Vehicle / Van Weights

Dougwe · Chief one feather

RE: Vehicle / Van Weights

montie · Guru

Yobarr, I can see where you are coming from and you are correct that the fitment of a WDH will impose a minimal weight to the van axle group. The effect of this minimal imposition on the vans measured total weight can only be verified by unhooking to weigh the van which negates the issue anyway. Wouldn't you agree?

yobarr · Guru

Later.

-- Edited by yobarr on Sunday 15th of December 2019 07:43:03 PM

yobarr · Guru

montie wrote:
Yobarr, I can see where you are coming from and you are correct that the fitment of a WDH will impose a minimal weight to the van axle group. The effect of this minimal imposition on the vans measured total weight can only be verified by unhooking to weigh the van which negates the issue anyway. Wouldn't you agree?

Hi Montie......thanks for your support.It becomes a little frustrating when not only can people not understand simple physics,they don't seem to want to understand.There are many ways to show that a WDH transfers weight to the vans axle group,but the easiest way is to simply park your (non-tensioned) WDH equipped car and van on a weighbridge so that only the van's axle group is actually on the weighbridge deck.Note the weight. Now tension the WDH up as far as you can manage and again take the weight. This will show how much weight is added to the ATM. Depending on how much time and patience you have,you also can do 'before and after' tests on the car's front axle only,or you can park the car (both axles) on the weighbridge, take that weight,wind up the WDH.....waaaay up.....and again take the weight.The difference is what has been transferred from the car to the van's axle group. If we use Greg's example of a WDH equipped 200,which seemed to have little weight on the rear axle,and tension the WDH so much that the rear wheels do actually leave the ground, (can be done) all weight will be on only two axles....the front axle of the car,and the van's axle group.Then try and tell me that the ATM hasnt increased! Yeah,right! Cheers

PS..Always remember that weighbridges mostly weigh in 20kg to 50kg increments,so accurate figures may be difficult to obtain,but at the very least you will be able to see that what I say is correct.Cheers

-- Edited by yobarr on Sunday 15th of December 2019 07:25:29 PM

blaze · Guru

I will call you foe a cyberbully yobarr, It got to the stage whether you are right or wrong forum members are just tuning out and that does nobody any good, just cool it down a degree or three.
cheers
blaze

yobarr · Guru

blaze wrote:
I will call you foe a cyberbully yobarr, It got to the stage whether you are right or wrong forum members are just tuning out and that does nobody any good, just cool it down a degree or three.
cheers
blaze

No problem Blaze,but I am not at all receptive to having people argue with me about things of which they know little. Since being a member here,I have learned all sorts of interesting things,simply by reading posts written by others.We each can learn from others....T1Terry for things Solar (and I sell Solar!) Mike Harding for communications,Peter n Margaret for almost anything,with several other members seeming to know a lot about various things.Montie and I know weights,but weights differ from other fields in that there is no middle ground.....your weights are either right,or they are wrong.Always I am happy to help,but when my advice is incorrectly challenged by people who know little,always I will respond.The fact that they are wrong is of little interest to me,with my main concern being that the apparent misinformation posted by these people will mislead members who simply are seeking reassurance that they are on the right track with their own weights.If you know little,or nothing,about something,surely it is best to just read,and learn? We all have to learn,but you will never learn by arguing with those who already know what they are talking about.Always I am happy to answer questions. Cheers

-- Edited by yobarr on Sunday 15th of December 2019 07:53:35 PM

Baz421 · Guru

yobarr wrote:

blaze wrote:
I will call you foe a cyberbully yobarr, It got to the stage whether you are right or wrong forum members are just tuning out and that does nobody any good, just cool it down a degree or three.
cheers
blaze
No problem Blaze,but I am not at all receptive to having people argue with me about things of which they know little. Since being a member here,I have learned all sorts of interesting things,simply by reading posts written by others.We each can learn from others....T1Terry for things Solar (and I sell Solar!) Mike Harding for communications,Peter n Margaret for almost anything,with several other members seeming to know a lot about various things.Montie and I know weights,but weights differ from other fields in that there is no middle ground.....your weights are either right,or they are wrong.Always I am happy to help,but when my advice is incorrectly challenged by people who know little,always I will respond.The fact that they are wrong is of little interest to me,with my main concern being that the apparent misinformation posted by these people will mislead members who simply are seeking reassurance that they are on the right track with their own weights.If you know little,or nothing,about something,surely it is best to just read,and learn? We all have to learn,but you will never learn by arguing with those who already know what they are talking about.Always I am happy to answer questions. Cheers

-- Edited by yobarr on Sunday 15th of December 2019 07:53:35 PM

What a load of crap yobarr,,, I proved you wrong months ago when you used incorrect terminology and time and time again I have posted legislation and technical bulletins etc to prove it.

