Yellow door sticker - right or wrong?

[Moflash]

The problem is that the axles are the last thing to break when over loaded.There are many other suspension pieces that have maximize capacities along with the wheels that your tires are mounted on.This is why the payload is always lower than the axle rating.The people that designed the truck took this into consideration when they engineered the vehicle.

[switz]

I failed to mention that all the steel spring components in my Dodge were replaced with a Kellerman air bag based level ride suspension system with more carrying capacity. The rear leaf springs were replaced with two 5,000 pound rated air bags and the front coil springs were replaced with two 4,000 pound rated air bags and different shocks. These are similar components to those that they use for the ambulance conversions.

The factory wheels, tires, wheel lug nut system and brakes must have capacities that equal or exceed the axle ratings. Otherwise the axle ratings would be degraded to the weakest component.

[AlbertF]

I always get a chuckle from those silly yellow stickers. It's a regulatory/liability thing that arose from an accident/lawsuit a number of years ago.
Ignore them. The only reliable way to calculate payload capacity is to weigh your empty vehicle, and subtract that number from GVWR.

[Alphonse]

Originally Posted by AlbertF

I always get a chuckle from those silly yellow stickers. It's a regulatory/liability thing that arose from an accident/lawsuit a number of years ago.
Ignore them. The only reliable way to calculate payload capacity is to weigh your empty vehicle, and subtract that number from GVWR.

Albert, you should get about the same answer as the silly yellow sticker (plus/minus a few pounds).

[AlbertF]

Nope. Our 2008 V70's sticker shows 950 lbs. GVWR is 5060. Curb weight is 3900.

[CapriRacer]

Originally Posted by AlbertF

Nope. Our 2008 V70's sticker shows 950 lbs. GVWR is 5060. Curb weight is 3900.

But what about the front to rear split? Sure it isn't 50/50.

[Alphonse]

Originally Posted by AlbertF

Nope. Our 2008 V70's sticker shows 950 lbs. GVWR is 5060. Curb weight is 3900.

So Albert you have a 210 pounds difference! Was it full of fuel? Is your Volvo labeled per US requirements? For the US, the most recent regulations for the Vehicle/Tire Information Placard was enacted in the US by the DOT/NHTSA in 2003. I do not know what the Canadian requirements are.

Weighed my truck and the difference was 40 lbs. I suspect the sticker is always going to be conservative (meaning understated, albeit it slightly). Of course at this 40# level you begin to wonder about the accuracy/calibration of the CAT scale as well but the scales gives one a confirmation.

By the way, are you towing your 27' Overlander with the Volvo?

[AlbertF]

Originally Posted by CapriRacer

But what about the front to rear split? Sure it isn't 50/50.

It's 1220 and 1140 kg - actually, 2360 kg or 5,192 lbs total. That would give a payload capacity of 1,292 lbs.

I'm being conservative with a curb weight of 3,900 lbs. Volvo published specs back in 2008 showing a curb weight of 3,527 lbs, but that was quite optimistic and may have been without fuel.

[AlbertF]

Originally Posted by Alphonse

So Albert you have a 210 pounds difference! Was it full of fuel? Is your Volvo labeled per US requirements? For the US, the most recent regulations for the Vehicle/Tire Information Placard was enacted in the US by the DOT/NHTSA in 2003. I do not know what the Canadian requirements are.

Weighed my truck and the difference was 40 lbs. I suspect the sticker is always going to be conservative (meaning understated, albeit it slightly). Of course at this 40# level you begin to wonder about the accuracy/calibration of the CAT scale as well but the scales gives one a confirmation.

By the way, are you towing your 27' Overlander with the Volvo?

Yes, 3900 would be full of fuel, with the receiver bolted on.

Most Canadian market cars are labelled in accordance with US requirements. Our market is too small - 10% of the US - to do otherwise. Also, safety requirements are almost completely aligned, except Canada requires 5 mph bumpers and daytime running lights. You have FMVSS, we have CMVSS. It's essentially a copy of the US code.

I am seeing silly stuff with passenger cars. Like a Honda Accord with a capacity of 400 kg or 880 lbs. That's effectively a full size car, but four full size men and their golf clubs would overload it! Or a Ford Escape labelled for 847 lbs passengers and cargo. It really makes me question the credibility of the labelling. However, if you subtract curb weight from labelled GVWR, you will often get an actual capacity of over 1,000 lbs.

