Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 57

Thread: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

  1. #1

    Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    About 3 to 4 months ago I started doing some research for a new ‘tow tractor’. At the time ‘I’ thought it was going to be one of the mainstream Dual Cab utes available, so being a numbers man started to compare specs and capacities on these etc while scrutinising brochures.

    (Oh, and a Google search didn’t produce any useful comparisons, in particular those that were important to me at the time – towing & ‘staying legal’, diesel, auto, min 3t towing (possibly 3.5t in the future), longish wheelbase.

    With a few quick mental calculations it became evident that even though some claimed to be able to tow ‘this much’, doing so with the vehicle loaded meant either the allowable payload or tow capacity needed to be reduced to stay ‘legal’.

    At first I was scribbling everything down by hand on a few sheets, but that ended up a big mess so I put it all into Excel with a few calculations and checks etc to make it a bit more clearer and easier to decide what the ‘real specs’ were. This also meant my mates could make use of it too!

    In the end I ended up with something which I thought was pretty handy to me….. problem was I forgot about the ‘We’ in ‘I’…..What, only five seats, that’s not going to work is it dear…” Oops, what was I thinking darling...how much can I spend…!!

    Anyway, after a little bit of a clean-up and some formatting etc the info should be pretty handy as a ‘guide/reference’ for others crunching the specs on D/Cabs & towing etc.

    Items to note in particular:

    · The first Table is mostly 'Specs' obtained from the brochures (and in some cases helpful Ausfishers with a manual or access to relevant info) - except for the last three columns where calculations are performed using the corrected vehicle mass/weight (with full fuel tank), GVM and GCM specs.

    · The second Table is basically multiple sets of calculations based on;
    Columns T & U - towing with the vehicle loaded to max i.e. at max GVM condition.
    Columns V to AB - not towing with the vehicle loaded to a 'moderate condition'.
    Columns AC to AG - towing with the vehicle loaded under the same 'moderate condition'.

    · Refer to attached for relevant ADR definitions, in particular GVM and GCM are very important for anyone towing anything!

    · For those that fit a 'truckload' of accessories and options, be aware that every bit of weight added to the vehicle comes off the available payload and possibly the towing capacity too.

    · By Law a ‘GCM’ is not required to be specified for this type/Class of vehicle, however only one model/range presented did not have a GCM specified (Navara).

    · The Navara also had a GVM de-rating/restriction based on the condition at max allowable tow ball mass, i.e. when towing 3t. (see the fine detail in their Specs). For a '3t' ute with the most capable engine, this de-rating puts it way behind the D-Max & Triton - and only marginally ahead of the Amarok - in terms of load carrying capacity when towing 3t. I actually sent a Technical Request to Nissan (via a dealer) to confirm this detail, but no reply was received!

    · Isuzu provide by far the best ‘payload/capacity’ information and a very detailed ‘as supplied’ vehicle ‘Payload Calculator Sheet’ based on the vehicle purchased with all accessories/options etc, before you drive out the door! I guess this comes from their commercial heritage, where it is extremely important to 'stay legal'!

    · Holden/Colly also provide good info & example payload ‘Capacity Calculations’ & checks at the back of their brochure.

    · The weights assumed for Options/Accessories etc were taken from the data provided by Isuzu for their D-Max, and then in some cases changed if I thought they might be heavier for other makes. These are assumptions and may not be 'exact' for other manufacturer’s equipment/accessories!

    · Only the XLT Ranger included the towbar as standard (and also therefore 'should be' included in the specified vehicle mass – one would hope!)

    · Please note that in some cases, when towing the maximum allowable load, that there is sometimes alarmingly little vehicle payload capacity left/available with a few options/accessories, two people and a bit of cargo etc. Refer to the second table.

    · Also note that all 3.5t rated Utes come with constraints. You can’t tow 3.5t and load any of these 3 utes up to their full GVM. The Colly is the best (by 50kg) in terms of max available (legal) payload when towing 3.5t. With the Ranger (the worst of the three 3.5t utes for available payload when towing 3.5t), you can only load the vehicle to ~66% (=673/1023) of its allowable payload and still legally tow 3.5t (based on conditions as per the table).

    · In the 3t towing capacity there are two makes listed that allow the full 3t towing and allow the vehicles to be loaded to their max GVM capacity (D-Max & Triton).

    Disclaimer:

    No guarantee is given whatsoever that the information presented is correct, nor that any manufacturers' specifications won’t have changed in the meantime. No liability will be accepted if you make a decision based on the information provided. It is after all, a free public forum, so treat this information as you would any other ‘obtained’ free over the internet – and do the necessary checks/calculations yourself! Blah blah blah...

