New Jayco potential purchase for the Ranger to pull, Advice needed!!

[brroberts]

Now that quality, repairs, warranty, DIY, depreciation has come up, I’ve been in RV’s 54 years and here’s my strong thoughts based on experience.

Quality: they are all junk, but some are less junk than others. I’m a BIG advocate of MOLDED, not laminated wall fiberglass. The majority of molded fiberglass shells will outlast you. The appliances and systems industry wide are junk and you will have to fix them.

Repairs, warranty, DIY: The warranty on most of this stuff, except a few companies, is vapor ware. Learn to fix this stuff and find a good mobile RV tech for when you need help.

Depreciation: true fiberglass trailers do depreciate, but far more slowly. My current trailer bought new in October ‘21 and used over 300 nights, is still worth more than I paid for it.

My thoughts take them or not, but I stand by my thoughts.

Sponsored

 

[brroberts]

There is a lesser frontal area rating for the Ranger. It’s not been a problem for anyone I know, and many people do not move up to full size. I tow over 10,000 miles a year with my Ranger just fine. However, I personally do pay attention to windage. I don’t think I would care though if my trailers had more frontal area, because I’ve had MUCH more frontal area in the past. The dump and utility trailers I tow have small frontal areas. My cargo trailer is V nose. My boat trailer has a sailboat on it, lots of area, but streamlined. My RV is only 7 feet wide. So currently I’m at 56 sq Ft with the travel trailer, but basically don’t care because it’s not a big issue. I get 14 to 16 mpg towing. This mindset you need a full size is crazy. This truck is much more capable than full sizes until 2000ish, and I towed then just fine too.

 

[YaBoiNewton]

From what I've been able to figure, frontal area is a spec that is less of an issue under towing conditions OP mentions here:



because it relates to how much wind resistance the trailer has when being pulled. If planned use involves long trips then that is something that I'm going to factor into the equation more heavily. Especially if traveling somewhere remote with big distances between fuel-ups, into the mountains where other factors pile on, and so on. For short drives fairly close to home? Meh.

Note the statement about "exceeding these requirements will affect vehicle performance". I'd say that statement qualifies it as a "soft" specification, and not a hard safety rule.

One thing I've not found a clear answer to is precisely how to calculate a trailer's frontal area. An RV dealer once tried to tell me that the more curved and "aero" shape of the front of a trailer makes it less of a factor. I have my doubts about that (because the shape of the back of the trailer plays a big role in aerodynamics, too), but the manufacturers are pretty mum about all this. Also a factor when comparing trailers that might be lifted a bit. I've seen a variety of methods quoted for how to calculate a trailer's frontal area - almost all of them being discussed in various forums. Just about nowhere is it conclusively stated by a manufacturer of a trailer OR a tow vehicle, and that reinforces my thoughts of it being a "soft" specification.

There's definitely a ton of nuance here and I agree either trailer would be fine in the right context. Personally, there's no way I would pay the ~$30k these things cost if I have to sit and think about whether or not my truck can pull it up a mountain on a windy day. Some people are cool with that risk and that's fine, but that's just not me. It sounds like the original poster may not be aware and I'd rather he had all info available when making his decision.

 

[Grumpaw]

Now that quality, repairs, warranty, DIY, depreciation has come up, I’ve been in RV’s 54 years and here’s my strong thoughts based on experience.

Quality: they are all junk, but some are less junk than others. I’m a BIG advocate of MOLDED, not laminated wall fiberglass. The majority of molded fiberglass shells will outlast you. The appliances and systems industry wide are junk and you will have to fix them.

Repairs, warranty, DIY: The warranty on most of this stuff, except a few companies, is vapor ware. Learn to fix this stuff and find a good mobile RV tech for when you need help.

Depreciation: true fiberglass trailers do depreciate, but far more slowly. My current trailer bought new in October ‘21 and used over 300 nights, is still worth more than I paid for it.

My thoughts take them or not, but I stand by my thoughts.

