1995 BMC 37 Major Overweight Problem

[Tom Warner]

Just a side note before panic sets in. Are you
absolutely sure you weighted the coach correctly?
Its possible on some scales that are sloped at
the sides, when you attempt to weigh one dual or
one front tire the coach leans just enough to one
one side to transfer a significant amount of
weight to the tire/tires being weighed. Most
truck scales are designed so the truck is weighed
on the fly and goes down the middle of the scale.

Did you weigh this coach yourself or did someone
do it for you and were either of you knowledgable
on how to do it correctly. This is an excellent
guide to correctly weighing your
coach.
http://www.michelintruck.com/michelintru...Guide.pdf.
700# over on the front sounds like an awful lot. I am suspicious.

tom warner
Vernon center,NY
1985 PT 40




At 09:06 PM 7/25/2006, you 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]
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]