    Cheers
    Brendon

    PS. tried to attach the tables as jpegs but a lot of detail was lost in reducing them to size etc. Hope Photobucket works OK.

    Thanks also to those Ausfishers who have helped me out with info and comments on how their vehicles have performed.











    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by gofishin; 19-10-2013 at 07:05 AM. Reason: Typo corrected

  2. #2

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    so what did you get?

  3. #3

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Quote Originally Posted by myusernam View Post
    so what did you get?
    LC200 Altitude. Brilliant tow vehicle and highway 'cruiser', but no ute tub/tray for those days when you need to carry messy/big stuff etc .
    Cheers

  4. #4

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Hey mate,

    Good research, but your specs on the Navara are incorrect. You have a mixture of specs from the 2.5L TDi and and 3.0L V6 TDi. You will need to correct this and possibly add the info for both models.

    Ben.

  5. #5

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Quote Originally Posted by gofishin View Post
    LC200 Altitude. Brilliant tow vehicle and highway 'cruiser', but no ute tub/tray for those days when you need to carry messy/big stuff etc .
    Cheers
    Chop it!!

  6. #6

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    maybe you should have gone straight to this, Brendon

    http://www.toyota.com/tundra/#!/Welcome


    LP
    Kingfisher Painting Solutions:- Domestic and Commercial.

    For further information, contact details, quotes or advice - Click Here





  7. #7

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Kingfisher Painting Solutions:- Domestic and Commercial.

    For further information, contact details, quotes or advice - Click Here





  8. #8

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    The Navara is a great truck Phill, I am also impressed with the Ranger!
    Living the dream, Barry

  9. #9

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Marty, both a mate and brother in law in the mines advised me to steer well clear of them before i got the Landy, apparently they like being tucked up in workshops for a lot of TLC
    Tangles KFC


  10. #10

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Quote Originally Posted by morphias View Post
    Hey mate,

    Good research, but your specs on the Navara are incorrect. You have a mixture of specs from the 2.5L TDi and and 3.0L V6 TDi. You will need to correct this and possibly add the info for both models.

    Ben.
    Ben, maybe we are looking at different specs, or my eyes are seeing things they shouldn't .... Which specs are you referring to???

    I worked off a scanned brochure sent to me by a dealer, and the data matches the Nissan website as I just checked:
    http://www.nissan.com.au/~/media/Fil...ification.ashx
    ...except that the website doesn't seem to include the 'special conditions' or GVM de-rating tables based on tow ball downloads.

    Look at the second column from the right. ST-X is now the V6 3L TD, was previously the 4-pot 2.5L TD

    Anyway I originally didn't included the 4-pot 2.5L 140kW variant as I was not interested in this vehicle on this occasion (however have owned one previously and it was a very good truck. Weak point was the clutch though).
    cheers
    Brendon

  11. #11

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Quote Originally Posted by chisel View Post
    Chop it!!
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucky_Phill View Post
    maybe you should have gone straight to this, Brendon

    http://www.toyota.com/tundra/#!/Welcome


    LP
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucky_Phill View Post
    Only problem with any of these options boys was the lack of seating...so I was told by SWMBO. Just wished 'she' had stated those conditions before I spent so much time thinking about D/Cabs ....

    Phill,
    There is a mob importing and converting the Tundras now, saw one a few months ago - bloody nice. Look here:
    http://www.performaxint.com.au/toyot...australia.html

    Cheers
    Brendon

  12. #12

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Quote Originally Posted by Tangles View Post
    Marty, both a mate and brother in law in the mines advised me to steer well clear of them before i got the Landy, apparently they like being tucked up in workshops for a lot of TLC
    What a crock !!! lol

    We run all Rangers now nationwide in our mine vehicles and they have been exceptional. 300 plus now.

  13. #13

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Better send the boss a email and tell him a few people would love a right hand drive diesel with all the fruit just not sure we could afford toyota australian pricing.

    http://www.caradvice.com.au/212547/n...ht-hand-drive/


    Toyota Tundra arrives Down Under

    words - Chris Fincham may 2012

    Right-hand drive conversions of Toyota’s full-sized American ute are now available in Australia with a LandCruiser-beating 4.5 tonne towing capacity


    Owners of big caravans and fifth-wheelers now have another tow vehicle to consider with the arrival of Toyota’s American-built Tundra pick-up in Australia.

    Right-hand drive versions of the Tundra are now available from Performax International, a Queensland-based importer and converter of American-built vehicles.

