Towing w/ 2005 4Runner
 

Hi,

I am thinking about buying a 4x4 2005 4Runner with the 270hp V-8
engine. The specifications for this model say that I can tow upto
7000lbs with it. I am new to towing and I want to know how well this
4Runner will tow a 6000lb trailer?
Any thoughts or experiences?


Thanks,
Robert.

towing is hard on any vehicle, esp if you go to the max rating.

Make sure you order a tow kit from the factory. usually thius comes
with bigger brakes, radiator, tranny cooler and such....

For regular towing I would want to be not so close to the max tow
rating.

Matt

I dunno but from my limited experience there are some considerations ...
Background: I tow a 3000 lb boat/trailer (no brakes) with a 3100 lb '96
Cherokee spec to tow 5000 lbs, 4 sp auto, command-trac, 4.0 litre ... lets
say about 200 lbs
torque at about my normal 1800 rpm (100 km/hr), bolt on transmission cooler.
I have absolutely no problems pulling the boat out of the drink (4 L), no
problems at up to about 110 km/hr in 4th (overdrive) since I'm up basically
idling along at about 1800 rpm in the 200 lbs or so torque range. The only
potential problem I have is that the trailer does not have brakes ... so I
drive watchfully, looking a few cars ahead as it were.

So, a 4x4 (5000 lbs?), (5 spd auto?), (300 lbs torque at I dunno 3K rpm?),
pulling 6000 lbs ... daily? once in a while?. From my limited experience, I
would do it pulling a boat which is maybe 20 times/year but would: look into
the appropriateness of the rear axle ratio, would for sure add a
transmission cooler,
would for sure get trailer brakes, would for sure double up on the oil
change frequency ... that's about it ... my 2 cents worth.

Now ... I'm retiring in a year or 2 ... I'm gonna get a bigger boat at 7000
lbs plus and trailer it all over the frikken place (bonus: saves about
$2K/yr on marina fees) ... and I'm gonna be towing it with a 4x4 dodge 2500
cummins ... that's the plan.





"robert" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I am thinking about buying a 4x4 2005 4Runner with the 270hp V-8
> engine. The specifications for this model say that I can tow upto
> 7000lbs with it. I am new to towing and I want to know how well this
> 4Runner will tow a 6000lb trailer?
> Any thoughts or experiences?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Robert.
>

Were this me, I'd go with a 3/4 ton truck (Dodge 2500, GM 2500, F-250)
rather than a Toyota 4Runner. My Dodge 2500 is rated about 13K towing,
huge brakes, factory towing package... Tows well, it is meant to work.
The 4Runner could do the job occasionally, but for distance or
frequent towing I'd be reluctant to push it--realize you are towing
much more than the actual vehicle weight (which is about 4000 lb) and
that makes a situation where the tail is wagging the dog... <g> Even
3/4 ton trucks are not (usually) 6000 lb net, but they are heaver than
that Toyota.

I strongly recommend if towing use an automatic, they are much better
at keeping you in the engine's power range, don't have a clutch to
wear out (especially if you are not an experienced driver of heavy
loaded vehicles...) and are just as reliable. No, automatics are not
'sissy', many of today's big rigs (semi's) are equipped with
automatics for these vary reasons. If you tow a lot, do a
transmission flush *every* year...

On 28 Jan 2005 22:01:53 -0800, "robert" > wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I am thinking about buying a 4x4 2005 4Runner with the 270hp V-8
>engine. The specifications for this model say that I can tow upto
>7000lbs with it. I am new to towing and I want to know how well this
>4Runner will tow a 6000lb trailer?
>Any thoughts or experiences?
>
>
>Thanks,
>Robert.

