100 series measured weight

[whitenoise]

Hey guys,

I just weighed the 03 LX recently using Intercomp racecar scales, and here are the results for anyone that cares.

Curb weight with full tank of gas, no 3rd row seats or running boards. Vehicle is completely stock other than a 10lb heavier battery. Options are AHC and night vision. Yes i washed the mud off too

LF/RF/LR/RR (lbs) - 1488 / 1391 / 1334 / 1320

Total - 5533 lbs

Distribution - 52% front / 48% rear

I also added weight at different points along the wheelbase so you can do some simple math to figure out how the weight distribution changes with accessories such as bumpers, winches etc.

1) Adding driver and passenger on front seat does not change the weight distribution.

2) Every pound in the 2nd row seats adds 0.18 lbs to the front and 0.82 lbs to the rear axle.

3) Every pound in the footwell behind the front seats adds 0.35 lbs to the front and 0.65 lbs to the rear axle. This seems like a good place to carry 10 gal of water with a FrontRunner type footwell water tank.

4) Every pound of weight just behind the 2nd row seats is 100% directly on top of the rear axle.

5) Every pound of weight at the extreme rear of the cargo area takes 0.25lbs OFF the front axle and adds 1.25lbs to the rear axle. Based on this, I can safely conclude, I'm not adding a rear bumper and especially a swingout or jerry can holders to the rear .


The nice thing is, based on my door jamb sticker that says 6860 lbs GVWR, I get about 1327 lbs of payload capacity, which is not too shabby. I intend to carry 90% of this figure and no more. If my stuff adds up to a lot more than that, I will look into a trailer seriously.

 

[shadow247]

Interesting data. I was just thinking about this as I took the first long trip in my new to me 100 series this weekend. I am used to a 4 Runner which weighs about 3800 pounds, and I could definitely feel the difference in weight over the long haul.

 

[sPaulp]

Stock size tires? Just curious because my recent addition of 285/65/18 tires added about 15 lbs each as the BFG's are 58lbs compared to 43 lb stocks (I believe). I have the 3rd row and RB delete as well.

 

[Bubba68CS]

5) Every pound of weight at the extreme rear of the cargo area takes 0.25lbs OFF the front axle and adds 1.25lbs to the rear axle. Based on this, I can safely conclude, I'm not adding a rear bumper and especially a swingout or jerry can holders to the rear .

Wouldn't a front bumper with winch more than offset this?

 

[whitenoise]

Stock size tires? Just curious because my recent addition of 285/65/18 tires added about 15 lbs each as the BFG's are 58lbs compared to 43 lb stocks (I believe). I have the 3rd row and RB delete as well.

Yes, stock size highway tires. I recently did a detailed search of tires available in the market and my conclusion is 265/70R18 in standard load range is the optimal combination considering popularity, weight, cost and ride height increase.

Wouldn't a front bumper with winch more than offset this?

Sure it would statically, but dynamically you're still dramatically increasing the moment of inertia. Can you think of many situations during an expedition (not intentional "wheeling") where you would need a winch if you were traveling with at least one other vehicle to pull you out?

 

[Bubba68CS]

Sure it would statically, but dynamically you're still dramatically increasing the moment of inertia. Can you think of many situations during an expedition (not intentional "wheeling") where you would need a winch if you were traveling with at least one other vehicle to pull you out?

Sure - when you're the one out front and there's no turning back

A winch is peace of mind for most people. But really, my instinct would say that the increase in moment of inertia wouldn't be noticed in the vast majority of situations facing these rigs. Not nearly as much as the static increase in weight anyway. I am certainly flexible in that thinking if anyone has any evidence to the contrary.

 

[ylexot]

This is good information. I wonder if having the 3rd row seats is enough to make the weight distribution split evenly, 50/50 front and rear.

Hanging a lot of extra mass off the ends of the frame front and rear would naturally change the way the suspension manages bigger bumps. I haven't made a math model of a suspension before, but with some of this data, I might just have to fool around a bit.

I can imagine a few situations where a winch is more handy than a tow vehicle. One example happened the other day on the beach. The tow straps weren't cutting it. I didn't have enough traction in the soft sand to pull a pickup that was starting to get a salt water bath. If I had wired up my winch, I would have been able to drag him out no problem. Fortunately a good Samaritan with an elastic tow rope let us borrow it and there was plenty of running room to yank him out of the surf. Straight running room and traction for the second vehicle aren't always available.

 

[whitenoise]

But really, my instinct would say that the increase in moment of inertia wouldn't be noticed in the vast majority of situations facing these rigs. Not nearly as much as the static increase in weight anyway. I am certainly flexible in that thinking if anyone has any evidence to the contrary.

I don't have evidence to show that increasing yaw/pitch inertia via winch/bumper/swingout etc can directly increase rollover risk, but I can guarantee that it will change the handling in a very significant and measurable way. Not handling that an average driver will feel in a majority of situations, but handling when you actually want it the most: crash avoidance. Highway @70+mph is probably 95% of most overland travel miles, and therefore, you most certainly do not want to degrade handling in highway crash avoidance situations. This is all the more important when you raise the CG via suspension and tire mods (see http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv21/09-0532.pdf and http://www.aamva.org/uploadedFiles/...izedTiresOnAlteredHeightVehicles_Findings.pdf).

