Tacoma that's 1600 lbs over GVWR... recertifying and wheeling

[kmacafee]

It isn't a matter of opinion. I already went through this in another thread awhile back. As I recall an unladen Tacoma took 180 ft to stop, while an unladen Tremor took 222 ft... both C&D test data. It isn't only about weight, tires also come into play... but if you look at the measurements there is a very clear trend of heavy pickups taking longer to stop than light ones. If you put the same load this Tacoma is carrying on the Tremor, it would still lose. The Tremor has bigger and stronger brakes of course, but traction is usually the limiting factor.


A person driving a truck that is over GVWR is intending to get in a wreck?!

I may not know much about law, but I know something about physics, and the liability and warranty number (GVWR) that manufacturers put out, isn't a "safety limit" by any stretch of the imagination. Stopping, handling, maneuverability, etc... are far worse on larger vehicles. I truly would like to know if the people who keep saying it is a safety issue, are under the delusion that the big trucks and RVs on the road are safer to other drivers than this guy's Tacoma?

What determines if a vehicle in good working order is safe enough? The driver.

Speaking of big trucks... I was on the I70 at night driving towards Indy a few months back, and it scared the crap out of me. I was surrounded by semis in a hurry... plus there was road construction every few miles, which meant changes onto bumpy asphalt, barricades, and other things that required close attention. And it was windy... which meant the trucks were bobbing and weaving a bit. If I left a gap someone would slot in... bumper to bumper. I just hoped nobody sneezed, because I would have been squashed in an instant.

Its not necessary to prove intent with negligence. We are all guilty of it at some point. Just sit at a Home Depot and watch people strap heavy stuff on their car roof using twine or small straps. Do they intend to have that load fly off and cause an accident, potentially killing someone? I'd say no but are they negligent in not using the right equipment? You bet and a jury would probably agree.

 

[rruff]

Its not necessary to prove intent with negligence. We are all guilty of it at some point. Just sit at a Home Depot and watch people strap heavy stuff on their car roof using twine or small straps. Do they intend to have that load fly off and cause an accident, potentially killing someone? I'd say no but are they negligent in not using the right equipment? You bet and a jury would probably agree.

If you think the driver of the Tacoma in this thread or similar vehicles are being dangerously negligent, then please make a case for it. I think I've proved that they are not.

 

[nickw]

Actually... they stop less well, generally... because of the weight and contact pressure. The brakes are bigger just because they need them in order to be traction limited... which I'd assume is the low bar most manufacturers try to achieve.

You can also look at the difference in handling and maneuverability, and the lighter truck will win there as well... especially if you make the common and smart upgrades to tires and suspension for carrying a load.

Where public safety is concerned, the only viable argument against the Tacoma is that it might be more likely to fall apart on the highway and cause an accident. We can speculate on how often that happens, but I'd bet it's rare enough to be a non-issue. What may or may not happen in the back country, or how reliable the truck is, is not the concern of anyone but the owner.

In summary... there is no viable public safety issue that can be sensibly pinned to GVWR.


The 1st is say a 2600 lb load added to each, like the Tacoma in this thread.

The 2nd one is comparing both trucks loaded to the same total weight, which would mean the Tacoma has ~2500 lb greater load added than the Tremor. Like I said, that would only be true if the Tacoma was still traction limited, but it's likely that this isn't true >GVWR.


If the Tremor wins the "dragging brakes on a descent" contest, it won't be by a lot.

Also being 2500 lbs heavier makes the Tremor an inherently bigger hazard to others, but safer for its occupants.

Not sure where you are going with some of that, but the more a truck weighs the less it's going to be traction limited / skid and the heavier duty the truck the less that extra weight is going to effect chassis balance and brake bias. To your point, the larger brakes are needed to be traction limited because there is more traction to be had with a heavier rig.

So what you are saying, load up my Ram 2500 to it's 10,000 lb GVWR (+3000 lbs), load up a Tacoma to 10,000 lbs (+5500 lbs), you are saying they'll both stop that weight equally as good? Add in hills and it won't be dramatically different?

