When you read the maximum payload number vs your actual payload number.

[DevilDodge]

Broken Ram 3500 Dually Shows a Camper Can Still Overload a Big Truck

This Ram 3500 is awaiting a $17,000 repair job after an enormous slide-in camper snapped its frame.

www.thedrive.com

 

[MEGA HO]

Yup seen these pictures already and not only he is overloaded, his COG (center of gravity) is likely ways behind the rear axle together with that bike carrier on a hitch extension.

 

[H3LZSN1P3R]

The guy is hoping FCA will pay to fix his stupid mistake….. and there is no way a frame swap will cost 17k…. Say the frame is 5k new( most likely less) it wont be 12k labour to swap it all

its one thing overloading pin weight on a gn/ 5th wheel trailer as its right over the axle not hanging far back like this guy….

 

[jenninr]

I read somewhere else that he also stated that the front camper mounts were welded to the frame and that's where the frame cracked. If that's the case the heat from those welds could have weakened the frame a lot.

 

[AH64ID]

I read somewhere else that he also stated that the front camper mounts were welded to the frame and that's where the frame cracked. If that's the case the heat from those welds could have weakened the frame a lot.

I did see another failure with a full custom camper that had welding at the aft of the cab and that’s where the frame failed.

I know Ram doesn’t recommend welding on these frames, but does publish acceptable parameters for doing so.

 

[jadmt]

I would like to see his door payload sticker. I bet he is way over payload.

 

[AH64ID]

I would like to see his door payload sticker. I bet he is way over payload.

I’m more interested in what the RAW was.

Door payload is a joke on these trucks, it’s limited by class of vehicle and not true capability. There is a reason door sticker payload and GVWR aren’t legally bearing ratings in most states. Axle ratings and tire ratings are what matters.

DRW’s have a GVWR of 14K, but a FAWR of 6,000 and a RAWR if 9,750. You can’t tell me that the truck isn’t built to handle full axle weight ratings.

To go one further, the only different in an auto-level 3500 SRW and an auto-level 3500 DRW is the tires. Same frame, suspension, brakes, axle, etc. Yet even the SRW GVWR is less than FAWR+RAWR. It’s a numbers game on paper for marketing, not a capabilities game. The 2500’s are the worst at it, they hamstring their “capabilities” to maintain them as a Class II truck.. it’s dumb, IMHO. A 2500 is fully capable of at least 12K lbs, based solely on axle ratings.

All that being said that guy was likely way overloaded, and if the frame was welded then you compound issues. Improper frame welding could also cause this issue within weight ratings. The other failure I saw was on a 3500 SRW, so likely not overloaded for frame design.. until it was welded on.

If I wanted to run a camper that size a 4500 is what I’d be looking at.

 

[H3LZSN1P3R]

I’m more interested in what the RAW was.

Door payload is a joke on these trucks, it’s limited by class of vehicle and not true capability. There is a reason door sticker payload and GVWR aren’t legally bearing ratings in most states. Axle ratings and tire ratings are what matters.

DRW’s have a GVWR of 14K, but a FAWR of 6,000 and a RAWR if 9,750. You can’t tell me that the truck isn’t built to handle full axle weight ratings.

To go one further, the only different in an auto-level 3500 SRW and an auto-level 3500 DRW is the tires. Same frame, suspension, brakes, axle, etc. Yet even the SRW GVWR is less than FAWR+RAWR. It’s a numbers game on paper for marketing, not a capabilities game. The 2500’s are the worst at it, they hamstring their “capabilities” to maintain them as a Class II truck.. it’s dumb, IMHO. A 2500 is fully capable of at least 12K lbs, based solely on axle ratings.

All that being said that guy was likely way overloaded, and if the frame was welded then you compound issues. Improper frame welding could also cause this issue within weight ratings. The other failure I saw was on a 3500 SRW, so likely not overloaded for frame design.. until it was welded on.

If I wanted to run a camper that size a 4500 is what I’d be looking at.

