![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Then
there are the cars I've pulled out of ditches with it during the winter. I just returned from visiting Idaho, where I grew up. I was feeling home sick until I read your comment above. I just remembered why I like San Diego so much. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I guess the "Ariana Wussies" have hit this forum - even if they aren't from
the US Give me a break, there are so-called SUVs that can blow the doors off of anything less than a new Ferrari and out corner anything built in Japan. In fact, I'll take my two wheel drive pickup truck and challenge you in whatever 1000 cc turkey you drive and race you an any road, any track, anywhere and drub you soundly - and I'll drub you in a straightaway towing a 2000# load. And, yes folks, I really can do it! If you want to push this BS, go to Green Peace. Drive what you want where and when you want. The other responses to this thread were on point, what will make his vehicle handle better while towing. Please get with it. Let the games begin! ADP "CH" wrote in message ... I don't know how long it does take for certain people to recognise, that SUV's and 4-wheel drive cars - are built for use in the outback and not for driving in towns - have a high CG and are handling worse on windy roads than any normal cars with good suspension (European/Japan cars) - have big tires to suit off road driving, which are worse on normal roads, worse than normal or low profile tires. - often do not have independent side stable suspension on the back which give them bad side stability (push the car sideways on the rear bumper and let it go - if the hole car swings around the vertical yaw axis then it does not suit towing) - have bad aerodynamics and produce more turbulence behind, which has again bad influence on the trailers stability. Conclusions: Quite any car is better for towing, in handling and safety than a SUV. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I guess the "Ariana Wussies" have hit this forum - even if they aren't from
the US Give me a break, there are so-called SUVs that can blow the doors off of anything less than a new Ferrari and out corner anything built in Japan. In fact, I'll take my two wheel drive pickup truck and challenge you in whatever 1000 cc turkey you drive and race you an any road, any track, anywhere and drub you soundly - and I'll drub you in a straightaway towing a 2000# load. And, yes folks, I really can do it! Now here is a man who loves 1 mile start circles and 6 inch finishes. Man after my own heart. (Please include me in you will) Bruce Patton |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
100kph? Do you drive backwards on retrieves for sport? Or perhaps you
always land close enough to the airport that there's no hurry... Sing what praises you may, they echo hollow among the leather clad comforts of my 7000 lbs of 4x4 SUV... the best you can achieve with your little brand-name putt-putt is "adequacy." If you want to excel, be the envy of every man and the desire of every woman, there's no substitute for SIZE, POWER, and TRACTION. But fear not, I'm sure you'll find friends for whom "adeqaute" is enough. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bingo!!!
I never had a better ride puliing my glider-trailer than with My Honda Civic (90 H.P). Drove it all the way from Montreal to the ridge in Pensylvania, up the steep mountain roads of Lake Placid, or Sugarbush, many outlandings and 800 km drives to the repair shop. Very steady drive at 110 km/h. I had this car for eleven years, and I miss my Civic sinceI bought a new car with more horse power, and a higher c.g. !!!! I guess you want the shortest distance between rear axle and hitch point (obviously) and the lowest c.g (automobile engeneering is regeressing) and also all what is mentioned below. It amazes me mucho to see all theese people driving SUV thinking they are safer!!! BQ "CH" a écrit dans le message de ... I don't know how long it does take for certain people to recognise, that SUV's and 4-wheel drive cars - are built for use in the outback and not for driving in towns - have a high CG and are handling worse on windy roads than any normal cars with good suspension (European/Japan cars) - have big tires to suit off road driving, which are worse on normal roads, worse than normal or low profile tires. - often do not have independent side stable suspension on the back which give them bad side stability (push the car sideways on the rear bumper and let it go - if the hole car swings around the vertical yaw axis then it does not suit towing) - have bad aerodynamics and produce more turbulence behind, which has again bad influence on the trailers stability. Conclusions: Quite any car is better for towing, in handling and safety than a SUV. I prefer to rent a 4-wheel drive for holiday in the outback, own a small car with common rail turbo diesel engine (2000 ccm, 110kW, 250Nm at 1750 rpm, and 4.5 to 6 liters per 100km consumption). Like that I can pay many tows with the saved money I do not spend on petrol. I can tow any trailer with brakes up to 1500kg stable with 100km/. And on a windy road the SUV just disappear in the rear mirror. But I cannot compete offroad with these monsters. I don't mind because I only need offroad function perhaps 7 days a year. How often do you need offroad capability? Think of it when you buy the next car. Chris "chris" wrote in message om... Several people have had good luck towing a glider with a Subaru Forester. My Mazda MX-6 [much lower car] has Pirelli P4000 P205/55 R15 87H - it is stable, and if you push sideways it does not sway side to side anywhere near the degree that the Forester does. Steering response and cornering are good. Chris Ruf |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"szd41a" wrote in message . ..
