No, mkirsch is just being a little dramatic or critical of some previous uninformed comments. Of which rvnet has no lack of.
The big takeaway from this whole thing is ratings are (sometimes) there for a real physical limitation reason. You know, something based on engineering principle and design. Other ratings are given similarly but with large factors of safety not explicitly mentioned. And yet others are in place for only regulatory reasons.
That’s why the old adage of “stick to the ratings” if you can’t understand or discern from the above is always the “safe” bet.
But sometimes “safe” or in many cases overly safe costs alot of unnecessary money. And if one can understand or get some good advice that is cheaper than spending cubic dollars to be “overly safe.”
In the case of this truck. This is the largest capacity rating on a given design (light duty pickup chassis). It seems obvious to me but should stand to reason to anyone with some knowledge that if the same thing is rated less here and more there, that the more rating has a lower factor of safety.
And this guy found out what that limit is for his frame!
On the upside like mkirsch has been ranting about , this failure totally supports the arguments that your not going to break that frame, springs or axle on your 2500 Ram (or whatever 3/4 ton) by exceeding the paltry regulatory based rating by a large margin.
Mkirsch is doing a disservice by trying to lump ALL comments into the same bucket.