Readers Letter in April issue of Practical Caravan Magazine

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi all,
while sitting here with insomnia going through the posts written in the archives and relating to this thread after reading it again I realised a omission that I had intended to write in my last post.
regarding newbies towing high ratios, that is while my last combination with the megane was nearly 97% and a one point only 25kg under the gross train weght it did tow beautifully in the 3 years I towed with it. I did both ends of the country from st austell to ullapool and margate to anglesey, which is nothing new exept on one trip to dornoch our daughter came with us with the Sil unfortunatly I was taken ill comming up to the last weekend and my daughter had to drive us home as I could not, she had never driven with a van in tow ever, but we arrived home in a time that I would have been proud of without any problems en route save for stopping every 50miles for me, it is not that there is anything special about this event, exept to say that although 97% was not ideal and that she coped with it, but rather than it was the loading, balance and stability of the combo that made it possible not the ratio as if that was the case we would not have got home.
while at it speaking of ratios it is by sheer fluke and coinsidence that the new meriva @ 1446kg to the bailey is a 73% match and something I am not used to, wonder what it tows like?? I tell you when we get back in may,
colin

 

[xtrailman]

I completely agree with Roger L , comments.
The 85% guide for beginners is too often rubbished by a couple of people with entrenched views.
I think some posters forget what towing for the first time is like, perhaps it was that long ago?
While i tow at 92%, and i am considering towing near to 100%, there is no doubt in my mind that a lower ratio is by far the best option.
I tow only above 85% due to economical reasons.

 

[Jayster]

I got into a bit of a spat with a fellow forum member on another site. A newbie who had never towed asked the question " will my car tow this van"
He got the usual get as close to 85% match as possible....
I even went on the CC website and did a outfit match for him... To my horror it came out at 110%.... The other member who on his profile states in his profile, that he is an Advanced Driving Instructor, told him just to balance everything out as the 85% rule was not legal....
I spent £11,000s making sure my outfit fell within the 85%... Money that I could of spent on far better things as there was nothing wrong with my other car, other than it was an outfit match of 94%...
Amazes me why people say " It's ok , do it" They be the first to be moaning if an accident happened and someone was hurt....

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

I spent £11,000s making sure my outfit fell within the 85%... Money that I could of spent on far better things as there was nothing wrong with my other car, other than it was an outfit match of 94%...
Amazes me why people say " It's ok , do it" They be the first to be moaning if an accident happened and someone was hurt....

hi, just one question well 2 really, did you try towing with the other car and what was it like or did you just assume it would not be ok because it was over 85%
the reason I ask is because and I appologise for going over old ground, but at the figure you quote removing the average nose weight @7% and then recalulating the actual TOW LOAD it would have been approx 87% anyway. as I have tried to explain in my previous posts it is not the 85% I have a issue with it is the way it is calculated there are just too many variables for it to be a rule.
the recommendation was fine when it tried to put a safe figure on a combo when talking about a lunar clubman towed by a hillman hunter but things have changed since then a new passat is a completely different animal.

secondly. "Amazes me why people say " It's ok , do it" They be the first to be moaning if an accident happened and someone was hurt...." I along with the other 100% of forum users would be upset and horrified at learning that someone had been involved in a accident while towing irrispective of how or why the the said incident happend, and it would be a long time after the investigation before it was undersood what had gone wrong.
but that aside do you know what really gives me the "willies" when a newbie writes and there are plenty of examples in the achives " we are new to caravaning and are about to take delivery of our new 640 whatever it is do you think our what ever it is will tow it ok as the match is about 90%" what do I think "well I think it's like passing your driving test on monday and buying a ferrari on tuesday" not recommended for a newbie immaterial of the weight ratio? and thats another reason I don't like the formula.

 

[Parksy]

..............Given the very nature of the (Rule) which is based on a general concensus of what might be best advice for new comers there is bound to be a range of views. Providing those that perhaps don't agree articulate an argument in favour of their views surely people are sensible enough to draw their own conclusions?
David

Although I'd tend to share the general concensus that the 85% ratio between towing vehicle and trailer is as good a starting point for novice towcar drivers as any, the worth of the actual figure was not the point that I have tried to make although Roger L who had his letter published did in fact appear to be making the 85% the crux of his point.
My point is that the blizzard of argument and counter argument which inevitably follows any fairly simple enquiry from a new forum member and which can drag on for weeks tends to obscure anything of any value in the replies.
Although several long time forum members who are experienced caravanners have contributed to this particular thread to say that the 85% starting point for novice towcar drivers is in their opinion of doubtful value, more often than not it is a very small minority of forum members who tend to obscure any useful advice given in a reply with this constant argument about one single facet of what a novice towcar driver and new caravanner may want to know.
It has not gone unnoticed that when these long protracted arguments are articulated the new forum member who originally asked the question has in the meanwhile begun to wish that they hadn't asked, and decided instead to use a different caravan forum, so Practical Caravan loses yet another active forum member while the same minority continue to repeat the same old arguments ad nauseum.

