SoundGuy wrote:

Thanks for your detailed reply. Now that there's just 2 of us I do from time to time give some thought as to whether I really need my Silverado vs a somewhat smaller, more fuel efficient vehicle like the Honda Ridgeline. My wife has an '06 Civic and with the usual regular maintenance required for any vehicle all we do is put gas in it (not much) and drive it - dead reliable. However, the question remains - what would I gain? Honda claims 26/19 mpg for the current generation of Ridgeline and if I could actually believe it that 25% improvement over my Silverado might in itself be sufficient justification, especially here in Canada where our fuel costs average 30% higher than in the US. Fuel cost when towing isn't my concern but rather the significant annual cost for fuel when not towing - thousands $$$$$ every year. I really like driving a 1/2 ton, the interior space it provides, and of course how easily it tows our 192RBS. However, your fuel mileage numbers tell me what I've always believed - your V6 Ridgeline is working a lot harder than my V8 Silverado pulling a 192RBS, despite the fact that some of that extra 5.3L GM engine grunt is being used to push along a much heavier vehicle. EPA numbers for the Ridgeline (not towing) are to me the main attraction but in the real world I question whether it really comes anywhere near close to those numbers.

SoundGuy wrote:

The fact you're able to tow without weight distribution has me mystified as there's no way I could with my Silverado ... 625 lbs of gross tongue weight just unloads the truck's front steer axle far too much. I typically average ~ 13% gross tongue weight but in fact have tried everything I can to increase that just a bit more, the problem being that fully loaded fridge at the far rear of the trailer really counters my efforts. A full black tank on the way home also exacerbates the situation, 'though by that time the fridge contains far less so that does help. In your case, running just 10 to 11% gross tongue weight is awfully low, especially without the use of weight distribution. So - we have essentially the same trailer, typically averaging about the same gross weight (4600 to 4800 lbs) yet you're running significantly less gross tongue weight. Loading as I do I don't see any way I could run that little even if I wanted to and 2) if I did I have little doubt I'd be all over the road when towing at highway speed. I'm mystified.

Quote:






Well then , we'll just take our Jeep GC and move to Australia
I have heard that Auto/Truck manufacturers in North America keep vehicle caps and limits artificially low so people feel the need to buy more expensive trucks etc. as tow vehicles . That and our increasingly sue happy society sure answers some questions as to why we are different from the rest of the world .

Bols2DawaLL wrote:

Soundguy , just following along here but you've mentioned to me in the past that my 2011 6 cyl. (290 h.p V6 ) Grand Cherokee would not be a good tow vehicle for this TT . Just curious but what would make the Ridgeline a better choice ? Thanks

mountainkowboy wrote:



He is a doom and gloomer that believes you need twice the towing capacity to tow a TT. Not sure what your Jeep is rated to tow but 80% of towing ability seems to be the formula that most use. The 192 was designed to be towed by SUV's and midsize trucks and is within there towing abilities...PERIOD. There will be other D&G'rs that will also say that your jeep is only rated for a popup also as they have told me with my Ranger.

drsteve wrote:



Nobody has told you your Ranger will only tow a popup, but several have offered their opinion that, based on their actual towing experience, you'll be pushing the Ranger's capabilities with that much trailer.

Don't be so defensive. People are offering their honest opinions and experiences. Isn't that what the forum is for?