Sponsored

Wrangler JL (boat) towing experience report

kkuntz01

Well-Known Member
First Name
Kevin
Joined
Jan 20, 2018
Threads
32
Messages
1,117
Reaction score
1,162
Location
Mount Juliet, TN
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLU Rubicon, 2014 Ram 2500 Crew Cab
I skipped over this thread, apparently for good reason. :) But it's funny to see the very first post give the Jeep a "10 out of 10" for towing that boat, which is clearly larger than the Jeep itself, and then post a picture which shows the suspension sagging and the tongue of the trailer pointed downward. Lol.

I guess one good thing we can take from this thread is that since he handled that oversized load well, the rest of us should be in great shape towing within specs.
Yeah there are silly ass threads on JK-Forum and jkowners from people who feel that tow ratings are for sissies.
Sponsored

 

bobzdar

Well-Known Member
First Name
Pete
Joined
Nov 29, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
248
Reaction score
317
Location
Richmond, VA
Vehicle(s)
'24 Rubicon X 4XE, '23 Defender 130
I agree with you on this - risk assessment, in anything from swimming to speeding on the highway to driving impaired - should be evaluated not just on YOUR assumed risk but also including the potential collateral damage to others. The Army beat that into us, believe me; you can't just start spraying rounds into a crowded street full of pedestrians to kill one bad guy. It translates just as well to civilians driving Jeeps or anything else - you shouldn't drive 80 down the interstate pulling 4000lbs with a JLUR, you shouldn't drink and drive, you shouldn't drive at 2am without adequate rest; not because of what may happen to you (not much of anyone cares about that other than your direct relatives) but because of the potential collateral damage to my 25yr old daughter on her way home from working on treating CF, or to my wife on the way home from the grocery store, or whatever. And if it's not MY daughter you're plowing into - I bet it's someone's. Risk is rarely ever just about you; even if there's no possible chance the behavior will directly affect anyone BUT you - I bet there's at least one person that cares about you and will be affected by your loss



this I don't agree with. I would consider myself generally risk-adverse; maybe my definition is different. I don't get a thrill from blowing things up, or driving really fast, or jumping from planes, or firing full-automatic weapons; but comparatively, I'd like to think I've had a pretty exciting life. Sure I've done stupid things (usually the result of thinking I was indestructible at the time) but I think it's hard to fully support the general idea that in order to have an exciting life you have to take a lot of risk. Proper balancing of risks and mitigation, and engaging in activities that still bring plenty of excitement is entirely possible.

an example; two jetski'ers are out on a nice day on the lake. Neither can swim. or heck both can swim, sure. one wears a life vest, the other doesn't (he's a risk-taking kind of guy). A jerk with a huge boat goes flying by, creating a large, unexpected wake throwing both off their jetskis and they both happen to clunk their head as they tumble into the water.

now - up to that point, do you think that the risk-adverse (the one who assessed a potential risk and mitigated it by wearing a life vest) person had any less fun or excitement than the 'risk-taking' kind of guy? Did potentially drowning make it somehow more exciting, while the other guy wearing the vest lead a boring life? I donno. for me - I'd wear the vest. call me prudent, risk-adverse, whatever.

there's enough unforeseen danger around from self-centered people who don't assess their risky behavior outside of their own personal space (you don't sound like one of those people - but they ARE out there) that I'll mitigate what I can and where I can. If that makes me boring, then I reckon that's what I am ;)
I think the posit is that risk-averse would stay off of the jet skiis altogether. The other two are both risk takers, one is just more stupid than the other.

To wit, I race cars, and I have a well built cage, hans setup, fire suppression etc. in excess of those mandated by rules. That doesn't make me risk averse, quite the opposite. There is more risk, even with all of that, than there is in not doing the activity at all and sitting in the stands. Proof: It was a specific question on my life insurance application, and probably makes me pay a buck or two more a month for it. Insurance companies know risk and assign dollars to it.

Risk averse wouldn't tow with a Jeep at all (or tow, period). Towing something is inherently riskier, equipment, skill etc. will determine the extent of the risk. A properly setup JL with WD hitch, properly set up trailer brakes and sway control will be less risky than somebody that hooks up 5k lbs to their half ton pickup with a regular hitch, no adjustment to the brake controller (or no trailer brakes) and doesn't bother checking tire pressures on either the tow vehicle or trailer. I can assure you the latter is a very common occurence, particularly with boats.
 

Cowboy JK

Active Member
First Name
Jeff
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Threads
0
Messages
34
Reaction score
17
Location
OKC, OK.
Vehicle(s)
2011 2dr JK Sahara
Once upon a time a friend of mine wanted me to haul some bags of concrete. When we got to the store I heard him ask for 25 Eighty pound bags of concrete. When I objected and he said it would "fit". I had to explain that just because they would fit doesn't mean my half ton pickup would haul a ton of concrete. Just because it will doesn't mean you should.
 

