Prado tow bar problem
Submitted: Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 15:18
ThreadID:
73467
Views:
19926
Replies:
8
FollowUps:
23
This Thread has been Archived
snailbait (Blue mntns)
Image Could Not Be FoundOn our recent travels, and we are still travelling, we experienced a complete failure of our genuine Toyota Prado towbar which was fitted in September 2008 by our local Toyota dealer. We have travelled some 20,000kms in the vehicle, but not of these kms had the van attached, we estimate around 15,000 kms with the van attached.
We had just arrived at Yarloop West Australia for the HF Club Meeting and we we driving up a slight incline into the
camping area when we heard a loud bang and someone told us that we had lost our Hayman Reese. We stopped the vehicle and got out and to our surprise the caravan was not attached to the vehicle but was at the bottom of the incline with the towbar broken and dug into the ground.
With the assistance of the Club Members our caravan was parked and then the looking began. We discovered that the towbar had cracked with the safety chains attached to the part that was on the ground. The safety factor of the towbar, when used with a Hayman Reese Weight Distribution Hitch, not in question as the towbar is rated at 2,500 kilos (caravan tare is 1700 kilos). The rated towball rate of the towbar is 250 kilos (estimated towball weight of the caravan is 200 kilos).
If you are using the same towbar and Hayman Reese Weight Distribution Hitch you should take a good look at it.
We were at the
Busselton Image Could Not Be FoundGet Together where this caused a great deal of discussion and interest amongst Club members.
If you would like to discuss this with me or receive a photo please leave me a message and I will reply. This could take a while as we are on the road until mid December.
snailbate
Reply By: Member -Dodger - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 15:45
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 15:45
Yes len told me about this happening at the meet.
Were you able to get it fixed under warranty or did you have to replace the bar then try for a claim?
We have many Prado owners in our 4wd club that tow large vans up to 2200kg loaded. They are hoping that this is a one off incident.
Have you subsequently heard of any similar failures?
Look forward to your reply.
AnswerID:
389705
Follow Up By: snailbait (Blue mntns) - Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:15
Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:15
Hi Dodg
They refused the claim, we had to buy a new towbar, we will continue when we get back to
Sydney.
We have heard of a incident on Fraser island
The tow bar has a tow raiting of 2500 kgs and a tow ball weight of 250 kgs we had 2000 kgs in the loaded caravan and a tow ball weight of 200 kgs, so there was a safety margin of approx 1/3 rd
Thanks for commenting
Terry
FollowupID:
657845
Reply By: toyocrusa - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 15:58
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 15:58
Hi Snailbait. Thank goodness you wereonly entering the Caravan Park. What a catastrophy it could have turned into with unimaginable results. I shiver thinking about it. I fitted a Hayman Recce bar to mmy Prado as I felt at the time that section of the Toyota bar being cast steel did not look sustantial enough. The H/R bar is fabricated and welded from square tube and plate. It also does not require so much to be cut out of the rear bar. I hope Toyota do some tests and furnish the results to the public as a matter of safety. Regards,Bob.
AnswerID:
389706
Follow Up By: snailbait (Blue mntns) - Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:19
Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:19
Hi toyocrusa
We were very luck that we were driving slow
thanks for the comments
Terry
FollowupID:
657846
Reply By: Honky - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 16:48
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 16:48
I am not a expert or anywhere near it ( what I know you could write in capitals on the back of a postage stamp) but the break looks more like a bleep ter of high tensile steel.
You would think being mild steel that it would show distortion and tearing.
May be some need to
check manufacturing processes.
Honky
AnswerID:
389712
Follow Up By: Patrol22 - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 08:55
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 08:55
Honky - that looks like cast to me - neither high tensile nor mild steel.
FollowupID:
657540
Follow Up By: snailbait (Blue mntns) - Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:22
Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:22
Hi Honky
yes it is cast iron
Thanks for the comments
Terry
FollowupID:
657847
Reply By: DIO - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 18:13
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 18:13
of the actual cause, it might be prudent for you to actually weigh your van in 'travel mode' as it could become an issue with warranty or even insurance.
