2016 ccsb empty weight

[photowrite]

I changed my door sticker. It cost me a tiny bit of ink, a piece of paper, and a little tape....

I used my knowledge of the frame/suspension/brake/steering/axles/wheels/tires to justify my increase in ratings.

Title 49 CFR 567.7 explains what is required to modify a vehicle. Just google it. Despite what many people believe there is no certification required to modify a GVWR/FAWR/RAWR/etc..
.

I like your approach! Changing the door stricker is good.

 

[photowrite]

This is under COMMERCIAL, not private use.

Yes, two different shares I may not have adequately separated...

1) I'm well versed in many non-commercial traffic laws/rules of the road. (Not ignorant about commercial laws either.)

2) I shared one example of where a LEO 'could' cite someone for a weight violation.

There are more facets to this than many realize. LEO only need probable cause to take enforcement action, arguing about the laws being part of the commercial sections can be done in a courtroom if necessary, but that won't stop enforcement action if that's the direction things are going. I'm not saying that getting stopped or a citation is likely, but I know it's possible.

To make a similar argument about what section of the codes a laws may be in...

Nevada has less restrictive guns laws than many states as you may know. There are codes in the hunting section about having loaded 'long guns' in a vehicle. If you were not hunting, but we're in violation of one of these loaded firearms laws, enforcement could happen.

I have/do travel over I80 in Calif. in the winter often. One year I was doing this with a small off-road Australian outback trailer in-tow, towed by a very capable (on- and off-highway) 4WD, and R2 chain controls were up. I know the rules, had (new) chains for the trailer, but didn't need or want to use them. However, the CA DOT worker running the chain controls checkpoint proceeded to tell me that once I hooked-up a trailer I was subject to the commercial chain control laws and requirements (though this was clearly an RV, not a commercial vehicle), and I needed to put chains on to proceed.

So, while I agree with all the statements and arguments about the weight laws being targeted at commercial vehicles, and it's highly unlikely that someone will get stopped and/or cited unless they are obviously grossly overweight and unsafe, it's certainly possible. We have 50 states, many laws (and enforcement practices) are similar but not identical. Years ago one never would have thought a farmer/rancher/construction guy might get stopped and have his tanks dipped to check for off-road fuel... It's still rare but it does happen.

Then there is Canada, a place I know little about but plan to travel to soon. Recently I've been reading about 'tighter' enforcement of speed laws, and weight laws in BC on an overland travel forum. Likely, nope. Possible, yep.

With my camper mounted I'm within my GAWRs, but over on my GVWR. My front GAWR is fine, but increasing the rear GAWR and GVWR wouldn't hurt if I can figure out the process like John in Idaho has done.

James

 

[AH64ID]

I never had any issue's with any difference with the anti lock brakes, but I never had a super heavy load on or behind me when I had them on
I personally HATE anti lock brakes in winter time here, WAY too many times I can roll into a stop sign going 5-10 mph and with snow on the ground , roil, right thru an intersection due to they DON"T stop me, or worse when traveling down a steep snow covered hill off road(I hunt a lot)
and them things just click and rattle
never locking up a wheel and free rolling me into near crashes
I wish there was a override option or at least when in 4x4

as pretty hard to explain to a cop how you were going slow and NO skid marks and yet still went thru a stop sign, at least skid marks showed you tried LOL

and I have a ton of crash free yrs of driving on winter time and off road, just anti lock brake I hate in snow and ice, rather have a wheel locked up than free rolling down a steep hill LOL

Yes ABS can be quite aggravating, thou the one in my 2005 seems pretty good as long as I have the proper tire pressure. A little too much air in the tires is really hard to use the ABS with. I haven't ever felt like it was working too much and keeping me from stopping.

I would like ABS to turn off in 4LO like it did in my 2007 Tacoma, but for the most part ABS has served me well on this rig. I have driven many a vehcile where it was worse in all circumstances.

I haven't personally noticed a difference in brake pads but there are plenty of discussions online about changing the coefficient of friction and it's effect on ABS and it's part of the reason I'll go back to stock brakes on my 05 when the time comes.

The other reason is I have 115K miles on the truck and the brakes are OE and work VERY well. My truck is 8500lbs empty and gets over 11K when loaded for camping and I have never complained about the brakes.

Then there is Canada, a place I know little about but plan to travel to soon. Recently I've been reading about 'tighter' enforcement of speed laws, and weight laws in BC on an overland travel forum. Likely, nope. Possible, yep.

With my camper mounted I'm within my GAWRs, but over on my GVWR. My front GAWR is fine, but increasing the rear GAWR and GVWR wouldn't hurt if I can figure out the process like John in Idaho has done.

