Looking at buying a new dual cab advise welcomed

[gofishin]

Scotty, from a quick scan over specs and comparing to calcs I did 2 yrs ago, no changes to GVM /GCM for the Ford, but kerb weight has increased - effectively reducing payload capacity even further. A GVM upgrade won't help them (when towing 3.5) unless you can also upgrade GCM as the GCM is the limiting factor when towing, not GVM.

It seems (from a quick look), only 3.5t tow dual cab that has GVM problems when towing is the Navara. With 300kg on the ball (which seems to be max - need someone to check in their manual), the Navara has a huge 410kg GVM derating!! Just about need to drive it by remote control when towing 3.5t! ie from another car.

I will crunch some numbers properly when I get a chance.

Darren, Ford used to be the only ute that came std with a towbar - one reason for additional kerb weight in specs.
Cheers
Brendon

[Darren J]

Which is great - if you can live with the silly grin

Having just had a quick look at the numbers - the Ford / Mazda wins out - once it has had a GVM upgrade - for my money. Simply looking at the difference between kerb weights and the remainder of the GCM once the 3500 for the trailer is removed, the Ford Mazda has the highest payload available over the Collie and Dmax by a few hundred kilo. The downside with the Ford/Mazda is by running at maximum weight it is the only one to get pushed over its allowable GVM at full weight allowance once you add the towball weight but the upgrade will sort that. Couple this with equal highest torque figures in the class but a torque delivery that comes in at less RPM (bigger cubes) gives it the go on my account. Like I said though, if you can get a ride in one with a load on I would because "it tows it well mate" means different things to different people

While I agree with your conclusion as to the "pick of the bunch", I think you have made an error re the best payload when towing at 3.5t. Note the GVM upgrade does not help the Ford/Mazda payload when towing 3.5t. They are ALWAYS limited by the GCM first. Note ranger is the worst of the dual cabs due to it having the highest kerb weight, which leaves buggar all payload when GCM is accounted for (6000kg GCM -(3500kg trailer total) - (2229 kerb weight (XLT, Widtrak is worse) ) = 271kg max payload on/in the vehicle). Tow ball load does not have a lot of effect in this calculation as vehicle GVM is no where near overloaded, so the GVM upgrades do no help here, as they would on a LandCruiser.

Below are revised numbers I calculated from the other 3.5t towing thread, updated based on current models and GCM numbers being now published for 200 series Landcruisers. I have added in a BT50 and SR5 Hilux, and adjusted the comments on the Landcruiser given they now identify a GCM.

All payloads below need to account for all additional accessories (bulbar, lights, wracks, canopies, wheels etc), fuel, passengers, gear etc as may be added into the vehicle. These numbers all assume you are towing a full 3500kg with 350kg on the tow ball. Obviosuly as the tow weight and/or tow ball load reduces, your payloads will improve. and this becomes much less of an issue. Up to say 3.0t, most of these payload compliance issues pretty much go away for any of the vehicles.

79 series single cab 935kg (plus any GVM upgrades if done) (noting this payload excludes tray I believe, so these must be allowed immediately).
79 series dual cab 785kg (plus any GVM upgrades if done) (noting this payload excludes tray I believe, so these must be allowed immediately).
LC200 Land Cruiser 280-410kg depending on model (based on tow ball download of 350kg, plus any GVM upgrades if done will add back to the payload up to 350kg more i.e. Landcruiser with 350kg GVM upgrade will get at best back to 630-760 payload to the vehicle)
Dmax 510kg (vehicle is lightest, thus has best pay load remaining before hitting its GCM).
NP300 Navara 489kg (new Nav is fairly light) - but needs to be then down rate the GVM for tow ball down load so becomes much lower.
New Patrol 395-485kg depending on model (plus any GVM upgrades if done)
Colorado 425kg
BT50 (XT/XTR/GT in auto) 464/395/382kg
Discovery 382kg (based on tow ball download of 350kg and having no listed GCM) plus any GVM upgrade.
Ranger (XLS/XLT/Wildtrak auto) 370/271/229kg
New Toyota Hilux SR5 (manual) 275kg (these have a GCM of 5850 although Toyota does not publish this on their specifications, dealer had to confirm. As the GCM is 150kg lower than most other D/C utes it ultimately give pretty poor overall payload when towing to 3.5t)

This list is generally in order based on best to worst payload... Note if the LC200 Landcruiser gets no GVM upgrade, it drops way down the list to about third last..... This reenforces that clearly there is more to the ability of a the tow vehicle than just the paper calculations. The calculation to me, is more of an insurance exercise for peace of mind.

