Tundra and FWC Hawk

trikebubble said:
I have a 2014 Tundra and we have a Hawk on order. I've replaced the stock Michelin with E rated Nitto's, and installed Firestone airbags (yesterday actually) . I know it's not necessary but I've also replaced all the suspension components including the rear leaf packs to gain some ground clearance along the way.
You should be able to go anywhere now, without any worries, good job!!!
 
ottorogers said:
But you are probaly legally overweight, right?
There is no legal overweight in court. Airbags, e-rated tires, don't mean *hit if you total weight is over the vehicles rating. You are up the creek if you are in court due to a traffic accident. And if there is a death do to your cause, kiss your future goodbye.
 
sourdough said:
There is no legal overweight in court. Airbags, e-rated tires, don't mean *hit if you total weight is over the vehicles rating. You are up the creek if you are in court due to a traffic accident. And if there is a death do to your cause, kiss your future goodbye.
I am not sure this is true - can you cite any laws or precedent for legal action related to exceeding GVWR for a non commercial operator? I have never heard of any law or specific legal precedent related to GVWR for non commercial vehicles.

My understanding is that the GVWR is what the manufacturer recommends as the maximum load, just like the manufacturer recommends certain lubricants and tires. It is set where it is a for a variety of reasons, none of which are revealed to the consumer.

If there were an accident that could be specifically tied to a weight issue, I am sure you could be sued, but no more than you could be sued for having bald or oversized tires, or an off-road bumper, distracted driving or any other of a thousand reasons. Exceeding the GVWR certainly entails some risk, but it is not as if everything is hunky dory 100lb below the GVWR and goes to pot (both physically and legally) if you are 100lb over the GVWR.
 
rando said:
I am not sure this is true - can you cite any laws or precedent for legal action related to exceeding GVWR for a non commercial operator? I have never heard of any law or specific legal precedent related to GVWR for non commercial vehicles.

My understanding is that the GVWR is what the manufacturer recommends as the maximum load, just like the manufacturer recommends certain lubricants and tires. It is set where it is a for a variety of reasons, none of which are revealed to the consumer.

If there were an accident that could be specifically tied to a weight issue, I am sure you could be sued, but no more than you could be sued for having bald or oversized tires, or an off-road bumper, distracted driving or any other of a thousand reasons. Exceeding the GVWR certainly entails some risk, but it is not as if everything is hunky dory 100lb below the GVWR and goes to pot (both physically and legally) if you are 100lb over the GVWR.
the Legal issue is something we all would love to know
 
"the Legal issue is something we all would love to know"


Then some folks planning to visit BC, Canada might be interested in this - if not, no need to read further.

from the BC Motor Vehicle Act Regulations:
Overload prohibition
19.11 (1) Unless operating under the provisions of an overload permit issued under the Commercial Transport Act, no person shall operate or cause to be operated a vehicle that is loaded in such a manner that the gross weight carried by any axle exceeds the gross weight rating for that axle as specified by the vehicle manufacturer, or the gross vehicle weight exceeds the gross vehicle weight rating for that vehicle as specified by the vehicle manufacturer.
- but -
does not apply to a vehicle
(a) manufactured before January 1, 2001, and
(b having a gross vehicle weight rating of 5 500 kg or less.
(more on this exclusion in second link below)

btw the BC Commercial Transport Act defines commercial vehicle as:
"commercial vehicle" includes
(a) a motor vehicle having permanently attached to it a truck or delivery body,

<snip>

In my and others experience, pick ups are registered in BC as "Commercial" even though they may be licensed and insured for private use only.

More info found here:
http://www.drivesmartbc.ca/miscellaneous/topic/alphabet-soup-gvw-gcwr-gawr-and-more#comment-597

note from that link above, the following :
If you are from outside B.C. your pickup truck is considered to be covered by the Commericial (sic) Transport Act regardless of the fact that you use it only for pleasure and it is not registered to a business or for business use.
-----

Also I believe a driver in BC can be given a ticket for an unsafe vehicle at a POs discretion using visual clues (Violations Act section 37.35 Operate unsafe vehicle). See link for more (I think this may have been posted on this forum before - my apologies forgetting that poster):
http://www.cvse.ca/references_publications/pdf/MV3231(082003)GVWR.pdf
----

fwiw I have also read (didn't keep the citation) that to counter a PO or "credible person"s belief in a weight (with respect to a believed overload) it is the drivers responsibility to prove the weight is otherwise.

