00:51 PM UTC-8, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
> > On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 1:11:26 AM UTC-5, JS wrote:
> > > Peter got my attention right away. I'll look at the VW TDI AWD wagon if it's ever released.
> > > Looking for one vehicle with great fuel economy, AWD, tow capable and International standard trailer lighting capable. Unfortunately Audi USA is very slow at getting the 2.0TDI engine into their Allroad, which has been very popular in Europe. Believe the 2.0TDI is only in FWD A3s. Incidentally the A3 will tow single seaters well.
> > > The VW Tiguan TDI is unavailable in USA.
> > > So is the Subaru Forrester TDI.
> > > And of course Audi Allroad TDI.
> > > All are available and used for towing gliders elsewhere.
> > >
> > > Sorry about the hurried earlier post, my flight was about to leave: The fiberglass top Cobras have been discussed many times before regarding the aerodynamic qualities of the fin.
> > > But it seems mostly C/G that will make a trailer difficult to tow.
> > > Jim
> >
> > Mercedes GLK-250 BlueTec is available in the USA with 3500 lbs towing capacity and great mileage. It tows very well an 18 m trailer.

You will not get wrong with this SUV. I bought one in September and I love it. I will not say here what I get for mileage towing an ASH-26E in an 18 m trailer, no one will believe!

Hey Pete -

Forget the pickup - get a full size conversion van. Then you won't have to sleep in that tiny tent of yours:)

MNLou > wrote:
> Hey Pete -
>
> Forget the pickup - get a full size conversion van. Then you won't have
> to sleep in that tiny tent of yours:)

Maybe Steve Leonard has a spare "Stalker Van" he could part with ;-)

Peter

On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 3:50:43 PM UTC-6, vontresc wrote:
>
> Maybe Steve Leonard has a spare "Stalker Van" he could part with ;-)
>
> Peter

Maybe he does. Do you want the optional "Smoke Screen" for easy get-a-way?

Steve Leonard

Hey Pete -

Forget the pickup - get a full size conversion van. Then you won't have to sleep in that tiny tent of yours:)

You better believe it!!! Speaking from experience .....

You better believe it!!! Speaking from experience .....

Chevy's... G20's $4000 finds really nice ones...

On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 7:41:56 PM UTC-6, Steve Leonard wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 3:50:43 PM UTC-6, vontresc wrote:
> >
> > Maybe Steve Leonard has a spare "Stalker Van" he could part with ;-)
> >
> > Peter
>
> Maybe he does. Do you want the optional "Smoke Screen" for easy get-a-way?
>
> Steve Leonard

is the smoke screen really an option? ;)

I did about 7500 miles towing trailers round europe last year behind a SWB
toyota land cruiser tdi and a VW passat TDi130 estate.
With the land cruiser you didnt notice you had anything on the back (even
with a Nimbus 4 in a cobra trailer). However fuel consumption was in the
low 20mpg and it was uncomfortable.

The Passat was great. Measured fuel consumption was 47mpg with a LS6/18 in
a tube trailer. Very comfortable and stable up to well in excess of the
legal lmit.

As said elsewhere the TDI engine characteristics are great for towing.
Loads of mid range torque that avoids constant gear changing that you get
with a similar size petrol engine.

The trick with stability with trailers is to get the weight distibution
corect. You want as much as possible over the axle(s) but with a sensible
amount on the draw bar. (not hundreds of pounds as I have seen advocated
here) If you put all the spare gubbins in the front and back of the trailer
you end up with a "dumbell" which is potentially unstable.

