A happy ending?

[notsobigjoe]

There are two articles about this much talked about topic on TCA. The first is literally almost word for word of all of the comments on this forum. I think someone posted this already...

https://www.truckcamperadventure.com/overloaded-ram-3500-dually-results-in-truck-camper-disaster/

The second article explains more of what actually happened. Sorry if someone already posted this. But all in all a good ending to a disaster.

https://www.truckcamperadventure.com/insurance-covers-repair-to-pavels-overloaded-and-broken-ram-3500-frame/

[Grit_dog]

My bad! Apologies. It is sometimes hard to discern between the wacky conjured up theories that some folks have and those who “get it” and are just being a bit sarcastic. (I should know, lol!)

And I meant frame, not crane, in my previous post.
It doesn’t add up.
Hood, bumper, grille and some associated minor mechanical parts/fasteners and a new 30” LED retina scanner on the front of our truck was an over $8k repair bill last fall at the body shop and that was lower than quoted elsewhere.
I’m very skeptical one could purchase a new frame, disassemble the entire truck off of the old one and reassemble, along with other incidental items for that amount.

[otrfun]

Grit dog wrote:

otrfun wrote:
I sometimes wonder if GEICO's approval of Pavel's claim (snapped frame on his Ram 3500 dually) was a one-time marketing decision. With his photos going viral, they knew approving this particular claim would generate free, positive publicity for GEICO---more than enough to make up for the $17k payout. GEICO knows they're under no obligation to approve any future claims of this type in the future.

Nope, it’s just insurance. You’re trying too hard here too….
No wonder stupid human tricks like breaking your truck in half go “viral”. It ain’t just the Instagram generation…..
Well, that and you actually have no idea what you’re taking aboot. About 101% off base speculation on your part.
It was a little claim. Like the 1000s of little claims they process every day.
And there’s no details. This all sounds hinky since $17k wouldn’t replace the crane under that truck. Not even close.

Lol!! I'm trying too hard?! My post was meant to be speculative humor that you took way, way, too seriously 🙂

[Grit_dog]

otrfun wrote:

3 tons wrote:
Insurance company pays for driver-owner’s irresponsible malfeasance, then he unloads his truck on some poor unwary, meanwhile others wonder why their rates keep climbing…Why complain, isn’t this just the American way?? (LOL!)

3 tons

JimK-NY wrote:
Having recently dealt with an insurance claim, it seems that the insurance companies do not care about the high cost of coverage. Higher expenses just mean they can justify higher premiums . . . .

I sometimes wonder if GEICO's approval of Pavel's claim (snapped frame on his Ram 3500 dually) was a one-time marketing decision. With his photos going viral, they knew approving this particular claim would generate free, positive publicity for GEICO---more than enough to make up for the $17k payout. GEICO knows they're under no obligation to approve any future claims of this type in the future.

Nope, it’s just insurance. You’re trying too hard here too….
No wonder stupid human tricks like breaking your truck in half go “viral”. It ain’t just the Instagram generation…..
Well, that and you actually have no idea what you’re taking aboot. About 101% off base speculation on your part.
It was a little claim. Like the 1000s of little claims they process every day.
And there’s no details. This all sounds hinky since $17k wouldn’t replace the crane under that truck. Not even close.

[Grit_dog]

JimK-NY wrote:
Having recently dealt with an insurance claim, it seems that the insurance companies do not care about the high cost of coverage. Higher expenses just mean they can justify higher premiums.

I had some very minor damage. Another car rubbed my front bumper when trying to parallel park. The only damage was a small area where the plastic on the bumper was torn. They had no problem paying for a new bumper for a total cost of a bit over $2000. I even qualified for a rental car for the week the repair took but did not need it.

You haven’t even figured out what you’re complaining aboot.
You didn’t have to take the new bumper and rental car. You could have cut the insurance company “a break.” Heck you could have fixed it yourself and done your civic duty to keep rates lower…
Or more succinctly it sounds like you’re trying real hard to find something to complain aboot.
Lol

[otrfun]

3 tons wrote:
Insurance company pays for driver-owner’s irresponsible malfeasance, then he unloads his truck on some poor unwary, meanwhile others wonder why their rates keep climbing…Why complain, isn’t this just the American way?? (LOL!)

