Contradicting statements on towing and payload

[goduc]

If you're full timing then you're packing more than most. Dry brochure TW for that TT is 1067 lbs. You Ram on average has 1400 lbs for payload.
Filled propane tanks will get you to 1100 lbs. That leaves only 300 lbs that can be put in the truck. I'm guessing that you're way over the trucks RAWR and GVWR.

[mudbug70]

Had not considered the weight of the propane tanks on the truck's payload. Thank you.

[goduc]

Everything thats in front of the TT's axles is going towards the TW. Filled propane tanks, battery, gear in the front storage holds, all things in the bedroom, etc.

[mudbug70]

The V-nose on our Windjammer is a large closet, so, yeah, we are probably WAY OVER on tongue weight! *Sigh* We definitely needed better advice when truck shopping last year.

[Seeking Adventure]

Weight distribution & loading also cannot be overlooked!

[Tom48]

Originally Posted by itat

Everyone here knows that weight is a hot button issue on the forum. Bottom line is that we don’t all think the same. We all have different experience, comfort levels and opinions. If someone has a differing opinion, don’t get upset and debate it. As the forum mods always say...(respectfully) give your opinion and move on.

We all KNOW GVW is important and I make all effort to run under GVW. What I had missed for a while is that with my tongue weight (a toy hauler with no weight in the back) and my hot air balloon on board, I was running 300 lbs heavy on the rear axle.

So you say no biggy. Well I scrambled to reload my tools and other heavy cargo off the tongue and out of the bed to the back,. But guess what. Suffered premature failure of rear tires on the truck. Caught it at the point of going out of round from internal failure and avoided a blowout. All goes to say every indiscretion has it's price. In this case two very expensive big rear tires being replaced. With lots of good tread left and before they aged out. Could have been bad to have one blow at full load and 75 mph.

[itat]

Originally Posted by Tom48

We all KNOW GVW is important and I make all effort to run under GVW. What I had missed for a while is that with my tongue weight (a toy hauler with no weight in the back) and my hot air balloon on board, I was running 300 lbs heavy on the rear axle.

So you say no biggy. Well I scrambled to reload my tools and other heavy cargo off the tongue and out of the bed to the back,. But guess what. Suffered premature failure of rear tires on the truck. Caught it at the point of going out of round from internal failure and avoided a blowout. All goes to say every indiscretion has it's price. In this case two very expensive big rear tires being replaced. With lots of good tread left and before they aged out. Could have been bad to have one blow at full load and 75 mph.

Tom, just to be clear, I never said “no biggy”. I only said we don’t all think alike and we all have different experience and comfort levels. I tend to be on the conservative side when it comes to towing safety. Ultimately, we are responsible for own own actions.

Overweight or not, I would NEVER tow at 75 mph!

[JohnD10]

"Comfort levels" have absolutely nothing to do with correct towing specs...

You are either in...or out!

Doesn't matter what you are 'comfortable with' while towing...

However, feeling comfortable with a correct towing setup is a very nice feeling indeed!

[Bobaloo]

A wise old man once told me "Bobby, you can do that BUT a Lawyer/lawsuit will take everything you've got and everything you will ever have, is it worth the chance?" Not worth the chance for me. Follow the rules.

[MikeRP]

Let’s hope none of us is ever in an accident where someone is hurt that would be horrible. I know a lot of places like FMCA offer driver courses. Even though I’ve had a class a cdl for 30 years and driven all kinds of pickup truck configurations, I think I should go because I haven’t had any formal trading for 25 years.

Speed seems to me to be one of the big problems. In 2013 I followed in my Class C Sunseeker w no toad to Colorado, 2 high end class a’s. They never were under 70 mph. The Sunseeker kept up but this was a little uncomfortable for me. For the 5 years after that I always ran and 65 mph got better fuel mileage and the Coach just ran very well at that speed pulling our JeepGC. Interestingly enough when I got back from Colorado I had a recall on the Michelin’s for blowouts.