Nigel
>

On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 7:00:07 AM UTC-6, Nigel Pocock wrote:
> I did about 7500 miles towing trailers round europe last year behind a SWB
> toyota land cruiser tdi and a VW passat TDi130 estate.
> With the land cruiser you didnt notice you had anything on the back (even
> with a Nimbus 4 in a cobra trailer). However fuel consumption was in the
> low 20mpg and it was uncomfortable.
>
> The Passat was great. Measured fuel consumption was 47mpg with a LS6/18 in
> a tube trailer. Very comfortable and stable up to well in excess of the
> legal lmit.
>
> As said elsewhere the TDI engine characteristics are great for towing.
> Loads of mid range torque that avoids constant gear changing that you get
> with a similar size petrol engine.
>
> The trick with stability with trailers is to get the weight distibution
> corect. You want as much as possible over the axle(s) but with a sensible
> amount on the draw bar. (not hundreds of pounds as I have seen advocated
> here) If you put all the spare gubbins in the front and back of the trailer
> you end up with a "dumbell" which is potentially unstable.
>
> Nigel
> >

Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up right now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers. Why can't we all go metric???

On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 8:44:53 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up right now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers. Why can't we all go metric???

And report in kilometers per liter?

At 14:44 18 February 2015, wrote:
>On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 7:00:07 AM UTC-6, Nigel Pocock wrote:
>> I did about 7500 miles towing trailers round europe last year behind a
>SWB
>> toyota land cruiser tdi and a VW passat TDi130 estate.
>> With the land cruiser you didnt notice you had anything on the back
(even
>> with a Nimbus 4 in a cobra trailer). However fuel consumption was in
the
>> low 20mpg and it was uncomfortable.
>>
>> The Passat was great. Measured fuel consumption was 47mpg with a LS6/18
>in
>> a tube trailer. Very comfortable and stable up to well in excess of the
>> legal lmit.
>>
>> As said elsewhere the TDI engine characteristics are great for towing.
>> Loads of mid range torque that avoids constant gear changing that you
get
>> with a similar size petrol engine.
>>
>> The trick with stability with trailers is to get the weight distibution
>> corect. You want as much as possible over the axle(s) but with a
sensible
>> amount on the draw bar. (not hundreds of pounds as I have seen
advocated
>> here) If you put all the spare gubbins in the front and back of the
>trailer
>> you end up with a "dumbell" which is potentially unstable.
>>
>> Nigel
>> >
>
>Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are
>kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up
right
>now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers.
Why
>can't we all go metric???
>

47mpgUK =39mpg US = 6l/100km
My brain hurts now

Apples / apples comparisons really aren't possible between US and anywhere else. Emissions regs are a bit different in USA, resulting in lower economy US for both diesel and gas. As well, USA gasoline is diluted with ethanol for political reasons (basically, Archer Daniels Midland corporation owns more of Congress than "We, the People") which further erodes gas economy.

T8

On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 8:19:31 AM UTC-7, Steve Leonard wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 8:44:53 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> > Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up right now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers. Why can't we all go metric???
>
> And report in kilometers per liter?

"Inflated imperial gallons" - don't you mean deflated American gallons! I expect a pint of beer to be 20 fluid ounces, not 16!

Mike

Why can't we all go metric? Because 10s of litres per 100 miles is a
silly measurement compared to miles per gallon. Same with knots
airspeed and lift/sink vs. km/hr and m/s. How about inches per teaspoon
for mileage?


On 2/18/2015 7:44 AM, wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 7:00:07 AM UTC-6, Nigel Pocock wrote:
>> I did about 7500 miles towing trailers round europe last year behind a SWB
>> toyota land cruiser tdi and a VW passat TDi130 estate.
>> With the land cruiser you didnt notice you had anything on the back (even
>> with a Nimbus 4 in a cobra trailer). However fuel consumption was in the
>> low 20mpg and it was uncomfortable.
>>
>> The Passat was great. Measured fuel consumption was 47mpg with a LS6/18 in
>> a tube trailer. Very comfortable and stable up to well in excess of the
>> legal lmit.
>>
>> As said elsewhere the TDI engine characteristics are great for towing.
>> Loads of mid range torque that avoids constant gear changing that you get
>> with a similar size petrol engine.
>>
>> The trick with stability with trailers is to get the weight distibution
>> corect. You want as much as possible over the axle(s) but with a sensible
>> amount on the draw bar. (not hundreds of pounds as I have seen advocated
>> here) If you put all the spare gubbins in the front and back of the trailer
>> you end up with a "dumbell" which is potentially unstable.
>>
>> Nigel
> Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up right now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers. Why can't we all go metric???

