Good article in Outside.

grizzlypath

grizzlypath

Active member
Now I will up front say I understand that it is black-box in some cases how GVWR is calculated and can even depend on administrative restrictions in countries. Also that upgrading certain components could potentially bulk up the GVWR "weak link", such as suspension or tires. However, as a general rule of thumb for most of us it's good to strive for < or = to GVWR if possible. That being said, I have a pretty dang minimalist build where I've strained the brain with weight considerations.

4runner.jpg

rear platform.jpg60-percent.jpgtrunk.jpg

The other day I ran over a scale while out, fully loaded with a week's worth of camp gear, my wife, and son-
IMG_5536.jpg

The placard from the vehicle:
IMG_5794.jpg

Permanent changes:
+44 larger tires (net increase)
+30 1/2 plywood platform build
+70 DIY 0.120 wall sliders
+117 winch plate (55) + winch (62)
+50 Sherpa rack
-20 OEM roof rails
-45 60% removed seats
+0 upgraded suspension

Accessories:
+130 Roofnest RTT
+30 fridge
+41 5-gal water jug
+50 recovery gear
+400 2.2 humans

----
Total* add'l weight: 897
*does not include all the other misc camping gear
*approximate

4Runner GVRW = 6300LB
Scale weight = 6150LB

Kind of just food for thought and makes you wonder about some of the mega-builds you see out and about.
 
Last edited:
AggieOE

AggieOE

Trying to escape the city
It's not a bad article and definitely makes some good points but it is 100% biased to the F250 and larger Fords and his math is blatantly wrong. The only relevant comparison numbers would be in the suspension, gearing, and brake upgrades to manage the weight. The $18.4k tray is not relevant.
So, the cost savings in fuel in 20k miles is completely inaccurate.

That being said, I'm glad the point is continuing to be made that everyone needs to start really understanding the GVWR and that less is more.
 
dstefan

dstefan

Well-known member
No arguments with any of the comments, and the article makes lot of good points, but this comment is out to lunch AND raises an important point:
"Driving down a simple dirt road of the kind accessible to Subarus and similar, its frame bent in half and the engine blew."

I’ve seen all the detailed videos of this incident and while the guys rig was way heavy, it had been well built, including frame mods for the weight. The problem was he was bombing at 70mph down the road in DVNP got airborne in a dip he misgauged and slammed into a bank and then bent his frame and perfed his radiator. The whole video sequence is pretty educational, including what he had to do to get out of there.

But my point is not to justify overweight vehicles, but rather that we all (mostly) mod our rigs to be more capable. The challenge is that just because you COULD go 70 on "a simple dirt road of the kind accessible to Subarus” you really should not. I’ve been nearly head-on’d by yahoos like this driving out of control. The guy deserved what happened.

Mods (and I have my share) are not a justification for crazy.
 
AbleGuy

AbleGuy

Officious Intermeddler
billiebob said:
You probably need a bigger pickup truck than you think...

No

You probably need less stuff than you think...

there, fixed it
Click to expand...

One of the best philosophies shared here

The too much stuff debate strikes me as somewhat ironic though, when I realize that, other than driving to get to our destination and later sleeping in our rig, when we are out on our adventures we spend most all of our time outside…away from our over packed, FSC rig.

Once in camp, we’re usually out either hiking, biking or kayaking… which in each case means we have only the most minimal amount of gear with us. Here, the ‘too much gear’ scenario gets fully stripped away.

It’s just a weird yin/yang-ish conflict of perceived needs I guess.🥴
 
Last edited:
J

jchasse

Active member
dstefan said:
No arguments with any of the comments, and the article makes lot of good points, but this comment is out to lunch AND raises an important point:
"Driving down a simple dirt road of the kind accessible to Subarus and similar, its frame bent in half and the engine blew."

I’ve seen all the detailed videos of this incident and while the guys rig was way heavy, it had been well built, including frame mods for the weight. The problem was he was bombing at 70mph down the road in DVNP got airborne in a dip he misgauged and slammed into a bank and then bent his frame and perfed his radiator. The whole video sequence is pretty educational, including what he had to do to get out of there.

But my point is not to justify overweight vehicles, but rather that we all (mostly) mod our rigs to be more capable. The challenge is that just because you COULD go 70 on "a simple dirt road of the kind accessible to Subarus” you really should not. I’ve been nearly head-on’d by yahoos like this driving out of control. The guy deserved what happened.