Geez.

I kept a nice TPMS system on that Coach and when it was very hot outside if I pushed 70 mph and over the tires would heat up very quickly and would cool right back down to a normal level at 65 mph.

We all know there are lots of factors that cause premature tire failure. Hitting curbs, not having proper inflation during storage, etc. Since I traveled with a Class C that would always at or slightly over the combined rear tire ratings, I was always mindful of the care of my tires.

But also because of that experience, I’m not necessarily afraid to run at max weight on those tires. Good care, good tpms, watching speed and temps are very important! But being 300 lbs over although not something I would shoot for or recommend, should not in of itself cause tire failure.

But combined with any damage that may knowingly or unknowingly occurred, along with speed and summer temps can cause premature failure.

Overloaded, under inflated, improper storage, summer temps, and improper speed most likely combined are a recipe for bad things.

[Lzerarc]

I think the comments that appear contradictory are based more on feel and comfort than fact. My situation is an example.

My f150 truck and trailer combo all fall within capacities however right up there on payload. So yes all of the numbers are legal. However the question is should my 5300 lb half ton be pulling a 7500 lb 34' trailer. On a windless day, works great. Get above 15 mph wind and now the trailer is in control. And in the Midwest the wind is always 15 or above. This is making me want to look at an f250 for the added control and stability.
I think it's this example is what more refer to. It's a comfort thing while towing.

[mawilson]

Originally Posted by Lzerarc

...should my 5300 lb half ton be pulling a 7500 lb 34' trailer...

Average weight of a semi tractor is ~20 lb. Average weight of semi trailer loaded is somewhere around 50K lb. Ratio of ~1:2.5. Length is approximately the same ratio. So should you tow with ~1:1.5 ratio? Who knows. As others have said, there are a lot of other factors to consider (in no particular order): engine, transmission, differential, all the various weight ratings, brakes, tires, WDH, etc.

My opinion, for what it's worth, do the scales, do the math, check the numbers. Even then, being within spec (which you should be if only for liability reasons) only answers "can it tow". "Should it tow" is going to be answered more by experience. If you're buying the TV first, err on the side of caution and go bigger. If you're buying the TT first (you already have a 'numbers' appropriate TV), you'll know pretty soon if you need a bigger TV.

Anecdotally, my TV can handle my TT just fine by the numbers and does so in flatlands. It struggles a bit with steeper grades. The TV came first by about 5 years. So, I'll likely bump it up to an F250 when I replace it, which will likely be as soon as I can fit it in the budget.

[Lzerarc]

I know I am stating the obvious, but one difference between the tv/tt and your semi is the way the weight is handled. A lot more wheels on the ground giving stability, and the pin is over the double axles. Obviously we all know the TT setup, by physics, will never tow as well as 5th wheel/semi designs. What handicap does that give the tv/tt ratio number? 20%? 50%?

Who knows. Some people base their decisions on facts and science, which I did when I bought my truck. However towing with this combination for 2 years, I understand more is at play than numbers on a sheet that say "looks good".

[goduc]

Originally Posted by Lzerarc

I think the comments that appear contradictory are based more on feel and comfort than fact. My situation is an example.

My f150 truck and trailer combo all fall within capacities however right up there on payload. So yes all of the numbers are legal. However the question is should my 5300 lb half ton be pulling a 7500 lb 34' trailer. On a windless day, works great. Get above 15 mph wind and now the trailer is in control. And in the Midwest the wind is always 15 or above. This is making me want to look at an f250 for the added control and stability.
I think it's this example is what more refer to. It's a comfort thing while towing.

Best example yet. Butt feel. It's easy to do the numbers and say it will work. Real world experience is the best way IMO. BTDT with a 2010 F150 Max Tow, 1857 CCC, 31' 7200 lbs TT. On paper it looked great. Out on the road, not so great sometimes. Jumped to a 2500 and got that great feeling back.
What was interesting was the 2010 F150 was rated for IIRC 11,500 lbs. The 12 Ram 2500 CTD was only rated for 12,500 lbs with 3.73's. But the truck it's self was far superior in the handling of the rated weight.