Yes, we tow the Overlander with the V70. It carries the tongue weight well, with surprisingly little change in ride height. The car's actual payload capacity is clearly adequate. Power is good. It's just not quite as stable on the highway as the old S60 was. Firmer suspension is good for towing. However, my wife is still happy to drive the combination.

[DC Bruce]

I believe the yellow sticker capacity assumes a 175 lb driver and a full tank of fuel and all other fluids, so the weight of those is not included in the cargo capacity number. GVWR is everything. Also, the yellow sticker reflects the way that particular vehicle is equipped: power seats, sunroof etc. all add weight, as well as wheels and tires' capacity. P-metric tires usually have a lower rating that LT tires. Low aspect tires usually carry less than, say 50-series tires. If you spec out an F150 with the max payload package, you will see that you can't get the extra-capacity 36 gallon fuel tank or the moon roof. So, the good news is that you have a 1/2 ton truck with a payload of more than a ton; the bad news is you better not go far from a gas station when hauling that payload.

[DKB_SATX]

Originally Posted by DC Bruce

I believe the yellow sticker capacity assumes a 175 lb driver and a full tank of fuel and all other fluids, so the weight of those is not included in the cargo capacity number. GVWR is everything. Also, the yellow sticker reflects the way that particular vehicle is equipped: power seats, sunroof etc. all add weight, as well as wheels and tires' capacity. P-metric tires usually have a lower rating that LT tires. Low aspect tires usually carry less than, say 50-series tires. If you spec out an F150 with the max payload package, you will see that you can't get the extra-capacity 36 gallon fuel tank or the moon roof. So, the good news is that you have a 1/2 ton truck with a payload of more than a ton; the bad news is you better not go far from a gas station when hauling that payload.

You can configure an F150 with HD Payload and the 36-gallon fuel tank. You have to package it right... for an XLT I think you can only do it with the "mid" trim (301A) because the fuel tank isn't available with Base (300A) and the HD Payload isn't available with Lux (302A). It's like playing whack-a-mole.

[rostam]

I weighed my vehicle with full tank of fuel and the actual payload was 40# more than the door sticker. Close enough, given the measurement error of the scale. May be your Volvo's door sticker figure does not include the driver? Your manual should state this. Regardless, that sticker states the load carrying capacity of your vehicle. Nothing silly about that.

[21Airstream]

In my experience, commercial scales are pretty accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Airstream Forums

[AlbertF]

Here's an older article from USA Today that I remember reading in the past:

Car weight limits are a big, fat problem - USATODAY.com

The impractically low limits for many vehicles is the reason I am mocking these yellow stickers. Also, the realization that GVWR less curb weight often provides a greater payload capacity in the case of a passenger vehicle has caused me to conclude that the yellow stickers are practically irrelevant, something that is more about liability than actual safety.

Tire capacity is a generally a non-issue for cars. Manufacturers tend to specify tires with a total load capacity that is often 1,000 lbs more than GVWR.

[CapriRacer]

Just some stray thoughts:

1) GVWR's ought to be smaller then the sum of the GAWR's. That's because the vehicle is not always loaded evenly, so to account for that, the GVWR needs to be lower than the GAWR.

1) The GAWR's ought to be lower than the corner weights. Again, the vehicle is not always loaded evenly.

3) The load carrying capacity of the tire at the inflation pressure specified ought to be higher than the GAWR's. That's just good engineering practice.

4) Therefore, the payload specified for a given vehicle ought to be lower what you can calculate using the GVWR's and GAWR's. Again, that's because the payload might not be evenly distributed among the corners.

[AlbertF]

A logical progression. However, there are margins built in at each step. What we end up with is excessively conservative, and founded on concerns about liability rather than engineered design.

[xrvr]

Really? Wow!

[rostam]

If the car manufacturers with their deep pockets and army of lawyers feel the need to protect themselves by putting margins in the ratings, I would say a customer without those resources would definitely want to protect himself/herself by respecting the ratings.

[dkottum]

I would say if an army of lawyers determined the ratings, one good mechanic would know what they are really capable of.