Supplemental Brake... Necessity or Preference

lanerd wrote:
Abstract and without substance....??? You gotta be kidding me.

Ok, I guess I am simplifying it. It is a simple and logical statement

A motor home will stop shorter and quicker while pulling a toad if the toad has a supplemental braking system. That's all I'm saying.

Ron

Nope - not kidding you at all. Your point is abstract, and without substance unless you look at the individual rig. That part that you left off is the point I've been trying to make all along.

Yes - it is a simple and logical statement to say that a motor home will stop shorter and quicker while pulling a toad if the toad has a supplemental braking system.

It would be just as simple and logical to propose a 45 MPH speed limit for RVs with toads. After all, it is logical that driving an RV with a toad at 45 MPH will stop shorter and quicker than driving at 55 or 65 MPH.

Both statements are simple and logical, but neither one is necessary for every RV or in every case. What is relevant in every case is the ability to stop in a reasonable distance to avoid an accident, and there are accepted standards for that. If you want to go beyond that accepted standard to be more "safe", then that is your choice. But that can be a slippery slope - where does it end? My sports car stops far faster than any RV & toad with supplemental brakes. Should we hold RVs to that standard?

Ultimately we have to define a standard, which is what our state (California) has done. And if an RV with a toad meets that standard, then supplemental brakes are not necessary, and not considered by the state to be a "safety concern".

My only point all throughout this discussion is that the blanket statement that all toads should have supplemental brakes is incorrect. You have to consider each rig individually, based on it's own handling and braking capacities.