Sponsored

JeepinOutfitters

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Threads
1
Messages
130
Reaction score
71
Location
Lewisville, TX
Website
www.jeepinoutfitters.com
Vehicle(s)
1995 XJ, 2016 JKUR Hard Rock
Occupation
Outfitting Jeeps for adventures.
Yes, it’s a multi-link coil rear suspension, but with a geometry like the Ram 1500 and NOT like the JL’s.
 

BillyHW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Threads
97
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
1,794
Location
CAN
Vehicle(s)
-
I just looked at the Cherokee manual (not the Grand), and even it has a class III hitch and 4,500 lbs towing capacity vs class II and 3,500 for the Wrangler.

Class II even looks stupid.

It makes no sense at all.
 

Revelation17

Well-Known Member
First Name
Pete
Joined
Jul 11, 2017
Threads
8
Messages
250
Reaction score
240
Location
Minnesota
Vehicle(s)
'00 Corvette; '19 JLRU (Manual, Firecracker red)
Occupation
slave for "the man"
Vehicle Showcase
1
Is class II that little sissy looking 1” square one?
 

Sponsored

BillyHW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Threads
97
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
1,794
Location
CAN
Vehicle(s)
-
The Jeep hitch comes with the 2" receiver.
What's the point though if it isn't rated for more than 3,500 lbs? Isn't putting a 2" receiver kind of dangerous if it makes people mistakenly think it's class III and can tow more than 3,500?
 

The Great Grape Ape

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
2,840
Reaction score
4,122
Location
Canadian Rockies
Vehicle(s)
2015 JKU AspenX 5spd , 2015 JK Sport 6spd
What's the point though if it isn't rated for more than 3,500 lbs? Isn't putting a 2" receiver kind of dangerous if it makes people mistakenly think it's class III and can tow more than 3,500?
It’s a more common size, for even things like bike carriers.
If people don’t educate themselves before towing, that’s hardly FCA’s fault.
 

digitalbliss

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 26, 2017
Threads
21
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
1,933
Location
North Alabama
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLUR, 1979 CJ7
What's the point though if it isn't rated for more than 3,500 lbs? Isn't putting a 2" receiver kind of dangerous if it makes people mistakenly think it's class III and can tow more than 3,500?
Couldn't the same be said about a class III hitch vs a class IV hitch? If they use a standard 2" receiver on both (which is almost a certainty), what is to keep someone from hitching up over 8,000 lbs?
 

BillyHW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Threads
97
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
1,794
Location
CAN
Vehicle(s)
-
Couldn't the same be said about a class III hitch vs a class IV hitch? If they use a standard 2" receiver on both (which is almost a certainty), what is to keep someone from hitching up over 8,000 lbs?
Good point.
 

Sponsored

robplumm

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
141
Reaction score
74
Location
Newport News, VA
Vehicle(s)
2012 JKUR in Dozer
On a side note to towing, I just drove past a Jeep Liberty towing a Ram 2500 lol. Unfortunately I was driving and unable to get a picture.
Nice.

Last time I was in Germany...I was amazed at what I'd seeing being towed by station wagons there. Not sure if they just didn't GAS or their regs are that much different, but there was no fear of a ford focus wagon flat bedding another vehicle.

The limits on the Wrangler are all driven by the government. Safe to assume one could safely tow more than 3500...just might be in a bit of crap if you have an accident while doing so ;)
 

AxiomF1

New Member
First Name
AJ
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
Location
Chicago
Vehicle(s)
07 Volvo XC90
Signed up to reply to this thread, and because I have always wanted a Jeep pickup since the end on the Comanche.

After owing 2 Grand Cherokees (ZJ and WJ), I now drive a Volvo XC90 as I needed 3 rows to serve as taxi cab for ride share. After getting set up for towing a Uhaul for a cross country camping trip this year, and looking into RV trailers for next year, I learned that Europeans and Americans don't tow the same. This article is useful info (If it hasn't already been posted): https://oppositelock.kinja.com/tow-me-down-1609112611/1609771499

The main take aways in addition to the science:

1) Not mentioned in the article, but the EU uses a single 50 MM tow ball as the continental standard. This ball is mounted to a tow hook, which usually places the tow ball level with the rear bumper. One then buys a trailer with in the car manufacturers weight guideline. In addition to that ball, North America has three hitch ball sizes and a 4th ball for heavy duty gooseneck, because why not. Add to that 4 classes of receiver bars. And 4 sizes or receiver opening.

