Ca. Traveler said: wrote: I think we can all be held accountable for our actions. I think the fact that the mfg didn't supply the label or someone removed it would be a minor point in a serious court case.
The new truck I looked at is sitting on a Dealer's lot. I doubt someone took a label off. The label with the Axle and Vehicle ratings is there, but no mention of Combination Rating.
I do agree that we are responsible for our actions. There is already too much "it's not my fault" in this country.
Once again, it is a question of legal requirements I am interested in.
Thanks to all!
Mike
My comment on the legal aspects are in response to the OPs other
comment quoted above.
Polly-Anna's naiveté to think that all accidents are blameless and
without legal action.
As originally stated, there will be those who say it's okay to do
whatever and have no regard for the fact that some will take their
advice to the letter. As they have no responsibility and only the driver
is responsible.
If someone causes an accident because they drove over the speed limit,
ran a stop sign, leaned over to change their station, etc to run one
of you over in a cross walk...you are saying you'd not sue them even
if they broke a law or was negligent?
Also note that my original post touched on other issues than legal.
Like warranty, which of by the way turns into a potential for legal
action...I see too many talking about taking off their mods to claim
warranty...that is fraud in my book.
Too bad the blocking function no longer accepts additional names,
other wise, please block my posts...
-Ben Picture of my rig
1996 GMC SLT Suburban 3/4 ton K3500/7.4L/4:1/+150Kmiles orig owner...
1980 Chevy Silverado C10/long bed/"BUILT" 5.7L/3:73/1 ton helper springs/+329Kmiles, bought it from dad...
1998 Mazda B2500 (1/2 ton) pickup, 2nd owner...
Praise Dyno Brake equiped and all have "nose bleed" braking!
Previous trucks/offroaders: 40's Jeep restored in mid 60's / 69 DuneBuggy (approx +1K lb: VW pan/200hpCorvair: eng, cam, dual carb'w velocity stacks'n 18" runners, 4spd transaxle) made myself from ground up / 1970 Toyota FJ40 / 1973 K5 Blazer (2dr Tahoe, 1 ton axles front/rear, +255K miles when sold it)...
Sold the boat (looking for another): Trophy with twin 150's...
51 cylinders in household, what's yours?...
Here's the answer to the only question raised in this post that actually has a definitive answer: The reason the GCVWR does not appear on the door sticker is because there is no law requiring it to be there, as there is with the GVW and the FAWR & RAWR.
The door stickers are like mattress tags. The government requires them to be placed there by the manufacturers and also defines what information is required to be posted --- and GCVWR is not one of the requirements.
pupeperson wrote: Here's the answer to the only question raised in this post that actually has a definitive answer: The reason the GCVWR does not appear on the door sticker is because there is no law requiring it to be there, as there is with the GVW and the FAWR & RAWR.
The door stickers are like mattress tags. The government requires them to be placed there by the manufacturers and also defines what information is required to be posted --- and GCVWR is not one of the requirements.
here a matteress tag theory debunker from FMCSA missing GVWR plates . NHTSA uses the same 390.5 regs for non commercial operators. Paragraph three shows how DOT is required to address missing plates. Missing plates for "legal" haulers can get very expensive if the rig gets impounded waiting for a certified vehicle modifier to come on site and add a tag. One operator said it cosy him around 375 dollars for the tag plus his shut down time. Also in my state its a misdeameanor to knowingly remove/deface/alter/destroy the tag.
Jim
'03 2500 Dodge/Cummins HO 3.73 6 speed manual Jacobs
'97 Park Avanue 28' with two slides
pupeperson wrote: Here's the answer to the only question raised in this post that actually has a definitive answer: The reason the GCVWR does not appear on the door sticker is because there is no law requiring it to be there, as there is with the GVW and the FAWR & RAWR.
The door stickers are like mattress tags. The government requires them to be placed there by the manufacturers and also defines what information is required to be posted --- and GCVWR is not one of the requirements.
here a matteress tag theory debunker from FMCSA missing GVWR plates . NHTSA uses the same 390.5 regs for non commercial operators. Paragraph three shows how DOT is required to address missing plates. Missing plates for "legal" haulers can get very expensive if the rig gets impounded waiting for a certified vehicle modifier to come on site and add a tag. One operator said it cosy him around 375 dollars for the tag plus his shut down time. Also in my state its a misdeameanor to knowingly remove/deface/alter/destroy the tag.
Jim
Again, let's stay on topic. GVWR and GAWR are DOT mandated to be present on the door tag. GCWR is not. The topic is about GCWR, which is NOT recognized by any law agency. If you ask a Trooper how much you can tow, he will not reference the tow rating or GCWR in his answer because they don't care about it.
'04 Ford Freestar (Primary tow vehicle) '05 Subaru Forester (Backup tow vehicle) '65 Bethany popup (best popups ever made!) Looking for a tow vehicle Minivan towing
The link provided by JIMNLIN is for commercial carriers and may or may not apply to RV'ers (I rather doubt it) BUT there was some interesting info in that link, that if applicable lends credence to those who modify their vehicles to handle more weight than the door sticker shows. Specifically:
"Question 4: If a vehicle with a manufacturer's GVWR of less than 10,001 pounds has been structurally modified to carry a heavier load, may an enforcement officer use the higher actual gross weight of the vehicle, instead of the GVWR, to determine the applicability of the FMCSRs?
Guidance: Yes. The motor carrier's intent to increase the weight rating is shown by the structural modifications. When the vehicle is used to perform functions normally performed by a vehicle with a higher GVWR, §390.33 allows an enforcement officer to treat the actual gross weight as the GVWR of the modified vehicle."
