Towing with 4Runner

[TeryT]

I know you guys are probably more into the off-roading capabilities of the 4Runner, but I thought I would ask you regarding it's towing prowess. In the past I've been an avid participator in the RV forum, so I think I know (at least) a couple of things, as well as towing a 17' trailer with my Pathfinder for many years.

We've basically choosen the 4Runner over the new Explorer. The primary safety concern has to be with towing, because that is potentially the most dangerous. The new Explorer is perhaps the finest Detroit has put together for this task. However, handling & reliability has to go to the 4Runner.

We will be towing a type of travel trailer that is called an "ultralight," because it is engineered for less than monster truck SUV's. The loaded weight will be around 4,500 - 5,000 and a 26' length. Truck payload will be about 400 lbs. organic (living creatures), and 300 in gear.

Now here's the thing that will make it all handle more better - a Hensley Arrow hitch. This hitch is the best on the market for eliminating trailer sway, and totally distributing the weight (remember that the V8 4Runner literature says 7,000 lbs. with weight-distributing hitch - this hitch is the best period).

So how do you think this set-up will do, pulling a 26' ultralight trailer, verses getting the Explorer? The Explorer has independent rear suspension (IRS) which is supposed to be superior for towing.

(Thai - thoughts?)

 

[Thai]

I don't know much about towing, but i do know that IRS is NOT superior to solid axle. In fact, solid axle is superior to IRS because it is far stronger (more rigid foundation). Here's a hint...why do trucks have solid axles and not IRS?? Why do heavy duty trucks have solid axles front and rear??

Durability is a problem with IRS if it is subjected to heavy tow weights over a long period of time.

With regard to 4runner specifically, i will let the other more experienced owners answer.

 

[TeryT]

Thanks, but . . .

Thai - The questions you ask regarding IRS sound logical, but . . . I guess time will tell on the newly redesigned Explorer & Expedition with IRS. I realize that live axles have traditionally been stronger, and this makes conventional wisdom sense.

Now as to the questions of why long haul trucks all have live rears, how can this be answered? The obvious seems to be that it's because it's stronger. BUT - What about cost!? What about cuz they've always done it that way!? What about the weight is put directly over the wheels!? See where I'm going?

We've gone around & around on this subject in the RV forum, where such things matter a lot to folks. The IRS is touted to be a better performer from the stability aspect - it puts the weight out to the wheels better, etc. Many on there are testifying that IRS has been better for towing.

Now regarding the longevity issue, well that remains to be seen. Supossedly Ford has engineered around that. But . . . we shall see, won't we!?

 

[Thai]

Ford Excursion has solid axles. Tahoe...solid axle.

Remember that a lot of the new SUVs favor independent rear suspension because they need a foldable/disappearing third row seat. IRS saves space, thus allowing you to package a folding 3rd row rear seat.

As for Ford engineering, i love the way the rear half-axles on the Expedition goes THROUGH the frame! Great idea......except that it limits the rear wheel travel to zero...so forget about off-roading!

 

[TeryT]

True

Yes, the IRS does allow other things. However, even many experts agree that the IRS provides superior towing handling. Now were they thinking of that when they designed IRS into those SUVs? Perhaps not, as things like 3rd rows seats, etc. maybe were probably foremost on their minds.

Theoretically, something akin to a Corvette would make the best tow vehicle: low profile, powerful, wide with IRS - although it would need to pick up a couple tons weight!

 

[Thai]

Tery, when you repond to a post...do NOT start another thread...there's a "POST REPLY" button you can use.

In my opinion, IRS belongs on a car, not a SUV.