Refund for overweight van.

I’m not surprised at all in as much as what materials are used in caravans like msg and heavy ply. We all know these materials are heavy but cheap. In comparison to the lightweight fallata ply I used it is one half the weight but triple the price.
Hence along with many other light materials my 16ft van has a tare of 730kg. I will never tow a block of units

We have a twin cab Ranger but did check it's limits and even at GVM we still have a margin below GCM with our chosen van. We have checked it on weigh bridges a few times on heading South each trip.

While I can agree that twin cab utes have an issue I can't understand the over the top singling out of them when it comes to this whole issue. It doesn't take much of a look at the specified weights of an LC200 to see that the problem is much wider than twin cabs. If you take away the up to 350kg ball weight from the rather meagre weight allowance they have then you don't have much left for passengers, fuel, luggage and fitted accessories. I've seen so many of them that have plenty of fitted accessories and up to 7 passengers without a GVM upgrade yet still seem to have rather weighty vans behind. I would think that they also would be illegal.

The figures on vehicles are there and it's ultimately up to the owner to select an appropriate tow vehicle. The car dealer was unaware what we intended to use it for, but the caravan dealer did ask and approve of our choice. With a personal weight allowance of 600kg our van can be towed with all our needs, including both water tanks full, and not exceed its ATM.

The worst I have seen though was a twin cab D-Max that while I don't know what the van weighed, it was what was on the vehicle roof that was amazing. It had a tinny, on its trailer with outboard motor attached, plus some kind of hoist to load/unload. Neither the car or van dealers could have approved their choosing to load it that way. The owner has to be the primary person responsible.

Here is a link relating to why the twin cab utes are bullshit...

https://www.club4x4.com.au/modern-ute-tow-ratings-bullst/

I read that article, and similar ones, when they were first published and I still disagree about them as they seemed to be aimed deliberately at twin cabs for personal or commercial reasons. The problem, as I stated, goes to other vehicles as well but you try and find anything similarly published about them as its rare.

The LC200 is touted by so many owners as the be all and end all when it comes to towing vehicles. I've read postings in Forums telling people that if you bought a twin cab then you bought the wrong vehicle. I had a wagon 4x4 for 38 years prior to the Ranger and the last thing I wanted was another one. They just don't fit my desired usage. Although we could have afforded one, it just wasn't on our list of choices.

It's only later when this article appeared that I went looking at the actual specs of the LC200 that I could see that it also has its limitations, weight wise. Yes at full GVM it can technically still tow its rated 3500kg.
BUT
As it has a weight allowance of around 700kg once you take away the probable 350kg from that as ball weight it doesn't allow for much in the way of passengers, luggage, accessories etc. A great many owners of LC200's will still need a GVM upgrade to stay legal.

You can finger point to the limitations of twin cabs as much as you like but be fair that similar mildly deceptive limitations exist elsewhere as well. I only used the LC200 as an example, not to knock it particularly. It's up to the end user of all vehicles to make themselves aware of any limitations and the regulations and to load to stay within those limits. People need to stop trying to put all blame onto vehicle manufacturers and caravan dealers and start looking into a mirror.

Not withstanding the GVM and GCM issues, a 200 series would be more capable of towing a van at or near the upper limit.

Why a person buys a vehicle, whether it be a 200 series or a dual cab, then proceeds to buy a van that weighs over 3ton is beyond my understanding ?
I know a lot of you out there probably do the same, but why ? If you want a 3.5T Bushtracker, buy a Silverado ( or similar ).
If you want a dual cab ( or 200 series ), why not buy a van that weighs 2.5T ?

I can see why Bigfish thinks it is only dual cabs. Any vehicle that is towing its maximum allowance will more than likely be exceeding the GCM.

My D-Max dual cab when fully loaded for extended touring weighed in at 3,000kg. I had done all my homework and had a GVM upgrade as part of the purchase. My GCM at 5950 allows me to tow a van weighing in at 2950kg but when I weighed it at the same time as I weighed the car, it came in at 2,500kg so I am 500kg under my maximum.

Anyone that thinks they can tow at the maximum needs to check there figures regardless of what type of vehicle they are towing with and this includes the mighty LC200.

I definitely would not like to tow 3500kg with my D-Max.

I have towed my 2500 ton (loaded weight) with both a Ranger and Landcruiser and I think both vehicles are very similar in their towing ability. The Ranger may offer better stability because of its longer wheelbase. I am not biased because now I own neither.
At one time we were led to believe that Landcruiser was the only vehicle suitable for towing sadly there are many owners that still believe that.