Bingo!!! I never had a better ride puliing my glider-trailer than with My Honda Civic (90 H.P). Drove it all the way from Montreal to the ridge in Pensylvania, up the steep mountain roads of Lake Placid, or Sugarbush, many outlandings and 800 km drives to the repair shop. Very steady drive at 110 km/h. I had this car for eleven years, and I miss my Civic sinceI bought a new car with more horse power, and a higher c.g. !!!! I guess you want the shortest distance between rear axle and hitch point (obviously) and the lowest c.g (automobile engeneering is regeressing) and also all what is mentioned below. It amazes me mucho to see all theese people driving SUV thinking they are safer!!! BQ "CH" a écrit dans le message de ... I don't know how long it does take for certain people to recognise, that SUV's and 4-wheel drive cars - are built for use in the outback and not for driving in towns - have a high CG and are handling worse on windy roads than any normal cars with good suspension (European/Japan cars) - have big tires to suit off road driving, which are worse on normal roads, worse than normal or low profile tires. - often do not have independent side stable suspension on the back which give them bad side stability (push the car sideways on the rear bumper and let it go - if the hole car swings around the vertical yaw axis then it does not suit towing) - have bad aerodynamics and produce more turbulence behind, which has again bad influence on the trailers stability. Conclusions: Quite any car is better for towing, in handling and safety than a SUV. I prefer to rent a 4-wheel drive for holiday in the outback, own a small car with common rail turbo diesel engine (2000 ccm, 110kW, 250Nm at 1750 rpm, and 4.5 to 6 liters per 100km consumption). Like that I can pay many tows with the saved money I do not spend on petrol. I can tow any trailer with brakes up to 1500kg stable with 100km/. And on a windy road the SUV just disappear in the rear mirror. But I cannot compete offroad with these monsters. I don't mind because I only need offroad function perhaps 7 days a year. How often do you need offroad capability? Think of it when you buy the next car. Chris "chris" wrote in message om... Several people have had good luck towing a glider with a Subaru Forester. My Mazda MX-6 [much lower car] has Pirelli P4000 P205/55 R15 87H - it is stable, and if you push sideways it does not sway side to side anywhere near the degree that the Forester does. Steering response and cornering are good. Chris Ruf So, pulling anything at 55-65 mph should be fairly safe. What I want to see is pulling a trailer beyond the rating of a vehicle-happens more than it should. Yes, many might have an suv but, given the situation of having to get somewhere where there are actually grades to climb and areas of less than perfect roads, an suv is useful. I own one and have used it several times on a "retrieve" without having to worry about where I'm going. Personal choice is acceptable in both driving and soaring. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Now that is a sensible argument for having the big lump. I just fail to
understand the "bigger is always better" argument. I most situations that the average driver experiences - an SUV or "full size" sedan is more liability than advantage. At least the guy with the compact sedan can dodge the 18 wheeler - in something as nimble as the agerage big SUV it comes down to trying to intimidate your way on the road. Problem is that does not work with the average 18 wheeler (at least where I come from) Fact is that these jobs are less safe, less economical and more work to drive in most situations. I know the average US male has never had the opportunity to experience the convenience of driving a spacious, comfortable and compact car. If you have a situation that justifies the inconvenience - like having real need of off road capability - drive the SUV. If you can afford it, as a couple of my friends can, have the SUV for when you need it and a more practical vehicle for the commute. (As an extreme - one member at our club drives a 2ton Landrover Discovery for gliding and mountaineering, and Scuba expeditions, but commutes in a Mini Cooper S) Whatever works for you. I just fail to understand those who have to justify emotional / ego / social purchases by somehow trying to construct a reasoned argument for why bigger is better. If you take that to it's logical conclusion you should be buying Peterbilt (Or Mercedes, or Renault...) horses for commuting in- I mean there is no shortage of power, leather upholstery, aircon, air suspension, power everything, and the best thing is you don't have to dodge the 18 wheelers, you are on their level so to speak. For what it is worth I have driven military 10ton 6 wheel drives through Damaraland in Namibia - really needed the traction, power and ground clearance, especially in case we hit a landmine, but I would hate to put this on my list of fun vehicles to drive. Also driven all over South Africa in ordinary sedans and MPVs, most with front wheel drive. Towed retrieves with vehicles ranging from a Jeep Cherokee, to a 1600 hatch. Have to say that for comfort, safety, good stability and everyday convenience the best I have met is a small MPV. The current crop has adequate power, excellent aerodynamics for stability in those windy situations and certainly beats driving a truck all day. Problem is the US carmakers can't make small cars profitably, SUVs are very profitable because they are made on cheaper "truck" platforms. Once again we have the victory of marketing and corporate profit over common sense. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Amen to the Tahoo. I just bought my second one. Calling the Civic a
