Putting **** in the bed is hauling that's what it was used for. EVERY vehicle is meant to have the ability to tow its double for example a Chevy Aveo engine would be more than capable to tow another Aveo.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Car Thread ... !
- Thread starter D.T.
- Start date
-
- Tags
- car
- Sort by reaction score
Putting **** in the bed is hauling that's what it was used for. EVERY vehicle is meant to have the ability to tow its double for example a Chevy Aveo engine would be more than capable to tow another Aveo.
i actually did look it up once, My Daewoo is capable of towing up to 500 pounds
Key word designed. A car with zero suspension, 2ft wheel base, and a 500lb towing capacity is not designed for towing.
500lbs would probably be just enough to tow you and me standing on a trailer.
This is a very interesting topic.
I did a focus group for luxury SUV owners a few weeks ago and towing came up multiple times. I can't go too much into detail (NDA), but I did learn a lot about towing.
One of the major concerns raised was how BMW does not offer a factory installed tow-package on the X5. If you want to get a hitch, the installer actually has to cut up the rear diffuser/valence trim to fit the hitch (on the E70.)
Another interesting thing I learned was that towing was exactly the reason why Porsche didn't bring the PDK to the Cayenne during the facelift. It can't handle the driveline stress. They expect Macan owners to NOT tow, so they didn't both giving it a regular torque-converter.
----------
Bingo. Tow ratings don't mean anything, if the car isn't designed for it.
I have never seen an X5 or Porsche towing anything (let alone a Q7 or Touareg). The goal of these cars is to drive like a sports sedan and look like an SUV while offering some true SUV/truck-like conveniences. Unibodies are not ideal for towing, neither are their suspensions, neither are their engines or drivetrains. It seems like a waste to install hitches, but I suppose it adds to the perceived and marketable versatility of the vehicle. Trailer hitch on an X5? What's next, a low range transfer case
. A last generation Range Rover/spot, LR3/LR4, Land Cruiser, G-Wagon, Suburban/Yukon, etc on the other hand with a V8 and a body-on-frame chassis, rugged air suspension, etc is a much better option. Anyone actually towing I imagine would not be fooled by an X5 with a trailer hitch.
Actually, there are a huge number of X5/Cayenne/ML/Q7 owners who tow, especially with the diesel models. These cars are more than capable. No need for a BOF truck with duallies.
Interesting. I honestly can say I have never seen it in person though. The Q7/Audi at least has a defined SUV platform. The X5 is still a car underneath. I'd be a little nervous using the BMW or Audi turbo gasoline engines however. The Cayenne and X5 also have relatively short wheel bases which might make highway driving unpleasant.
The diesels with are great though. I suppose air suspension would make them more comfortable to toe with as well. I suppose anything is possible, but it just depends how comfortable you want to be.
My parents have a small but decent sized sailboat. I've towed it with my brothers old Discovery, my Dad's Range Rover Sport, Uncle's Yukon XL, and a Land Cruiser. The longer wheel bases make a far more pleasant driving experience driving over 125 miles. The Discovery, despite having rear air shocks and hydraulic adaptive sway-bars was terrible, was terrible. The short wheel base made it impossible to comfortably track straight. The RRS is a bit better, I think suspension has to do with it. The Yukon XL was the best by far.
FWIW, my sister and brother in law had a Volvo Crossover for a while(not sure of the exact model) with a 5 cylinder engine. By BIL used it a fair bit to haul boats-at the time, he had a fishing boat(16') and an 20' pontoon.
He sold the fishing boat, but still has the pontoon. He doesn't haul it much anymore(it stays docked at his sister's house), but has since replaced the Volvo with an Acura MDX. I always thought that it was pushing things a bit to tow a boat trailer with the Volvo-the Acura is at least a little better.
At least somewhere or another in there, he did have a Jeep Wrangler(my BIL buys cars like I buy PowerPC Macs , although he sells them unlike me) that I think he used for towing where he could.
He sold the fishing boat, but still has the pontoon. He doesn't haul it much anymore(it stays docked at his sister's house), but has since replaced the Volvo with an Acura MDX. I always thought that it was pushing things a bit to tow a boat trailer with the Volvo-the Acura is at least a little better.
At least somewhere or another in there, he did have a Jeep Wrangler(my BIL buys cars like I buy PowerPC Macs
, although he sells them unlike me) that I think he used for towing where he could.