Kazza..I do not think it is only dual cabs. However dual cabs are the strongest selling class of vehicle in Oz at the moment. To tow with any of the twin cabs at their maximum weight would be absolutely stupid. A 200 series can tow its actual certified weight quite capably. I,m not talking about how much weight is left for luggage, passengers etc. I own a Pajero and it is advertised as capable of towing 3 tonne. I tow a bit over 2 tonne. I have upgraded suspension, torque converter lock up kit and an ecu remap. I would still not tow the advertised 3 tonne. 2.5 would be my top weight for safety, handling and driveability...sitting on 95-100 and not the 85 -90 like many over weight mobile strata flats. Still has me beat why people buy bloody great monstrosities of vans and tow them with a vehicle that is really not up to the task.....lack of homework???

Firstly, the trouble is, there's no education for drivers intending to tow.

You can drive nothing but a Toyota Yaris shopping trolley or similar for 40 years and then on retirement go and buy some kind of big ute or wagon and an equally big van, combination 6 or 7 tonnes, and off you go, no questions, no knowledge test, no skills test.

It's total BS.

If there was a knowledge test at least, the issues that arise through owner/driver ignorance would be largely reduced. And I'm sorry, if as a towing candidate you don't understand the numbers and you don't pass the test, you don't get to tow.

Secondly, the caravan industry is a self-regulated cesspool of deception and ignorance. Within my caravan club associated with a single manufacturer there are multiple instances of incorrect compliance plates and incorrect details on rego certificates, even though we all own the same kind of van with, in the overall scheme of things, little variation in weights or configuration.

It is not helped by the states' registration authorities using terms that are not in national legislation. My van registered in NSW has a figure for GVM. By definition, trailers don't have a GVM, it's ATM or GTM.

In SA the field on the rego certificate is "mass".

Yet all the regulations are based on defined terms, GTM and ATM.

WTF?

The situation is further not helped by self-professed experts in motoring/caravanning media publishing supposedly clarifying advice that is wrong, with the misuse of terms showing a clear lack of understanding of the subject.

Nothing will improve until the caravan industry is forcibly removed from self regulation to effective national regulation with no room for individual states to "interpret".

Likewise licencing for those proposing to tow more than a box trailer.

You shouldn't have got me started. LOL

Take it easy Frank....I think that many on here totally agree with your statements..An overhaul is needed..

You can drive on P's etc for 4 years and then on turning 20 go and buy some kind of big ute or wagon and an equally big van, combination 6 or 7 tonnes, and off you go, no questions, no knowledge test, no skills test.
Apology's Frank :)
Dave

Yeah, but they don't.

Its the 65/70 year old that has only towed a trailer to the tip 6 times a year that can actually afford the Taj Mahal on wheels and hits the road.

Yep. And it's the 65/70 year old who's probably put in 40 odd years of hard yakka to earn that right. Unlike some of the snowflakes on here who need a 3 day course on how to change a tyre. :)
Dave

Who are the snowflakes you talk about David?

PhilD-NT...

"I read that article, and similar ones, when they were first published and I still disagree about them as they seemed to be aimed deliberately at twin cabs for personal or commercial reasons. The problem, as I stated, goes to other vehicles as well but you try and find anything similarly published about them as its rare."

What do you disagree with? That someone has posted a list of dual cabs and there towing capabilities? The fastest growing sector in the automotive industry..The trouble with the dual cabs is that the manufacturers are in such a race to beat their competitors that they constantly pull bullshit figures out of their as to what their vehicles can safely tow. 3500kg for any of them is crap. 3000kg will test them as well. People get sucked in and believe this bullshit. At least with a comparison between the manufacturers you can make an informed choice....the caravan manufacturer on the otherhand has, in many cases, no idea of the true weight of their vans and blatantly tell outright lies to anyone willing to listen and buy their vans.

I have seen many comparisons on say Pajero wagons, Colorados, Tojos, Nisssans, Land Drovers, Everest etc. Heaps of info for them all if you look. The load carrying capacity of the 200 series is well known as well. Great tow vehicle but like many others actual luggage you can carry is very limited.

Snowflakes to me in this context are people that believe that you should have a degree in the task before attempting it, as opposed to the person who says " I'll give it a go". The latter is the type of person that built this nation.
After reading some comments on this and other forums you would expect the roadsides to be littered with the remains of caravans driven by senile 70 year old's. There not.
Much of there lack of skill in towing a van seems to centre around their inability to reverse the van into the C/Park site first time, much to the amusement of some. As we all know if you get it right first time no one is watching. Get it wrong and the whole bloody parks watching.
Re the sales pitch. I think "hope" in the very near future we are going to see a lot more responsibility placed on the builders/sellers of caravans and vehicles.
Not before time.
Dave.