Interestingly, the lighter dual cab utes (Dmax/Navara NP300) have the best payloads remaining, but are also the ones that appear to be the least capable of genuinely dealing with the 3.5t out back (if you agree with most reviews and opinions out there).

[Darren J]

Darren, Ford used to be the only ute that came std with a towbar - one reason for additional kerb weight in specs.
Cheers
Brendon

Good point!. That swings I guess 20kg or so? back in their favour.

Scary part for me, I am looking for options knowing I will be right on 3.5t. Its quite doable but finding a reasonable solution with ability to carry some load is the issue....
I know first hand that a properly set up trailer, with properly set up vehicle, will tow these loads, irrespective of what it says on paper. Its just getting that combination with clear insurance compliance that is proving the issue.

[Darren J]

Which is great - if you can live with the silly grin

True... But the new model is growing on me more. I disliked it originally so much that I never even considered/referred to them....just relied (and assumed) the ranger was equivalent in all regards other than styling.

[scottar]

Numbers I found had the GCM of the Ford at 6550Kg Darren which is the discrepancy - http://www.caradvice.com.au/compare-...h-ford-ranger/ - can't vouch for the accuracy - maybe they have it wrong or know something we don't. Maybe you can't believe everything you read off the internet If it is indeed a 6000Kg GCM that changes things

[Darren J]

you can't believe everything you read off the internet If it is indeed a 6000Kg GCM that changes things

Too true re what you read. I am 100% sure on the 6000 GCM for the current Rangers with the 3.5t tow capacities. Just re-read it form their website now. Identical GCM on the BT 50 (and I think about the same from memory on Colorado, NP300 Nav etc)

Just checked that link... they refer to 'Gross Vehicle Weight" which really is an imaginary term in the scheme of things. Unlike GVM or GCM which is meaningful, their description appears some invention of the author that means.... Nothing!.
Love the internet.

[bugman]

Goona - how much do you want to spend?
A mate of mine just bought an 06 Dodge Ram out of SA in the early $30k.
He's spent another $5k on it to fix, replace, modernise a lot of things and for under $40k has a BIG dual cab ute that tows everything with a motor and gearbox that will do another 200,000km.
I have an 09 Dodge Ram and it's my daily driver - I'd buy another in a flash.
Just thinking outside the box for you.
Brett

[scottar]

Just seems a strange figure to come up with. The other "Gross Vehicle weight" ratings all seemed to align with GCM specs. Personally wondering if there might not be a press release come 2016 to combat the new Luxxy. Nothing would surprise me in the current game of "mines bigger than yours". Interesting when you read the 2016 review from the same people the "Gross Vehicle Weight" is stated as not provided - have they inadvertently let the cat out of the bag perhaps ( Ford would want to keep info like this on the down low until stocks at the old rating were gone). Who knows - watch this space perhaps.

[goona]

Numbers I found had the GCM of the Ford at 6550Kg Darren which is the discrepancy - http://www.caradvice.com.au/compare-...h-ford-ranger/ - can't vouch for the accuracy - maybe they have it wrong or know something we don't. Maybe you can't believe everything you read off the internet If it is indeed a 6000Kg GCM that changes things

Just looked a the link and I am sure it is refereeing to GCM but it actually says GVM? Weird. I think it may be wrong but if it isn't then I would be the best by far. Compared it to the Collorado due to the Collie being far superior in acceleration on the 4 x 4 Aust mag also topping the Ranger on torque but and here's the but. Peak power comes on way sooner with the ranger as does the torque 1500rpm as apposed to 2000rpm.

Good write up again Darren and definitely food for thought. It amazes me how a lighter vehicle can tow better (theoretically) than a heavier vehicle. Be like dropping the boat behind the Golf LOL

Still undecided. I wish I could gave one of each hook the boat up an go for a spin with each. Would certainly sort it out.