 

[nickw]

If you think the driver of the Tacoma in this thread or similar vehicles are being dangerously negligent, then please make a case for it. I think I've proved that they are not.

You certainly have not "proved" a thing, don't conflate your opinion with reality.

 

[Alloy]

You certainly have not "proved" a thing, don't conflate your opinion with reality.

Yes, there been allot proven in this thread. One thing is I made a mistake buying a F450. I should have spent $20,000 upgrading my Tacoma or CRV.

 

[kmacafee]

It isn't a matter of opinion. I already went through this in another thread awhile back. As I recall an unladen Tacoma took 180 ft to stop, while an unladen Tremor took 222 ft... both C&D test data. It isn't only about weight, tires also come into play... but if you look at the measurements there is a very clear trend of heavy pickups taking longer to stop than light ones. If you put the same load this Tacoma is carrying on the Tremor, it would still lose. The Tremor has bigger and stronger brakes of course, but traction is usually the limiting factor.


A person driving a truck that is over GVWR is intending to get in a wreck?!

I may not know much about law, but I know something about physics, and the liability and warranty number (GVWR) that manufacturers put out, isn't a "safety limit" by any stretch of the imagination. Stopping, handling, maneuverability, etc... are far worse on larger vehicles. I truly would like to know if the people who keep saying it is a safety issue, are under the delusion that the big trucks and RVs on the road are safer to other drivers than this guy's Tacoma?

What determines if a vehicle in good working order is safe enough? The driver.

Speaking of big trucks... I was on the I70 at night driving towards Indy a few months back, and it scared the crap out of me. I was surrounded by semis in a hurry... plus there was road construction every few miles, which meant changes onto bumpy asphalt, barricades, and other things that required close attention. And it was windy... which meant the trucks were bobbing and weaving a bit. If I left a gap someone would slot in... bumper to bumper. I just hoped nobody sneezed, because I would have been squashed in an instant.

If you think the driver of the Tacoma in this thread or similar vehicles are being dangerously negligent, then please make a case for it. I think I've proved that they are not.

The case is that he is knowingly driving a vehicle that is grossly overweight and not designed to carry that additional weight. Honestly, many, many overlanding vehicles and RV's are probably overweight every day, largely because people don't think to get them weighed. In this case, the driver knows he's over weight and is trying to get a mechanic to sign off thats its ok, and is stupid enough to post about it where any attorney can read it. So, to use your own words, it's the driver who's ultimately responsible. As for GVWR, it is set by the manufacturer but it is a critical number, especially in civil and insurance cases. And you haven't proven anything. You're entitled to your own opinion but not your own set of facts.

 

[rruff]

You certainly have not "proved" a thing, don't conflate your opinion with reality.

Physics is the science of physical reality... not opinion. You're thinking of marketing and politics...

If you can make a Tacoma (like the one in this thread) handle and brake better than a stock 1 ton with the same 2600 lb load, then how can it be called a hazard to other road users? Relative to what? And why are all the larger vehicles that handle and brake like pigs, deemed safe?

How do automakers comply with federally mandated crash worthiness if they don't use the gov FMVSS standard ? Surely GVW is an important consideration in design.

Pretty sure they are tested unloaded. A realistic load would be tough to standardize.

The case is that he is knowingly driving a vehicle that is grossly overweight and not designed to carry that additional weight.

He is knowingly driving a vehicle that brakes and handles better than stock 3/4 ton with that weight... and brakes and handles way better than a lot of vehicles on the road... ergo it is not "dangerous" by any objective measure. Am I beating a dead horse?

 

[nickw]

Physics is the science of physical reality... not opinion. You're thinking of marketing and politics...

If you can make a Tacoma (like the one in this thread) handle and brake better than a stock 1 ton with the same 2600 lb load, then how can it be called a hazard to other road users? Relative to what? And why are all the larger vehicles that handle and brake like pigs, deemed safe?