The chassis on the E53 X5 was pretty much a Range Rover (taken from their merger) and the E70 X5 chassis was a derivative of that. The F15 X5 uses the same chassis as the E70 so I don't think it's totally accurate to say that the X5 doesn't have a defined SUV platform.
The X3 and X4 don't with the chassis/platform partially taken and influenced by and from the 3-Series.
Last edited:
Yeah, our E53 (above) was pretty solid when performing SUV type chores. It was a 2nd gen 4.4 V8 with 315HP and a reasonable stout 325lb/ft of TQ (if I recall correctly). It even did pretty well offroad (though more tuned to onroad than our current T4R which handles towing/offroad without breaking a sweat).
Yeah, our E53 (above) was pretty solid when performing SUV type chores. It was a 2nd gen 4.4 V8 with 315HP and a reasonable stout 325lb/ft of TQ (if I recall correctly). It even did pretty well offroad (though more tuned to onroad than our current T4R which handles towing/offroad without breaking a sweat).
I don't think any of these SUV/SAV's have any problems with going off-road or handling heavy loads. People watch one episode of Top Gear and think these German utility vehicles are passenger cars dressed as SU(A)V's. Are some SUV's better than others? Sure. But to think that the X5, Q5, ML or Cayenne can't do anything other traditional SUVs can do is ridiculous.
Hmmmm I didn't realize the X5 used a RR frame. It makes sense though considering the time frame.
Off-road capability is a whole different story. To tow you need a strong frame, power, and a compatible suspension. Off-road prowess requires suspension articulation, ground clearance, short overhangs, smaller wheels/larger tire sidewalls, low range transfer case, locking differentials, etc.
The problem with many SUV's is their tight suspensions that allow for a tighter, more car like driving experience. As a result you loose articulation, though there are some ways around it. The Cayenne is one of the few that actually has a low range option other than Land Rover. An ML without air suspension has just over 5" of ground clearance, an X5 has 8.2", a Range Rover has 11". 20"+ wheels won't do much good, and even 18" aren't favorible. Some of these cars have dumped the center locking differential entirely and rely on traction control alone. TC is great, but will never replace locking differentials. Driving on a dirt road is not off-road driving.
PS: Top gear loves bashing the German SUV's because they're so biased towards British cars, not matter how bad they are.
Realistically, most people aren't taking their $60,000+ vehicles off-road. Aside from your typical true-off-road SUVS, the Cayenne is probably in theory the best spec'ed vehicle with the proper options. That said, the giant wheels are a bit problematic.
That was the X6 that couldn't get up a hill right? That car actually sucks. Not necessarily reflective of the rest of BMWs SUVs
I personally don't think it sucks. Was I a bit skeptical of a SAV weighing 4500 pounds? Sure. When I finally got a chance to drive it, absolutely amazed and stunned at the way it drove. It doesn't drive like a 3-Series or even a 5 or 7-Series for that matter but what everyone says about it is true. Something that size should not handle the way it does. I don't care about the looks (which isn't the best but there are uglier cars out there) nor do I care about a the name or anything else people criticize. For drive alone, it's something I would consider if it was a second car - that's how impressive I think the X6 is.
I have never seen an X5 or Porsche towing anything (let alone a Q7 or Touareg). The goal of these cars is to drive like a sports sedan and look like an SUV while offering some true SUV/truck-like conveniences. Unibodies are not ideal for towing, neither are their suspensions, neither are their engines or drivetrains. It seems like a waste to install hitches, but I suppose it adds to the perceived and marketable versatility of the vehicle. Trailer hitch on an X5? What's next, a low range transfer case
A last generation Range Rover/spot, LR3/LR4, Land Cruiser, G-Wagon, Suburban/Yukon, etc on the other hand with a V8 and a body-on-frame chassis, rugged air suspension, etc is a much better option. Anyone actually towing I imagine would not be fooled by an X5 with a trailer hitch.
one of my neighbors have a Tow hitch on a Kia SUV and another neighbor has a tow hitch on a Cavalier....
I remember when I first moved to Europe and saw virtually no trucks I thought to myself no one must tow anything here then I saw a golf 2 towing a 2 horse trailer and I just cringed. Here I thought I was silly flat towing my the Jetta with my CJ5.
Yes they tow with anything in Europe.
