The Truck will suit my needs wonderfully. I have other ways to go off-road, haul heavier loads, and go places that require more range.
No. I see where you think thats how all this works, but that's not how any of it works. With enough math and an actual vehicle to use you can get all this info for yourself for any vehicle setup.
Requirements change.
When I got a big load of stuff a while back I had Lowes deliver it ....via 18 wheeler and a fork lift. No way am I buying anything to do that kind of work! IIRC, delivery was free since I'm close enough or the total was high enough.
That's a link to how HITCH ratings work, which is just as I stated. The only point of confusion might have been the class vs hitch rating. Yes the individual hitch rating can be lower than the class rating, like the common 350/3.5k on Class III hitches. I don't think I've ever seen that done on a Class I hitch though. They all seem to be 200/2k, but I'll concede that doesn't mean it's always the case.
And here's the more relevant Curt link:Curt's actual stance on towing capacity said:
This is their liability CYA for people that think hitch rating = vehicle rating. If there is no manufacturer rated towing capacity for a vehicle, Curt hitches are only rated to be used for attachments based on the tongue weight rating.Curt's actual stance on towing capacity said:
Even for people that are willing and able to not only set up a standard trailer, but perform and fully document all of that testing, including making the drive to Davis Dam... Good luck getting the structural test data for section 4.2.
Foreign towing regulations and standards are based on the usage and limitations in their country, which can be very different than ours. Conflating them is a mistake, and using them as a point of comparison for US towing is little more than mental gymnastics to justify poor practices.
That's not how any auto insurance I've known from multiple of those companies works. Yes they insure the car, and yes they insure the trailer. That doesn't mean they are specifically authorizing that car as able to safely tow that trailer, nor to cover that combination if outside of manufacturer ratings.
Toyota made a big show with it's previous gen Tundra demonstrating that it CAN tow 30x it's manufacturer rated (300k vs 10k) towing capacity... Which also provides zero useful information or context for meaningful towing discussions. What something "can" tow is an irrelevant and invalid point of comparison to what something else is rated to tow. It's like using that a supercar can go 200mph, and is allowed in another country under their specific conditions, as justification for doing so anywhere else. Good luck making that argument to authorities and insurance if caught or anything goes wrong.Just because Honda didn't want to pay the DOT testing people to tow-test to certify a car that they A) never designed a tow setup for, because they B) never intended to offer a tow package for it, doesn't mean it CAN'T... it only says:
....and after 25 years I dont think a warranty matters any more. Also note that no where does it say it can't, only that it "wasn't designed to" and that it "can void your warranty"....meaning it may be able to and that it may not void the warranty. Technically it would be on Honda to prove that any modifications caused any issues; not on you to prove they didn't.
This is where I was talking about comparing a Slate's 1k tow rating to a civic's non-rating. Most likely, if you really want to, you could tow 2k with a Slate as easily as you towed 1k with a civic. I'm not recommending it, just saying people will probably do it. Somewhere there was a complaint that a Slate could only tow what a civic did, but that's comparing a "rating" to a "did it despite not being rated"
If you put a hitch on a civic with no tow rating and it breaks off and your trailer causes accidents, I suspect that your trailer insurance will get denied.That's a link to how HITCH ratings work, which is just as I stated. The only point of confusion might have been the class vs hitch rating. Yes the individual hitch rating can be lower than the class rating, like the common 350/3.5k on Class III hitches. I don't think I've ever seen that done on a Class I hitch though. They all seem to be 200/2k, but I'll concede that doesn't mean it's always the case.
Here's the relevant part of your link:
And here's the more relevant Curt link:
Curt - What's my towing capacity?
This is their liability CYA for people that don't understand, nor take the time to learn, the difference between hitch ratings vs vehicle ratings. If there is no manufacturer rated towing capacity for a vehicle, Curt hitches are only rated to be used for attachments based on the tongue weight rating.
Even for people that are willing and able to not only set up a standard trailer, but perform and fully document all of that testing, including making the drive to Davis Dam... Good luck getting the structural test data for section 4.2.
Their regulation standards are based on the usage limitations in their country, which can be very different than ours. Conflating them is a mistake, and using them as a point of comparison for US towing is little more than mental gymnastics to justify poor practices.
That's not how any auto insurance I've known from those companies works. Yes, they insured your car and they insured your trailer. That doesn't mean they are specifically authorizing that car as able to safely tow that trailer, nor to cover that outside manufacturer rating combination.
I own a 5000+ lb travel trailer and a Subaru Forester in addition to my F150. There is nothing in the insurance specifically linking my F150 to the trailer as it's official tow vehicle, but that doesn't mean I'd be covered if I hitched it up to the Forester.
I've also never heard of 'tow' insurance for approving and insuring specific towing activities, which is covered under normal policies attached to the vehicle and/or trailer. The only personal towing insurance I know of is for covering the cost of assistance from a tow truck in the event of a breakdown away from home... In other words, it's their name for roadside assistance.
Toyota made a big show with it's previous gen Tundra demonstrating that it CAN tow 30x it's manufacturer rated (300k vs 10k) towing capacity... Which also provides zero useful information or context for meaningful towing discussions. What something "can" tow is an irrelevant and invalid point of comparison to what something else is rated to tow. It's like using that a supercar can go 200mph, and is allowed to on public roads in another country, as justification for doing so on public roads here. Good luck making that argument to authorities and insurance if caught or anything goes wrong.
No, the modification of simply adding the hitch itself cannot be used to deny warranty claims. If it was used for towing though, which the 4-pin wired in would be a dead giveaway, the statement "Your vehicle is not designed to tow a trailer" should meet the low bar of 'proof' used to deny warranty coverage on all sorts of engine, transmission, driveline, suspension, brake, electrical and even chassis issues. If they choose not to anyway, it's purely out of generosity. Even on a 25 year old car that statement also can just as easily used by insurance, civil lawyers, and even criminal lawyers to make the driver personally and financially liable when towing for all sorts of bad things that might happen on the road.
Everybody has their own risk tolerance, so you do you, but using towing with a non-rated car as some kind of argument about them being able to tow as much as Slate is nothing but an illogical rationalization. The only relevant towing comparison between the two is that Slate quite simply enjoys an (infinitely higher) 1,000 lb legal advantage in the towing department.
Slate is RWD and while the Slate Board became its own thing it was initially designed to be more Body on Frame like then Unibody. That gives it more of a respect than as a Truck than the Maverick for example. Right now they are trying to make it the most affordable possible which has resulted in more CUV capabilities. But I won’t doubt it if each refresh/generation has more and more truck capabilities as it becomes for feasible to do so economically.It seems like a lot of people are expecting the Slate to be more truck-like than it will actually be.
The Slate is car with a pickup bed. There's a name those: "Coupe Utility Vehicle" or CUV.
A coupé utility is a vehicle with a passenger compartment at the front and an integrated cargo at the rear, with the front of the cargo bed doubling as the rear of the passenger compartment. -- source
Other CUV examples would be a Chevy El Camino, a Ford Ranchero, a Subaru Brat, and a Volkswagen Pickup.
They're all cars with beds, not trucks, and they all provide abundant stuff-hauling capability.
I won't go as far as to say a Slate pickup is a TINO (Truck In Name Only). I'm just noticing that the Slate Truck is a Slate Compact Car With a Bed.
It's a pickup, but not quite a pickup ''truck'', at least for some intents and purposes -- for example, towing. The Slate's has the towing capacity of a subcompact car.
This is an observation, not criticism.
