Towing with the Chevy Colorado or GMC Canyon? - Page 8 - Escape Trailer Owners Community

Go Back   Escape Trailer Owners Community > Escape Me | General Topics > General Escape
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-07-2015, 11:57 PM   #71
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Trailer: 1979 Boler B1700
Posts: 9,061
Quote:
Originally Posted by padlin View Post
axle pin total
3329 728 4057
3840 520 4360
3490 610 4100
My guesses:
  • the first one is Bob's, with all that waste water and propane and no fresh water
  • the last one has fresh water instead of waste water, and bikes hung on the bumper but no propane (same total weight as the first one, just differently distributed)
  • the middle one has full fresh water tank, big dual batteries under the dinette, a bike on the back, and a cast-iron cookware collection in back

The point, as Bob explained, is that loading matters. If your truck is close to the GVWR or GAWR-rear with the trailer, you need to be particularly careful about loading. A Colorado/Canyon might be close to its limits, but a Silverado/Sierra 1500, a Ram 1500, or a Ford F-10 might be, too, depending on configuration and cargo.
__________________

Brian B-P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 08:23 AM   #72
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Earth, Florida
Trailer: none
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian B-P View Post
"Dry" means without fluids. Most manufacturers (of any vehicle, whether a motor vehicle or a trailer) list the weight without options, which might best be described as "base". Of course they also weigh it dry. If the spec says "dry", it means dry... and it's probably also without options.
That was my understanding of dry weight too. Usually, most motor vehicles list "curb weight" though which includes all fluids even a full tank of gas.
__________________

yogiyoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 08:33 AM   #73
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Earth, Florida
Trailer: none
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian B-P View Post
Yes.

Traditionally, for North American trailers the "rule of thumb" was 10% for conventional trailers with a weight-carrying hitch, 15% for conventional trailers with a weight-distributing hitch, and something higher (25%) for a fifth-wheel trailer. None of these numbers have any basis in the facts of a specific trailer, they're just sort of typical. In Europe, tongue weight is typically much lower.

The recommended numbers in forum discussions seem to keep getting higher. I'm waiting for the day someone declares that any less than 50% of the weight on the tongue is unsafe

Fifth-wheel trailers have higher hitch weight because they can, not because they need it.
I believe the argument for not having tongue and pin weight too low has to do with trailer sway, tracking and issues with truck handling.

"If you don't have enough weight on the trailer tongue, less than 10 percent of the total loaded trailer weight, the trailer can end up swaying from side to side, making it difficult to control."

Tongue Weight and Its Role in Safe Trailering and Towing | GMC

"If the trailer is being towed nose up, the hitch weight will be too low and can lead to ride problems with the truck, bad trailer sway, and tracking problems with the trailer."

https://www.etrailer.com/question-44961.html

I've commonly heard 10% for traditional trailers, but I don't know what the value is for fifth wheels.
yogiyoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 08:46 AM   #74
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Earth, Florida
Trailer: none
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian B-P View Post
My guesses:
The point, as Bob explained, is that loading matters. If your truck is close to the GVWR or GAWR-rear with the trailer, you need to be particularly careful about loading. A Colorado/Canyon might be close to its limits, but a Silverado/Sierra 1500, a Ram 1500, or a Ford F-10 might be, too, depending on configuration and cargo.
Yes, the Ram 1500 Ecodiesel will usually do worse than the GMC Canyon depending on the configuration. It can tow more, but doesn't have much payload capacity, which is the limiting factor here.
yogiyoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 09:51 AM   #75
Site Team
 