[67L48]

Originally Posted by moose074

[...] It seems to me that those who strictly abide by payload and tow standards [...] appear to be the first to say they would never tow a trailer they felt was to heavy for the half ton 3/4 [...] even when well within the standards set by the same engineers. [sic]

Cut some things out to distill what I believe is the apparent contradiction you are pointing to -- using engineers' specs when it is convenient to one's argument only to ignore them later when it's no longer convenient to one's argument.

My answer is pretty simple: yours is a straw-man argument whose premise is incorrect. At best, you have taken a slim minority behavior and cast it as common practice.

Rather, there are generally two buckets. Those who use the ratings as guidance and those who are dogmatic about the ratings.

The first category includes those who insist on having 80-90% buffers against the stated ratings (not fully trusting the stated specs). This is the behavior you speak of -- people who feel the capability isn't there even when well within published specs. That first category also covers the other end of the scale -- those who are comfortable going over the ratings a bit. After all, the engineers assuredly put in safety buffers and the truck seems to pull/handle just fine. Or exceeding them is fine for short trips, or fine as long as you're not going over a mountain pass, etc. Either way, these people use the engineers' ratings as guidance ... loose rules that need some interpretation up or down depending on various factors.

The second category are people who count, measure, weigh, and calculate. 5,000 lb specs mean 5,000 lbs ... 4,999 is OK and 5,001 is not OK. All specs must be honored and it's worth knowing/following them all. Binary. Black/white. Much more rigid.

I don't see much of the crossover that you speak of. I don't see people line up on the dogmatic spec side of the argument only to later switch to a fluid interpretive stance. So, I think your statement is flawed. For those rare times that it does happen, you're correct -- it's inconsistent, at best, and disingenuous, at worst. But, it's a distinct minority that operates with such duplicity, in my experience.

Good luck.

[moose074]

Originally Posted by KFX450RXC

I've seen many of his videos before. But is he some kind of professional or just a guy with lots of opinions trying to get as many views as he can on YouTube?



At one part of the video, he recommends pulling a Puma TT with a minimum a 1 ton or dually. Good grief.

That is what I said on the other thread some good advice in part of video then he strayed

[moose074]

Originally Posted by Dustyhd

Consumers don’t understand that the TWR is established using a very specific cargo type trailer, loaded in a specific manner with 10% TW. These trailers will tow and handle very well in that state. Once you change trailer types (cargo to travel trailer) that TWR is now meaningless. A RV travel trailer now has different requirements by design due to its weight distribution (floor plan) which is generally poor compared to a properly loaded cargo trailer.
Since TTs floorplans will vary, it’s design weight distribution becomes as important as the weight itself. Not all x,xxx lb TTs will tow the same way and it is possible to select a TT that has the right characteristics to tow well.

I 100% agree with you on how weight ratings are conducted.

[moose074]

Originally Posted by 67L48

Cut some things out to distill what I believe is the apparent contradiction you are pointing to -- using engineers' specs when it is convenient to one's argument only to ignore them later when it's no longer convenient to one's argument.



My answer is pretty simple: yours is a straw-man argument whose premise is incorrect. At best, you have taken a slim minority behavior and cast it as common practice.



Rather, there are generally two buckets. Those who use the ratings as guidance and those who are dogmatic about the ratings.



The first category includes those who insist on having 80-90% buffers against the stated ratings (not fully trusting the stated specs). This is the behavior you speak of -- people who feel the capability isn't there even when well within published specs. That first category also covers the other end of the scale -- those who are comfortable going over the ratings a bit. After all, the engineers assuredly put in safety buffers and the truck seems to pull/handle just fine. Or exceeding them is fine for short trips, or fine as long as you're not going over a mountain pass, etc. Either way, these people use the engineers' ratings as guidance ... loose rules that need some interpretation up or down depending on various factors.



