Payload, who cares?

[Guest pelmetman]

747 - 2012-11-21 12:48 PM

You misunderstand what I said .... maybe my fault though.

 

A weighbridge used for industrial purposes with a digital readout MAY be set to read in 10 or 20Kg increments, it will still accurately weigh, it is just the readout system. These types are not best used for your purpose (and are not normally used for private vehicles). The typical weighbridge that allows anyone to use it for a small charge will not have these restrictions and will give the exact weight that it reads.

 

Your right I did get hold of the wrong end of the stick ;-)......................but as Rich pointed out with his post, weighbridges do vary, so I getting an correct weight is a lottery *-)..........

 

I think that someone said a 5% tolerance is given.... which with my 3500 GTW means 175 kg 8-)......

 

Kinda puts the fuss about being 100 kg over into perspective :D

[goldi]

Afternoon all,

 

 

There simply has to be a tolerance because even the wind blowing can cause a variation , the tolerance of 5% is the government legislation. However I cannot say whether this is permitted in the rest of Europe who may operate a vero tolerance policy.

 

 

norm

[Tracker]

pelmetman - 2012-11-21 1:05 PM

 

 

I think that someone said a 5% tolerance is given.... which with my 3500 GTW means 175 kg 8-)......

 

Kinda puts the fuss about being 100 kg over into perspective :D

 

Try explaining that to VOSA or the Gendarme?

 

I thought the tolerance is .5% which at 17.5 kg would be realistic?

 

But I don't know if VOSA allow any tolerance or if so what the figure is above which they switch into money grabbing mode - or whether that varies from country to country?

 

Hopefully losing 17.5 kg should not be too much of a problem whereas shedding 100 plus kg probably would be?

[euroserv]

rupert123 - 2012-11-20 9:41 PM

 

euroserv - 2012-11-20 6:43 PM

 

Hold on, hold on!

 

Perhaps this, even more succinct statement will convey the message?

 

ANY vehicle that is almost or fully loaded (while still being entirely legal) will handle differently and will take longer to stop than a vehicle that is partially loaded.

 

You don't NEED any empirical evidence to support that because we ALL know it to be true.

 

Therefore it is reasonable to assume that if you over load a vehicle beyond it's legal limits your actions will most definitely NOT have IMPROVED the handling or braking of said vehicle.

 

Thankfully for us we are protected from doing this ourselves and can rest assured that other road users will not take these risks because we have LAWS.

 

Because of these laws we, unlike our cousins in 3rd world countries that have no such rules regarding loads and suffer great carnage, can travel in relative safety knowing that one day, those who ignore the law will be prosecuted.

 

Hopefully the above will occur while they are towing an A frame in Spain, believing that the law of their land applies to someone else too.

 

There you go; how many facts do you need?

 

Surely that is the end of that?

 

Nick

 

No Nick it is not. While you clearly know vans you just as clearly have no knowledge of motorhomes. Trackers post above is an example of what happens all the time. A M/H at 3300kg, as my last one was, wanted to carry a scooter so fit air suspensionn on the rear uprated to 3500kg, no problem. At 3300kg can now load to 3500kg with no change to brakes or tyres and minimal to suspension. The next owner may choose to downpate back to 3300kg but then overload to 3400kg, not likely but possible, is it now dangerous? Most M/H can be legally uprated if the owners choose to, most do not because it pays to keep under 3500kg hope that is clear. Makers like Autotrail on some vans even offer a choice of weights for the same van as do Elddis with their top range, Aspire think. This is not white van man world, differant place.

 

 

I am not offended and no apology is required. It seems that Rupert123 agrees with me.

'Safe' is a subjective term.

Manufacturers and VOSA do indeed allow you to piddle about with the plated weights of vehicles and it is true that just because you do this and carry more weight (quite legally) you are not necessarily turning your vehicle into a dangerous one.

However, the laws of physics (and vehicle dynamics, about which I have much experience) do tend to suggest that you have made it less safe.

 

All of this is irrelevant though because you still have to not exceed the weight. If you do you can be prosecuted and are an idiot.