--
Dan Marotta

On 2/18/2015 9:42 AM, Mike the Strike wrote:
> <snip>
> I expect a pint of beer to be 20 fluid ounces, not 16!
>
> Mike
Best argument yet that I've heard for using any sort of Euro measurement!
--
Dan Marotta

On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 11:46:10 AM UTC+13, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Why can't we all go metric?* Because 10s of litres per 100 miles is
> a silly measurement compared to miles per gallon.

It depends on whether you're filling your tank and then asking "ok, now where can I go to?" or saying "I want to go to X, what will it cost me?"

The latter is, I would submit, more generally useful.

Quick, if you're going to travel 1000 miles, is it a bigger saving to get 22 mpg from something that was previously doing 20, or to get 45 mpg from something that was previously doing 40 mpg?

In fact, the former will save you a lot more: 4.5 gal vs 2.8.

Which can be readily seen from converting to l/100 km: 11.76 vs 10.69 and 5..88 vs 5.22. The difference between the first pair is 1.07 l/100km while the difference between the second pair is only 0.66 l/100km.


> Same with knots airspeed and lift/sink vs. km/hr and m/s.

I don't care what the units are, only whether it's up or down, and getting better or worse.

On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 4:46:10 PM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Why can't we all go metric?* Because 10s of litres per 100 miles is
> a silly measurement compared to miles per gallon.* Same with knots
> airspeed and lift/sink vs. km/hr and m/s.* How about inches per
> teaspoon for mileage?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/18/2015 7:44 AM,
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 7:00:07 AM UTC-6, Nigel Pocock wrote:
>
>
> I did about 7500 miles towing trailers round europe last year behind a SWB
> toyota land cruiser tdi and a VW passat TDi130 estate.
> With the land cruiser you didnt notice you had anything on the back (even
> with a Nimbus 4 in a cobra trailer). However fuel consumption was in the
> low 20mpg and it was uncomfortable.
>
> The Passat was great. Measured fuel consumption was 47mpg with a LS6/18 in
> a tube trailer. Very comfortable and stable up to well in excess of the
> legal lmit.
>
> As said elsewhere the TDI engine characteristics are great for towing.
> Loads of mid range torque that avoids constant gear changing that you get
> with a similar size petrol engine.
>
> The trick with stability with trailers is to get the weight distibution
> corect. You want as much as possible over the axle(s) but with a sensible
> amount on the draw bar. (not hundreds of pounds as I have seen advocated
> here) If you put all the spare gubbins in the front and back of the trailer
> you end up with a "dumbell" which is potentially unstable.
>
> Nigel
>
>
>
>
>
> Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up right now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers.. Why can't we all go metric???
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

Dan and Steve,

Here are a couple more good solid American-value based reasons not to go metric:
1. The scientific community is all metric. Can't trust those bozos.
2. You want us to go Euro-style? Will never happen in this country
3. Powers of ten are too easy to convert. We rather stay with funny conversion factors and fractions, keeps the mind sharp.
4. Isn't metric the first step to Sharia law?
6. Only liberal socialists (and the Chinese/Russians) use the metric system.
5. The French invented the metric nonsense
6. I don't understand metric

Anybody else? Did I miss any other 'good' reasons?

