DRW vs SRW safety, tire blowout

[AH_AK]

Every time the DRW vs SRW debate starts up, dually owners always point to the safety of having 4 rear wheels in case of a blowout while driving. What I am wondering is has anyone actually experienced (or have first hand knowledge of) a SRW blowout that ended in a catastrophic outcome (e.g. crash)?
Obviously, the DRW is going to have better lateral stability
in cornering/cross winds compared to the SRW, but I am only considering the blowout safety aspect. While the redundant tire safety argument is logical, I am wondering how likely such blowout situations are.
To be clear, I am talking about SRW that are not exceeding the maximum tire load, are correctly inflated, and being driven within the tire speed limit. I am running 19.5’s with Firestone AT3’s so I am in this category. I realize most SRW truck camper owners are over their max tire load and yet, there is little to no documentation of blowout failures despite the obvious overloading. It makes me think the DRW blowout safety argument is essentially moot, even though it is totally logical.

[jimh406]

ferndaleflyer wrote:
I have over the years had at least 2 situations that I don't believe I would have survived had I not had a dually.
1-It was Friday before the 4th of July and I was towing a enclosed 32ft 3 axel bumper pull trailer with a race car and assorted junk inside traveling with traffic at about 70mph on I 40 near Burlington NC. The trailer hitch ball sheared off and I went for a ride. I think to this day what saved me was the dual wheels on the truck and the 3 axels on the trailer. Not much damage and I didn't hit anyone.
2-Coming down the hill on I-70 coming into Frederick, MD towing a trailer that was rear end heavy, it started swaying and was almost sideways, I floored it and as soon as it got straight behind me I locked up the brakes and got it stopped. Only the dual wheels stopped it from turning me around and maybe rolling the whole mess.
You never have to much truck.

1. Seems like that failure had zero to do with the truck. Of course, anything can fail, but was the ball rated for the load.
2. This was a case of improper loading. Of course, the easy fix would be not to do that.

I'm not sure someone working inside the safety limits of the tow vehicle and trailer would have ever seen either no matter if they were DRW or not. In any case, neither case seems to have a lot do with with a TC/Truck combination unless you also had a TC in your bed.

[specta]

jaycocreek wrote:


As you probably know,that's why truckers go around and pound there tires with a bar fairly often, It's pretty easy to have a flat and not know it and ruin a tire..

It was fine when I left. 🙂

[BB_TX]

AH_AK wrote:
Every time the DRW vs SRW debate starts up, dually owners always point to the safety of having 4 rear wheels in case of a blowout while driving. What I am wondering is has anyone actually experienced (or have first hand knowledge of) a SRW blowout that ended in a catastrophic outcome (e.g. crash)? …..
…...

In answer to your actual question, apparently no one, in spite of the frequent arguments to the merits.
No truck camper on, but had a blow out on the rear of my F350 SRW at 70 mph towing a utility trailer and truck didn’t even wiggle. Just a loud bang, flying pieces of rubber, and smoke. And a mangled fender.

[notsobigjoe]

KD4UPL wrote:
I carried my Fleetwood 11x TC on a 2007 3500 SRW for a couple years. Then I switched to carrying it on a 2005 Chevy 3500 Dually. The difference in handling, stability, and ride was immediately obvious. The dually was far superior in every way to the SRW. I got exactly the same fuel mileage with both trucks, 10 mpg on diesel. The only real difference in the trucks was the SRW was a regular cab and the dually was a crew cab.
I don't care how many reasons you want to give a dually is the only way to go for a truck camper.
I daily drive my dually. It goes thru bank and restaurant drive thrus a couple times each week. It fits in parking spaces just fine.

