Towing with a 200-series Toyota Land Cruiser (6 Viewers)

[chiplee]

With a WD I think of tow rate in terms of total GVW (GVW tow vehicle+GVW Trailer). I can see the logic of Lance as it could make people be more aware of weight on the truck.

They're specifically using that math to tell people they can tow a 7800lb trailer with a 7000lb tow rating vehicle though. Even in the off chance that there's any such vehicle on the road that wouldn't be way over its GCWR if loaded for camping, I think it's still bananas.

Edit: To put it in perspective, if you used this Lance math to justify towing a 9000lb trailer behind a Land Cruiser (900 on the tongue and 8100 on the trailer axles), the Land Cruiser’s 14,400lb GCWR would be exceed by 450lbs at LC curb weight. At typical weight with just a driver, you’d be over by more like 1000lbs. I really wonder if there’s even a vehicle that has the necessary GCWR to tow by their math.

 

[linuxgod]

Great info in this thread. I've read just about every page now and it's an amazing resource. I'm almost convinced a Lance 2285 is for us, but since there are some Lance owners here I thought I'd ask what you all think about the fact that Lance lists their 2465 (7800lb GVWR) model as one of their "7000lb tow rating" offerings. Their rationale for this is explained as follows...

"Hitch weight is actually being hauled while the
remaining trailer weight is being towed.

Ex: If a trailer has an overall weight of 4k lbs.
with 400 lbs. of hitch weight that would mean
3600 lbs. is on the axles and being towed.
(4,000 – 400 = 3,600 or Towed Weight)"

In the 2465's case, 7800lb GVWR - 800lb tongue weight = 7000 tow rating required.

Usual good judgement aside, how does this square with the fact that there's probably almost no case where a 7000lb tow rating vehicle can tow that amount without a weight distribution hitch, which will cause some of the tongue weight to be transferred back to the trailer axle exceeding the 7k rating?

Regardless of their categorization, there are 4 weights that matter to you when towing:

1. Tongue Weight (TW). The LC is rated at a max of 850#. I believe the LX may be less.
2. Tow vehicle (TV) GWVR. This is the max weight the TV is rated to carry, including the TW. While many folks exceed GVWR, especially with heavier suspension components, technically those don't increase GVWR.
3. TV GCWR. This is the max weight of the TV + trailer, including the TW.
4. Trailer axle and GWVR. The trailer axles and frame have a weight limit

As far as what Lance is saying above, IMO that is wrong. I get what they are trying to say, and maybe technically under federal motor vehicle laws it's legal if your vehicle has a 7k# limit, but it's just a terrible idea. (Side note: when I asked them about weight ratings I was told that the 6000# GVWR on my trailer has to include the TW). As to why it's a terrible idea:

1. You'll reach GWVR on your trailer quicker than you think, especially if you carry water (clean or waste). While Lance may rate the TW as 800#, moving stuff around inside the trailer or even just running full black/grey water tanks can decrease the TW as those are typically behind the axles (while the fresh water is in front) on the Lance. So you could end up with 600# TW and 7200# combined trailer axle weight.

2. Weight distribution will screw up the 7000/800 calc. And yes you want a good WD setup if you have more than 3000# behind the axle. With an 800# TW and a good WD setup, due to the physics of WD you'll move 150-200# to the outer axles (front of the TV and rear axle of the trailer) not just to the front of the TV. How much goes where depends on the distance from the hitch. So again you're now running >7000# in the trailer.

3. If you have a 7800# trailer you will likely exceed Toyota's GCWR rating of the LC/LX. On my 2013 LC I believe that's 14,400#, which means you have only 6600# to work with in the TV despite the ~7300# TV GVWR. BTW my LX is "lightly" built IMO (200# bull bar and winch, sliders, and a roof rack) but with a family of 5 plus a cooler full of drinks and a dog in the back I reach the GWVR of the LC *without* the trailer attached.

 

[linuxgod]

Why would Lance put that info in their brochure and on their website, or do all RV manufacturers do that? Do you all think of your trailer weight as its gross weight minus tongue weight or just it's straight gross weight when calculating rating margin? It could be that's just common and I've just never thought of it that way, but it's also kind of clear that it's not ever going to be true when using a WD hitch

Generally speaking most of the RV manufacturers stretch the truth. I remember the "dry weight" on my 2005 Forest River Surveyor was ~3700# but that excluded the electric jack, A/C, battery, propane, microwave, stove/oven, fridge, and 6 gallons of water which is always in the water heater. Realistically the dry weight was about 4500#, which didn't leave much room for the 5200# GVWR.

