Weight Master, check my readings

Here's a good illustration of the whole 'I can tell if it's overloaded on sight' hooey:

Is this combination overloaded?

Expboat2 by gijoecam, on Flickr

Nope.

-The rear wheel wells sit an inch and a half lower than the fronts when it's unloaded and sitting on level ground, and that's how it came from the factory.
-The boat had a 350lb tongue weight. (Measured at a CAT scale just like we measure our travel trailers)
-Boat weighed 3650lbs. A slight-bit tongue-light, yes, but boats generally tend to stray towards the lighter range of tongue weight.
-Rear axle weight was 50lbs UNDER the RAWR. (Don't have the numbers handy, but can find them at home if anyone's curious)
-Front axle was about 150lbs lighter than unloaded. Noticeable at the wheel, yes, but never felt uncomfortable.

When I hauled it to the launch ramp every weekend for those couple of years, I had friends ride separately to keep from overloading the rear axle, but was never concerned about the capability of the Explorer. It handled it just as I would have expected.

lawrosa wrote:

Also put max psi in tires when towing..

lawrosa wrote:

Again air up tires to max 50 psi when towing. If not those tires will get hot. Hate to see you get a blow out. And with those weights your best off towing solo. Have wife and kids follow or meet you at the camp ground..

Why? I see this mentioned a lot, but I don't see the point?

The rear axle has 3580lbs on it. That means each tire is carrying roughly half of that, or 1790lbs. The 35psi pressure listed on the sticker represents the recommended inflation pressure at the rear axle weight rating of 3950lbs, or 1975lb/tire.

If the tires are running at 35psi with only 1790lbs on them, they're still *slightly* over-inflated for the weight they are carrying, but that's where I'd run them myself.

The tires only need to be at their 50psi max pressure if they are carrying their 2469lb max load. That's fully 25% more than the rated rear axle weight... He's nowhere near that, hence, no need whatsoever to exceed the 35psi manufacturer's recommendation.

Inflate the tires to the load they are carrying. Blindly running the tires at max pressure when they are not under maximum load is poor advice I see parrotted over and over again. Running too high of a pressure for the load compromises tire tread life, ride quality, and, more importantly, traction.

Terryallan wrote:

You are correct. Numbers don't lie. According to his numbers he added 780lb to the rear axle, 3580- 2800 = 780lb, and 40lb to the front axle,3420 - 3580 = 40lb, and 220lb to the TT axles, 4960 - 4740 = 220lb for a total weight of 1040lbs. Remember the 1300lb pay load. If this were the end of the story. He will be over loaded when he gets in the truck.

But it is the last set of weights that tell the tail. The no WDH weights. Rear truck axle weighs 2800lbs unhooked, and 4100lb with the TT just sitting on the ball. 4100- 2800 = 1300lbs. A 1300lb tongue weight? and remember he only has 1300lb of payload? Grass, or no grass. (don't know why you think grass makes a difference) something ain't right. I would suggest going back to the scales. The numbers don't add up. The tongue weight should not be that high. And I'm using his weights. Might want to redistribute some of the weight in the TT.

As others have already pointed out, the tongue weight is 1020lbs, not 1300lbs. The rear axle weight shown on the non-WDH scale ticket includes both the tongue weight *and* the weight transferred from the front axle to the rear axle by that tongue weight. It has to do with leverage... We can get into the physics involved, but others have done it more eloquently than I elsewhere on this site before.

And yes looks matter. Most of us can glance at a TT, and TV on the highway and tell if it is setup right or not. The TV should sit pretty much hooked up, as it does unhooked. the TV tail should NEVER be lower than the front.

I'm sending up the BS flag on this one. My SuperDuty looks like it's squatting with nothing but a 30lb tonneau cover on the bed. Why? It has the plow prep package and the V-10 which is a relatively light and stiff combination compared to the diesel. I have a 6000lb-rated front axle and a 6100lb rated rear axle. With an empty weight of 8020lbs (4300 front, 3720 rear), I can basically put the entire 1600lb cargo capacity wherever I want it on/in the truck without exceeding my GAWR, save for maybe on the back bumper.

