Do like the sound of both 4x4, just wonder if we will be ok towing our van full loaded 1330kg towing behind the Skoda Yeti or will it be better to go for something heavier like the honda CRV, What do you think! Thanks Trevor123
Skoda Yeti TDI 170 4x4 or Honda CRV 4x4
- Thread starter trevor123
- Start date
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,678
- 3,937
- 50,935
Hello Trevor123.
It always makes sense to try and keep the trailer weight as small as possible compared to the tow vehicle. And whilst that is true it doesn't automatically guarantee a good or safe tow, that is achieved by more than just tow ratio. Other factors such as load distribution and probably most important driving style.
However I understand that both vehicles are pretty good so if everything else is equal then the heavier car seems a better choice.
The database I refer to suggest the following figures apply
Skoda Yeti 2.0 (170) ULW1460 and Max towing weight 2000Kg
Honda CR-V 2.2 i-CTDi SE 5d ULW1660 and max towing weight 2000Kg
On paper the Honda wins by weight, but the Yeti has more grunt 170 vs 138. But solo the Yeti returns 47 compared to the Honda's 43 fuel economy.
I have to observe that even 138 should give you adequate towing performance.
Being 200Kg ULW heavier the Honda gives you more scope to change your caravan at a later date.
It always makes sense to try and keep the trailer weight as small as possible compared to the tow vehicle. And whilst that is true it doesn't automatically guarantee a good or safe tow, that is achieved by more than just tow ratio. Other factors such as load distribution and probably most important driving style.
However I understand that both vehicles are pretty good so if everything else is equal then the heavier car seems a better choice.
The database I refer to suggest the following figures apply
Skoda Yeti 2.0 (170) ULW1460 and Max towing weight 2000Kg
Honda CR-V 2.2 i-CTDi SE 5d ULW1660 and max towing weight 2000Kg
On paper the Honda wins by weight, but the Yeti has more grunt 170 vs 138. But solo the Yeti returns 47 compared to the Honda's 43 fuel economy.
I have to observe that even 138 should give you adequate towing performance.
Being 200Kg ULW heavier the Honda gives you more scope to change your caravan at a later date.
There might be some good deals to be had with the Honda, as there's a new one out later in the year!
- Nov 11, 2009
- 23,572
- 8,115
- 50,935
Skids are now doing 20% off the Yeti now EU sales are down and the pound is up. Don't know if it includes the 4wd version. Both makes also consistently come top in the JD Power survey for reliability and customer service. You have a difficult but pleasant choice.
Sorry for the late reply, But Thank you All for the reply did wonder if the Honda would be better, Thanks Trevor123
- Nov 11, 2009
- 23,572
- 8,115
- 50,935
My son has the CRV and it drives really well, comfortable and car like. With Pirelli Scorpion STR tyres it deals well with grass sites and snow. These tyres are not that aggresive a trad pattern so run quietly and economically. His last two cars have been CRVs and no problems with either. The Skoda has good off road performance far superior to CRV but does not have the carrying flexibilty. If off road (excluding CL/CS) is not your scene then the CRV might be the one for you. Try a good test drive and walk through each car though.
Over your cornflakes and tea, meander through Chevrolet’s Guide to Safe Caravanning this summer, featuring the Chevrolet Captiva: http://waynesworldautobloguk.wordpress.com/
I suggest you have a test drive of both cars and get a feel which is the best for you.
I was very impressed with the Yeti and has a very solid feel,but the ride is quite hard the engine is excellent and full of grunt.
I was very impressed with the Yeti and has a very solid feel,but the ride is quite hard the engine is excellent and full of grunt.
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
The CRV will tow 2000kg with a 100kg nose limit.
But more importantly is a LARGER car
The yeti will only tow 1800kg,and has a lower kerb weight. Not sure what the nose limit is, 80kg?
I would go for the Honda.
Forget the government figures for mpg, the latest tests give over rated figures, see whatcar real mile per gallon for more realistic figures, or honest john true mpg.
But more importantly is a LARGER car
The yeti will only tow 1800kg,and has a lower kerb weight. Not sure what the nose limit is, 80kg?
I would go for the Honda.
Forget the government figures for mpg, the latest tests give over rated figures, see whatcar real mile per gallon for more realistic figures, or honest john true mpg.
Unless i stand corrected you are not permitted to exceed the kerbweight of your car when towing? so the maximum towing limit of 2000kgs is irrelevent (the Yeti is 2000kgs as well) this i understand is for towing testing ie 1 in 6 hill starts etc.
