JIMNLIN
Oklahoma
Senior Member
Joined: 09/14/2003
View Profile
|
Wadcutter wrote: (snip{
So far it only shows you don't really understand what it is you've been posting. It's a clear case of someone not understanding what they're reading or wanting something to fit what they think it says. You have your preconceived belief which contradicts with the facts and that is clouding your ability to understand the facts. And what shows that you are clearly confused about what you are posting you keep referring to FMCSA and trying to link it to registration and weights. FMCSA doesn't have anything to do with registration requirements. You are reading the parts about weights applying to FMCSA and jumping to the erroneous conclusion that somehow what makes FMCSA apply also applies to registration. It doesn't. 2 completely separate acts. One is not related to the other.
Reread jmramiller's last post.
I don't know why I even bother responding to these posts.
your blowin' smoke. My state uses FMCSA rules for guidence for licensing and weight enforcement. If you have read my many posts on this subject I keep saying, see your state for their interpetation and how they enforce FMCSA regs. The first thing any new operator that is getting into a hauling buisness is get a copy of FMCSA regs and read the parts that pertains to his rigs class. Then we go to the state we are registering in and seek their input on compliance for registering and weight enforcement requirements for that class of vehicle.
That OHP troop captain says its a 6 months course for a trooper to go through to be weight certified for enforcement purposes. And I didn't ask for any documentation.
JIM
"good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment" ............ Will Rogers
'03 2500 QC Dodge/Cummins HO 3.73 6 speed manual Jacobs Westach
'97 Park Avanue 28' 5er 11200 two slides
|
jmramiller
Dallas
Senior Member
Joined: 01/24/2006
View Profile
|
I guess some people just don't get it. One of the first things I learned in school is that it is impossible to prove a negative. It is only possible to prove what does exist - it is not possible to prove what does not exist. Jim you have failed repeatedly to provide a link or a direct quote to any portion of any regulation to support legal binding of the door sticker. The definition section is just that - definitions. No where in the definition section does it say that the door sticker is legally binding. And last I checked us RVers don't need to fill out any MCS 150. If the same laws apply to non commercial TV's then why are we not required to complete these forms? If anyone is blowing smoke it is you. If this is the way your state interprets the law then surely someone out there has been cited. Where is that person? I would prove that he does not exist but as I have stated earlier that is not possible. But with your connections you should easily be able to prove that person does exist. Post a copy of a citation one of your "friends" issued. You can block out the names - that is not the important thing. The important thing is the reference to the section of code that was violated. And I know you don't care about that because so and so said so and so and that is the only thing that matters to you. What you need to understand is that if you want to have any credibility on this forum then you need to be able to back your claims with something more than "this is the way I am told my state interprets these regs". So Jim, Cowboy Up and at least give us a direct quote from a reg that applies to the topic at hand.
2006 2500HD CC SB 4X4 Duramax/Allison
Prodigy/16K Reese/265E Tires/Bilstein Shocks
RM Active Suspension/RDS 60gal Toolbox combo
2008 Big Country 3490BHS by Heartland
|
BertP
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Senior Member
Joined: 11/07/2003
View Profile
|
I think that Jim has a point. If you look at the FMCSA regs, you will find the following definitions:
Gross axle weight rating or GAWR means the value specified by the vehicle manufacturer as the load–carrying capacity of a single axle system, as measured at the tire–ground interfaces.
Gross combination weight rating or GCWR means the value specified by the manufacturer as the loaded weight of a combination vehicle.
Gross vehicle weight rating or GVWR means the value specified by the manufacturer as the loaded weight of a single vehicle.
Notice that all of the definitions use the manufacturer's numbers. So, what will happen when a LEO needs to decide if a vehicle is overweight or not? In States and Provinces where private vehicle register their weight, no problem: just use the registered weight of the vehicle. But, what about States and Provinces where there is no registered weight for a vehicle? I can see a LEO interpreting the FMCSA regs to say that in the absence of any other definition, the manufacturer's GVWR as the reference point. Note that I amm not suggesting that that is how it is, just that that is how it may be interpreted.
Bert
|
JIMNLIN
Oklahoma
Senior Member
Joined: 09/14/2003
View Profile
|
my neighbor lady is a hotshoter with a 3500 DRW flatbed and she gave me some numbers for FMCSA regs 571.110 for under 10k tires/wheels/GAWR/door placards and FMCSA reg 571.120 for over 10000 lbs with the same regs and definitions if any one is interested (federal motor vehicle safety standards). We also have the FMCSA 571.3 regs for definitions, GAWR/GVWR/GCWR, that I mentioned in above post. Keep in mind FMCSA regs are a recommendation for our states BUT states are required to be equal or better those regs. These regs were given to her from other commercial operators on those webs I mentioned.
once again I'll say this one more time, check with your state for their interpetation of the new FMCSA regs.
This may tie in to why my tag office refused to give a uprate GVWR indorsment for my wifes '06 chev 1500 CC, we just bought. They say new state regs don't permit uprate GVWR indorsment unless I register the truck for commercial use. Her '06 trucks new title has no GVWR numbers on the line for GVWR anymore. That also ties in with my conservation with that OHP troop captain when he mentioned we use the truck GVWR from the door tag.
JIM
edit: see federal motor vehicle safety standards part 49 sect 567.4 and 567.5 for door placard FMCSA 571 refers to.
* This post was
edited 11/28/07 05:20am by JIMNLIN *
|
Wadcutter
IL
Senior Member
Joined: 05/25/2004
View Profile
|
JIMNLIN
Why do you keep bringing up FMCSA? It doesn't apply. An RVer doesn't have to be concerned with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Act. By continually harping on the FMCSA it just shows you don't have a grasp of the topic. Don't confuse these other folks by continually posting things that have no bearing on the topic.