AnswerID:
389727
Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 19:29
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 19:29
The ball weight as
well
Where was he Breaksafe connected to as if it worked properly the van should have just stopped.
Mine locked on in a van park the other day and the Croozer couldnt move it either back or forward.
FollowupID:
657490
Follow Up By: Fatso - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 21:40
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 21:40
1700 kg tare would definitely have to be over 2000 kg loaded. Even I would carry more than 300 kg.
You are right there Dio. At that weight the van to be legal should have breakaway brakes fitted & active.
FollowupID:
657511
Follow Up By: Member - Charlie M (SA) - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 22:28
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 22:28
Break safe starts at greater than 2000kg
Charlie
FollowupID:
657513
Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 22:56
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 22:56
Yes it does 2001kg ATM and a van of 1700kg would be unlikely to be under.
Should have it fitted just in case anyway if the manufacturer is a responsible one. Its Atm is so close it should have one
FollowupID:
657519
Follow Up By: Nomadic Navara - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 23:00
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 23:00
Brake safe is only required for vans of 2,000 kg GTM and above (not ATM.) A van with an ATM of 2,100 kg would have a GTM or around 1,900 kg.
PeterD
FollowupID:
657520
Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 23:32
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 23:32
You are probably correct but why the arbitrary weight.
Surely a van just under the weight as this one was would cause as much damage in a runaway as one 200kg heavier.
Another case of bureaucrats know best is it
I reckon all should have it.
Here is a perfect example of why.
It should also be an offence to connect it to any part of the towbar as
well.
I've got
mine connected to a separate ring on the chassis.
Cheers
FollowupID:
657525
Follow Up By: Patrol22 - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:00
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:00
I'm guessing those weights are not arbitrary at all. These would have been determined by engineers and not bureaucrats per se (althought the engineers may
well have worked for the government) but I'm sure that any decision maker would rely on the science before determining such things. I'm also thinking that, like the safe working load ratings on shackles, slings etc, that there is a >10% margin ie 10% or more greater than the calculated safe load. My thoughts only and having been exposed to the regulatory system in ship building for more than a few years.
FollowupID:
657541
Follow Up By: Member - Timbo - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 12:55
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 12:55
Could someone please explain to me the difference between GTM (assumed to be Gross Towed Mass) and ATM (assumed to be Aggregate Towed Mass)?
FollowupID:
657567
Follow Up By: Shaker - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 13:13
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 13:13
GTM is the weight on the axle, ATM is the total weight of the trailer.
FollowupID:
657571
Follow Up By: Nomadic Navara - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 14:29
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 14:29
Graham
You asked "You are probably correct but why the arbitrary weight." There must be some weight selected for the change over point or we would have all trailers with brakes needing to fit break-away controllers. Two tonnes was selected as the magic figure, but when you consider that this regulation is applied to all trailers then 2t is a fairly small weight when looking at transport trailers.
It is intriguing that GTM is the weight selected for the specification for break-away devices. However when considering the van weight we tow behind our vehicles we think of the ATM. On the other hand when it comes to 5th wheelers it is the GTM that is considered and the hitch weight is considered as part of the trucks load. Has anyone seen where it has been specified that we should consider the GTM or ATM when considering the size of our van? Or is it like the 300/400 kg van loadings - common practice and not legislation?
PeterD
FollowupID:
657581
Follow Up By: Member - Timbo - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 14:55
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 14:55
Thanks Shaker - so the difference between the two should be the towball load then.
FollowupID:
657584
Follow Up By: Shaker - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 15:43
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 15:43
Correct.
FollowupID:
657589
Follow Up By: Nomadic Navara - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 17:07
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 17:07
Timbo & Shaker
ATM and GTM are legal terms for the maximum loadings applicable to that particular. The ball weight can only be calculated by measuring the actual total weight and the weight on the axles and then subtracting the lesser weight from the greater weight. These weights will vary over time as you change the loading and thus the ball weight will change in sympathy with the way you distribute the weight. I am yet to see a van where the ball weight can be estimated by using the ATM and GTM, no van I have owned has been any where near that figure. That is why you should weigh your van occasionally when you are leaving
home on a long trip.