My truck has a squat. If I put 3/4 of a ton of stuff in the bed, it's gonna squat even more... So what? It looks dangerous, therefore it must be?? You go ahead and think that; I know better. The numbers don't lie.

Prior to the adjustment he made, I'd say the rig was plenty good 'nuff. By my calculations (and I fudged the trailer's axle weight in the non-WDH weights to get the GCW the same with both passes), my trusty spreadsheet shows the following data:

Actual Trailer Weights
Gross Axle Weight 4,760 lbs
Tongue Weight 1,020 lbs
Gross Trailer Weight 5,780 lbs
Tongue Weight (% of GTW) 17.65%

Weight Distributing Hitch Effect
Weight Levered off Rear Axle 520 lbs
Weight Transfer to Steer Axle 320 lbs
Weight Transfer to Trailer Axle 200 lbs

Safety Margin
Steer Axle 530 lbs
Rear Axle 370 lbs
Trailer GVWR -5,780 lbs
Gross Combined Weight -11,960 lbs


The way I see it, with that setup, a 100lb dog isn't going to be toeing the line with 900lbs of available capacity left no matter where he sits!

After making the hitch adjustment, there is a 200lb difference in the gross weight of the rig, so for the sake of making the numbers work, I'm going to spread that weight out over the two tow vehicle axles at 100lbs each.

That shows the following:

Gross Axle Weight 4,740 lbs
Tongue Weight 1,020 lbs
Gross Trailer Weight 5,760 lbs
Tongue Weight (% of GTW) 17.71%

Weight Distributing Hitch Effect
Weight Levered off Rear Axle 360 lbs
Weight Transfer to Steer Axle 180 lbs
Weight Transfer to Trailer Axle 180 lbs

Trailer Effect on Tow Vehicle
Weight added to rear axle 1,300 lbs
Weight transferred from front axle 280 lbs
Actual Tongue Weight 1,020 lbs

Safety Margin
Steer Axle 670 lbs
Rear Axle 210 lbs
Trailer GVWR -5,760 lbs
Gross Combined Weight -11,940 lbs


I'm still not seeing an ssue with a 100lb dog no matter where he sits in either setup.

Personally, I like the original setup better. In the original setup, the tongue weight transferred 280 lbs off the front axle, but the WDH restored 320lbs to it. Slightly high, yes, but 40 lbs isn't a huge difference.

In the second setup, the trailer still transfers 280lbs off the steer axle, but only restored 180 lbs back to it, leaving it 100lbs light.

Not enough info listed (can't tell which numbers you're talking about - as weighed or dry/loaded limits) and not I'm willing to look it all up to tell.

I don't even know what year/model truck/engine/etc you have.

Butt looks heavy to me but your truck is on pavement and your camper is on the grass so no way to tell anything.

Terryallan wrote:
I believe we will just have to disagree. You don't see a problem with the empty truck being at the GVWR before the driver, passengers get in. I do.---

Where was it stated that the truck was empty when it was weighed?

All I see is the OP's statement which says, "The only thing that's not in the trck is 100pds of dogs."

The numbers indicate there was 696# of occupants and cargo in/on the truck when it was weighed.
Perhaps some of the TV cargo can be carried in the TT -- allowing the dogs to be carried in the TV without exceeding the GVWR.

Ron

You know better.

The brakes are only designed to stop the GVWR of the truck.

To the OP.
OP, your trucks example is a 3950 FAWR plus a 3950 RAWR = 7900 lbs of braking performance at the minimum. Now lets say your trailer has two 3500 lb axle = 7000 lbs of braking for a 14900 lb of combined braking performance.

Ron Gratz wrote:

Terryallan wrote:
But Ron. Does the 220lb transferred to the TT not count in the tongue weight? It is in fact tongue weight. It has just been moved, but the entire weight including the weight transferred is going thru the receiver on the truck.