Thanks for the chuckles! A few comments:

1. The scientific community also brought us "global warming" so you're
right - you can't trust at least some of those bozos.
2. We'll probably go Euro style some day. After all, you brought us
the Mercedes and the Aston Martin, both great cars. All we did was
bring you the moon.
3. Yaaas... Powers of ten. Let's talk about dodecafurlongs and
hectares. Microhenries are useful, however.
4. Nah... Not calling a spade a spade is the first step to Sharia
law. Note that was a reference to a card game.
5. I'm neither liberal, socialist, Chinese, nor Russian, and I did use
the metric system for my engineering degree. I simply like the system
of knots and feet for my flying.
6. Really? Did the French invent the metric system? If so, I learned
something today (a good thing!)
7. Actually, I do understand metric (see 5 above).
8. My comments were in actual numeric order.
9. Spring is approaching in the northern himisphere. Or is that the
northern 5 decispheres?
10. This is all in fun. I hope you took it that way.

:-D

On 2/19/2015 7:49 AM, wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 4:46:10 PM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> Why can't we all go metric? Because 10s of litres per 100 miles is
>> a silly measurement compared to miles per gallon. Same with knots
>> airspeed and lift/sink vs. km/hr and m/s. How about inches per
>> teaspoon for mileage?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/18/2015 7:44 AM,
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 7:00:07 AM UTC-6, Nigel Pocock wrote:
>>
>>
>> I did about 7500 miles towing trailers round europe last year behind a SWB
>> toyota land cruiser tdi and a VW passat TDi130 estate.
>> With the land cruiser you didnt notice you had anything on the back (even
>> with a Nimbus 4 in a cobra trailer). However fuel consumption was in the
>> low 20mpg and it was uncomfortable.
>>
>> The Passat was great. Measured fuel consumption was 47mpg with a LS6/18 in
>> a tube trailer. Very comfortable and stable up to well in excess of the
>> legal lmit.
>>
>> As said elsewhere the TDI engine characteristics are great for towing.
>> Loads of mid range torque that avoids constant gear changing that you get
>> with a similar size petrol engine.
>>
>> The trick with stability with trailers is to get the weight distibution
>> corect. You want as much as possible over the axle(s) but with a sensible
>> amount on the draw bar. (not hundreds of pounds as I have seen advocated
>> here) If you put all the spare gubbins in the front and back of the trailer
>> you end up with a "dumbell" which is potentially unstable.
>>
>> Nigel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up right now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers. Why can't we all go metric???
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dan Marotta
> Dan and Steve,
>
> Here are a couple more good solid American-value based reasons not to go metric:
> 1. The scientific community is all metric. Can't trust those bozos.
> 2. You want us to go Euro-style? Will never happen in this country
> 3. Powers of ten are too easy to convert. We rather stay with funny conversion factors and fractions, keeps the mind sharp.
> 4. Isn't metric the first step to Sharia law?
> 6. Only liberal socialists (and the Chinese/Russians) use the metric system.
> 5. The French invented the metric nonsense
> 6. I don't understand metric
>
> Anybody else? Did I miss any other 'good' reasons?

