Tail Wags Dog, Duel Cab Ute

Aus-Kiwi · Guru

RE: Tail Wags Dog, Duel Cab Ute

dogbox · Guru

who mentioned the 15 amp earth plug there is no end to this thread now

dogbox · Guru

Dougwe wrote:

Morn'n all,

I was going to sit this one out but why should I miss out on all the fun, nope, not me.

I am a driver of one of the twin cab utes and is listed in my signature. I will say up front the Collie and Aluminium TeePee tow very nicely indeed thankyou very much. The Collie is well under weight in all areas and the TeePee is also under it's max weight allowed. The Collie is slightly heavier than the TeePee as well. As the Collie and TeePee are my home the are loaded at all times. The only thing that changes are the tyre pressures on the Collie, slightly less than when TeePee is hooked up.

I always drive to conditions including weather and roads. I have even been known to slip the Collie into low range 4X4 with TeePee hooked up and off, to navigate a gravel or dirt road, not often but has been done. (Thanks Mrs Garman)

I have gone to a lot of trouble to make sure both the Collie and TeePee are under their max weights as it is always in the front of my mind. I have weighed on a few different weighbridges and one time only in the last few weeks. I also got waved in not long after that one and was fully checked by 'Vic Roads' on the Hume Hwy just south of Wodonga. ALL GOOD. Two of three of us were told to have a good trip and one was told to move to the side ahead. I can only guess why?

I'm a great beleiver in driving to the conditions and sitting around 90kmh as a max speed.

It could be one of a number of reasons why this thread is taking place.

Keep Safe on the roads and out there.

now that you have stated as a matter of fact !! that you seen ONE(we can all guess you mean a caravan /please give full description in future) being ushered to the side of the road you should have draw a conclusion an posted it with your solution to the problem did you get the drivers name /make of vehicle ect
how can we jump to conclusions if we don't have at least some info no matter how little to start with
you should apologize someday
biggrin

iana · Guru

And the van had a three way fridge that wasn't working properly

Will we ever have a thread back on here that's serious aww

Desert Dweller · Guru

Once again thank you for your interest. Life for us is all about the places we travel to.

If we hear what we consider to be a TRUE story again we won't be posting it on here.

Then again, have we told you about the Mafia/Underbelly story that we were told by a Senior National Park Ranger.

Keep safe out there. biggrin biggrin

Dickodownunder · Guru

Desert Dweller wrote:
Once again thank you for your interest. Life for us is all about the places we travel to.

If we hear what we consider to be a TRUE story again we won't be posting it on here.

Then again, have we told you about the Mafia/Underbelly story that we were told by a Senior National Park Ranger.
Keep safe out there.

Your contribution is not lost DD.

Quite often when we sit around a campfire or in a "happy hour" we all hear "TRUE LIES"

It is easy to call the purveyor of the story a liar sometimes just because the caller has the support of the majority of the group or sometimes just to create a another subject on a tangent which detracts from the original story.

Sometimes just to push their own personal agenda.

Public forums are no different, but you already know that.

Keep on posting...and just run with the flack.... biggrin

Aus-Kiwi · Guru

My mum would often say when we where kids . About 15 years ago .. ( true lol ) is that true lie or a dam lie ?? .. Na still a kid !! Always acting a goat !!

Desert Dweller · Guru

The gentleman's recollection of his accident wasn't in a Happy Hour environment, no alcohol involved.

rockylizard · Guru

Gday...

confuse STRUTH DD and Dicko ... at no stage has ANYONE on this thread even suggested that DD was a liar.

It is just that the story was so lacking in any detail to convey ANY useful information regarding the incident - on why the tail wagged the dog.

It can only be assumed that DD accurately conveyed the limited information provided by the bloke who experienced the off-road excursion because his BT50 was so unsuitable for towing the particular van he had. We have no way of knowing whether this was the first trip with the BT50 and this van or whether he had years and kilometres of experience - and this was just a 'one off' incident. Obviously, the final 'one off' incident, it seems.