cpaharley2008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: York, Pennsylvania
Trailer: 2016 2ndGen Escape 19' PRAIRIE SCHOONER pulled by 2014 Ram Hemi/8sp
Posts: 13,693
That is why they are called "1/2" ton trucks, they can only carry 1,000 lbs safely.
__________________
Jim
The two most important days in your life are the day you were born and the day you find out why………..Mark Twain
cpaharley2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 10:13 AM   #76
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: none, Washington, D.C.
Trailer: None
Posts: 1,083
One of the issues with the modern 1/2 ton trucks is that they are not built like trucks of years past . Most modern 1/2 ton trucks are used as commuter vehicles or so called " Grocery Getters" and in many cases never tow anything behind the truck or carry much of anything in the box . Years ago trucks were bare bones work vehicles ,now they have all the features of a luxury car. My Ram truck rides better than my wife's passenger car but the ride comes at the expense of payload capacity. I am not sure if they built an old fashioned work truck in this day and age if the trucks would sell well to the general public . In the attempt to raise the MPG of trucks ,the truck manufacturers keep trying to reduce weight , sometimes at the expense of what makes a truck a truck . IMHO . Years ago we would throw 3000 lbs of rock in the back of a 1/2 ton truck and not worry about it.
steve dunham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 11:33 AM   #77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Trailer: 1979 Boler B1700
Posts: 9,061
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve dunham View Post
I am not sure if they built an old fashioned work truck in this day and age if the trucks would sell well to the general public .
They do sort of make them - the base trim of any truck line - and no, they don't sell. Even companies buying work trucks choose a higher equipment level for either worker comfort or resale value.
Brian B-P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 11:35 AM   #78
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Trailer: 1979 Boler B1700
Posts: 9,061
Quote:
Originally Posted by yogiyoda View Post
That was my understanding of dry weight too. Usually, most motor vehicles list "curb weight" though which includes all fluids even a full tank of gas.
Yes, good point - the common practice in motor vehicles for fluids is quite different from that for travel trailers. The reason is that the motor vehicle needs those fluids to operate, while the trailer is still a usable trailer with empty tanks - some people even make a point of having the water and waste tanks empty whenever they hit the road. I should have only said that motor vehicles are listed by base weight, rather than fully equipped; trailers are usually listed dry (and with base equipment) while motor vehicles are "wet".

The term "curb" refers to the vehicle being parked at the curb, ready to drive - so including fluids. Currently in the UK this is usually given as "MRO" which means Mass in Running Order... the same thing (and similar terms are used in Europe in various languages).

Either approach - filled or dry - works, as long as the conditions are stated. It makes sense for trailers specifications to be given dry and with only base equipment; the tank sizes should also be listed, as well as available options. In an ideal world, options would be listed with their weights, so the buyer can determine what their chosen trailer would weigh.
Brian B-P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 11:39 AM   #79
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Trailer: 1979 Boler B1700
Posts: 9,061
Quote:
Originally Posted by yogiyoda View Post
I believe the argument for not having tongue and pin weight too low has to do with trailer sway, tracking and issues with truck handling.
...
I've commonly heard 10% for traditional trailers, but I don't know what the value is for fifth wheels.
Yes, that's the reason... and neither the style of the coupling (conventional ball-and-socket or fifth-wheel pin-and-plate) nor the height (bumper height or up in the box) changes that. If anything, having the hitch at or ahead of the tug's rear axle makes the tug better able to control the trailer and helps stability, so there's less need for forward weight distribution (so less hitch weight).
Brian B-P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2015, 12:24 PM   #80
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Earth, Florida
Trailer: none
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian B-P View Post
Yes, that's the reason... and neither the style of the coupling (conventional ball-and-socket or fifth-wheel pin-and-plate) nor the height (bumper height or up in the box) changes that. If anything, having the hitch at or ahead of the tug's rear axle makes the tug better able to control the trailer and helps stability, so there's less need for forward weight distribution (so less hitch weight).
What you say makes some sense, but do you have any resources to back that up?

I did a quick Google search and didn't find anything. I did find this thread on conventional fifth wheels. A few posters comment on how going much lower than 20% pin weight is not good. Complaints are of worsened handling and the risk of "porpoising" and that things can "get scary".

Is loading back of 5th Wheel a good way to minimize pin weight? - Page 2 - iRV2 Forums

I understand that 5.0 TA is lighter but the tow vehicles used tend to be lighter too. The difference between trailer and vehicle weights might not be as extreme but you would think the same general principles would apply even if the results aren't as extreme.
__________________

yogiyoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off






» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.