--
Dan Marotta

On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 10:31:23 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Thanks for the chuckles!* A few comments:
>
>
>
> 1.* The scientific community also brought us "global warming" so
> you're right - you can't trust at least some of those bozos.
>
> 2.* We'll probably go Euro style some day.* After all, you brought
> us the Mercedes and the Aston Martin, both great cars.* All we did
> was bring you the moon.
>
> 3.* Yaaas...* Powers of ten. * Let's talk about dodecafurlongs and
> hectares.* Microhenries are useful, however.
>
> 4.* Nah...* Not calling a spade a spade is the first step to Sharia
> law.* Note that was a reference to a card game.
>
> 5.* I'm neither liberal, socialist, Chinese, nor Russian, and I did
> use the metric system for my engineering degree.* I simply like the
> system of knots and feet for my flying.
>
> 6.* Really?* Did the French invent the metric system?* If so, I
> learned something today (a good thing!)
>
> 7.* Actually, I do understand metric (see 5 above).
>
> 8.* My comments were in actual numeric order.
>
> 9.* Spring is approaching in the northern himisphere.* Or is that
> the northern 5 decispheres?
>
> 10. This is all in fun.* I hope you took it that way.
>
>
>
> :-D
>
>
>
>
> On 2/19/2015 7:49 AM,
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 4:46:10 PM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
>
>
> Why can't we all go metric?* Because 10s of litres per 100 miles is
> a silly measurement compared to miles per gallon.* Same with knots
> airspeed and lift/sink vs. km/hr and m/s.* How about inches per
> teaspoon for mileage?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/18/2015 7:44 AM,
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 7:00:07 AM UTC-6, Nigel Pocock wrote:
>
>
> I did about 7500 miles towing trailers round europe last year behind a SWB
> toyota land cruiser tdi and a VW passat TDi130 estate.
> With the land cruiser you didnt notice you had anything on the back (even
> with a Nimbus 4 in a cobra trailer). However fuel consumption was in the
> low 20mpg and it was uncomfortable.
>
> The Passat was great. Measured fuel consumption was 47mpg with a LS6/18 in
> a tube trailer. Very comfortable and stable up to well in excess of the
> legal lmit.
>
> As said elsewhere the TDI engine characteristics are great for towing.
> Loads of mid range torque that avoids constant gear changing that you get
> with a similar size petrol engine.
>
> The trick with stability with trailers is to get the weight distibution
> corect. You want as much as possible over the axle(s) but with a sensible
> amount on the draw bar. (not hundreds of pounds as I have seen advocated
> here) If you put all the spare gubbins in the front and back of the trailer
> you end up with a "dumbell" which is potentially unstable.
>
> Nigel
>
>
>
>
>
> Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up right now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers.. Why can't we all go metric???
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta
>
>
> Dan and Steve,
>
> Here are a couple more good solid American-value based reasons not to go metric:
> 1. The scientific community is all metric. Can't trust those bozos.
> 2. You want us to go Euro-style? Will never happen in this country
> 3. Powers of ten are too easy to convert. We rather stay with funny conversion factors and fractions, keeps the mind sharp.
> 4. Isn't metric the first step to Sharia law?
> 6. Only liberal socialists (and the Chinese/Russians) use the metric system.
> 5. The French invented the metric nonsense
> 6. I don't understand metric
>
> Anybody else? Did I miss any other 'good' reasons?
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

Here you go, Dan. You're welcome.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_metric_system

Two kinds of countries.

Those who went to the moon

Those who use Metric.

'murica

I had a 2010 TDI Sportwagan DSG and pulled a DG300 in a cobra trailer around the Midwest. No major issues except passing trucks could give it a good sway and strong cross winds could be a bit of a hassel. I use a F-150 with a cap for long trips out west and back. Lots of room for all the extra stuff too. You don't even know its back there most of the time. TDI 32 mpg towing F-150 more like 15-20 mpg. Heading back to NEPHI in late June, will be using the truck. Glad gas is cheap again.

On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 2:34:40 PM UTC-6, Tony wrote:
> Two kinds of countries.
>
> Those who went to the moon
>
> Those who use Metric.
>
> 'murica

Tony, I suggest you look again at my point #6

On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 2:34:40 PM UTC-6, Tony wrote:
> Two kinds of countries.
>
> Those who went to the moon
>
> Those who use Metric.
>
> 'murica
Tony,

Sorry to be pounding this topic (I'm actually off topic) but this made my day:
http://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-US-military-use-the-metric-measurement-of-distance-when-the-U-S-otherwise-measures-distances-in-inches-feet-and-miles
This makes sense. When shooting at the enemy (preferably from a safe distance) you want to make sure all parties to your 'coalition' use the same measurements.

Maybe 'Murica is getting religion after all!

Thanks, Herb!

