Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-19-2013, 09:40 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
prof_fate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Beaver, PA
Posts: 911
Quote:
Originally Posted by CZNEDY View Post
Good one, I remember when my parents towed a 19' trailer with our for country squire LTD. ThAt set-up was rediculous.
Back in that day trailers were heavier (i'd assume) but cars were too - big V8s even if they were smogged down on power they still had torque.

I had a 79 lincoln -400 v8, 4800 lbs, 20' long. Not much different than my new silverado and lighter than some 'full size suvs' these days.

Power isn't the issue - vehicles today have more HP than ever before. Of course your truck with 325 hp will pull it...my lincoln was listed at 180hp (or maybe it was less...180 may have been the top of the line vette back then).
__________________

__________________
Chris, Wills (16) Evie (13) & Toby our collie (6)
2011 Grey Wolf 28BH
2013 Chevy K1500 Crew w/ Reese StraitLine Dual Cam

Nights camped 2011: 11 2012: 18 2013: 12 2014: 12 2015: 13 2016: 56 2017: 8+
prof_fate is offline  
Old 06-19-2013, 09:52 PM   #22
Engineer of Crazy Train
 
ChooChooMan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Tiverton, RI
Posts: 1,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by F and E Damp View Post
IMO, the weight limits in the US are a reaction by the vehicle manufacturers to either their fear of lawyers, or a poor opinion of the average driver's capabilities.

In Europe, there are almost no 5th-wheel rigs. People either have TTs or motor-homes. Tow vehicles for the bigger TTs are either Land Rover/Range Rover or Toyota Land Cruisers. For the smaller TTs, they typically tow with the family sedan, wagon or "people carrier" (minivan in US terms). There are very few pick-ups used as family vehicles and no big ones like the F-series, Chevy or Dodge equivalents. In a road test by one of the Top Gear program guys a couple of years ago, he referred to the Honda Ridgeline as "gargantuan". I shudder to thnk what he'd call an F350 crew-cab, long bed dually!

European tow ratings are much higher. My 03 Kia Sedona (3.5 liter V6, 5-speed auto transmission) is rated for 3500 pounds in the US. A family member in the UK has the '02 model, same configuration as mine and it's rated for 3000 Kg (6600 pounds).
I totally agree. My CRD has a tow rating of 5000lbs here and 7700 in Europe. Same vehicle, same parts, same assembly plant.

Right now, I am 100 over GVW fully camp ready, with the family in the vehicle. It is what it is.
__________________

__________________
TV - 2015 Ram Truck EcoDiesel
TV - 2006 Jeep Liberty Turbo Diesel (Retired to Daily Driver)
TT - 2015 Rockwood Roo 183
Locomotive Engineer
Nights Camping --- 2015 - 19 Camped | Winterized -- 2014 -18
Come read my Camping Blogs
ChooChooMan74 is offline  
Old 06-19-2013, 11:06 PM   #23
Oklahoma Proud
 
MillerTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: central OK
Posts: 2,774
I believe that all # should be heeded with extra wiggle room, with the occasional exception to the combined gvwr.

As a dealer tech I see everyday why the ratings are what they are. Many of you think that the # are only for pulling, but these # are also for braking and for collision calculations and safety measures. If the # are exceded then the compulation of safety feature inputs will not be effective. ( this may be why uk #may differ- and most of us dont live there, so why even argue that point?)

On my exception on combined gvwr, the trailer gvwr may be greater with the gvwr of the truck than what the combined is rated. Now im not talking campers, but gooseneck trailers where the loads can be placed over more axles with more brakes and more tires.

Around here there are trailers that have 21k- 25.9k gvwr running around all the time. I even have one myself.

-I feel that if your tv can be within all the rated limits except on the combined that with good tires, brakes, lights and such and not over individual ( tv and trailer separately) gvrw- you know Commercial DOT inspection compliant stuff , you should be good- IF you are under 26k combined gvwr or have a cdl.

