Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-18-2016, 10:40 AM   #29
Rivet Master
dkottum's Avatar
2012 25' Flying Cloud
Battle Lake , Minnesota
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,845
I think of payload number is a shopping tool, once it arrives at the dealer lot and they add any accessories (running boards, bed liner, mats, etc) the number has no accurate meaning. We buy the vehicle and add or remove anything, it becomes less accurate. We use GVWR, GAWR, GCWR (listed on the door sticker), and tire ratings at prescribed tire pressure to know our load capacities. The tire rating on the sidewall is at maximum pressure stated on the sidewall.

Every vehicle, load and hitch weight is different. I have not weighed ours without any w.d. applied. I do know w.d moves some of the hitch and bed load from the rear axle to the front axle, and some to the trailer axles. Our w.d. hitch has screw jacks to easily make adjustments, then go around and weigh again. (Interesting they or the scale wouldn't allow us to weigh again without pulling off and going around.)

By the numbers I see, I believe we may overload our rear axle without weight distribution. It doesn't matter because we would never tow without a w.d. hitch. Yours may be different depending on load, hitch weight, GVWR and individual axle ratings.

Doug and Cheryl
2012 FC RB, Michelin 16, ProPride 1400
2016 Ram 1500 Laramie Crew Cab 4X4 Ecodiesel 3.92 axles

The Truth is More Important Than the Facts
dkottum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2016, 12:30 PM   #30
2 Rivet Member
Portland , Oregon
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 67
This is a review I wrote after a trip to Utah last year. I have an SOB that is similar in weight as yours.


We just returned from a 2300 mile trip, Portland, OR to Southern Utah and back. Figured I would do a review on how the Tundra tows.

Tundra is a 4WD TRD dual cab with the 5.7L iForce V8. Route was mainly interstates (I84 and I15) with state routes (Utah SR28, SR24, SR12, SR89, SR20) mixed in. Travel trailer weighed in at 6600 lbs wet. Tundra weighed in at 7050. With the trailer attached, the Tundra payload was exceeded by about 150 lbs. All other measures were within spec.

Speeds were kept between 59-62 MPH, except on grades as explained below. Gas mileage averaged from a low of 9.4 MPG to a high of 13.5 MPG per tank. Wind and elevation changes were the most common factor for differences. Overall, the average for the trip was between 10 and 11 MPG.

On level terrain, cruise control was set and the truck chugged along with minimal effort. There was some jostling/pogoing and one definitely "knew" the trailer was there, but there were no oscillation issues (uncontrolled sway) even in heavy winds or being passed by semis. The truck is softly sprung (TRD package) and has P rated tires; this probably accounted for the pogo effect. At no time did I feel unsafe.

The route contained many long steep ascents and descents. 8% grades were not uncommon and I saw as high as 10%.
The Tundra was also effective at pulling on hills. Except on the steepest grades, 50-55 MPH could be maintained easily, albeit with the tach north of 3500 RPM. On the steepest grades, 8%+, I would let off the pedal at 40-45 MPH to keep the RPMs within a comfortable range. No, not for the truck, because they are designed to run as high as 5000 RPM, but for my sanity because north of 3500 the sound is uncomfortable.

Downhill was another story. One really needed to get ahead of the curve and slow down to about 40-45 MPH prior to the descent. Otherwise, it felt like a runaway freight train and no amount of downshifting was going to reign it in without using some serious braking. Now, mind you, I am talking about 6%+ grades that were 1+ miles in length. One really doesn’t want to be riding the brakes for 2-3 miles. But, when I downshifted prior to starting the descent, I was able to maintain decent control, as long as I kept the speed slower than 45 MPH with a combination of braking and low gears. These moments were work and not all that pleasant.

The Tundra cruise control was probably the most disappointing aspect of the experience. The cruise control would inexplicably cut out on any serious grade. Cruise set on 60 MPH, truck begins ascent, truck downshifts, tach goes to 3500 RPMs, no problem right. Wrong. Even though the truck was marching up the hill, the tach bounced and the speed started dropping like an anvil off a cliff. Sometimes the speed would drop 20+ MPH before any sign of shifting. If I cancelled the CC, I could manually drive up the hill no problem. Disconcerting to the point I would take it out of cruise control when approaching any grade.

