Factor your canoes into the equation,
right, because I have carried a variety of canoes on pickups and minivans over the years, and they will “perform” in like manner in the air, as they "perform’ in water.
For example, a heavier weight blunt nosed canoe will have much more of an adverse effect on your mileage than a lighter weight streamlined kevlar canoe.
+1 for TDI
+1 for Jetta TDI wagon. I have a golf TDI and it have had it loaded with 2 boats, 3 guys and gear and it handled it great (could have squeezed a 4th man if need be).
Be wary of hybrids if you often haul a heavy load…they are commuter vehicles and at highway speeds man not have the power you need when you have extra wind resistance and weight to deal with.
Nonsense regarding the hybrids
– Last Updated: Oct-22-12 12:56 AM EST –
First, whether they are "computer vehicles" or not makes no difference. With extra weight and wind resistance, the car will do the same thing it would otherwise do when going uphill. Second, the gas engine will take on as much of the load as it has to if a period of unusually hard work lasts too long for the battery/electric-motor to continue providing assistance (battery power is normally a short-term thing when extra oomph is needed, not full time, so the gas engine is fully capable of doing the work when necessary - there's just less reserve power in that case). The gas engine of a Prius, for example, has much more horsepower than the compact cars made around 1980 and earlier, and I can vouch for the fact that a 50-horsepower car from the 70s or early 80s was more than capable of hauling two canoes plus people and gear. I have it on good authority that before my time, the same was true of 40-horsepower VWs. You won't be winning any drag races with such a rig, but it'll get you where you are going. Low horsepower nowadays doesn't mean your car can't pull whatever practical amount of load you ask it to, it only means it won't have as much reserve power when accelerating up to speed, and it MIGHT have to go slower up really steep hills. No modern car runs at it's horsepower limit simply because there are boats on the roof and a bunch of stuff inside.
read more on how hybrids work.
I never said that hybrids COULDN’T do it, just that they will struggle more than a diesel or other gas powered engines. Hybrids get their efficiency in the city (as COMMUTER vehicles) by charging their batteries when you coast or brake. On the highway they rely almost exclusively on the gas engine to keep them going and will draw on the electric motors when needed (ie, on a hill or when you smash it to merge). As a result, the gas engine has less power and torque than a conventional engine in favor of fuel efficiency. Now, get on the highway and take away this constant charge/discharge that you get in town and load an extra 600-700+ lbs of load and strap two wind-breaks to the roof and suddenly that little engine is working for all it’s worth. Yes, it will get you there, but no, it will not be happy doing it.
I’m not saying that hybrids are the worst and to avoid them at all costs, but if the majority of your driving is on highways and involves being loaded with more than just you and maybe 1 or 2 friends, perhaps they are not for you. If on the other hand you do most of your driving in the city and just want to be able to move a heavy load and 2 boats a couple of times a year, than any car will do and a hybrid is a fine choice. Just expect it to be noticeably less efficient and struggle more than what you are used to compared with driving it around town (what they were meant for).
It’s been my experience
that some cars or truck’s mileage drops more than others when loaded. I wish that someone would test vehicles with stuff on the roof or pulling a trailer.
I know how they work, …
– Last Updated: Oct-22-12 10:12 AM EST –
..., I often drive a Honda Civic hybrid and there's a display right on the dashboard that tells when the batteries are charging and by what method (the car I sometimes drive makes use of deceleration, whether by brake application or coasting, as well as engine power). On the highway, all of the power for normal cruising comes from the engine, and the electric motor only kicks in for hill climbing. But you seem to have missed my point. You say these engines are small, and for a reason, which is true, but since I already mentioned the fact that they are not any smaller than those of compact cars years ago, and are a lot more powerful, why do you still insist they don't have enough power to haul boats? Let me guess. You're a young pup and weren't carrying boats back in the days when 50-horsepower compact cars where used for all the same things that modern small cars are used for. Back when I was doing such things, having 75 or 90 horsepower would have been an unbelievable luxury, not a "handicap". Of course in those days we didn't expect to be able to go 85 mph on the highway. Going the speed limit was considered good enough.
