Tow capacities are plummeting on 2012 cars...

[Mojave Bob]

There is power and there is power. Back in the 70s and 80s, it was almost impossible to purchase a modest car with significantly over 100 HP, and small cars had 60-85 HP. It was adequate, but certainly not surplus power. Top speeds typically fell short of 100 mph, but that was ok, since the speed limit was 55mph. Even the Corvette in 1975 had only 165 HP.

Fast forward to today, and most small cars have 130-200 hp, with only the smallest cars having under 120. The Chevy Cruze has 138 HP. The Mazda 3 has 167 (more than a '75 'Vette). My experience is that virtually anything built today will outrun virtually anything from 35 years ago. Today's cars will cruise the interstate effortlessly at 75-85 mph, while 35 years ago, most cars were pretty close to topped out at that speed.

I drive "older" cars (a '95 and an '01). The '01 will run circles around the '95, up to about 70mph, when the roles reverse. When I have a chance to drive newer cars, I am always struck by how much more acceleration they have than my cars do.

I suspect that that may not be linear when towing, particularly with an automatic transmission, however. New cars are geared for optimum cruising efficiency, while my '01 takes more of a "shoot up the middle" approach, keeping the engine revs higher, which keeps me more in my peak power curve. If you work the gears on your new car manually, and run the revs up into the power curve, a new car would have more power, at the expense of the gas mileage.

[Mojave Bob]

In 1985 I bought a Toyota Tercel with a 1.5L engine. I would frequently take backpacking trips where I would drive 1000 miles or more with 4 people and 4 full packs, get 42MPG, and pull all hills the mountains could throw at us.
Today's cars, with engines almost twice the size would be hard pressed to carry the same load without struggling. I kept the Tercel for 19.5 years.

Larry

Your '85 Tercel had 63 HP. Most '85 Tercels had a 4-speed manual transmission or a 3-speed auto (a 5-speed manual was available). Either one had the rpm running about 3000 or more at 55 mph (my '78 Plymouth Arrow ran 3200 rpm at 55mph and got 41 mpg). So, at 55mph, you had access to pretty much the whole 63 HP. On a newer car, you would have to be running closer to 90 mph to get the engine up to 3000 rpm. At 1800 rpm (55mph typical), you might only be producing 40 HP or so. A new car might not reach peak power output until 4500rpm. So, if you want strong acceleration, downshift ... way down. Try mashing the gas in 2nd gear, and watch the tach. Make note of what rpm the tach shows when you feel the power kick in. You really have to rev it up, but it'll go.

[whitefishpoint]

I haven't looked at the VW or Suburu lines because the MPGs are comparatively low. If I remember right some are in line with small pickups. Defeats the purpose of getting a small car....

Huh? TDI diesels get 40 mpg and have 230 ft-lbs of torque. I have a subaru outback and it gets 34 mpg highway and 21 mpg when I'm towing my 6x10 trailer full of gear.

[Larry C]

There is power and there is power. Back in the 70s and 80s, it was almost impossible to purchase a modest car with significantly over 100 HP, and small cars had 60-85 HP. It was adequate, but certainly not surplus power. Top speeds typically fell short of 100 mph, but that was ok, since the speed limit was 55mph. Even the Corvette in 1975 had only 165 HP.

Fast forward to today, and most small cars have 130-200 hp, with only the smallest cars having under 120. The Chevy Cruze has 138 HP. The Mazda 3 has 167 (more than a '75 'Vette). My experience is that virtually anything built today will outrun virtually anything from 35 years ago. Today's cars will cruise the interstate effortlessly at 75-85 mph, while 35 years ago, most cars were pretty close to topped out at that speed.

I drive "older" cars (a '95 and an '01). The '01 will run circles around the '95, up to about 70mph, when the roles reverse. When I have a chance to drive newer cars, I am always struck by how much more acceleration they have than my cars do.