Downhill was even worse. CC set on 60 MPH cresting the hill, truck would start accelerating to 65-70 MPH before any hint of downshifting to control the speed. By this time it was too late for engine braking to be effective. The result was like a runaway freight train with me looking for the emergency ramps.

Thus, the cruise control was only effective on relatively flat terrain.

My conclusion is that the Tundra is a good match for trailers this size or smaller. I would not want to go bigger. And, if you only tow occasionally where there are steep grades, i.e. east of the Mississippi. If you are a weekend camper or travel within a few hundred miles from home, the Tundra makes a great TV.

2015 Nash 24M
2014 Tundra DC Limited TRD (Sold)
2016 Ram 3500 CTD SRW CC
Blue Ox SwayPro
Still looking at Airstreams....
MacPDX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2016, 10:53 PM   #31
Rivet Master
Currently Looking...
Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 577
Originally Posted by FCStreamer View Post
I don't understand the distinction. Doesn't the payload number take into account the rear axel weight capacity?

I mean, my truck is not going to tell me it can have a 2000 lb payload if the axel can't handle it?
You need to think about where you are going to carry that payload.

Just for a moment, forget the trailer. In this example, you are going to put a 1000 lb cube of metal (similar in magnitude to tongue weight) in the back of your truck. If you put that 1000 lb cube somewhere between the truck axles, the two axles will each carry a portion of the load. All is good.

Now imagine that you are going to carry that 1000 lb cube right over the rear axle. The rear axle load will go up by 1000 lb, and the front axle won't change.

Now slide that 1000 lb cube back to where it rides on your tailgate (if you have one), positioned somewhere out behind the rear bumper. The axles are now not each seeing a similar share of the 1000 lb load. The rear axle is carrying more than 1000 lbs due to the effect of the lever applied by the 1000 lb cube. The front axle is carrying less than it was empty. The two still add up to 1000 lbs (imagine something like +1200 on the rear, -200 on the front, just using example numbers) but your rear axle loading matters now. You've gone from a portion of the 1000 lbs on the rear axle, to more than 1000 lbs, all with the same load.

None of the weights are real in this example, but the concept is. It matters where you carry the load.

Now swap the 1000 lb cube for your actual tongue weight (same relative position behind the bumper). Now apply weight distribution to (virtually) move the 1000 lbs forward, restoring front axle load. If you do so, your rear axle should be fine, but you won't know until you weigh it, loaded for travel.

The reason that the two axle ratings add up to more than the gross vehicle weight ratings is that the manufacturer doesn't know where you are going to carry the payload. They have to provide some margin when they design and rate the vehicle. You just don't know how much, and if it is all still good, until you weigh it.

Hope that helps.

jcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2016, 10:54 PM   #32
2 Rivet Member
Currently Looking...
Northville , Michigan
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 31
Goodyear Tire Co has put together a really good guide that talks about GVWR, GCVWR, GAWR, etc. They also provide a recommendation on how to weigh your rig. As noted, you could overload one axle. Similarly, you could overload one wheel and still be under the rating for the axle. Take a look at:
SailorSam205 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2016, 06:07 PM   #33
1 Rivet Member
2014 16' Sport
Newport Beach , California
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 12

Is your Tundra a 4WD? If so and you have the factory towing kit - standard for most Toyota 4WDs with a hitch mount, you should have heavier brakes and a closed transmission with transmission radiator mounted in front of the radiator.
CalifBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2016, 06:43 AM   #34
2015 27' Flying Cloud
Spring , Texas
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 73
Yes - 4WD + tow package + hitch.

Not sure if it has transmission radiator?

PSU1981 is offline   Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Excess Parrbond on A/S Skin Cousin Eddie Leaks - Weatherstrips, Gaskets, Caulks & Sealants 5 10-03-2012 03:37 PM
Excess parts available Exsys Cabinets, Counter Tops & Furnishings 12 02-18-2012 07:59 PM
How much towing capacity do I need? altamont Tow Vehicles 19 02-25-2007 01:16 PM
Carbon Monoxide: How much is too much? Lotek General Appliance Topics 3 01-08-2005 06:06 AM
How much is to much garry Our Community 13 07-08-2003 03:53 PM

Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities

Copyright 2002-2015 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.