My 2015 Lance 2185 (really a 2014.5) has a stated TW of 500# in their brochure. Lance at least stickers the trailer with a "realistic" dry (what they call factory) weight which includes everything above (but excludes fresh, grey, or black water tanks). However when I put my trailer on a TW scale it was 770#, and that was before I put ANY of our gear into it. Was the TW measured wrong, was it a plain old lie, or was Lance assuming if you ran a proper WD setup that the actual TW *should* be 500#? BTW the difference between dry weight and factory weight on my trailer is ~600#.

 

[chiplee]

Regardless of their categorization, there are 4 weights that matter to you when towing:

1. Tongue Weight (TW). The LC is rated at a max of 850#. I believe the LX may be less.
2. Tow vehicle (TV) GWVR. This is the max weight the TV is rated to carry, including the TW. While many folks exceed GVWR, especially with heavier suspension components, technically those don't increase GVWR.
3. TV GCWR. This is the max weight of the TV + trailer, including the TW.
4. Trailer axle and GWVR. The trailer axles and frame have a weight limit

As far as what Lance is saying above, IMO that is wrong. I get what they are trying to say, and maybe technically under federal motor vehicle laws it's legal if your vehicle has a 7k# limit, but it's just a terrible idea. (Side note: when I asked them about weight ratings I was told that the 6000# GVWR on my trailer has to include the TW). As to why it's a terrible idea:

1. You'll reach GWVR on your trailer quicker than you think, especially if you carry water (clean or waste). While Lance may rate the TW as 800#, moving stuff around inside the trailer or even just running full black/grey water tanks can decrease the TW as those are typically behind the axles (while the fresh water is in front) on the Lance. So you could end up with 600# TW and 7200# combined trailer axle weight.

2. Weight distribution will screw up the 7000/800 calc. And yes you want a good WD setup if you have more than 3000# behind the axle. With an 800# TW and a good WD setup, due to the physics of WD you'll move 150-200# to the outer axles (front of the TV and rear axle of the trailer) not just to the front of the TV. How much goes where depends on the distance from the hitch. So again you're now running >7000# in the trailer.

3. If you have a 7800# trailer you will likely exceed Toyota's GCWR rating of the LC/LX. On my 2013 LC I believe that's 14,400#, which means you have only 6600# to work with in the TV despite the ~7300# TV GVWR. BTW my LX is "lightly" built IMO (200# bull bar and winch, sliders, and a roof rack) but with a family of 5 plus a cooler full of drinks and a dog in the back I reach the GWVR of the LC *without* the trailer attached.

Yes, exactly. All of that. Bullet 3 is the real kicker. We can tow 8100lbs, but only with the bare minimum cargo in the LC. Loaded for camping with family, our effective tow rating (what’s left of GCWR for a trailer) is more like 7000lbs, and you still have to sort out the impact of tongue weight on TV GVWR.

I think this will be the case with most SUVs, meaning people will be able to tow less than their tow rating in a real world load scenario, not more as Lance is advertising.

 

[chiplee]

Yes, exactly. All of that. Bullet 3 is the real kicker. We can tow 8100lbs, but only with the bare minimum cargo in the LC. Loaded for camping with family, our effective tow rating (what’s left of GCWR for a trailer) is more like 7000lbs, and you still have to sort out the impact of tongue weight on TV GVWR.

I think this will be the case with most SUVs, meaning people will be able to tow less than their tow rating in a real world load scenario, not more as Lance is advertising.

Put another way, if you want to be by the book and not go over LC GVWR via some Aussie spring upgrade approach, you can tow a 7k trailer IF you load the LC to only 6600lbs. A 700-750lb tongue weight puts the LC at ~7350 GVWR, resulting in a GCWR of 13600. This was the math than talked me into a 6400lb GVWR TT.