In my follow-up above I wrote

"The situation is further not helped by self-professed experts in motoring/caravanning media publishing supposedly clarifying advice that is wrong, with the misuse of terms showing a clear lack of understanding of the subject."

Here's a classic example.
The statement under the NSW heading is wrong. If you're towing and the combination's GCM is above 4.5 tonnes your speed limit is 100, even if the posted limit is higher.

The applicable rule is NSW Rule 21(2).

This says that if you're towing it is GCM, not GVM that limits your speed. GVM and GCM are defined in the legislation. They are not the weight on the day, they are the maximums specified by the vehicle manufacturers. So if your combination is under 4.5 tonnes on the day but your specified GCM is over 4.5 tonnes, you are captured by the GCM rule and your speed is limited to 100 max.

Any of the modern utes or touring wagons without a trailer connected can drive at the posted limit because they all have GVMs below 4.5 tonnes. Simples as the meerkat would say.

But as soon as you hook a trailer OF ANY WEIGHT on the back it becomes a combination and the GCM restriction cuts in.
Because ALL of those modern utes and touring wagons have a GCM over 4.5 tonnes they are ALL limited to 100 when towing in NSW.

Alko's Without A Hitch page has completely missed this subtlety and is issuing wrong advice.

You'd think that a company that specialises in this stuff might get it right, but sadly, no.

As an aside, the rule has some interesting implications.

A corolla can tow a braked trailer weighing 1300kg. Over-run brakes suffice. What a wonderfully safe combination! Because Corolla's GCM is less than 4.5 tonnes, it can tow at the posted limit, even if that limit is, say 130kph. But a Ranger or a BT50 with that same trailer, unarguably a much safer combination, is limited by the rule to 100. Go figure.

Similar for a family sedan towing a light, slab-sided caravan - the limit is the posted limit. But put that van behind a larger, safer tug with a GCM over 4.5 tonnes and the limit is reduced to 100.

Not so simples.

Have you ever seen a motoring writer explain this? Me neither.

Warning - long post.

Here's another one.

"GTM (gross trailer mass)

This is the maximum weight of the loaded caravan that can be supported by its wheels, not counting the portion supported by the car when hitched – or jockey wheel when parked. This rating is set by the manufacturer and cannot be exceeded.

GTM = ATM – tow ball mass"

The definition is right, but the formula at the bottom is wrong.

Towball mass (TBM) is a variable, depending on how the trailer is loaded. If you apply the formula the GTM will vary as the TBM varies. But GTM is a specified limit fixed by the trailer manufacturer, so the formula is an incorrect oversimplification.

Note: If the trailer’s axle is loaded up to GTM, then the difference between GTM and ATM is the ball weight available. If the loaded trailer’s actual axle load is lower than the GTM (lucky you!), then there is a larger margin for towball weight without exceeding the ATM.


On the same page:

"GCM (gross combined mass)

The gross combined mass is a combination of the maximum allowed mass of the trailer and the maximum allowed mass of the vehicle. It’s rare that you’ll need to consider this one.

GCM = GTM + GVM"

This simplified definition is wrong.Here is the definition of GCM in ADRs. You'll have to scroll down the list.

"GCM is the value specified for the vehicle by the ‘Manufacturer’ as being the MAXIMUM of the sum of the ‘Gross Vehicle Mass’ of the drawing vehicle plus the sum of the ‘Axle Loads’ of any vehicle capable of being drawn as a trailer."

That is, GCM is a maximum sum. It is not the sum of maximums as the Alko definition states - a subtle but significant difference.

It is simpler to think of GCM as simply the maximum permitted mass of the vehicle and trailer combination as specified by the vehicle manufacturer. It is NOT obtained by adding together other weights, though in some cases when you do the result is coincident. (Eg some Landcruisers, where GCM was not specified.)

And the formula doesn't work - simply because it is inappropriate. You cannot calculate GCM with a formula because it is simply a limit stated by the manufacturer.

Lastly, the sentence in the definition, "It’s rare that you’ll need to consider this one." could not be further from the truth. It need to be considered ALL THE TIME if you're setting up for towing!

This is erroneous and confusing information put out by a company that should know better. The trouble is, consumers rely on and use this sort of stuff and are, in turn, mininformed and confused. Then they got on the road overloaded and unbalanced.