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi parksy,
while as you know I am of a different opinion as to the validity of putting a hard and fast figure on what is really a complex issue. I must agree that at times it could be off putting when a question is asked and then followed by 40 answers all different and also agree with your sentiment on the outcome when the newbie just wants a simple yes or no answer.

it is to this end that I have stated that if PCV forum wishes to go with a particular figure in a catch all situation then I will for one be happy to go along with it (reservations aside) and after this particular thread has run it's course will probably not mention it again.

however one suggestion that I would make to any newbie wether a experienced solo driver or not is to go on a towing course as a first priority if possible before buying a van and the look at all the criteria invovled including the 85% recomendation at some later stage,

driving technique for me is the most important aspect of succesful towing next to loading and probably the reason my daughter got us home she learned to tow on the 400 mile journey with tips from me, a towing course while being short will give the newbie confidence that may otherwise be denied to them and assist their choices when the time comes to buy the van.

 

[DavidKlyne]

Although I'd tend to share the general concensus that the 85% ratio between towing vehicle and trailer is as good a starting point for novice towcar drivers as any, the worth of the actual figure was not the point that I have tried to make although Roger L who had his letter published did in fact appear to be making the 85% the crux of his point.
My point is that the blizzard of argument and counter argument which inevitably follows any fairly simple enquiry from a new forum member and which can drag on for weeks tends to obscure anything of any value in the replies.

Steve
That happens on every forum I belong to! Best that we don't talk about Reverse polarity

What surprises me about the letter writer is that he is often vociferous about not accepting things that cannot be substantiated by evidence. In general that is what people are saying, whilst as a general guideline they are happy with it, there is none or little factual evidence to support it. Two years ago I had a hip replacement. Recently I was called but to the hospital for some tests because of a scare regarding metal on metal replacement. Mine is ceramic on ceramic. It was interesting that the Doctor told me that it is not longer acceptable to call upon past experience and to use that as anecdotal evidence but instead proper research has to be carried out to support any findings. That is not that far removed from the 85% (rule)

Although several long time forum members who are experienced caravanners have contributed to this particular thread to say that the 85% starting point for novice towcar drivers is in their opinion of doubtful value, more often than not it is a very small minority of forum members who tend to obscure any useful advice given in a reply with this constant argument about one single facet of what a novice towcar driver and new caravanner may want to know.
It has not gone unnoticed that when these long protracted arguments are articulated the new forum member who originally asked the question has in the meanwhile begun to wish that they hadn't asked, and decided instead to use a different caravan forum, so Practical Caravan loses yet another active forum member while the same minority continue to repeat the same old arguments ad nauseum.

That is not the way I read things. Even if you don't agree with the idea of the 85% (rule) because its seems to be a figure plucked out of the ether, albeit with good intent, its very unlikely that anyone would suggest that newcomers should tow near or in excess of kerbweight even if it were legal to do so by the towing weight of the vehicle. But what do we do if a newcomer has purchased a caravan which means he is towing at a 90% figure, do we tell him to go out and buy a new car?
David

 

[Parksy]

There are some very good points being made in this topic and it's a shame that Roger L is not around at the moment to explain or defend the points that he made in his letter. Perhaps he's on holiday.
Most experienced caravanners who use internet forums to offer advice are careful to point out that there are many safety related pieces of information and advice that need to be considered, the 85% guideline doesn't guarantee outfit stability, especially if other factors are disregarded.
In the case of a novice using an outfit with a higher than 85% ratio I'd like to think that forum users would advise caution whilst re-iterating the importance of correct loading, tyre safety, good towing practice such as care when overtaking and where not to attempt an overtaking manoeuvre. Colin's point about towing courses would be relevant where someone new to caravanning was considering towing at or above 90%.

I have no axe to grind as far as the 85% guideline for novice towcar drivers is concerned, I know that there is no published data to back up the 85% figure but if it was 'plucked from the ether' the 85% figure at least allows for some margin of error.

When I see posts in reply to inexperienced caravanners which argue against the 85% figure by stating that it's perfectly legal to tow at 100%, and a protracted forum argument develops which causes the newbie to go elsewhere, I can't help wondering exactly what the motivation is for someone to advocate a high ratio for a beginner which leaves little or no margin for error either in loading or driving technique.

