🔧 BUILD Emerson Builds an Army Utility Trailer into Camping Overland Off Grid Luxury Suite

General Information

1688756916592.png


:jg: Well actually it didn't just appear there... I had to drive all day and get it:

HOCXBl0.jpg


I guess Yaj Yak and I were having the same sort of idea at the same time and he beat me to the punch and we both took different routes...:werd: Thanks to ilikemtb999 for the knowledge assist.:fy:

It is an M116A3 with an A101A2 bed on it for those that know their lingo.

kmDUQGw.jpg


4d1m1Qj.jpg

EmersonHart13

TCG Elite Member
TCG Premium
Jul 18, 2007
54,211
22,334

EmersonHart13

TCG Elite Member
TCG Premium
Jul 18, 2007
54,211
22,334
it's going to be interesting to see what your montero/this trailer gets highway mpg's... and other place mpgs.

what you think it will get or hope for?

It was miserable on the way home. I was actually a little down on the project. But there is a big caveat here. I have a pretty good exhaust leak at/near the manifold I have just been too damn busy to get to. I thought it was just a noise thing but have come to find out it is hampering my performance which in turn is not so good on the mpgs.

I think I got like 12.75 mpgs running 65. The truck was working to keep 65 up any grades. But as mentioned that number is off because I have neglected to fix a known issue. I have the best combination MS as it has the 3.5 (over the 3.0 in the base trucks) and a 4.9 rear gear. I did go from a 30" to a 32" tire though.

This is why I won't go over 2500 lbs though. I know full well this isn't a towing machine.
 

Yaj Yak

Gladys
TCG Premium
May 24, 2007
122,168
87,686
Niche score of 2,363
It was miserable on the way home. I was actually a little down on the project. But there is a big caveat here. I have a pretty good exhaust leak at/near the manifold I have just been too damn busy to get to. I thought it was just a noise thing but have come to find out it is hampering my performance which in turn is not so good on the mpgs.

I think I got like 12.75 mpgs running 65. The truck was working to keep 65 up any grades. But as mentioned that number is off because I have neglected to fix a known issue. I have the best combination MS as it has the 3.5 (over the 3.0 in the base trucks) and a 4.9 rear gear. I did go from a 30" to a 32" tire though.

This is why I won't go over 2500 lbs though. I know full well this isn't a towing machine.

i guess my curiosity lied in if im making an okay choice doing fullsize gas one ton... granted my truck will do a lot of other stuff, and hopefully down the road i "need" it's towing capacity...

but im thinking loaded up w/rtt ill get 12-13mpg or so highway... maybe 14 but who knows. right now i can get 14 without trying too hard, but i do plan on going taller tire, so maybe that will help with highway mileage.
 

EmersonHart13

TCG Elite Member
TCG Premium
Jul 18, 2007
54,211
22,334
i guess my curiosity lied in if im making an okay choice doing fullsize gas one ton... granted my truck will do a lot of other stuff, and hopefully down the road i "need" it's towing capacity...

but im thinking loaded up w/rtt ill get 12-13mpg or so highway... maybe 14 but who knows. right now i can get 14 without trying too hard, but i do plan on going taller tire, so maybe that will help with highway mileage.

I am assuming you are doing a rack or topper as I don't think I have found you made a decision yet...

So if your RTT is up in the wind that will hurt you. I like those racks where they ride just below the roof line.

That is why my rack is going to collapse. I can get full lurch height in camp and get it below the roofline of the MS
 

EmersonHart13

TCG Elite Member
TCG Premium
Jul 18, 2007
54,211
22,334
did you change your speedometer after you put on taller tires...

UM, MS is old school. There is a gear in the dash that operates that.

Would require custom gear, lol.