The Rear axle weight does not account for the weight way past the bumper plus the welded frame mounts create a fracture point both from the heat of the weld and the leverage point. If the truck was a LB i guarantee the failure would have not happened like that as the weight would not be as far past the rear axle

 

[AH64ID]

The Rear axle weight does not account for the weight way past the bumper plus the welded frame mounts create a fracture point both from the heat of the weld and the leverage point. If the truck was a LB i guarantee the failure would have not happened like that as the weight would not be as far past the rear axle

The RAW does account for weight behind the axle, since all the weight pulled from the front axle is added to the rear axle.

Bedsides, it was a long bed. The camper is just that long.

 

[H3LZSN1P3R]

The RAW does account for weight behind the axle, since all the weight pulled from the front axle is added to the rear axle.

Bedsides, it was a long bed. The camper is just that long.

I thought at first it was a MCSB i see now it is a LB but the weight is cantilevering way past the rear axle thats were the RAW is pointless as its shear frame strength that matters at that point even if under the RAW cap

 

[AH64ID]

I thought at first it was a MCSB i see now it is a LB but the weight is cantilevering way past the rear axle thats were the RAW is pointless as its shear frame strength that matters at that point even if under the RAW cap

The camper does dwarf the 8’ bed.

The more weight you cantilever behind the rear axle the more weight you pull from the front axle and add it to the rear, so the more cantilever action you have the heavier the rear axle is. I’d be shocked if he was under RAW with all that weight, and a CG that appears well aft of the axle, which is why I’m curious what it’s at. The frame failed forward of the axle, where the weight is lower than without the extreme cantilever but you do have the cantilever action trying to lift the cab/engine and that’s failure point. Just looking at the photos, the empty weight of that camper, and the bike rack, I’d be shocked if the RAW was under 11K… way overloaded.

Ram says 9,750#, even thou that’s well below AAM’s limit for the axle (10,912 was the rating for the original 11.5”’axle and the 12.0” is much stronger). So is that a frame limit? Suspension limit? Good enough? It’s hard to say without speaking to one of the Ram engineers.

Sad/scary part is that this is the only guy with this setup, and I bet they are all oblivious.

 

[44Dan44]

Rv Dealer "heck yeah your truck is perfect for this"

 

[Dave01]

I bet it will cost all of the $17,000 if done at a dealer, and done right.

So ... disclaimer that I've never owned, nor driven, a truck with a slide in camper. I went to Eagle Cap's web site (pretty cool product BTW!) and the largest model was around 4,800# dry weight, as stated in the article. So the guy's estimate of 6,500# loaded for vacation is probably pretty close.

I do understand the points made above about gvwr, axle rating, CG, RAW. I get it that the heavy rear end of the camper plus the bike create a significant lever action that takes weight off the front axle, plants it on the rear while putting a lot of stress on the frame somewhere between the axles. I do get all that. I'm still surprised it fractured like that. I think of these frames as being pretty rugged given all the different uses they are made for and if you showed me that truck and that camper and asked me off the cuff if the truck would handle it, I'd have said yes. Not that I'd suggest going over weight ratings, not that I think it would drive very well (that truck had to handle like crap I would think), just that it wouldn't fail.

 

[H3LZSN1P3R]

The camper does dwarf the 8’ bed.

The more weight you cantilever behind the rear axle the more weight you pull from the front axle and add it to the rear, so the more cantilever action you have the heavier the rear axle is. I’d be shocked if he was under RAW with all that weight, and a CG that appears well aft of the axle, which is why I’m curious what it’s at. The frame failed forward of the axle, where the weight is lower than without the extreme cantilever but you do have the cantilever action trying to lift the cab/engine and that’s failure point. Just looking at the photos, the empty weight of that camper, and the bike rack, I’d be shocked if the RAW was under 11K… way overloaded.

Ram says 9,750#, even thou that’s well below AAM’s limit for the axle (10,912 was the rating for the original 11.5”’axle and the 12.0” is much stronger). So is that a frame limit? Suspension limit? Good enough? It’s hard to say without speaking to one of the Ram engineers.

Sad/scary part is that this is the only guy with this setup, and I bet they are all

I bet it will cost all of the $17,000 if done at a dealer, and done right.

So ... disclaimer that I've never owned, nor driven, a truck with a slide in camper. I went to Eagle Cap's web site (pretty cool product BTW!) and the largest model was around 4,800# dry weight, as stated in the article. So the guy's estimate of 6,500# loaded for vacation is probably pretty close.

