otherclive said:
Unfortunately they rely on the manufacturers to supply the test vehicle and this means higher power, high spec vehicles.
totally mis leading remark. you weren't on here when indeed that exact topic was hot ... you need LOWDOWN torque, hence the popularity of diesel engines over the past 2 decades, but you cannot FORGET the importance of BHP too [ working rate ]otherwise you limit your ability to go anywhere at more than a crawl. .note today's modern petrol engines are now developing there torque much earlier than in the past .never the less for a long time the caravan club [ i believe or PC] gave out what it considered to be a min bhp figure it perceived for decent towing.. last time this was a hot topic on here 2 or 3 years ago] it appeared that the CC or PC had updated its info and gave a min torque figure too.. Hence when looking at both those passats in question they appeared to lack enough torque given they had less torque than a 2 decade old passat diesel but the new petrol version at least had some extra bhp .. point is its 2017 what was perceived good 2 decades ago wouldnt hold true today .just look at what many tow with today on here if they are towing 1500kg and you'll find at least 250 ft/lb of torque and 160 plus bhp .. neither of those new passats compare well to that and therefore would pull inadequately compared to the vast majority of vehicles that you normally see towing 1500kg caravans .if i was new to caravaning and about to go purchasing a new car costing xxxx pounds i'd like to think someone would point out that yes they can tow what you're asking but frankly by today's chosen tow vehicles they are lacking . surely better than buying one and finding out the hard way they tend to be lacking compaired to other outfits that cross your path..EH52ARH said:
Well, having had two Passat 140TDi CR estates, a B6 and our present B7 (the newer 150bhp is a B8) I can honestly say it is the best towcar we have ever had - and that is pulling a Bailey Pegasus 462. As it is a long chassis with a good heavy block of metal at the front it is very stable even when being passed by coaches and trucks at speed.
Reading through brings up two interesting facts: the petrol version is limited to 1600Kg but the diesel is 1800Kg on the same chassis so one can only conclude that the difference is due to the engine power and ability to pull; there has been much comment about the torque of the two different fuel versions but no-one has mentioned the hill start. As a diesel produces high torque from not much more than tickover - say about 1800rpm - it has no difficulty starting on a hill significantly aided by the automatic brake hold. Whilst modern petrol engines do have much more low down grunt that still does not come in until well over 2000rpm IME and to do a hill start might actually require a near screaming engine - which does go against the grain somewhat.
Personally I would always have a diesel, towing or not. The flexibility, lack of need to change gear so much, but the real get-up-and-go plus 47mpg around town and typically mid 50's mpg solo on a longer run wins every day in my book.
A final point: any version based on a sport has the rear suspension dropped by 15mm which can be troublesome in some circumstances.
Reading through brings up two interesting facts: the petrol version is limited to 1600Kg but the diesel is 1800Kg on the same chassis so one can only conclude that the difference is due to the engine power and ability to pull; there has been much comment about the torque of the two different fuel versions but no-one has mentioned the hill start. As a diesel produces high torque from not much more than tickover - say about 1800rpm - it has no difficulty starting on a hill significantly aided by the automatic brake hold. Whilst modern petrol engines do have much more low down grunt that still does not come in until well over 2000rpm IME and to do a hill start might actually require a near screaming engine - which does go against the grain somewhat.
Personally I would always have a diesel, towing or not. The flexibility, lack of need to change gear so much, but the real get-up-and-go plus 47mpg around town and typically mid 50's mpg solo on a longer run wins every day in my book.
A final point: any version based on a sport has the rear suspension dropped by 15mm which can be troublesome in some circumstances.
JonnyG said:
Good articulate post Jonny.
Let's hope Hammond doesn't increase diesel fuel tax and add the threatened additional tax for buying /selling Diesel vehicles. I read somewhere recently, can't find it today, that a retrofit piece of kit may be available that can reduce old diesel car's NO emissions by 80%.
JonnyG said:
Hello Jonny,
I totally agree it is about perception.