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi Parksy, I agree it is a shame Roger does seem to be around at the moment, maybe he will enlighten us when he comes back ,
I also have not really got any axe to grind with the recomendatios or with the points you make regarding newbies on the forum to be honest I don't think most of us notice very much how many or how few posts some members make of course the regulars are allways around but others come and go the reason for this is unknown, I will take your word for it that is is to do with controversy some of the time.
I will let you into a little secret a guy who i used to work with bought a old caravan, at every break thats all he talked about I advised him the best I could but obviously could not answer every question, I suggested that he joined a forum and told him I was a member of the Practical caravan one, where there was a wealth of information and all his question could be answered, he joined us and asked a couple of questions added a couple of posts then stopped, gradually he stopped talking about his van, when I asked him why he had stopped he said "well I know most of it now anyway? but most of them just talk about there new vans and tow cars" and techincal stuff thats goes over my head, I tried to explain that the techinical stuff was probably the most important but he declined to accept it. most weekends he is up the M62 with his van, but up to me leaving he never mentioned it again.
perhaps he was part of the percentage you speak of, or possibly he had just decided that he had gained enough information to enjoy his hobby in his own way as most of us do, one thing is for sure, forums are made up of different people with different experiences and opinions it is sure fire that on any subject there will be differences of opinion with the odd light hearted comment thown in that occasionaly is taken the wrong way, there is also a core of members who have a draw full of T shirts and wish to convey there experiences to the new to the hobby that may not be aware of some of the pitfalls around the corner.
little supprise then that some threads are protracted and complicated veering off at every corner, it is also a shame that sometimes the simple bit of advice that could make the world of difference is missed by someone who does not know like plugging the EHU into the van before the hook up point.because the price of electric and tariffs are talked about in great detail,
wether we like or not the technical stuff is important as are all the legal aspects of our hobby while some may find it off putting there is no doubt that ignoring them is foolhardy
the 85% recommendation is for me one such topic at it conseption 30 odd years ago when cars had drum brakes and virtually nothing was regulated it seemed a sensible "rule of thumb" for all caravanners to follow an approach that was aimed at getting those with caravans to think about what they were doing in a different way an ideal solution to solve a growiing problem of heavier vans been produced.
wether it has any relevence today is open to question as regulations take out any of the doubt there may have been at one time, the percentage rule has carried on as some sort of standard to be followed eventhough legistlation and technology has left it behind,

is it prudent then to advise newbies to follow this ancient rule as a recommendation when it sell by date as well past? that is the question? in a way and this is where i see the logic put forward if the rule is recommended it could be said that there is less chance that the tow car could under perform, there wont be any problem on hills or maintaining momentum, the unit will brake more efficiently, and there is less chance of the tail wagging the dog. if this rule of thumb is put forward for beginers you have to accept it. even though it seems too simplistic to be of any use to the majority.

.

 

[Dustydog]

Colin's point about towing courses would be relevant where someone new to caravanning was considering towing at or above 90%.

Hi Parksy,
IMO every newbie should be encouraged to go on a professional caravan towing course. Some years ago SWMBO did the CC one at Evesham. It was day and a half course, hands on . She was given a most informative guide book . Some of the techniques were new to me and I use them now! So you can teach an old dog new tricks.

It is a shame we get bogged down with only one of the many crucial factors that leads to a safe tow. Hopefully Colin's words of wisdom will enlighten a newbie. And yes driving technique is very important. Advanced observation etc based on the Police Roadcraft book is invaluable.

 

[Lutz]

Well said, Dustydog. A caravan towing course would be a lot more effective than a dogmatic approach to any weight ratio recommendation, whatever the percentage. One will then learn to appreciate that the demands placed on the driver will increase as the weight ratio increases and it will be easier to come to terms with what one feels confident with, whether it be 70%, 85%, 100% or anything in between.
For the first 10 years of my caravanning 'career' I was towing at 100% and I never felt uneasy with the outfit, but then I may just have been lucky to have an inherently docile combination. Having an electronic stabiliser years before AlKo brought their ATC on the market probably also helped to put my mind at ease in the knowledge that there would always be something there if things were to go seriously wrong due to lack of experience.

 

[ProfJohnL]

I am dismayed at this attempt to stifle proper debate about this important subject.

Towing caravans is not something that you can do without taking proper care and attention, and people looking for advice need the facts so they can make informed proper decisions.

On the face of it suggesting 85% as a guideline is simple and in principal concurs with part of my own advice of keeping the trailer weight as small as possible. But there have been enough reports of incidents on forums and in the press, where apparently despite keeping to the 85% guideline some caravanners have had serious towing incidents.