Yep, I agree. Never had any problems with gas mileage or checking tires and the width of a parking spot. I'll swear on a dually over a single any day but everyone has a preference. Not being snarky, I just don't have some of the issues that others have. I pretty much just load and go. Every time you check a tire you let air out of it. I stopped doing it years ago. I check my oil/fluids once a day when I'm driving. I just got tired of doing it at every fill up. JMHO
Joe

[ferndaleflyer]

I have over the years had at least 2 situations that I don't believe I would have survived had I not had a dually.
1-It was Friday before the 4th of July and I was towing a enclosed 32ft 3 axel bumper pull trailer with a race car and assorted junk inside traveling with traffic at about 70mph on I 40 near Burlington NC. The trailer hitch ball sheared off and I went for a ride. I think to this day what saved me was the dual wheels on the truck and the 3 axels on the trailer. Not much damage and I didn't hit anyone.
2-Coming down the hill on I-70 coming into Frederick, MD towing a trailer that was rear end heavy, it started swaying and was almost sideways, I floored it and as soon as it got straight behind me I locked up the brakes and got it stopped. Only the dual wheels stopped it from turning me around and maybe rolling the whole mess.
You never have to much truck.

[jaycocreek]

That's my work truck and I drove over 100 miles with the RR outside tire flat and never knew it.

I have no idea how it would feel with a 1-ton dually.

As you probably know,that's why truckers go around and pound there tires with a bar fairly often, It's pretty easy to have a flat and not know it and ruin a tire..

[specta]

That's my work truck and I drove over 100 miles with the RR outside tire flat and never knew it.

I have no idea how it would feel with a 1-ton dually.

[AH_AK]

Personally, I think it is really a matter of preference. Both can be safe and handle well, but the SRW will likely need significant mods to get there, whereas the dually may be able to do it stock.
w.r.t. lateral stability, I would agree that the extra rear track width of the dually is hard to make up for with suspension mods on a SRW. If you don't mind the DRW and can get a good one for a reasonable amount...go for it.

KD4UPL wrote:
I carried my Fleetwood 11x TC on a 2007 3500 SRW for a couple years. Then I switched to carrying it on a 2005 Chevy 3500 Dually. The difference in handling, stability, and ride was immediately obvious. The dually was far superior in every way to the SRW. I got exactly the same fuel mileage with both trucks, 10 mpg on diesel. The only real difference in the trucks was the SRW was a regular cab and the dually was a crew cab.
I don't care how many reasons you want to give a dually is the only way to go for a truck camper.
I daily drive my dually. It goes thru bank and restaurant drive thrus a couple times each week. It fits in parking spaces just fine.

[jimh406]

DRWs are heavier and usually have different gearing to tow much more. My 06 Ford 6.0 PSD had 3.73s, and my 10 F450 6.4 has 4.30s. I bought it to potentially tow a fifth wheel.

I've heard it's supposed to be only a 1-1.5 mpg penalty to have a DRW if they are similarly equipped. Towing heavy at slower speeds in mtns, the difference in gearing isn't that big of an issue. Otherwise, a F350 DRW with 3.73s would be lighter and get better MPG with just a TC.

[KD4UPL]

I carried my Fleetwood 11x TC on a 2007 3500 SRW for a couple years. Then I switched to carrying it on a 2005 Chevy 3500 Dually. The difference in handling, stability, and ride was immediately obvious. The dually was far superior in every way to the SRW. I got exactly the same fuel mileage with both trucks, 10 mpg on diesel. The only real difference in the trucks was the SRW was a regular cab and the dually was a crew cab.
I don't care how many reasons you want to give a dually is the only way to go for a truck camper.
I daily drive my dually. It goes thru bank and restaurant drive thrus a couple times each week. It fits in parking spaces just fine.

[AH_AK]

If I am in the double digits MPG with my gasser, I call it a victory. I am also super vigilant about checking tire pressures. It is funny when I roll into a rest stop with a bunch of RV's and we are all out scurrying around inspecting and checking tire pressures.

Jack_Diane_Freedom wrote:
Towed a 40 foot, Mobile Suites with SRW F350 for 7 years all over Canada and many trips from Canada to South Florida and never had a problem with tires. I am very particular about my air pressures and checked them constantly. Did not want the big hips of the DRW and limitation on fitting into places as a daily driver. Towing a heavy trailer or truck camper mileage does not enter the equation. You will get mileage from really bad to horrible regardless of SRW or SRW.

[Jack_Diane_Free]

Towed a 40 foot, Mobile Suites with SRW F350 for 7 years all over Canada and many trips from Canada to South Florida and never had a problem with tires. I am very particular about my air pressures and checked them constantly. Did not want the big hips of the DRW and limitation on fitting into places as a daily driver. Towing a heavy trailer or truck camper mileage does not enter the equation. You will get mileage from really bad to horrible regardless of SRW or SRW.

