Hauling with and towing a U-Haul

[MKohlman]

You may be making this harder than it needs to be. Drive over to your local U-haul place and they'll help you determine the hitch you need for whatever trailer you're going to haul. Alternatively, get an adjustable hitch (there are a variety available on Amazon).

@Broncosaurus I tend to agree with Mark as I have a habit of over-thinking things as well. ?

I saw the same U-Haul 18" statement on their web site and since I was doing some of my planning from a distance (Badlands was still in Illinois and I was in California) I got 2 hitch mounts from Amazon (the 4" drop which is what I ended up using, and a 2" drop, which I'll keep in my bag of tricks for the future). I found that the 4" ball mount with the Rockerball was closest to level for me with the 5x8 trailer. My suspicion is that U-Haul's web specs are (somewhat) generalizations. But because of the distance with coordinating this I admittedly sweated the details a bit more than I probably should have.


Stopping by U-Haul and asking if you can measure is good advice as well. In almost every case where I've used them, U-Haul dealers have been very accommodating.

Sponsored

 

[Whitenight]

I forgot to mention, this is the one I use:

You can insert into the receiver with the vertical up or down, and the adjustable part may also be flipped (although you would need a wrench to flip the ball as well). It's relatively inexpensive compared to some of the choices, mainly because you only have a single ball size. But it provides a tremendous amount of adjustability on the height. Despite the height difference between the two vehicles, I can use this hitch on either my Badlands or the wife's Escape.

Here's a link to the hitch on Amazon.

I have this exact same model that I also got off of Amazon and use it on both our Escape and Bronco Sport with out any issues. The only thing that I changed was I replaced the pins with Grade 8 bolts, washers and locknuts so that the trailer and receiver couldn't be easily stolen.

 

[RLader]

None of the cars in that test achieved significantly better efficiency with premium fuel, and one actually saw reduced efficiency.


No doubt there is a difference between fuel with and without ethanol, mainly because ethanol has fewer BTUs per gallon than gasoline. But there is no significant difference in BTUs between premium with ethanol and regular with ethanol. I find it much more likely any mileage difference you noted between the two was due to other factors (grade, wind, road contamination, etc.). These are very boxy cars, and you were towing a boxy trailer with a large gap between. In this driving situation a small change in wind speed/direction at highway speed can make a very big difference in fuel mileage. Same goes for grade. Pulling weight up a mountain takes a lot more energy than cruising on a flat.


Yes, by providing greater peak horsepower, not better efficiency. If it were possible to get better engine efficiency using premium fuel manufacturers would advertise it. So far, I have been unable to find any data-based article or study online showing better fuel efficiency with premium fuel. If anyone has a link I'd love to see one.

Why does the 2.0 in the Maverick say use 91 octane?

 

[DMEARC]

Why does the 2.0 in the Maverick say use 91 octane?

Does it say minimum of 91, or does it say 91 is recommended for best performance?

 

[DMEARC]

A while back I added a Curt receiver and trailer wiring to our Badlands as there had always been an intention to be able to do light towing with it. I posted about the wiring work back in October:

Trailer Wiring Install for Bronco Sport Using Factory Power Circuit (Part Two – Installation) | 2021+ Ford Bronco Sport Forum - Broncosportforum.com

The big motivation to get it all done before winter set in was that I accepted a new job in the Monterey CA area, which meant a 2,000+ mile move from the Midwest. After examining the options, the most cost-effective choice was to have our less-critical items shipped via container while the must-have stuff got hauled in our BS plus a U-Haul Trailer.

Based on the 2,200lb limit for the Badlands model, the largest trailer U-Haul will let you book is their 5x8 model, which has a 900lb empty weight and a 2,700lb GVW.

For the hitch mount I went with a Curt Class III mount with a 4”drop. For the 2” ball I decided to try the Curt 7,500lb Rockerball as I’d seen good reviews on its ability to reduce driveline shock when towing trailers with no trailer brakes. Since the Rockerball adds an inch to the overall hitch height, this worked out to an approximately 3” drop from the receiver height on the Badlands with the Curt unit. In addition, the ball mount was further secured with an anti-rattle clamp.

Amazon.com: CURT 45050 Class 3 Trailer Hitch Ball Mount, Fits 2-Inch Receiver, 7,500 lbs, 1-Inch Hole, 4-Inch Drop, 2-In Rise : Automotive

Amazon.com: CURT 40047 RockerBall Cushion Hitch Trailer Ball 7,500 lbs, 2-Inch Diameter, 1-Inch Shank : Automotive

That setup, once the trailer and BS were all loaded up, gave me an almost perfectly level pitch on the hitch. The Curt Rockerball was a pleasant surprise as it really does work as advertised, when combined with the anti-rattle clamp it reduced the jerking/shock through the driveline to an almost negligible level. I would highly recommend it.

My estimation is that there was probably about 1,000-1,200lbs loaded into the trailer (for an estimated GVW of 1,900-2,100lbs), with another 700-800lbs in the Badlands itself (wife, myself, English bulldog, misc. household items), so this was towards the high-end of what Ford would recommend for it.