It is not possible to quantify the numbers of such incidents and to compare them to the total number of journeys made and of course any other issues that might be involved, but the fact there have been some, demonstrates that the 85% guidance on its own is either not always right, or there needs to be greater emphasis given to other towing criteria.

I advocate that good towing is only achieved when a combination of factors have been addressed, and that despite the industries focus on weight ratio, I believe that other factors are probably more significant. That is not to say that weight ratio is not important, just that its needs to be considered in a wider context.

So is it not right to raise these issues to show that weight ratio alone is not a guarantee of good towing. I think it would be irresponsible to gag such important matters. If the truth makes newcomers unhappy, then it suggests they are not really prepared for the rigorous of towing caravanning.

The second area of issue is the language used or perhaps misused when describing the 85% guideline. It has been a tenant of the forum that spelling and grammar used by forum members should not be held up as bar of any sort, and I agree, My own spelling and grammar is far from perfect, but when it comes down to technicalities where mistakes can make a big difference to the meaning of a particular point, then I think it is fair and right to point out the mistake.

In the context of the industries 85%, and being fair to the industry, they have always called it a guideline, they do not hold it up as a gold standard for everyone to try an achieve, but as a general area or field. A colloquial term is a 'rule of thumb' Unfortunately too many people shorten the term to just 'rule' and that has a very different and serious implications: A new reader of the forum and any other source will be looking for guidance on number of issues, so when they see the '85% rule' it takes on meaning that if they deviate there will be consequences, so they strive to hit 85% at all costs and to the exclusion of other perhaps more important criteria. When they have difficulty in achieving it they may write for advice and of course they refer to the '85% rule' which further reinforces the misconception for other readers.

This has happened so much that the original meaning and intention of the guidance has been overshadowed and adherence to the 'rule' has become a mantra.

Is it wrong to redress the dogmatic misrepresentation of the guidance?

I am grateful to a number of the previous contributors on this thread who have already very eloquently pointed out many of the strict inadequacies of the calculation of towing ratio's and how they don't actually represent the real life conditions of an outfit. So I wont go there in any detail as part of this contribution.

But I do feel we need to continue to push for clarification on how the 85% guidance came about.

I am sure that when the advice was first given, it was an attempt to provide guidance at a time when there was an absence of technical data about towing capability of cars etc. To that extent any guidance was better than none.

• But why 85%? why not some other value?
• What process was used to formulate the figure?
• What data or evidence was used to support the process?
• Who actually carried out the process, and how were they qualified to do so?
• Is the guidance still valid or should an alternative figure or consideration be used?
• Should guidance be broadened to rebalance the position of towing ratio in the mix of other important criteria?

Until these questions have proper answers, the debate about the industry consensus continues to be very important.
To counter a posting already made, I venture to suggest that by asking these questions shows that I and others do not have entrenched views - we are asking for validation and verification and if its proven to still be valid we are quite happy to change. The entrenched view is the one that doggedly follows a tradition without asking if it actually is the best way to achieve the end - and caravanning is riddled with traditions.

A poor question is not foolish, but the person who does not ask the question is foolish.

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi all,
good post John, I think there is some concencus here and get the feeling "although I dont know how to put it into words correctly"
That there could be a better way to advise the new to caravanning exactly what are the important factors to be considered when attemting to embark on thier new hobby. I also get the feeling that while there is a difference of opinion has to how this should be done, there is a need to do it concisely and if possible with clear advice that is easily understood by those who know nothing about what they have decided to under take
one consern I have is that re-enforcing an ancient rule "sorry about the terminology" muddies the water somewhat and the priority it places in the the grand scheme of things along side legistlation, loading, and driving technique.
it is in the wrong place, where as in rogers letter he seems to advocate it as a "high priority" and objects to those who do not agree
I would put it somewhat further down the list probably about 4th. after.
1. legistlation " if it is not legal you can't do it.
2. loading "if it not loaded right you are at risk of instability no mater what the ratio is"
3 driving technique "you have to know what the vans doing on the back" and how to cope with it a towing course would help no end
and then 4. try and get the combo weight ratio down to reasonable level 85% seem a fair starting point. irrespective of how it was arrived at.
I dont think there is an attempt to stiffle debate it is more a question of the debate iself can be off putting in this Parksy could well be right, untill a concrete solution is found I assume the debate will continue as it has for over 30 years since it's conseption it is only it's priority that is in doubt I would think that over time this will diminish as technology and legislation moves on even further.
if the PC team wishes to make recommendations as to it use in the mean time backed by Roger and others well thats fine where it acctually fits in relevence my be in question but that is up to them.
I have my conserns but that will stand, myself I have the opposite problem as I shall this year be a newbie? as it will be the first time in 40 years that I have towed a van that is less than 70% of the weight of the car and unsure how it will react in relation to what I am used to, got any tips!! anyone??.
colin

 

[Parksy]

I am dismayed at this attempt to stifle proper debate about this important subject.