55/70-16 265/75-16 Difference
Diameter inches (mm) 30.06 (763.4) 31.65 (803.9) 1.59 (40.5) 5.3%

https://www.tacomaworld.com/tirecalc?tires=255-70r16-265-75r16

Speedo Reading Actual Speed
20 mph (32.19 km/h) 21.06 mph (33.89 km/h)
25 mph (40.23 km/h) 26.33 mph (42.37 km/h)
30 mph (48.28 km/h) 31.59 mph (50.84 km/h)
35 mph (56.33 km/h) 36.86 mph (59.32 km/h)
40 mph (64.37 km/h) 42.12 mph (67.79 km/h)
45 mph (72.42 km/h) 47.39 mph (76.26 km/h)
50 mph (80.47 km/h) 52.65 mph (84.74 km/h)
55 mph (88.51 km/h) 57.92 mph (93.21 km/h)
60 mph (96.56 km/h) 63.18 mph (101.68 km/h)
65 mph (104.61 km/h) 68.45 mph (110.16 km/h)

So yeah at 65 I was doing almost 69
 

Yaj Yak

Gladys
TCG Premium
May 24, 2007
122,168
87,686
Niche score of 2,363
I am assuming you are doing a rack or topper as I don't think I have found you made a decision yet...

So if your RTT is up in the wind that will hurt you. I like those racks where they ride just below the roof line.

That is why my rack is going to collapse. I can get full lurch height in camp and get it below the roofline of the MS

im like 70% wanting to do a cap, i've got a pretty sweet leer commercial one priced out currently, that would be super awesome for day-to-day as well.

i like the racks like that too, but want dry, lockable, weather proof storage for the bed.

30% sure i might do something like this, instead of the cap, would defintiely be a cheaper option.

holds 1250 lbs, bed is still locakable, rack is adjustable to the front of the cab when not in use/tall loads... etc.

TracRac G2 Truck Racks

g2-8.jpg


tracrac_full_spread_with_retrax_one.jpg



https://www.tonneaufactoryoutlet.co...L2IKJ4WCQQiQOccu-FT3iHou3Yxedwihy6BoClx7w_wcB


im not even sure wind resistance will matter for how stupid big this is of a truck. i think it might be like your old burban, where it just gets what it gets always no matter what :rofl:
 

Yaj Yak

Gladys
TCG Premium
May 24, 2007
122,168
87,686
Niche score of 2,363
UM, MS is old school. There is a gear in the dash that operates that.

Would require custom gear, lol.

55/70-16 265/75-16 Difference
Diameter inches (mm) 30.06 (763.4) 31.65 (803.9) 1.59 (40.5) 5.3%

https://www.tacomaworld.com/tirecalc?tires=255-70r16-265-75r16

Speedo Reading Actual Speed
20 mph (32.19 km/h) 21.06 mph (33.89 km/h)
25 mph (40.23 km/h) 26.33 mph (42.37 km/h)
30 mph (48.28 km/h) 31.59 mph (50.84 km/h)
35 mph (56.33 km/h) 36.86 mph (59.32 km/h)
40 mph (64.37 km/h) 42.12 mph (67.79 km/h)
45 mph (72.42 km/h) 47.39 mph (76.26 km/h)
50 mph (80.47 km/h) 52.65 mph (84.74 km/h)
55 mph (88.51 km/h) 57.92 mph (93.21 km/h)
60 mph (96.56 km/h) 63.18 mph (101.68 km/h)
65 mph (104.61 km/h) 68.45 mph (110.16 km/h)

So yeah at 65 I was doing almost 69

so 5% tire size difference = your new taller tires, are actually not that mileage i'd bet... because if your odometer says you went 1000 miles, you actually went 1,050.

for round numbers, you used 66.66 gallons for the 1000 miles, which would (without odometer/speedometer changes) be 15 mpg, or with your speedo reading correctly you got 15.75 mpg. nothing huge, but the 1-2 you believe you lost going with taller tires, you might have only lost 1 mpg at most.
 

EmersonHart13

TCG Elite Member
TCG Premium
Jul 18, 2007
54,211
22,334
so 5% tire size difference = your new taller tires, are actually not that mileage i'd bet... because if your odometer says you went 1000 miles, you actually went 1,050.

for round numbers, you used 66.66 gallons for the 1000 miles, which would (without odometer/speedometer changes) be 15 mpg, or with your speedo reading correctly you got 15.75 mpg. nothing huge, but the 1-2 you believe you lost going with taller tires, you might have only lost 1 mpg at most.

I figured that was the case and was going to figure it out eventually. I was going bigger tires either way so mpgs are a huge concern. I was more miffed by how the vehicle felt pulling 1600 lbs. Considering it was rated for 5k there should have been plenty of power and mpgs shouldn't be that low.

Time to dig into that spreadsheet and see if the smitty has any real contenders.
 

Thread Info