Cargo weight vesus pay load

APT,

Many thanks for posting those two links and they took a while for me
to skim to finally 'read' one, this: NHTSA Docket No. NHTSA-02-13678 RIN 2127-AI32

Also had some time to poke around the morass of NHTSA/DOT. Guess there
is a rhyme and reason on how they structured their indexing and search....but
I've not figured it out, yet

The link you posted am guessing circa September 1, 2003, as that is the
effective date listed in the doc

Have found that NHTSA/DOT revised the 'yellow label' pre-2009, but
have not zeroed in on that, yet

NHTSA_Docket_No._NHTSA-02-13678_RIN_2127-AI32 wrote:


2. Modification to FMVSS Nos. 110 and 120

snip....

The proposal discussed that certain performance-oriented requirements of FMVSS No. 110 would have been retained, including S4.2.2, which establishes a linkage between the vehicle normal load {10} and the load specified for the high-speed test in FMVSS No. 109. {11}? S4.2.2 would have been extended to cover SUVs, vans, trailers, and pickup trucks for the first time, which means that P-metric and LT tires used on these vehicles would have a load reserve similar to P-metric tires used on passenger cars.?The proposal also noted that it would have extended S4.4.1(b) of FMVSS No. 110, which requires that each rim shall retain a deflated tire in the event of a rapid loss of inflation pressure from a vehicle speed of 97 km/h until the vehicle is stopped with a controlled braking operation, to light trucks and vans for the first time.?The agency is not issuing a decision on these performance aspects in this final rule.?Vehicle and tire manufacturers may comment on this issue after having an opportunity to consider the tire performance upgrade proposal.


snip...

Note {10} footnote and here it is:

{10} ??? Vehicle normal load on the tire means that load on an individual tire that is determined by distributing to each axle its share of the curb weight, accessory weight, and normal occupant weight and dividing by 2.

Note the highlighted in bold black, which seemingly says the 'curb'
just previous does NOT include the 'accessory weight', which
to me...means options like: AC, 4x4, upgraded interior, power windows,
power door, power seats, etc, etc


So looks like I'm not going to agree that the 'yellow sticker' does
include all of the options for the vehicle the sticker is on

Do think this a very good discussion and thank you for that

On the other side of the coin, don't believe the "1/2 ton towable" label being flogged now. If you fall for, they'll tell you that your 1/2 ton can tow pretty much anything. KZ for example now has a new "1500" designation for their 5th wheel Durango model line and is advertised as "1/2 ton towable". They are saying you can tow a 34' 5th wheel with 10,800 lbs GVWR with a 1/2 ton. Actual pin weight would likely be up around 2,000 lbs. I'd like to see them list some 1/2 ton trucks with actual payload capacities and RGAWR that can handle that. Even if you go by their dry hitch wt. of 1380 lbs, that would cut a lot of 1/2 tons off the list. Even our 3/4 ton couldn't handle this 5th wheel. But it's not just KZ doing this. It's crazy out there now...

Any of the big three 3/4 ton trucks will handle a 10800 GVWR 5th wheel trailer.

GM has a 1500 HD with a 8600 GVWR/6000 RAWR/6.0 engine/4L80E tranny/E tires and wheels 11k tow rating that will easily handle that size 5er.

Dodge has a 1500 Mega Cab with a 8510 GVWR/6000 RAWR/E tires and wheels/Hemi. No problems there.

And of course the F150 HD 8200 GVWR/4800 RAWR/E tires and wheels with payloads up to 3030 lbs will work also.

You are right about one thing and thats many 1/2 tons are not on the list for that size trailer.

Ben,

Here is the NHTSA article.

Here is another reference.

APT

APT wrote:
Ford varies the GVWR for 2WD/4WD, each cab size, each bed length, each engine option, plus the Max Towing and HD packages. The Tire and Loading sticker is probably the more important one for owners and less confusing. It takes the actual GVWR for that combo, subtracts the base curb weight for that combo, and subtracts all the trim/option weight. I call it the "As Equipped" payload, because no one buys the base model no option truck.

People used to (and often still do) recommend weighing the truck before these stickers were required on 2006+ model year vehicles. That is difficult to do on several trucks on dealer lots.

APT...have tried to find the details or specifications for this label
and can not find it

Could you post a link that spells out how they derive the info. Specifically
that they used the 'curb' plus the OEM options subtracted from the GVWR?

Am not arguing, just extremely interested. If we (you) can prove
that, then part of the mystery of weights or HOW2 derive them can
be laid to rest

Thanks

As mkirsch says, take the truck to a scale and weight it and then subtract that from the GVWR (on sticker) to get the actual payload weight. Do not use the payload weight shown on the door jamb sticker to base your buying or towing decision on. The payload number is always going to be higher than the actual. Our actual available payload weight is 1,000 lbs lower than what the sticker says it is.

Never use manufacturer's stickered or advertised payload (or cargo carrying capacity) or dry weights for anything. You'll get yourself in trouble in the end if you don't watch it, unless you want to tow overloaded. Actual payload capacity is just important as the towing capacity if not more so, and esp. in the case of towing a 5th wheel. For a 5th, you'll probably need to look at the rear GAWR too.

On the other side of the coin, don't believe the "1/2 ton towable" label being flogged now. If you fall for, they'll tell you that your 1/2 ton can tow pretty much anything. KZ for example now has a new "1500" designation for their 5th wheel Durango model line and is advertised as "1/2 ton towable". They are saying you can tow a 34' 5th wheel with 10,800 lbs GVWR with a 1/2 ton. Actual pin weight would likely be up around 2,000 lbs. I'd like to see them list some 1/2 ton trucks with actual payload capacities and RGAWR that can handle that. Even if you go by their dry hitch wt. of 1380 lbs, that would cut a lot of 1/2 tons off the list. Even our 3/4 ton couldn't handle this 5th wheel. But it's not just KZ doing this. It's crazy out there now...

Ford varies the GVWR for 2WD/4WD, each cab size, each bed length, each engine option, plus the Max Towing and HD packages. The Tire and Loading sticker is probably the more important one for owners and less confusing. It takes the actual GVWR for that combo, subtracts the base curb weight for that combo, and subtracts all the trim/option weight. I call it the "As Equipped" payload, because no one buys the base model no option truck.

People used to (and often still do) recommend weighing the truck before these stickers were required on 2006+ model year vehicles. That is difficult to do on several trucks on dealer lots.

Thank you, that is what I thought.

love2rvcamp wrote:
I do have one other question...

I know what GVWR means just want to clarify something.

When looking at window stickers on trucks you see

#7350 GVWR Package or

#7700 GVWR Package

These are listed under the optional equipment. Can I assume that even though on the Ford spec sheet the GVWR might be 9500 that the number listed this way on the sticker is the specific rating for that vehicle?

Forget the window sticker, open the door and look at the doorjamb. There will be a sticker for that EXACT truck.

But, yes - the sticker on the vehicle itself is the one to go by. NOT a spec sheet. Lots of things change the GVWR when the truck is ordered from the factory.

I do have one other question...

I know what GVWR means just want to clarify something.

When looking at window stickers on trucks you see

#7350 GVWR Package or

#7700 GVWR Package

These are listed under the optional equipment. Can I assume that even though on the Ford spec sheet the GVWR might be 9500 that the number listed this way on the sticker is the specific rating for that vehicle?

Yes it will. Congrats and enjoy!