A tongue in cheek advantage of increasing the 85% to 90% or more !!!.

[TheTravellingRooster]

Hi to you all out there. Yes Steve L,the articulated lorry has got to be the epitome of the tail & the dog,indeed if one tried to push/steer a dog with its tail I am positive that the head would react and bite back,just similar to the illustration of the Tractor Unit.
I put onto another forum before Christmas 2010 a specific post with the title:- Towing with a Ford Scorpio 2.3 Ultima Auto Estate (feedback please). I was addressing several specifics and specifically wanted feedback from those that had owned and or used one. You would not believe some of the garbage that came back,including references about entirely the wrong car.
The issue of the 85% recommendation(aimed at Newbies/Beginner Caravanner's) and the claimed maximum braked towing weights was a real surprise when in the last few weeks I have spoken to a Professional Auto-Recovery chap that had bought exactly what I had been asking for feedback on (I had already committed to my car but due to all of the pre-Christmas mayhem,I left it in Reading).He needed a capable vehicle already fitted with tow-gear as a temporary back-up vehicle.It was going to pull a David James type car trailer with rescue on board.
The weight of the trailer and the rescued vehicles (including a Range Rover on one occasion) well exceeded the Train Weight never mind the 2000kgs Maximum Braked Towing Weight of the Scorpio.When I picked him up on this "MINOR DETAIL!!!" he chuckled and said with the load in the correct place and securely strapped/anchored down and the tyre pressures at the correct inflation level;and the nose weight correct he did not know it was on the back except for the image in the rear-view mirror.
The problem with a great many caravanner's that I have communicated with of late is very simple,they do not understand fully about what they profess no know about. They often boast about the silly(no,Stupid ) speeds that they propel themselves at). There appears to be a need to travel at no less then 60mph at a minimum and all to use more fuel,create a lot of stress and pressure and increase wear & tear on themselves,their outfits and other road uses.
I am a firm believer,that Newbies/Beginners to caravanning just like Motorcyclists should start at a minimum & safe point and progress to greater things,the newer generations want everything to happen NOW and do not appear to want to take things in their stride. But,then again;what do I know !,I am only one of those 1945 home from war products,we had everything and wanted for nothing and we got so much love and affection that we were genuinely wanting for little else.

 

[mcghee]

I don't know what the answer is rooster. Any kind of attempt to make a change in respect of the 85% guideline will inevitably only end in screeds of legislation which will ultimately achieve very little other than cost us more money.

Perhaps the answer would be no automatic towing entitlement on driving licenses. A separate test covering safe loading and outfit set up as well as actual towing. P-plates for new towers with restrictions on trailer weight and speed throughout the probationary period. Although some caravanners may only tow once during that period so not a lot would be achieved there.

This chap, who I'm quite sure is very experienced, tows with a RangeRover on a trailer with a Scorpio 2.3 and tells you he doesn't know it's there is telling you lies. First time someone pulls out of a junction in front of him he'll know it's there. But in among his fantastic claims there is a valid point. That being that most cars will tow considerably more than you would think, I have towed a bus with my ML270, but that doesn't make it safe to do so.

Regarding motorcyclists, you can do your direct access in six weeks and be blasting round the country on a 600, 750, or1100 though probably not for long...

 

[TheTravellingRooster]

This chap, who I'm quite sure is very experienced, tows with a RangeRover on a trailer with a Scorpio 2.3 and tells you he doesn't know it's there is telling you lies. First time someone pulls out of a junction in front of him he'll know it's there. But in among his fantastic claims there is a valid point. That being that most cars will tow considerably more than you would think, I have towed a bus with my ML270, but that doesn't make it safe to do so.

Regarding motorcyclists, you can do your direct access in six weeks and be blasting round the country on a 600, 750, or1100 though probably not for long...

The chap with the Scorpio that I refered to was mainly on Motorways & Trunk Routes,but yes and more so if it pulled the bar away from the back of the car at start off. I shudder to think what would happen if a detour was imposed onto a 12% or steeper gradient with Stop-Start Traffic conditions.
Yes.I have argued the point about stupid maximum braked towing weight claims for years,and inparticular on the Queens Highway.
Your point about motorcyclist is but one endorsement of my comments/observations of the modern/younger generations.