[AH_AK]

I agree. There are a lot of variables outside of number of rear wheels that will impact the safety. You can build out almost any SRW 1T to carry near to what a DRW will, but $$$. If you get a DRW that carries TC well in stock configuration, that is likely the most cost effective solution. I still see a lot of DRW owners doing suspension upgrades which leads me to conclude that the handling of a stock DRW with a TC may not be fantastic (albeit safe from a payload standpoint). Again, I imagine it depends on the exact truck + camper combo and the preferences of the driver.

Lwiddis wrote:
Any advantage of DRW trucks regarding blowouts can’t be discussed in a vacuum IMO. The extra cost, lower MPG, width inconvenience etc. need to be factored into the discussion. But if you need the weight carrying availability, discussion over.

[AH_AK]

For me it came down to availability of a solid used 1T pickup. I wanted a gasser as I am comfortable maintaining gas engines and didn't plan to tow at all (only haul TC). I found a sweet low mileage 3500HD
SRW gasser at auction for a good price. In the end, I can confirm that considering the expense and time of the mods I had to make, the DRW (gasser or diesel) would have been cheaper and would have gotten me out camping sooner.

Does you DRW get worse mileage due to the DRW, or, because of all the new emissions controls? I was under the impression that the DRW in an unto itself does not drastically decrease fuel economy.

I would love to do a 1-to-1 comparison of lateral stability between a SRW and DRW. Seems like a lot of DRW owners are still doing suspension upgrades to improve this aspect of the handling. My SRW has pretty solid lateral stability, but it took a lot of mods to get it there. I am sure DRW would be better in this respect in the stock configuration.

jimh406 wrote:
I haven't heard of or seen a wreck with a TC of any type.

A few here have blown out a rear tire, and other than the resulting damage the fenderwell etc were mostly ok.
I think the real danger results from a front tire blowout. I think in that case, a DRW won't help that much.

If you can't get by with a DRW for other reasons, it's a moot point. Otherwise, it's far cheaper to buy a DRW on the front side compared to adding 19.5s or heavier loading tires in 18s etc.

My old truck was a SRW because a DRW wouldn't work as my daily driver. It was simply too wide. After a few years, I started working somewhere with an even smaller parking lot. Then, my SRW was too long. That led to me buying a car to drive to work, and trading the SC SRW for a CC DRW. The DRW gets horrible fuel mileage compared to my old SRW, but otherwise, is a much. better platform for a TC.

[AH_AK]

The front tire blowout is scary. I would be really interested in how a SRW w/ a truck camper would handle a rear blowout. Maybe not as big of a deal in terms of loss of control as one might think.

I hadn't thought of run flats. Not sure how much they would help with maintaining control at highway speed. To some extent, it seems like the only way you die is if you hit the sh*tty lottery and have an unlikely blowout at an inconvenient time (e.g. around a curve into traffic or of a drop).

JIMNLIN wrote:
Back in the late '60s up to the early '80s I had truck campers (8'- 9.5'-10.5') on my 3/4 and one ton drw work trucks.
So all my trucks had tires that weren't overloaded by any means.

Of the 9 different trucks I had in service the only one I wrecked from a blowout was on a one ton drw Ford.

Twisty winding roads in southern AR my right front tire blew out with the usual sudden lose of air pressures making a left hand 50 mph curve and a loaded 18k gvwr GN flatbed pushing me.
Off the road the rig went to the right and across the old style concrete culvert with a 10" tall concrete upright taking out the Fords front suspension....shoved the engine up into the firewall and dash. Tranny bell housing broke and jammed the tranny tail shaft up through truck floor right behind the front seat...and of course the rear axle was torn loose one side.

In that type of work and the miles we drove a blowout on those old bias ply 16-16.5" tires/wheels was a fact of life.
Soooo... we had plenty of run flats and actual blowouts on road service LDTs rear that simply was no problem getting the rig shut down....unlike a front tire blowout.
I've noticed some rv folks have some wild/funny theories about subjects like over loading....tire blowouts.....weights/etc.

BTDT with srw and drw blowouts. I'm in the moot point camp.