The queries, and suggested scenarios, proposed by respondents were simply seeking whether there was more information to what seemed a fairly implausible (or incomplete) account.

There are so many holes in the description of "the incident" "He was driving at 60-70kph on a back road & came to a 90 degree right hand bend. The road was dry & his weighs (sic) were all legal, after braking his rig kept going in a straight line through a fence into a farm paddock pulling up just before a dam."

But once again ... I restate "Anyhow, the bottom line is that not a single one of us will ever know what happened, why it happened ... or even IF it happened. We are all "urinating into the wind" so to speak."

I, along with every member of this forum welcomes, and appreciates, information that will/can assist each of us to better arrange our towing rigs to travel safer - and legally. So it is incumbent on each of us to relate information as factually and fully as we are able.

Jest sayin' hmm

Cheers - John

Dickodownunder · Guru

Aus-Kiwi wrote:
My mum would often say when we where kids . About 15 years ago .. ( true lol ) is that true lie or a dam lie ?? .. Na still a kid !! Always acting a goat !!

Hahaha!

My mum used to say,

now, that is just a barefaced lie.....

How the hell did she know?? biggrin biggrin

dogbox · Guru

I hope no one called dd a liar lest wise I never seen anything that indicated he was telling an untruth but the information that was given left room for speculation and people will speculate even to the gravel road that he never mentioned

Dickodownunder · Guru

rockylizard wrote:
Gday...
STRUTH DD and Dicko ... at no stage has ANYONE on this thread even suggested that DD was a liar.
It is just that the story was so lacking in any detail to convey ANY useful information regarding the incident - on why the tail wagged the dog.
It can only be assumed that DD accurately conveyed the limited information provided by the bloke who experienced the off-road excursion because his BT50 was so unsuitable for towing the particular van he had. We have no way of knowing whether this was the first trip with the BT50 and this van or whether he had years and kilometres of experience - and this was just a 'one off' incident. Obviously, the final 'one off' incident, it seems.
The queries, and suggested scenarios, proposed by respondents were simply seeking whether there was more information to what seemed a fairly implausible (or incomplete) account.
There are so many holes in the description of "the incident" "He was driving at 60-70kph on a back road & came to a 90 degree right hand bend. The road was dry & his weighs (sic) were all legal, after braking his rig kept going in a straight line through a fence into a farm paddock pulling up just before a dam."
But once again ... I restate "Anyhow, the bottom line is that not a single one of us will ever know what happened, why it happened ... or even IF it happened. We are all "urinating into the wind" so to speak."
I, along with every member of this forum welcomes, and appreciates, information that will/can assist each of us to better arrange our towing rigs to travel safer - and legally. So it is incumbent on each of us to relate information as factually and fully as we are able.
Jest sayin'
Cheers - John

Oh! Rocky,

FFS put down the whip and leave the dead horse to rest in peace.

Most members on here see the OP and all the comments, including yours in many cases are quite valid.

Members do not have to agree with me you or anyone else but that is what makes it a good forum

I am at times, dissapointed in this forum for the carry on that unfortunately does turn into a masive urination contest.

Settle and zip it up Rocky, let it go, and live to contribute another day biggrin biggrin

Sometimes I agree with what you contribute and other time I do not agree.

That is what a debate is all about...in this scenario no one will never know the true cause of the fact that the BT 50 with the Patriot Caravan hanging on the back actually went through the fence etc etc... but the member who told the original story should not be subject the question as to the accuracy of the finer details.

The story is the story... Simple as it is but...and it is a big but...just maybe the person that OWNED AND OPERATED the combination actually realised that his original choice of vehicle combination was IN HIS ESTIMATION AND ASSESSMENT actullay wrong and that his decision to purchase another vehicle to be more suitable to his requirements was a wiser choice.

This decision has been highlited many posts ago by Montie..