At one point you admitted misleading people with incorrect information.

I think you google stuff you don't know and pretend to be an expert.

I think you should be removed form this forum.

People who admit to providing incorrect information and don't learn from it are incompetant and dangerous.

Dougwe · Chief one feather

Rob Driver · Guru

Dougwe wrote:

Gday Doug,

Unfortunately his comments and recommendations are at most times very innacurate and dangerous.

I find it hard to believe that he is still posting on here, I would have thought that anyone who has been proved wrong or cannot provide credible links to any information that he manages to inflict us with, would eventually just go away.

What is his point?

Many others have now expressed their concern about his trolling and I ask why do we have to put up with his antics.

His interest is far from the welfare of our members on this site. His concern is that the rubbish that he posts gets him recognition which he was unable to achieve on other sites. Now we are stuck with him

Baz421 has hit the nail on the head. I will be keeping my fingers crossed.

Or just make it easy Yobarr and go away.

Regards

Rob

Greg 1 · Guru

I will say again. You cannot increase the ATM of the van with a WDH. You can distribute the tow ball weight a little differently to that without one but the overall weights stay constant unless you change the actual load in the van. The GCM and the ATM will always stay the same, as will the kerb weight of the tow vehicle. The only change when the two are connected together is the tow vehicle is now supporting the ball weight, but nothing has been added or subtracted from the vans overall weight nor the GCM of the two. Because the car is now supporting the towball load in a vertical plane, it does not mean that suddenly the van has lost weight. What you are suggesting is that gravity is somehow altered with WDH. It's like saying that a car under heavy braking has somehow gained weight. There is a forward weight shift but the car still weighs exactly what it did before applying the brakes. Upon acceleration the car will squat and the weight shift rearward, but again, the car still weighs exactly the same. All a WDH does is basically does the same, in a static sense, to a lesser degree, and causes a small weight shift in the tow vehicle from the rear axle to the front axle. Neither car or van gain weight in any way.

Iva Biggen · Senior Member

blaze wrote:
I will call you foe a cyberbully yobarr, It got to the stage whether you are right or wrong forum members are just tuning out and that does nobody any good, just cool it down a degree or three.
cheers
blaze

Hi blaze,

Most people on forums realise that we all have varying views but unfortunately his comments and attitude are indicative of the behaviour of a forum troll.

I also agree with Baz, we have all had to tolerate him for too long.

This guy ruins any realistic discussion with his bombastic comments to the detriment of all the members on here. Almost every topic in which he has participated has been locked or removed.

I guess that says it all.

Cheers

Ivan

Rob Driver · Guru

Greg 1 wrote:
I will say again. You cannot increase the ATM of the van with a WDH. You can distribute the tow ball weight a little differently to that without one but the overall weights stay constant unless you change the actual load in the van. The GCM and the ATM will always stay the same, as will the kerb weight of the tow vehicle. The only change when the two are connected together is the tow vehicle is now supporting the ball weight, but nothing has been added or subtracted from the vans overall weight nor the GCM of the two. Because the car is now supporting the towball load in a vertical plane, it does not mean that suddenly the van has lost weight. What you are suggesting is that gravity is somehow altered with WDH. It's like saying that a car under heavy braking has somehow gained weight. There is a forward weight shift but the car still weighs exactly what it did before applying the brakes. Upon acceleration the car will squat and the weight shift rearward, but again, the car still weighs exactly the same. All a WDH does is basically does the same, in a static sense, to a lesser degree, and causes a small weight shift in the tow vehicle from the rear axle to the front axle. Neither car or van gain weight in any way.

Greg, I dont think that this fellow will even begin to understand what you are saying.

He does not want to believe it because if he does it will ruin his argument of his recommendation of not using a WDH with a Mitsubishi Pajero or on any vehicle towing a van for that matter.

He has been told and documentation has been presented to support the fact re ATM that he is incorrect but still he continues with his rubbish.

I really cant see that anyone can change his view but as I had said earlier I think more and more people are eventually seeing him for what he represents.

Regards

Rob