If you must have a formula it would be

When coupled, Actual Vehicle mass (not GVM) + actual trailer axle load (not GTM) must be =< GCM
or
When uncoupled, Actual vehicle mass (not GVM) + actual trailer mass (not ATM) must be =< GCM

And within both of those you must not exceed GVM, ATM or GTM.

******************************************

Actually, I have a bit of trouble with the ADR definition and how it works with, say, a Ranger/BT50 (GVM 3200) and the max published towed masses for those vehicles of 3500kg.

Using the ADR definition of GCM as being the manufacturer's maximum sum of GVM plus axle load of the trailer, then

GCM 6000 minus GVM 3200 = 2800 as the maximum permitted axle load of the trailer.

Using the Ranger/BT50 max ball weight of 350, that would make the max towable trailer mass (ATM) 3150, not 3500 as advertised.

If you get a GVM upgrade, commonly to 3500 for these vehicles, it's even worse. Using the same calculation, the max towable trailer weight (ATM) would be 2850.

Another argument against the overoptimistic specs for these utes, or am I missing something?


If you've read this far you're maybe as bored as I am with this %^&* isolation stuff LOL

Maybe I should have posted just this:

Great diagram Frank.

Cheers
Jim

Thanks Jim. It lacks one thing which I really should put in.

A and B each must not exceed the specified max axle load.

Ron, there's every chance the tribunal member's grounding is more about law and contracts than any understanding of caravan stability that would guide him/her to make a call on that aspect. So take the "easy" way out and rule on the familiar stuff, which means the same outcome for the plaintiff.

As the owner of a business that has a registered weighbridge we often weigh vans and 4 wheel drives. I have seen people have to go out and buy a new vehicle just to pull a van that far exceeds the makers weights. One of the worst was a friend that could only add 90 kgs to the van before it was over the ATM weight, it had 390 kgs on the towbar. when empty. The makers tried to tell that our bridge was wrong like a lot of them are (ours is tested on a regular basis). On pushing them for some time they relocated the water tanks to behind the axles to reduce the towball weight, that was all they could do. So he sold his Prado and bought a Isusi and went around Aus overloaded. Had another one who had a suspension upgrade and still was overweight. Most landcruisers we weigh set up for a trip are also overweight , without anyone in them. It will happen one day after an accident that someone will end up with criminal charges for operating an overloaded vehicle. In our business if we overload a truck or trailer we could get fined $20,000 or an accident end up in court as a result of the chain of responsibilities law. You would not know how many arguments we get into with blockies who think they can get 2 tonnes into a tandem trailer with override brakes on one axle.
Thant my rant. Lindsay.

For too long now Lindsay authorities have turned a blind eye to the caravan industry as well as the amount of overweight vans on the road. I think it is ridiculous that a truck driver can get fined $10k-$20k for being over weight and the general public towing their wobbly boxes just carry on as usual with many well aware of the fact they are overweight but know there is little chance of getting caught.

Yeah , and the trucks are a lot more capable of being overloaded too!

There are many weighbridges on the roads and highways that everyday are weighing trucks. I would say the vast majority are legal. Unlike an overweight an overweight truck costs the driver many thousands of dollars. Vans are not stopped and weighed anywhere near the rate as the trucks.

Yep and I was one of those truckies that got caught. Unbeknown to me, the load manifest stated what my total weight was. Pulled over and then put on the weighbridge, 6tonne over - shit I was fuming as it cost me 4points on my licence and made the boss pay the fine ( not my fault). Following day, pulled over again and placed on the scales - choice words were made, and I again pleaded innocent as my load manifest stated my legal weight, exactaully the same load. On returning to the office I fronted the Boss and had a heated discussion about losing a further 4points ( yep a total of 8 points in 2 days), and he had to pay the fine. yep in the thousands. On investigation, the truck had a new hydraulic tailgate installed as well as other items that were not considered in overall GVM. On that note, I told the boss were to stick his job and went else where.
May when people get pulled over and put on the scales and fined and lose demerit points, they will start to understand what their responsibility is. If it good enough for truckies to be booked, then the same goes for people towing these outrageous vans. Yes we do get a small percentage for over weight, but that is bugger all. I have had my rant now - thats it for me

And that's the problem, Keith. I suspect this is a widespread practice, and generally not audited in any way.

The fox is in charge of the hen house.

More likely they have a pile of weigh bridge certificates and just change the date when doing the pre-delivery paperwork.

The transport inspectors should be asking some questions of whoever's signature is at the bottom of the certificate..