U-Haul says "No" to the Ford Explorer

[nissangirl74]

If properly equipped, the Explorer can to up to 5,000 pounds, but it can’t tow a trailer, of any size, from U-Haul. It’s not that U-Haul uses a proprietary electrical connector or an off-sized hitch, it’s simply that U-Haul doesn’t want to defend a lawsuit involving a Ford Explorer. Even a brand-new-and-completely-redesigned Ford Explorer.

Do you think the insurance company is doing the right thing or just being paranoid?

http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/10 ... d+Blogs%29

[skydragoness]

Wasn't that whole Firestone/Ford Explorer debacle because of people not checking their tire pressures (and why they have TPMS on newer vehicles?)
What a stigma that car has now. Ford should have changed the name with the new 2011 redesign.

[Jesda]

U-Haul can get AIDS and die for being so stupid.

As for name changes, its been proven that when a manufacturer abandons a well-established badge, even a tarnished one, sales of the new model are typically lower.

[nissangirl74]

I don't think this will hurt Ford but I do think it will lower people's opinion of U-haul even more.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Even a brand-new-and-completely-redesigned Ford Explorer.

I'm sure this is the source of the problem. The new Exploder is a Taurus wagon and isn't up to towing duties.

[AppleBonker]

Even a brand-new-and-completely-redesigned Ford Explorer.

I'm sure this is the source of the problem. The new Exploder is a Taurus wagon and isn't up to towing duties.

This was my first thought. Then again, I've seen cars with hitches on the back. Would U-Haul block them from renting a trailer too?

[Bubba1]

If properly equipped, the Explorer can to up to 5,000 pounds, but it can’t tow a trailer, of any size, from U-Haul. It’s not that U-Haul uses a proprietary electrical connector or an off-sized hitch, it’s simply that U-Haul doesn’t want to defend a lawsuit involving a Ford Explorer. Even a brand-new-and-completely-redesigned Ford Explorer.

Do you think the insurance company is doing the right thing or just being paranoid?

http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/10 ... d+Blogs%29

It's not paranoia, U-haul is responding to a trackable trend and operating in their best interest. It's also not their insurance company driving the decision, but their hstory of defending themselves against lawsuits filed by Ford Explorer (and jeep wrangler) owners, who have sued them significantly more often on average than other make/model owners. Whether the lawsuits were frivilous or not was not discussed (I suspect many were), but I don't blame U-Haul for trying to minimize their exposure to lawsuits, as losing them could be catastrophic financially.

I also don't think the decision is going to hurt U-Hauls business that much, as tow hitches are a fairly common option on new Explorers.

[Dattebayo]

I also don't think the decision is going to hurt U-Hauls business that much, as tow hitches are a fairly common option on new Explorers.

Bubba, the ability to rent and tow their trailers with an Explorer is being discussed here, not the hitches.

[AZ89two4Tsx]

U-Haul sucks anyways.

Every time I've had to use one of their car trailers, they are GARBAGE. Rusted to s*** and just plain OLD. Not to mention their whole fleet of moving trucks. They're still using vehicles from the 80s.

[AZhitman]

This was my first thought. Then again, I've seen cars with hitches on the back. Would U-Haul block them from renting a trailer too?

Yes.

When you rent a trailer, your vehicle make, model, and in some cases, standard equipment, is checked before a contract is issued.

I can't roll in there with my 400-hp S13 and hook up a trailer, even IF I had the appropriate hitch and wiring.

I don't see a problem with U-Haul limiting their liability. Perhaps they've not done their homework (getting educated on the new redesigned Explorer) but that's more likely a function of making sure the dropouts who staff the rental counters don't have to discern between a current-gen and a previous-gen Explorer.

[Bubba1]

I also don't think the decision is going to hurt U-Hauls business that much, as tow hitches are a fairly common option on new Explorers.

Bubba, the ability to rent and tow their trailers with an Explorer is being discussed here, not the hitches.

That does not change my argument one bit, but thank you pointing it out. It's U-Haul's decision to not rent trailers (or install aftermarket hitches to people with specific vehicles- UHauls happens to be one of the largest aftermarket hitch sellers), based on their bad previous experiences. Limiting one's liability is common sense.

It would not surprise me that the same lawsuit crazy Explorer owners who would sue U-Haul at the drop of dime for any kind of problem, would probably also sue U-Haul because they can't won't rent a trailer to them because they own Explorers.

[Jesda]

Its unlikely that UHaul made this decision based on the new Explorer's capability. Its a sturdy unibody SUV just like the Grand Cherokee. Towing capacity decreased with the new generation, but they didn't ban the Grand Cherokee or any other vehicles with a capacity of 5000lbs.

From the article:
"Joanne Fried, director of media and corporate relations with U-Haul, confirmed that this was indeed a corporate policy, and told Consumer Reports, “Every time we go to hire an attorney to defend a lawsuit, as soon as we say ‘Ford Explorer’ they charge us more money."

Trial lolyers being trial lolyers, making the world a crappy place. This isn't about liability. Its about legal fees. There's nothing "common sense" about any of it.

[Loki]

^ What Bubba said. It came down to trying to predict future lawsuits (verdicts and settlements) caused by such owners compared to the projected profit from Exploder owners. U_Haul legal team must've worked the math to show that the lawsuits would outweigh the profits.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Its a sturdy unibody SUV just like the Grand Cherokee.

No, it isn't. The Cherokee was designed from the ground up to be a unibody SUV, like a Range Rover, or a classic Patrol. The Explorer was not. It is a Taurus. It's no more "sturdy" than a Pilot or a Murano.

[Jesda]

Its a sturdy unibody SUV just like the Grand Cherokee.