 

Law wins every time, even when common sense and the ability to reason fails.

 

This was my point from the beginning, and that of Mel. Why argue the toss about this if we all understand the implications and there are clear laws to abide by?

[Guest pelmetman]

Tracker - 2012-11-21 1:25 PM

 

I thought the tolerance is .5% which at 17.5 kg would be realistic?

 

5% or .5%? that is the question :-S.........

 

I should think given your experience with 3 weigh bridges just in your locality Rich, showing a difference of 40 kg, you can imagine the variation across the country ;-)..........I'm more inclined to go with Norms 5% :D

 

Although it would be nice to get some official confirmation (?)

[rupert123]

Actually Nick I do agree with you but as I have just pointed out my original post was about the average M/H owner not knowing or caring. This does not make it right or sensible but I wonder how many on here have actually weighed their van loaded this year, hands up. I obviously did not make my point very clear.

[goldi]

Hello again,

 

Its on the vosa website.

 

 

norm

[Rayjsj]

I think I understood you ok, i just think that the Title was a bit of a 'Red rag to a bull'.

 

I still think that, 3500 kg is a stupidly low limit for a motorcaravan. and that the limit 'itself' , NOT motorcaravanners that needs changing. Until it does, there will still be folk who by innocent ignorance or by deliberate 'Who Cares' attitude, will be running around 'Overloaded'. Ray

[Guest pelmetman]

rupert123 - 2012-11-21 3:11 PM

I wonder how many on here have actually weighed their van loaded this year, hands up.

 

I have :D

[Tracker]

Me too - twice - but don't tell anyone as I wouldn't want to be seen as sensible or law abiding and spoil the fun of others!

[crinklystarfish]

rupert123 - 2012-11-21 10:30 AMJust looked at my original post on this thread and like most long threads this one has moved away from the point I was trying to make. I really did not want to get into a dispute over the issue of stopping distance etc. especially as the extra load I mentioned was 100kg and repeat this will have no effect on stopping or cornering ability, at least not an amount that could be measured. I suppose it was inevitable that some would take exception to this and bring out all the possible situations where it would be very dodgy. I would remind them I was suggesting a 100kg, not white van man and a 1000kg. I also stick by my suggestion, and original point, that the great majority of M/H owners neither knew or cared about this. Again I never said I agreed with this, as Mel and Crinkly seem to think, indeed because I carry a scooter reckon I weigh my van more than most and always know pretty much what van weighs. Not being ‘holier than thou’ here but reckon if anyone is a candidate for being stopped it is the van with a scooter on the back. Certainly did not wish the thread to fall into a slanging match, good dispute is one thing but personal insults another, although even here some sensitive souls will take exception more than others. So sorry to anyone who feels they have suffered, perhaps a proper moderator is long overdue on this forum.

Rupert, I fully understood your point right from the start but I'm not sure you've understood the counter-point put forward by many a poster.

How about this:

You are driving along in a 30mph urban area, a kid runs out in front of you, you slam on the brakes and swerve.

At 25mph you stop a metre short of him.

At 26mph you hit him but not with much force and he runs off crying.

At 27mph you break his leg.

At 28mph you throw him 10 metres up the road and he's in a bad way.

At 29mph he might well be killed.

At 30mph he has no chance of survival.

At no point did you exceed the speed limit.

Substitute every 1mph for 100kg.

I realise you are sensible and weigh your 'van. So do I, last did it 3 weeks ago. You ask does 100kg matter.

Well, for most of the time probably not, but it might also mean you kill somebody. Is it right to play dice with other people's lives?

[bolero boy]

Not this year but at the end of last year in full 'race trim'. This was done voluntarily at a Vosa weigh bridge and we were 3300 on the nose, giving us a spare 200kg. Also both axles were well within capacity.

On our Bolero we have huge storage under the side facing sofas and this allows us to keep the weight between the axles, a problem for some vans with inbuilt tanks under the dinette which can force items into the boot/garage behind the back axle. We also store cables and hoses in the gas locker as we only now have one Gaslow 11kg rather than the 2 x 6kg we had before. We also only keep chairs etc in the rear locker so not much weight overhanging the rear other than our bikes.