Mods (and I have my share) are not a justification for crazy.
Click to expand...
interesting, can you share where you saw the videos?
 
dstefan

dstefan

Well-known member
I hate to give this numbskull any more views on his YT channel, but here you go.

dstefan said:
View attachment 759525
This was posted recently on the “Overlandy Meme Thread“. Having seen a video of his in the past and thinking it was a well-built Tundra, I found these two videos about how this happened that are quite detailed and pretty interesting as to the cause and results of the event (along with being typical Youtuby clickbait epic journey stuff).

The first video (chapter four, part two) shows the actual incident that bent the frame starting shortly after the 17 minute mark. The second video (chapter five) recaps the issue, but then goes on to show him limping this screwed up Tundra up over Lippincott Pass (during the night and with a fast leaking, radiator!) into Death Valley where he gets picked up.

The owner appears to have built this rig to be a combination overland vehicle, and a desert racer. Early in the chapter 4 video, he speaks about the suspension allowing him to bomb over the road, and mentioned he’s going 65 mph in one stretch. You’ll see the frame bending incident was him mis-gauging a dip in the road because he was going so fast. He also mentions that he can’t believe how well the truck handles the camper despite the camper’s 2200lb weight! I suspect this guy is/was more than double his trucks payload, not to mention it’s a crew cab and the camper sits farther back.

He sure made a lot of questionable decisions, and he does admit to everything that happened being fully his fault, but he doesn’t address the role speed and weight played in the problems he had. I pretty much think he’s an idiot, but I have some grudging admiration for how he got himself out of the fix he got into, and the toughness of the poor Tundra.


Click to expand...
 
IdaSHO

IdaSHO

IDACAMPER
Like it or not, unless you have a vehicle that falls under commercial reg’s or are obnoxiously over your GVWR, being over has little to nothing to do with legality in the USA. Feel free to prove me wrong, and be sure to site instances that resulted in charges and/or lawsuits. 😉

Ive said it before. Max GVWR for light trucks is driven almost entirely by vehicle class and registration $$. MFGs know this. Which is why you will fine so many mentions of trucks like the F250 and F350 using the same chassis, axles, brakes, gearing, etc, but have greatly varying GVWRs. And with regard to registration, there are many places in the US that picking up an F250 with a GVWR less than 10,000lbs costs considerably less than the “same truck” in F350 badging with a GVWR greater than 10,000lbs. All because crossing that 10k line bumps the truck from class 2 to class 3. This can effect registration as well as insurance costs.
 
AggieOE

AggieOE

Trying to escape the city
dstefan said:
No arguments with any of the comments, and the article makes lot of good points, but this comment is out to lunch AND raises an important point:
"Driving down a simple dirt road of the kind accessible to Subarus and similar, its frame bent in half and the engine blew."

I’ve seen all the detailed videos of this incident and while the guys rig was way heavy, it had been well built, including frame mods for the weight. The problem was he was bombing at 70mph down the road in DVNP got airborne in a dip he misgauged and slammed into a bank and then bent his frame and perfed his radiator. The whole video sequence is pretty educational, including what he had to do to get out of there.

But my point is not to justify overweight vehicles, but rather that we all (mostly) mod our rigs to be more capable. The challenge is that just because you COULD go 70 on "a simple dirt road of the kind accessible to Subarus” you really should not. I’ve been nearly head-on’d by yahoos like this driving out of control. The guy deserved what happened.

Mods (and I have my share) are not a justification for crazy.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the backstory. Context is key.
 
B

burleyman

Active member
Somehow, purpose built trucks evolved from basic workhorses to gaudy, flashy things that should carry clowns or Shriners that disembark with funny little cars and bicycles with unround tires with squeeze bulb horns. I own one. I'm also old.

My reason for more truck than camper was to hopefully be able to drag it down the road if it came unglued. Master of Sparks style.

 
IdaSHO

IdaSHO

IDACAMPER
billiebob said:
To say the GVWR is a scam to collect $$$ is as backwards as saying distracted driving and impaired driving is fake news.
Click to expand...

I dont believe anyone referred to it as a scam. More like red-tape.

And if you do not believe the over/under differences of that magical 10k GVWR, thats on you. Don't blame us for your ignorance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
188,207
Messages
2,903,797
Members
229,665
Latest member
SANelson

Members online

Total: 605 (members: 34, guests: 571)
Top