Both cars are more than capable of towing your van, the yeti has more payload and is in a cheaper road tax bracket.
The Yeti is much cheaper to buy new.Both are offering good servicing packages, Honda's is £299 for 3 years whereas the Skoda's is free.
You really do need to test drive both and decide yourself.
Both cars are more than capable of towing your van, the yeti has more payload and is in a cheaper road tax bracket.
The Yeti is much cheaper to buy new.Both are offering good servicing packages, Honda's is £299 for 3 years whereas the Skoda's is free.
You really do need to test drive both and decide yourself.
Isnt the the "passed test after 1997" related to max combined towcar and trailor weight of 3.5 tonnes?
This is different to exceeding the kerbweight of the tow car?
Recommended is 85% but this must not exceed the max permissable tow weight of the car?
This is different to exceeding the kerbweight of the tow car?
Recommended is 85% but this must not exceed the max permissable tow weight of the car?
- Mar 14, 2005
- 10,030
- 859
- 40,935
The post-1997 driving licence restriction not only limits the gross train weight to 3.5 tonnes but also prohibits towing a trailer with a maximum allowable weight greater than the unladen weight of the towing vehicle. By the way, this restriction will be lifted again on driving licences issued after the 19th Januaty 2013.
There is no other reason why one must not tow a heavier caravan, other than the technical limit specified by the manufacturer.
There is no other reason why one must not tow a heavier caravan, other than the technical limit specified by the manufacturer.
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
Michael E said:
Yes the yeti does tow upto 2000kg whatcar have got that wrong, says 1800kg in the mag.
But the nose weight limit for the yeti is only 80kg, i class that as poor for a tow car, considering a new Mondeo, passat, both have a 90kg limit.
Maybe the op should consider a Mazda cx5, max tow of 2000kg, nose limit of 88kg, but giving 148bhp and 280 lb/ft of torque, with class leading economy and emissions.
A more powerful version is available with around 173bhp and 310 torque. Kerb weights up to 1620kg, the auto has the same tow limits.
- Nov 11, 2009
- 23,572
- 8,115
- 50,935
I really cannot see why 80kg is not deemed a satisfactory noseweight unless you belong to the 'big must always be better'. There must be thousands of caravanners in UK and Europe towing safely with noseweight limits of 80kg or lower. The first of the current Mondeo had 80kg and won numerous awards and drew good reviews for its towing ability. If we are not careful we could restrict people's choice to much by always driving to the top end. At 80kg the Yeti sits well within the recommended range and would allow a van of 2000kg to be towed within the 4% guide, but this would be well outside the normal guidance of max of 100% of kerbweight for experienced towers or the more usual 85%. The 80kg noseweight on the Yeti gives a useful range of MTPLM. If you have noseweight at 5% of MTPLM you could tow 1600kg without exceeding noseweight or accepted norms for the ratio of noseweight to MTLPM. As the head of the Soviet Navy said 'the better is the enemy of the good enough'
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,678
- 3,937
- 50,935
Using a large proportion of the nose weight limit is the generally preferred route to better towing, but ultimately its what's figure is best for any given combination.
What is required is enough nose weight to keep the outfit controllable. Any more is probably unnecessary. It may be your limit is 100Kg, but you could find that 60Kg nose weight is sufficient for a given outfit.
The only practical way of establishing what is an adequate nose load is by trial and error, so in the absence of any founded method of calculating the optimum figure, it is sensible to start with a high nose load, and then trialling small reductions until the handling starts to become a concern, at which point you should re-add the last incremental change.
There is of course nothing wrong with using high nose weights, providing they sit within the outfits technical limits.
What is required is enough nose weight to keep the outfit controllable. Any more is probably unnecessary. It may be your limit is 100Kg, but you could find that 60Kg nose weight is sufficient for a given outfit.
The only practical way of establishing what is an adequate nose load is by trial and error, so in the absence of any founded method of calculating the optimum figure, it is sensible to start with a high nose load, and then trialling small reductions until the handling starts to become a concern, at which point you should re-add the last incremental change.
There is of course nothing wrong with using high nose weights, providing they sit within the outfits technical limits.
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
The reason i decided to not buy a Q5 was the low 80kg nose weight limit, my Valencia is naturally nose heavy up to 100kg unladen so most of the ballast is rear of the axle, so yes i can achieve 80kg on the nose, but only with a lot more back loading, having a limit of 100kg makes for easier loading and ultimately a more stable tow.
So that's the basics for my comment that 80kg is poor, as generally a 4x4 should be capable of a 100kg nose limit, reflecting a strong chassis.