BTW Rocky, many combinations of tow vehicles and trailers with direct relation to caravans do have the trailer (caravan) heavier than the tow vehicle ( maybe in this case the BT 50) BUT none of us really know.

This is really not the consumers fault unless they know their weights as per a weigh bridge ( a point that you, Rocky, have already put across) but it is an unfortunate observation that the average Joe, Geoff, or even Rocky, is told by a vehicle dealer that the vehicle that they are outlaying their "hard earned" on will be suitable and worse still, legal to tow their van.

To criticise the OP with other "maybe scenarios" is placing doubt on his post.

Call it as you like Rocky but it really amounts to calling him a liar...

Easy to do to someone, but these negative contributions to support different varying agendas do not make for a friendly or informative forum.

The owner of the rig said that he wasnt happy with the combination of the ute and the van and bought another vehicle which he believed is more suitable...really Rocky, a "no brainer"

Oh and BTW I will add a couple of " smilies" just to indicate (as you said to me once in another post, but not on this topic) that there is no harm meant.

Here they are... biggrin biggrin biggrin

Cheers

-- Edited by Dickodownunder on Thursday 5th of April 2018 09:27:55 PM

dogbox · Guru

landy wrote:

thomas01 wrote:

Not too sure the BT50 should be called a "lightweight tug". My 2016 model with bull-bar, tow-bar and canopy weighs in at just under 2400kg unloaded.

That's a fact. Not a story. Zoom, zoom!

I understood he was towing it with a Landcruiser I wouldn't call that a lightweight either.

he was towing with a bt-50 had an episode an bought new landcruiser an some new undies( I just thru that in not part of dd's story)
nice to have the funds available to do that on a whim

Desert Dweller · Guru

Oh! Rocky,
FFS put down the whip and leave the dead horse to rest in peace.
Most members on here see the OP and all the comments, including yours in many cases are quite valid.
Members do not have to agree with me you or anyone else but that is what makes it a good forum
I am at times, disappointed in this forum for the carry on that unfortunately does turn into a masisve urination contest.
Settle and zip it up Rocky, let it go, and live to contribute another day
Sometimes I agree with what you contribute and other time I do not agree.

Yep, too much territorial pissing by certain members of this forum. It's still a great place to be though.

dieseltojo · Senior Member

Here I was, thinking the Op was trying to give an instant that happened to a friend, and that it was of interest. I am pretty sure that he will be a bit unwilling to post a thought again.

Why can't we just accept that this on person had this happen to them, and decided to get a Landcruiser. I mean it happens.....

I can hardly wait for a member stupid enough to mention casually that it is a nice day.

He better not be giving second hand opinions, and how the heck does he know what it is like 15 and a half kays from him.

What makes him an authority any way. It might rain later and that will sort out this possible liar.

I reckon when a mate makes a post it ought not be subject to intense scrutiny and the virtual questioning of the person to the ength degree, over such a simple, innocuous, informative post.

Although I did know a bloke that was always bad tempered once. He noticed one day that his undies were two sizes to small....so you never know....

rockylizard · Guru

dieseltojo wrote:
SNIP~~~ I reckon when a mate makes a post it ought not be subject to intense scrutiny and the virtual questioning of the person to the ength degree, over such a simple, innocuous, informative post. ~~~SNIP

Gday...

Your "mate" who made the post was never "subject to intense scrutiny". Similarly, the post was not a "simple, innocuous, informative post".

The veracity of the poster was never queried - just the incomplete and/or implausible story provided by the "bloke DD ran into" that his BT50 caused the incident.

It would help if people would actually read the responses through this thread and realise that at no time was DD personally being questioned to the "ength (sic)" degree.

Simply accept that DD was NOT under scrutiny, was NOT being questioned to the nth degree, was NOT being called a liar and, whilst the quoted description within the original post did not provide sufficient information for anyone to form any valid opinion of or in itself on the basis of the information provided by the original person quoted by DD, it did generate discussion on the topic.