3 tons

JimK-NY wrote:
Having recently dealt with an insurance claim, it seems that the insurance companies do not care about the high cost of coverage. Higher expenses just mean they can justify higher premiums . . . .

I sometimes wonder if GEICO's approval of Pavel's claim (snapped frame on his Ram 3500 dually) was a one-time marketing decision. With his photos going viral, they knew approving this particular claim would generate free, positive publicity for GEICO---more than enough to make up for the $17k payout. GEICO knows they're under no obligation to approve any future claims of this type in the future.

[JimK-NY]

valhalla360 wrote:


Fact is this guy was grossly negligent. We aren't talking about being a couple hundred pounds overweight. He was wildly overweight with poor weight distribution.

Considering the payload is right there on the door jam, claims that he was told he had more payload don't ring true.

My experience has been that when shopping for a truck, the salespeople have no experience. At least that is the case on the East coast area where I live. They sell mostly 1/2 ton trucks and seem to think a 3/4 or 1 ton should be able to carry everything. It seems that there is a combination of ignorance and just trying to make a sale for a truck currently in their lot. Buyers and salespeople alike also seem to be confused about the need to check the specs for the specific truck. They often fail to realize that a diesel engine, crew cab and other modifications and options can significantly affect the cargo carrying capacity.

The approach of RV dealers doesn't seem to be much better. Brochures and literature which do provide specs seem to be geared towards underplaying this issue. They typically show weights for a stripped down basic unit without common options such as an A/C and even awnings. New buyers don't understand that the spec weight is going to increase by often thousands of pounds when the camper is loaded and ready for a trip.

The weight problem is not restricted to truck campers and can be even worse for trailers. Trailers are typically built with undersized tires, wheels, suspension and frame components. It is common to see a 25-30' trailer that is designed to sleep up to 6 people but is only rated to carry about 1000#. These trailers often have huge compartments that are loaded up with BBQ grills, tools, lawn furniture and often even large amounts of firewood in addition to the clothing, kitchen stuff, food and gear that a family is likely to load.

[valhalla360]

JimK-NY wrote:
Having recently dealt with an insurance claim, it seems that the insurance companies do not care about the high cost of coverage. Higher expenses just mean they can justify higher premiums.

I had some very minor damage. Another car rubbed my front bumper when trying to parallel park. The only damage was a small area where the plastic on the bumper was torn. They had no problem paying for a new bumper for a total cost of a bit over $2000. I even qualified for a rental car for the week the repair took but did not need it.

Auto insurance in most states is regulated. The insurance commission typically limits the percentage of premiums that are profits. So while it's not a free for all, more payouts means they can increase the profits.

Fact is this guy was grossly negligent. We aren't talking about being a couple hundred pounds overweight. He was wildly overweight with poor weight distribution.

Considering the payload is right there on the door jam, claims that he was told he had more payload don't ring true.

[JimK-NY]

Having recently dealt with an insurance claim, it seems that the insurance companies do not care about the high cost of coverage. Higher expenses just mean they can justify higher premiums.

I had some very minor damage. Another car rubbed my front bumper when trying to parallel park. The only damage was a small area where the plastic on the bumper was torn. They had no problem paying for a new bumper for a total cost of a bit over $2000. I even qualified for a rental car for the week the repair took but did not need it.

[3_tons]

Insurance company pays for driver-owner’s irresponsible malfeasance, then he unloads his truck on some poor unwary, meanwhile others wonder why their rates keep climbing…Why complain, isn’t this just the American way?? (LOL!)

3 tons

[notsobigjoe]

otrfun wrote:
TCA did an outstanding job of explaining, what I feel, is the primary reason this guy's frame failed---improper COG. If the COG had been located directly over the rear axle, and not a number of feet behind, this particular failure would have never occurred---even overloaded as he was.

If the owner of this truck would have taken the time to visit a scale (unloaded and loaded), yes, he would have discovered his truck was overloaded. However, he would have also discovered his front-axle was being off-loaded hundreds and hundreds of pounds---indicating a COG far behind the rear axle.

IMO, it's not a simple case of calculating GVWR and payload and calling it safe. *Where* you place the payload (COG) is a critical consideration, too.