 

[JonnyG]

"Regarding motorcyclists, you can do your direct access in six weeks and be blasting round the country on a 600, 750, or1100 though probably not for long..."
Actually for those above 21 years of age, you can do all this in a week! never mind 6 weeks. Compulsory CBT can be done any day of the week , so lets say Saturday AM . Saturday afternoon out and about on a 125. Sunday out on a 500cc bike.Monday Tuesday, evening or daytime out again Theory test and practical test any day in the week, if you pass that then Wednesday or Thursday or Friday,you can take you bike test. Indeed its a mad scenario,and one that many do.

 

[mcghee]

Don't kid yourself that it's only the younger generation. I know plenty guys who reached 50 before their butts ever touched a bike seat, they all do direct access and they're the ones you need to watch out for. You can spot most of them a mile away in their dayglo outfits.

 

[JonnyG]

Don't kid yourself that it's only the younger generation. I know plenty guys who reached 50 before their butts ever touched a bike seat, they all do direct access and they're the ones you need to watch out for. You can spot most of them a mile away in their dayglo outfits.

I see like myself you have an interest in myths. unfortunately a read of " motorcycles news", a weekly mag does just that proves this whole episode to be purely myth.Although the media and government did nothing to correct their stupid misinformed propaganda at the beginning of the 21st century! They certainly but a stigma on all older bikers as you response shows.plenty of bikers including myself who has been riding 30 years wear dayglo over my outfit.
Rule 1 treat every other road user as a complete blind idiot.

 

[mcghee]

Don't take that too personally Johnny. I myself know lots of guys who have been biking since before I was in nappies, I also know a fair few who became bikers in their second youth. It always seems that the latter group choose rather more esoteric riding wear than the former. I was actually just poking a bit of fun with that statement, rather like most drivers of Imprezzas have shaved heads and ski jackets, and most drivers of BMW 3series are balding with a moustache and a pair of aviator sunglasses. I actually used to read MCN cover to cover every issue but I've not seen one the last couple of months.

 

[JonnyG]

Non taken...Cuzz i aint 50 ....yet..

 

[602]

Hi
Checking through the drivers handbook for my old 1992 Land Rover Discovery, I find that the Kerb Weight (Doh!) is 2080kg which includes a 75kg driver and full tank of fuel. The MGW is 2720kg, which gives a payload of 640kg.
The holder of a Group B only licence may tow a trailer weighing up to 780kg, which takes the GROSS train weight up to the legal limit of 3500kg. But he could legally drive a car of 2500kg MGW, with say, a 1000kg ULW, and tow a 1000kg MGW trailer (don't ask me what vehicle meets that spec).
So, assuming that the greater the weight of the tow car in relation to its trailer, the law requires the use of a less safe combination. ????
Kerb weight is only relevent to the Caravan Club recomendation, which is only relevent to caravans. And in real life, kerbweight is variable.
602

 

[Steve L]

To some extent I can empathise with most on this subject. Even with the post 1997 legislation you can still get people with absolutely no idea what they are doing when towing a trailer or even driving solo for that matter. I've actually seen people uncouple and turn their caravan round o the motormover on the highway because they have not only missed their turning, or can't be bothered to drive on to a roundabout or a wide junction or a lay-by to execute a "U" turn, and even more frightening, they don't know how to reverse.

That is why I would realy like to see clear info on exactly what weight your car can tow on the VIN plate and reitterated in the car hand book, plus a seperate competancey test for all drivers. BTW, I'm over 50 and was brought up the old do it and learn way, well until I did my HGV 1 driving coarse and passed my test (4 day coarse). Trust me 4 days does not set you up for a lifetime on the road. But at least i was taught to reverse safely and drive a 40ft rig correctly.

To me driving is a lifetime of learning because you will always learn more each time you drive.