When there is no WD applied, there is no load transferred to the TT's axles. 100% of the tongue weight is being carried on the receiver.
The increased load on the TV (sum of front and rear axles) is equal to the TW.

I have always been taught. that the total weight of the tongue, before transferring. Is the actual tongue weight of the trailer. After all. That is what you get when you weigh the tongue by it self. If that weight is 1000lbs, then the tongue weight is 1000lbs. If it is 500 then it is 500, and if it is 1200 or more that is what it is. The only way to know how much weight the TT actually adds to the truck is to weigh the tongue by it self.

The way to determine how much load the TT adds to the TV is to weigh the TV hitched with no WD applied and then subtract the weight of the TV only.

When WD is applied, the load added to the TV becomes equal to the tongue weight MINUS the amount of load transferred to the TT's axles.
That means, with WD applied, the indicated TW is equal to the load added to the TV PLUS the load added to the TT's axles.
The OP's numbers show this estimate of TW to be equal to 820+220 = 1040#.

At any rate. Even if it is 1020lbs. It is still too much. Something is NOT right. A -6000lb TT should NOT have a 1000lb tongue weight. It should be in the 720lb range

There is nothing wrong with a 6000# TT having a 1000# TW -- as long as the TV and receiver can handle the vertical load imposed by the TT.

The OP's numbers show the load on the TV's axles, with WD applied, to be 3420+3580 = 7000# -- compared to a GVWR of 7000#.
He was 530# under front GAWR and 370# under rear GAWR.

I don't see a loading problem.

Ron

I believe we will just have to disagree. You don't see a problem with the empty truck being at the GVWR before the driver, passengers get in. I do. Not going to guess how much the OP, and his DW weighs, but there is 100lbs of dog listed. It will be over loaded as soon as they sit down. There is no room for the driver. It may be under the axle rating, but it will be several hundred over the GVWR once ready to travel. You know I don't have a problem with being a little over the GVWR. But that truck will be a bunch over the GVWR. I'm not worried about the tires, even the OEM tires should be fine, and I'm not concerned about any overloaded tickets. Not going to happen. however we all know. The brakes are only designed to stop the GVWR of the truck.

But you know. I ain't driving it. And MOP is just worth what y'all paid for it.
Have fun.

Terryallan wrote:
But Ron. Does the 220lb transferred to the TT not count in the tongue weight? It is in fact tongue weight. It has just been moved, but the entire weight including the weight transferred is going thru the receiver on the truck.

When there is no WD applied, there is no load transferred to the TT's axles. 100% of the tongue weight is being carried on the receiver.
The increased load on the TV (sum of front and rear axles) is equal to the TW.

I have always been taught. that the total weight of the tongue, before transferring. Is the actual tongue weight of the trailer. After all. That is what you get when you weigh the tongue by it self. If that weight is 1000lbs, then the tongue weight is 1000lbs. If it is 500 then it is 500, and if it is 1200 or more that is what it is. The only way to know how much weight the TT actually adds to the truck is to weigh the tongue by it self.

The way to determine how much load the TT adds to the TV is to weigh the TV hitched with no WD applied and then subtract the weight of the TV only.

When WD is applied, the load added to the TV becomes equal to the tongue weight MINUS the amount of load transferred to the TT's axles.
That means, with WD applied, the indicated TW is equal to the load added to the TV PLUS the load added to the TT's axles.
The OP's numbers show this estimate of TW to be equal to 820+220 = 1040#.

At any rate. Even if it is 1020lbs. It is still too much. Something is NOT right. A -6000lb TT should NOT have a 1000lb tongue weight. It should be in the 720lb range

There is nothing wrong with a 6000# TT having a 1000# TW -- as long as the TV and receiver can handle the vertical load imposed by the TT.

The OP's numbers show the load on the TV's axles, with WD applied, to be 3420+3580 = 7000# -- compared to a GVWR of 7000#.
He was 530# under front GAWR and 370# under rear GAWR.

I don't see a loading problem.

Ron