James

The process I posted is for federal use, so it should suffice for any of the 50 states.. but that is a guess for Canada. You are registered in the US and just traveling in Canada, so I would guess that US Federal safety laws still apply to your truck. Read the CFR and make a new sticker and I would think you are good in Canada or Mexico. That will be a harder one to investigate thou.

A lot of times the appearance is very important. Make sure your truck/trailer are level and you have the tires for the load and you probably won't be messed with having US plates.

 

[RVTRKN]

Your brakes seem more capable because your 2005 is a manual transmission, even W/O an exhaust brake, the NV5600 helps in slowing down your truck. I'd have to double check with my brother, but my 04.5 (in sig) still has the original brakes at 130k miles.

 

[Deleted member 995608]

Your brakes seem more capable because your 2005 is a manual transmission, even W/O an exhaust brake, the NV5600 helps in slowing down your truck. I'd have to double check with my brother, but my 04.5 (in sig) still has the original brakes at 130k miles.

My former 04.5 still had original rotors at just shy of 300K. Only went through sets of front pads during that time. My 2nd gen ate brakes for breakfast.

 

[RVTRKN]

I'll verify that, my 2nd gen 94 auto 2500 gasser went through them every 25K.

 

[mrbb]

I too had a gasser for 10 yrs and it ate front brakes up, lucky to get 40k on them, and about 55 on backs, went thru 4 sets of brake pads and 3 rotors up front one in the back
had OEM, Hawk, NAPA Premium, and then forget brand name on last rotors/pads on front, all lasted about the same, but sold truck before last one's wore out to say IF any better or not!
they were drilled and slotted last se,t that is!,
and again I did notice a BIG difference in stopping power with them, wish I switched to them sooner! lol

 

[photowrite]

The other reason is I have 115K miles on the truck and the brakes are OE and work VERY well. My truck is 8500lbs empty and gets over 11K when loaded for camping and I have never complained about the brakes.

With the possible exception of a poor design (2nd gen.), often brake longevity has much to do with the driver, style, and terrain. My '96 F-350 had brakes that were notably inferior to my '14 Ram 2500, yet there was still much lining left after 133,000 when I sold the truck to a friend.

The process I posted is for federal use, so it should suffice for any of the 50 states.. but that is a guess for Canada. You are registered in the US and just traveling in Canada, so I would guess that US Federal safety laws still apply to your truck. Read the CFR and make a new sticker and I would think you are good in Canada or Mexico. That will be a harder one to investigate thou.

A lot of times the appearance is very important. Make sure your truck/trailer are level and you have the tires for the load and you probably won't be messed with having US plates.

Agreed, a federal process should be fine in all states, that's what the OE sticker is too, federal.

I spent more time last night researching online, but went to bed (late) thinking: my truck(s) drive, handle, and look right and tight, 'my butt doesn't drag in the sand', the likelihood of being stopped or questioned is extremely low.

 

[RVTRKN]

["With the possible exception of a poor design (2nd gen.), often brake longevity has much to do with the driver, style, and terrain. My '96 F-350 had brakes that were notably inferior to my '14 Ram 2500, yet there was still much lining left after 133,000 when I sold the truck to a friend."]

That has some truth to it, but the first few MY years, 2nd gen trucks were known for it. After my first brake job on my 94 2500, I questioned the fact that the shop manual showed different pads and calipers for the 3/4 ton and 1 ton trucks, and mine seemed not to match any of them. So my dealer brought in a factory rep to talk to me, and instaed of arguing with me, he just ordered a complete set of Calipers and pads free of charge, which I used later and matched the same I had. I knew a Glass company that sold off his entire fleet because the brakes were costing him so much in maintenance costs. Unfortunately I asked him what he thought of the new Dodge Ram fleet he had, thinking I would get a good response, he slammed the brand because of the brakes. I believe it is why the later trucks brakes are so much better. Also, when I was looking at replacing my 94 just before the change from 2nd to 3rd gen trucks, Dodge had a Frame and Drive train W/O the cab assembled for display at a special show in LA. I was so impressed with the beefed up brakes,frame & suspension, I waited for the 3rd gen truck. It is why I owned a 04.5 CTD

BTW, my 2500 was a 2500HD pickup, and in 94 there was a difference between a 2500 and 2500HD, and mine had the 360 Magnum so the 2500HD wasn't just for the CTD option.

 

[photowrite]

That has some truth to it, but the first few MY years, 2nd gen trucks were known for it.

Yep, I know, I bought a new 1995 2500/Cummins. The rig had numerous reoccurring mechanical problems, including the brakes, and was eventually bought back by Chrysler.