It's been my experience that when some one boasts of having the "inside scoop" on any given subject, and then declines to offer any backing evidence such as where they work or what position they hold that allows them to be privy to such info, they rarely do. Generally it's boasting based on an over inflated sense of importance.
That's not to say that such people never have valid points, because a lot of the time they do, but these subjects are rarely so simple as to be explained in the black and white terms some folks would like to define them with. Made in America, is almost never that simple under the surface.
The validity of some CEOs wage/benefit package isn't as simple as he doesn't deserve it.
The Internet is chock full of experts on finance, politics, foreign policy, military strategy, etc etc ad nauseum. I'm surprised our government/corporations/military leadership dont do all their recruiting from Internet forums and Yahoo chat rooms. Apparently that's where all the talent hangs out.
I just can't see how they can have 70,000 people out on the street and hiring people here a Toledo Power Train :h
I'm sure the Union would have something to say about that. Now they did offer a lot of buy out before the bankruptcy but none after, same holds true for Chrysler. I know GM/Ford even hired some trades people back that took the buy outs.
But at any rate buyouts should not be considered as lost jobs. GM has always been overstaffed both union and non union workers. Were you once needed 40 people to staff a line you now can do it with 15 do to robotics and modern production techniques. But I can assure you GM does not have any workers laid off.
People should pay attention to the last part of this post, because in reality that is what has happened to the bulk of manufacturing jobs in this country. They haven't been "shipped overseas". There is more manufacturing happening in this country than ever, but it's all being done with less people. Nature of the beast. Manufacturing refinement results in better efficiency, and like or not better efficiency usually means fewer humans involved.
Back in the day if you needed to dig a ditch you hired a bunch of guys and passed out shovels. These days any John Q Public can run down to his local Rent All and tote home a Ditch Witch and do it by himself in a fraction of the time.
Thanks Jim & G'day to you. We've traveled the states before and found Americans to be extremely friendly. Cant wait to get back there and be one amongst ya all for a while.
Must be an Aussie thing. Seems a lot of Europe thinks we're some of the rudest most obnoxious people on the planet. All fat too. ;)
Expecting perfection on something this big and complicated at this price point is a lost cause.
There are RV manufactures that offer lifetime warranties, but you have to write a check in the deep 7 digits.
I'd have to disagree with this. Your average car is WAY more complicated than any normal RV, can cost way less as well, and offers 5 times the warranty at a minimum. Factor in that most vehicles will see mileage that makes most RVs road time pale in comparison and that warranty difference becomes even greater. My last truck cost $33,000, had 66,000 miles on it when I sold it, and had not one single failure that wasn't a wear item, IE tires/brakes/batteries.
You can build a fairly nice HOUSE, on LAND, FURNISHED, for the cost of a middle of the market RV.
Construction quality is crap, plain and simple. You need only pull off a basement wall to view the mess behind it to realize how much pride in work there is in the RV industry.
Boy, some posts in here sure do smell of that ol' elitist attitude that rears it's ugly head now and again.
I learned to drive with a 3 on the tree pickup. My first truck was a 4 speed manual. I've driven OTR tractors enough to know it wasn't something I wanted to get fat doing. I've had a LOT of manual vehicles both truck and auto and I'm proud to say it wouldn't break my heart if I never had to own another manual transmission truck for the rest of my days. Not in something I have to USE. If it's a toy, that's one thing, if it's something I have to use to work, that's another.
If that makes me part of the "herd", well, I've been part of worse things. If it makes somebody feel better to say I drive an auto because I don't know how to drive a stick, which means I don't know how to drive, so be it. No skin off my nose and doesn't bother me one little bit.
I say to each his own, and to denigrate someone based on their preference is...rude at best.
Bags. Bags bags bags. They can say what they want about the RAS but when you get down to it it's just another spring and is no more "active" than the springs already there. It's not going to stop the rear end from sagging, it'll just change the amount of weight it takes to do it.