safe tow vehicle is like saying a 12 ft row boat is OK for the north Atlantic. I've seen enough crumpled trailers & tow cars along side the roadway to know that my butt is worth the extra price of the Tahoe. You other guys can take your chances for all I care. I just hope I don't find your crumpled mess along the way (but at least you know you've save a few bucks on gas). Tom Seim Richland, WA |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chris,
Another often overlooked issue is the length of the hitch (i.e., the distance it protrudes from the back of the car). Shortening the hitch even a couple of inches can drastically improve the handling. Think about it... if you could mount the hitch ball on top center of the rear axle, then any sort of steering induced oscillations would be non-existent. Obviously that cannot be done with a standard vehicle. But at times you can find a hitch that will fit into the receiver that can be cut down shorter. I did that on one of my hitches and it made a world of difference. Larry Goddard "01" USA PS You might even be able to mount the hitch assembly further forward. chris wrote: Several people have had good luck towing a glider with a Subaru Forester. I do not know why mine is different. I just bought a 2004 Forester tried to tow with it. Mine is a nightmare. It is unstable above 50mph. It has a lot of side to side sway above 50mph if there is any steering input. It is almost harmonic in nature – it does not dampen out quickly. If feels like you are driving on Jello. It feels like the problem is much more the tires than the suspension. Though that is hard to prove. Even when parked if you push on the hitch with your foot the Forester will sway side to side [right and left] a lot. You can watch the rim move right and left in and out of the tire. I think the sidewalls are just really weak. The tread is probably relatively soft also. The Forester's tires are Yokohama Geolander G900 P215/60 R16 94H. Even in normal driving the steering response and cornering are poor. [Other Foresters may be equipped with 15" tires, and other models of Geolander tires – rather than the G900]. My Mazda MX-6 [much lower car] has Pirelli P4000 P205/55 R15 87H – it is stable, and if you push sideways it does not sway side to side anywhere near the degree that the Forester does. Steering response and cornering are good. The Geolander G900 has a tall soft sidewall, it is 4.500" above the rim rather than 3.625" for the P4000 [24%higher]. My best idea right now is to change to a shorter and stiffer sidewall tire. I am considering changing from P215/60 R16 94H - an "H" rate tire with 60% width/height ratio, to Bridgestone Turanza LS-V 225/50R16 92V - this is a V rate tire so the sidewall is stiffer and at a 50 or 55 ratio it is shorter. This is the V rated version of the tire that some other Forester owners have [LS-H]. The tread should also be a harder sports car like compound. Some of these tires are rated and discussed on www.tirerack.com. It seems that Steering response and cornering stability are good expressions of my issue. On tirerack there are a mass of good comments on the Turanza tire – though I doubt anyone is towing. As far as I can tell everyone on "tirerack" hates the geolander 900 like on mine. Does anyone else have any Experience changing to a shorter V rated tire for better stability? My trailer does great and stable to 85+mph behind my Mazda MX-6, so I do not think it is the trailer. The trailer is a 1979 Komet with a Mosquito. It weighs ~1800lbs [816kg]. The tongue weight is 153lbs [69kg]. The Forester's manual says to keep the tongue weight between 8-11% of the trailer. 8%=144lbs [65kg] 11%=198lbs [90kg]. [the max allowed is 200lbs on the tongue] The manual transmission version of the Forester is rated for 2400lbs [1088kg] towing capacity. I have already tried raising the tire pressure on the rear tires to 41psi [2.8bar] as recommended by the manual. The trailer tires are about 40psi. Chris Ruf |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Eberle trailer wheel rims | Bob | Soaring | 7 | November 25th 11 05:39 PM |
Tire question | Jay Honeck | Owning | 30 | February 8th 05 07:55 PM |
Stiffness of finished Carbon Fiber part | RKT | Home Built | 3 | April 8th 04 02:00 PM |
Trailer towing safety | CH | Soaring | 9 | August 13th 03 05:45 PM |