 

[dubitup]

I love my overweight, lifted, degraded handling rig.

 

[SWUtah]

I love my overweight, lifted, degraded handling rig.

That's how I roll

 

[whitenoise]

Hopefully you'll love it equally when you roll it over after a limit lane change to avoid a stupid deer....

 

[SWUtah]

Hopefully you'll love it equally when you roll it over after a limit lane change to avoid a stupid deer....

Why would I change lanes to avoid a deer in my 2" lifted, 33" tired beast. I would just run over his ass and get my insurance to fix any damage. Now back in 2001 in my 80 series when a big black Bull was standing in the middle of the road at 11 PM I was luck enough to have a on coming vehicles lights indicate that there was a giant black hole in my lane. I was able to stop, get the farmer and get that big boy back in his fenced in area. Now hitting that guy would of killed me.

 

[cap80]

Isn't the point of a steel bumper to just crush deer and other cars? So technically your less likely to flip cuz you don't have to do dangerous evasive maneuvers.

If bumpers, tires and a lift so bad then a RTT must be just asking for it.

 

[whitenoise]

Pretty easy to think that adding some heavy metal to the front somehow makes your 4x4 a "beast". All it takes is one collision with the right animal (OK maybe a deer was a bad example) or even a tiny smart car to bring down that house of cards.

Cause F=ma, mofos... Your " beast" was designed to crush and absorb energy under impact so all it will do is fold up almost exactly like a stock 100 behind that heavy front bumper, leaving you stranded just the same. Better to live with the notion that you have stock weaksauce bumpers and drive cautiously...

 

[ylexot]

Indeed, avoiding collision is usually the best path. Tongue and cheek aside, being aware that handling has been reduced by adding all the gear should translate to increased caution when driving about, especially around civilization. There are way worse possibilities than deer blood in your crumple zones.

 

[montegofd3s]

Hopefully you'll love it equally when you roll it over after a limit lane change to avoid a stupid deer....

He did ok......
Hitting a 200 lb deer with an ARB at 50 mph

BTW adding bumpers isn't changing your CG very much. They sit fairly low, and if you added a medium or heavy spring rate lift when adding your new bumpers the suspension should be more than adequate to compensate for the weight.

 

[agaisin]

Cause F=ma, mofos... Your " beast" was designed to crush and absorb energy under impact so all it will do is fold up almost exactly like a stock 100 behind that heavy front bumper, leaving you stranded just the same. Better to live with the notion that you have stock weaksauce bumpers and drive cautiously...

Sure sounds logical but that thread montegofd3s posted indicates otherwise right? Every single account in that thread of someone with a bull bar had no substantive damage and no folding up of crumple zones despite being collisions at speed and every single account of no bull bar had the expected damage.

I'm sure there's a logical explanation, but your assertion and understanding seems incorrect. Are you *assuming* that bullbars would not prevent crumple zones from crushing under impact of hitting dear or you have experiences and/or technical knowledge that counters all the firsthand accounts in that thread?

Fwiw I do not have a bullbar but I'm drawn jnto this discussion b/c damn if bullbars work as well as they appear to from other first hand accounts referenced I'll be considering it - I've had near misses but never hit a dear yet and would certainly prefer it to bounce off/under...

 

[agaisin]

All it takes is one collision with the right animal (OK maybe a deer was a bad example) or even a tiny smart car to bring down that house of cards.

Your " beast" was designed to crush and absorb energy under impact so all it will do is fold up almost exactly like a stock 100 behind that heavy front bumper, leaving you stranded just the same.

Fortunately at least arb engineers (pretty sure not all bull bars are crash tested and certified) put some thought, engineering and certifications behind their product as described here ASK ARB - air bag compatibility - ARB 4x4 Accessories
I don't fully understand how they can make sure an airbag deploys when it should without triggering air bags unnecessarily for 50+mph collisions with deer or kangaroos but it looks like that's the engineering feat they have accomplished no doubt with lots of time and money...

 

[HFDPNL]

I thought the point of bumpers was for added clearance and because they stand up better than the plastic factory shells? I've always considered them protection from low speed impacts or collisions with smaller items, tree branches, trash cans, freeway debris, deer.....

70 mph against another vehicle, i don't think the difference is going to be measurable, particularly not with one designed to crumple, like the ARB.

If we're concerned about rollover, adding height via tires and lifts, and adding weight up high via roof racks is likely much worse than bumpers....

These aren't exactly sports cars from the factory.....isn't that why they came with VSC?

I think the larger takeaway from this is the GVWR....what are components, like the rear axle, wheels, tires, actually rated for. Sure, we can change springs to handle more weight, but there has to be a practical limit....

 

[benc]

If your really that concerned about the affect on handling with the addition of bumpers you could always do something like this to offset the affect