Ps. Im under all my numbers with my 5er, hauling equipment and hay, occasionally over on combined gvwr- but cringe the whole time doing it.
__________________
MillerTime is offline  
Old 06-19-2013, 11:29 PM   #24
Fulltime family RVer
 
ependydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,712
I think most (not all) of the respondents are still missing the question- I commonly see statements like, "you can be over GVWR/payload, but as long as you're within RAWR and tire load capacity, you're ok."

What makes GVWR less important than RAWR?

To that end, is it ok to hang 600 pounds off of a hitch that is rated only for 500 pounds (without WDH)? Is it ok to use a 800 pound WDH for a trailer with a tongue weight of 1,000 pounds? Is it ok to exceed a trailer's GVWR? The trailer's axle ratings?
(I don't expect answers to these exact questions- just this general idea.)

The topic isn't necessarily about the stickers being "lawyered up" or lowered for the US market. It's more in the specifics.

I find it fascinating. I actually had a PM conversation a month or so ago where I asked this exact question.
__________________
2012 Ram 3500 DRW/crew cab/long bed/4x4/4.10 gears pulling an early 2013 Sabre 36QBOK
Checkout my site for RVing tips, tricks, and info | My family and I have fulltimed since June 2015
ependydad is offline  
Old 06-19-2013, 11:32 PM   #25
Fulltime family RVer
 
ependydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 14,712
I guess phrased another way... when you choose to go over ratings, which rates are ok to exceed and which aren't? And why?
__________________
2012 Ram 3500 DRW/crew cab/long bed/4x4/4.10 gears pulling an early 2013 Sabre 36QBOK
Checkout my site for RVing tips, tricks, and info | My family and I have fulltimed since June 2015
ependydad is offline  
Old 06-19-2013, 11:36 PM   #26
Site Team - Lou
 
Herk7769's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Eastern PA
Posts: 21,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by WEMig View Post
So the big question is what component of the truck is affected by violating only GVWR?
I tried to explain why the GVWR is lower than the sum of the axle ratings etc. in the past and will try once more.

Consider a steel rope. It is made with a continuous piece of exactly the same material with exactly the same properties. It has ONE breaking strength rating. It is guaranteed by the manufacturer NOT to break as long as it carries less than that rated load. It does NOT mean it WILL break above that; just that it COULD break above that (and it won't be their fault if it does).

TRUCKS are not made like a rope; they are made out of many different pieces all with their OWN rated loads.

So consider a CHAIN, where each link is made out of different materials, strengths, hardness, and load bearing capabilities. As the manufacturer, you buy the links from many different vendors who EACH certify their link to carry a certain amount of load before they COULD break.

Now, as the manufacturer of the CHAIN, do you rate your chain to hold the weight of the strongest link, an average of the strengths of EACH individual link, or the weakest link. Remember if the chain breaks before that rated load is reached, YOU will be responsible.

Now you know why GVWR is lower than the sum of the axle ratings.
__________________

Lou and Laura with Bella - German Short Hair Pointer
2008 GMC Sierra 2500HD Crewcab SB Allison Duramax
2010 Flagstaff 8526RLWS - Superglide 3300
HAM CALLSIGN - KC3FFW
Herk7769 is offline  
Old 06-19-2013, 11:49 PM   #27
Oklahoma Proud
 
MillerTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: central OK
Posts: 2,774
Ependy
I believe the answer to your question is
-no
-no
-no
-and no

And the rear rating vs gvwr is becsuse of the idiots that have put do much weight in the rear that the front is pointing in the trees, and nothing on the front axle

But being in my early 30s and in the minority on this forum, I know that you will never convince the old farts that thier overloaded situation is incorrect or wrong.
- I see more mangled frames and bodys of vehicle that weren't towing anything, and wonder how some of the crazy tow ratings can be as high as they are, especially on half tons. And I usually change 6-12 complete frames a year, have a tundra waiting on me when I get back from the lake on monday.
__________________
MillerTime is offline  
Old 06-20-2013, 06:05 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
transamz9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 409
Quote:
Originally Posted by herk7769 View Post
I tried to explain why the GVWR is lower than the sum of the axle ratings etc. in the past and will try once more.