Again fwiw, also read on a CVSE (Commercial Vehicle Safety Enforcement) site the following:
We weigh vehicles post collision for police collision reconstructionists so they can use momentum equations for speed determination. Or private vehicle owners with trailers or loads if they have a concern.
From link:
https://www.tranbc.ca/2012/04/10/weighing-in-with-the-cvse-no-such-thing-as-a-silly-question/
----

DISCLAIMER: I am not a LOE, or in the "Legal Industry". The above are just a few things I found online that apply to my jurisdiction ...
 
I switched to E rated KO2’s on my tundra double cab and love the way they ride. I run them at about 60 lbs. great on road and off...
 
gaylon said:
I switched to E rated KO2’s on my tundra double cab and love the way they ride. I run them at about 60 lbs. great on road and off...
If you switch to E rated tires, does that increase the load weight you can legally carry in the truck bed
 
No, the legal thing is not changed by tires. The legal situation is antiquated. The law doesn’t have variables built into it even if those variables have real effect on vehicle performance.
 
klahanie said:
"the Legal issue is something we all would love to know"


Then some folks planning to visit BC, Canada might be interested in this - if not, no need to read further.

from the BC Motor Vehicle Act Regulations:
Overload prohibition
19.11 (1) Unless operating under the provisions of an overload permit issued under the Commercial Transport Act, no person shall operate or cause to be operated a vehicle that is loaded in such a manner that the gross weight carried by any axle exceeds the gross weight rating for that axle as specified by the vehicle manufacturer, or the gross vehicle weight exceeds the gross vehicle weight rating for that vehicle as specified by the vehicle manufacturer.
- but -
does not apply to a vehicle
(a) manufactured before January 1, 2001, and
(b having a gross vehicle weight rating of 5 500 kg or less.
(more on this exclusion in second link below)

btw the BC Commercial Transport Act defines commercial vehicle as:
"commercial vehicle" includes
(a) a motor vehicle having permanently attached to it a truck or delivery body,

<snip>

In my and others experience, pick ups are registered in BC as "Commercial" even though they may be licensed and insured for private use only.

More info found here:
http://www.drivesmartbc.ca/miscellaneous/topic/alphabet-soup-gvw-gcwr-gawr-and-more#comment-597

note from that link above, the following :
If you are from outside B.C. your pickup truck is considered to be covered by the Commericial (sic) Transport Act regardless of the fact that you use it only for pleasure and it is not registered to a business or for business use.
-----

Also I believe a driver in BC can be given a ticket for an unsafe vehicle at a POs discretion using visual clues (Violations Act section 37.35 Operate unsafe vehicle). See link for more (I think this may have been posted on this forum before - my apologies forgetting that poster):
http://www.cvse.ca/references_publications/pdf/MV3231(082003)GVWR.pdf
----

fwiw I have also read (didn't keep the citation) that to counter a PO or "credible person"s belief in a weight (with respect to a believed overload) it is the drivers responsibility to prove the weight is otherwise.

Again fwiw, also read on a CVSE (Commercial Vehicle Safety Enforcement) site the following:
We weigh vehicles post collision for police collision reconstructionists so they can use momentum equations for speed determination. Or private vehicle owners with trailers or loads if they have a concern.
From link:
https://www.tranbc.ca/2012/04/10/weighing-in-with-the-cvse-no-such-thing-as-a-silly-question/
----

DISCLAIMER: I am not a LOE, or in the "Legal Industry". The above are just a few things I found online that apply to my jurisdiction ...
thanks for this post, I know BC has very strong highway safety laws, that horrible accident when the gravel truck killed all those people in the mini van at Horseshoe Bay really changed things (rightfully so)
 
If I find I do need "E" rated tires in the future . . .

================

I highly recommend E rated tires for the sidewall stiffness and protection against snake bite.
We're on our second set of BFG KO's
YMMV
 
Lighthawk said:
If I find I do need "E" rated tires in the future . . .

================

I highly recommend E rated tires for the sidewall stiffness and protection against snake bite.
We're on our second set of BFG KO's
YMMV
I will install "E" rated as soon as my brand new Michelin LTX AT2 tires wear out (or at least down)
 
ottorogers said:
But you are probably legally overweight, right?
Everybody is overweight with the tundra, I don’t worry at all being 1000 pounds or do over With the two extra leaf springs I installed, the truck handles just like a 1 ton
 

New posts - WTW

Back
Top Bottom