GVWR, how much can a 200 safely carry? (1 Viewer)

[Taco2Cruiser]

We all use our 200s differently, from daily driving with families, to towing, weekend camping, to full long term expedition travel.

Safely carrying extra weight seems to be an ongoing concern, as it should be. Lives are at stake. I for one use mine for long term remote travel and harder rock crawling trails, that leaves me rather heavy. So I began researching how I can safely increase my payload and GVWR.

In Australia, there are companies that offer legal GVM (gross vehicle mass or Australian DOT for our GVWR) increase kits. These are tested, under government set conditions. Being an American, and proud of it! I still would trust the Australia DOT, if you don't, then this may not be a solution for you.

Lovells Springs is one of those companies, their kit includes just a heavier rate spring that will also lift the truck slightly, longer shocks to accommodate the tall springs, and legal decals stating the new legal GVM. That's it, basically just springs. I was never able to get the actually springs rate used, but Lovell did state they have between 10-50% spring rate increase. This moves the stock GVWR (GVM) to 8,377 lbs (3800kg), regardless of engine or equipment. The split is Front 3968 lbs (1,800kg) and Rear 4409 lbs (2,000 kg)

In the US LC200, stock spring rates are
Front: 500 lbs/in
Rear: 170 lbs/in

Under the most extreme case secanio, a 50% spring rate increase needs to be
Front: 750 lbs/in
Rear: 255 lbs/in

If using Old Man Emu springs, front springs 2701 and 2703 have a rate of 720 lbs/in. Not quite to the 750 mark, yet most weight is placed to the center and rear of the vehicle, while it wouldn't bother me, you need to determine if you are comfortable with that. If using a BP-51, that spring rate is 750 lbs/in, so that meets the mark, and more so as you can further increase preload.

For the rear spring, 2721 and 2722 have a spring rate of 270 and 275 respectively, and meets the mark. Obviously, 2723, 2724 and 2725 are even heavier at 340, 400, and 440 lbs/in respectively.

With variables still unknown, like what spring rate Lovells is actually using outside of knowing their springs are not heavier than 50% more of the stock spring. I feel safe with my BP-51s, and 2724 rear springs (and E rated tires, which the Lovells kit never mentions being required) carrying up to 8,375 lbs.

Also, please check your weight on a certified Cat Scale completely loaded with all people, equipment and full fuel tanks. It's the only way to actually know your weight.

 

[TonyP]

Is GVWR not also a product of axel load once you reach a certain point beyond suspension limitations? I know the first hurdle is obviously suspension. Follow by the usual safety concerns (trans cooling, brakes, ect). While I'm sure the axles/diffs/center lock are pretty stout, I'd think it would/should be a consideration.

 

[Taco2Cruiser]

Is GVWR not also a product of axel load once you reach a certain point beyond suspension limitations? I know the first hurdle is obviously suspension. Follow by the usual safety concerns (trans cooling, brakes, ect). While I'm sure the axles/diffs/center lock are pretty stout, I'd think it would/should be a consideration.

Absolutely, yet according to the Australian DOT, everything other than springs can handle the 3800kg GVM. Frame, steering, brakes and axles are already up to the task.

 

[gaijin]

We all use our 200s differently, from daily driving with families, to towing, weekend camping, to full long term expedition travel.

Safely carrying extra weight seems to be an ongoing concern, as it should be. Lives are at stake. I for one use mine for long term remote travel and harder rock crawling trails, that leaves me rather heavy. So I began researching how I can safely increase my payload and GVWR.

In Australia, there are companies that offer legal GVM (gross vehicle mass or Australian DOT for our GVWR) increase kits. These are tested, under government set conditions. Being an American, and proud of it! I still would trust the Australia DOT, if you don't, then this may not be a solution for you.

Lovells Springs is one of those companies, their kit includes just a heavier rate spring that will also lift the truck slightly, longer shocks to accommodate the tall springs, and legal decals stating the new legal GVM. That's it, basically just springs. I was never able to get the actually springs rate used, but Lovell did state they have between 10-50% spring rate increase. This moves the stock GVWR (GVM) from 7,275 lbs (3,300kg) to 8,377 lbs (3800kg), regardless of engine or equipment.