Looking back to the 1950's the power output of cars was considerably lower than today's models. From then until now people have continued to caravan, with what ever vehicles were available at the time, so back in the 50's there would have been people towing with Austin's, Ford's, Humber's, Morris's, Riley's, Triumph's, Wolseley's etc
Whilst even in those days, caravanning tended to be for the slightly better off, so they may well have had some of the larger models with more powerful engines, even so its probable the power output for the average tow car was probably only in the order of 60 to 70 BHP. Even allowing for the lighter weight of caravans of the period, they still managed to tow.
It's perhaps due to the poorer power to weight ratio's of the day that the general public has the "perception" that caravans hold up traffic. But even then, a car with a caravan could still out perform laden lorries of the day - but that another subject for another thread.
It would seem that between 1950 and 2010 manufactures have given family cars an extra 10BHP per decade. In many cases that means 100% or more the genres power output. But equally caravans in particular have also become more obese, where as a 1960's 4 berth caravan typicaly was in the order of 900 to 1000kg, to day they are closer to 1200 to 1300kg, which is only about a 50% increase.
This means that on average car power has increased faster than caravan weights by a factor of about 2:1.
We have come to accept this new scale of things and it plays to the clamour for "more and faster" when we don't actually need more.
The reality is the Passat 1.4 turbo petrol and 1.6L Diesel are quite capable of towing, but it may require a new (or older) perspective on the way they will tow. I'd wager they will still be better overall tow vehicles than a 1980's 1.6L Cortina
"More, Bigger and Faster" is not always true advancement, Sometimes it is sensible to stop and survey what been going on and question if the route we've come really was necessary.
Who needs a family car with a 155mph top speed, or that can accelerate in under 10s to 60mph?
It may be that as power has been increased we have simply got used to easier towing and forgotten earlier problems. At the end of the day more power and torque makes the job easier but lower powered cars will survive in most cases if you accept some compromise.
Prof.
Good observation. My recollection from 1978 with various tugs is that cubic capacity then was very important. Say no more we all know that's not so today. However looking at engine design and progression we have moved from very long stroke engines to over square and short stroke. Historically the long strokes gave bags of torque....... Agreed we are not comparing like for like but this just illustrates that our pre conceived ideas may no longer be true
Good observation. My recollection from 1978 with various tugs is that cubic capacity then was very important. Say no more we all know that's not so today. However looking at engine design and progression we have moved from very long stroke engines to over square and short stroke. Historically the long strokes gave bags of torque....... Agreed we are not comparing like for like but this just illustrates that our pre conceived ideas may no longer be true
Raywood said:
Hello Ray,
But what were the earlier problems?
Cars manged to tow quite successfully. As a family we spent many holidays touring around the UK with 4 berth Sprite behind a range of modest cars.
I do agree that towing to day may be safer due to improved brakes, and the periodic inspections such as MOT's more comfortable, but the basic function of the tow vehicle has not changed and so the issues are also similar, and most come down to the drivers ability to load correctly and to drive in accordance with the conditions.
I wouldn't want to go back to a 1950's car for daily transport or towing, becasue they were much less reliable than today's cars. But all other factors being equal, they worked and were perhaps appropriate for their timE.
What we have today are cars with prodigious power outputs which can propel 1700kg from 0 to 60 in 6.5 seconds with a top speed of 155mph, But where can you use that performance? And does it not help to explain why car insurance now costs so much more even allowing for inflation?
ProfJohnL said:
Having been extensively involved with High Pressure and Solid Polymer Electrolysers both in development and application I am intrigued by the CGON device. It's certainly more sophisticated than some "catalytic pebbles" that were lowered into the fuel tank, and they were advertised some years ago. They promised improvements in power, emissions and economy. But I am disappointed in that the CGON website mentions a US testing establishment and VOSA without any real details of results. Is I would take a lot more convincing before thinking about fitting such device.
ProfJohnL said:
I think the word that fails you is "progression"Generally speaking high powered engines bring short 0 to 60 times and high top speeds,it also makes an ideal towcar with lots of power.I like fast journey times with or without the van in tow,of course keeping to speed limits but that also includes travelling up hills,i dont enjoy struggling up hills and why should i.If i feel the need for high power thats my choice,i pay the RFL,As for the insurance it has very little impact on the situation expect for the person insuring his vehicle,infact my 245hp diesel is less to insure than the wifes 1.4 petrol.
Facebook
Twitter