No, it isn't. The Cherokee was designed from the ground up to be a unibody SUV, like a Range Rover, or a classic Patrol. The Explorer was not. It is a Taurus. It's no more "sturdy" than a Pilot or a Murano.

Its as capable as any soft-roader at towing a UHaul trailer, which UHaul will gladly hook up.

[AZhitman]

You'd be surprised.

I'm not disputing your assessment of the Explorer as being functionally capable of towing, I'm disputing the assertion that it's in the same class as a Cherokee, and disputing the implication that they'll "hook up" a Murano, a Sedona, an Edge, a Pilot or a Highlander. To my knowledge, they won't.

Blame the lawyers. If it were my company, I'd rather piss off a handful of Explorer owners than contend with ill-informed insurance actuaries and legal nimrods.

Y'all-Haul is under no obligation to "take one for the team" here.

[Jesda]

The issue is our screwed up legal system that creates an atmosphere of marketplace paranoia, throwing all sense and logic out the window. Tort reform is necessary.

FYI, UHaul will hook up a trailer to other Ford products including the Edge and Escape. Its full-on retarded. The Explorer trailer policy originally applied to the previous generation, and carrying it over to the completely new model is idiotic.

[Jesda]

You'd be surprised.

I'm not disputing your assessment of the Explorer as being functionally capable of towing, I'm disputing the assertion that it's in the same class as a Cherokee

**Grand** Cherokee

Different beast with lighter pants.

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

Even a brand-new-and-completely-redesigned Ford Explorer.

I'm sure this is the source of the problem. The new Exploder is a Taurus wagon and isn't up to towing duties.

So how come other unitbody SUV's aren't disallowed? Used an MDX a couple months ago. The explorer has more towing capability than that.

[numbnuts240]

this is news? explorer owners haven't been able to rent uhaul trailers for a good decade now.

[Jesda]

Its newsworthy because the rule was carried over to a completely different vehicle with the same model name.

[AZhitman]

The issue is our screwed up legal system that creates an atmosphere of marketplace paranoia, throwing all sense and logic out the window. Tort reform is necessary.

NOW we're cooking [bacon] with gas [in nice pants].

[themadscientist]

Let me save Ford the trouble of responding with an eye roll.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYhofTqsxrg[/youtube]

http://www.uhaulsafetyalert.org/

I will say, as a trained 4 ton truck and trailer operator i am a little uncomfortable at the erroneous assumption that people can just hook up a trailer and magically know how to properly load and drive with it; ain't happenin. Driving a large truck, heck even a regular-sized truck with a tall box cargo area is not the same as your damned Prius.

If I owned an outfit that was renting out gear like this than you can be sure I would have the equipment impeccably maintained and documented, contractually protected against user induced damage and inspected on return and before it's reissued to a new customer. There would be a cursory check of the customer's vehicle and a documented half hour practical driving lesson with their vehicle hooked up to the trailer and one of my reps instructing. To do anything less would put my business, the customer and the rest of the public at risk.

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

Considering our camping group has at least 2 trailer blowouts every year out of 5 families I'd be inclined to support your operation TMS...

[AZhitman]

TMS certainly brings up a good point.

Think of the WORST driver you've ever met. She can go and rent a 27' box truck, overload it, and drive it cross-country while texting and chugging a venti latte.

Hence, I steer far clear of rental trucks when I see them on the road.

[samxini]

TMS certainly brings up a good point.

Think of the WORST driver you've ever met. She can go and rent a 27' box truck, overload it, and drive it cross-country while texting and chugging a venti latte.

Hence, I steer far clear of rental trucks when I see them on the road.

I love how you tell us to imagine the worst driver we've ever met, and its automatically a she.
Well played sir.

[MinisterofDOOM]

TMS certainly brings up a good point.

Think of the WORST driver you've ever met. She can go and rent a 27' box truck, overload it, and drive it cross-country while texting and chugging a venti latte.

Hence, I steer far clear of rental trucks when I see them on the road.

Same scenario for motor homes. Geezers who can barely park their Avalons can drive bus- and semi-based motorhomes with no special licensing or even a second thought. Terrifying.

[RustyBucket]

The thing that makes the refusal to rent to Explorer owners more asinine is the fact that there is no problem whatsoever if you have a Mercury Mountaineer or a Mazda Navajo. Last I checked, the only substantial difference between the Explorer and the latter two vehicles is the badging.

U-haul has a utility on their website to tell you if your vehicle is acceptable to tow the trailer you wre interested in renting. The system works based on the curb weight of the tow vehicle compared to the maximum possible weight of the trailer. If your tow vehicle doesn't weigh 80% the weight of the maximum weight of the trailer, it's a no-go.

I had an issue with that when I wanted to tow my Q45 on one of their flat deck trailers with my GMC 1-ton van. The 1-ton van is a no-go because the curb weight of the van is not enough, according to their system. The same year 3/4 ton extended body van is perfectly acceptable. Turns out that the extra 12 inches of van makes up the couple hundred pounds to make the system happy.

I ended up buying one of their used trailers, repainted it, greased the wheel bearings, used it for what I needed and then sold it for what I bought it for in the first place. The money sunk into it for the paint was still cheaper than renting.

The trailer worked well for me, but when I bought it, I pointed out that the brake pads were bad so I had them order me a replacement set to be included with the trailer purchase at no charge. When I opened them up at home (a mistake now - I realize I should have opened them at the store), I found out they had given me used brake pads. After all the crap I dealt with from them, I am going to be doing my best to avoid giving my money to U-haul ever again.

[themadscientist]

nono, not "used," "seasoned." Bedding in a new set is such a pain.