Frame Strength, Who to Believe! The RV Sales Guy or the New Truck Dealer? Maybe Neither?

[ripperj]

It doesn't seem ethical, but would he have any legal liability? I'm guessing not. He probably has many satisfied customers with that camper on a 1-ton.

As several people have pointed out, real weights can be much higher than what the camper manufacturers claim as well...

I’m not sure we can assume the camper dealer knew any better. Have you been to any dealer lately? (anything: car, truck, camper, lawn equipment). Unless you go to a mom and pop place that’s been around forever, you are talking to someone with zero knowledge on what they are trying to sell. When I got my new truck it was embarrassing how little the kid knew about the brand and the various packages. Fortunately I research things to death.

In the case of the camper salesman, he probably looks at whatever numbers the camper manufacturer claims and a typical truck payload. How many 3500 2wd, longbed, regular cab with 7800# payload leave the lots?, not many that aren’t fleet. Most are overweight pigs with mega cabs, short-bed and 4x4…throw in a oil burner and lose another 800-1000#

The fact that the stated camper weight is hundreds of not thousands low and the truck is the opposite is beyond his scope of concern. His focus is 6 units a month or whatever quota is. He will probably be working a different job in 90 days


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[PirateMcGee]

This is why I have a 300lb camper on a full size truck with a 1400 payload. Surprised we don't see more Tacomas and Tundras with cracked frames. Seems like every build is over payload. It's amazing how little attention folks pay to weight.

 

[IdaSHO]

Overloaded or not, I cannot help but assume that Dodge/Ram is dealing with some metallurgy issues with their frames.
I've seen multiple references to Ram truck orders being halted and pushed back due to some sort of frame QC issue.

And every day it seems a new forum thread is posted about a cracked or broken frame, no matter the MFG.
It seems that all MFGs are having frame failures, and more often since going to fully boxed/hydroformed frames.

 

[vintageracer]

Are you suggesting that BIGGER IS NOT BETTER????

For Shame!

 

[FAW3]

It seems there might be more to this whole "truck camper thing" than:

A: "the salesman said"

B: "I think we are under GVWR"

C: "so far I have had no problems"

D: "It's a full size truck"

 

[rruff]

Surprised we don't see more Tacomas and Tundras with cracked frames.

A few years ago (probably 7 years) I saw a Tundra with a huge camper that hung way off the back of his 8' bed! I talked to him a bit; the only upgrade he mentioned was airbags... said it handled it fine. Him and his wife had been living and working in it, camping in the woods for a couple years. I bet it was at least 3k lbs over GVWR... but I'm pretty certain the CG was in front of the axle by a good amount.

A consistent theme I'm seeing with these failures is: shortbed with a camper CG that is behind the rear axle, or pulling a trailer offroad. The frame bends upward, not the other direction. And it always bends right behind the cab.

On the Tundra specifically, the frame section (and bed mount) right behind the cab is very strong on the 8 ft. The 6.5 ft and 5.5 ft only mount the bed to the weak rearward rails. You could use supports that tie into the frame right behind the cab and you'd probably be ok with the 6.5 ft, but this isn't an option on the 5.5... which is the one most likely to have a CG behind the rear axle. Even then the only failure I've seen is the guy who wrecked his going through a ditch recently.

And every day it seems a new forum thread is posted about a cracked or broken frame, no matter the MFG.
It seems that all MFGs are having frame failures, and more often since going to fully boxed/hydroformed frames.

Since they also make the new frames lighter than the old ones, they likely won't be as strong in the vertical direction (C channel is better optimized for vertical loads)... unless they are using higher strength steel.

 

[IdaSHO]

Since they also make the new frames lighter than the old ones, they likely won't be as strong in the vertical direction (C channel is better optimized for vertical loads)... unless they are using higher strength steel.

Yep, and when it fails it doesn't simply deflect/bend. It "tears" open as the material is so thin.
And I believe you are spot on with your CG behind the rear axle putting upward forces on the chassis assessment.

 

[Mickey Bitsko]

As always, not a bright consumer... aka, zero common sense.
Similar to the tacoma trd consumer..imo

 

[Over The Silent Planet]

Holding sellers liable for the purchaser's decision is a dangerous road to go down. Where do you draw the line?

Kinda hard to tell a guy that it’s all his fault and he should’ve known better when the supposed expert with all the experience steers him wildly wrong into a disastrous situation. IF that’s what actually happened.

I think that documenting the weights and capacities of both the trailer and the truck (including the truck’s door jamb numbers) for the protection of all parties involved and the sharing of liability when a poor recommendation is made by a licensed “expert” should be mandatory.

 

[rruff]

...licensed “expert”...

Salesmen sell things. They aren't experts regarding the stuff they sell, rather the good ones are skilled at manipulating $$$ out of customer pockets, and that is about it.

If you can show that camper dealers have legal liability for the claims made by salesmen, that could be interesting...

 

[Highlander]

Is not it better and safer to pull an RV than having a slid in camper?

 

[Mickey Bitsko]

Is not it better and safer to pull an RV than having a slid in camper?

Unfortunately, many are not doing that correctly either..
When a truck manufacturer says a vehicle can carry/ tow or get xxx mpgs,
It's tested in a very controlled environment.
How many times can a vehicle haul/ tow It's max load in sunny southern California compared to the rockies.. big difference.

 

[RoyJ]

I believe it's a frame defect, not caused by general overloading. A frame doesn't fail by overloading per se, it's the bending moment. As rear heavy as that camper is, it's no where close to this:

1 ton chassis are designed to lift 3000 lbs 6' behind the rear axle, day in day out.

That's way more bending stress than a 6000 lbs camper with a CG slightly behind the rear axle.

 

[JaSAn]

. . .
1 ton chassis are designed to lift 3000 lbs 6' behind the rear axle, day in day out . . .

Where did you find that spec?

P.S. Wrecker frames are reinforced.

 

[PirateMcGee]

I believe it's a frame defect, not caused by general overloading. A frame doesn't fail by overloading per se, it's the bending moment. As rear heavy as that camper is, it's no where close to this:

1 ton chassis are designed to lift 3000 lbs 6' behind the rear axle, day in day out.

That's way more bending stress than a 6000 lbs camper with a CG slightly behind the rear axle.

That wrecker also isn't a dually crew cab.