Handling comparison: SRW vs DRW at GVW
I don’t think anyone would argue that a DRW is more stable at carrying a TC but let’s hear some thoughts when comparing “apples to apples” For example let’s assume trucks are both new Ram 3500 4x4 di...
Forum Discussion
Kayteg1 wrote:mkirsch wrote:
If you want apples to apples, use bagged concrete for the weight instead of campers.
43 90lb bags of Sakrete in the SRW
62 90lb bags of Sakrete in the DRW
Then take them both on the Nurburgring.
That's only 3870 lb on SRW.
Using my F250 I scaled 4300lb of gravel on it more than once, not mentioning that flatbed add some weight too.
But I was always carrying shovel with me and after gravel drop, I shovel it into pile behind the cab. This way 1/4 to 1/3 of the load went on front axle and handling was just fine.
Something impossible to manage with TC.
So for fair comparison, the 43 bags of Sakrete should be loaded with most of it behind the axle.
Your point being? The weight is as close as you can get to the OP's original specified weights using 90lb bags of Sakrete, without "shorting" the load any.
3800lbs in the SRW. 43 x 90lb is 3870lbs.
5500lbs in the DRW. 62 x 90lb is 5580lbs.
Why "most of it behind the axle?" The load should be centered over the rear axle, within the camper COG range.
