sell my new tundra? add a leaf? stay single?

[carl28]

UPDATE -

Regarding the 28s, based on a post from my companion thread (AS brochures length and weight mysteries), I am now feeling the weight (sorry couldnt help it).........because my charts are probably off even more than I thought.

Steverino says his WD hitch load on his 27 ft is 900 lbs loaded up more or less normally with gas and water and clothes and stuff. That means his real hitch load for a 27 ft is somewhere near 1300 lbs. The 28 ft would likely be even more. I cant verify his loading exactly but its a scaled number.

Assuming this is a realistic number, its maxing it out tight on a crewmax. After my leer cap and a few minor tools, I have a max of about 1300 lbs to work with for me, cargo, hitch load, passengers, step boards, etc. If 900 (or more) is gone from the hitch, then I have only 400 lbs left for me and anything else including passengers.

So it will go down the road on the interstate, but its tight and maybe sagging some, and over the specified "limit"

With just one passenger, I cant load anything in the truck at all and not be over the GVWR. I think the 25s are ok but I guess I am sort waffling now on the 27s and 28s. I will not be in a rush to go loose my lovely and wonderful toyota though

[dkottum]

As an architect, perhaps you see the plan of the 28' as more efficient use of living space than the front bed models, and better structurally as well with their weight of the door and pano windows held by a compromised rear assembly. The next closest thing going down of this type, is the 23' front sofa or dinette models. I mention this as a response to a wish for travel to remote areas. I do some residential design, and hate to leave those books at home, but I do.

[Gene]

Originally Posted by carl28

Steverino says his WD hitch load on his 27 ft is 900 lbs loaded up more or less normally with gas and water and clothes and stuff. That means his real hitch load for a 27 ft is somewhere near 1300 lbs. The 28 ft would likely be even more. I cant verify his loading exactly but its a scaled number.

Not having seen your other thread, I am confused. Has he weighed the tongue? Was it 1,300 or 900? If 1,300, tongue wt. to the truck is roughly 870. But tongue wt. is supposed to be 10-15% of total weight of the trailer, or if loaded to maximum GVWR, would be 760 to 1,140. I'm unclear what "real hitch load" means. Sounds like Steverino's trailer is way overloaded in the front, or maybe not.

One sure thing, you need a partner who is short and thin and you need to leave the books at work.

Gene

[BillTex]

I am not sure how reading the sticker on the door and validating your load at the scales is guessing. Rated capacity is what it is…

It amazes me how Folks will rationalize over loading a vehicle, weighing every last item you want to bring, leaving luxuries behind…
Do you really want to go through the weight reduction program every time you pack?

I travel like that when backpacking…but not in the AS.

Get a vehicle with enough capacity and travel comfortably.

These posts always baffle me, why would you want to repeatedly use any machine at its max rated capacity?

Must be the Engineer in me…but I don’t gamble with safety…

Good luck.

Bill

[carl28]

BILLTEX - I am starting to agree - why fight it, just have a bit more than you need rather than less??? and bring your toys....... I think the energy behind all this discussion with tundra is having to leave the brand. Or perhaps its that people get attached to their trucks or dont really desire to go trading cars or driving a stiffer truck when stories of success abound otherwise. Then a spell of doubt is cast on the numbers and everything becomes murky by choice. But to be fair hardly anyone is telling me I am going to break something. I think some are all just living in the safety factor, and only a few will experience hitting the wall on something

GENE - the 900 lb number was the weight-distributed load on the scales. He unhitched and weighed both axles, then re-hitched and weighed the TV axles, and it went up exactly 900 lbs. He said it was loaded "reasonably" and with fuel and water

[steverino]

Just to clarify - sounds like one of my posts caused confusion. Carl's got it right.

I performed two cat scale readings:
1. Truck and trailer, hitched with Equalizer WD. full fuel, full propane, full fresh water, both vehicles loaded for a typical trip.
2. Truck only. left the WD bars attached to the truck, so it included full hitch weight.

Total difference in steer axle and drive axle weights from the two readings, was 900 lbs. Which I attribute to tongue weight.

