Dingy braking - do, did, or won't

[vandave]

How many tow a vehicle without supplemental brakes? Please, don't turn me into DOT and I know the State "requirements". Car weighs less than 4,000 lbs. I'm just asking how many do it or have done it. Thanks your replies; I do, I did, I won't.

[tenbear]

I have always used a braking system since I acquired my motorhome. I have to admit that there have been times that I was glad I had the extra braking.

[eheading]

We first started towing in 1996, towing a Geo Metro, 1800 lb. No aux. braking. When we graduated to a Geo Tracker weighing 2900 pounds, we added auxiliary braking. Now we are towing a MINI Cooper Roadster that weighs about 2800 pounds (less than the 3000 pound requirement for trailers in FL). In addition, when we have our motorhome, a 34' Newmar Ventana LE, full loaded with the car in tow, the TOTAL weight including the toad is over 1000 pounds less than the GVWR of the motorhome. We don't have an auxiliary brake at the current time.

Ed Headington

[Bumpyroad]

EsoxLucius wrote:
Anecdotal blather. Science and data matters. I guess we are losing that.

well stated.
I guess when I exited at off ramps, and when my braking got a little more intense and the toad brakes activated and jerked back on the motor home I guess it was all in my imagination?
bumpy

[EsoxLucius]

dubdub07 wrote:
I will say that I use one, sometimes. I have three toads and move the brake from vehicle to vehicle. Sometimes I do not use it. I will be honest, I do not notice much difference in the stopping distance or handling. I go down Monarch pass and Vail pass regularly, no issues with or without it. I also have had to make quick stops. Notice nothing different.

The biggest reason I do like the brake box is the breakaway. But even then, if ALL the hardware breaks down that have by vehicles attached, something has gone seriously wrong.

Has anyone heard of a Roadmaster or Blu-Ox towbar or baseplate fail?

WW

Anecdotal blather. Science and data matters. I guess we are losing that.

[dubdub07]

I will say that I use one, sometimes. I have three toads and move the brake from vehicle to vehicle. Sometimes I do not use it. I will be honest, I do not notice much difference in the stopping distance or handling. I go down Monarch pass and Vail pass regularly, no issues with or without it. I also have had to make quick stops. Notice nothing different.

The biggest reason I do like the brake box is the breakaway. But even then, if ALL the hardware breaks down that have by vehicles attached, something has gone seriously wrong.

Has anyone heard of a Roadmaster or Blu-Ox towbar or baseplate fail?

WW

[et2]

RJsfishin wrote:
Well, for those who just "don't get it"
Wouldn't you just drive a little more defensively if you are driving in less than ideal conditions, whenever,whatever that may be ?

For me its a simple no brainer, others just don't get it, never will !

I think many do get it. Lot of chest thumping going on. Speed matters, brakes matter, distance matters, moving mass matters. Common sense matters which is what some fail to use.

[RJsfishin]

Well, for those who just "don't get it"
Wouldn't you just drive a little more defensively if you are driving in less than ideal conditions, whenever,whatever that may be ?

For me its a simple no brainer, others just don't get it, never will !

[mowermech]

Bumpyroad wrote:
if your speed at impact is reduced by 5-10-15 mph, what effect will this have?
bumpy

Good question. What will the difference be to a six year old human body if it is hit by a 20,000 pound vehicle at 60 MPH or 55 or 50 or 45 MPH?
The end result will not be pretty, IMO.

[Bumpyroad]

if your speed at impact is reduced by 5-10-15 mph, what effect will this have?
bumpy

[mowermech]

I am 75 years old. I have been driving since I was 15. In that time, I have had three experiences with deer jumping or running in front of me while I was traveling 55 MPH or more. In all three cases, I had no time to do anything about it. Once I was driving a 1966 Barracuda. The deer totally destroyed the front of the car. I didn't even have time to get my foot on the brake pedal.
another time I was driving a Datsun 610 station wagon. I was able to get slowed down enough that the car barely bumped the rear end of the deer, and she ran off. Damage to the car was minimal. But, again, I was unable to stop and avoid the accident entirely.
Another time I was in a Dodge W100 truck. The deer went under the truck and off to the side of the road. There was no damage to the truck. Again, I did not even get my foot on the brake before I hit it.
The deer hit by the Barracuda and the Dodge both died.
The point is, in the emergency scenarios commonly presented to justify the use of towed vehicle braking systems, there is a good chance that the vehicle will hit whatever suddenly appears regardless of the existence on non-existence of a braking system. At 60 MPH the average stopping distance, including reaction time, will be 150 to 200 feet under the best of conditions.
Again, good luck.

Edit: Oh, yeah, I forgot about the time down in Wyoming that a big black dog ran out in front of my Ford E150 Club Wagon. Once again, I had no time to do anything. I ran over it. It ran off, so perhaps it survived. Same point: The best brakes Ford could build meant nothing, because there simply wasn't time to use them.

[Dutch_12078]

mowermech wrote:

Dutch_12078 wrote:

RJsfishin wrote:

Dutch_12078 wrote:
I have, but not willingly. I don't care how good your coach brakes are, unloading that extra 3-4,000 lb load will shorten your emergency braking distance. Sometimes just a few inches can be the difference between a safe stop and a disaster.