Cheers!
Dan

On 2/19/2015 11:24 AM, wrote:
> On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 10:31:23 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> Thanks for the chuckles! A few comments:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. The scientific community also brought us "global warming" so
>> you're right - you can't trust at least some of those bozos.
>>
>> 2. We'll probably go Euro style some day. After all, you brought
>> us the Mercedes and the Aston Martin, both great cars. All we did
>> was bring you the moon.
>>
>> 3. Yaaas... Powers of ten. Let's talk about dodecafurlongs and
>> hectares. Microhenries are useful, however.
>>
>> 4. Nah... Not calling a spade a spade is the first step to Sharia
>> law. Note that was a reference to a card game.
>>
>> 5. I'm neither liberal, socialist, Chinese, nor Russian, and I did
>> use the metric system for my engineering degree. I simply like the
>> system of knots and feet for my flying.
>>
>> 6. Really? Did the French invent the metric system? If so, I
>> learned something today (a good thing!)
>>
>> 7. Actually, I do understand metric (see 5 above).
>>
>> 8. My comments were in actual numeric order.
>>
>> 9. Spring is approaching in the northern himisphere. Or is that
>> the northern 5 decispheres?
>>
>> 10. This is all in fun. I hope you took it that way.
>>
>>
>>
>> :-D
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/19/2015 7:49 AM,
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 4:46:10 PM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
>>
>>
>> Why can't we all go metric? Because 10s of litres per 100 miles is
>> a silly measurement compared to miles per gallon. Same with knots
>> airspeed and lift/sink vs. km/hr and m/s. How about inches per
>> teaspoon for mileage?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/18/2015 7:44 AM,
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 7:00:07 AM UTC-6, Nigel Pocock wrote:
>>
>>
>> I did about 7500 miles towing trailers round europe last year behind a SWB
>> toyota land cruiser tdi and a VW passat TDi130 estate.
>> With the land cruiser you didnt notice you had anything on the back (even
>> with a Nimbus 4 in a cobra trailer). However fuel consumption was in the
>> low 20mpg and it was uncomfortable.
>>
>> The Passat was great. Measured fuel consumption was 47mpg with a LS6/18 in
>> a tube trailer. Very comfortable and stable up to well in excess of the
>> legal lmit.
>>
>> As said elsewhere the TDI engine characteristics are great for towing.
>> Loads of mid range torque that avoids constant gear changing that you get
>> with a similar size petrol engine.
>>
>> The trick with stability with trailers is to get the weight distibution
>> corect. You want as much as possible over the axle(s) but with a sensible
>> amount on the draw bar. (not hundreds of pounds as I have seen advocated
>> here) If you put all the spare gubbins in the front and back of the trailer
>> you end up with a "dumbell" which is potentially unstable.
>>
>> Nigel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nigel, your mpg numbers are obviously based on British gallons which are kind of an inflated type of imperial gallons (too lazy to look it up right now). I think our mpg values would be 10-20% lower than your numbers. Why can't we all go metric???
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dan Marotta
>>
>>
>> Dan and Steve,
>>
>> Here are a couple more good solid American-value based reasons not to go metric:
>> 1. The scientific community is all metric. Can't trust those bozos.
>> 2. You want us to go Euro-style? Will never happen in this country
>> 3. Powers of ten are too easy to convert. We rather stay with funny conversion factors and fractions, keeps the mind sharp.
>> 4. Isn't metric the first step to Sharia law?
>> 6. Only liberal socialists (and the Chinese/Russians) use the metric system.
>> 5. The French invented the metric nonsense
>> 6. I don't understand metric
>>
>> Anybody else? Did I miss any other 'good' reasons?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dan Marotta
> Here you go, Dan. You're welcome.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_metric_system

--
Dan Marotta

This is fun!

What was it caused NASA to miss the target on Mars? Did some programmer
use metric when he should have used "the other system" or vice versa?
(km vs miles or meters vs feet)

On 2/19/2015 4:30 PM, wrote:
> On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 2:34:40 PM UTC-6, Tony wrote:
>> Two kinds of countries.
>>
>> Those who went to the moon
>>
>> Those who use Metric.
>>
>> 'murica
> Tony,
>
> Sorry to be pounding this topic (I'm actually off topic) but this made my day:
> http://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-US-military-use-the-metric-measurement-of-distance-when-the-U-S-otherwise-measures-distances-in-inches-feet-and-miles
> This makes sense. When shooting at the enemy (preferably from a safe distance) you want to make sure all parties to your 'coalition' use the same measurements.
>
> Maybe 'Murica is getting religion after all!