> I strongly recommend if towing use an automatic, they are much better
> at keeping you in the engine's power range, don't have a clutch to
> wear out (especially if you are not an experienced driver of heavy
> loaded vehicles...) and are just as reliable. No, automatics are not
> 'sissy', many of today's big rigs (semi's) are equipped with
> automatics for these vary reasons. If you tow a lot, do a
> transmission flush *every* year...
Actually automatic trannies do have clutches that wear out :(

Matt

That's true, but they wear out based on usage, not crappy driving
habits! <bg> I've seen very few drivers who can clutch heavy loads
correctly that are not big rig drivers... And the clutches in must
small SUVs are just not made to take that kind of usage.

But, worse than clutches on automatics is fluid breakdown, and
overheating. Most automatics die because owners abused them (towing
without selecting towing mode if there is one, towing too fast, too
hard...; and failing to change the tranny fluid on a regular basis.)

On 29 Jan 2005 11:13:54 -0800, wrote:

>
>Actually automatic trannies do have clutches that wear out :(
>
>Matt

Peter D. Hipson wrote:
> That's true, but they wear out based on usage, not crappy driving
> habits! <bg> I've seen very few drivers who can clutch heavy loads
> correctly that are not big rig drivers... And the clutches in must
> small SUVs are just not made to take that kind of usage.

Yes true the manual clutch will wear faster, altough you can destroy an
auto fairly quickly if you beat on it with a powerful motor and a
trailer.

What is the best way to get going with a standard in terms of clutch
friendly?


> But, worse than clutches on automatics is fluid breakdown, and
> overheating. Most automatics die because owners abused them (towing
> without selecting towing mode if there is one, towing too fast, too
> hard...; and failing to change the tranny fluid on a regular basis.)
Yep very true. #1 auto tranny killer is heat

Matt

I really wish I could describe it in an email, but basically you want
to minimize slipage on startup as much as possible... This does
require a transmission with a low first gear, if possible.


Heck, I've seen drivers who slip the clutch each shift (hit the
accelerator then let up the clutch slowly--clutch death!)


On 30 Jan 2005 11:05:09 -0800, wrote:

>
>
>What is the best way to get going with a standard in terms of clutch
>friendly?
>

If you know your tranny, the clutch is redundant. Anybody have one of those
old air cooled beetles ... the ones with the clutch cables that would break?
Get it rolling with the starter, and shift at those shift points that were
conveniently marked on the speedometer face. Tachometer ... we don't need no
stinkin tachometer!!! I remember when that thing would get stuck in the
snow, put it in gear, get out and push, and jump back in when it got
rolling. And when one cylinder went bad, just replace that cylinder ... and
only 4 bolts to remove too pull out the motor to work on it on the bench.

So for me on a few occasions, the most clutch friendly way to get started
was ... put it in gear and use the starter :-)


"Peter D. Hipson" > wrote in message
...
> I really wish I could describe it in an email, but basically you want
> to minimize slipage on startup as much as possible... This does
> require a transmission with a low first gear, if possible.
>
>
> Heck, I've seen drivers who slip the clutch each shift (hit the
> accelerator then let up the clutch slowly--clutch death!)
>
>
> On 30 Jan 2005 11:05:09 -0800, wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >What is the best way to get going with a standard in terms of clutch
> >friendly?
> >
>

Yer showing yer age... <g> Yes, I've drivin a few miles in just such a
car. They did so well without clutches, didn't they, and just like
todays hybrid cars, don't run at the stops at all!

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:27:39 -0500, "bowgus" >
wrote:

>If you know your tranny, the clutch is redundant. Anybody have one of those
>old air cooled beetles ... the ones with the clutch cables that would break?
>Get it rolling with the starter, and shift at those shift points that were
>conveniently marked on the speedometer face. Tachometer ... we don't need no
>stinkin tachometer!!! I remember when that thing would get stuck in the
>snow, put it in gear, get out and push, and jump back in when it got
>rolling. And when one cylinder went bad, just replace that cylinder ... and
>only 4 bolts to remove too pull out the motor to work on it on the bench.
>
>So for me on a few occasions, the most clutch friendly way to get started
>was ... put it in gear and use the starter :-)
>