The second category are people who count, measure, weigh, and calculate. 5,000 lb specs mean 5,000 lbs ... 4,999 is OK and 5,001 is not OK. All specs must be honored and it's worth knowing/following them all. Binary. Black/white. Much more rigid.



I don't see much of the crossover that you speak of. I don't see people line up on the dogmatic spec side of the argument only to later switch to a fluid interpretive stance. So, I think your statement is flawed. For those rare times that it does happen, you're correct -- it's inconsistent, at best, and disingenuous, at worst. But, it's a distinct minority that operates with such duplicity, in my experience.



Good luck.

This could very well be the case. Many people had great points . I believe the video post helped make my point as well to some extent in that without giving us anything other than his opinion. He classified a trl as should only be towed with a 1 ton and possibly even only a dual I think a real world test of acceleration, braking swaying would have been a better comparison. The reason I made the original post is this is a forum where people come for advice and help. However for some people who are new to towing or rving the forum can scare them into thinking they need a 550 diesel to safely tow their r pods, and removes part of the fun out of rving as they are scared to tow or worried about being pulled over for being overweight. I have a friend who is in this boat, while he has a masters degree and is a great driver. He reads the different forums and often is hesitant on his trucks ability even though he completed 3000 mile trek thru Rockies , Blackhills and several trips to Sacramento Mountains in NM. Thanks to those who kept the thread civil

[spock123]

Originally Posted by mawilson

Average weight of a semi tractor is ~20 lb. Average weight of semi trailer loaded is somewhere around 50K lb. Ratio of ~1:2.5. Length is approximately the same ratio. So should you tow with ~1:1.5 ratio? Who knows. As others have said, there are a lot of other factors to consider (in no particular order): engine, transmission, differential, all the various weight ratings, brakes, tires, WDH, etc.



My opinion, for what it's worth, do the scales, do the math, check the numbers. Even then, being within spec (which you should be if only for liability reasons) only answers "can it tow". "Should it tow" is going to be answered more by experience. If you're buying the TV first, err on the side of caution and go bigger. If you're buying the TT first (you already have a 'numbers' appropriate TV), you'll know pretty soon if you need a bigger TV.



Anecdotally, my TV can handle my TT just fine by the numbers and does so in flatlands. It struggles a bit with steeper grades. The TV came first by about 5 years. So, I'll likely bump it up to an F250 when I replace it, which will likely be as soon as I can fit it in the budget.

Is that how much weight a semi hauls or is that 50k what the semi carries. Most semi loaded weighs 80,000lb

[mawilson]

Originally Posted by spock123

Is that how much weight a semi hauls or is that 50k what the semi carries. Most semi loaded weighs 80,000lb

Tractor is ~20K lb. Trailer (assume a box) is ~10K. Max Wt. = 80K lb. Payload is <= 50K lb. The average I found is a bit lower and may take into account less than full loads.

With a max ratio of TV to TT at 1:4, that would imply that I could pull a 20,000 lb. 5'er with my F150, assuming that the 5L could even get it rolling to street speeds. I don't think anyone would believe that to be safe. My point was that one shouldn't rely on ratio of TV to TT to determine what the TV can pull.

Use the numbers as a baseline or NTE, if you will. At the end of the day, only pull with any particular TV what you feel comfortable with. If you aren't comfortable with the load, you'll tend to over-react to situations on the road. You'll tend to be hyper-vigilant (over attending to each sensory cue) thus spend less time planning ahead and thinking your options through. If it requires an F350 diesel dually to make you comfortable pulling an R-Pod then that's what you should do regardless of what anyone says. I'd rather have you comfortable on the road as you'll be much more predictable. That said, I also don't want you hauling that R-Pod with a Smart Car (I'm pretty sure it's misnamed - should be Smart Half-car) as even the R-Pod probably exceeds it's published limits.