In the US LC200, stock spring rates are
Front: 500 lbs/in
Rear: 170 lbs/in

Under the most extreme case secanio, a 50% spring rate increase needs to be
Front: 750 lbs/in
Rear: 340 lbs/in

If using Old Man Emu springs, front springs 2701 and 2703 have a rate of 720 lbs/in. Not quite to the 750 mark, yet most weight is placed to the center and rear of the vehicle, while it wouldn't bother me, you need to determine if you are comfortable with that. If using a BP-51, that spring rate is 750 lbs/in, so that meets the mark, and more so as you can further increase preload.

For the rear spring, 2723 has a rate of 340 lbs/in, and meets the mark. Obviously, 2724 and 2725 are even heavier at 400 and 440 lbs/in respectively.

With variables still unknown, like what spring rate Lovells is actually using outside of knowing their springs are not heavier than 50% more of the stock spring. I feel safe with my BP-51s, and 2724 rear springs (and E rated tires, which the Lovells kit never mentions being required) carrying up to 8,375 lbs.

Also, please check your weight on a certified Cat Scale completely loaded with all people, equipment and full fuel tanks. It's the only way to actually know your weight.

Great post! Great subject! This is important, and deserves some serious discussion.

I have a couple of minor comments:

Using my door jamb sticker as reference -

My GVWR is 7385LB (3345KG) which differes from the 7275LB (3300KG) you mention.

Also important to note that my Front GAWR is 3595LB (1630KG) and my Rear GAWR is 4300LB (1950KG). This highlightys two points of interest: 1) the GVWR of 7385LB can not be split 50/50 F/R without overloading the Front axle (7385/2 = 3693LB which is >3595LB which is the Front GAWR) and 2) the total of the Front GAWR (3595LB) and the Rear GAWR (4300LB) = 7895LB which is > the GVWR of 7385LB.

This leads me to believe that we should be looking at weight distribution F/R and not just total GVM.

This also leads me to believe that the GVWR as specified by Toyota has some "safety margin" built-in. In my case, that would be the difference between the total of the individual GAWR's (7895LB) and the GVWR (7385LB) which is 510LB or about 6.5% less than the total.

This then leads me to wonder why there would be such a safety margin? My read is that the GAWR numbers look at suspension components - springs, shocks, axles, etc. The GVWR, however, takes into consideration other components like transmission, differentials, brakes, even wheels and tires. If this is the case, then it is easy to imagine a case where springs could be upgraded which could indeed increase the GAWR, but if taken beyond the safety margin, then could have an adverse effect on other components.

I do not reject out of hand the Australian government testing, I'm justy not familiar enough with the details to trust that "just springs" would safely increase the GVWR (or GVM).

Also one question:

You state that a 50% increase to a 170 lb/in Rear spring would be a 340 lb/in spring. Wouldn't a 50% increase be a 255 lb/in spring?

Looking fgorward to a great thread.

HTH

 

[TonyP]

Interesting. I think out of sheer concern I'd at least do something about brakes especially for us in the mountain regions. Warping and fade is a constant concern of mine. Also considering all of the traction aides rely on wheel braking.

Just a thought. Very interesting topic though.

 

[gaijin]

Absolutely, yet according to the Australian DOT, everything other than springs can handle the 3800kg GVM. Frame, steering, brakes and axles are already up to the task.

If we just think about brakes, it's easy to expect brakes that are designed to work with a GVM of 3345KG would work at some diminished level when asked to stop 3800KG. So, how much less performance is acceptable?

 

[Taco2Cruiser]

Great post! Great subject! This is important, and deserves some serious discussion.

I have a couple of minor comments:

Using my door jamb sticker as reference -

My GVWR is 7385LB (3345KG) which differes from the 7275LB (3300KG) you mention.

Also important to note that my Front GAWR is 3595LB (1630KG) and my Rear GAWR is 4300LB (1950KG). This highlightys two points of interest: 1) the GVWR of 7385LB can not be split 50/50 F/R without overloading the Front axle (7385/2 = 3693LB which is >3595LB which is the Front GAWR) and 2) the total of the Front GAWR (3595LB) and the Rear GAWR (4300LB) = 7895LB which is > the GVWR of 7385LB.