Consider a steel rope. It is made with a continuous piece of exactly the same material with exactly the same properties. It has ONE breaking strength rating. It is guaranteed by the manufacturer NOT to break as long as it carries less than that rated load. It does NOT mean it WILL break above that; just that it COULD break above that (and it won't be their fault if it does).

TRUCKS are not made like a rope; they are made out of many different pieces all with their OWN rated loads.

So consider a CHAIN, where each link is made out of different materials, strengths, hardness, and load bearing capabilities. As the manufacturer, you buy the links from many different vendors who EACH certify their link to carry a certain amount of load before they COULD break.

Now, as the manufacturer of the CHAIN, do you rate your chain to hold the weight of the strongest link, an average of the strengths of EACH individual link, or the weakest link. Remember if the chain breaks before that rated load is reached, YOU will be responsible.

Now you know why GVWR is lower than the sum of the axle ratings.

You have a "working load limit" and you have a "breaking load limit" on a chain or anything for that matter. The numbers on the door are the "working load limit" of the truck. It depends on what formula they use to come up with them.
__________________
2005 Ram 5.9 AT SB QC (Retired)
2010 Ram 6.7 G56 QC CC Aluminum flat/Leveled (Sold)
2008 Nitro Z9 towed by a 2015 Sanibel 3601 towed by a 2013 Ram 3500 SRW CCSB Cummins
2006 EZ GO 6" lift
transamz9 is offline  
Old 06-20-2013, 06:39 AM   #29
Site Team - Lou
 
Herk7769's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Eastern PA
Posts: 21,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by transamz9 View Post
You have a "working load limit" and you have a "breaking load limit" on a chain or anything for that matter. The numbers on the door are the "working load limit" of the truck. It depends on what formula they use to come up with them.
I don't understand how you can consider anything other than the working load limit to be "normal operations."

In the case of an aircraft (take the C-130 for example), we have a maximum gross weight limit of 165,000 pounds. We also have an emergency/war weight of 175,000 pounds. Will the aircraft fly at 175,000; yes it will. Will it fly more than once? Yes, it will. BUT eventually, you will get THIS.

__________________

Lou and Laura with Bella - German Short Hair Pointer
2008 GMC Sierra 2500HD Crewcab SB Allison Duramax
2010 Flagstaff 8526RLWS - Superglide 3300
HAM CALLSIGN - KC3FFW
Herk7769 is offline  
Old 06-20-2013, 12:16 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
transamz9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 409
A couple things I see with the video is that one, was the pilot flying operating outside the limits of the plane with it's load? (hotroding)

Second, He was carrying a load that was not stationary (it shifts). If he was loaded to the 175,000# max then I assure you that he went over his wing load when he dropped his nose. I don't know much about planes but I would think they would have wing load ratings just like we have axle ratings.

I've tried to re-frame from giving my opinion on the particular matter because I'm not an engineer that actually builds the trucks we drive. I am however an old crane operator and I am pretty familiar with load ratings , how they work and what weight does on the move.

The axles under our trucks are rated on the door at their WLL. Their BLL is much higher. What percentage that is I don't know. I believe the GVWR is a crash test rating put out in that class of vehicle. When they do their crash tests they have limits of damage or injury to the occupants that they go by in that class off vehicle. Each class has a different set of limits they have to meet. All this is saying is that my truck may receive more damage in a crash if I'm over my GVWR than one that is not over it's GVWR. That is not making anyone around me more unsafe because I am over my GVWR it's just saying that my truck is going to get messed up bad in a crash. The test that they do are at about 30 MPH so unless I'm only running 30 MPH down the road, my truck is going to be messed up anyway if something happens. All I can hope for is that my seatbelts and airbags do their jobs.
__________________

__________________
2005 Ram 5.9 AT SB QC (Retired)
2010 Ram 6.7 G56 QC CC Aluminum flat/Leveled (Sold)
2008 Nitro Z9 towed by a 2015 Sanibel 3601 towed by a 2013 Ram 3500 SRW CCSB Cummins
2006 EZ GO 6" lift
transamz9 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




ForestRiverForums.com is not in any way associated with Forest River, Inc. or its associated RV manufacturing divisions.


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:27 PM.