GAmes

You must be paranoid when hauling that 40 ft dovetail then, unless you are hooking it to a bigger truck. Fully loaded behind your pickup you are at what? Around 32k? In TX, FMCSR are enforced by DPS, state hwy patrol to you foreigners, the same as in a lot of other states. TXDOT has no enforcement capabilities. DOT is a pretty generic term so there is no way that "DOT regs clearly state if an unsafe vehicle is clearly responsible for a death or injury, it IS A CRIME not a traffic violation."

It's also a safe bet that not all fatality wrecks have any federal or state inspectors called to the scene, especially if there are no commercial vehicles involved.

I do love the way you guys pull all this expert information out of??????????
Does it bother the 'roids?

keith1992

Yep. These little cars cut off trucks all the time and then wonder why they get smashed.

Bluedually4x4

Actually all trucks and SUV are underrated by the manufactures both in power and load ratings, for two reasons
1. makes insurance cheaper
2. 80% or more of the people who buy them have no idea how to drive a truck or SUV let alone tow a trailer.
Yes I have grossly overloaded my truck a number of times, can I stop safely from 60mph hell no, but I can stop safely from 20mph. I have even asked local law enforcement about it before ever towing the load first. I always have had pilot cars in those instances.
Yes a 3500 dually can tow a 14' x 60' mobile home, granted the rear end is almost on the bump stops and NO you can't yank it at highway speeds. But it works in a pinch to haul something that big through town at a slow speed.

Valv

I wonder about your mis-information too Games, seems to me you frequent these TX bars a little too much, time to get home now, no more chit chat with the locals old farts.


My last DOT inspection was interrupted by an accident involving a commercial vehicle, inspector was radioed at the scene, he replied there are 3 criterias for him to be involved
1 Total loss of one of the vehicles.
2 Death
3 (I forgot which one)

Dispatcher got back to him and informed criteria was met, he needed to reach the location and investigate. I was in his brand new brown Tahoe while this happened. I was going to be put out of service, he let me go with a fine.

Anything else to ask ? Where do you actually live ?

loch

Games the source is the book,,,,,,,,,,,,,paralegal studies an introduction. just so you know you can google it.

try criminal act driving in google.
http://books.google.com/books?id=b2Q...um=2&ct=result

I dont mean to be a butt but come on you have too see there right and wrong, we are responsible for our own actions morally and legally. Every thing we do as drivers can go wrong in the blink of an eye. Go read the book or the part it shows, just because you dont think doesnt mean its not so.

Totallyrad

I believe that link contains the 2002 specs. I think things have changed a bit since then, at least in Alabama. I do agree with not putting yourself in a position to be under the microscope.
I'd have to say I don't want to find out. When a vehicle is over weight negligence is a consideration because the operator didn't weigh the vehicle and correct an over loaded condition if present.

You might want to check again. I believe 26,000 is the gross for a non-CDL vehicle. If you hit 26,001 you better have your CDL license, medical card and inspection stickers, just to start.

Last month I towed a load of firewood to Ohio. I used an 18' GN with twin 7k axles. The rated gross for the trailer is 15k. I scaled in B'ham prior to leaving. I was under on all my axles although it was only by 40 pounds on the trailer. I was under the gross for my tags by 2600 and change. Although I met all my weight requirements, I still felt like it was prudent to drive I was hauling eggs. I set the cruise on 60 and off I went. I arrived without issue, except for the loss of my trailer brakes as I started to descend a 2 mile grade coming into Cincinnati. My Brakesmart went to sleep on the job. My point is that even though I was doing right by my weight, things can still happen. Because I was erring on the side of caution, I did not get into trouble when I had a problem. Once I could safely pull off, I reset the Brakesmart and all was well.

All that having been said, let me remind some of you of an unrelated point. If you disagree with a member here, do it respectfully. If you can't just discuss the point without belittling or flaming or making other derogatory remarks, excuse yourself so the thread and your little green light will remain open. Thanks

GAmes

Oh, so it's not a DOT reg?

If you read my posts I never once promoted driving overloaded. I put the BS flag up when it was posted that an insurance company could arbitrarily deny coverage to a policy holder. You did a quick tap dance when you found I was correct. Then you muddied the water with an official sounding reg. I just tried to inject a little commom sense to contradict all the absolutes that were posted and were inaccurate.

loch

Game thats what i said, any insurance doesnt have to pay in the event of a crime, notice the word crime. being overloaded is a traffic violation not a crime but if you have a wreck that resulted from being overloaded then its a crime. i did speak wrongly saying overloaded is a crime, but its still illeagal.

OK lets use an extreme example,,,your out driving and suddenly get road rage, you then decide to run 37 powerstrokes off the road(good idea maybe) after this rather funny ford incident is over, is it the ins place to repair all 37 of the trucks you smashed ? the short answer is no (with the exception of 13 no fault states) and thier trying to get it changed now.