I'm not sure whether you mean my comments or Roger L's letter to the Practical Caravan Magazine but if the former is the case because there is not 100% agreement with a point that you amongst others insist on repeating this hardly constitutes 'an attempt to stifle debate'.

Towing caravans is not something that you can do without taking proper care and attention, and people looking for advice need the facts so they can make informed proper decisions.

On the face of it suggesting 85% as a guideline is simple and in principal concurs with part of my own advice of keeping the trailer weight as small as possible. But there have been enough reports of incidents on forums and in the press, where apparently despite keeping to the 85% guideline some caravanners have had serious towing incidents.
It is not possible to quantify the numbers of such incidents and to compare them to the total number of journeys made and of course any other issues that might be involved, but the fact there have been some, demonstrates that the 85% guidance on its own is either not always right, or there needs to be greater emphasis given to other towing criteria.

Neither you, I or anyone else has any data to show the cause of 'serious towing incidents' and neither is there any data to show the weight ratio between towing vehicle and caravan when these serious towing incidents have taken place.
No one is suggesting that the 85% guideline for novice towcar drivers should be given on it's own.

I advocate that good towing is only achieved when a combination of factors have been addressed, and that despite the industries focus on weight ratio, I believe that other factors are probably more significant. That is not to say that weight ratio is not important, just that its needs to be considered in a wider context.

I don't agree that the information providers such as clubs, publications and organisations do focus on weight ratio, the 85% guideline for novice towcar drivers forms only a small part of the overall guidance and advice that is available.

So is it not right to raise these issues to show that weight ratio alone is not a guarantee of good towing. I think it would be irresponsible to gag such important matters. If the truth makes newcomers unhappy, then it suggests they are not really prepared for the rigorous of towing caravanning.

No one has attempted to gag any safety related issues at least as far as forum moderators are concerned for this forum. Neither has anyone tried to suggest that weight ratio alone is any guarantee of safe and stable towing because experienced caravanners are fully aware that several factors make for a good towing experience and generally speaking a wide range of advice including the weight ratio for beginners recommendation given by the main clubs and organisations is offered when novice towcar drivers or potential new caravanners ask questions on the forum.

The second area of issue is the language used or perhaps misused when describing the 85% guideline. It has been a tenant of the forum that spelling and grammar used by forum members should not be held up as bar of any sort, and I agree, My own spelling and grammar is far from perfect, but when it comes down to technicalities where mistakes can make a big difference to the meaning of a particular point, then I think it is fair and right to point out the mistake.

In the context of the industries 85%, and being fair to the industry, they have always called it a guideline, they do not hold it up as a gold standard for everyone to try an achieve, but as a general area or field. A colloquial term is a 'rule of thumb' Unfortunately too many people shorten the term to just 'rule' and that has a very different and serious implications: A new reader of the forum and any other source will be looking for guidance on number of issues, so when they see the '85% rule' it takes on meaning that if they deviate there will be consequences, so they strive to hit 85% at all costs and to the exclusion of other perhaps more important criteria. When they have difficulty in achieving it they may write for advice and of course they refer to the '85% rule' which further reinforces the misconception for other readers.
This has happened so much that the original meaning and intention of the guidance has been overshadowed and adherence to the 'rule' has become a mantra.
Is it wrong to redress the dogmatic misrepresentation of the guidance?

I would concede that the '85% rule' when used to describe the recommendation may in some cases lead to a misconception that the 85% figure has some legal standing.
The only problem that I have when members decide to redress what they may regard as 'dogmatic misrepresentation' is that the rectification of this inadvertent misrepresentation usually develops into another full blown forum debate about the worth of the recommendation instead of simply correcting the grammatical error.

I am grateful to a number of the previous contributors on this thread who have already very eloquently pointed out many of the strict inadequacies of the calculation of towing ratio's and how they don't actually represent the real life conditions of an outfit. So I wont go there in any detail as part of this contribution.
But I do feel we need to continue to push for clarification on how the 85% guidance came about.
I am sure that when the advice was first given, it was an attempt to provide guidance at a time when there was an absence of technical data about towing capability of cars etc. To that extent any guidance was better than none.

