Thread: Towing with D4

Hundreds (and hundreds, and hundreds) of posts on here discussing towing - have a search.

There is no way the D4 (or anything short of a Tardis!) can know how to "level" the van - that's up to the owner. Simple answer would be that they used the wrong size drop - the car level's itself, but you have to use the right tongue insert to level the van.

Cheers,

Gordon

G'day

I have a D3 and tow a Kedron van with it. The Kedron has more ground clearance than just about any van on the road and as a consequence of this, the tow hitch is very high. I had to get a swept-up tow tongue which was specially made to gain me another 75mm in height. It cost a fortune as it had to be rated and stamped for 3.5 tonne. In addition to that I had to get a raised tow ball which gained me another 50mm.

Even with the extra 125 mm of height, my van still rides nose-down. I'm not overly worried about it because the van has load sharing suspension. I strongly suspect that the Coromal van that you saw on the show would also have a load sharing suspension, which would make the nose-down attitude a moot point.

Our van tows straight and true and has never given us any grief over the three years that we've had it.

I agree that the "plow" is a design stuff up on Land Rover's behalf but there are ways around it, as we have found. Another alternative is to get the Mitchell Brothers' hitch which places the hitch receiver in the centre of the rear bumper. The biggest drawback with these hitches is that you cannot lower the rear tailgate fully down without it resting on the hitch. Ours has about 6mm of clearance with our present setup.

Cheers

Russ

From memory I don't believe Coromals have load sharing suspenion.

If you are towing and have a high connection height as I do then use a Mitch Hitch and that will give you all the height you would need providing your ball height is legal. I use a D2 tongue to get me the correct level for our van.

Unfortunately many vans are made and sold with illegal ball heights and are a insurance claim just waiting to be rejected if and when an accident happens.

cheers,
Terry

Or get a rapid hitch to allow for adjustable heights

Www.rapidhitch.com

I just got mine works great, would attach a pick but iPad won't let me.

It is not the first time I have seen a van hitched up incorrectly on that show. I suspect they don't tow them very far anyway. I use a Mitch hitch and a rapid hitch to get things level. And there is now way a Coromal van could cause the rear to drop on a D4.

"Quote " The biggest drawback with these hitches is that you cannot lower the rear tailgate fully down without it resting on the hitch. Ours has about 6mm of clearance with our present setup. "

If the ball height is the same there is no difference in this by changing the hitch ?

"Quote " If you are towing and have a high connection height as I do then use a Mitch Hitch and that will give you all the height you would need providing your ball height is legal. I use a D2 tongue to get me the correct level for our van.

Unfortunately many vans are made and sold with illegal ball heights and are a insurance claim just waiting to be rejected if and when an accident happens."

My understanding is that a "ball height" specification is exactly that ! If you have any other form of attachment including a Mchitch, Tregg or any others that do not use a "ball" then this specified height does not apply ?

Will stand corrected if anyone has other information - better than a friend of a friend said.

DD

Hi guys

I have read all sorts on the forum regarding hitch heights and that a 50mm ball must be no higher than 460mm otherwise it is illegal.

I have just ordered our new Supreme Territory slide out and the ball height is 530mm to the centre.

I have read that if you have an adjustable height hitch on the Tug that allows the height to be adjusted to below the 460mm then it is legal? Can anyone advise if this is the case as I cannot find anything in the ADR documents.

This is an extract from ADR 62/02
16.4.1: 50mm Ball Couplings
Ball couplings on towbars are required to be installed so that the height of the centre of the body of the ball coupling is between 350mm and 420mm from the ground when laden (Refer to ADR 62/01). Alternatively, if complying with the requirements of ADR 62/02 the maximum height of the centre of the body of the ball coupling may be increased to 460mm. However, the ball may be installed at any other height, provided it is also capable of being adjusted to at least one height within the 350-460mm range.

This is where the rapid hitch comes in.

Cheers

I've been following this thread with interest. Can someone with an engineering background enlighten me as to why there needs to be a mandated maximum ball height? For instance, why could the Regulation not be simplified to something like "The top of the towball may not be higher than the top of the bumper bar of the vehicle."

This is one instance where I happily choose to ignore the regulations as I simply don't understand what difference ball height makes and I want my van to be able to sit as level as possible.

In a previous post someone stated that having an incorrect ball height is an insurance claim knockback waiting to happen. I have had many dealings with insurers over the years and one thing that is not clearly understood by insurance customers is that an insurance company cannot reject a claim arbitrarily. The reason for rejection of a claim for an incident MUST be shown to be directly attributable to the incident before a claim can be rejected. As an example, if you blew a tyre in a van and the van rolled over, then the insurer cannot reject the claim based on the fact that the ball height was not kosher. They might try... but if push comes to shove, they are stuffed. Too many people give in without so much as a whimper.

One argument that Insurers often state is that something such as a "incorrect towball height" alters their risk as an insurer and that the customer has an obligation to notify them of such anomalies. This is also poppycock. again, the cause of the incident MUST be directly attributable to the reason for rejection of a claim. An actual example I have had is where we changed the registration of a vehicle and put personalised number plates on it. We overlooked notifying the insurer and later, after smacking a pair of kangaroos and stoving the front of the car in, we made a claim which was rejected on the basis of the incorrect registration details of the vehicle. That piffle only took one phone call to the Ministry for Fair Trading to sort out.

Cheers

Russ