Wanna know something else? The owner of the car I mentioned above often carries a canoe, and sometimes a big canoe AND a kayak. Wanna know something else? The mileage takes a noticeable hit (just as was true of tiny-engined small cars decades ago) but it still gets much better mileage than any mid-size car running unloaded, let alone with boats on the roof, and there is NO feeling of inadequate power. Yeah, it's not a race car, but it gets the job done, and it does it a whole lot easier than you have convinced yourself would be the case.
Finally, a few people here, including the original poster, stressed the idea that a car which suits everyday needs well and may not be ideal for hauling boats is a wiser choice than choosing a car for reasons that are the other way around, and for some people, this would be compatible with the idea of using a hybrid. As has been said, the biggest problem with the Prius is that it's roof is so poorly suited to mounting a good rack, not that it struggles too much when carrying boats and gear. Gear weight is over-rated anyway. A four-person car carrying two people and their gear is usually carrying less weight than if it were simply carrying four people. At worst, it might be about the same, but normally that will only be true if the people are lightweights (does your portion of gear on a typical trip exceed your own body weight? How about exceeding the body weight of a "normal" American male? (that's about 240 pounds)
Multi vehicles.
– Last Updated: Oct-22-12 1:32 PM EST –
There are trade offs with every vehicle out there. If it is great at hauling a lot of gear and boats it will typically not be as great as a daily driver (mpg). What is good mpg for one person is not for someone else, relative.
My 98 TDI Jetta got 41 around town and 48-50 on trips. 2000 rpm was the sweet spot. Had roof racks and hauled okay but limited on rack placement. Engine torque and power is excellent. Trunk was pretty big too. That was my daily till it gave in to rust.
We have 2 Outbacks, a 2000 with a 4 cylinder which we would load with 4 people (adult size), gear for a weak at the beach, kayak and cargo box on top. Typically saw about 26-29 mpg. It is great on power except emergency merging when loaded like that. Great car.
Our 2006 is the 3.0 6 cylinder and gets in the high teens to mid to high 20's on trips. Have not had it loaded much but the 3.0 is a strong engine. The roof racks on these Outbacks of both these generations is excellent for loading with gear. They are both fun and nimble to drive around town and as a daily.
My 94 Land Cruiser consumes much fuel. 15 mpg is the best I have gotten. But, it will hold an absolute ton of gear. Put what we usually put in the Outbacks and not even half full. Love to drive it but gets 10-11 mpg around town. But, this gets us to those hard to reach sites and with ease.
We had a mini van which was great on trips but a fun factor of 0. Do not like as a daily driver, not as easy to park as the autos or wagons. Longer wheelbase makes daily driving that much worse or can depending on what you do each day. MPG in the mid low to mid 20's, it was a 2000 Grand Caravan.
My 86 Subaru GL 4x4 wagon will haul a few boats but limited in power and size for sure but can certainly beat around in the backwoods to get you there. Mid 20's on mpg, carburated does not help this as the fuel injected flavor of these did much better.
Basically what works best for me is to have multiple older vehicles for more specific purposes. Depends on what you want to do. Technically the 06 Outback is my wifes, the others are mine. If you are comfortable with older vehicles you can have several for less money than a newer one. Keep them well maintained and you can drive them anywhere. Repairs as needed and still way less than a new vehicle.
Just an option that works for me. Keep the beloved van for what you love it for. By an older TDI for daily driving. Taxes are way less than a newer car. Save on insurance as you can just do liability if paid for in full and not out a huge loss if totaled.
Safety is a concern as well and many of the vehicles in the 2000's got great scores. The TDI's have great scores and the Outbacks do too I believe.
Good luck to you in whatever you decide.
canoe vehicle
I use a Ford f-350 pick-up and a trailer. It gets 24 mpg with a diesel engine and can haul a ton of stuff.
I used a 1/2 ton pick-up once at a take out and hauled two rafts and frames, 7 people and 4 dogs in one vehicle. We could have used 2 little vehicles, instead but it would not have saved us anything.