--
Dan Marotta

On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 9:34:40 AM UTC+13, Tony wrote:
> Two kinds of countries.
>
> Those who went to the moon
>
> Those who use Metric.
>
> 'murica

In 1962, 'murica was able to get two men onto the moon and safely back in less than seven years after the decision.

Today it would take how long after a similar decision?

I doubt it would be less than twenty years, at least if we're talking about the US government and NASA.

If we're talking about an engineer from South Africa, well -- he could probably do it in two years starting from now, and take a Tesla car along too.

On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 7:41:05 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> This is fun!
>
>
>
> What was it caused NASA to miss the target on Mars?* Did some
> programmer use metric when he should have used "the other system" or
> vice versa?* (km vs miles or meters vs feet)
>
>
>
>
> On 2/19/2015 4:30 PM,
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 2:34:40 PM UTC-6, Tony wrote:
>
>
> Two kinds of countries.
>
> Those who went to the moon
>
> Those who use Metric.
>
> 'murica
>
>
> Tony,
>
> Sorry to be pounding this topic (I'm actually off topic) but this made my day:
> http://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-US-military-use-the-metric-measurement-of-distance-when-the-U-S-otherwise-measures-distances-in-inches-feet-and-miles
> This makes sense. When shooting at the enemy (preferably from a safe distance) you want to make sure all parties to your 'coalition' use the same measurements.
>
> Maybe 'Murica is getting religion after all!
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

If it's what I'm thinking it is..... it's called, "Two different groups doing different programming".
One group was in USofA measurements, the other was metric.
The probe "thought" it was one height above ground when it was another height.
Thus..... "splat"......

"Ya don't know until you run the WHOLE program........"

On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 8:17:14 AM UTC-6, Steve Leonard wrote:
> On Monday, February 16, 2015 at 9:23:42 PM UTC-6, vontresc wrote:
> > Still don't understand why one must use a full size truck to tow anything
> > ;-)
> >
> > Pete
>
> I know someone that towed his glider with his Honda CRX. Routinely at 80 MPH. Yes, the trailer weighed more than the car. And as I recall, the trailer did not have brakes.

Would that have been GFB?

On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 10:28:34 PM UTC-6, WB wrote:
> >On Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 8:17:14 AM UTC-6, Steve Leonard wrote:
> > I know someone that towed his glider with his Honda CRX. Routinely at 80 MPH. Yes, the trailer weighed more than the car. And as I recall, the trailer did not have brakes.
>
> Would that have been GFB?

Nope. A friend from Houston. Contest number on the glider was F1. An HP-18.

On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 7:41:05 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> This is fun!
>
>
>
> What was it caused NASA to miss the target on Mars?* Did some
> programmer use metric when he should have used "the other system" or
> vice versa?* (km vs miles or meters vs feet)
>
>
>
>
> On 2/19/2015 4:30 PM,
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at 2:34:40 PM UTC-6, Tony wrote:
>
>
> Two kinds of countries.
>
> Those who went to the moon
>
> Those who use Metric.
>
> 'murica
>
>
> Tony,
>
> Sorry to be pounding this topic (I'm actually off topic) but this made my day:
> http://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-US-military-use-the-metric-measurement-of-distance-when-the-U-S-otherwise-measures-distances-in-inches-feet-and-miles
> This makes sense. When shooting at the enemy (preferably from a safe distance) you want to make sure all parties to your 'coalition' use the same measurements.
>
> Maybe 'Murica is getting religion after all!
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

Regarding metric I simply look at the issue as ...what is my brain naturally trained to think in?....Why do I want to add one more factor (conversion) to my thought process while flying? and the famous finish.......What's in it for me?

The answers are

English
I don't
Nothing

Dennis