• But why 85%? why not some other value?
• What process was used to formulate the figure?
• What data or evidence was used to support the process?
• Who actually carried out the process, and how were they qualified to do so?
• Is the guidance still valid or should an alternative figure or consideration be used?
• Should guidance be broadened to rebalance the position of towing ratio in the mix of other important criteria?

Until these questions have proper answers, the debate about the industry consensus continues to be very important.

The guidance is still better than none, what other recommendation would you suggest? None at all? A long winded debate on why we should insist on seeing data and written evidence before accepting any advice from anybody?
The advice from the authoritative sources gives a starting point for novices, taken in context with the other advice also offered by the same authoritative sources it provides a tangible figure which leaves room for error and which novice towcar drivers would do well to try not to exceed until they have gained sufficient experiece of towing.

To counter a posting already made, I venture to suggest that by asking these questions shows that I and others do not have entrenched views - we are asking for validation and verification and if its proven to still be valid we are quite happy to change. The entrenched view is the one that doggedly follows a tradition without asking if it actually is the best way to achieve the end - and caravanning is riddled with traditions.
A poor question is not foolish, but the person who does not ask the question is foolish.

Have you ever considered 'asking for validation and verification' away from queries from new forum members in order to allow them to try to assimilate the information that they may need, instead of them invariably having to read a confusing and sometimes heated technical debate on a subject about which they know very little?

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Parksy,

I have to say that in your opening post I detected a what I felt was a threat to curtail debate on these issues. Perhaps I have misread your intention, but that is the way it came across to me.

There have been quite a number of towing incident (by which I mean any report involving instability) where the correspondent has claimed they have been compliant with the 85% guideline. So it is relevant to this debate. I stated that we don't have access to the necessary data to confirm a link, but clearly some people do believe there is a link.

I do concede that point that the industry may not over emphasis the towing ratio, but just looking at the posts over the years it is clear that many caravanners do. We certainly hear of some dealers who offer compatibility advice based on weight ratio, so perhaps its not that weight ratio is emphasized, but more that other matters are under emphasised. The result is the much the same that many caravanners still use weight ratio as their major consideration when choosing cars or caravans and relating concerns about matches. Nothing wrong in that provided it is not the only consideration.

At least we generally agree about the incorrect use of the word 'rule' in connection with the industry guidance.

With respect of the use of the guidance, as you and most readers know I suggest that caravanners should keep the trailer weight as small as possible. So I am not advocating 'no advice'. However I do not automatically assume that any revised figure should be higher than present, in fact I have expressed the opinion in other threads that the recommendation may need to be lower than the current 85% whether by a fixed figure or by other means of assessment.

I have made a number of personal enquiries through various contacts I have in various different industry organisations about the source of the industry advice. No verifiable information has been forthcoming - and that worries me.

 

[Lutz]

I would seriously suggest that until such time as anyone is able to tell us under what conditions 85% are appropriate one should refrain from recommending anything other than keeping the weight ratio as low as possible. Putting any figure on the recommendation without any factual basis is rather like advising against towing when the wind speed exceeds 30mph (or any other arbitrary value). Everyone knows that towing in a force 12 gale is sheer stupidity and calm conditons are obviously not a problem, but where do you draw the line in between?

 

[Parksy]

Hello Parksy,

I have to say that in your opening post I detected a what I felt was a threat to curtail debate on these issues. Perhaps I have misread your intention, but that is the way it came across to me.

I'm not sure if you've seen the full text of Roger L's letter which was published in the April edition of Practical Caravan Magazine John but the initial reason for my original post was in defence of the forum because Roger L wrote that: 'Practical Caravan and it's forum have a duty to provide responsible advice to new caravanners.'
RogerL went on to imply that forum moderators may be at fault by allowing the undermining of the 85% guideline for new caravanners by a minority who ridicule this advice when it is offered to new forum members who ask about towing weight ratios.
If you had read and understood my opening post you would have seen that I pointed out that forum moderators do not censor or edit posts or comments which do not breach forum etiquette or the T&C's of form usage. I also made the point that editing or censorship of forum posts (on any subject) does not take place no matter what personal beliefs or views the moderator concerned may hold and then went on to express my broad support for the 85% recommendation for novice towcar drivers which comes from authoritative sources for want of something better.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Hello Parksy,

I have not seen RogerL's full letter in PC magazine, so my response was purely based on the content of this thread.

I am sorry if I misinterpreted your intentions, never the less I am pleased that you have reiterated the position of forum moderators in these situations.

 

[DavidKlyne]

Steve

Could you perhaps copy and paste the full text of the letter?