I agree with you. But, the OP is a newbie looking to buy their first rv, and you and I know that the type of trailer your referring to will cost twice as much as the entry level rigs he is looking at.
That's why, for a new looker I tend to point them to a used fir, as it won't lose too much value, over what it's already lost, and hopefully any problems have already been taken care of.
But, as you and I know, for a new looker, part of the process is the "newness" of a rig, which is why many never consider a used rig.

 

[Grumpaw]

There's definitely a ton of nuance here and I agree either trailer would be fine in the right context. Personally, there's no way I would pay the ~$30k these things cost if I have to sit and think about whether or not my truck can pull it up a mountain on a windy day. Some people are cool with that risk and that's fine, but that's just not me. It sounds like the original poster may not be aware and I'd rather he had all info available when making his decision.

Therein lies the problem with what your posting...your taking info from reading....If you don't tow, you don't know !!!
My rig has about a 72 sq ft frontal area weighs 7000 lbs, and has a 700 lb tongue weight. I have pulled it, without any problems at all, for over 8000 miles now, on interstates, and up and over mountains. Ranger never busted anything, never overheated, and preformed flawlessly.
Your only posting your opinions from reading, not from real world experience, which many of us have, and gained from many years experience.
Not going to get into a pissing match, but,
If You Don't Tow, You Don't Know !!! You haven't stated in your posts that you tow an rv...if you do, than by all means, stick to what your comfortable with....if not, don't take everything you read as "the gospel".

 

[Big Blue]

For some reason this "55 sq ft" seems to be the gospel from on high.
Truth is that almost ANY regular travel trailer with an 8 ft width will be over the magical "55 sq ft".
If you go over the 55 sq ft what do you think wil happen.....nothing xcept maybe a loss of a bit more mpg.....which you already will be getting 10-12 mpg anyway.
Your Ranger will not break down, refuse to move, or throw a tantrum. And, guess what...your Ranger may be smart, but not smart enough to figure out your 10 sq ft over the magic "55".

Look at the towing guide, the "recommendation" for a Superduty is only 60 sqr feet, it only goes to 75 if your towing a 5th wheel. There's not a travel trailer out there that fits within any of these recommendations. The biggest hit frontal area has is MPG. The bigger safety issue is length/side area. That is where wind and big vehicles hit you most. Nobody gives recommendations on that in tow guides. Oh, there are rules of thumb based on tow vehicle wheelbase, you don't hear much about except on forums.

 

[dtech]

There is a lesser frontal area rating for the Ranger. It’s not been a problem for anyone I know, and many people do not move up to full size. I tow over 10,000 miles a year with my Ranger just fine. However, I personally do pay attention to windage. I don’t think I would care though if my trailers had more frontal area, because I’ve had MUCH more frontal area in the past. The dump and utility trailers I tow have small frontal areas. My cargo trailer is V nose. My boat trailer has a sailboat on it, lots of area, but streamlined. My RV is only 7 feet wide. So currently I’m at 56 sq Ft with the travel trailer, but basically don’t care because it’s not a big issue. I get 14 to 16 mpg towing. This mindset you need a full size is crazy. This truck is much more capable than full sizes until 2000ish, and I towed then just fine too.

yeah I decided to go well under the tow limit with my 1st RV - owing to what I'll call "comfortable towing" and in the interest of not consuming too much petrol.

 

[YaBoiNewton]

Therein lies the problem with what your posting...your taking info from reading....If you don't tow, you don't know !!!
My rig has about a 72 sq ft frontal area weighs 7000 lbs, and has a 700 lb tongue weight. I have pulled it, without any problems at all, for over 8000 miles now, on interstates, and up and over mountains. Ranger never busted anything, never overheated, and preformed flawlessly.
Your only posting your opinions from reading, not from real world experience, which many of us have, and gained from many years experience.
Not going to get into a pissing match, but,
If You Don't Tow, You Don't Know !!! You haven't stated in your posts that you tow an rv...if you do, than by all means, stick to what your comfortable with....if not, don't take everything you read as "the gospel".