Steve
2010 27FB Flying Cloud
2010 F250 Crew Cab 4x4 6.4L Diesel

[2airishuman]

hi carl

welcome to the forums

and good4u trying to sort ALL of these issues, PRIOR to buying.

i see your questions (in these 2 threads) lumped into 3 general categories...

1. trailer specs, build issues, structural differences and so on...

2. w/d in regard to hitches, calculating vs measuring tongue weight and how that all relates to tv selection.

3. tv ratings, matching tv to trailer and meaningful modifications to the tv that may enhance real world towing.

the tangential issue related to #1 is "what size/floorplan stream do i need"

the tangential issues related to #2 are many and will eventually involve SELECTION of a hitch apparatus.

the tangential issues related to #3 are also many but for now focus on axles, springs and supporting payload.

is that a reasonable summary?
_________

for now this post focuses on #3 and a bit on #2.

#1 and some of #2 will go into your OTHER thread.

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463...ies-69871.html

Originally Posted by carl28

...am headed towards buying a 28 ft flying cloud. My goal for now is to travel alone for weeks or months to more remote places. (I know the 28 is a lot for one person but thats another thread)...

i solo in a 34 and go to remote locations...

it's not 1 inch too big, for my goals.

i LIKE the mid 2000s safari in 28...but with a SLIDE...

it's your space, your choice and hopefully will fit YOUR NEEDS.

ignore those suggesting smaller/vintage/change your priorities...

in other words folks suggesting YOU adopt their travel style MISS the basic idea...

it's YOUR streamn' adventure ahead.
_______

it MIGHT however be useful to share more about your travel notions.

for example west texas, idaho, wyoming and so on, are REMOTE locations that can handle giant trailers...

while there are tiny pockets of isolation (feel remote) in some very dense/tight/tiny places, were tiny trailer rule.

weeks/months in some remote places may require WATER which is heavy.

so hookup/vs/boondocking is another rubik in the travel cube.

water requires MORE PAYLOAD so that does relate to tv selection.

Originally Posted by carl28

I own a 2010 tundra crewmax...

...It seems to me that the issue of the tundra (towing capacity vs payload capacity) can be neatly explained by the issue of the ring gear: ...

the 'dra is a nice truck.

and while we really don't know how towing parameters are fully derived or how published capacities are set,

your assumption about the ring gear is reasonable...

4 example there is a "9.75 rear axle" upgrade available for fords (aftermarket diy OR oem)

and doing this tweak UPrates the rear axle carry capacity 500-1000 lbs.

Originally Posted by carl28

...But toyota did not (comparatively) increase the suspension. The leaf springs are like any other half ton. Toyota thus leaves it to us to determine that 10-15% of the trailer on the hitch is going to be an issue - at least thats my take on it...

correct again.

i find the 1/2, 3/4 1 TUN labels about as useful as the a/s length and published weight info...

and since folks just MAKE UP fractional tonnage labels now, these old established markers are even MORE useless.

they do help the makers LUMP things 2 sell, folks like neat clumping even when it is murky.

your 'dra has ~ 4000 lb axles and a gvwr of ~72-7400 lbs and probably does NOT have E rated tires.

this is similar to other trucks in the same "class" but not all of them.

for example some of the 150s have gvwr OVER 8000 lbs and axle ratings OVER 4500 lbs...

these UPsized bits allow payloads of nearly 3000 lbs...in a "1/2 ton truck" and they come with SPRINGS to support it.

Originally Posted by carl28

...So how do I approach this?...

yeah that's the crux of this.

this is an a/s enthusiast forum, so...

#1 DECIDE on YOUR stream.

98.7853% of all new streamers UPSIZE within 2 years....

IF that might include u, make sure the tv will handle the next stream.
_________

i read over your pdf and think it is WISE to sort out as much of the gear/weight as possible.

((looks like u have the gensets listed IN BOTH vehicles?))

but not everything is there yet and some things are clearly UNDER estimated.

i have NO problem with 200LBs of books, even with electronic media added to that.

experience tells me to allow at least 100 lbs PER toy/hobby/activity...

that's 100 lbs for cycling, kayaks, puters, photog, movies, pets, hiking, kiting, cooking, spelunking, meditating or space travel...

then there is shopping on the road and collecting rocks...

