1995 BMC 37 Major Overweight Problem

[Stephen Birtles]

my 77 weighs 26,000 lbs loaded
has 13,000 front axle and 23,000 rear but havenot got a clue what the
gvw is
Stephen 77fc35



--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "Gardner Yeaw"
wrote:
>
> Neil,
> Since you have been weighing BB's, I am looking at a 1978 FC33. I
> have seen several threads on the forum about gvwr on thes older
> units, but no-one seems to know the real value. Would you perchance
> have access to that data?
> I don't have a BB at this time, but I am looking at a couple and
> the actual weight and GVWR are of great interest to me.
>
> Gardner
>
> --- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "Neil & Pat"
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Lee, thanks for writing. I am very sorry to hear of your
> (coaches)
> > "weight" problem but you are far from alone. First, so you will
> know who is
> > talking to you; I am a 32 year active RVer, 15 year Bluebird owner
> and a 36
> > year tire engineer who upon retirement volunteered nearly 4 years
> with the
> > RVSEF the group that weighed your coach at the FMCA rally. Since
> that time
> > I have written a comprehensive book on RV safety with a strong
> emphasis on
> > the weight issues because they are not only prevalent but the
> cause of most
> > of the problems and concerns that we face as RVers.
> >
> > When you were weighed you were given your vehicle's weights
> written on a
> > fairly long detailed pamphlet, which listed step-by-step the
> initial steps
> > to take to get safe and legal. That is a very good start (I
> actually wrote
> > that document several years ago) and I am pleased that you have
> already
> > followed many of the recommendations in your effort to help
> alleviate the
> > problem. Your problem appears to go beyond what can be easily
> accomplished
> > yet there is more that can be done. When making any changes
> please keep
> > track of all weigh removed from your coach; in addition you need
> to make a
> > "rough" determination as to where that weight was located i.e. the
> weight
> > that you removed was located behind the rear axle? Between the
> axles or
> > forward on the coach. That will help you to determine which axle
> overload
> > was reduced by your effort and by approximately how much. In your
> case the
> > overload in the rear is worse that the front so shifting weight
> will also
> > aid in minimizing the problem at all locations. You did not state
> the
> > actual weight differential from side-to-side so the magnitude of
> your
> > overloads may actually be worst than stated if the side-to-side
> differential
> > is high (note this is not the case with most BBs without a
> slide). In any
> > case the basic steps are to immediately eliminate all controllable
> weight
> > i.e. dump the black water totally, dump fresh water to no more
> than ¼ tank
> > (for emergencies) and get rid of personal goods aggressively
> (promise to
> > always travel in this configuration in the future). You indicate
> that you
> > are full-timers yet your total weight most likely does not exceed
> 2000#. I
> > have found through our work at the RVSEF that the average full-
> timer carries
> > in excess of #3000, in all likelihood your do as well. Note that
> it may be
> > necessary to even limit yourself to less than a full tank of fuel
> (drastic
> > but very important.) You did not indicate but it is almost a
> certainty that
> > you tow something, if that vehicle is on a trailer or dolly there
> is weight
> > carried by the RV that can be eliminated. After all of this is
> fully
> > addressed, there is still something significant that you can and
> should do
> > that is when you are driving you are "not towing a car but a
> trailer"; you
> > can legally and properly carry as much as #800-1000 in the car
> because at
> > that time (driving) your car is empty (no passengers) thus it has
> excess
> > capacity before it reached it's GVWR, inconvenient yes but very
> important.
> > Don't forget that you will also require brakes on your toad; No
> responsible
> > RVer will tow without them.
> >
> > One final consideration is that your driving habits can be altered
> to give
> > you greater margins for your tires thereby offsetting some of the
> overload
> > consequences. Slowing down to 55mph is the law in many states for
> good
> > solid reasons. Note that for a tire rated at 65mph (most large RV
> tires)
> > the max load rating is appropriate for speeds from 51-65 however,
> slowing to
> > 50 will actually increase the tires load carrying capacity by
> approximately
> > 8% (this info is all contained in the Tire & Rim Association
> manual); this
> > can't be carried to an extreme but you get the idea our tires gain
> > capability with every mph we slow down.
> >
> > The real issue here is that the coach you purchased as "spec'ed"
> by the
> > original owner and operated by you does not have the payload
> capacity to
> > meet your expectations as a full time RVer. That point could be
> debated all
> > day without resolving the issue but the bottom line is that the
> owner has
> > the ultimate responsibility to live within the vehicle's
> limitations (your