 

[TheTravellingRooster]

Hi to you all out there. Further to my starting of this issue.A little off topic, but intrinsically linked. The EU Directive that was created back in 1995,to be exact the 20th September 1995 was an initial attempt to HARMONISE or ALL SINGING OFF THE SAME HYMN SHEET across Europe and to any country selling auto-mobiles into Europe from outside, the idea of standardising a kerweight definition was a complete waste of time,by all accounts. Some gave only Ex Factory Weights,some gave figures with a footnote,some gave figures but left out the driver allowance,some included a full tank of fuel and on it went. Every other which-way but in conformity of a Mandatory & Legislative Directive. I can honestly say as a Petrol Head with my ears constantly to the ground and my eyes never away from the reputable magazines that I never once heard of any manufacturer being taken to task by the powers that be over the non conformity in the published sales brochures etc that millions of pounds are spent on in promoting their products.
Caravan manufacturers have for a long time now quoted MiRO & MTPLM figures along with maximum hitch head weight,the MiRO figures have not always been as accurate as stated but more recently have become so much more accurate.
I have met the issue of kerbweight head-on again in the form of the recently acquired 1997 Ford Scorpio Ultima 2.3 16v Auto Estate.
This time it is a vastly different figure in the Ford Owner Handbook and on the Ford Scorpio Specific Data Sheet to the actual weight,of the car. The weight given is for that very specific vehicle,taking into account it is not a vehicle with weight influencing options,or omissions.
The point being,that despite Ford appearing to comply and me believing that my previous comment referring to kerbweight,"when you can establish correctly what it is",was about to de-bunked; the figure still needed the driver allowance 68kgs+7kgs luggage (75kgs) adding to it. Then the VOSA spec' weighbridge showed the figure to be 99kgs lighter than the declared weight. As the figure that is published has a footnote to say "Weights in Kilos. Assumes full fluid levels. 90% full tank of fuel and no driver",why can't the correct figure be shown and stated as in compliance with EU Directive 95/48/EC. That way there is no DIY conclusion/maths exercise,it would be conclusive.
The sad fact is,the only way to know your Kerbweight & MiRO despite any future massaging of figures is to go to public weighbridge that complies with the 0.5% accuracy of the VOSA bridges. They are becoming more available for Self Use by The Public.Indeed I believe that some VOSA sites are now accessible by the public,without being invited to FOLLOW ME.

 

[TheTravellingRooster]

Kerb weight is only relevent to the Caravan Club recomendation, which is only relevent to caravans. And in real life, kerbweight is variable.
602

Hi 602. Excuse me,but how can you make the above statement?.Kerbweight is not only relevant to the recommendation by the Caravan Club or for that matter even The Camping & Caravanning Club or any other club or organisation the wants to promote safe practice to beginners/nebbie/novice caravanners or towing in general.
In 'real life' as you call it,of course kerbweight is variable,as are all vehicles variable. The one common link to the phrase kerbweight was an attempt to HARMONISE or ALL SINGING OFF THE SAME HYMN SHEET by the introduction of EU Directive 95/48/EC on the 20th of September 1995.That way there was or should have been a Common Ground Rule laid do. Oh Ye,Ho Ho.

 

[Lutz]

Just want to point out that there is no legal definition of kerbweight. What is and what is not included in kerbweight is covered purely by convention but has no legal significance so, in principle, anyone can interpret kerbweight as they see fit. Usually it is assumed to include a full fuel tank but no driver.
The law still refers to an equally obsolescent term 'unladen weight' which included neither fuel nor any driver. However, the DfT now interprets unladen weight as being the same as MIRO, i.e. with a 90% full fuel tank and a 75kg allowance for the driver and miscellaneneous sundry items. This should also be the same as the 'Mass in Service' quoted in Section 4 Item G of the V5c certificate. It is always specific to each and every vehicle so brochures, databases, etc. can only be a rough guideline.

 

[TheTravellingRooster]

Just want to point out that there is no legal definition of kerbweight. What is and what is not included in kerbweight is covered purely by convention but has no legal significance so, in principle, anyone can interpret kerbweight as they see fit. Usually it is assumed to include a full fuel tank but no driver.
The law still refers to an equally obsolescent term 'unladen weight' which included neither fuel nor any driver. However, the DfT now interprets unladen weight as being the same as MIRO, i.e. with a 90% full fuel tank and a 75kg allowance for the driver and miscellaneneous sundry items. This should also be the same as the 'Mass in Service' quoted in Section 4 Item G of the V5c certificate. It is always specific to each and every vehicle so brochures, databases, etc. can only be a rough guideline.