I do understand the points made above about gvwr, axle rating, CG, RAW. I get it that the heavy rear end of the camper plus the bike create a significant lever action that takes weight off the front axle, plants it on the rear while putting a lot of stress on the frame somewhere between the axles. I do get all that. I'm still surprised it fractured like that. I think of these frames as being pretty rugged given all the different uses they are made for and if you showed me that truck and that camper and asked me off the cuff if the truck would handle it, I'd have said yes. Not that I'd suggest going over weight ratings, not that I think it would drive very well (that truck had to handle like crap I would think), just that it wouldn't fail.

The cross braces welded to the frame directly where it broke is the biggest reason for the failure in that exact spot i would say.




in no way is that a 17k fix Unless the labour rate is over 200$ per hr thats no more than a 40 hr weeks work done right

 

[MEGA HO]

I'm into truck campers and I'll tell you one thing: very few manufacturers report the correct camper weights. Usually stated "dry weight" is for a barebone camper with no options, no propane, no batteries, no AC no solar no generator no nothing. Obviously empty tanks. Each camper will come with different options and would obviously weight different from each other but they don't follow the same procedure as vehicle manufacturers where each vehicles available payload would be stated and would depend on included options.
It is advisable to drive over the CAT scales to find out the actual weight, after picking up your camper.
My very conservative rough estimates:
TC - 4917lbs
Water 66 Gal - 550lbs
Propane - 60lbs
Batteries - 132lbs
Motorcycle - 440lbs
2x adults - 400lbs
---------
Total 6500lbs

This does not include any of the other options in their TC, not their personal / camping junk they'd carry, not their food supplies. Their estimated 6500 is already over the limit but I think it's safe to say the actual weight is somewhere between 7000 and 7500lbs. People don't realize how much junk they accumulate until it's time to empty their TT or a TC (or a 5er), I've done that a number of times over the years and each time it came as a surprise.

 

[Dave01]

Looking around Eagle Cap's web site, I was wondering what trucks they actually would be within weight specs on. Maybe RCLB 1 ton? Or Ford or GM?

 

[AH64ID]

Ford and GM have similar axle ratings and GVWR’s. Aside from marketing they are all about the same.

Even the F-450 pickup shares a frame and axles with the F-350.

 

[H3LZSN1P3R]

Looking around Eagle Cap's web site, I was wondering what trucks they actually would be within weight specs on. Maybe RCLB 1 ton? Or Ford or GM?

4500\5500 c&c trucks

 

[RVTRKN]

First impression I saw was the CG, I looked up the website and the CG is at the 16' point of 21'. Now I don't know which direction thats from, but if its from the rear of the camper that puts the CG forward of the RA. Next question is where are the Fresh, Grey and Black water tanks located? It seems to me he would have had a full tank of fresh water, being in Mexico, I know I would have. Did he fill the fresh water tank after using some to the Grey and Black water tanks? If he didn't empty the near full Grey and Black tanks with a full fresh water tank, then its even more overloaded, then add on the motor scooter.

What was brought to our attention of frame welding, that was not in the initial article and is a big concern as I look at. My 04 2500 QC 4X4 needed 5ver rails to mount my hitch, due to the Hydro-Formed frame it was not recommended to drill or weld on the Hydro-Formed frame. I did a lot of research and found bolt on brackets to the frame that set the pin forward of the axle and the hitch fit perfect to the brackets. I had the dealer tell me its OK to weld on, and the RV installer told me its OK to drill on the frame. I'll bet the Camper Dealer just quickly welded on the supports not paying attention to locality or approved methods. I'm sure bolt on supports are available for that camper.

Big mistake was not to weigh it, but with the rear CG more likely behind the axle and welded supports combined is the probable cause.

 

[MEGA HO]

Yes frame mounted tiedowns are available for every make and model, they are bolt on but a few folks choose weld them on to their frames.

I don't see where anyone confirms though that the tieadowns were welded on, just speculation.

I don't think his black / gray tanks were full together with full water tank. This is a standard procedure for any type of RV to dump your tanks and top up the water tank at the same sani station