*Sidenote to comments in this thread: the size of receiver opening is not always related to the tow capacity of the hitch setup. It's an engineering need to allow towing aftermarket suppliers to fit receivers to cars without them. For example, there is a lot of equipment size overlap in Class III and IV, but those receiver bars have very differrent raitings even if the hitch ball and etc are the exact same size. This is why buying towing equipment is such a pain in NA. It is also why people pay extra money for Class III equipment though their tow vehicle maxes out at Class II. Remember them UHauls (more on this below)? Their trailers can fit all 3 hitch regular duty hitch ball sizes so it's no skin off their back.

2) In EU countries that are more outdoorsing, the single tow equipment standard is either fitted on large portions of vehicles or can be readily done so. In North America, towing for the masses has honestly been dictated by a single company you either loathe or love: Uhaul. Uhaul pioneered aftermarket towing in America and had rules changed in all 50 states to make their business model work. This is why idiots and the sane alike can drive thousands of pounds of junk in a massive 24 foot truck with a 2100 pound 2 axle car trailer towing a 3000 pound clunker across America without an ounce of additional training or licensing or even a 10 minute online course. To achieve this feat, Uhaul idiot-proofed their trailer towing protocol (as Uhaul designs and builds their van trailers in house): make a deliberately heavy trailer tongue and specify trailer loading to be 60/40 front/rear to minimize the chance of the trailer unhitching from the ball, a potentially deadly event. Though Uhaul specs trailer towing at 55 mph, they know people will speed and deliberately overengineer their trailers to head off the lawyers. EU tow design caps out out at 65 MPH while US towing is the regulatory wild wild west. In the socialist republic of CA, the statewide tow speed is 55 MPH. In Montana, I learned recently (and saw) that you can legally tow two hitch ball trailers simultaneously; three in Texas! Vehicle manufacturers in NA will as such work to meeting the lowest possible common denominator in such a regulatory morass. This is in part why [insert your vehicle's name] tow rating sucks, and why you are insulted when you see Europeans in [your named vehicle] towing massive awesomeness in internet photo searches.

So as it is, you get tongue-heavy trailers in NA that can tow at sustained high speeds while lane changing; in the EU you get weight balanced trailers made to fit a single specification of equipment that is suitable for towing at moderate speeds on winding and/or mountainous roads. Few places in the EU will allow you to legally operate long or heavy tow setups without additional licensure.

Oh yeah one more thing: All trailers in the EU over 2k pounds have to have brakes.

So, what does all this have to do with the Wrangler's hateful tow limitations:

1) Wrangler's don't have real roofs. In a decoupling scenario you or your passengers will likely be killed while dragging your favorite RV. Some older folks may remember the Wrangler boom in the 90s when idiots were rolling over their trucks with alarming frequency. My 93 ZJ Grand had stark yellow rollover warning labels permanently stitched into both visors. I wonder why...

2) Pre FCA, Jeep was ran terribly like most other US car companies. If a Wrangler costs less than a Grand Cherokee, it should do less, even with the same engine, xfer case and trans. (My 93 Grand 6 cyclinder towed 5k max. That era's Wranglers much less, with a common powertrain) In fairness, BMW and Porsche do this too, going as far as using software to restrict performance to neatly slot products. If you had a Wrangler and wanted 5K towing, you cheapskates were supposed to buy Gr Cherokee or a Ram truck. Otherwise, there is no planned obsolescence to get you to buy new vehicles. The reason that this blog is hot, I would argue, is that the new Wrangler offerings will be positive measured improvements that will not only get new customers to buy but make people like yourselves sign on the dotted line once again.

The reason we are getting a Scrambler: GM is owing the baby pickup market with the Dakota/Canyon as the country rapidly reurbanizes and folks want the joys of pickup truck awesomeness. All this said, FCA is not going to readily ceed market share from Ram Trucks to Jeep because that's a circular firing squad. But FCA knows that a Scrambler will be easier to parallel park in more spaces in NA cities than the Ram 1500. And why should GM and Honda (and Ford with their hatefil Ranger in rapid design and produce mode) make all the cash?

Used 1500s are readily available and tow quite well as I hear from people having this very same convo on the Dakota/Canyon blogs about their low two ratings on the Duramax Diesel variants. So its no just you lot with thius is due. When the new Ranger drops, FoMoCo heads will be using their blogs to be angry that their baby pickup won't tow what the F150 will.