Originally Posted by carl28

...Is is not going to be safe for some unrelated issue such as braking or stability?...

i appreciate the real world reports IN your thread from folks over the limits and doing fine.

but "try it" implies...observing for some EFFECT.

it's unlikely the 'dra will explode in use, even over the limits...

but then again smoking tobacco doesn't kill ya with the first puff.
________

i towed with a 3/4 ton truck and was right at the payload limit.

over time the spring stack fatigued and w/d was no longer possible.

ONE LEAF added to the stack solved that issue, for awhile.

the cost of ONE LEAF added later was MORE than going for the 350 truck originally.

and the best solution was trading for MORE TRUCK.
_______

folks on the T or F or D truck forums ask the same basic question ("i'm over payload a bit, what should i do")

and on EACH truck enthusiast forum they get the same answers...

1. respect the ratings or...
2. "that truck will handle a BUNCH MORE, trust me!!!"

guess which answer dominates?

folks in your position (at/over payload) can do a LOT of stuff...

1. add a leaf
2. add timbrens
3. add air bags
4. UPgrade tires
5. swap rear ends
6. leave stuff home
7. all of the above.
_________

from your posts so far it APPEARS u have respect for the ratings, so do i.

some of the sensible options are...

1. buy a new UPrated 150
2. buy a used 250/2500
3. buy a new 250/2500

i understand vehicle BRAND LOYALTY, but get the right tool for streamin IN the stream of your choice.
__________

more 2 follow...

cheers
2air'

[2airishuman]

$ hasn't been mentioned by the op, but most of us think about the $ issue.

trading trux may cost money.

but a ready to TOW 150/250 will have...

REAL mirrors, a plentiful rated receiver, INTEGRATED brake controller, back up camera, antisway circuitry, proper spring/tires and so on...

in other words very little EXTRA is spent on making for "TOW" ready.

one could spend 1000s on the 'dra and still not feel GOOD about the ratings/capacity issue.

i am reminded of a thread here by another colorado guy who wanted to tow with his porsche cayenne...

and about 5-8000$ worth of mods might have gotten it CLOSE to capable....

and a string of suggestions including driving to canada to 'save money' on the tv appeared...

his solution was simply to save the cayenne for fun stuff and buy a new (toyota) truck...

that was HIS value/cost/satisfaction conclusion.
_________

we all place different emphasis on the list of items that factor into any given tv/trailer combo.

many ways to cut cheese.

cheers
2air'

[carl28]

2air’

Thanks for your thoughtful post, which I find encouraging.

Its the right perspective after all to slow down a bit and consider what makes the airstreaming fun for you - and then back your way into what you need as best you can afford it...

For me, I like to go to the northwest and canada, boundary waters, and maybe alaska. I dont like to constanty worry about stuff so I try to be organized and research things as much as possible - but still with loose plans. I may go alone, maybe not. I’ve always been a hiker and a sometimes a multi-day backcountry canoeist, not an RVer. The more remote it gets, I’ll probably like it better within reason. I need to have my canoe with me (54 lbs). I probably would pack more stuff if I could, because I always bring more than I need.

I wouldnt mind doing some upgrades to the trailer either that might add a little weight, the batteries, tires and rims, and if I can haul more water or gas, I would consider that a good thing for backcountry style trips.

So I really appreciate your comment about bringing (within reason) what makes your trip fun - kayak, cooking, books, boondocking supplies, whatever.

This is almost like a relief to think about it this way and give it some perspective

thanks 2air

[carl28]

2air'

I dont want to do mods on the truck, except for tires. So really it is just the question - can I get what I want in there and feel comfortable with the weights. Brand loyalty is not so much an issue - its just that with toyota there isnt an upgrade path to a 3/4. I think thats why these tundra forums get attention, its a mental jump to do both: leave a reliable brand with some nice features, and then also to go to a bigger truck.

[dkottum]

The bigger-is-better crowd makes the best argument every time (they will have you trading in a new truck - what the . . . !), unless purchase price and maintenance cost is considered. Or agility. Then less-is-more makes sense, and leaves something in your wallet besides dust.