So, yes, I care about my own van but also care that others stay within the law and the correct figures for their vans.

 

Drive safely!

[Guest pelmetman]

crinklystarfish - 2012-11-21 7:13 PM Is it right to play dice with other people's lives?

That's a bit alarmist Crinkly 8-)..............based on your post we should all drive around at 20 mph in empty vehicles :-SIn my view your average motorhome driver, driving an overloaded vehicle by 100 kg (assuming the weigh bridge is accurate :D)..........is far less a danger on the road when compared to your average 17 year old ;-)

[Tracker]

crinklystarfish - 2012-11-21 7:13 PMHow about this:

You are driving along in a 30mph urban area, a kid runs out in front of you, you slam on the brakes and swerve.

At 25mph you stop a metre short of him.

At 26mph you hit him but not with much force and he runs off crying.

At 27mph you break his leg.

At 28mph you throw him 10 metres up the road and he's in a bad way.

At 29mph he might well be killed.

At 30mph he has no chance of survival.

At no point did you exceed the speed limit.

Substitute every 1mph for 100kg.

I realise you are sensible and weigh your 'van. So do I, last did it 3 weeks ago. You ask does 100kg matter.

Well, for most of the time probably not, but it might also mean you kill somebody. Is it right to play dice with other people's lives?

Sobering statistics that every driver would do well to study but I think maybe a bit of a red herring in this case to make a point and I have to ask if there is any proven research data to link the 100kg to the 1 mph comparison?In some towns and villages and even on some parts of minor roads 30 mph is too fast for safety in a 3.5 tonne battering ram and quite probably many of us on here who are experienced drivers drop well below that and try to be extra vigilant and this especially applies abroad in unfamiliar surroundings as well as around housing and schools.To accuse someone with 100 kg of overweight of playing dice with the lives of others is also a bit over the top and when steps are taken to ensure that every other road vehicle is properly MOTd and serviced and every driver young or old is capable of stopping within the distance stated by the vehicle maker when it was new there might be some grounds for ensuring that every vehicle is within its design weight limit - not it's plated weight - it's design limit.I don't think we will ever agree but at least I hope we can continue to discuss it like normal people.

[Mel B]

Tracker - 2012-11-21 7:55 PM

 

I don't think we will ever agree but at least I hope we can continue to discuss it like normal people.

Now that is a discussion to be had ... what constitutes a 'normal person' then!!! :-D

[Guest pelmetman]

Mel B - 2012-11-21 9:40 PM

 

Tracker - 2012-11-21 7:55 PM

 

I don't think we will ever agree but at least I hope we can continue to discuss it like normal people.

Now that is a discussion to be had ... what constitutes a 'normal person' then!!! :-D

 

Counts us out then Mel (lol) (lol)

[Mel B]

pelmetman - 2012-11-21 9:45 PM

 

Mel B - 2012-11-21 9:40 PM

 

Tracker - 2012-11-21 7:55 PM

 

I don't think we will ever agree but at least I hope we can continue to discuss it like normal people.

Now that is a discussion to be had ... what constitutes a 'normal person' then!!! :-D

 

Counts us out then Mel (lol) (lol)

 

Already have ... although would it be more apt if I put the first 2 letters of the alphabet at the beginning??? :D

[derek pringle]

Hi All,

Problem here seems to be that m/h users are not clued up about this subject and that is what causes the trouble. On this thread alone there are a lot of regular posters and I would say people who think they know a lot about Motorhoming and its rules etc. and yet we are seeing great differences in the perceived principles of how the subject should be approached.