David

 

[Parksy]

I don't think that we're allowed to copy material directly from the magazine without the permission of the publisher David.
There's a warning in the magazine to that effect although I've used quotes from various magazine articles from time to time.
My main reason for opening this topic was to correct any impression given by Roger L that moderators could interfere with comments left on the forum without a very good reason and to demonstrate to casual browsers who may have seen the letter in the magazine that whatever anybody thinks personally or individually debate must be allowed to develop and continue.
If as a result of this particular discussion a forum concensus could be arrived at which encouraged safe towing practices whilst avoiding confusion when newbies ask questions about vehicle weights so much the better, at least this current discussion does not form part of a response to such an enquiry which is really what I find objectionable.

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi all,
as a compromise could it not be possible to get the PC team on board and the forum to advise newbies that " while the legal limit may be considerably higher it is recommended that the trailer weight be as low as possible" with all the other advice regarding loading noseweights and all the rest. leaving out any reference to a percentage,
this should satify everyone conserned
earlier it was mentioned that is was a shame Roger was not with us it is olso a shame that we have not heard from any of the PC team to clarify there position seeing as how it was a letter published in the magazine that prompted this topic,
I also understand why Parksy opened it up to counter allegations that moderators interfear with debates in some way and it exposed that myth, it is a pity though that the crux of the debate is around reccommending a percentage rule that is also a myth that roger seems to feel so strongly about
perhaps a few letters countering his claim could be published as well

 

[Parksy]

To be fair to the Practical Caravan team Colin, towcar editor David Motton wrote a very comprehensive reply to Roger L's letter.
David informed Roger L that broadly speaking Practical Caravan agree with him 'that the 85% matching guideline is a worthwhile rule of thumb, especially for beginners....'
David also pointed out that the guideline which he prefers not to refer to as a rule is explained in the 'Caravan Basics' page of the magazine each month.
David Motton said that the subject of towing vehicle weight matching was often the subject of questions in the magazine 'Talking Towcars' Q&A column and that there is a guide to towcar matching on the Advice section of this website.He went on to write that he thought that it was clear to anyone reading the magazine or the website that Practical Caravan 'supports the 85% guideline as a useful tool for inexperienced caravanners.'
After quoting Dr Jos Darling, the University of Bath towing physics expert, David Motton defended the freedom of the Practical Caravan forum by writing that unless forum posts were defamatory or offensive they should not be censored and this is also one of the main points that I'd like to undeline in my comments on this topic.
Practical Caravan Magazine welcomes readers letters from what I've seen, so perhaps those who wish to counter or disagree with Roger L's stance might care to write in? You can do it via email at: letters@practicalcaravan.com
The snail mail postal address is: Practical Caravan, Teddington Studios, Broom Road, Teddington, Middlesex, TW11 9BE

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi Parksy,
thanks for the reply I may just do that wether it is given air will be seen however I will have to get a copy of the mag to see exactly what was wrote and what the reply was

 

[Lutz]

hi all,
as a compromise could it not be possible to get the PC team on board and the forum to advise newbies that " while the legal limit may be considerably higher it is recommended that the trailer weight be as low as possible" with all the other advice regarding loading noseweights and all the rest. leaving out any reference to a percentage.

That's exactly what I would suggest, too, Colin, until we know more about the relevance of the 85% and under what conditions it applies.
On the other hand I see little chance of this happening so long as the various bodies affected (PC, CC, C+CC, etc.) continue to hide behind a cloak of common understanding without any one of them taking the lead to question the issue. As things stand at the moment, each organisation is leaning on an apparently authoritative external source without independently convincing themselves that the 85% is at all relevant.

 

[xtrailman]

I am dismayed at this attempt to stifle proper debate about this important subject.

I'm not sure whether you mean my comments or Roger L's letter to the Practical Caravan Magazine but if the former is the case because there is not 100% agreement with a point that you amongst others insist on repeating this hardly constitutes 'an attempt to stifle debate'.

Towing caravans is not something that you can do without taking proper care and attention, and people looking for advice need the facts so they can make informed proper decisions.

On the face of it suggesting 85% as a guideline is simple and in principal concurs with part of my own advice of keeping the trailer weight as small as possible. But there have been enough reports of incidents on forums and in the press, where apparently despite keeping to the 85% guideline some caravanners have had serious towing incidents.
It is not possible to quantify the numbers of such incidents and to compare them to the total number of journeys made and of course any other issues that might be involved, but the fact there have been some, demonstrates that the 85% guidance on its own is either not always right, or there needs to be greater emphasis given to other towing criteria.