Pretty sure they are tested unloaded. A realistic load would be tough to standardize.


He is knowingly driving a vehicle that brakes and handles better than stock 3/4 ton with that weight... and brakes and handles way better than a lot of vehicles on the road... ergo it is not "dangerous" by any objective measure. Am I beating a dead horse?

You are making the logical leap that you can make them brake the same which is not supported by fact nor physics. In some scenarios or in some very specific circumstances, maybe, I guess it's not impossible...but generally speaking in real world conditions, no way.

Use the other example you suggested, a 10,000 lb Tacoma vs a 10,000 lb max GVWR 3/4T platform.

Your not beating a dead horse your banging your drum.

 

[kmacafee]

Physics is the science of physical reality... not opinion. You're thinking of marketing and politics...

If you can make a Tacoma (like the one in this thread) handle and brake better than a stock 1 ton with the same 2600 lb load, then how can it be called a hazard to other road users? Relative to what? And why are all the larger vehicles that handle and brake like pigs, deemed safe?


Pretty sure they are tested unloaded. A realistic load would be tough to standardize.


He is knowingly driving a vehicle that brakes and handles better than stock 3/4 ton with that weight... and brakes and handles way better than a lot of vehicles on the road... ergo it is not "dangerous" by any objective measure. Am I beating a dead horse?

It really doesn't matter what the driver thinks about his vehicle. He's significantly over GVWR- he might get away with it but if he's involved in an accident and goes to court, his opinion won't really matter much. The only entity that can change the GVWR is the manufacturer. No amount of upgrades can change what the manufacturer says the GVWR is. Does the manufacturer set that number low to cover their asses? Almost certainly but it is what it is.
The bigger question is - why load a vehicle that heavy when it's not designed for that much weight? Why not select the right tool for the job?

 

[rruff]

You are making the logical leap that you can make them brake the same which is not supported by fact nor physics. In some scenarios or in some very specific circumstances, maybe, I guess it's not impossible...but generally speaking in real world conditions, no way.

The "very specific circumstance" of both carrying a 2600 lb load above their curb weights, and a panic stop from 70 mph. The Tacoma has a big "headstart" with a stopping distance of 180 ft vs 229 ft at curb weight. Even if you assume that the Tacoma is brake limited at >GVWR, it still stops quicker. If you put larger diameter tires on the Tacoma and it's brake limited, it would be a little worse. There isn't much in it.

It really doesn't matter what the driver thinks about his vehicle. He's significantly over GVWR- he might get away with it but if he's involved in an accident and goes to court, his opinion won't really matter much.

You may have missed that GVWR isn't a legal limit for the owner. Being over GVWR does absolve the manufacturer from liability though, which is the purpose of it.

 

[rruff]

To put braking into perspective by comparing it to a large RV:

"Your stopping distance is affected by three factors; perception distance, reaction distance, and braking distance. Your RV is longer and larger than most other vehicles on the road and the stopping distance will not be the same as in your car or truck.

Perception Distance is the distance you travel from the time you notice a hazard until your brain registers it. For most people it's about three quarters of a second or about 60 feet at 55 miles per hour.
Reaction Distance is the time it takes to apply the brakes which is another 60 feet.
Braking Distance in a 40 to 50 foot RV at 55 miles per hour takes another 4.5 seconds.
That is a total of 6 seconds and a stopping distance of 500 feet at 55 miles per hour."

The C&D data doesn't have the reaction component, so removing this (120 ft) from the above analysis, gives a stopping distance of 380 ft at 55 mph... which would be proportional to V^2 or 615 ft at 70 mph... which is ~2.5x the stopping distance of the loaded pickups. So which vehicle is unsafe?

 

[nickw]

The "very specific circumstance" of both carrying a 2600 lb load above their curb weights, and a panic stop from 70 mph. The Tacoma has a big "headstart" with a stopping distance of 180 ft vs 229 ft at curb weight. Even if you assume that the Tacoma is brake limited at >GVWR, it still stops quicker. If you put larger diameter tires on the Tacoma and it's brake limited, it would be a little worse. There isn't much in it.