I suspect that that may not be linear when towing, particularly with an automatic transmission, however. New cars are geared for optimum cruising efficiency, while my '01 takes more of a "shoot up the middle" approach, keeping the engine revs higher, which keeps me more in my peak power curve. If you work the gears on your new car manually, and run the revs up into the power curve, a new car would have more power, at the expense of the gas mileage.

Bob,
Hp ratings 35 years ago were different than the method used today. I don't know what "new cars" you have driven lately, but I tried 19 different NEW cars in the past 10 months, and NONE of them would out run the 4 cyl cars I have owned in the past.
My point is the car manufactures are trying to gain MPG's by changing gear ratios which works ok on the open road if it's flat, but run that same car in the mountains and it's constantly shifting. All the gears are way too tall! This is why I feel small trucks still have the edge even though they can't touch the MPG's of the cars.
The bottom line for me anyway is if a car can't pull it's own weight easily, I surely don't want to tow with it even though it may be fine for tooling around.

It's just my personal opinion.....

Larry C

[Mojave Bob]

Larry, although it may sound like it, I don't disagree with your premise. The new HP ratings method is different, usually about 10% as a rule of thumb, or so I have been told. The new gearing is, indeed, the culprit. That is what I meant by "downshift". A new car has plenty of power, but you have to keep the revs up so high that it is painful. Additionally, the throttle-by-wire systems common today won't easily give you the full power. They make you work for it, beyond what is comfortable. It used to be that the further you pushed the pedal, the further the throttle opened. Now, the normal range of throttle movement only gives you partial throttle opening, and you have to flat-out floor it to get it to go.

As I mentioned, my '78 Plymouth Arrow 1.6L ran 3200 rpm at 55mph. To get my Honda Civic (1.5L, 58mpg+) to 3200 rpm, I would be running 98mph. To run 3200 rpm at 55mph, I would be between second and third gears. However, the Arrow was a spunky performer at any reasonable speed (that it was capable of), while the Civic is an absolute dog below 65mph in 5th gear, and doesn't get peppy until 75mph, unless I run the rpm way higher than the car is obviously "designed" to be. If I play the Civic hard, and keep the rpm up at 3500-6000, it will really fly, but it isn't happy about it.

The bottom line is that newer cars, in spite of technological advances, are becoming less and less suitable for towing, and that duty has been delegated to trucks and SUVs, as you asserted.

[mikeschn]

You had a 78 Plymouth Arrow. That reminds me of my 78 Dodge Colt Challenger. 1.6L, with a top speed of 78mph!

Mike...

[Pete S]

Huh? TDI diesels get 40 mpg and have 230 ft-lbs of torque. I have a subaru outback and it gets 34 mpg highway and 21 mpg when I'm towing my 6x10 trailer full of gear.

As best I can tell VW no longer recommends towing with it's cars. Now that diesel fuel is quite a bit more expensive than gas the savings aren't what you might expect on first blush. Besides, winter in Minnesota is very hard on turbos and diesels.

The Outback doesn't break 30 mpg at fueleconomy.gov even in 4 cylinder trim and without a trailer. As best I can tell the newer Outbacks now compare in size to the bigger CUVs, not exactly just a car anymore.

Without getting into the Crown Victoria - full sized cars all I've found that are rated to tow (2012) at all are the Malibu and the Camry. Both are only rated to 1000#. Malibu with a 6 cylinder: 25 hwy / Camry with a 6 cylinder: 29 Hwy. Even the Taurus is only rated to 1000#.

The next step up seems to be be the CUV class...

[Mojave Bob]

You had a 78 Plymouth Arrow. That reminds me of my 78 Dodge Colt Challenger. 1.6L, with a top speed of 78mph!

Mike...

Loved that car. The Challenger was quite a bit heavier than the Arrow, so I was capable of speeds well over 80mph. I actually hit 86 one time, dancing with the semis out on I-80.