Unfortunatly the 37 ford drivers only hope is thier own ins or cival suits against you which would be ineffective because you'll be in jail. Its not really fair to them but at the same time its not fair to ins comp. If you dont live in one of those 13 states get a copy of your bylaws theres a very good chance that inclusion is there.



On a side note totalyrad is correct, I do apoligize for being a butt games,,,,i have probs sometimes making my point clear.

GAmes

That's quite a statement, overloading is not a crime but is illegal.

The whole reason that lending institutions require collision coverage and all states require liability is to cover you when it is YOUR fault that a wreck occurs. More than likely, if it was YOUR fault, then you broke a traffic law or common sense law of some type. Apparantly you feel that you should comply with those requirements, but if YOU do cause a wreck that YOU should pay the damages from YOUR own pocket and not make a claim to YOUR insurance company. Fine.

Where is the line of being overloaded? Valv apparantly loads up to 32k on his light duty pick-up and 40 ft dovetail. I'm sure he is licensed and insured for those weights, therefore, not illegal. If he is involved in a wreck it is not automatically his fault because he is exceeding the manufacturers GCWR. And if it is his fault he will not be denied coverage just because he exceeded the GCWR. I'm sure he would be hammered if it was a case of negligence, but I'm betting the insurance company would pay up to it's limit, then drop him or raise his rates accordingly.

A friend of mine was involved in a fatality wreck that was not his fault, testified to by DPS. The dead, uninsured, driver's family sued him anyway. His insurance company was willing to pay, just to not have to go to court. My friend would not sign off on it, because he felt that if his insurance company paid off the leeches it was inferring that the wreck was his fault.

When you buy insurance you are betting you will have a wreck and the insurance compay is betting you won't. I've lost that bet for the last 35 years running, but prior to that I won it 2 or 3 times. Fair to the insurance company? Is it fair that law abiding good drivers be forced to pay for the acts of bad drivers? That is what happens when you pay that premium. Part of it goes to pay for the damages, the rest goes into the insurance company's bank account.

chaikwa

Loch said that he was done with this thread, (and so did I!), but then he came back… so I guess I can too!

Please take no offense to the following information as it is presented to hopefully help clear up some of this over-weight issue. Also, I don’t normally identify myself as I am about to because it’s probably border-line inappropriate, but also because I don’t like to come off as a know-it-all on ANY subject, or appear that I’m some self-important jerk. ( A regular jerk maybe, but not a self-important one! )

With that said, let me say that I work as an ‘occasional contractor’ for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, (FMCSA), through the SAE International. (SAE assists in the policy and rule making procedures as it applies to automotive safety) I assist in the writing of certain aspects of policy and rule making and edit policy that others have written before they are submitted and become accepted as rules. I guess you could say I’m an ‘editor’ of sorts. Because of this experience I apparently have, this has lead to me being asked to write a training manual for commercial drivers that was recently published by Jones & Bartlett Publishers. So I DO have a little experience and background with this subject.

In speaking with several colleagues at SAE, the FMCSA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration about this issue, I have learned that;

• The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administers a statute requiring that motor vehicles manufactured for sale in the United States or imported into the United States be manufactured so as to reduce the likelihood of motor vehicle crashes and of deaths and injuries when crashes do occur.

• That statute is referred to as the Vehicle Safety Act. It is codified at 49 U.S.C. 30101.

• One of the NHTSA’s functions under the Vehicle Safety Act is to issue and enforce Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS’s). These standards specify safety performance requirements for motor vehicles and/or items of motor vehicle equipment.

• Manufacturers of motor vehicles must certify compliance with all applicable safety standards and permanently apply a label to each vehicle stating that the vehicle complies with all applicable FMVSSs and providing the vehicle Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR), Gross Axle Weight Rating (GAWR) and Gross Combination Weight Rating (GCWR). (49 CFR 571.3)

• Those who exceed the GVWR, GAWR or GCWR as per 49 CFR 571.3 are in violation of the law in that the vehicle is performing a task that the manufacturer did not intend for it to safely perform.

• Local enforcement agents may choose to ignore the operator of a vehicle that has exceeded the GVWR, GAWR and/or GCWR of that vehicle, (i.e.; not issue a citation), but may also be held as liable as the vehicle operator in the event that a property damage or personal injury accident occurs after the violation was known by the agent and as a direct result of the over-loaded condition. (I don’t know the exact chapter and section of this statute but feel free to look it up yourself, it is under Part 387.301 to Part 387.417, sub-part C, if I remember correctly. Note that not ALL Parts and sub-parts will be listed on the FMVSS or NHTSA’s web-sites. For a complete listing you will need ‘The Book’ available from either entity for a fee. I have 'The Book' but it's a BIG book and I was too lazy, after talking to all these people, to look it up myself.)

• Involvement in an accident while operating a motor vehicle in excess of the manufacturers GVWR, GAWR and/or GCWR will theoretically allow the owner and/or operator to be charged as having a ‘chargeable accident’ and a possible violation of $11,000 per violation. ‘Accident’ by definition and for the purposes of this subject is considered a “continuous or repeated exposure to the same conditions, (i.e.; loading in excess of the GVWR, GAWR and/or GCWR), resulting in public liability”. So essentially, if it could be proven that you have operated in an over-weight condition repeatedly, you could be charged that $11,000 fine for as many times as it can be proven you operated as such.