Doug K

[2airishuman]

space and payload ...

in the 250/2500 world short bed trucks out sell long beds 10 to 1 easily ...

so when first shopping trucks some of my test drives were over nighters.

this provided the opportunity to trying PACKing the beds.

the short beds turned out to NOT have enough space (length) for some gear...

again, dealers typically don't stock a lot of long bed trucks, especially with crew cabs, so finding a few took effort.

however, once some of the truly long trucks were test driven 3 things became obvious...

1. the ride was MUCH smoother at interstate speeds.

2. parking anywhere but an urban zone was easy

3. my crap fit in the bed.

after towing with the long bed/crew cab (about 22 feet of truck) yet another discovery...

4. wheel base is a wonderful thing when towing.

adding a fiberglass shell to a long bed provides serious SPACE,

and even without the payload UPgrade that cavern of space is very handy.

ONE OTHER THING, the long bed had a bigger fuel tank, which is very NICE 2have.
________

so again finding your personal sweet spot withIN the many variables...

means trying/testing things for size, utility and potential needs.

it might read like 'bigger is better' but the message really is...

sort it out, then buy accordingly.

long bed trucks were NO more money than short bed

and in 05 a 350 was only about 3-400$ more than a 250...

when i traded the long ungainly, diesel sucking, un reliable 6.0, noisy, smelly, crude truck...

i got a PREMIUM because it wasn't common,

and it sold again within 24 hours.

cheers
2air'

[dznf0g]

2Air,

Ditto the long wheelbase. I had the opportunity once to tow with a 155" long WB Express Van. Short rear overhang. This was without exception, the most stable platform I have ever towed with.

[slowmover]

Mine is an 8' longbed, so a 160" wheelbase. With the LEER bed topper it has 170 cubic feet of all-weather storage, and with the factory plastic bedliner it is easy to slide containers back and forth. A customized cap would be a good idea for any pickup, IMO. It also is slightly better on fuel mileage than an open bed or tonneau cover IF the topper is only roof height and a close fit all around. (I have averaged 22+ mpg for ALL miles the past 18,000 [only towing U-haul trailers this past year]).

A shortbed pickup truck is pretty well useless if any work is to be done.

[Mikethefixit]

Ya know I dont like toyota. But With the right wd hitch,adjusted correctly,I'd say like we use to say at the race track "RUN WHAT YA BRUNG"
IF it tears up the truck or the trailer ,then ya know you should have bought somethin bigger. DO WHAT YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH.
ITS yours and you have to foot the bill when ya tear somepin up.
GOOD LUCK

[Gene]

Seems like if you tear up the truck, you may not lose any more resale value than if you sell a 2010 now and eat the depreciation. This is not to say you'll tear it up, but just a thought from Roger's post. I do recall reading of someone who added Timbrens to their Tundra and was happy with that while towing a 27'. I can't remember who since it was a couple of years ago.

2air' says 98.7853% of people upgrade to a bigger trailer. That must be tongue in cheek. But some do, I expect far, far more don't. After all upgrading trailer or truck or both is very expensive.

2air's wimpy suspension that eventually went bad while within payload limits is anecdotal and only proves either (1) he overloaded it without knowing it, or (2) the brand (unstated, but surely not Tundra) either puffs up payload or uses wimpy suspensions (both alternatives are really the same).

Carl, after you sort out those who state a 3/4 ton truck, preferably diesel, is necessary to tow anything but a Basecamp, and those who believe a '56 Mercury can tow anything if you just get the hitch tuned in Ontario, you may not have the right answer, but you'll know what most do. If majority means well thought out answers, then it's good.

The decision may come down to how much you want to bring. We have some limits and it doesn't bother us. We've got what we need. Others need more or less.

And next time I hitch up, I'll have measure leaf deflection out of curiosity.

Gene

[BillTex]

Originally Posted by CrawfordGene

I do recall reading of someone who added Timbrens to their Tundra and was happy with that while towing a 27'. I can't remember who since it was a couple of years ago.