I think that GCVW of 5000 pounds is doable for a party of 4 adults or 2 adults and 3 children of average weight and heights. That will allow the new Wrangler and Scrambler to compete quite well. Big folks or people with greater towing needs will have to do Explorer/Durango/Tahoe or 1/4 tons. Which is as your local dealer likes it to be.

Sorry for the long post, but going from America to Euro trucks was an eye opener. And much like actually going to Europe, you can appreciate rational standards that allow you to max out equipment potential while being safe and cost effective. We need more of that in the states, IMHO.
 

BillyHW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Threads
97
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
1,794
Location
CAN
Vehicle(s)
-
Signed up to reply to this thread, and because I have always wanted a Jeep pickup since the end on the Comanche.

After owing 2 Grand Cherokees (ZJ and WJ), I now drive a Volvo XC90 as I needed 3 rows to serve as taxi cab for ride share. After getting set up for towing a Uhaul for a cross country camping trip this year, and looking into RV trailers for next year, I learned that Europeans and Americans don't tow the same. This article is useful info (If it hasn't already been posted): https://oppositelock.kinja.com/tow-me-down-1609112611/1609771499

The main take aways in addition to the science:

1) Not mentioned in the article, but the EU uses a single 50 MM tow ball as the continental standard. This ball is mounted to a tow hook, which usually places the tow ball level with the rear bumper. One then buys a trailer with in the car manufacturers weight guideline. In addition to that ball, North America has three hitch ball sizes and a 4th ball for heavy duty gooseneck, because why not. Add to that 4 classes of receiver bars. And 4 sizes or receiver opening.

*Sidenote to comments in this thread: the size of receiver opening is not always related to the tow capacity of the hitch setup. It's an engineering need to allow towing aftermarket suppliers to fit receivers to cars without them. For example, there is a lot of equipment size overlap in Class III and IV, but those receiver bars have very differrent raitings even if the hitch ball and etc are the exact same size. This is why buying towing equipment is such a pain in NA. It is also why people pay extra money for Class III equipment though their tow vehicle maxes out at Class II. Remember them UHauls (more on this below)? Their trailers can fit all 3 hitch regular duty hitch ball sizes so it's no skin off their back.

2) In EU countries that are more outdoorsing, the single tow equipment standard is either fitted on large portions of vehicles or can be readily done so. In North America, towing for the masses has honestly been dictated by a single company you either loathe or love: Uhaul. Uhaul pioneered aftermarket towing in America and had rules changed in all 50 states to make their business model work. This is why idiots and the sane alike can drive thousands of pounds of junk in a massive 24 foot truck with a 2100 pound 2 axle car trailer towing a 3000 pound clunker across America without an ounce of additional training or licensing or even a 10 minute online course. To achieve this feat, Uhaul idiot-proofed their trailer towing protocol (as Uhaul designs and builds their van trailers in house): make a deliberately heavy trailer tongue and specify trailer loading to be 60/40 front/rear to minimize the chance of the trailer unhitching from the ball, a potentially deadly event. Though Uhaul specs trailer towing at 55 mph, they know people will speed and deliberately overengineer their trailers to head off the lawyers. EU tow design caps out out at 65 MPH while US towing is the regulatory wild wild west. In the socialist republic of CA, the statewide tow speed is 55 MPH. In Montana, I learned recently (and saw) that you can legally tow two hitch ball trailers simultaneously; three in Texas! Vehicle manufacturers in NA will as such work to meeting the lowest possible common denominator in such a regulatory morass. This is in part why [insert your vehicle's name] tow rating sucks, and why you are insulted when you see Europeans in [your named vehicle] towing massive awesomeness in internet photo searches.

So as it is, you get tongue-heavy trailers in NA that can tow at sustained high speeds while lane changing; in the EU you get weight balanced trailers made to fit a single specification of equipment that is suitable for towing at moderate speeds on winding and/or mountainous roads. Few places in the EU will allow you to legally operate long or heavy tow setups without additional licensure.

Oh yeah one more thing: All trailers in the EU over 2k pounds have to have brakes.

So, what does all this have to do with the Wrangler's hateful tow limitations:

1) Wrangler's don't have real roofs. In a decoupling scenario you or your passengers will likely be killed while dragging your favorite RV. Some older folks may remember the Wrangler boom in the 90s when idiots were rolling over their trucks with alarming frequency. My 93 ZJ Grand had stark yellow rollover warning labels permanently stitched into both visors. I wonder why...