[Darren J]

Still undecided. I wish I could gave one of each hook the boat up an go for a spin with each. Would certainly sort it out.

I have towed 2t (not a boat) out to Emerald and back on a current model Ranger Wildtrack. I thought my D40 4cyl Navara towed and sat better overall in comparison, but it has upgraded suspension to suit towing, power chip (giving more grunt than ranger) etc. The Ranger still felt good. Can't comment on the rest except an older D40 navara I had (stock suspension, 4cyl 127kw diesel) and I know it would not be anywhere near the modified Navara or Ranger for towing ability... it would have been "uneasy" and not overly capable past about 2.5t in my view without modifications being made.

These comments all refer to 100k/hr type stuff, not a close trip to the local ramp in 60 zones.

See if any dealers will hook up their demo vehicle to your boat to see? Surely there must be a demo with a brake controller fitted? Or ask for them to fit one to a demo, if you like it you buy it??

How heavy is your boat?

[goona]

Right I think I have found it but from what I Gather they don't tow 3500kg yet!

The Nssan Navara 170kW/550Nm 3-litre V6 turbo-diesel is and impressive power plant but only tows 3000kg. If these were uprated to tow 3500kg and had the same as the NP300 Navara 489kg that would be the go.

[Darren J]

Right I think I have found it but from what I Gather they don't tow 3500kg yet!

The Nssan Navara 170kW/550Nm 3-litre V6 turbo-diesel is and impressive power plant but only tows 3000kg. If these were uprated to tow 3500kg and had the same as the NP300 Navara 489kg that would be the go.

The D40's may not be good at some things, but I still think they made a good tow platform. My D40 with chip is around the same (on paper) torque and power of the V6 D40. 168Kw and 540Nm. As stated above, with correct suspension it proves to be a very good tow vehicle. It drags a 3t cat to 1770 with no grief. It will be getting sold in the near future but as I need to go to 3.5t.

Unfortunately I waited for the new Navara NP300 for about a year, only to find while they went to 3.5t, they went down in engine size, shorter wheelbase, and the coil rear suspension is considered way too soft for towing anything much without upgrades. All moved away from where I think it was best as a tow vehicle. I would have consider it with a suspension upgrade and chip, if they didn't shorten the wheelbase. The suspension packages are still fairly new/unknown/untested also at present, but I am sure that could be overcome easily enough.
Out of interest the D40 have about the longest wheelbase out there (3200) about equal to the current Rangers/BT50 (3220). They were going very well priced not too long ago, but I am not sure there are any left about now. Also still limited to 3t.

[goona]

More searching on the net. Pity they didn't bring these over here in the Titan variant but will probably be pricy

http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/c...12-12mstl.html

[gofishin]

...NP300 Navara 489kg (new Nav is fairly light) ....

I see that you have used the kerb weight for the ST manual Darren, however the 489kg is not correct. You forgot to cross reference to the restricted GVM when 300kg is on the ball. Specs here


The limiting factor then becomes the 'derated' GVM, not the GCM.

At 300kg ball load, GVM is derated by 410kg, so is now 2500.

Been to an Xmas party, so beers might be affecting me but pretty sure your 489kg should have been 279kg.

Available payload getting pretty skinny, as the towbar needs to come off this. If you want a bullbar, lights and canopy... better get the missus or decky a bicycle...
Cheers
Brendon

[Darren J]

I see that you have used the kerb weight for the ST manual

At 300kg ball load, GVM is derated by 410kg, so is now 2500.

Brendon

Thanks for pointing that out.

Yes I was looking at ST manuals... not as good with the STX auto, which get heavier again. It as a while ago I worked out most of those numbers.
And yes, also not as good with the derated GVM, which you correctly point out. I guess they either need a GVM upgrade to counter this...
I also never did detailed calc on max axle ratings, but I am sure they would have to be getting close as well.

Maybe I need to re-adjust those numbers again in the post above. I have dismissed the Navara's completely in any case.
I am unsure if there is a de-rating for the Dmax/Colorado, but it would pay to check.
I have not seen it mentioned for the Ranger or BT50.