What you say may be true.
But what about paying more attention, and leaving those same few more inches between you and the vehicle you're following,.....won't that accomplish the same thing ??

Of course that's common sense when driving a heavy vehicle, but it does not help when some fool pulls out in front of you or runs a light or stop sign. Or a kid or animal runs in front of you...

Ah, yes, the "Emergency" argument.
But, let's inject a dose of reality into that "emergency". When that kid or animal runs in front of you, how far will you travel before your foot hits the brake pedal? How far beyond that will you travel before the braking takes effect?
The FMVSS braking performance laws (and most State Braking Performance laws) state that you must be able to stop within 40 or 45 feet(FMVSS is, IIRC, 40, MT is 40, CA is 45) from 20 MPH. Keep in mind that the distance does not take into account the time it takes to apply the brakes, it is actual stopping distance from brake application to full stop. Even at 20 MPH, you hit the fool that pulled out in front of you, or ran over the kid or dog that ran out! What chance will you have to get stopped in time at 40, 50, or 70 MPH?
Good luck.

In 57 years of driving and 8 years of co-owning a towing/recovery business, I've seen enough near misses and accidents where a few inches made the difference between a disaster and nothing, or a fender bender and a fatality, that I'll take all the advantages I can get. There are too many variables to say if an auxiliary brake actuating system will add extra inches or feet in any given setup, but the laws of physics say there will be a measurable difference. The other laws don't matter when it comes to the difference between life or death. Especially if it's your own...

[mowermech]

Dutch_12078 wrote:

RJsfishin wrote:

Dutch_12078 wrote:
I have, but not willingly. I don't care how good your coach brakes are, unloading that extra 3-4,000 lb load will shorten your emergency braking distance. Sometimes just a few inches can be the difference between a safe stop and a disaster.

What you say may be true.
But what about paying more attention, and leaving those same few more inches between you and the vehicle you're following,.....won't that accomplish the same thing ??

Of course that's common sense when driving a heavy vehicle, but it does not help when some fool pulls out in front of you or runs a light or stop sign. Or a kid or animal runs in front of you...

Ah, yes, the "Emergency" argument.
But, let's inject a dose of reality into that "emergency". When that kid or animal runs in front of you, how far will you travel before your foot hits the brake pedal? How far beyond that will you travel before the braking takes effect?
The FMVSS braking performance laws (and most State Braking Performance laws) state that you must be able to stop within 40 or 45 feet(FMVSS is, IIRC, 40, MT is 40, CA is 45) from 20 MPH. Keep in mind that the distance does not take into account the time it takes to apply the brakes, it is actual stopping distance from brake application to full stop. Even at 20 MPH, you hit the fool that pulled out in front of you, or ran over the kid or dog that ran out! What chance will you have to get stopped in time at 40, 50, or 70 MPH?
Good luck.

[Dutch_12078]

RJsfishin wrote:

Dutch_12078 wrote:
I have, but not willingly. I don't care how good your coach brakes are, unloading that extra 3-4,000 lb load will shorten your emergency braking distance. Sometimes just a few inches can be the difference between a safe stop and a disaster.

What you say may be true.
But what about paying more attention, and leaving those same few more inches between you and the vehicle you're following,.....won't that accomplish the same thing ??

Of course that's common sense when driving a heavy vehicle, but it does not help when some fool pulls out in front of you or runs a light or stop sign. Or a kid or animal runs in front of you...

[RJsfishin]

Bumpyroad wrote:

fpresto wrote:

RJsfishin wrote:
What ?? Is this for real ??
If you rear end someone, there would be NO question, you are automatically at fault for driving w/ undo caution, namely, following too close. It makes no difference what conditions mite have caused it, you are at fault, period ! Your insurance will be forced to pay,....unless of course someone could prove you did it on purpose, which then changes it from an accident to insurance fraud ??

I think you totally misunderstood my post. Of course he was guilty of failure to have his vehicle under control and received a ticket for that and I assume paid the fine. The purpose of the civil trial was to determine damages. He was being sued. In my opinion, having set through the trial, his lack of a breaking system on the toad contributed greatly to the large size of the award as that was what the lawyer stressed over and over and I think it made an impression on the jury. As I said many civil trials are decided by the emotions of the jury and how well the lawyers can play on those emotions.

well stated. saved me the trouble, thanks
bumpy

Saved you the trouble of what,....bad mouthing somebody else for not thinking the way you do ??

[Bumpyroad]

fpresto wrote:

RJsfishin wrote:
What ?? Is this for real ??
If you rear end someone, there would be NO question, you are automatically at fault for driving w/ undo caution, namely, following too close. It makes no difference what conditions mite have caused it, you are at fault, period ! Your insurance will be forced to pay,....unless of course someone could prove you did it on purpose, which then changes it from an accident to insurance fraud ??

I think you totally misunderstood my post. Of course he was guilty of failure to have his vehicle under control and received a ticket for that and I assume paid the fine. The purpose of the civil trial was to determine damages. He was being sued. In my opinion, having set through the trial, his lack of a breaking system on the toad contributed greatly to the large size of the award as that was what the lawyer stressed over and over and I think it made an impression on the jury. As I said many civil trials are decided by the emotions of the jury and how well the lawyers can play on those emotions.

well stated. saved me the trouble, thanks
bumpy