I'm enjoying the tow vehicle debates...

[BayouBiker]

Why not take the person posting at his word?

1) I did not see any inference of a reckless speed, though I did see a reference to a person who committed an act that was reckless with the only mentioned cause being a vehicle that was towing beyond its capacity.

2) One does not need to address speculative red herring arguments that never figured into the case.

3) One does not have to consider absence of arguments. The person posting directly provided the rationale for the conclusion. To raise additional irrelevant points as a diversion could be interpreted as an insult the intelligence of the person posting and the readers.

4) The original poster clearly provided the courts conclusion about why the combination did not stop in time. There is no reason to second guess it.

[Collyn]

Originally Posted by 3bcamper

I have also read the towing discussions, with a mixture of entertainment and dismay. Unlike most other discussions, this thread doesn’t actually help the reader seeking guidance on towing.

There appears to an ongoing misunderstanding on RV fora generally re a vehicle maker's definition of towing capacity. It is essentially what it can tow under rated conditions on 'the end of a rope'. More specifically its ability stop and re-start on a defined gradient, etc. But not necessarily towed via an overhung hitch.

Travel trailer owners may not realise that towing trailers such as theirs is a tiny percentage of the towing market. Most by far is tradespeople (you may have a different term for this) - and the military. Much is short twin axle trailers of a typical two tonne max.

It simply does not make sense to tow a trailer that, when laden, weighs much more than whatever tows it. The main limitations (dynamically) however are trailer length, tow ball mass and towing speed. These are inter-related - but by and large it is not clever to tow above about 60 mph.

Collyn
rvbooks.com

[smithcreek]

Hey, if you love the tow vehicle debates you should try having a root canal, it would be right up your alley!

[brokeboater]

Originally Posted by Collyn

It simply does not make sense to tow a trailer that, when laden, weighs much more than whatever tows it.

Your position is you need a 10,000# truck to tow a 10,000# trailer? Going by that my one ton Dodge diesel is just barely adequate to tow my 25' Airstream Safari, if I pack light and keep in mind a 60 mph maximum speed. Call me a reckless daredevil but I tend to push the limits bit above that.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by BayouBiker

Why not take the person posting at his word?

1) I did not see any inference of a reckless speed, though I did see a reference to a person who committed an act that was reckless with the only mentioned cause being a vehicle that was towing beyond its capacity.

2) One does not need to address speculative red herring arguments that never figured into the case.

3) One does not have to consider absence of arguments. The person posting directly provided the rationale for the conclusion. To raise additional irrelevant points as a diversion could be interpreted as an insult the intelligence of the person posting and the readers.

4) The original poster clearly provided the courts conclusion about why the combination did not stop in time. There is no reason to second guess it.

Because it is an incomplete anecdote, with an illogical conclusion.

Look up crash investigations. It appears the driver was unable to stop his combination in time. I gave three likely reasons. But you choose to assume one that doesn’t follow from the info given. We don’t even know what context the word capacity was used in. You seem to assume tow rating. What if it was significantly over rear axle load, with a very light front axle? That doesn’t have to be a capacity issue, it can be a setup issue.

[tkowalyk]

Originally Posted by BayouBiker

Why not take the person posting at his word?

1) I did not see any inference of a reckless speed, though I did see a reference to a person who committed an act that was reckless with the only mentioned cause being a vehicle that was towing beyond its capacity.

2) One does not need to address speculative red herring arguments that never figured into the case.

3) One does not have to consider absence of arguments. The person posting directly provided the rationale for the conclusion. To raise additional irrelevant points as a diversion could be interpreted as an insult the intelligence of the person posting and the readers.

4) The original poster clearly provided the courts conclusion about why the combination did not stop in time. There is no reason to second guess it.

Here are the facts.

The car that turned in front of my fiend was found to be the primary contributing factor to the accident, and the tow vehicle - a new Toyota 4 runner would have probably not been able to stop even if it didn’t have a 7,500 lb trailer in tow.

The court concluded that the owner of the truck / trailer was towing a trailer in excess of it’s rated capacity, and as a result, the attorney made the case solely on the capacity issue, not the material issues that the car that was t-boned was in error and turned into oncoming traffic.

Solely because of the capacity issue - My friend was found to be “reckless” and the court concluded that the truck / tow vehicle was unsafe to operate.

Again - all of the discussions of it is possible to tow with vehicle X, is not the same as the legal ramifications if one would have an accident.

Of course - safety is another concern altogether. Putting yourself and others on the road at risk is a personal decision and you generally can’t change people’s minds.

[GettinAway]

Interesting. So, if the guy pulling the trailer was in a recommended F-650, the other driver would have been at fault? Was this a Florida court decision? It seems amazing that blame could totally be shifted from the person who was actually at fault, to someone that wasn’t. Got to love the lawyers. Obviously just looking for nothing but justice here?

[BayouBiker]

I wonder what people who apply a court of law reasonableness test would find negligent?

1)Those who tow under the manufacturers US weight and load guidelines (towing, Combined weight and axle weight) and travel at or near US legal limits of 65-70 mph

2) Those who tow well over the manufacturers US weight and load guidelines but keep their speed closer to 60 mph.

[BayouBiker]

Collyn's comparable weight guideline is actually very reasonable. It would have small and midsize SUVs pulling up to 23' trailers. Large SUVs and 1/2 tons pulling 25-26 ' trailers, 3/4 tons pulling up to 33' trailers and one tons pulling the monsters. This is spot on in terms of ideal cross over points.

