Trailer weight capacity/axle weight capacity

My Bigfoot came with 2x 3500lb axles 5lug LRC tires.
Last time at the scales it was at ~7000 lbs, black/grey empty and 1/4 tank fresh water. GVWR is 7000lbs.

Original owner being a trucker decided to upgrade the axles years ago to 2x 4400lbs came with bigger brakes and 6 lug LRE tires.

Only thing he forgot was the springs which one leaf broke on each end a few years ago coming back from Mexico. Replaced all 4 springs with 4400 lbs rating.
Now I dont worry anymore if all my tanks are full....54/44/40 gallons or 1100 lbs!!!!

Even expensive trailers can be skimped in areas.

As always the case, the consumer does well to know about these things, buy and then load accordingly. My funfinder has two 2800 pound axles and a 6K gvwr.

But, it only weighed 3600 when I brought it home, and currently weighs right around 4100 as I use it, so I'm well within the load limits of the axles and tires.
This is all part of the reason that even though I was buying a small, 19' trailer, I insisted on tandem axles. Many of the single axle smaller trailers are very close indeed to their axle load capacity. A good friend recently bought a single axle Lance, and loaded to go it's pretty darn close to capacity, especially tires.

As an aside, in the horse and stock trailer world, then tend to rate the gvwr as the sum of the axles, so they are a little more conservative compared to the RV builders.

Our Dart has 2 3500# axles with a gross weight of 6000#. Plenty of reserve. I would rate the quality as a bit higher than other similar units that I have seen. That was the second main reason we bought it. The first was floor plan.
Of course, they are no longer made.
Maybe that means something.

Well there ya go ??

My Jayco Jay Flight 23RB has 2 3500# axles under it and it's GVWR is 6500#.

trailer_newbe wrote:
My Jayco has a GW of 8,700, and each axle is rated for 4,400 lbs. so not all cut it that close.

My Jayco has a GW of 8,700, and each axle is rated for 4,400 lbs. so not all cut it that close.

JCR-1 wrote:
Thanks oops forgot about the tongue.. but still aren't they cutting things close without much of a safety margin considering pot holes speed humps overweight and the like... I guess Chinese engineering is hitting America as well ??? and yes the tire load ratings are similarly slim as well.

Yes all have been made this way forever. Nothing to do with China.

JCR-1 wrote:
Thanks oops forgot about the tongue.. but still aren't they cutting things close without much of a safety margin considering pot holes speed humps overweight and the like... I guess Chinese engineering is hitting America as well ??? and yes the tire load ratings are similarly slim as well.

None of that changes the load, so what's your point? Axle and tire ratings already take into account real world conditions like bumps and potholes. And the load ratings already have a margin built in - your tires aren't going to explode or your axle collapse as soon as you put 3501 lbs on them.

People don't want to pay more for a high end quality unit. That's why most of the high end trailer manufacturers are out of business.

They are leaving very little room for error, but it's how they roll.
Why spend a little more money and put a larger axle under the trailer when you can barely make the numbers work with a lighter axle?

JCR-1 wrote:
Thanks oops forgot about the tongue.. but still aren't they cutting things close without much of a safety margin considering pot holes speed humps overweight and the like... I guess Chinese engineering is hitting America as well ??? and yes the tire load ratings are similarly slim as well.