Today's automatics also have more GEAR RATIOS. It's about engine peak efficiency, heat rejection (keeping the engine at a certain RPM) and much more. It gets, quite literally, into engineering. People here have their simplistic views of towing and payload and there's just to way to use logic or even complex formulas. It's as much about gear ratios as about anything else. Tire size for may tow was chosen along with the 4.10 ratio to keep the engine in the RPM ranges necessary. A stick with only 6 gear ratios simply cannot do that. I'd say it's almost nothing to do with shock load since they lock up the converter and are as direct drive as any stick when on the highway.
Agreed to a point, but maybe things would improve if more effort was spent on helping people understand and learn how to think instead of insulting their intelligence.
My only question is how to get one of those pints off the email is there a place to click on or what?And what do you know, we immediately have a good example of somebody that has a question about the tow rating of their vehicle and we have an online reference that provides the wrong answer. Shocker.
Earlier owner's manuals included tables which broke down the tow ratings based on the options that the vehicle came equipped with. Later owner's manuals do not have that info in them. In both cases we still have owners that are confused about what the correct tow rating is for their vehicle, for some reason or another. The problem is worse with the later manuals which do not contain the tow information and instead refer to a website, with predictable results.
At the very least Jeep should put the tow tables back in the owner's manual where they belong. No more trying to dig through webpages and try to discern which ones have reliable information and which don't. It'd be nicer still if they'd lead the way and do the courtesy of putting the "as equipped from the factory" tow rating and/or the combined gross weight rating on the door jamb sticker like they do for the payload figure.
Agreed to a point, but maybe things would improve if more effort was spent on helping people understand and learn how to think instead of insulting their intelligence.
I think you're giving way too much credit for some perfect engineering for max tow. If it were that critical the ratings would have to be ultra specific down to percent grade, speed, air temperature and even frontal area of the trailer. The 8 speed auto does a great job of keeping the engine in the proper rpm for the load. The dam test involved in certifying the tow rating is as near to worst case scenario as anyone towing will ever see. The max tow doesn't get a special frame, axles, or really anything that makes it tow better than any other JT aside from stiffer springs. The smaller tires help a little with heat rejection... towing up a steep grade in 100⁰ heat like the dam test. No rubicon or mojave is going to overheat towing 7700lbs across Iowa. The grade needed to tax the cooling system isn't there. If I need to tow heavy in the desert, I do it at night or early morning. Even if you had to tow up a grade in 100⁰ heat, slowing down by 10mph would do just as much for heat rejection. Anyone towing a large frontal area trailer is going to want to keep an eye on temps no matter what they are towing with it. The potential heat issue is the only thing I'd worry about towing up to 7700lbs with any JT, even the 3.73 equipped models. As these towing threads all prove, even Jeep isn't clear about what models are rated for what depending on when and where you look it up. Nobody's JT is going to fold in half or flip over or break an axle because they were towing 7k pounds with their sport. The clutch might explode, but they do that towing nothing too. I'm sure an engineer might have a formula for % of decrease in frontal area from the max listed, heat below 100⁰, speed, and grade % below the dam test and how much of a diffrence that makes in load, but any of us with experience know full well just how exponential those factors are without the formulas.