Sean L

Well-Known Member
First Name
Sean
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Threads
23
Messages
43,739
Reaction score
260,024
Location
North Carolina
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLU, 2017 Honda Accord, 2014 Yamaha XVS 1300
Occupation
Retired Marine, Construction Estimator
Vehicle Showcase
2
Once upon a time a friend of mine wanted me to haul some bags of concrete. When we got to the store I heard him ask for 25 Eighty pound bags of concrete. When I objected and he said it would "fit". I had to explain that just because they would fit doesn't mean my half ton pickup would haul a ton of concrete. Just because it will doesn't mean you should.
You'd be sitting on your rear axle in a Half ton, lol.
 

InvertedAerialX

New Member
First Name
Jeffrey
Joined
Jun 7, 2018
Threads
0
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
Location
Toronto, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2017 Ford F-150, about to own 2018 JL 4DR Rubicon
You guys all have valid points. Except the tow rating has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with what it can tow. For example, hook up a jk or a jl to a box car, it will pull it...tow rating, i think not. The tow rating is what the vehicle can stop in an emergency should the trailer brakes fail.

Meaning...at 3,500lbs, and the trailer brakes fail, the jk and jl will stop it safely at an acceptable distance. Pls dont ask me what that is, that is up to highway safety or the manufacturer.

This B.S. about it’s max towing is 3,500lbs so i am only going to tow 2,500lbs to be safe...that’s ridiculous... but if that is what you want go for it. Please dont say we are being unsafe when we tow up to and including 3,500lbs. Going over, not wise.

But of course they KNOW there are going to be people who are going to tow more than 3,500lbs, so the ACTUAL limit probably is 4,000 or 4,500lbs, because they have to make it idiot proof. But there will always be that one guy.

We have all seen the video of the TJ or JK pulling the transport truck through the snow, he/she was towing more than 3,500lbs and it didnt break the jeep. But he/she sure as hell couldn't stop it.

I towed 5,500lbs with my TJ....i moved the boat from where we unhooked it from the F350 to where we parked it for the winter...maybe 100ft, becasue the jeep’s turning radius was amazing and we pin point where the boat was going to go. Did I endanger anyone or anything... just my clutch. But there is no way i would tow it on a open road or off a driveway.

If you have a second thought about what you are about to do. DON’T DO IT!

Just my two cents.

Okay all i am going to go buy my JL now.
 

Sponsored

Biscuit

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2018
Threads
10
Messages
544
Reaction score
571
Location
Northeast Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLU Sport
Occupation
Retired
This is no concern of mine. I buy insurance for insurance. As long as I am not purposely driving the Jeep into a tree, or paying someone to "steal" my car for the $$$, insurance will cover anything you do.

Think about it. If insurance could deny something like this,they could deny anything and everything to the point that no one would buy insurance. They could deny you for following too close, speeding, driving to fast for conditions, driving too slow, driving with any BAC other than 0.00, listening to radio too loud etc etc etc. In "almost" every single accident, somebody did something "wrong. "

If insurance could deny a claim due to the claimant doing something "wrong", then what would be the point?
Don't be so sure. You have admitted purposely overloading your vehicle by half a ton and operating it on public roads. Regardless, if you screw the pooch, damage property, and injure or kill someone, your insurer only pays up to the policy limits. Anything beyond that, civil and criminal, is all on you or your estate.
 

WXman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Threads
61
Messages
2,855
Reaction score
3,076
Location
Central Kentucky
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler Unlimited
Occupation
Meteorology and Transportation
I've mentioned this several times over the years, but just to recap... the hitch on the JK/JL bolts only to a crossmember. It does not bolt down two frame rails like the hitches on pickup trucks. Therefore, it puts a significant torsional load on the frame crossmember. That's one reason why the tongue weight and towing rating is so low on Wrangler.

Then there's the issue of it being a convertible. Go to any U-Haul with a convertible and try to rent a trailer. Nobody wants that liability if a trailer starts to sway and there's a rollover.

The drivetrain is rugged and won't be harmed. That's not the issue. Sure, there's enough power to pull much heavier loads. There's enough brake, especially with trailer brakes in use, to stop much heavier loads. But the Wrangler is rated low for a specific reason, and that's because it simply is not safe to overload it.

I'm a "country boy" and growing up we overloaded trucks all the time. You get the job done with the tools you've got. But heavy duty pickup trucks are much more forgiving and much less likely to injure or kill people if they are stressed hard. A Wrangler simply isn't designed to be a tow rig. They allow us to have a tow package and just enough capacity to get jet skis, ATVs, fishing boats, etc. down the highway but that's the limit.
 

