How many would have a smaller vehicle if it wasn't for the need to - safely, tow a caravan? Few of us are towing every week, or even every month, so the cars 'requirements' are only really valid 'part time'. But, you cannot have 'part time' vehicle as such. So what is the logical answer. Is there a logical answer?
Aside from those of us that have two vehicles where the towing one has little use outside that role, I suspect most single vehicle users who could have a lighter vehicle, would do so?
The logical answer to me to using a lighter vehicle is to better understand the vehicle's towing attributes and weaknesses and use that knowledge as a modifier for the 85% mass ratio. Thus, as we can see elsewhere vans towed with vehicle 90, 95%, without encountering issues. Plus, knowing we now have the advantage of ATC, though I emphasise not a stabilising tool, but as a last resort device to cull instability should it occur. Something unknown when the 85% mass ratio was first tabled as a guide.
It would be great if academics busied themselves developing the mathematical models to explore towed unit stability or experimenters physically modelled towed units to gain a deep insight.
However, I contend some aspects are self evident in pushing the natural frequency more safely out of our way, as a snake is all about oscillations and how they manifest or decay.
A mass ratio we all know can help, but other self evident features are the overhang and wheelbase, the less of one the more of the other must improve the match. Then, even a casual glance tells you the vehicle is squat or lanky, so near 100% indicates if the CoG is lower helping stability. A glance at the tyres fitted tell if the vehicle's lateral stiffness is designed to be comfortably high or otherwise.
I don't see it challenging to see the attributes a vehicle has and if you are damned to keep down to an 85% mass ration or could with little risk ease up on that.