I'm submitting to the weight police!

[Hersbird]

But the trailer in question is more like 9x8 plus awnings and a/c unit so a frontal area of more like 74 sqft. No ford short of a f-550 with Max tow package is allowed to tow it.

I was a nuclear engineer too, but like I said I don't think the engineers are the only ones involved in these numbers. Marketing, laywers, accountants, etc all get a stab at them after engineers submit them. As an engineer the joke always was not what the numbers show but what do you want the numbers to show.

I also agree this is a Ford only thing, not Dodge or GM, but it's right there as a limit in the factory towing guide the weight police so love. You can (and rightly so) factor it off with aerodynamic drag discussions, or towing conditions you face, but then why do these same arguments not apply to the other numbers out there?

[325BH]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

But the trailer in question is more like 9x8 plus awnings and a/c unit so a frontal area of more like 74 sqft. No ford short of a f-550 with Max tow package is allowed to tow it.

I was a nuclear engineer too, but like I said I don't think the engineers are the only ones involved in these numbers. Marketing, laywers, accountants, etc all get a stab at them after engineers submit them. As an engineer the joke always was not what the numbers show but what do you want the numbers to show.

I also agree this is a Ford only thing, not Dodge or GM, but it's right there as a limit in the factory towing guide the weight police so love. You can (and rightly so) factor it off with aerodynamic drag discussions, or towing conditions you face, but then why do these same arguments not apply to the other numbers out there?

Your argument shows:

How silly the frontal specs are and how people pick-and-choose which specs they want to "police".





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CWSWine]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

But the trailer in question is more like 9x8 plus awnings and a/c unit so a frontal area of more like 74 sqft. No ford short of a f-550 with Max tow package is allowed to tow it.

I was a nuclear engineer too, but like I said I don't think the engineers are the only ones involved in these numbers. Marketing, laywers, accountants, etc all get a stab at them after engineers submit them. As an engineer the joke always was not what the numbers show but what do you want the numbers to show.

I also agree this is a Ford only thing, not Dodge or GM, but it's right there as a limit in the factory towing guide the weight police so love. You can (and rightly so) factor it off with aerodynamic drag discussions, or towing conditions you face, but then why do these same arguments not apply to the other numbers out there?

Read what says:

Frontal
area
is the total area in
square feet that a
moving vehicle and
trailer exposes to
air resistance. The
chart shows the
limitations that must
be considered in
selecting a vehicle/
trailer combination.
Exceeding these
limitations may
significantly reduce
the performance of
your towing vehicle.

LOL we all now the full profile 5er will affect the performance of the tow vehicle more than low profile 5er. Doesn't say don't exceed it just pointing out common sense that performance is reduced.

[Hersbird]

So it is a "limitation", just like any of the other "limitations", but exceeding the other "limitations" won't just reduce performance (and I'm the one getting the duhs here), but is strictly forbidden?

You will notice in none of the factory Ford ads, and pictures do you see a truck towing a big modern travel trailer or 5th wheel camper. They are always low profile horse trailers, contractor trailers, or mini excavators and such. I have heard on other forums Ford has denied warranty claims for exceeding the frontal aera limitation.

I personally think it is just like all the other recommendations, based on a worst case scenario that covers 99.9% of the idiot things people will do out there. A truck will hold 10 times the limit, or tow the space shuttle as in a famous Toyota ad. It then comes down to speed, road conditions, wind conditions, etc. Say for instance you can hit a 6" pothole at 60mph at max load, but a 12" pothole will brake the axle. On a nice, new smooth asphalt road you could load double or triple the weight and the axles will be fine. Same thing with tires, it is a load vs speed that causes failures. Less weight at 80 mph can be tougher on a tire then more weight at 50 mph, yet the truck tires have a on size fit's all weight rating that one can only assume is based on being good at the max speed rating which is say 110mph on the truck tires. So less then some insane 110mph fully loaded truck, you will be fine somewhat over but an normal speeds and we haven't even gotten into how air temperature effects them.
The new fancy tow tests are based on silly hot and maintaining a fast speed up a steep grade while running the A/C and such. Seems logical a truck may pull the load just fine if you don't have to be in such a hurry on the hills, or didn't live in the desert, or could live with rolling down the windows for a while instead of A/C. Don't get me wrong, I love them in that now at least all things are tested somewhat equal. The problem is you don't know what the limiting factor in the test was. If it was the braking then I would be unwilling to exceed, but if it was a heat problem I might be more willing to push things and just treat it more like a consideration like the frontal aera. If you are towing a 70 sqft frontal aera cargo box in the wind, it is different then a 70 sqft frontal aera Airstream camper (not that they make one but some 5ers are built with a great endcap, narrow TV gaps, and just the right taper for good aero drag considering their massive frontal aera.)

Anyway, sorry if I ruffled any feathers, I just like people to think for themselves and not just accept everything... even if it is a engineer saying it LOL!