Note; Unless there is an over-load spring on that 1/2 ton...the Timbren is useless...
In any case, does nothing to increase capacity.

B

[Gene]

Bill, if the Timbren operates to prevent the leafs from hitting the stops, doesn't it increase carrying capacity by taking up some of the load? I don't pretend to understand suspension engineering. Seems to me overload springs do the same thing but in a different place. I see that overload springs have prices all over the place and I don't know if that indicates quality or not. And if you install overload springs, why get Timbren rubber springs or air bags?

It also seems to my non-engineering mind that if you install overload springs, air bags or rubber "springs" it won't do any good beyond that if all the other things aren't upgraded. The Tundra appears to be upgraded except for the rear suspension (has anyone commented on the front suspension?) and there's enough info to indicate the rear differential certainly can handle more than a typical 1/2 ton truck. But do we really know about the brakes or drive line or transmission? If Toyota made everything but the leaf springs 3/4 ton, one more leaf is cheap and why didn't they install it and call it a 3/4 ton? That seems like a good selling point—"A 3/4 ton truck at a half ton price".

And as 2air' has written elsewhere more than once, 1/2 ton trucks can handle weight better than they used to. Someone else (I think) said these differences (1/2, 3/4, 1 ton) are more about differentiating models than actual capacity. After all, a 1/2 truck that has a payload of 1,500 lbs. seems like a 3/4 ton to me.

Gene

[carl28]

This is the best picture I can paint so far - not having buyed and tried yet:


TUNDRAS and AIRSTREAM 27S and 28S:

Q: will a tundra haul a 27 or 28 ft airstream within factory limits?
A: yes, with some restricions

Q: is the engine powerful enough?
A: yes

Q: is the transmission and drivetrain good enough?
A: yes, plenty of torque and overall power, big ring gear, good 6-speed

Q: Are the brakes good enough?
A: yes the brakes are great

Q: Does it burn a lot of gas to haul a bigger load?
A: yes

Q: Will it go fast uphill?
A: probably about as fast as you want, the gas will go fast

Q: Can you bring a lot of stuff and stay under the factory payload rating for a 27/28?
A: No not really - maybe if you are by yourself and you pack lightweight objects

Q: Can you bring 2-3 passengers + lots of stuff and be in the factory payload?
A: No its not possible. Even if the trailer is dry it probably wont work.

Q: Does it matter how you load everything, truck and trailer?
A: Yes it matters, you could easily go over because it looks and acts like a big truck

Q: Does anybody know where safety factor limit really is if you want to overload it?
A: no - but hardly anyone is reporting any serious problems (telling others) for being over, some issues may be invisible to the eye until high miles

Q: will the tundra be in the shop less than other brands?
A: not sure maybe / probably - if you dont drive it badly or severly overload it

Q: In terms of safety, does hitch assembly and driving habits and choices of routes / interstates / bumpy roads matter perhaps as much as a few hundred pounds over payload?
A: most likely yes

Q: can you modify the truck to make it better on payload
A: you can add air bags or a leaf, so it doesnt sag, but it doenst change the axle, the wheels, the lug nuts parts of the system

Q: does tundra offer some good and equal amenities
A: yes it has great crewmax space, great ride, reliability, back up camera, tow package, large sliding rear window, and more

THANKS for everyone's input - every poster has added something

[Gene]

Boiling it down—good work Carl.

We've towed 33,000+ miles and the Tundra has another 20,000 on it. No problems apparent. We've been pretty maxed on some long, long trips. The longest was this year and was more than 10,000 miles, some of it on bad roads, and no problems.

It has been noted the Tundra has 5 lugnuts, not 6. I believe they are larger than the usual 6, but haven't measured them. Mine came with Load Range C tires, I upgraded better quality tires and to LR E after 18,000 miles as I was dissatisfied with crappy OEM Goodrichs.

I think the difficult thing about this is the 25 FB is not a problem. The 27 and 28 don't weigh that much more, but maybe a little too much more, and it easy to juggle numbers to make things come out critically differently.

Steve's enormous tongue wt. is disturbing. Like any experiment, I think someone else needs to replicate it before we accept the numbers.

Gene