Neither you, I or anyone else has any data to show the cause of 'serious towing incidents' and neither is there any data to show the weight ratio between towing vehicle and caravan when these serious towing incidents have taken place.
No one is suggesting that the 85% guideline for novice towcar drivers should be given on it's own.

I advocate that good towing is only achieved when a combination of factors have been addressed, and that despite the industries focus on weight ratio, I believe that other factors are probably more significant. That is not to say that weight ratio is not important, just that its needs to be considered in a wider context.

I don't agree that the information providers such as clubs, publications and organisations do focus on weight ratio, the 85% guideline for novice towcar drivers forms only a small part of the overall guidance and advice that is available.

So is it not right to raise these issues to show that weight ratio alone is not a guarantee of good towing. I think it would be irresponsible to gag such important matters. If the truth makes newcomers unhappy, then it suggests they are not really prepared for the rigorous of towing caravanning.

No one has attempted to gag any safety related issues at least as far as forum moderators are concerned for this forum. Neither has anyone tried to suggest that weight ratio alone is any guarantee of safe and stable towing because experienced caravanners are fully aware that several factors make for a good towing experience and generally speaking a wide range of advice including the weight ratio for beginners recommendation given by the main clubs and organisations is offered when novice towcar drivers or potential new caravanners ask questions on the forum.

The second area of issue is the language used or perhaps misused when describing the 85% guideline. It has been a tenant of the forum that spelling and grammar used by forum members should not be held up as bar of any sort, and I agree, My own spelling and grammar is far from perfect, but when it comes down to technicalities where mistakes can make a big difference to the meaning of a particular point, then I think it is fair and right to point out the mistake.

In the context of the industries 85%, and being fair to the industry, they have always called it a guideline, they do not hold it up as a gold standard for everyone to try an achieve, but as a general area or field. A colloquial term is a 'rule of thumb' Unfortunately too many people shorten the term to just 'rule' and that has a very different and serious implications: A new reader of the forum and any other source will be looking for guidance on number of issues, so when they see the '85% rule' it takes on meaning that if they deviate there will be consequences, so they strive to hit 85% at all costs and to the exclusion of other perhaps more important criteria. When they have difficulty in achieving it they may write for advice and of course they refer to the '85% rule' which further reinforces the misconception for other readers.
This has happened so much that the original meaning and intention of the guidance has been overshadowed and adherence to the 'rule' has become a mantra.
Is it wrong to redress the dogmatic misrepresentation of the guidance?

I would concede that the '85% rule' when used to describe the recommendation may in some cases lead to a misconception that the 85% figure has some legal standing.
The only problem that I have when members decide to redress what they may regard as 'dogmatic misrepresentation' is that the rectification of this inadvertent misrepresentation usually develops into another full blown forum debate about the worth of the recommendation instead of simply correcting the grammatical error.

I am grateful to a number of the previous contributors on this thread who have already very eloquently pointed out many of the strict inadequacies of the calculation of towing ratio's and how they don't actually represent the real life conditions of an outfit. So I wont go there in any detail as part of this contribution.
But I do feel we need to continue to push for clarification on how the 85% guidance came about.
I am sure that when the advice was first given, it was an attempt to provide guidance at a time when there was an absence of technical data about towing capability of cars etc. To that extent any guidance was better than none.

• But why 85%? why not some other value?
• What process was used to formulate the figure?
• What data or evidence was used to support the process?
• Who actually carried out the process, and how were they qualified to do so?
• Is the guidance still valid or should an alternative figure or consideration be used?
• Should guidance be broadened to rebalance the position of towing ratio in the mix of other important criteria?

Until these questions have proper answers, the debate about the industry consensus continues to be very important.

The guidance is still better than none, what other recommendation would you suggest? None at all? A long winded debate on why we should insist on seeing data and written evidence before accepting any advice from anybody?
The advice from the authoritative sources gives a starting point for novices, taken in context with the other advice also offered by the same authoritative sources it provides a tangible figure which leaves room for error and which novice towcar drivers would do well to try not to exceed until they have gained sufficient experiece of towing.

To counter a posting already made, I venture to suggest that by asking these questions shows that I and others do not have entrenched views - we are asking for validation and verification and if its proven to still be valid we are quite happy to change. The entrenched view is the one that doggedly follows a tradition without asking if it actually is the best way to achieve the end - and caravanning is riddled with traditions.
A poor question is not foolish, but the person who does not ask the question is foolish.

Have you ever considered 'asking for validation and verification' away from queries from new forum members in order to allow them to try to assimilate the information that they may need, instead of them invariably having to read a confusing and sometimes heated technical debate on a subject about which they know very little?

Well said parksy
And you didn't have to write a long winded essay!