If anyone was keeping tabs on the weather last week, we saw just about every road condition imaginable, from calm and flat (Missouri, Kansas, last part of California), to high-elevation, near blizzard conditions (I-70 trhough Glenwood Canyon and Loveland Pass), to 60+ mph winds (Colorado, Utah, Nevada) to rain (on and off throughout). FWIW our Badlands handled it all exceptionally well, with only a couple of brief nerve-racking moments during the descent on the west-side of the Continental Divide on I-70 when conditions were near-white out and there were a few inches of snow on the pavement. But even with a trailer hanging off the back in some really poor road conditions I never felt like the vehicle was over-extended. Indeed, with the GOAT mode set to slippery plus anti-sway and lane-keeping assist on, it was quite possibly the most poised vehicle I’ve driven while towing. In some ways it was almost too poised as I could see it encouraging someone to push it harder/faster than they probably should and getting bitten hard by physics if they weren’t careful.

Fuel mileage suffered big-time, which really should be no surprise, with a total trip average of 15.9 mpg, on generally 91 octane fuel. Similar to my Fiesta ST, the 2.0l EcoSport motor is very sensitive to the quality of gasoline, with best MPG and responsiveness using 91 octane with no added ethanol (which yielded something closer to 18mpg) to the one tank of 87 octane with 10% ethanol getting me only about 14 mpg. Being that thirsty though meant fuel stops around every 200 miles, so we saw a lot of travel plazas:

Final numbers:

2,165.6 Miles from Springfield IL to Marina CA.

38.09 Hours trip time (with overnight stays, etc.… about 4 days overall)

56.9 average MPH.

15.9 average MPG

Overall I’m delighted with the capability of our Badlands when it comes to towing and while I’m sure Ford had their reasons limiting it to just 2,200lbs, it is an incredibly competent and confidence-inspiring vehicle pretty much right up to that limit. Power from the 2.0l 4 was very good, ride and handling were excellent, and fuel mileage wasn’t horrible. Coming out of the experience I think the only thing I would have loved to have seen is a somewhat larger fuel tank as I could picture scenarios where pulling a camper into the back-woods with only a 200-225 mile tank range would make me want to make sure I was fully fueled before leaving civilization. Other than that, this thing can definitely tow.

Great write up. I don’t have a reason to tow very often but I’m glad the Bronco Sport handles it well. Also, these look awesome in red.

 

[Mark S.]

Why does the 2.0 in the Maverick say use 91 octane?

Here's a link to the relevant section in the Maverick Owner's Manual. Excerpt:

Your vehicle operates on regular unleaded gasoline with a minimum pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87.

Some fuel stations, particularly those in high altitude areas, offer fuels posted as regular unleaded gasoline with an octane rating below 87. The use of these fuels could result in engine damage that will not be covered by the vehicle Warranty.

For best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended. The performance gained by using premium fuel is most noticeable in hot weather as well as other conditions, for example when towing a trailer. See Towing a Trailer.

In other words, the car was designed to use regular gas. If you need increased performance, such as towing a load in the mountains, then use premium. But it's not a requirement. You can still use regular to tow in the mountains, you'll just get less power out of the engine while doing so. The next section is enlightening:

Do not be concerned if the engine sometimes knocks lightly. However, if the engine knocks heavily while using fuel with the recommended octane rating, contact an authorized dealer to prevent any engine damage.

This highlights my point about how the engine management software works. The engine MUST knock on occasion for the powertrain control module (PCM) to get the most performance out of whatever gas you're using. When the driver demands more power by stepping on the accelerator pedal the PCM listens to the knock sensor installed on the engine while changing fuel injection and timing to increase power output. The PCM continues modifying the parameters--mainly advancing timing--to increase power until it hears knocking (detonation). At that point, the PCM retards timing to just below that setting that induced knocking. In this fashion the engine is safely producing the most power possible from the octane in use. But the key point is the engine MUST knock for this to occur. Those who say ANY knocking is bad don't really understand how the PCM works. PROLONGED knocking is bad--it indicates you may have fuel with an octane below 87 in the tank, or perhaps a malfunction with the PCM or one of the many sensors it uses to control the engine. But slight occasional knocking is entirely normal.

 

[Whitenight]

Does it say minimum of 91, or does it say 91 is recommended for best performance?

Manual says for towing purposes to use Premium.

 

[DMEARC]

Manual says for towing purposes to use Premium.

That makes sense. Extra work for the engine requires extra protection from knocking.

 

[Mark S.]

Manual says for towing purposes to use Premium.

Not exactly. Here's the relevant quote (it's the same as the Maverick owner's manual):

For best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended. The performance gained by using premium fuel is most noticeable in hot weather as well as other conditions, for example when towing a trailer.

So the manual doesn't recommend premium for towing, per se. It recommends premium if you want to get the best engine performance, and that you will most notice the performance gained in situations where more power is beneficial, such as when towing a trailer.