Bingo!!!!
Not putting words in your mouth but I think the whole dam thing was his fault. The dealers told him it was OK and he believed them. That camper is heavy on a 550 much less a 3500. There has to be some kind of responsibility to the owner driver when doing something like this. It is the cornerstone of our weight police argument on many occasions. This man got in it and drove down the road to disaster. My god what if he was doing 60 or 70 forget it, they would have been killed and others too.
"Quote"
“First of all, Mike, I want to let you know that your assessment of the payload capacity is correct,” Michael Pavel told Truck Camper Adventure. “Yes, I was unaware of it when I bought the truck and camper and should have done more research on the payload.
"Quote"
But overloading the truck was only part of the couple’s problem. The triple-slide truck camper’s massive rear overhang plus two 72-pound bikes placed an inordinate amount of weight behind the rear axle. Coupled with the weight from the 1,100-pound 6.7L diesel engine and a 300-pound aftermarket front bumper, this fulcrum affect created a “bowing” affect in the center of the frame, exactly where Pavel’s Ram 3500 frame split in two. The arched and cracked frame shown in the photographs provide additional evidence that an excessive amount of weight was located behind the rear axle.

We have gone back and forth about this very topic "COG" tons of times. Not only is it more common than not but it most assuredly is the driver owner responsibility to be aware of such an easy mistake.
I am still solidly in the corner of being over weighted by a few hundred pounds but with my decades of TC owning experience this an acceptable place for me to be. I can certainly appreciate the every ouncers a little bit better with this article.
Cheers, Joe

[otrfun]

TCA did an outstanding job of explaining what I feel is the primary reason this guy's frame failed---improper COG. If the COG had been located directly over the rear axle, and not a number of feet behind, this particular failure would have never occurred---even overloaded as he was.

If the owner of this truck would have taken the time to visit a scale (unloaded and loaded), yes, he would have discovered his truck was overloaded. However, he would have also discovered his front-axle was being off-loaded hundreds and hundreds of pounds---indicating a COG far behind the rear axle.

IMO, it's not a simple case of calculating GVWR and payload and calling it safe. *Where* you place the payload (COG) is a critical consideration, too.

[otrfun]

Double post.

[jimh406]

I'm not reevaluating based on that frame breaking. I don't know what all the truck owner was doing, but the fact remains there are lots of overloaded vehicles that never break. I think it's more likely that he added more stress to the frame by having a poor suspension solution/worn suspension and/or the type of roads he drove.

That being said, I'm under my GVWR sticker which is 14500. When I first bought my truck, it had 95K miles on it. The first trip with the TC I hit a bump on I-90, and it sounded like it hit really hard. It's hard to describe the sound, but I knew that wasn't right. So, I bought new shocks. The previous owner used it to haul horses cross country with a large gooseneck, and it had regular service based not he Carafe. They obviously didn't think the shocks were worn out ... at least they weren't replaced. All it took was to load the TC, for me to notice it. I have no idea what their pin weight was on their trailer loaded.

In other words, some of us notice things that aren't quite right while others just keep driving. I wasn't driving the truck that had the frame break, but it's hard for me to believe there were zero warning signs if I had been driving. Of course, this is just speculation on my part.

I've seen it before with other vehicles. For instance, my friend drove his vehicle every day. One day, I rode with him and asked him what that noise was. He said, "I don't know ... it's been doing it a few weeks." After I mentioned it, he took it to the shop and all of this front end components were worn and were so bad that the shop told him to leave it. It was ready for a catastrophic failure. Who knows how much longer he could have driven it.

Similarly, most blowouts on RVs aren't really from overloading at normal pressure. Instead, it's usually because they have low pressure. If you are paying attention, you should be able to notice it.

YMMV.

[wjlapier]

mkirsch wrote:

deltabravo wrote:
This situation has me really taking a closer look at my RVing situation, all because I am over the GVWR of my truck

Several thoughts have crossed my mind:
1. Sell the pristine 2009 truck in my signature, which only has 75k miles on it and buy a newer truck with a higher GVWRE
2. Sell my AF 992 and get a smaller truck camper.

By rv.net TC forum standards, and the loudest advice given here, that guy had at least another 1000lb of payload capacity left.

He was NOT overloaded. The truck had an AAM axle. Can't be overloaded.

If he wasn't overloaded, you sure as heck aren't. Hit the road and enjoy yourself.

That story has many folks re-evaluating their RV config. Too bad they don’t come here for reassurance they are in fact under max towing/payload.