Biscuit

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2018
Threads
10
Messages
544
Reaction score
571
Location
Northeast Ohio
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLU Sport
Occupation
Retired
I've mentioned this several times over the years, but just to recap... the hitch on the JK/JL bolts only to a crossmember. It does not bolt down two frame rails like the hitches on pickup trucks. Therefore, it puts a significant torsional load on the frame crossmember. That's one reason why the tongue weight and towing rating is so low on Wrangler.

Then there's the issue of it being a convertible. Go to any U-Haul with a convertible and try to rent a trailer. Nobody wants that liability if a trailer starts to sway and there's a rollover.

The drivetrain is rugged and won't be harmed. That's not the issue. Sure, there's enough power to pull much heavier loads. There's enough brake, especially with trailer brakes in use, to stop much heavier loads. But the Wrangler is rated low for a specific reason, and that's because it simply is not safe to overload it.

I'm a "country boy" and growing up we overloaded trucks all the time. You get the job done with the tools you've got. But heavy duty pickup trucks are much more forgiving and much less likely to injure or kill people if they are stressed hard. A Wrangler simply isn't designed to be a tow rig. They allow us to have a tow package and just enough capacity to get jet skis, ATVs, fishing boats, etc. down the highway but that's the limit.
Exactly! Plus you cannot just look at your trailer weight and think, I'm under 3500 lb so I'm good to go. Not so. If your combined loaded weight - vehicle, passengers, cargo, etc. plus the loaded trailer exceeds the GCVWR, danger Will Robinson!

Now I personally don't care if someone wants to tax his vehicle beyond its limits and compete for the Darwin Award, but I do have a problem with him putting the lives and property of other people at risk. I've been maimed once by a careless, negligent drive and I'd not wish it on anyone.
 

TroyBoy

Well-Known Member
First Name
Troy
Joined
Jun 14, 2017
Threads
94
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
1,539
Location
Vancouver Island, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLUR
Exactly! Plus you cannot just look at your trailer weight and think, I'm under 3500 lb so I'm good to go. Not so. If your combined loaded weight - vehicle, passengers, cargo, etc. plus the loaded trailer exceeds the GCVWR, danger Will Robinson!

Now I personally don't care if someone wants to tax his vehicle beyond its limits and compete for the Darwin Award, but I do have a problem with him putting the lives and property of other people at risk. I've been maimed once by a careless, negligent drive and I'd not wish it on anyone.
In Australia it is apparently safe to tow 4500 pounds. Go figure. Now maybe the speed limits on roads are slower but you would think people would slow down when towing anyways. A full size truck that is pulling 2000 pounds can get into trouble too if they are not paying attention. When towing anything, you have to take extra precautions. A JLU towing 3600 pounds isn't competing for the Darwin Award. Especially if all you are doing is driving around the block to the nearest marina. Having said that, once the tow rating has been defined, going over that may cause you problems legally.
 

Sponsored

bobzdar

Well-Known Member
First Name
Pete
Joined
Nov 29, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
248
Reaction score
317
Location
Richmond, VA
Vehicle(s)
'24 Rubicon X 4XE, '23 Defender 130
I've mentioned this several times over the years, but just to recap... the hitch on the JK/JL bolts only to a crossmember. It does not bolt down two frame rails like the hitches on pickup trucks. Therefore, it puts a significant torsional load on the frame crossmember. That's one reason why the tongue weight and towing rating is so low on Wrangler.

Then there's the issue of it being a convertible. Go to any U-Haul with a convertible and try to rent a trailer. Nobody wants that liability if a trailer starts to sway and there's a rollover.

The drivetrain is rugged and won't be harmed. That's not the issue. Sure, there's enough power to pull much heavier loads. There's enough brake, especially with trailer brakes in use, to stop much heavier loads. But the Wrangler is rated low for a specific reason, and that's because it simply is not safe to overload it.

I'm a "country boy" and growing up we overloaded trucks all the time. You get the job done with the tools you've got. But heavy duty pickup trucks are much more forgiving and much less likely to injure or kill people if they are stressed hard. A Wrangler simply isn't designed to be a tow rig. They allow us to have a tow package and just enough capacity to get jet skis, ATVs, fishing boats, etc. down the highway but that's the limit.

That might make sense if that cross member wasn't welded to the same frame that a hitch would only be bolted to, and the x-member is significantly beefier than most hitches that bolt to the frame. It's fully boxed and has a much larger x-sectional area than the horizontal part of pretty much any hitch I've seen attached to a 1 ton or smaller pickup.

It's because the Wrangler is a convertible. The frame portion that the hitch is installed to is stronger than the same place a hitch is installed on a Grand Cherokee (unibody vs. ladder frame, it's not really close), it has the same engine and transmission as a Grand Cherokee, weighs within a couple hundred pounds and has a longer wheelbase than a Grand Cherokee, has the same sized brakes and beefier axles, has a stiffer suspension (ride in both, it's not really close) - yet is rated for 3k lbs less weight. It's the removable top.
 