 

[chiplee]

Put another way, if you want to be by the book and not go over LC GVWR via some Aussie spring upgrade approach, you can tow a 7k trailer IF you load the LC to only 6600lbs. A 700-750lb tongue weight puts the LC at ~7350 GVWR, resulting in a GCWR of 13600. This was the math than talked me into a 6400lb GVWR TT.

Put yet another way, Toyota, and vehicle manufacturers in general, are saying the following with these numbers.

1. You can load your vehicle to max GVWR of 7385, but you won’t be able to tow anything.

2. You can tow your max rating of 8100lbs, but you won’t be able to load much of anything in the LC.

3. If you want to load and tow, both TV and trailer weight limits will need to be well below maximums.

 

[linuxgod]

Put yet another way, Toyota, and vehicle manufacturers in general, are saying the following with these numbers.

1. You can load your vehicle to max GVWR of 7385, but you won’t be able to tow anything.

2. You can tow your max rating of 8100lbs, but you won’t be able to load much of anything in the LC.

3. If you want to load and tow, both TV and trailer weight limits will need to be well below maximums.

I went from a 5200# trailer to a 6000# one and I can tell the difference. Granted my LC is 1000# overweight and has 34" tires with stock gearing, but I wouldn't want to go much heavier without a re-gear at least. I wouldn't get a 7800# trailer to pull with my LC - not that you couldn't do it but uphill acceleration and downhill braking will be really poor.

 

[TeCKis300]

Everybody is going to have a different threshold for towing comfort. As a case study, I do tow near the upper bounds of rated capacity and am ultimately very satisfied with the stability and performance. My build and mods are are focused on overlanding and towing, with excess weight a primary consideration as I continue to build out. Largest compromise would be gearing losses due to larger tires (which I'm in the middle of addressing).

LX570 ratings:
- Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR): 7,385 lbs
- Payload capacity: 1,280 lbs
- Tow capacity: 8,500 lbs (7,000 lbs in subsequent revised LX ratings)
- Gross Combined Weight Rating (GCWR): 14,645 lbs

200-series relevant mods - 33.2" LT-E tires (7% gearing loss), LRA subtank (+150lbs weight), .75" AHC sensor lift, front OEM shock spacer and rear 20mm spring spacer for added AHC support

Airstream 27FB specs (optimistic best case-scenario without any options, of which my trailer has many as a designer "Ocean Breeze" trim):
- Exterior length: 28'
- Base weight (without options, water, cargo): 5,868 lbs
- Base hitch weight: 791 lbs
- GVWR: 7,600 lbs

On my longest heaviest trip, I was fully loaded for 2 weeks, with a family of 6 in car.
Estimated laden trip weights
- Trailer weight: 7,300 lbs
- Hitch weight: 1,000+ lbs
- Vehicle Payload (with hitch weight, gear, and 6 occupants): 1,800lbs
- Vehicle laden weight (without hitch weight): 7,300 lbs
- Total rig weight: 14,600 lbs

On this same trip, I tackled some of the most extreme hill climbs in the Rockies.

My impressions are nothing but positive with strong, smooth, and stable cruising. I'm in the process of re-gearing to 4.3s and I'm interested to note the performance difference in acceleration, efficiency, and engine braking.

 

[FrazzledHunter]

Ever wonder exactly how the towing limits are derived?

 

[TeCKis300]

Lookup SAE J2807. Many good articles on the topic.

 

[linuxgod]

Everybody is going to have a different threshold for towing comfort. As a case study, I do tow near the upper bounds of rated capacity and am ultimately very satisfied with the stability and performance. My build and mods are are focused on overlanding and towing, with excess weight a primary consideration as I continue to build out. Largest compromise would be gearing losses due to larger tires (which I'm in the middle of addressing).

I'd feel comfortable pulling 7k # around Illinois or across Nebraska, but less so in the mountains. Even now I've can tell when I have water sloshing around in the tanks vs when they are empty. I'm sure I'd be fine 99.9% of the time, but it's the emergency situations that concern me - i.e. hard braking on a downhill mountain turn when someone loses control or locks up their brakes in front of me. I've had bozos pass on the shoulder in a construction zone (with jersey walls) and dive in front of me despite the fact that I was actually going faster than the speed limit, people change lanes into me (PCS lock-up engaged), and an 18 wheeler throw a retread in my lane (with cars in the lanes around me). Then again I also abhor going 55, especially on highways with 70-80MPH speed limits where it's impossible to merge at 55 without getting overrun (stupid California trailer rules).

