How (not) to transport a tractor

[joshuabardwell]

lol. the bumper on a v6 dodge Dakota (just the bumper with no hitch) is rated for 500 pounds. I don't know what truck you own but dodge and ford hd non-dually trucks can handle 2000 pounds on the hitch. that's just the rating and they can handle twice that amount. ****, I had an old buddy with a junker chevy s10 4 banger that hauled a long wheelbase single axle landscape trailer with more than 500 pounds on the tongue plus another couple hundred pounds in the bed. what 1/2 and 3/4 trucks are you buying????

2013 Ford F150 - Factory hitch rated for 500 lbs without a WD system.
http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/general/pdf/towingguides/13flrv&tt_f150.pdf



2013 Ford Super Duty pickups - Factory hitch rated for between 600 and 850 lbs depending on spec.
http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/general/pdf/towingguides/13flrv&tt_superdtypu.pdf



2009 was the last year the Dakota was made, so: rated for 500 lbs on the bumper and 1200 lbs on the receiver hitch.
Dodge Towing Guide - By Vehicle Results



That's pretty good, but what they don't tell you is that those numbers both assume a WD system, which I know because I own a Dodge Ram pickup, and I went through this rigamarole some time ago. The actual rating of the receiver hitch without a WD system is significantly less. On my 2005 Ram 2500, rated for 1200 lbs tongue weight with WD system, you can only have 350 lbs tongue weight without the WD system. Presumably the Dakota's rating is similarly reduced by the lack of a WD system. If you're skeptical, and want to take the 1200 lb rating as "without a WD system," ask yourself whether you think a 2009 Dakota had almost double the rated tongue weight of a 2013 Ford F-250/350/450. Probably not.

2013 GMC Sierra 1500: 600 lb tongue weight max without WD system, regardless of trim.
http://www.gmc.com/content/dam/GMC/...chure/01_Images/2013_GMC_Trailering_Guide.pdf



I looked, but I can't actually find any reference to what the max tongue weight is on the GMC HD trucks--although clearly they have one.

2013 Chevy Silverado 1500: Max tongue weight 1100 lbs, but it doesn't say whether this is with or without a WD system. My experience has been that when manufacturers don't mention a WD system in their tow/tongue weight ratings, it means that they're assuming that you are using one--presumably so that they can inflate their numbers.
http://www.chevrolet.com/content/da...w/02_pdfs/Trailering Guide MY13 eBrochure.pdf



For the Chevy Silverado 2500 HD, there is no mention of max tongue weight in the trailering guide, but the hitch is clearly rated for some maximum weight, and it'd be interesting to find out what that is.

These are just some examples that I pulled up. Should I keep going?

 

[joshuabardwell]

The bottom line, IMO of course, is that these 1/2 and 3/4 ton trucks with huge tow ratings are almost never actually equipped from the factory to fully realize the tow rating using a bumper-pull trailer without a WD system. Stick a WD system on the trailer and you're usually good. Or, of course, step up to a gooseneck or fifth-wheel, where tongue weight is irrelevant because you're riding right over the rear axle.

There are exceptions, however. A regular poster on TBN whose name escapes me reports that his Tundra's factory hitch is welded to the frame, and is rated for a full 1000 lbs tongue weight without a WD system.

 

[paulharvey]

Typical, some people think they need a 3500 dually to pull a 3000# trailer, some will pull 15,000# with a 1500. I would pull that trailer if I needed to, no its not ideal, but plan your stops, and stay off interstate. I like it tongue heavy, would be very nervous if tail heavy because I dont trust the actual ball hitch to stay on with heavy tail, but I know the truck can easily take 1000-2000# on a reese hitch.

 

[joshuabardwell]

Look, this isn't what "some people think" they need. It's the manufacturer's rating. You seem to be comfortable exceeding that; more power to you. And may your hitch always remain connected to your truck.

 

[yelbike]

Please tell me YOU took that picture!

Nope not me at all! I found this pictures somewhere on the web a long time ago. I downloaded it because I thought it was hilarious! I guess I'm a picture thief!!:dance1:

 

[DT86]

Nope not me at all! I found this pictures somewhere on the web a long time ago. I downloaded it because I thought it was hilarious! I guess I'm a picture thief!!:dance1:

Dang, I had hoped it was you! I would have wrecked taking pictures.

 

[Xfaxman]

I am guessing it was transported a lot, since the front of the trailer was modified for extra length and the front tires to fit on the tongue.

 

[yelbike]

Yup! That would have been one of those wet my pants type of moment!!

 

[k0ua]

View attachment 312779

At least the tractor is not the trailer!!

I have had those little MTD transaxles apart several times. They dont have bearings, they have bronze bushings, and they don't have 80/90 weight oil in them either, they have bentonite grease. I cannot even imagine trying to pull one of those at anywhere near highway speeds without the transaxle burning up. Not to mention the lunacy of what they are doing overall.

James K0UA

 

[dave1949]

I am guessing it was transported a lot, since the front of the trailer was modified for extra length and the front tires to fit on the tongue.

View attachment 312817

That's a good observation, maybe the trailer is used to haul those sized tractors for whatever reason. That particular tractor doesn't look like it's done much work in a while, but who knows?