I have an '08 F450 and I installed a set of bags. My truck rides at the exact same height, always. It doesn't matter if there is no weight on the rear end, or 4,000 lbs, it rides at the same height. RAS won't do that.
I installed it, I set it, and I promptly forgot about it. I don't have to worry about adding air, bleeding air, or anything else. It's just there. Shoot, when I fill my fuel tank the compressor kicks in to compensate for the weight and as I burn it up the valve dumps air to adjust.
You can't really get much more active than that.
You're probably going to have to do some digging. Your compressor shouldn't be kicking on when the vehicle is turned off. Main power should be an ignition switched source, hot only when the key is in the on/run position.
You may or may not have a leak. If the compressor kicks on a lot, maybe so. If it just kicks on now and again, that could be nothing more than ambient temperature changes which will affect the pressure in the bags, causing them to dump and/or fill erratically.
When I hook up my toy hauler, which has a very heavy pin, the compressor will cycle on numerous times before settling down. Compressing air causes it to heat up, which raises the pressure. As it cools the pressure drops, and the compressor kicks back on to raise it again. Mine will generally kick on and off 2-3 times after I hook up.
I'm a first timer and I've got a B&W companion. I'm assuming that it's close to a B&W Patriot. Quality product. It's idiot proof. I love it. As a matter of fact we just hooked up today and put a few miles on the tires after sitting for awhile and my wife couldn't believe how simple it was to hook up. No blue air!! I haven't owned any other hitch, so I have nothing to compare mine to, but the B&W is my first and probably my last hitch. IMHO.
I agree it's idiot proof!
People that design idiot proof products consistently underestimate the creative ingenuity of idiots. :B
Thanks for all the responses. I'm passing on the ext warranty. The $2000 would end up being $2880 over time. Only using it for 30 nights a yr is only 7 mnths total in 7 yrs. $2880 is a lot for 7mths use, IMO.
You'd be surprised how much******can fail in those 7 months. These things aren't exactly winning any awards for quality of construction. Crawl down in the basement and pull one of the walls hiding your plumbing/duct work/wiring and you'll get a depressing eyeful. Pride in a job well done seems to have mostly missed the mark in the RV industry.
My 3rd trip out with a brand new unit and my hydraulic system blew a massive leak that left me sitting in a campground with non-functioning slides, non-functioning landing gear, and a campground operator that wanted me gone because it was "Closed for the season" day.
get a tundra...I heard they are pretty flexible.
I recall that the Fords flexed badly in a comparison test too, so much so that the tailgates buckled and the beds hit the cab. See here. They all will under extreme circumstances and the right conditions.
Some flex is normal, that's why the cab and bed are separate. I don't think you'll hurt anything, certainly not the drivetrain. If you're concerned, stagger some 2x4s in front of the curb.
What some call a flaw, others call a design feature. Remember who was conducting the test, and who designed the test criteria. You can bet Chevy designed the criteria to ensure the Ford "failed".
You'll notice that in the test the Ford maintained ground contact with all 4 tires, even though the producers tried cutting away from that shot. That means traction from both axles is being applied to the ground. Something that might come in handy when crossing a deep ditch at an angle, which I believe the test was supposed to simulate.
You'll also notice that one front tire on the Chevy was about 3 feet in the air, which unless it has a locking differential up front means you get ZERO traction out of the front axle.
Ford could do this same test, sans the 3,000 lbs of material in the bed, and claim 4x4 superiority because it has 4 wheels of traction on the ground and the Chevy only has 2.
Yes, Chevy has a nice stiff, non-twisting frame. This comes at a price. Ford has a nice flexy frame that helps keep all the tires on the ground providing traction. This also comes at a price.
Drive like an Asian woman. Get up to your comfortable speed, turn on blinker (that portion optional), forego use of any mirror, say to the universe in general...."I need to merge. I go now. Good luck everyone else!". Merge. Done.
Any kind of insurance is a waste of money....unless you suddenly find yourself needing it.