Long story short I am helping some elderly relatives out and for the next few days I will be driving their Ford Fusion (2011). It's not a terrible car, but the 4cyl leaves much to be desired. It's decently comfortable handles well for a cheap car. The worst thing is the MyKey with a 75mph speed alarm and supposedly an 80mph limit. Unfortunately on some roads 70 - 75mph is the norm and the constant beeping drives me nuts. It will also mute the radio until you put your seatbelt on.
While I hate the X6 and think it is pointless, the TG test was pretty BS. It needs proper tires, not the low-profile tires that BMW typically equips on the X6.
That being said, I wouldn't take the X6 off-road. It doesn't belong there. The X5 is sort-of decent off-road, but even then... if off-roading was a priority, I would own a RRS or Cayenne.
----------
Is this 100% correct? I'm skeptical because the code changeover from E->F usually signifies a new chassis. In this case, I would assume the F15 is built off a derivative of the F10 chassis? No?
The reason why I'm curious is because the F15 saw a decent weight-loss from the E70.
----------
I agree that the X6 drives really well (had them as loaners before), but the price they ask for the limited utility is ridiculous. Not to mention, the back seats are a joke. If driving enjoyment were really my #1 priority with any SUV, the Porsche SUVs are the correct choices.
I recently drove an X4 35i and was shocked at how bad it really was. However, it might have been an unfair comparison because I had just come from the Porsche dealer and drove a Macan Turbo with PASM/air suspension. (now there's an SUV that blew my mind)
----------
I've run into this with ZipCar and their Fords. You have to take the main key and do some tinkering in the computer. There's a video on Youtube that shows you how to turn it off.
----------
Proper options is the point that needs to be emphasized. I've been mildly interested in a RRS, so I have been poking around their website. All of the off-road tech is optional, so it is just as "useless" off-road as any of the German equivalents.
Only Mercedes (ML/GL) and Porsche (Cayenne) offer all of the true off-road technology to go up against the regular Range Rover, such as low-range, skid plates, locking diff, etc. BMW and Audi don't bother.
This is also why I really do think Porsche did a fantastic job on the Cayenne. It not only slaughters the competition with its on-road dynamics, but it can roll with Range Rovers off-road too. A true swiss-army knife.
Yes, the RRS up until 2014 pretty much had it all. Now a lot of the features are options. In the market of performance SUV's, when it comes to off-road, I'd still rate the RRS as #1, Porsche #2, assuming they're properly equipped. Even though a number of the competitors offer air suspension I think the Range Rover is the only option with cross linking to enhance articulation. I know they used to have a function to essentailly disable the sway-bars in the RRS and Discovery with the adaptive suspension option. I think the ML's overhangs will prevent it from ever being a good option, except for in Jurassic Park.
I agree with this 100%. Land Rover builds their SUVs (besides the stupid Evoque) to be off-road SUVs as their #1 priority. Porsche doesn't.
What a throw-back reference!
My father owned that generation ML around 2000. The dealer gave me a scale model of the ML all dressed up for the movie when I was young. Wish I hadn't destroyed it. Such a cool toy.
What a pile of crap that car was, but I digress...
I agree with this 100%. Land Rover builds their SUVs (besides the stupid Evoque) to be off-road SUVs as their #1 priority. Porsche doesn't.
What a throw-back reference!
Image
My father owned that generation ML around 2000. The dealer gave me a scale model of the ML all dressed up for the movie when I was young. Wish I hadn't destroyed it. Such a cool toy.
What a pile of crap that car was, but I digress...
I've never really liked the ML, especially the 1st generation. For a company that can build gorgeous sedans, I've always been shocked at how poorly the ML turned out. The latest ML isn't bad, but it reminds me of an Acura MDX and still doesn't quite have the elegance of their sedans and coupes.
I agree completely, but I'm just not a Benz fan. They just rub me the wrong way. Can't put my finger on what though.
I appreciate their history and technology, but I don't see myself ever owning a Mercedes-Benz. Too young maybe?
I agree. Mercedes make great vehicles but there's something lacking about some of their models. They were first to market (amongst the Germans) for the ML (luxury SUV) and the CLS (4-door coupe) yet I wouldn't consider any of those over a X5 or 6-Series Gran Coupe and the Audi A7. That's not to say the ML or CLS aren't fine vehicles but they don't really leave a lasting impression.