Hi Lutz & to you all. "this should also be the same as ************** ",however, should and is are a very long way apart. Your reference to the DfT and there NOW interpretation of unladen weight really is going to confuse an already Pickle Brained section of the Newbie/Beginner/Novice Caravanner Brigade. It is the same give or take a ,'.!? as the EU Directive 95/48/EC that I have been carping on about for the duration of my involvement on this forum and it seems forever on one other in particular. It is quoted in The Practical Caravan Magazine and has been for some time now,it is in the Blue Pages Section. This is nonsense,to have the DfT butting in and redefining an old reference. Unladen weight is is going to cause no end of head scratching. Mass in service makes a lot more sense. This would then align in a **** eyed way with the EU Directive. The one that has continually been denied of its existence on this forum,even though it is in the printed magazine.
The burning question is when are the manufacturers going to put figures into the sales brochures and onto the data bases that concur with this now NEW definition?
It seems to me that DVLA,DfT,the EU Think Tank and the major bodies within the caravan publishing world should all get together and write a new and standardised definition and glossary for publication across Europe. When agreed, a copy could be posted on the .gov site in a PDF format and throw a party to celebrate unity at last. That could be held at the NEC with free parking for all that turn up,caravans in tow.

 

[Lutz]

As long as the law talks about 'unladen weight' but this is not documented anywhere there is bound to remain some confusion. This confusion will be added to as long as many sources still refer to kerbweight when they actually mean MIRO (or Mass in Service).
The situation is a lot clearer in Europe where the EU definition has gained acceptance throughout the industry and all 'old' terms have long since been discarded.
When I contacted the DfT they couldn't understand the concern and the need to get things sorted out once and for all. Their attitude was rather indifferent even after I mentioned that differences of over 100kg could be at stake.

 

[Steve L]

This just typifies how muddled and confusing eu and uk towing laws are.

It's exactly why vehicle manufacturers should be persuaded to have a harmonised VIN plate system clearly stating the total weight of the vehicle and the gross train weight. It could also display axle weights too.

We have a basically unified system for HGV's and every driver knows exactly what he/she should be loading to.

Although I've been driving cars since April 15th 1977, I would still support a trailer test for all drivers and not limit it to post Jan 1997. BTW, I have held HGV1 license but handed it in at 45 not long after I was diagnosed with adult sleep apnea. Wether or not I could of still drove a 38 tonner on a days only basis. You see I put health & safety on the roads as number 1 priority and I see enough dozy drivers out there anyway. As I'm now a leisure driver as such, it doesn't matter how many times I stop for a rest. There are plenty of truckers out there who have been forced to drive tired by scrutinising transport managers who only want more done faster and they don't care how.

 

[Lutz]

It's exactly why vehicle manufacturers should be persuaded to have a harmonised VIN plate system clearly stating the total weight of the vehicle and the gross train weight. It could also display axle weights too.

To my knowledge, manufacturers already have a harmonised VIN plate system stating:
1. MTPLM (Max. Gross Vehicle Weight)
2. Maximum Gross Train Weight
3. Maximum front axle load
4. Maximum rear axle load
There is no requirement to show the MIRO on the plate.

 

[ProfAlGoogle]

Not quite correct Steve,

"We have a basically unified system for HG V's and every driver knows exactly what he/she should be loading to."

Most HGV trailers vary in unladen weight, as do tractor units, does it have 3 axles or 2 axles, so the common denominator in both cases is the vehicle plate, which will allow you to determine your payload. the same applies to cars/caravans, my Bailey California displays it`s MIRO/MTPLM, clearly visible next to the entrance door, likewise under the bonnet of my Volvo all the relevant information will be found on a metal plate.

BTW, Articulated trucks gross at 44 tons.

 

[TheTravellingRooster]

As long as the law talks about 'unladen weight' but this is not documented anywhere there is bound to remain some confusion. This confusion will be added to as long as many sources still refer to kerbweight when they actually mean MIRO (or Mass in Service).
The situation is a lot clearer in Europe where the EU definition has gained acceptance throughout the industry and all 'old' terms have long since been discarded.
When I contacted the DfT they couldn't understand the concern and the need to get things sorted out once and for all. Their attitude was rather indifferent even after I mentioned that differences of over 100kg could be at stake.