Basically, people go out to buy 'NICE' vans, ones that suit there needs, and obviously think that if the van has lots of nice cupboards then they are there to be filled. I was personally castigated on this very forum when having bought a new bessie 630 I found that with it being auto and larger engine and other extras-when the wife and I got on board we were sailing very close to the wind weightwise, we changed vans just after 18 mths which was a financial knock. I believe most people would if necessary adjust their choice to take in practicality if only they knew, hence the Salesperson or Manufacturer to put this topic OUT THERE as they say to give customers a much more in-depth knowledge. Of course we will always have people who will flount any rules, I am broadminded about this until the rules they break affect MY safety. Instead of arguing with each other maybe we should lobby the administrators and any other organizations to push for transparency and layman terms on our behalf.

cheers

derek

[Keith T]

Rayjsj - 2012-11-21 3:38 PM

 

 

I still think that, 3500 kg is a stupidly low limit for a motorcaravan. and that the limit 'itself' , NOT motorcaravanners that needs changing. Until it does, there will still be folk who by innocent ignorance or by deliberate 'Who Cares' attitude, will be running around 'Overloaded'. Ray

 

 

Cannot agree with you - 3500kg may not in some cases any longer be 'realistsic', but using that figure as max weight for the vehicle means that is co-incides with the changes to the driving licences, when at aged 70 you HAVE to renew, and certain conditons and costs apply to you if you want to drive a heavier vehicle, Additionally there are quite a few situations inder the road legislation where 3500kg has a direct effect on how/where you can use the vehicle, like, eg roads speeds and weight limits on some roads, especially on the contintent.

Whatever limit is set (not just in motoring terms!) it is likely to be controversial, but that doesnt mean it is ,del facto, right or wrong...it's just that that is what it is, although occasionally these things are reviews and sometimes changed.

[Tracker]

Didn't someone once say - what does the law have to do with what is logical or right?

 

Or was it - the law is an ass?

 

When the 3500 kg weight limit was first set for driving license puposes commercial vehicles were vastly inferior to the high tech machines that now ply our roads and whilst these are faster they are much safer too with abs being very common. These advances would not have been dreamed of back then and these modern vehicles even handle reasonably predictably in a crisis. I doubt that back then - whenever it was - the law makers had any concept of the motorhome of the future that we now have?

 

So to say that an extra 100 kg on a vehicle ruled by an old law in one country to be capable of carrying 3500 when the maker states that the vehicle is capable of safely carrying considerably more than 3500kg in other countries is a bit odd? Especially when you bear in mind that the manufacturers will without doubt have had legal liability issues at the forefront of publishing their vehicle's specifications?

 

My sincere apologies to all that were offended by my reference to 'normal people'.

I honestly meant no offence but the written word is always subject to misunderstanding and I praise the polite way that I was reminded of this!

Allow me to clarify - I didn't mean that anyone on here is or was once normal - all I meant was that I am hoping that we will try to behave like normal people - whatever normal is?

[Guest pelmetman]

OT I know but it makes anyone being 100 kg over weight, pretty small beer by comparison with whats going on everyday on our roads ;-)

 

More than 5,000 children have been banned from driving in the past three years, shocking figures revealed today.

 

Startling statistics show that among the huge number, five 11-year-olds have been banned since 2009, three of them for aggravated taking of a vehicle.

 

Another of the youngsters was banned for failing to supply a specimen for alcohol testing, according to data obtained by Auto Express after a Freedom of Information request.

 

The alarming data also showed that a 12-year-old received a lifetime driving ban this year, five years before they could legally drive.

 

A 15-year-old was also given a two-year ban after being convicted of causing death by dangerous driving.

 

The statistics showed that five 11-year-olds, 41 12-year-olds, 164 13-year-olds, 578 14-year-olds, 1,420 15 year-olds and 3,125 16-year-olds featured in the data.

 

Figures showed that 5,333 people under 17 received bans in the UK since 2009.

 

The AA's Paul Watters told Auto Express: "I think the average motorist will be horrified by these figures.

 

"Motoring lawlessness is a real problem in this country. Thankfully only a small minority of young people behave in this way."

 

Other experts suggested that parents should be punished for allowing their children to commit driving offences as juveniles.

