Bob_Skurka
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 7,615
HEY, I NEVER POSTED ANY PHOTOS OF DARGO'S WIFE!!!
If you want to fantisize, leave me out of it.
If you want to fantisize, leave me out of it.
Bob_Skurka said:HEY, I NEVER POSTED ANY PHOTOS OF DARGO'S WIFE!!!
If you want to fantisize, leave me out of it.
So, exactly what is the capacity of the cuoholders, Toyota VS Ford, Dodge , etc. ? How will that affect the overall GVW of the trucks if the cupholders are full, vs empty ? Will six of these go in the Toyota ? Or will there need to be cupholders added to the trailer ? How will that influence tongue weight (trailer, NOT Dargo's Wife) ? Would a gooseneck handle the additional weight better ? Should I use amsoil grease in the bearings ? This just overwhelms me & I want to be safe.whodat90 said:And therein lies the difference; the two trucks (the toy and the ford) are aimed at different markets and have different purposes. The toy is meant for a homeowner that's going to go to home depot and get a couple bags of concrete. It's built light and small for that purpose. The ford is meant to carry yourself and 3 workers towing a 16000lb trailer; that 'load capacity' is intended for tongue weight rather than a couple bags of concrete. Since the original post was about safety when towing, I think the tow rating is more important to the conversation than load capacity. Good point, but not applicable to this. You may as well discuss how many cup holders for all that bears on towing a trailer.
john_bud said:Teacha,
That was probably a duramax diesel. I have one, and it was not even straining under the load you saw.
daTeacha said:I've been chuckling along through the last couple pages of this thing. Dargo, was it you who corrected the spelling of "meaSly"? Just wondering since the post script abbreviation for the second one would be PPS, not PSS, and similarly for the third one. The logic is the second one would be a post-post script, not a post script script.![]()