The key portion in my view relates to the INTENT to increase the vehicles capacity by performing unspecified modifications. This lends credence to the positions of those on this forum who believe that the END USER is recognized as being capable of modifying a vehicle to perform tasks beyond the door sticker rating.
FWIW, the "FMCSRs" referred to at the end of the paragraph beginning with "Question 4" stands for "Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations." They were not drafted with the RVer in mind and they do not apply to us. If they did, we would be required to run log books, meet the physical requirements of commercial drivers and a myriad of other requirements that we are simply not required to meet, like start of shift comprehensive vehicle inspections, etc.
Like has been asked many, many times before. Who has been stopped and ticketed for being over GVWR or GCWR in a RV. As we all know there are many overloaded RVs on the road. Not to pick on any one type of RV but truck campers are probably one of the most overloaded RVs on the road but I have yet to read where one of them has ever gotten a ticket for being over anything. There are many of them that have gone to 19.5 tires and wheels but this does not change the GVWR and yet I have not read of one tickted for it. I would like to hear from that one person and not a friend of my fiends brother who knows this guy type of thing but first hand info. Like as an RVer "I got a ticket for being overloaded because I was over my GVWR." Another one I would like to see is "I got an overload ticket for my GVWR and I had upgraded my tires and wheels and they were rated to more capacity than I was loaded with." Or "I was denied my insurance coverage when I was in an accident because I was overloaded." Notice these are all in first person. Lets hear it from someone.
Every time this comes up this goes around and around but I feel if someone can give their first hand account of getting a ticket then this will be the most convincing thing.
This is IMO
Butch
2006 F550 CC 4X4 Lariat PSD/Torqshift Dark Shadow Grey Metalic w/Manning F350 bed
2009 Excel Limited 30TKE
2009 Arctic Fox 1140 (On Order due February)
2006 Dodge 3500 Laramie 4X4 QC SB SRW/Cummins 6 speed Jake exhaust brake
mecreature wrote: I would much rather use my GCWR then use outdoorsmans formula...
Then do so. You really can't go too wrong by choosing to adhere to the GCWR. It won't hurt any, it just may not help if you don't pay attention to ALL the other factors that make for a safe towing experience.
People need to stop betting the farm on this one silly number. So many on this forum honestly believe that GCWR is the holy grail of ratings, and that as long as you follow it you are safe regardless of any other variable. I've even read posts from senior forum members basically telling people that the GCWR rating for a particular vehicle is 'absolute' regardless of any other factor. Basically the message is if you stay under the GCWR, you are guaranteed safe.
pupeperson wrote: The link provided by JIMNLIN is for commercial carriers and may or may not apply to RV'ers (I rather doubt it) BUT there was some interesting info in that link, that if applicable lends credence to those who modify their vehicles to handle more weight than the door sticker shows. Specifically:
"Question 4: If a vehicle with a manufacturer's GVWR of less than 10,001 pounds has been structurally modified to carry a heavier load, may an enforcement officer use the higher actual gross weight of the vehicle, instead of the GVWR, to determine the applicability of the FMCSRs?
Guidance: Yes. The motor carrier's intent to increase the weight rating is shown by the structural modifications. When the vehicle is used to perform functions normally performed by a vehicle with a higher GVWR, §390.33 allows an enforcement officer to treat the actual gross weight as the GVWR of the modified vehicle."
The key portion in my view relates to the INTENT to increase the vehicles capacity by performing unspecified modifications. This lends credence to the positions of those on this forum who believe that the END USER is recognized as being capable of modifying a vehicle to perform tasks beyond the door sticker rating.
FWIW, the "FMCSRs" referred to at the end of the paragraph beginning with "Question 4" stands for "Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations." They were not drafted with the RVer in mind and they do not apply to us. If they did, we would be required to run log books, meet the physical requirements of commercial drivers and a myriad of other requirements that we are simply not required to meet, like start of shift comprehensive vehicle inspections, etc.
number three Q/A is from FMCSA 390.3 safety regs and a direct rebuttle to the matteres tag theory on this web.
Question 4 is for certified vehichle modifiers/upfitters that "structurally" modify a vehicle under 10000 lbs. Which isn't a RVer adding bigger tires/wheels. A vehicle that is structurally modified is required to be relabeled by a certified person (modifier) which the owner/operator isn't. FMCSR's cover a lot of regs involving functions of GVWR. GVWR as used in question 3 and 4 is for weighing for a combined truck and trailer rating (real GCWR) not weighing of the vehicle. That's where weighing the vehicle regs per GAWRs come to play for weighing a combined combo.
The link comes from FMCSA (commercial) regs which are the one and same NHTSA (non commercial) when it comes to GVWR/GAWR requirement and lack of GCWR requirement.
Jim
* This post was
edited 08/06/08 12:42pm by JIMNLIN *
Sure there hasn't been any 'reported' tickets/fines/etc....yet...
Commercial truckers have had many, many more laws governing them for
a long time. To me, because they have many more hours/miles under
their belts and the attendant accidents from all sorts of causes.
RV'ing is/was one of the fastest growing sector in all automotive and
the laws *WILL* be coming all too soon. That freight train has been
sidelined by the increase in fuel costs and general economy issues, but
it will get back on track soon enough.
Just because no one has reported getting a ticket, does it make it 'okay'
to over load or go over whatever ratings out there.
Too many just want to hear it's 'okay' and really either don't care,
or are ignorant of these cause and affects that play.
Also, too many take all things in absolutes. Stay under this magical
GCWR number and absolutely safe...go over it and absolutely going
to die...there are other attributes and sanity to the whole thing.
Think it is called middle ground...
There are only two things guaranteed....taxes and death...but...there
are things you can do to help 'your odds'...
Offline