[Tracker]

Sorry Dave, alarming as it is, all that pales into insignificance when compared to the horrific sin of an experienced driver in a well maintained modern motorhome carrying 100kg more that he is allowed to - and I do hope that you appreciate the severity of this heinous motoring sin and the carnage it causes!!

 

Oh dear - that's done it!

 

Before the incoming starts incoming I suppose that I had better add that I don't condone overloading but neither do I condemn it and this posting is made with tongue firmly in cheek.

[Robinhood]

pelmetman - 2012-11-22 10:33 AM

 

More than 5,000 children have been banned from driving in the past three years, shocking figures revealed today.

 

 

....but how many of them were stopped on the road, and banned for being overloaded? ;-)

[RogerC]

crinklystarfish - 2012-11-21 7:13 PM

rupert123 - 2012-11-21 10:30 AMJust looked at my original post on this thread and like most long threads this one has moved away from the point I was trying to make. I really did not want to get into a dispute over the issue of stopping distance etc. especially as the extra load I mentioned was 100kg and repeat this will have no effect on stopping or cornering ability, at least not an amount that could be measured. I suppose it was inevitable that some would take exception to this and bring out all the possible situations where it would be very dodgy. I would remind them I was suggesting a 100kg, not white van man and a 1000kg. I also stick by my suggestion, and original point, that the great majority of M/H owners neither knew or cared about this. Again I never said I agreed with this, as Mel and Crinkly seem to think, indeed because I carry a scooter reckon I weigh my van more than most and always know pretty much what van weighs. Not being ‘holier than thou’ here but reckon if anyone is a candidate for being stopped it is the van with a scooter on the back. Certainly did not wish the thread to fall into a slanging match, good dispute is one thing but personal insults another, although even here some sensitive souls will take exception more than others. So sorry to anyone who feels they have suffered, perhaps a proper moderator is long overdue on this forum.

Rupert, I fully understood your point right from the start but I'm not sure you've understood the counter-point put forward by many a poster.

How about this:

You are driving along in a 30mph urban area, a kid runs out in front of you, you slam on the brakes and swerve.

At 25mph you stop a metre short of him.

At 26mph you hit him but not with much force and he runs off crying.

At 27mph you break his leg.

At 28mph you throw him 10 metres up the road and he's in a bad way.

At 29mph he might well be killed.

At 30mph he has no chance of survival.

At no point did you exceed the speed limit.

Substitute every 1mph for 100kg.

I realise you are sensible and weigh your 'van. So do I, last did it 3 weeks ago. You ask does 100kg matter.

Well, for most of the time probably not, but it might also mean you kill somebody. Is it right to play dice with other people's lives?

 

In response to the quote (in red above)Is it right that the little 'darling' has no road sense and runs out in front of moving traffic.......IMO this sort of post is akin to news reports of an aircraft crashing and the scaremongering press saying it came down close to a school/hospital etc......sensationalist, inflammatory and irrelevant.  'Grossly' overweight vehicles will obviously have an increased stopping distance but those with for example a 100kgs overload will have a negligible increase.  In addition road conditions, shell grip surface, tyre pressures, tyre condition, abs, esc and many other factors have an effect on stopping distances so it is a variable feast.  I'm not addressing the 'legalities' here of being a bit overweight.  I am merely commenting on the realities of being for example 100kgs over the 'plated' limit......2.85% on a 3500kg vehicle.  On a car for example according to the highway code the quoted stopping distance from 30mph is 75 feet.  This 2.85 increase amounts to an additional 2 feet in 'ideal' conditions. Not something relevant in the 'real' world.

In closing and without getting into semantics or manipulated scenarios if someone runs out in front of a moving vehicle it's their fault if they are hit and injured/killed and whilst regrettable it is their fault.

 

[Guest pelmetman]

Robinhood - 2012-11-22 10:41 AM

 

pelmetman - 2012-11-22 10:33 AM

 

More than 5,000 children have been banned from driving in the past three years, shocking figures revealed today.

 

 

....but how many of them were stopped on the road, and banned for being overloaded? ;-)

 

That was probably the 12 year old who got a life time ban ;-)