You may have missed that GVWR isn't a legal limit for the owner. Being over GVWR does absolve the manufacturer from liability though, which is the purpose of it.

The original comments was general braking you keep steering the conversation to try and make your point, I'm trying to be intellectually honest by saying it's not 100% impossible given the right circumstances, nothing ever is, but your "facts" are not adding up like you think.

Somebody is going to be held liable - in the case of being overloaded, details matter of course, but it would likely be the owner of the vehicle unless a mechanic signed off on (in PA it seems) or somebody did some shoddy upgrades, etc.

 

[nickw]

To put braking into perspective by comparing it to a large RV:

"Your stopping distance is affected by three factors; perception distance, reaction distance, and braking distance. Your RV is longer and larger than most other vehicles on the road and the stopping distance will not be the same as in your car or truck.

Perception Distance is the distance you travel from the time you notice a hazard until your brain registers it. For most people it's about three quarters of a second or about 60 feet at 55 miles per hour.
Reaction Distance is the time it takes to apply the brakes which is another 60 feet.
Braking Distance in a 40 to 50 foot RV at 55 miles per hour takes another 4.5 seconds.
That is a total of 6 seconds and a stopping distance of 500 feet at 55 miles per hour."

The C&D data doesn't have the reaction component, so removing this (120 ft) from the above analysis, gives a stopping distance of 380 ft at 55 mph... which would be proportional to V^2 or 615 ft at 70 mph... which is ~2.5x the stopping distance of the loaded pickups. So which vehicle is unsafe?

Since we are moving the goalposts to RVs why not just jump up to Semi Trucks?"

How Long Does it Take to Stop a Fully Loaded Semi-Truck?

Even the slightest difference in weight or speed can result in a staggering change in stopping distance for a semi-truck.

www.keatingfirmlaw.com

"The effect that weight has on a truck's stopping distance is a bit of a mixed bag. Logically, the more weight that is put onto a truck, the more work the breaks have to do to stop it, and the more heat that the brakes absorb.

This would lead one to think that loaded trucks take longer to stop than empty ones, but I'm afraid that's not right. The breaks, springs, shock absorbers, and tires on heavy load trucks are specifically designed to work better when the vehicle is loaded.

This means that empty trucks take longer to stop than loaded trucks, and require a greater stopping distance. There is less traction with an empty vehicle. One can end up bouncing and locking up their wheels, which results in much poorer breaking times."

 

[Alloy]

The "very specific circumstance" of both carrying a 2600 lb load above their curb weights, and a panic stop from 70 mph. The Tacoma has a big "headstart" with a stopping distance of 180 ft vs 229 ft at curb weight. Even if you assume that the Tacoma is brake limited at >GVWR, it still stops quicker. If you put larger diameter tires on the Tacoma and it's brake limited, it would be a little worse. There isn't much in it.


You may have missed that GVWR isn't a legal limit for the owner. Being over GVWR does absolve the manufacturer from liability though, which is the purpose of it.

Both the Tacoma and Tremor are going to do the Ike Gauntlet carrying 2600lbs over the curb weight.

On the way up one of the trucks overheated. Which truck was it?

On the way down the brakes on one truck caught fire. Which truck was it?

 

[rruff]

On the way up one of the trucks overheated. Which truck was it?
On the way down the brakes on one truck caught fire. Which truck was it?

The one being driven by an idiot...

If it can tow a 6100 lb trailer up and down it with easy, it shouldn't have a bit of trouble with a 2600 lb load.

Can the 2016 Toyota Tacoma Tow Better than the 2015 Tacoma on the Ike Gauntlet? [Video]

The 2016 Toyota Tacoma is ready to take on the mighty Ike Gauntlet towing test. During the test, we take a truck - loaded nearly to the max - up and down an 8 m

tfltruck.com