[mikeschn]

The Outback doesn't break 30 mpg at fueleconomy.gov even in 4 cylinder trim and without a trailer. As best I can tell the newer Outbacks now compare in size to the bigger CUVs, not exactly just a car anymore.

We are getting 30mpg exactly in combined driving with our Forester. We didn't get that when it was new, but we are near 90k miles now, and the fuel economy just keeps getting better. Or maybe it's my driving.

Mike...

[Pete S]

The Outback doesn't break 30 mpg at fueleconomy.gov even in 4 cylinder trim and without a trailer. As best I can tell the newer Outbacks now compare in size to the bigger CUVs, not exactly just a car anymore.

We are getting 30mpg exactly in combined driving with our Forester. We didn't get that when it was new, but we are near 90k miles now, and the fuel economy just keeps getting better. Or maybe it's my driving.

Mike...

What year?

[mikeschn]

The Outback doesn't break 30 mpg at fueleconomy.gov even in 4 cylinder trim and without a trailer. As best I can tell the newer Outbacks now compare in size to the bigger CUVs, not exactly just a car anymore.

We are getting 30mpg exactly in combined driving with our Forester. We didn't get that when it was new, but we are near 90k miles now, and the fuel economy just keeps getting better. Or maybe it's my driving.

Mike...

What year?

2009, SOP was in 2008. We got ours in April 2008.



Mike...

[glenpinpat]

I have a 4 cyl suzuki grand vitara. It has 4wheel drive and when not in 4wheel it is an all wheel drive car. It is rated for towing up to 3000lbs. It has no problem towing our td and no problem getting up to speed on the highway. We get about 25mpg towing and about 28 when not towing. I would have got the 6 cyl which actually gets better fuel economy, had I known. The 4 wheel drive is so good that I just sold my chevy diesel 4x4 pickup as the suzuki does everything I need it to do.

[Larry C]

How many of you are living in states/Provence's that force you to buy gasoline with ethanol?

[Larry C]

I tell you guys what. my old 78 toyota with a 20R engine and a cabrator had way more power than any ford I have owned since.

my toyota had dirct 5 gear not over drive.

this tranny problem is a lot of the problems in the new cars.

they put a guttless overdrive into the tranny for high gear instead of a dirct power 5 gear.


SLow.

Slow, I agree, I had the same 1978 Toyota. Mine was 2WD and I used to tow a 2000 boat, and a 1500# pop-up with it and never gave it a thought.
I remember the time I drove the auto road on Whiteface MTN. in the Adirondaks of NY. The road is about 6 miles long and has an 8% continuous grade. I pulled this grade with the Toyota in 5th gear passing everything in sight, only downshifting for the switchbacks.
I could smell auto transmissions burning as I passed cars. This truck got 28-30 MPG.

Larry C

[whitefishpoint]

The Outback doesn't break 30 mpg at fueleconomy.gov even in 4 cylinder trim and without a trailer. As best I can tell the newer Outbacks now compare in size to the bigger CUVs, not exactly just a car anymore.

We are getting 30mpg exactly in combined driving with our Forester. We didn't get that when it was new, but we are near 90k miles now, and the fuel economy just keeps getting better. Or maybe it's my driving.

Mike...

What year?

Mine is a 2011 Subaru Outback. 21mpg towing. Its a 4 cylinder.

I bought it because it met the following criteria:
1) Good gas mileage
2) Comfortable for a tall persons.
3) Less than $25K.
4) Can tow a trailer.

I could not find any other car that had all 4 of the above.

I don't know what this car would get towing a teardrop but it would definately be better that 21 mpg. I used to tow with a 2006 VIBE and
here are my mpg:

VIBE:
31 mpg, no trailer
26 mpg with 4ft w x 4ft h teardrop ( height about 6 inches higher than the car.)
21 mpg with 5ft wide x 4ft h teardrop.
15 mpg with 6ft wide x 5ft h breadloaf (My current trailer that I get 21mpg with the Subaru).

I read that they are tweeking the 2012 engine to get even better gas mileage out of the Outback.