SUVs let's hear it!

[Burg Boxster]

bmussatti-
That's interesting...... Apparently, tow rating b/w '04 and '07 changed. Not sure how since they are basically the same (IIRC). But I do see the '07 dry is about 240# more. So maybe they beefed up the frame. Who knows? Anyhow,

'04 shows max tow capacity of 5380 #
'07 shows max tow capacity of 7120 #

However, the common mistake people make when calculating true towing capacity is those #s are bone dry, w/ nobody in the vehicle, and usually w/out the vehicle's (actual) installed options (i.e weight distributing hitch, sunroof, 3rd row seats, 3.73 axle needed to tow, etc.). Now, assume a full tank of gas (22.5 gal), some cargo (cooler, backpacks/briefcase, tool box, etc.) and 4 people (driver plus 3) in the SUV....

140#....... for 22.5 gal x 6.2#/gal
700#....... 4 People (175# ea on avg)
500#....... Misc cargo/stuff
25#......... drawbar
50#......... weight dist. hitch
1415#..... Sub Total

The 1415 # (basically the "cargo capacity") must be deducted from the max towing capacity to get the true weight for what can be towed. In this cases, it would be:

'04 - 3965# theoretically "can" be towed
'07 - 5705# theoretically "can" be towed

So back to the original proposition.... Can a V8 Explorer handle a 6000# boat/trailer (even if the 6000# is loaded w/ gas, stuff in boat, etc.). Answer is still no.

I'm not knocking the Explorer. They are very practical vehicles and I've owned one since they first came out in 1990 (1991MY, 1995, 1999, 2002, and 2004) and my daughter now drives my old '04. As I stated, they are 'predictable'. I know what they cost new and I know what I'll get on trade when I dump them in a few years after putting 75K on the clock. 1-2 set of tires, a bunch of oil changes, 2 sets of pads/rotors, and a couple air filters are all that's needed to run 'em.

That being said, I also know they are not the best tow vehicles for anything other than small toys like sea-doos, dirt bikes and snowmobiles. Aside from the theoretical weight ratings, throw in some hills/mountains (like we have in western PA) and you quickly find out the brakes are way undersized for the vehicle - especially towing something.

I don't have exact specs, but IIRC, the rotors on my '99 Boxster are the same diam. (about 12") if not bigger, and almost 2xs as thick as than those on the Explorer. Pads are almost double and braking area on the rotors is approx 50%+ more. The Boxster hits the scales at 2800#.... Explorer at 4500#. It's one thing to get something moving, but just as, if not more, important to make it stop.

[JackG]

Burg,

I don't generally disagree with most of your post, but a couple of points...

Your "cargo" weight calculation is pretty excessive. 500lbs of cargo/misc? 1/4 of a ton in ice chests and picnic baskets? Maybe 200lbs, and if only two people that adds back 650lbs to the tow rating, which puts you back in the OK range to tow that boat. Also, remember that the tow rating manufacturers give is conservative. You vehicle doesn't magically blow up if you exceed the rating by 100lbs.

Also, the size of the brakes on the Boxster isn't so it can stop once, but rather so it can haul the car down under severe braking (racing) repeatedly without fading. Got to dissipate that heat, you know.

The Explorer is not being asked to do that, so it can do just fine without having massive brakes. It's brakes can survive a couple of panic stops without fading, and if you're towing, why would you be putting yourself in situations where you're repeatedly pounding the brakes? If your towing 6000lbs, you sure better be planning ahead, leaving stopping room, etc.

Besides, a 3 ton boat and trailer better have it's own set of brakes. If you're towing that without trailer brakes, you're taking a huge chance and probably breaking the law.

Finally, the trannies will last 150k or more. Heat kills transmissions. An external tranny cooler and fluid flushes every 20k or so does the trick.

Oh, and my last Explorer went 64k miles on it's original set of pads. A new set of pads and it was good to go on the original rotors. I've heard other Explorer drivers say that they go through brakes just like you describe... what are you guys doing to your brakes?

In the end, an Explorer's towing downfall isn't it's capacity, but rather the short wheelbase. That's why you can "feel" even lighter trailers back there, and that plagues all short wheelbase tow vehicles. If you're towing relatively short distances on flat land, that Explorer and trailer brakes will do 3 tons just fine. Long distances or mountainous terrain, I'd want an F250/350 sized vehicle.

[Burg Boxster]

JackG-
Not trying to start a debate about all the exact #s.....

Instead, I'm simply trying, for safety sake, to show how a lot of people who want to haul things get into trouble. The crux of the problem is not understanding where the #s come from and the capacity of the vehicles they are using. You'd be surprised at the # of people who just look a the hitch and say, "hey I've got a 6500# rated hitch so I must be able to pull that much".

Agree, 500# in misc sounds high but most often, mfgs (especially domestic) use the stripped down weight of the vehicle to calculate max towing capacity. So, when you add in third row seat, rear a/c, sunroof, dvd players, 3.73 axle, weight distr hitch, plus your true cargo (cooler, bags, picnic chairs, etc.) it can easily hit the 500# I sighted.

But, yes the wheel base is an inhibiting factor too.

As for brakes, I usually get about 40-45K out of a set of pads/rotors here (since they beefed 'em up from 1st gen Explorer). My terrain in western PA and WV where I do a lot of driving is substantially different than in SC. Not to mention climate and all the rock salt used in the winter pays a much heavier toll on my components vs yours. So it's really not anything different I'm doing than you, more environmental.

Again, I'm not bashing the Explorer as I currently still own the '04 and have had 4 previous ones.