Prius Sucks for hauling
Had a rental Prius (2010) for two weeks and I would never own one: mileage is way less than advertised as I got 36mpg (actual,not what computer says) total on a long trip driving 65-70, a/c on most of the time, rolling hills/mostly flat, and temps in the high 90’s-low 100’s. In the wind, the handling is not good as they have a high roof line. Even if calm, the handling is poor with too much body lean. Headed for the mountains? This is not your car with it’s anemic 84hp engine. I’ve had some imports from the 70;s-80’s and they kill this thing for performance and handling. I made one trip with the Prius hauling my 16’ kayak and even in light wind, I could feel it pushing the car around.
My choices for yak haulers: Volvo wagon (low roof line), Mazda 6 wagon (made 2004-2008) good mileage/performance, Jetta wagon, and Ford Flex like buddy has…lots of room and long and roof line getting 29mpg hwy with LOTS of room.
Learn to drive it …
– Last Updated: Oct-30-12 9:16 AM EST –
I'm on my second prius and my friend has one too. I also have a Honda Insight. With either one I have no problem staying closer to 50 than to 40 actual mpg on the highway if i drive normally with traffic between 60 and 70 mph. If i drive closer to 60 mph i get clost to 60 mpg. That's with nothing on the roof. With 2 surfskis and 2 guys and gear over a 1000 mile roundtrip last year i easily got 40mpg actual mileage with speeds around 60mph.
My wife drives our '08 Prius and she's consistently around 44 actual (46.5) on the computer. I used to track both her and my old '02 and they give similar results. With the In sight I'm getting 43 mpg actual over the past 28k miles in mixed driving - if it was only highway or suburbs it would be much better, what kills mileage is short trips on cold engine, of which I do a lot...Plus, I'm usually the fastest and one of the more aggressive drivers, not a traffic calming device like some like to drive -;) If I drive calmly and with the traffic flow, I beat the EPA by a considerable margin - but who drives like that in the Metro D C area ???
That said, Top Gear managed to average 17 mpg in the Prius being gunned down to the floor, where a BMW M3 did 19 MPG at the same speed, following the Prius. So, you could torture a Prius to give you well below the EPA rating average, but most people seem to be getting about 50mpg real mileage out of the 2010+ Prii (just check Fuelly.com, with hundreds of real people - don't take my word for it).
TDI EuroVan
It will take a few thousand bucks and many, many frustrating hours in the shop, but once you’re done, you’ll have a full sized van that can tow 4,000 lbs and gets 32 mpg.
On canoe shape, the aerodynamics
at highway speed do not give an advantage to a sharp ended canoe. At subsonic speeds, a blunt entry and a tapered “stern” work best.
Our 15’, 65#, high rocker, blunt ended ww tandem actually gets a bit better mileage on our Honda Accord than our 17’, 50#, sharp ended flatwater tandem.
Another wild card in the mix is outfitting inside the canoe. The end bags in our ww canoe seem to stabilise turbulence. This probably makes more of a difference at the front end of the canoe, as it sits on the car. On the other hand, prominent minicell pedestals inside a canoe may impede air flow that has to occur.
There’s a lot we don’t know about canoe and kayak aerodynamics on car racks. Wish some grad student would supply the data.
We’ve had Accords and a '97 Outback.
Our stick Outback 4 got 29 mpg with no boats and no racks, and 25-26 mpg or so with a single ww tandem canoe on Yakima crossbars. In the SE, one seldom needs AWD for snow, and only occasionally for ice, but the Outback is outstanding on heavily rain-puddled highways, and extra competent when negotiating long stretches of gravel road.
Our latest Accord is an '08, and gets 32 mpg highway mileage with no boat and no racks. It gets 27 mpg with racks and one ww tandem on top. Last weekend we got Sandy tailwind going to New Orleans, and clocked 28 mpg. All of our Accords track straighter in crosswinds than our Outback, with or without boats. The latest Accord holds cruise control speed as well as the Outback, in spite of being much longer geared.