Don't forget the Bath uni study more or less stated than the heavier the nose weight the more stable the tow.
By the way the latest X3 takes 100kg on the nose with a 2000kg limit, figures are for both auto and manual. Another car I'm considering for my xtrail replacement. Max torque from 1750 to 2750 of 280 pound feet, with a real mpg of 42.
So that's the basics for my comment that 80kg is poor, as generally a 4x4 should be capable of a 100kg nose limit, reflecting a strong chassis.
Don't forget the Bath uni study more or less stated than the heavier the nose weight the more stable the tow.
By the way the latest X3 takes 100kg on the nose with a 2000kg limit, figures are for both auto and manual. Another car I'm considering for my xtrail replacement. Max torque from 1750 to 2750 of 280 pound feet, with a real mpg of 42.
- Nov 11, 2009
- 23,572
- 8,115
- 50,935
Referring to the original question by Trevor he gives the weight of his van as 1330kg so diversions about high noseweights are once again diverting the answer to the question. Even if Trevor were to buy a heavier van he has quite a margin to play with. Baileys new vans high noseweights seem to be an own goal given the sponsorship they provide to Bath University for caravan stability studies.
"So that's the basics for my comment that 80kg is poor, as generally a 4x4 should be capable of a 100kg nose limit, reflecting a strong chassis."
What do you mean by a strong chassis?
The Honda CRV is built on a Civic chassis and the X3 on a 3 series platform and all the VW groups are built on the golf platform .
I thought nose weight was to do with loading on the rear axle/suspension nothing to do with strong chassis?
What do you mean by a strong chassis?
The Honda CRV is built on a Civic chassis and the X3 on a 3 series platform and all the VW groups are built on the golf platform .
I thought nose weight was to do with loading on the rear axle/suspension nothing to do with strong chassis?
You will need to explain what defines a strong chassis Ray?
This is the information from the CaravanClub ref why cars have noseweights?
"Several factors may be taken into account when specifying this noseweight figure, including the capabilities of the car's suspension, the effects on the vehicles steering and its traction (particularly if front-wheel drive) and the strength of the towbar and its mounting"
No mention of a strong chassis?
This is the information from the CaravanClub ref why cars have noseweights?
"Several factors may be taken into account when specifying this noseweight figure, including the capabilities of the car's suspension, the effects on the vehicles steering and its traction (particularly if front-wheel drive) and the strength of the towbar and its mounting"
No mention of a strong chassis?
- Mar 10, 2006
- 3,274
- 47
- 20,685
Yes I've got the same link.Michael E said:
The key word is its mounting, ie the part of the chassis the tow bar fits too.
Remember the cavalier where the tow bar bolts were torn out, due to being fitted to a weak wheel well.
http://www.caravanclub.co.uk/media/6678669/noseweights-mo.pdf
Some of the nose weight data is for the old models, re X3.
The other thing i should also make clear is the limit is exactly that, the limit, not the goal to aim for.
I've towed caravans in the past with a limit of 75kg, but found aiming for 65kg the best compromise.
With both xtrails that came with a 100kg limit, i found the T30 happy at 85/90kg, but the T31 needs 90/95kg for a stable tow.
I've also towed with a 80kg limit Audi Quattro, and found 70/75kg best for that car.
Which really was my point saying 80kg nose limit was poor, as in all likely hood the usable load could be lower.
I've enjoyed our debate, but don't want to get into anymore nit picking, so will conclude my contribution with this post.
It would be nice if the OP would also contribute?
"The key word is its mounting, ie the part of the chassis the tow bar fits too.
Remember the cavalier where the tow bar bolts were torn out, due to being fitted to a weak wheel well."
Ray you are making it sound that 4x4's mounting points are stronger,things have moved on since the drilling of the chassis to fit the towbar.
The towbar for the Civic and CRV are identical and mount on exactly the same points on the chassis frame, but the civic rear suspension is softer and is only front wheel drive.
I wouldnt call it nit picking as you quoted 80kgs is poor for a 4x4 when your grounds for this claim are incorrect?
Remember the cavalier where the tow bar bolts were torn out, due to being fitted to a weak wheel well."
Ray you are making it sound that 4x4's mounting points are stronger,things have moved on since the drilling of the chassis to fit the towbar.
The towbar for the Civic and CRV are identical and mount on exactly the same points on the chassis frame, but the civic rear suspension is softer and is only front wheel drive.
I wouldnt call it nit picking as you quoted 80kgs is poor for a 4x4 when your grounds for this claim are incorrect?
Facebook
Twitter