You're assuming a lot here, but that's alright you've got no context for my experience and I did cite the literature. Your experience is valid, too, of course.

I'm speaking from past towing experience in which I've over-towed. Worst one was a 32' intrepid cuddy ~400 miles down and back through South Florida with a Nissan Armada. Weight was within capacity for the vehicle, but the boat was constantly buffeted by wind from all directions the entire drive. Although it was a cakewalk to go down to the local marina, the Armada was woefully undersized for a long trip. Had my grandpa tow the same boat on our trip the following year with his dually and it was a breeze.

That's a bit more extreme than what we're talking about here, but it illustrates why I'm conservative on trailer size. I've overdone it and it sucks!

 

[Grumpaw]

You're assuming a lot here, but that's alright you've got no context for my experience and I did cite the literature. Your experience is valid, too, of course.

I'm speaking from past towing experience in which I've over-towed. Worst one was a 32' intrepid cuddy ~400 miles down and back through South Florida with a Nissan Armada. Weight was within capacity for the vehicle, but the boat was constantly buffeted by wind from all directions the entire drive. Although it was a cakewalk to go down to the local marina, the Armada was woefully undersized for a long trip. Had my grandpa tow the same boat on our trip the following year with his dually and it was a breeze.

That's a bit more extreme than what we're talking about here, but it illustrates why I'm conservative on trailer size. I've overdone it and it sucks!

I "assumed" as you didn't post about any prior experience, but since you have corrected that, I agree, what you did was an "extreme" case, and if I were in the same position, wouldn't have attempted towing a 32 foot anything with less than a 3/4 ton truck.
That being said, nothing posted here from the OP is "extreme". A bit over the frontal area, yes, but unless the rv is a smaller 7 foot wide rig, or a low rig, as posted, almost any rv will be over the "recommended" 55 sq ft. And, yes, a lot has to do with the side "sail" area of the rig, my 24 footer included.
This is where a bit of experience comes in, and I would never advise a newbie to get a large rig. What the OP is looking at would be, in my opinion, about the largest he would be comfortable towing until he gets some experience. I would even go so far as to go with the larger of the two, simply because it has dual axle's, which makes for an easier pull, more stable, and not as susceptible to crosswinds.
Since the OP has decided to postpone his purchase, this is all a moot point now, so nuff said.

 

[CAG]

Look at the towing guide, the "recommendation" for a Superduty is only 60 sqr feet, it only goes to 75 if your towing a 5th wheel. There's not a travel trailer out there that fits within any of these recommendations. The biggest hit frontal area has is MPG. The bigger safety issue is length/side area. That is where wind and big vehicles hit you most. Nobody gives recommendations on that in tow guides. Oh, there are rules of thumb based on tow vehicle wheelbase, you don't hear much about except on forums.

When looking at frontal area, you have to subtract the frontal area of the truck. I found that on Ford's site but couldn't recall where. It makes sense as the truck is already pushing itself through the air and why you get more frontal area for a 5th wheel. Good luck on finding the frontal area of a vehicle. I have seen road tests that list it but I can't find it in the manual or anywhere else.

I have a F-350 Crew pulling a Montana.. the frontal area is 110 sq ft for the trailer. 8.3 * 13 = 110.5
The truck is 7 by 6 so call it 42 sq ft, thus only 68.5 frontal area for the 5th wheel.

 

[Strobes]

I "assumed" as you didn't post about any prior experience, but since you have corrected that, I agree, what you did was an "extreme" case, and if I were in the same position, wouldn't have attempted towing a 32 foot anything with less than a 3/4 ton truck.
That being said, nothing posted here from the OP is "extreme". A bit over the frontal area, yes, but unless the rv is a smaller 7 foot wide rig, or a low rig, as posted, almost any rv will be over the "recommended" 55 sq ft. And, yes, a lot has to do with the side "sail" area of the rig, my 24 footer included.
This is where a bit of experience comes in, and I would never advise a newbie to get a large rig. What the OP is looking at would be, in my opinion, about the largest he would be comfortable towing until he gets some experience. I would even go so far as to go with the larger of the two, simply because it has dual axle's, which makes for an easier pull, more stable, and not as susceptible to crosswinds.
Since the OP has decided to postpone his purchase, this is all a moot point now, so nuff said.