I'm really interested to hear if regearing helps your mileage when towing, btw. I was getting about 7.5MPG when running 70-75MPH on our trip last week (unadjusted for tire size), though I had one interval where I was getting between 6.5MPG and 7 and the truck felt like I really needed 3rd to handle any hill. I ran 91 octane the entire time and actually that fill-up was supposedly ethanol free. I've started theorizing that "bad gas" has a huge impact on MPG particularly when towing.

 

[coleAK]

I'd feel comfortable pulling 7k # around Illinois or across Nebraska, but less so in the mountains. Even now I've can tell when I have water sloshing around in the tanks vs when they are empty. I'm sure I'd be fine 99.9% of the time, but it's the emergency situations that concern me - i.e. hard braking on a downhill mountain turn when someone loses control or locks up their brakes in front of me. I've had bozos pass on the shoulder in a construction zone (with jersey walls) and dive in front of me despite the fact that I was actually going faster than the speed limit, people change lanes into me (PCS lock-up engaged), and an 18 wheeler throw a retread in my lane (with cars in the lanes around me). Then again I also abhor going 55, especially on highways with 70-80MPH speed limits where it's impossible to merge at 55 without getting overrun (stupid California trailer rules).

I'm really interested to hear if regearing helps your mileage when towing, btw. I was getting about 7.5MPG when running 70-75MPH on our trip last week (unadjusted for tire size), though I had one interval where I was getting between 6.5MPG and 7 and the truck felt like I really needed 3rd to handle any hill. I ran 91 octane the entire time and actually that fill-up was supposedly ethanol free. I've started theorizing that "bad gas" has a huge impact on MPG particularly when towing.

All of our gas in Alaska is ethanol free. When I run 55-60 mph get ~9-9.5 mpg. 65-70mph gets me ~8mpg, I don’t go faster than that.

 

[TeCKis300]

I'd feel comfortable pulling 7k # around Illinois or across Nebraska, but less so in the mountains. Even now I've can tell when I have water sloshing around in the tanks vs when they are empty. I'm sure I'd be fine 99.9% of the time, but it's the emergency situations that concern me - i.e. hard braking on a downhill mountain turn when someone loses control or locks up their brakes in front of me. I've had bozos pass on the shoulder in a construction zone (with jersey walls) and dive in front of me despite the fact that I was actually going faster than the speed limit, people change lanes into me (PCS lock-up engaged), and an 18 wheeler throw a retread in my lane (with cars in the lanes around me). Then again I also abhor going 55, especially on highways with 70-80MPH speed limits where it's impossible to merge at 55 without getting overrun (stupid California trailer rules).

I'm really interested to hear if regearing helps your mileage when towing, btw. I was getting about 7.5MPG when running 70-75MPH on our trip last week (unadjusted for tire size), though I had one interval where I was getting between 6.5MPG and 7 and the truck felt like I really needed 3rd to handle any hill. I ran 91 octane the entire time and actually that fill-up was supposedly ethanol free. I've started theorizing that "bad gas" has a huge impact on MPG particularly when towing.

Agreed and it's good to consider the points you're making. I'd say 70% of the trips I make regularly are to the mountains. My expectations of performance would be in that context and the setup as I have it is exceedingly stable. Perhaps it's my trailer (tanks are very close or within trailer axles), but I can't say I've ever felt the water load move my rig around. I have no qualms on backroads going with the speed of traffic downhill (prodigious use of engine braking!)

It'll be interesting to see what the re-gearing does to my efficiency. For long highway slogs, 4th seems to be a really good sweet spot with my 33s. Not sure I'll be able to reach 5th with gears which means 4th maybe 7% more aggressive unnecessarily. It will solve low end gearing getting going and should help with gas efficiency on local roads and steep grades at elevation. And improve engine braking all around.

 

[chiplee]

Anyone considered one of the mild chip tunes or even the supercharger? Boost and load don’t go great together, but 5.7L is a lot of displacement, obviously severely detuned by Toyota for longevity. I think it could safely make 450HP for a mild 5-10% total lifespan penalty.