2) Pre FCA, Jeep was ran terribly like most other US car companies. If a Wrangler costs less than a Grand Cherokee, it should do less, even with the same engine, xfer case and trans. (My 93 Grand 6 cyclinder towed 5k max. That era's Wranglers much less, with a common powertrain) In fairness, BMW and Porsche do this too, going as far as using software to restrict performance to neatly slot products. If you had a Wrangler and wanted 5K towing, you cheapskates were supposed to buy Gr Cherokee or a Ram truck. Otherwise, there is no planned obsolescence to get you to buy new vehicles. The reason that this blog is hot, I would argue, is that the new Wrangler offerings will be positive measured improvements that will not only get new customers to buy but make people like yourselves sign on the dotted line once again.

The reason we are getting a Scrambler: GM is owing the baby pickup market with the Dakota/Canyon as the country rapidly reurbanizes and folks want the joys of pickup truck awesomeness. All this said, FCA is not going to readily ceed market share from Ram Trucks to Jeep because that's a circular firing squad. But FCA knows that a Scrambler will be easier to parallel park in more spaces in NA cities than the Ram 1500. And why should GM and Honda (and Ford with their hatefil Ranger in rapid design and produce mode) make all the cash?

Used 1500s are readily available and tow quite well as I hear from people having this very same convo on the Dakota/Canyon blogs about their low two ratings on the Duramax Diesel variants. So its no just you lot with thius is due. When the new Ranger drops, FoMoCo heads will be using their blogs to be angry that their baby pickup won't tow what the F150 will.

I think that GCVW of 5000 pounds is doable for a party of 4 adults or 2 adults and 3 children of average weight and heights. That will allow the new Wrangler and Scrambler to compete quite well. Big folks or people with greater towing needs will have to do Explorer/Durango/Tahoe or 1/4 tons. Which is as your local dealer likes it to be.

Sorry for the long post, but going from America to Euro trucks was an eye opener. And much like actually going to Europe, you can appreciate rational standards that allow you to max out equipment potential while being safe and cost effective. We need more of that in the states, IMHO.
But all this doesn't explain why the Cherokee and Grand Cherokee have perfectly normal tow ratings in North America. The Cherokee even higher than the Wrangler with a lesser engine and transmission.
 

AxiomF1

New Member
First Name
AJ
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
Location
Chicago
Vehicle(s)
07 Volvo XC90
Again, you have to expand your mind past the powertrain. The powertrain is one component set of a modern automobile; there are also brakes and the body/platform to consider. As I argued in my post, the Wrangler is a convertible. Removing metal roofs from autos does undesirable things to automobiles that engineers have to work out. Sports convertible makers like Ferraris and Lambos spent untold hundreds of millions building vehicles out of space age materials to keep them from flexing at speed. Truck makers do likewise for pickups, which is in part why tow and load capacities skyrocketed in the last decade. But look at how much good pickups cost. Now wonder out loud if FCA would add $5000 or even $2500 to the retail cost of a current Wrangler Unl to strengthen the platform to tow 5k LBS, while they have a perfectly good Grand Cherokee they can sell you.

I personally think a Wrangler could infrequently move a 5k trailer and not snap in half. I'm sure many Wrangler owners would agree. The low tow rating ensures customers cannot sue if it did. It is my honest, humble opinion that low Wrangler tow ratings across the existence of the model have either been due to tort concerns and not engineering, or to ensure that the Grand Cherokee did not lose sales to the Wrangler. I'm leaning more on the former than the latter.



Since few customers find themselves wondering if they want a pick up or an SUV, we will see if the Scrambler is engineered to maximize it's full potential. Since people put awfully heavy things in pickup beds, I'm sure the frame structure will be more robust than the Unlimited. And it will cost a proper amount for the privilege.

Edit to my own point: the spec sheet for thed JKU in Australia rates the Wrangler tow capacity at 4400 pounds. In my post, I quoted a better source explaining why the Euro world tows differently than North America. http://www.jeep.com.au/brochures/model-specs-wrangler-unlimited.pdf

So again, powertrain ability is the much, much smaller part of the tow capacity conversation. Keep in mind this however: if NA rules changed trailer design to match the Euro standard, smaller vehicles could tow largerer trailers. What car company that makes trucks for the NA market would allow that to happen?
Sponsored

 
 



Top