Not moot at all, I’m learning a lot just watching the back and forth. Very helpful.

 

[Big Blue]

When looking at frontal area, you have to subtract the frontal area of the truck. I found that on Ford's site but couldn't recall where. It makes sense as the truck is already pushing itself through the air and why you get more frontal area for a 5th wheel. Good luck on finding the frontal area of a vehicle. I have seen road tests that list it but I can't find it in the manual or anywhere else.

I have a F-350 Crew pulling a Montana.. the frontal area is 110 sq ft for the trailer. 8.3 * 13 = 110.5
The truck is 7 by 6 so call it 42 sq ft, thus only 68.5 frontal area for the 5th wheel.

That's part of the problem. There is no hard published method for how to calculate frontal area. Even Fords towing guide gives a vague definition of it, with no details.

 

[mtbikernate]

That's part of the problem. There is no hard published method for how to calculate frontal area. Even Fords towing guide gives a vague definition of it, with no details.

Yep. I've seen it mentioned to subtract the tow vehicle's frontal area and I've seen it mentioned NOT to do so. I've seen it mentioned to calculate the frontal area of the tires, A/C, and any other little thing that sticks off of the "box" also. I've seen it mentioned not to bother with any of that. I've seen people talking about the coefficient of friction of an individual trailer. Without a clear, straight answer, it's nothing but a "soft" recommendation to me. If you're willing to take the hit to fuel economy, assuming the other weights are within spec, then go for it.

 

[JimG_AZ]

As has been repeated several times your Ranger with the trailer tow package will tow easily either trailer. To skip to points not already mentioned I tow a larger trailer the Jayco 224BH easily with my Ranger. The first point is that the rear tire pressure needs to be increased from the recommended 30 psi to around 38 psi to decrease wind induced sway, leave the front tires at 30. The second is to limit your speed while towing to 65mph or less as trailer sway increases with speed. You will also notice that fuel consumption also increases quickly with road speed. Better fuel economy typically occurs around 55mph. Hope that helps

Sounds like you are experiencing sidewall flex with your tires. Your probably better off with load range D tires. To determine the proper psi for the tires, use the chalk test on the tires.

Good point on limiting the mph to 65 or less. But, if you are experiencing noticeable sway at @ 65 mph, you have a setup issue that needs to be resolved. Sway at highway speeds can get out of control quicky. I would take your loaded trailer to a truck stops CAT scale and get the trailers total weight and the tongue weight. Make sure that tongue weight is 10-15% of the total trailer weight. You may find that fine tuning the tongue weight will make the trailer will pull a lot better. A good WD hitch with 4-point sway control is the minimum. The Hensley or the ProPride Hitch would be the best option, but very expensive.

 

[ctechbob]

Guess I'll drop my 2/100ths of $1.

I know you've already decide

Sounds like you are experiencing sidewall flex with your tires. Your probably better off with load range D tires. To determine the proper psi for the tires, use the chalk test on the tires.

Good point on limiting the mph to 65 or less. But, if you are experiencing noticeable sway at @ 65 mph, you have a setup issue that needs to be resolved. Sway at highway speeds can get out of control quicky. I would take your loaded trailer to a truck stops CAT scale and get the trailers total weight and the tongue weight. Make sure that tongue weight is 10-15% of the total trailer weight. You may find that fine tuning the tongue weight will make the trailer will pull a lot better. A good WD hitch with 4-point sway control is the minimum. The Hensley or the ProPride Hitch would be the best option, but very expensive.

What he said. Sway is never acceptable.

Are you talking about TRUE sway, which is unwanted oscillations in the trailer when disturbed? or are you talking about wind acting on the trailer, which isn't sway (and you'll never be rid of, even 18 wheelers are subject to it). If the setup settles right behind the truck when disturbed, you don't have sway.

Sponsored