Forum Discussion

Dog_Trainer's avatar
Dog_Trainer
Explorer
Dec 04, 2014

MFG Ratings what are the limiting factors

I know this post will not change the MFG rating no matter what is stated that is not the point. The point is that there are many after market products out there and in the end they do not change what the MFG sticks on the door. But why ?
So what is the true weak link in any rating. Which component or components provide the drawback.?
I suspect that it may be possible to add a component or components and that if the numbers were crunched taking the new component into consideration, that the rating may change.
Most tow Vehicles fall short in the carrying capacity rating. You can pull a great deal of weight but the cargo carrying capacity is met or exceeded long before the GCVW is close. I will list a couple of items that I can think of.
1. The tires that are put on many smaller P/u are P metric tires they make these cushy looking grocery getters ride more car like. So one limiting factor could be the tires and don't forget those 20" rims that they all have to have now. So with a stronger Rim and E rated tire what changes. Well nothing really because the Mfg rating does not change. Right.
2. Shocks
3. Springs
4. Axles
5. Trans cooler
6. engine in some cases
7. Cooling capacity
The whole suspension thing has so many after market components that you would think you could tow or carry about anything.
In the end it is about a truck that is engineered as a complete unit and the MFG does not list the limiting factors. In the case of the F150 with a max tow pkg., the rating of Carrying capacity goes up to around 2,000 lbl from about 1500 lbs with just the HD tow pkg. So what are the other factors of weight and tow ratings. One could become convinced that they can exceed the sticker ratings if the change components.
  • Without limitations guys would overload their trucks and things could wear out prematurely causing warranty issues for manufacturers. Put a limit on what the truck can handle without wearing out before the warranty is up and the manufacture comes out ahead.
  • X3

    Add that it may not be that bolt, bracket, frame section (they are
    now made up of several sections on most OEMs) etc

    It can be the stopping distance, the ability to get the GCWR going
    from a dead stop...several times...at the worst ambients (incline,
    altitude, humidity, temp, etc, etc)

    It can be the MTBF for 'that' model line

    It could be the tolerance variation & stack up on the worst case
    scenario for in house components/sub-systems/etc to out sourced
    products

    and a big ETC...



    Dog Trainer wrote:
    fla-gypsy wrote:
    john&bet wrote:
    I think it better to ask the engineers at the OEM manufactures.


    This is really the issue. Only the engineering design team know for sure and they aren't divulging that information. It could be as simple as the shear rating of the bolts used to hold it together but you cannot with 100% certainty know that. Many choose (unwisely IMO) to ignore the ratings and just do what they want. I'm not one of them since I don't know what exactly is the limiting factor and I value the continued good service my truck provides me and seek to keep it that way.

    I too think this is the real answer. We do not know where the weak component is and the Mfg ain't saying.
  • fla-gypsy wrote:
    john&bet wrote:
    I think it better to ask the engineers at the OEM manufactures.


    This is really the issue. Only the engineering design team know for sure and they aren't divulging that information. It could be as simple as the shear rating of the bolts used to hold it together but you cannot with 100% certainty know that. Many choose (unwisely IMO) to ignore the ratings and just do what they want. I'm not one of them since I don't know what exactly is the limiting factor and I value the continued good service my truck provides me and seek to keep it that way.

    I too think this is the real answer. We do not know where the weak component is and the Mfg ain't saying.
  • john&bet wrote:
    I think it better to ask the engineers at the OEM manufactures.


    This is really the issue. Only the engineering design team know for sure and they aren't divulging that information. It could be as simple as the shear rating of the bolts used to hold it together but you cannot with 100% certainty know that. Many choose (unwisely IMO) to ignore the ratings and just do what they want. I'm not one of them since I don't know what exactly is the limiting factor and I value the continued good service my truck provides me and seek to keep it that way.
  • The same components are used in multiple configurations to reach certain market segments. My previous truck could have a GVWR between 9600-11,500 using the same components because you could get to the same combination through different options. I believe marketing is number one driver of these ratings followed by warranty. Actual component specifications are derated to fit the needs of the above.
  • I think it better to ask the engineers at the OEM manufactures.
  • I have loaded my GMC way over the capacity and I have towed way over the capacity and never has the thing fallen into a million pieces. I believe another poster got it right, it is a liability thing. BTW, what do you want the manufacturer to do, have a computerized system that automatically detects and recalculates the capacities and displays them based on what 100 million or so modifications, adjustments and just plain stupid things people do to their rigs?
  • Dog Trainer :

    I think you make a very valid point. Doesn't really make sense, does it?

    For the most part, I believe it has more to do with a manufacturers "limits of Liability"

    All components "installed by the manufacturer" at the time of build enter into that arena.

    Anything added as "aftermarket" are at the owners option & liability.

    A simple example, my truck is rated at 5320# GVWR "as built". The front & rear axles, combined are at 6166# & those figures are based upon the weakest ling of the entire suspension system. I have added helper springs and changed to 108 rated tires only. When loaded with my ATV in the back & hooked to the TT (550# tongue weight), a full tank of gas, & with me in the drivers seat I'm at 5650# (Cat Scales). It handles like a dream.

    Another thing & I hesitate to mention this because the "weight police" will send the Sheriff to my door.
    My truck "as built" has two ratings for GCWR.
    The first is 9,200# with 3.55 gears (which is what I have)
    The second is 10,500# with 3.92 gears

    I have a WDH & anti-sway. My rig never flinches when a semi passes me & I never go over 60mph.

    I'm at 10,620#, TT loaded - NO water. I put water on board when I'm a few miles from destination.
    I have had absolutely no issues with handling. NONE
    I realize this is putting a strain on the transmission, yes, I have a cooler. When pulling I disengage the OD.
  • rhagfo's avatar
    rhagfo
    Explorer III
    I would think it varies from TV to TV!
    I have a rear axles rated at 10,000# by Dana, but Ram gave it a rating of 6,084#, which is the capacity of the stock LT245/75-16E tires. This truck was ordered with a Camper Package that included bigger springs and larger tires the LT 265/75-16E's that cam on it have a per tire rating of 3,415# so the VIN sticker should have been updated to reflect the LT 265/75-16E's as stock tires, and a rear axle of 6,830#, but Ram chose not to do this.
    The next thing would be springs, here again, larger springs, no change.

    This is all on my 2001 RAM 2500.

    Now days most trucks have many GVWR depending on options, and it is reflected in the VIN and Payload sticker.