In my case, blown xfer switch, fridge control board toasted, various hydraulic leaks, microwave went south, etc. All naturally occurring after the factory warranty went, which itself was no picnic when needed.
At 115 ridiculous dollars per hour shop rate it doesn't take long to burn up a $1500 +/- premium for an extended warranty.
On the plus side, the provider was overall easier to deal with than the factory, and fought/denied nothing.
Funny, you say that GCWR isn't figured in on stopping power, you might be surprised at what is taken into consideration when brakes are designed and put on a vehicle, this is something I DO know about...I know the brakes on the trailer help stop the trailer, but the trucks brakes, "IF" something happens to trailer connection, the trucks brakes WILL have to stop the trailer. There is more to the brake caliper than one might think in design and function, especially when coupled with 2 or 4 wheel ABS..
happened to me going down I26 Saluda grade.....lost connection from brake controller and the truck itself had to slow/stop my truck AND my 5er, son...I knew the weight was behind me then....can happen, I'm proof....so I figure the truck would perform better braking with a load at or under it's rated GCWR than one that was loaded a ton over it's GCWR....basic physics and something that could actually happen because it DID happen to me.
all that, to say, I've went off topic of original OP of "How close to GCWR can you get"...Sorry.
Jesus, where have you been? In 2 posts you've said this way better than I've ever been able. You hear on this site sooo many times that "my (fill in your under-rated truck of choice) has been pulling a gazillion pounds for a gazillion years juuuust fine" it isn't even funny anymore.
My take has always been how will your truck do when things go NOT "just fine".
The truck is a package of parts, a system designed to work as a whole, and not centered on an individual component, and I think way too many people lose sight of that fact.
My rear axle is rated by it's manufacturer at 14.5K, yet Ford has it rated at 9.5K. I will assume that is because the frame, springs, tires/wheels, brakes, etc that make up the rest of the system dictate overall limitations.
I've had more than one trailer brake failure, luckily with no ill effects, and cannot imagine having had those failures when loaded way beyond my trucks ratings. I generally tow at around 26.5k combined with my F450, which isn't even close to its max GCWR, and I'd defecate bricks having to stop THAT load unaided let alone at max or beyond.
But who knows, maybe one day I'll turn around and say "I've been towing 30,000 lbs with my F250 for a gazillion years and it does juuust fine".
Not likely... :)
(ps) I understand having a bit of censorship of words to keep things "clean" but having to use the word defecate to replace another word that begins with c and ends with p instead of the word that begins with s and ends with t, is just a bit ridiculous.
I don't know where the 80% "rule" came from but I wish it would go away. Load up to the rating.
How about: never push your throttle down more than 80%, never fill your interior seat with more than 80% of the passengers, don't drive more than 80% of the speed limit.
I could go on but you get my point.
Actually, 2 of those 3 I routinely do, and the 3rd depends on what I'm pulling. :)
Two people in a 3 person seat is more comfortable for the 2. Almost never need more than 50% throttle, let alone 80%. Last, I'm a pokey hauler. A max of 65 mph is good for me, even if the limit is 70+.
My vague point is yeah, the 80% "rule" is really nothing of the sort, but trying to stick somewhere around there could make for a more comfortable and less stressful trip depending on what you're hauling and where you're going.
To say that load makes no difference is not very realistic. I've been down plenty of mountains that would have been much more comfortable running empty than they were when at or near max load.
Oh yeah, and I hunt and fish and still get by with my 2wd's. I just do a lot of walking. (Which I need to do more of anyway)
Pretty much sums it up I think. :)
Initial up front cost is a bit more, but the flip side is resale will be a bit more as well.
Any additional maintenance issues are minimal in the overall scheme. Fuel mileage hit is minimal as well. Didn't use to be, but these days there's not much difference.
I don't know where some people go that have "been driving umpty ump years and never needed it", but I've needed more than once in the last couple yrs alone, and that was in plain jane KOA campgrounds.
As someone else mentioned, if you have it and never need it it's no real loss, but need it one time and not have it and it can really ruin your day.