PeterD
FollowupID:
657597
Follow Up By: Shaker - Wednesday, Nov 04, 2009 at 09:41
Wednesday, Nov 04, 2009 at 09:41
I never suggested that the ball weight can be calculated that way.
The question was what do the terms mean, every trailer has a maximum GTM & ATM, & don't believe what you read on the compliance plate.
I bought a
well known make brand new, the compliance plate showed the ATM as 750kg, I was suspicious, so I put it on a weighbridge & the tare weight was 911kg, 161kg over the maximum allowable fully laden weight. It also had
suspension rated at 1000kg, which made the trailer overloaded ex factory even with no water or gas, axles have to rated to 120% of the ATM.
Needless to say the trailer went back to the manufacturer, unfortunately not without some litigation.
FollowupID:
657669
Follow Up By: Nomadic Navara - Wednesday, Nov 04, 2009 at 16:05
Wednesday, Nov 04, 2009 at 16:05
Shaker re your FollowUp 14 - In FollowUp 12 you just said "Correct." I just took it that you were agreeing with Timbo when He said "Thanks Shaker - so the difference between the two should be the towball load then." I apologise If I mistakenly took it that you were answering FollowUp 13 but you were actually agreeing with something further up the thread.
I do wholeheartedly agree with you about the way weights are applied to compliance plates, particularly when I have seen vans at caravan shows that are labelled with GTMs that are a couple of hundred kilograms or more than the maximum axle weight on the chassis manufacturers plate.
PeterD
FollowupID:
657708
Follow Up By: Member - Timbo - Wednesday, Nov 04, 2009 at 17:19
Wednesday, Nov 04, 2009 at 17:19
I don't understand PeterD, it seems you're arguing a technicality which doesn't change the concept: ie. total ACTUAL mass of trailer = total ACTUAL mass on axles + total ACTUAL mass on the towball (regardless of the theoretical maximum allowable figure that the manufacturer in his wisdom (or otherwise!) may have stamped onto a little metal plate). Unless of course you forgot to put the jockey wheel up, in which case that will also carry some of the load! :-)
It goes without saying that different loading will result in different masses - although maybe some think they can load their van to the hilt without changing the weight from what's "stamped on the magic plate" LOL
FollowupID:
657719
Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Wednesday, Nov 04, 2009 at 21:19
Wednesday, Nov 04, 2009 at 21:19
Well turns out I know the actual owners and can state the van is
well under 2000kg and
well below the car and towbar limits.
Cheers
FollowupID:
657766
Follow Up By: snailbait (Blue mntns) - Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:34
Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:34
hi Guys
I put the Van and Vehicle over the weigh
bridge and can verify this by the weigh
bridge way docket , and i weighed the tow ball weight before i left
home at
easter 2009 , it was all in the rating of the compliant plate.
thanks for comments
Terry
FollowupID:
657849
Reply By: rags - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 19:29
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 19:29
This issue was only recently discussed in thread 73104 and can be seen on a Kedron Caravan DVD on Fraser Island
Russ
AnswerID:
389734
Reply By: rags - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 19:30
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 19:30
This issue was only recently discussed in thread 73104 and can be seen on a Kedron Caravan DVD on Fraser Island
Russ
AnswerID:
389735
Reply By: Member - John (Vic) - Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 23:25
Monday, Nov 02, 2009 at 23:25
That looks like a casting failure not a mild steel or even a high tensile steel bar??
Look at the Toyota emblem it looks like its a part of the casting itself??
Not very nice, good to see no one was hurt will be interested in the follow up results, keep us all in
the loop.
AnswerID:
389765
Reply By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 21:36
Tuesday, Nov 03, 2009 at 21:36
Could snailbait tell us perhaps If the van has breaksafe brakes on it and perhaps
its ATM and Ball weight as surely a light van wouldnt do that to the towbar.
Will clear up all the supposition about ifs and buts.
Thanks
AnswerID:
389880
Follow Up By: snailbait (Blue mntns) - Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:46
Thursday, Nov 05, 2009 at 14:46
Hi Graham
No it does not have breakaway brakes as it is under 2000kgs GTM
Thanks for the comments
Rhonda and I were happy to catch up with you
Terry
FollowupID:
657850