- Thread starter
- #16
Ya its roughly 6.5 tall. 8 wide. Did it specify though the shape? Like is that a flat faced trailer?
Sponsored
Sponsored
I think it's less a "good on Ford" and more a "required by law" thing, but it was an interesting read.
- First Name
- Jim
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2022
- Threads
- 5
- Messages
- 1,546
- Reaction score
- 2,029
- Location
- Cedar Park, TX
- Vehicle(s)
- '22 Area 51 Hybrid FE, 2014 Impala
- Engine
- 2.5L Hybrid
It's linked, so you can check out the specifics yourself, but I didn't see anything about shape - it just said "frontal area"... I would assume that in aero engineering terms, that would mean "flat plate equivalent area"... A tapered front would reduce it, but fenders increases it, as do the "square edges" where the sides meet the top and bottom. Aero is complex!
- First Name
- Shane
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2022
- Threads
- 1
- Messages
- 436
- Reaction score
- 641
- Location
- Caldwell, ID
- Vehicle(s)
- Ram 1500 ordered '23 XLT, Eco, AWD, FX4
- Engine
- 2.0L EcoBoost
Same thing I've been thinking when these towing threads pop up. My Dodge gets 13-14 anytime I tow a normal load, and it's lucky to hit 15-16 without towing on a good day. If I tow way more than I should be, it drops to about 11 mpg or so. Having a little rig that gets the same towing MPG as my full size but double the mpg most other times is a win-win.
My old Chevy on the other hand, gets about 8-10 normal driving and drops to 4 mpg when I tow anything.
Sponsored
- First Name
- Dave
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2022
- Threads
- 2
- Messages
- 212
- Reaction score
- 265
- Location
- Carthage IN
- Vehicle(s)
- Ford F-350 CCSB 6.7
- Engine
- 2.5L Hybrid
Frontal area is a significant attribute of a trailer. Itās more than a CYA thing from ford. While in motion the aero drag of a trailer is more significant than its weight. So not only is the larger frontal trailer area putting additional load on the drivetrain that it isnāt designed for, a trailer with a large frontal area also has a larger profile from the side. The larger side profile creates other issues in crosswinds and turbulence around big trucks on the highway that the small footprint of the Maverick might be overcome by.
I might be willing to push the frontal area on small lower speed trips, but driver beware on the highways. You literally could be blown off the road.
I might be willing to push the frontal area on small lower speed trips, but driver beware on the highways. You literally could be blown off the road.
for those who are newer to the Forum, we had extensive discussions on this about 1 year ago. The whole Frontal Area calculation thing seems like Fuzzy Math to me
and doesn't take into account any aerodynamic shaping of the trailer. Looking at OP's picture, he has a V-Nose trailer there. Also the Ford promotional material shows a Red Maverick towing a smaller (under 20' I'd guess) Travel Trailer with rounded front end- so clearly Ford took this into account when designing and testing the 4K package in real life situations.
you may, or may not be aware of this, but all Mavericks come equipped with Sway Control standard. I couldn't find anything advertised on this like they do on my F-150, but I attended a Maverick training event last year at my local dealership and brought this up and was told it is standard, but unadvertised.Hi all. Did the maiden tow on our work trailer. for reference, we use this trailer frequently to haul job boxes, welders, etc. 99% of the time we pull it with a F-250. Previously Iāve pulled it A few dozen times with a mid 2000s F-150. i have also used it once with a caravan (this was not an enjoyable experience) So those are the comparative reference points iāll be using.
Quick overview:
trip was about 50 miles. 20 miles highway (empty trailer). 30 city (with just a welder and some scrap placed over the axlesā¦ soā¦ lets say 2000-2500lbs total trailer weight).
Feel/towing confidence:
Super impressed with how the little thing handled the weight. Accelleration was suprisingly more than sufficient. visibility was fine. Would extended mirrors be helpful, sure, especially for backing up. But for occassional towing, stock was fine. Hitch height is also placed in a good spot for trailers this size. A small detractor, I hit a cross wind on an overpass with the trailer empty. This unsettled the truck a bit. Nothing unsafe. Just some jitters as the unibody tries to compensate for the sway.
drive modes:
Tow/haul feels really good. Shift points are where you want them. If youāre being light on the throttle for accelleration it kinda keeps you right around where your boost would start to kick in, so it attempts to keep your fuel econ in check, but gives you quick access to the power if needed. It fails in the prior lol but gracefully. I appreciated the attempt. The downshifting when coasting down a hill is very nice. Pretty perfectly set up for the rolling hills of the area i commute around.
Fuel econ:
as expected, it sucks. For reference i average 30mpg in normal driving. empty trailer on highway i got 17mpg. Loaded through city it fell to 13-14. It could be worse. But dont expect to save fuel by hauling a trailer with this thing instead of a full size truck lol
braking:
trailer brake controller works well. Ford didnāt try and re-invent the wheel. Its a familiar controller if you work with their āreal truckā sector of ford. Gain adjustable by the 0.5. standard is 5. I kept it at 6. I wanted a bit less strain on my mav brakes. Braking was confident, even when i misjudged a couple stop lights on the city portion. Despite being basically all city type driving for over an hour of driving there was no softening of brake feel. It felt the way it should. you feel the weight, but it doesnāt feel like its going to push you through the intersection.
overall thoughts:
ford gets a lot of hate in this forumā¦ which is somewhat ironic, but anywho, one thing they do well, and the main reason i went with this instead of the santa cruz (aside from price and styling) is that ford knows how to set up a truck for towing. This has proven true even when its an Escape, Elcamino alien child. I was especially impressed by the lack of rear suspension sag. the size of trailer isnāt something i would suggest exceeding for any trip with overpasses, or windy fields. There just isnt enough substance to the back end to keep it grounded the way youād want to haul anything bigger for long stretches with confidence. But overall, I Couldnāt be happier with this little baby truck. It can do so many big truck thingsā¦ as long as you remember what it is at its core and dont expect too much from it too often.
I was also wondering about the published frontal area limitation. My Maverick is XL AWD with 2.0L I4 and 4K towing package. I was hoping to tow a teardrop trailer, something like the Nucamp T@B 400 or a Safari Condo Alto F2114 (but my dreams may be dashed by inflation and supply issues). The Nucamp is 2840 dry weight, 18'3" L X 7'6" L X 8'8" H, tongue wt dry 318 lbs; GVWRis 3900 lbs; Alto is 2353 lbs dry wt, 21' L X 7.2' W X 8.2' H; for tongue wt they give a range to target of min/max between 350 and 525 lbs; GVWR is 3500 lbs. Both the trailers exceed the frontal area limitation of 40 sq ft listed by Ford. Is the main concern here the gas mileage?
- Thread starter
- #25
You can feel the resistance fighting you and i assume theyve got some smart person calculations that estimate how much side force youād end up with with standard trailer set ups in a cross wind. Anyways, if youāre under the weight, and you arenāt in a windstorm, youāll be fine as long as youāre careful.
Thank you, Pickles. On the guidelines, they give the frontal area as a "limitation/consideration." It seems more like a consideration, like you described as consideration of resistance and cross-wind factors, rather than a strict limitation like the towing capacity is.
Sponsored