> > are legally liable). If new, it is often possible to twist the
> > manufacturers arm to help resolve the problem but in a 10+ year
> old coach
> > there is virtually no recourse available to the owner. This is
> one of few
> > times that reengineering the vehicle may be necessary to assure
> your safety
> > but this will not rectify the legal issues. Note, that only the
> original
> > manufacturer can change the data plate limitations that were
> originally
> > applied to the vehicle and they have virtually no incentive to do
> so. In
> > your situation, larger or higher capacity tires make sense.
> However, there
> > are several considerations that must be satisfied if this is
> attempted i.e.
> > you may not have adequate wheels (size or pressure rating), there
> may not be
> > adequate tire spacing or wheel well clearance, higher tire
> pressures will be
> > required, the turning angle limits may have to be reset and the
> vehicles
> > computer and/or speedometer may be adversely affected and reset.
> Even after
> > all that work & expense to make the vehicle safe to drive you will
> still be
> > illegal if you exceed the posted GVRW of the coach. In the
> absolute extreme
> > if you wish to be totally safe and legal while maintaining your
> present
> > lifestyle it may be necessary to change motorhomes for one with a
> greater
> > (adequate) CCC (cargo carrying capacity).
> >
> > With all of the above stated, I must add that I have personally
> weighed many
> > many BBs of all models. My observations are that the single axle
> units (SP
> > and BMC) were somewhat limited in CCC and the PT versions were
> generally OK
> > with the front axle a little high on many 40s while the 36s/38s
> are well
> > balanced, the FCs are heavy on the front but generally legal
> without
> > question. Note, I drive a PT-36 and have determined that it is
> virtually
> > impossible to overload it either front or rear as the coach has
> close to a
> > 10,000# CCC.
> >
> > I suspect that your will receive other comments and that this e-
> mail will
> > receive it own share of questions as well as possible debate but I
> can
> > assure you that all the above comes from solid facts and
> observations. If
> > you require additional consultation, please feel free to contact
> me directly
> > or thru the forum, as other readers will no doubt benefit from this
> > discussion.
> >
> > Best of Luck,
> >
> > Neil
> > Author, "The RVer's Ultimate Survival Guide"
> > http://www.rvsafetyinfo.com
> > author@
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Lee Davis
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 1:16 PM
> > To: WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [WanderlodgeForum] 1995 BMC 37 Major Overweight Problem
> >
> > * We bought a 95 BMC 37 about 4 months ago (we RV full
> time). This
> > is
> > the first motor home we have owned and we excited about getting a
> > Bluebird. I recently had it weighed (each front wheel separately
> and
> > duals separately on the back) with full fresh water and fuel at a
> > Family Motor Coach Rally and found I was 3000 total lbs overweight.
> > About 700 lbs. on the front, and 2300 lbs. on the back) GVWR is
> > 31,000lbs ( I don't have a tag axle) and we were over 34,000 lbs.
> > That worried me since although we have a fair amount of stuff, we
> > don't have enough to be that overweight. I have since raised the
> tire
> > pressure (Michelin's) to the maximum 110 lbs, (still overloaded
> > according to the Michelin book) but less than with the recommended
> by
> > Bluebird of 100 lbs. on the front and 90 lbs. on the rear duals
> > printed on the Aqua Hot. I also carry now very little freshwater
> > which eliminates 700 lbs. or so. We are also trying to eliminate
> > everything else that's very heavy, but there is no way we'll get
> rid
> > of another 2000 lbs. I don't have Joey beds, I don't have more than
> > 50 lbs. of tools, I have some books, but nothing like we'll need to
> > jettison. (I think 2000 lbs is close to more stuff than we have!)
> >
> > I read in one of the forum notes about a rear axle recall that
> helps
> > with the weight problem, but when I contacted Bluebird, (Bill
> Coleman,
> > been there since before 1995 and says he has been involved in all
> > recalls) they deny there ever was a rear axle recall on this model.
> > They say Ridewell (sp?) redid some tag axles but nothing to do with
> > single rear axles. Blue bird say they have no info on the cargo
> > capacity of this model or the original initial weight with all
> factory
> > installed stuff, full fresh water and fuel, but no other cargo. (I
> > wish I'd weighed it before putting in our stuff, but we were moving
> > the stuff from a trailer and just didn't think about it.
> >
> > Has anyone else noticed a weight problem with this model? If so,
> what
> > did they do about it? I'm pretty concerned about the safety
> situation
> > I am in now. I bought the Bluebird because everyone said they were
> > built like tanks and were supersafe, but now I feel I am sort of
> > running on the edge of a potential major problem (like a front tire
> > blowout going down a mountain or something else).
> >
> > .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>