[Bruce B]

Originally Posted by BayouBiker

Collyn's comparable weight guideline is actually very reasonable. It would have small and midsize SUVs pulling up to 23' trailers. Large SUVs and 1/2 tons pulling 25-26 ' trailers, 3/4 tons pulling up to 33' trailers and one tons pulling the monsters. This is spot on in terms of ideal cross over points.

The use of the word “ideal” begs the question, what is the down side of using a 3/4 ton truck for a smaller trailer, beyond the extra costs of the truck...?

[BayouBiker]

Good point, maybe ideal is not the best choice of words, IDK. Anyway, you mentioned cost, the others are the dimensions, harder to park, larger turn radius, higher roll moments, heavier so poorer handling when not towing, stiffer suspension so less comfortable when not towing. However there are also some advantages too, so its hard to say if ideal was the right word.

[Collyn]

Originally Posted by brokeboater

Your position is you need a 10,000# truck to tow a 10,000# trailer? Going by that my one ton Dodge diesel is just barely adequate to tow my 25' Airstream Safari, if I pack light and keep in mind a 60 mph maximum speed. Call me a reckless daredevil but I tend to push the limits bit above that.

I would certainly suggest your one ton Dodge diesel 'is just barely adequate to tow my 25' Airstream Safari, if you pack light and keep below 60 mph'.

The problem with doing so is not so much how it behaves in normal use, but how it will behave in 'emergency' situations. These may be the need to swerve to avoid a head-on collision, or recover from a strong sudden side-wind gust.

'Pushing the limits' is possibly fine if the results affect only you but in a towing context is likely to affect (even kill) others.

I leave it to others to suggest a better term (my Australian one would overly offend!) - but I feel that 'reckless daredevil' is not adequate.

With such a wide choice of appropriate and affordable US-made tow vehicles I am surprised that many seem to choose one that's borderline adequate.

We have a similar situation here, where people attempt to 3500 kg (about 7700 lb) twin axle caravans (UK/OZ for travel trailers) by a dual cab vehicle weighing about 6000 lbs. Our tow speed limit is 110 kmh (about 69 mph). Rollovers are thus common.
Collyn

[Belegedhel]

Dennis C (OP)--now look what you've done--this "thread about towing threads" has not only become a towing thread, but has landed where they all do.

You are now distracting people from the "Argue thread."

[Spaggs]

Originally Posted by OTRA15

[emphasis added]

Hopefully your excellent observations will not be lost in the middle of the chatter here IMO.

Thanks for your post,

I have flirted with the idea of going past the factory weight limit because of all of the modifications I’ve done with F350 springs and other mods.
No more.

[KK4YZ]

Originally Posted by smithcreek

Hey, if you love the tow vehicle debates you should try having a root canal, it would be right up your alley!

Nah. One can enjoy the tow vehicle debates with detached amusement. Root canal not so much😀

[KK4YZ]

Originally Posted by jcl

But some may focus on the tow rating. Why?

The point was made that he couldn’t stop in time. Why is that a tow vehicle capability issue? No trailer brakes? Malfunctioning brakes? Or just travelling too fast?

Most likely the lawyer focused on the tow rating because that’s documented and easy to understand by a jury.

“Couldn’t stop in time...” How much time was the driver allotted to stop? You don’t know but just throw out FUD to obscure the point. How far out on a limb are you willing to go to argue your position?

[21Airstream]

Most traffic collisions occur due to a combination of factors, usually involving more than one driver and that appears to be the case here. One would assume the proximate cause of the crash was the Failure to Yield the Right-of-Way. To blame the whole thing on the other driver (if that’s what the Court did) seems unjust (absent some form of gross negligence). Depending on the amount of money involved you’d think this would be a good case to appeal. (Of course that’s usually decided by the insurance company.)

(I’m not an attorney but I have investigated a lot of traffic collisions)

[kittmaster]

Originally Posted by Spaggs

This video is what drives all of my conversations when it comes to tow vehicles:

I have an Excursion, but with the help of this forum and the Ford Truck Enthusiasts forum, I have been able to build a solid platform for towing. The biggest takeaway from this forum, for me, has been top speed. Thanks to all of you, and this video, I will not go over 65 mph.
Everytime I click on one of these posts, I learn something. You guys have been very helpful!

Spaggs, what the end result, did you find out they were ok? Wow that was a disaster.....why did he not hit the trailer brakes??? OMG....

[KK4YZ]

Originally Posted by 21Airstream

Most traffic collisions occur due to a combination of factors, usually involving more than one driver and that appears to be the case here. One would assume the proximate cause of the crash was the Failure to Yield the Right-of-Way. To blame the whole thing on the other driver (if that’s what the Court did) seems unjust (absent some form of gross negligence). Depending on the amount of money involved you’d think this would be a good case to appeal. (Of course that’s usually decided by the insurance company.)

(I’m not an attorney but I have investigated a lot of traffic collisions)

I think you’re absolutely right. I believe the post that cited this case was to bring up the point that there is a legal risk to exceeding manufacturers specs re: towing. I didn’t hear anyone say the court decision was right....but it is reality. Further if the decision stands, I believe it becomes part of case law (disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer either&#128512.

[Jaxon]

I prefer to combine personal protection with my tow vehicle...