It's like the guy who has taken 6 karate lessons. He knows just enough to be dangerous but not enough to know what it is he's talking about. Everything you're posting is from a "neighbor", "someone", "unnamed Lt", and FMCSA references that don't apply.
FMCSA doesn't apply. Forget about it. Doesn't have anything to do with the topic.
Camped in every state
|
|
|
jmramiller
Dallas
Senior Member
Joined: 01/24/2006
View Profile
|
BertP wrote:I think that Jim has a point. If you look at the FMCSA regs, you will find the following definitions:
Gross axle weight rating or GAWR means the value specified by the vehicle manufacturer as the load–carrying capacity of a single axle system, as measured at the tire–ground interfaces.
Gross combination weight rating or GCWR means the value specified by the manufacturer as the loaded weight of a combination vehicle.
Gross vehicle weight rating or GVWR means the value specified by the manufacturer as the loaded weight of a single vehicle.
Notice that all of the definitions use the manufacturer's numbers. So, what will happen when a LEO needs to decide if a vehicle is overweight or not? In States and Provinces where private vehicle register their weight, no problem: just use the registered weight of the vehicle. But, what about States and Provinces where there is no registered weight for a vehicle? I can see a LEO interpreting the FMCSA regs to say that in the absence of any other definition, the manufacturer's GVWR as the reference point. Note that I amm not suggesting that that is how it is, just that that is how it may be interpreted.
Bert
OK Bert, take these difinitions and show me where they are used that makes them legally binding for a non commercial TV. We all know the diffinitions of the terms - that is not in question.
|
BertP
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Senior Member
Joined: 11/07/2003
View Profile
|
jmramiller wrote:OK Bert, take these difinitions and show me where they are used that makes them legally binding for a non commercial TV. We all know the diffinitions of the terms - that is not in question.
I didn't say that they were legally binding. I simply pointed out that since they use the manufacturer's ratings in their definitions, it is possible that the local LEO's interpret that to mean that they are to use the manufacturer’s ratings in the absence of any other specific rating. Since there are a number of States that do not have a registered weight for privately registered vehicles, how do you determine if the vehicle is overweight or not? It just seems to me that it would be reasonable for a LEO to reference the door tag and use the FMCSA definitions for justification. After all, those definitions are used in quite a few regulations from licensing to vehicle equipment requirements. Whether a citation issued that way would stand up in court or not is a separate issue.
Bert
|
JIMNLIN
Oklahoma
Senior Member
Joined: 09/14/2003
View Profile
|
BertP wrote:jmramiller wrote:OK Bert, take these difinitions and show me where they are used that makes them legally binding for a non commercial TV. We all know the diffinitions of the terms - that is not in question.
I didn't say that they were legally binding. I simply pointed out that since they use the manufacturer's ratings in their definitions, it is possible that the local LEO's interpret that to mean that they are to use the manufacturer’s ratings in the absence of any other specific rating. Since there are a number of States that do not have a registered weight for privately registered vehicles, how do you determine if the vehicle is overweight or not? It just seems to me that it would be reasonable for a LEO to reference the door tag and use the FMCSA definitions for justification. After all, those definitions are used in quite a few regulations from licensing to vehicle equipment requirements. Whether a citation issued that way would stand up in court or not is a separate issue.
Bert
bert,
if you will look at FMCSA 571.110 and 571.120 it gives the legal definitions and ties to GAWR/GVWR/door placard/tire/wheel regs.
I don't know how to make a clickie but go th FMCSA home page/then vehicle regs in the search box/then scroll down to part 571/then scroll to 571.110 and 571.120 which gives us the regs that debunks the mattress tag theory. that tag is there for a legal reason and part 49 567.4 of the federal motor vehicle safety standards gives their requirements for that tag.
JIM
JIM
|
JIMNLIN
Oklahoma
Senior Member
Joined: 09/14/2003
View Profile
|
Wadcutter wrote:JIMNLIN
Why do you keep bringing up FMCSA? It doesn't apply. An RVer doesn't have to be concerned with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Act. By continually harping on the FMCSA it just shows you don't have a grasp of the topic. Don't confuse these other folks by continually posting things that have no bearing on the topic.
It's like the guy who has taken 6 karate lessons. He knows just enough to be dangerous but not enough to know what it is he's talking about. Everything you're posting is from a "neighbor", "someone", "unnamed Lt", and FMCSA references that don't apply.
FMCSA doesn't apply. Forget about it. Doesn't have anything to do with the topic.
571 FMCSA regs on door tag info does apply just as federal motor vehicle safety standards apply part 49 sect 567.4 thats says that door tag is a legal document. I never said we need a commercial license for our RVs. What those fed laws I just mention says is your mattress tag theory is just that, your theory. Door tag info is a legal document per those fed regs I mentioned above. Your saying they don't apply ?? Your kiddin' , right ??
How your/my state enforces those regs is why I keep saying , check with your state for their input on how thay enforce those FMCSA regs.
JIM
|
BertP
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Senior Member
Joined: 11/07/2003
View Profile
|
You're right, Jim. Section 110 specifies the contents of the tag and Section 120 species what tires and rims are required on vehicle so, yes, they are legally binding in that sense. Section 120 uses the definitions in Section 110 for its definitions. I went through the regs fairly quickly but I didn't see anywhere that said that you are not permitted to exceed the GVWR of a vehicle, though.
Bert
|
|
|