    A rival to Ford F-Series, Chevrolet Silverado and Dodge Ram in the 'States, the Tundra is powered by a 5.7-litre DOHC, V8 petrol engine producing 280kW at 5600rpm and 543Nm at 3600rpm, matched to a six-speed auto.

    Depending on spec it has a towing capacity of 4-4.5 tonnes and a payload up to 734kg. In comparison, Toyota's LandCruiser can tow up to 3.5 tonnes, while the smaller HiLux ute has a 2.5 tonne maximum tow capacity.

    Performax International sales manager Kevin Thoroughgood said response so far had been strong, with the Queensland company receiving 25 orders within a few weeks of announcing the Tundra’s availability in early-2012.

    “I think the big thing is it’s a Toyota branded item,” he explained. “Australians have a very strong affiliation and loyalty to the Toyota product and I think the chance to get a full-size dual cab utility is something Australia has been looking for.”

    Thoroughgood said the fact that the factory left-hand drive Tundra shares many parts with the 200 Series LandCruiser, made it an easier proposition when it came to conversion and compliance for the Australian market.

    “(Toyota) actually used LandCruiser parts (for the Tundra) so we can use genuine right-hand drive LandCruiser parts to convert the vehicle, and you can see the Japanese build quality in them,” he says.

    The Tundra is larger than the HiLux and LandCruiser, but slightly smaller than the Chevrolet Silverado, which trumps it with almost 10 tonne towing capacity and is also available from Performax.

    “We compared one recently to a Landcruiser Sahara, and it appears to be roughly the same dimensions but about a half a metre longer,” he says.

    Australian pricing of the top-spec Tundra Limited Platinum Crew Max, which Thoroughgood says has similar spec to the Lexus LX 570, is $115,990 plus on-road costs.

    For that expect a swag of goodies including leather electric seats, Bluetooth connectivity, dual zone climate control, cruise control, trip computer, 12 speaker sound system and 20 inch alloy wheels.

    The Limited Platinum 4x4 model also gets eight airbags, traction and stability control, tyre pressure monitors, front and rear parking sensors and trailer sway control.

    Underpinnings extend to independent coil spring front/ live axle leaf rear suspension, and part-time 4WD with dual range transfer.

    The right-hand drive converted Tundra was officially launched at last week’s Build and Design Queensland Expo in Brisbane.

    For further details visit the Performax International website.

  14. #14

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Quote Originally Posted by Tangles View Post
    Marty, both a mate and brother in law in the mines advised me to steer well clear of them before i got the Landy, apparently they like being tucked up in workshops for a lot of TLC
    If you are talking about the navara, I would have to eat my words and say they are great. This was after the d40 lemon I had that made me swear to never buy a nissan ever again. I bought the stx550 (v6 diesel) to replace the old car after much deliberation. The ranger was close second, but lost out to the power offered by nissan. Mine was bought as a tow hack for the rag boat which has high windage. 1000kg of boat and trailer and the old 2.4l diesel could not manage better than 90kph coming back from melbourne.

    Anyway, still early days, but the new car has not missed a beat yet. My first STX had been in the shop a half a dozen times before the 10k service. And to top it off, the v6 goes like stink.


  15. #15

    Re: Dual Cabs Comparison – Loading & Towing capacities

    Quote Originally Posted by gofishin View Post
    Ben, maybe we are looking at different specs, or my eyes are seeing things they shouldn't .... Which specs are you referring to???

    I worked off a scanned brochure sent to me by a dealer, and the data matches the Nissan website as I just checked:
    http://www.nissan.com.au/~/media/Fil...ification.ashx
    ...except that the website doesn't seem to include the 'special conditions' or GVM de-rating tables based on tow ball downloads.

    Look at the second column from the right. ST-X is now the V6 3L TD, was previously the 4-pot 2.5L TD

    Anyway I originally didn't included the 4-pot 2.5L 140kW variant as I was not interested in this vehicle on this occasion (however have owned one previously and it was a very good truck. Weak point was the clutch though).
    cheers
    Brendon
    My apologies Brendon. I wonder when they slipped that one through? The tow capacity is the same 3000kg of the 2.5L...bit sh!t IMHO. All that power and torque, but you can't use it, yet the Pathfinder 550 was 3500kg.

    Nissan have totally lost the plot this year - no diesel option in the new Patrol, the new Pathfinder is basically a Kluger with a Nissan badge - no diesel option, no low range anymore, reduced tow capacity to 2,700kg and a big step up in price. WTF are they doing to themselves?!?!

    The clutch is the weakness in the manual Navara - no issue in the auto though.

    Ben.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us