Hi to you all out there. Whilst I can agree with with a great deal of what Lutz has made mention of I fail to see the common use of the term MiRO in relation to both motor vehicles (including motor-homes) and caravans; as things stand at present. Now, this is not an invitation for Meddling Europe but if the use of the term MiRO was applied retrospectively onto all of the modern generation caravans;that is to say, those that have an on-board loo and water heater of the Carver/Truma type that can be filled to align with the now new shift of the MiRO interpretation there would be parity. In real terms the inclusion of the 68kgs driver+7kgs luggage is a disparity;in that the fluid & fuel put the motor vehicle at 'The Ready to Use State' as is the Caravan with the new MiRO. There is a balance/similarity in 'Their Ready to Use State'.
The downside of this unofficial proposal is that the years of campaigning and eventual massaging of figure to "up the anti" on kerbweight to account for cars getting heavier will take a backward slide. Alternatively a single 68kg passenger could be allowed to ride in the caravan,suitably restrained of course with a full racing harness type of restraint. In the case of a Fixed Bed Model, the caravan passenger could be straight jacketed and strapped down into the bed.
Now for those of you that think I have really lost my marbles,the last paragraph is very definitely 'Tongue in Cheek'. There again give Meddling Europe a sniff of a notion and watch that space.

 

[TheTravellingRooster]

Not quite correct Steve,

"We have a basically unified system for HG V's and every driver knows exactly what he/she should be loading to."

Most HGV trailers vary in unladen weight, as do tractor units, does it have 3 axles or 2 axles, so the common denominator in both cases is the vehicle plate, which will allow you to determine your payload. the same applies to cars/caravans, my Bailey California displays it`s MIRO/MTPLM, clearly visible next to the entrance door, likewise under the bonnet of my Volvo all the relevant information will be found on a metal plate.

BTW, Articulated trucks gross at 44 tons.

The metal plate that you refer to is the Vin Plate,this provides the Vin/Chassis number & Engine Number and essentially it gives the Gross Vehicle Weight,The Train Weight,The Maximum load on both the front & rear axles. Also in raised letter & number format it gives other details relevant to the build,the country of origin of the build,paint code and a lot more.
This Vin Plate is the first port of reference for VOSA if you have been invited to "FOLLOW ME". Then they will look at your caravan weight plate. Get it wrong and you don't escape their 0.5% accurate Dynamic Axle Weighbridges. They will initiate a Traffic Patrol Officer and if serious enough they will be supported by the CPS.

 

[Lutz]

Hi to you all out there. Whilst I can agree with with a great deal of what Lutz has made mention of I fail to see the common use of the term MiRO in relation to both motor vehicles (including motor-homes) and caravans; as things stand at present. Now, this is not an invitation for Meddling Europe but if the use of the term MiRO was applied retrospectively onto all of the modern generation caravans;that is to say, those that have an on-board loo and water heater of the Carver/Truma type that can be filled to align with the now new shift of the MiRO interpretation there would be parity. In real terms the inclusion of the 68kgs driver+7kgs luggage is a disparity;in that the fluid & fuel put the motor vehicle at 'The Ready to Use State' as is the Caravan with the new MiRO. There is a balance/similarity in 'Their Ready to Use State'.
The downside of this unofficial proposal is that the years of campaigning and eventual massaging of figure to "up the anti" on kerbweight to account for cars getting heavier will take a backward slide. Alternatively a single 68kg passenger could be allowed to ride in the caravan,suitably restrained of course with a full racing harness type of restraint. In the case of a Fixed Bed Model, the caravan passenger could be straight jacketed and strapped down into the bed.
Now for those of you that think I have really lost my marbles,the last paragraph is very definitely 'Tongue in Cheek'. There again give Meddling Europe a sniff of a notion and watch that space.

I think you'll find that EU Directive 95/48/EC applies only to motor vehicles of Category M1 and not to caravans which are normally Category O2 so the payload provisions of the Directive do not apply to caravans.
The Directive also uses the term MIRO exclusively. The term 'kerbweight' is not mentioned anywhere.