• GVWR’s, GAWR’s and/or GCWR’s are not ‘guidelines’, but are absolutes not meant to be arbitrarily altered. In the eyes of the law, they are the safe maximums that a vehicle may carry without modification.

• Vehicles may be modified to safely carry more weight than the original manufacturer intended and the procedure for this is covered in Part 595… somewhere. It is not an easy or streamlined process by any means but it can be done.

• Most states will allow any vehicle to be registered, (plated), for any weight as long as you have the money to pay for it, but this does not make the vehicle any more capable of safely carrying that extra weight. Conversely, a commercial vehicle can be registered for less weight than the manufacturer deems appropriate by their GVWR, but if the vehicle was determined to be above the CDL requirements by the original manufacturer, it still is bound by all CDL class rules, i.e.; you still need a class B license to operate a vehicle that the manufacturer classified as having a GVWR of 26,001lbs or more, even tho you may have registered it for 26,000lbs or less. There is currently some talk of restricting these practices from the Federal level, but uncertainty of how to implement and enforce it state by state.

• Also, under Part 387, (with a foot note to Part 595), is an exemption for insurance carriers that absolve them of liability to continue coverage of their insured if the overweight condition meets certain criteria. This doesn’t mean that your insurance carrier will not pay for peoples damages that you’ve maimed or killed as a result of your vehicle being over-weight and in an accident, but gives them the ability to sue you for the full amount of damages when all is said and done. (This was mentioned to me as a side-note and I didn’t get specifics)


And just for good measure, I asked about the Constitutional ‘right’ for a DOT Officer, (agent) to inspect any vehicle at anytime without ‘probable cause’, because that subject has been brought up on this forum in the past as well. The answer is;
• 396.9 states that, in part, every agent of the FMSCA is authorized to enter upon and perform inspections at any time on any motor carriers vehicle in operation.


chaikwa.

Russ Roth

Chaikwa,

Now that sounds like someone who knows what he's talking about. Thanks.

jumper

Interesting, but I'm curious about what design, or regulatory, or marketing criteria either bind the manufacturer's not to raise the as-published ratings, or whether its as simple as a lowest common denominator, like tires and wheels chosen for the truck to hit target Gross Weight ratings. Maybe its as simple as an economic "rated capability vs. warranty (and liability) cost" trade off analysis.

I wonder what Dodge thinks the trucks are capable of in over-the-road duty, notwithstanding the published ratings?

The whole issue smacks of 70's era muscle car horsepower ratings that were low-balled with a wink to keep the insurance ratings within reason.

Busboy

First.. Thank-you for the Whole post it was very enlightening and really verified what I sort of thought. The piece I quoted form your post is a piece that intrigues me. I have often wondered why people install extra springs or air bags on our trucks. I know I can overload my rear GAWR when positioning a load on my gooseneck but the springs are nowhere near touching. I fail to see how adding anything (except more or bigger tires) can increase the GAWR and if you did added bigger (weight rating) tires would you easily legally be allowed to increase the GAWR?

chaikwa

Busboy and Jumper, I agree with you both and wonder about such things myself. Russ Roth, I think you're just delusional if you think I know what I'm talking about!

Sometimes some of this regulatory stuff just makes you shake your head as there often isn't anything anywhere near common sense. But it IS after-all, the government that mandates all this garbage, so common sense and reasoning usually goes out the window. But it is still the 'bottom line' so to speak when dealing with legalities, be it right or wrong.

As far as altering something to increase gross weight capabilities, I've done it a few times when building specialty trucks. But I swapped out axles to get bigger gross axle weight ratings so I don't know if there is a way to increase the axle weights without a complete swap. There are a million ways around everything if you look hard enough!

What I still don't understand, and no one in my circle can verify an answer either, is that a lot of fire apparatus is waaaay overweight and it will tell you so on the manufacturers label on the door jamb. The last one I worked on stated, "This vehicle does not conform to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards", then goes on to state the gross vehicle weight of 42,000lbs even though the axle weight ratings didn't add up to anything close to that amount of weight. I've questioned this hundreds of times with no legitimate answers ever received. I wanted to know because I was essentially building the same trucks with the same gross weights, but in addition to frame alterations, I was changing out axles to get my weight ratings. If I could have avoided those axle changes I could have saved myself a TON of money! But on the other side of that coin is the fact that I was/am able to sleep peacefully at night knowing that the trucks I build are SAFE!

chaikwa.

chaikwa

I can't totally answer that question simply because I don't KNOW! But I DO know that brake size plays a huge role in determining the capacity of an axle. An axle may be able to support twice what it's rated for but have no ability beyond it's rated capacity to STOP a vehicle safely, repeatedly and dependably.

chaikwa.