Surely, that in itself was worthwhile ... read the comments by respondents all trying to understand how the implausible/incomplete story of the unfortunate incident could have actually been caused ONLY by the tail wagging the dog.

I, and everyone who reads this now ridiculous thread, is getting tired of this comment ... but I still restate it - "Anyhow, the bottom line is that not a single one of us will ever know what happened, why it happened ... or even IF it happened. We are all "urinating into the wind" so to speak."

Cheers - John

Aus-Kiwi · Guru

The latter vehicle has better brakes ?

dogbox · Guru

dieseltojo wrote:

Here I was, thinking the Op was trying to give an instant that happened to a friend, and that it was of interest. I am pretty sure that he will be a bit unwilling to post a thought again.

Why can't we just accept that this on person had this happen to them, and decided to get a Landcruiser. I mean it happens.....

I can hardly wait for a member stupid enough to mention casually that it is a nice day.

He better not be giving second hand opinions, and how the heck does he know what it is like 15 and a half kays from him.

What makes him an authority any way. It might rain later and that will sort out this possible liar.

I reckon when a mate makes a post it ought not be subject to intense scrutiny and the virtual questioning of the person to the ength degree, over such a simple, innocuous, informative post.

Although I did know a bloke that was always bad tempered once. He noticed one day that his undies were two sizes to small....so you never know....

how do you know his undies were to small did you actually see them is there a link did you take any pictures

just joking

dieseltojo · Senior Member

rockylizard wrote:

Gday...
Your "mate" who made the post was never "subject to intense scrutiny". Similarly, the post was not a "simple, innocuous, informative post".
The veracity of the poster was never queried - just the incomplete and/or implausible story provided by the "bloke DD ran into" that his BT50 caused the incident.
It would help if people would actually read the responses through this thread and realise that at no time was DD personally being questioned to the "ength (sic)" degree.
Simply accept that DD was NOT under scrutiny, was NOT being questioned to the nth degree, was NOT being called a liar and, whilst the quoted description within the original post did not provide sufficient information for anyone to form any valid opinion of or in itself on the basis of the information provided by the original person quoted by DD, it did generate discussion on the topic.
Surely, that in itself was worthwhile ... read the comments by respondents all trying to understand how the implausible/incomplete story of the unfortunate incident could have actually been caused ONLY by the tail wagging the dog.
I, and everyone who reads this now ridiculous thread, is getting tired of this comment ... but I still restate it - "Anyhow, the bottom line is that not a single one of us will ever know what happened, why it happened ... or even IF it happened. We are all "urinating into the wind" so to speak."
Cheers - John

So the veracity of the poster was never queried (yes he was)...... and he was not personally being questioned( yes he was)... yet you finally say ...even IF it happened. Honestly, does that allude to the OP being a liar.

Would it not be an oxymoronic statement then to include two opposites regarding the intent of this poster? Some one even suggested that retelling a story was in itself a warrant for that stories dismissal.

Isn't there the slightest reason on the Op's part in posting just for general interest? Not expecting to have a sit down with the person involved and grilling them to the third degree. Was he supposed to say "Ok you did that through the corner, MMMM, how was your van loaded? Did you check the brake blocks for 12.8 volts at each wheel? does the cable supply to the brakes on the van run centrally and then goes off to each wheel with the same length of cable? Was the brake controller on a hard brake setting?

Come clean now....John will be expecting all this info .....

I reckon you might want to re read that bit I wrote about that bloke that had to check his undie size.

Desert Dweller · Guru

We feel that the practice of quoting what someone else has written & emphasizing certain sentences in it by highlighting them in a different color is quite rude.

Almost to the point of changing the meaning of what the person being quoted has written. There are some on here that indulge in the practice consistently. We all know who they are.

This is supposed to be a friendly forum not a legal battlefield FFS.

-- Edited by Desert Dweller on Friday 6th of April 2018 01:15:41 PM