WXman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Threads
61
Messages
2,855
Reaction score
3,076
Location
Central Kentucky
Vehicle(s)
2018 Wrangler Unlimited
Occupation
Meteorology and Transportation
That might make sense if that cross member wasn't welded to the same frame that a hitch would only be bolted to, and the x-member is significantly beefier than most hitches that bolt to the frame. It's fully boxed and has a much larger x-sectional area than the horizontal part of pretty much any hitch I've seen attached to a 1 ton or smaller pickup.

It's because the Wrangler is a convertible. The frame portion that the hitch is installed to is stronger than the same place a hitch is installed on a Grand Cherokee (unibody vs. ladder frame, it's not really close), it has the same engine and transmission as a Grand Cherokee, weighs within a couple hundred pounds and has a longer wheelbase than a Grand Cherokee, has the same sized brakes and beefier axles, has a stiffer suspension (ride in both, it's not really close) - yet is rated for 3k lbs less weight. It's the removable top.
I don't follow. Of course it's welded to the frame. What does that have to do with it? There is a huge difference between the force applied to the receiver hitch and the torsional force applied to the crossmember when it's supporting a trailer.

Like we've already said..the drivetrain is not the issue. It's because of how the hitch mounts and because of the removeable top. There's no way you're going to see a huge tow rating with a setup like this.

Now, the JT model coming out next year, that is a different ball game. They're likely going to use a few tricks to support a tow rating safely that can compete with the midsize trucks already on the market. If a guy really wants a new Wrangler, but needs to work it like a truck, the JT is your answer.
 

TroyBoy

Well-Known Member
First Name
Troy
Joined
Jun 14, 2017
Threads
94
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
1,539
Location
Vancouver Island, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2018 JLUR
I don't follow. Of course it's welded to the frame. What does that have to do with it? There is a huge difference between the force applied to the receiver hitch and the torsional force applied to the crossmember when it's supporting a trailer.

Like we've already said..the drivetrain is not the issue. It's because of how the hitch mounts and because of the removeable top. There's no way you're going to see a huge tow rating with a setup like this.

Now, the JT model coming out next year, that is a different ball game. They're likely going to use a few tricks to support a tow rating safely that can compete with the midsize trucks already on the market. If a guy really wants a new Wrangler, but needs to work it like a truck, the JT is your answer.
How do you know it is because of a removable top? That sounds like speculation to me. Is there some sort of role over test? Or is it how much the body flexes? Aren’t trucks two pieces with a cab and a separate box? I can’t see how that would flex less.
 

bobzdar

Well-Known Member
First Name
Pete
Joined
Nov 29, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
248
Reaction score
317
Location
Richmond, VA
Vehicle(s)
'24 Rubicon X 4XE, '23 Defender 130
I don't follow. Of course it's welded to the frame. What does that have to do with it? There is a huge difference between the force applied to the receiver hitch and the torsional force applied to the crossmember when it's supporting a trailer.

Like we've already said..the drivetrain is not the issue. It's because of how the hitch mounts and because of the removeable top. There's no way you're going to see a huge tow rating with a setup like this.

Now, the JT model coming out next year, that is a different ball game. They're likely going to use a few tricks to support a tow rating safely that can compete with the midsize trucks already on the market. If a guy really wants a new Wrangler, but needs to work it like a truck, the JT is your answer.
The crossmember is more solidly attached to the frame than any hitch. I don't agree that it somehow sees more torsion than a hitch - they would see the same torsion applied by the trailer - and it has a much larger cross section (and is therefore more rigid) than a class iii/iv hitch that hangs below the frame and attaches to the rails.
 

bobzdar

Well-Known Member
First Name
Pete
Joined
Nov 29, 2017
Threads
4
Messages
248
Reaction score
317
Location
Richmond, VA
Vehicle(s)
'24 Rubicon X 4XE, '23 Defender 130
How do you know it is because of a removable top? That sounds like speculation to me. Is there some sort of role over test? Or is it how much the body flexes? Aren’t trucks two pieces with a cab and a separate box? I can’t see how that would flex less.
Nobody knows for sure, but given the same drivetrain in a gc is rated for 6500lbs, it rules that out as the limiting factor. And given a gc is unibody vs ladder frame on the wrangler, which provides a much more solid hitch mount and weight transfer to the frame, the chassis/mount isn't the issue. And given the wheelbase is longer on the wrangler, that's not the issue. Some have postulated that it's the suspension being softer, but the gc is softer. Brakes on the jl are the same size (and plenty big). That leaves either the cooling system or some other consideration, and given different crash standards etc. for convertibles, that's my best guess as cooling isn't an issue, at least on a rubicon.
Sponsored

 
 



Top