Note that there's nothing there about avoiding engine knock. You can't avoid engine knock. Premium allows the PCM to advance timing further before you get knock, and that allows the engine to produce more power.

 

[SLJ]

Nice write up. Thank you. Towed my 2,000 Lb. camper all last Summer with no problems. Averaged 17 MPG using 91 and in Sport mode with my 1.5. Would not tow it in Normal. Shift points in normal seem to suck for towing. Weak point on the Sports with either engine is the transmission, not the engines. I have gauges installed to monitor the engine and tranny temps, HP used, and voltage - the Sport charges my camper battery also. Only place I wouldn't use it for towing is the Rockies. Anywhere here in the East shouldn't be a problem.

 

[MySoupIsTooHot]

Nice write up. Thank you. Towed my 2,000 Lb. camper all last Summer with no problems. Averaged 17 MPG using 91 and in Sport mode with my 1.5. Would not tow it in Normal. Shift points in normal seem to suck for towing. Weak point on the Sports with either engine is the transmission, not the engines. I have gauges installed to monitor the engine and tranny temps, HP used, and voltage - the Sport charges my camper battery also. Only place I wouldn't use it for towing is the Rockies. Anywhere here in the East shouldn't be a problem.

you towed a 2,000lb camper with the 1.5 OB, which has a max capacity of 2,000lbs? Assuming you had a passenger, plus the added load of supplies/luggage, i would guess that put your total weight at 2,400-ish lbs. Was there no noticeable handling/braking issues despite likely exceeding the maximum recommended tow capacity?

 

[Mark S.]

you towed a 2,000lb camper with the 1.5 OB, which has a max capacity of 2,000lbs? Assuming you had a passenger, plus the added load of supplies/luggage, i would guess that put your total weight at 2,400-ish lbs. Was there no noticeable handling/braking issues despite likely exceeding the maximum recommended tow capacity?

I think you may be mixing limitations. The 2000 lb limit is for the trailer only. The OB has a GCWR (gross COMBINED weight rating) of 5860 lbs. The GCWR includes the car, everything in the car, and the weight of whatever you're towing.

The OB has a curb weight of roughly 3500 lbs, leaving a bit over 2300 lbs for a trailer and whatever you carry in the car. So yes, you can exceed the GCWR if you're not careful, but that's different from the towing capacity of 2000 lbs.

 

[PapaHotel]

Get the 2 inch lift. Then you can mount the ball either higher or lower depending on the trailer you rent. Two hitches for the price of one.....

 

[GCross762]

In regards to the fuel economy heres my results using Mobile fuel at the same gas station.
I went 3 tanks on 86 Octane and fuel economy calculated at the pump not lieometer was 30.2. Then switched to 92 Octane for three expensive tanks of fuel and got 29.7. Unknown of level of Ethanol. I drive 175 per day to work and back. But when i went through the Pennsylvania Mountains my economy was showing an average of 18.7. Halfway through the mountains i kicked over to premium and economy went up to just over 23. Those numbers were by the lieometer. Premium fuel is higher octane for the higher compression yes thats true. What I did notice is when on premium its more responsive and peppy.

 

[Mark S.]

I went 3 tanks on 86 Octane and fuel economy calculated at the pump not lieometer was 30.2. Then switched to 92 Octane for three expensive tanks of fuel and got 29.7. Unknown of level of Ethanol. I drive 175 per day to work and back. But when i went through the Pennsylvania Mountains my economy was showing an average of 18.7. Halfway through the mountains i kicked over to premium and economy went up to just over 23. Those numbers were by the lieometer. Premium fuel is higher octane for the higher compression yes thats true. What I did notice is when on premium its more responsive and peppy.

I believe you meant 87 octane. 87 octane is the minimum recommended, and you should never use lower octane fuel. At many higher elevation locations 85 octane is "regular," with 87 or 89 the mid-grade. Don't use 85 octane--stick with 87 octane or higher.

I agree with you that the lie-o-meter should not be trusted to deliver accurate mileage stats. The change in indication from roughly 19 mpg to 23 mpg is a perfect example.

I'm going to make an assumption here (please tell me if I'm wrong): The weather was generally warmer for the three tanks of regular vs the three tanks of premium. In my experience with EcoBoost engines cold weather has a far greater impact on fuel economy that fuel octane. If the weather was significantly colder for the three tankfuls of premium that could explain the reduction in fuel economy.

It's not surprising you felt a difference in performance with premium. Being more performance oriented, members of the EcoBoost Mustang community did a lot of dyno testing, and most estimates place the difference in engine power output between regular vs premium gas at 10%-15%. The 2.3L EcoBoost was rated at 310 hp on premium, but dyno testing showed that number was closer to 270 hp on regular. The 1.5L in the Bronco Sport makes 181 hp on premium fuel. A 15% reduction would dial power back to around 150 hp. That would make a significant difference in seat-of-the-pants feel in the mountains!

Sponsored