 

[TheTravellingRooster]

Hi to you all out there. Whilst I can agree with with a great deal of what Lutz has made mention of I fail to see the common use of the term MiRO in relation to both motor vehicles (including motor-homes) and caravans; as things stand at present. Now, this is not an invitation for Meddling Europe but if the use of the term MiRO was applied retrospectively onto all of the modern generation caravans;that is to say, those that have an on-board loo and water heater of the Carver/Truma type that can be filled to align with the now new shift of the MiRO interpretation there would be parity. In real terms the inclusion of the 68kgs driver+7kgs luggage is a disparity;in that the fluid & fuel put the motor vehicle at 'The Ready to Use State' as is the Caravan with the new MiRO. There is a balance/similarity in 'Their Ready to Use State'.
The downside of this unofficial proposal is that the years of campaigning and eventual massaging of figure to "up the anti" on kerbweight to account for cars getting heavier will take a backward slide. Alternatively a single 68kg passenger could be allowed to ride in the caravan,suitably restrained of course with a full racing harness type of restraint. In the case of a Fixed Bed Model, the caravan passenger could be straight jacketed and strapped down into the bed.
Now for those of you that think I have really lost my marbles,the last paragraph is very definitely 'Tongue in Cheek'. There again give Meddling Europe a sniff of a notion and watch that space.

I think you'll find that EU Directive 95/48/EC applies only to motor vehicles of Category M1 and not to caravans which are normally Category O2 so the payload provisions of the Directive do not apply to caravans.
The Directive also uses the term MIRO exclusively. The term 'kerbweight' is not mentioned anywhere.

Yes Lutz. I have never refered to the EU Dirctive 95/48/EC in relation to anything other than a motor vehicle,specifically the car.
I have used MiRO or MTPLM in other than reference to caravans.
If you are taking my reference/suggestion about a caravan passenger as payload in the sense of the driver at 68kgs in the car,it was Tonge in Cheek. Then again Europe might see it in a different light. As I infered,give them half of a notion.

 

[ProfAlGoogle]

The metal plate that you refer to is the Vin Plate,this provides the Vin/Chassis number & Engine Number and essentially it gives the Gross Vehicle Weight,The Train Weight,The Maximum load on both the front & rear axles. Also in raised letter & number format it gives other details relevant to the build,the country of origin of the build,paint code and a lot more.
This Vin Plate is the first port of reference for VOSA if you have been invited to "FOLLOW ME". Then they will look at your caravan weight plate. Get it wrong and you don't escape their 0.5% accurate Dynamic Axle Weighbridges. They will initiate a Traffic Patrol Officer and if serious enough they will be supported by the CPS
"FOLLOW ME". Yes on a few occasions as an ex HGV class 1 driver, and never been prosecuted for being overweight, gross or axle, I honestly cant understand the confusion, in the case of my Bailey California MTPLM= 15000 KG , Tow car has a manufacturers maximum towed limit of 18000 kg, all weights relating to the car including 100 kg for the roof rack are clearly printed in the owners manual for all to see, likewise said information is visible to all on both car and caravan, as is on HGV vehicles, so where is the confusion? Or am I missing a vital point having just returned from the pub (hastens to add with wife driving, T Total lol)

 

[Lutz]

...... in the case of my Bailey California MTPLM= 15000 KG , Tow car has a manufacturers maximum towed limit of 18000 kg, all weights relating to the car including 100 kg for the roof rack are clearly printed in the owners manual for all to see, likewise said information is visible to all on both car and caravan, as is on HGV vehicles, so where is the confusion? Or am I missing a vital point having just returned from the pub (hastens to add with wife driving, T Total lol)

Blimey, that must be quote some outfit you've got there, Cookieones. A caravan with a 15 tonne MTPLM and a towcar able to tow 18 tonnes. No wonder you need to be an ex-HGV driver to move something like that.

 

[ProfAlGoogle]

Now let that be a warning of the pitfalls of the amber nectar (and a wee dram of Scottish water) well spotted Lutz, pmsl, 100 lines and now standing at the back of the class with the infamous "D" cap on! should have been 1500, 1800, respectively.

PS Lutz, are you suffering with insomnia?

Allan.