 

[TeCKis300]

I'm a rabid enthusiast when it comes to tuning. Having installed piggybacks, standalones, and tuned many a NA and forced induction car for customers and myself. I have a 650hp missile in my garage that I've tuned for big turbos, injectors, and boost.

When it comes to a heavy load workhorse, I personally would not tune for more power. The difference between an enthusiast toy and a workhorse is the degree of extended and continuous load. Over more significant mileage. More load, more time at elevated outputs, more heat saturation. The reasons OEMs tune conservatively is because they have to account for worse case-scenarios, without failure. Rich OEM tunes use fuel to assist in cylinder cooling - increasing reliability and extended performance. Towing can involve slogs for significant periods (20+ minutes) climbing grades at 80%+ power.

The thing with tunes, running less margin with air/fuel ratios and ignition, is that they can give you some measure of time with increased power. Once the engine heat saturates, the ECU will be pulling timing and adding fuel anyways, reducing any power advantage. With more heat, potential for knock is increased which may reduce power further. Anytime there's knock, there's elevated engine wear and potential for grenading.

 

[linuxgod]

Agreed and it's good to consider the points you're making. I'd say 70% of the trips I make regularly are to the mountains. My expectations of performance would be in that context and the setup as I have it is exceedingly stable. Perhaps it's my trailer (tanks are very close or within trailer axles), but I can't say I've ever felt the water load move my rig around. I have no qualms on backroads going with the speed of traffic downhill (prodigious use of engine braking!)

It'll be interesting to see what the re-gearing does to my efficiency. For long highway slogs, 4th seems to be a really good sweet spot with my 33s. Not sure I'll be able to reach 5th with gears which means 4th maybe 7% more aggressive unnecessarily. It will solve low end gearing getting going and should help with gas efficiency on local roads and steep grades at elevation. And improve engine braking all around.

I'd like to do 4.88s, though I'm on 34s *and* I've given up some aero with the winch bumper and full roof rack. I don't expect to be able to run in 5th gear, but I do find the engine is a lot happier on the highway at 70MPH humming at 3k RPMs than it is at 60MPH and about 2500 RPMs and I'm hoping that gears will keep it in a sweet spot.

 

[chiplee]

I'm a rabid enthusiast when it comes to tuning. Having installed piggybacks, standalones, and tuned many a NA and forced induction car for customers and myself. I have a 650hp missile in my garage that I've tuned for big turbos, injectors, and boost.

When it comes to a heavy load workhorse, I personally would not tune for more power. The difference between an enthusiast toy and a workhorse is the degree of extended and continuous load. Over more significant mileage. More load, more time at elevated outputs, more heat saturation. The reasons OEMs tune conservatively is because they have to account for worse case-scenarios, without failure. Rich OEM tunes use fuel to assist in cylinder cooling - increasing reliability and extended performance. Towing can involve slogs for significant periods (20+ minutes) climbing grades at 80%+ power.

The thing with tunes, running less margin with air/fuel ratios and ignition, is that they can give you some measure of time with increased power. Once the engine heat saturates, the ECU will be pulling timing and adding fuel anyways, reducing any power advantage. With more heat, potential for knock is increased which may reduce power further. Anytime there's knock, there's elevated engine wear and potential for grenading.

Yeah, me too. My last car was an F80 M3 and I’ve installed and tuned my own engine management in small displacement, large (25+ PSI) turbo applications with very high effective compression ratios and high risk of failure. Forged internals, all my own labor from the bare block up, the whole nine, and produced over double the stock power. I’m way more comfortable squeaking a few extra HP out of huge V8 than it sounds like you are. And as you said, it’s piggy backs, so the ecu will limit things if temps rise, which I doubt they would with Toyota cooling. I’m at least doing an intake and maybe exhaust. Can’t hurt to let it breathe.

 

[chiplee]

Ordered a Lance 2185 with mountain graphics today. Should pair well with the Land Cruiser. I’ll post about how it tows when we pick it up in early September.

 

[TeCKis300]

Woohoo!

 

[Leelanau]

All of our gas in Alaska is ethanol free. When I run 55-60 mph get ~9-9.5 mpg. 65-70mph gets me ~8mpg, I don’t go faster than that.

What a dream that would be! I have to seek out gas stations with ethanol free pumps (few and far between) and haul 5 gal cans...