This leads me to believe that we should be looking at weight distribution F/R and not just total GVM.

This also leads me to believe that the GVWR as specified by Toyota has some "safety margin" built-in. In my case, that would be the difference between the total of the individual GAWR's (7895LB) and the GVWR (7385LB) which is 510LB or about 6.5% less than the total.

This then leads me to wonder why there would be such a safety margin? My read is that the GAWR numbers look at suspension components - springs, shocks, axles, etc. The GVWR, however, takes into consideration other components like transmission, differentials, brakes, even wheels and tires. If this is the case, then it is easy to imagine a case where springs could be upgraded which could indeed increase the GAWR, but if taken beyond the safety margin, then could have an adverse effect on other components.

I do not reject out of hand the Australian government testing, I'm justy not familiar enough with the details to trust that "just springs" would safely increase the GVWR (or GVM).

Also one question:

You state that a 50% increase to a 170 lb/in Rear spring would be a 340 lb/in spring. Wouldn't a 50% increase be a 255 lb/in spring?

Looking fgorward to a great thread.

HTH

Yes, our intitial GVWR differs than that from the Australian intitisl GVWR. When looking at all available engines, both diesel and gasoline, along with all their difffernt versions, on thing was the same. They all maxed at 3800kg. That led me to believe that past 3800kg, there must be something else needed, strong axles, brakes or steering changes. So knowing that we have the same 200, regardless of our 5.7l. 3800kg would be out limit also.

I agree knowing front and rear GVWRs, I'm in the same boat as you. This is where I should of mentioned I have my weight distributed quite evenly. Front steel bumper and winch, sliders, skid plates, rear steel bumper, fuel tanks in stock tire location, two adults up front, kids in second row, camping gear in back, RTT on roof yet pushed forward. That all said, I'll see if I can source their new front and rear GVMs.

Oh and yea I changed that incorrect rear spring rate. Thanks for the catch.

Edit: @gaijin I attached the decals in the original post

 

[Taco2Cruiser]

If we just think about brakes, it's easy to expect brakes that are designed to work with a GVM of 3345KG would work at some diminished level when asked to stop 3800KG. So, how much less performance is acceptable?

Ultimately it's an extra 1,100 lbs. when looking at the US tow ratings, Toyota says we can tow WITHOUT trailer brakes up to 1,000 lbs. That was why I feel the brakes are up to the task.

 

[gaijin]

Ultimately it's an extra 1,100 lbs. when looking at the US tow ratings, Toyota says we can tow WITHOUT trailer brakes up to 1,000 lbs. That was why I feel the brakes are up to the task.

Are you saying that towing capacity would be less if the GVWR is increased?

 

[Taco2Cruiser]

Are you saying that towing capacity would be less if the GVWR is increased?

So I've read a lot of Australian forums on that subject. With emails to Lovells and Australian installers, while increasing the GVWR, the GCWR stays at 14,400 lbs, and trailer brake would be required on all towing applications is going over the stock GVWR

 

[Dan Higgins]

We all use our 200s differently, from daily driving with families, to towing, weekend camping, to full long term expedition travel.

Safely carrying extra weight seems to be an ongoing concern, as it should be. Lives are at stake. I for one use mine for long term remote travel and harder rock crawling trails, that leaves me rather heavy. So I began researching how I can safely increase my payload and GVWR.

In Australia, there are companies that offer legal GVM (gross vehicle mass or Australian DOT for our GVWR) increase kits. These are tested, under government set conditions. Being an American, and proud of it! I still would trust the Australia DOT, if you don't, then this may not be a solution for you.

Lovells Springs is one of those companies, their kit includes just a heavier rate spring that will also lift the truck slightly, longer shocks to accommodate the tall springs, and legal decals stating the new legal GVM. That's it, basically just springs. I was never able to get the actually springs rate used, but Lovell did state they have between 10-50% spring rate increase. This moves the stock GVWR (GVM) to 8,377 lbs (3800kg), regardless of engine or equipment. The split is Front 3968 lbs (1,800kg) and Rear 4409 lbs (2,000 kg)

In the US LC200, stock spring rates are
Front: 500 lbs/in
Rear: 170 lbs/in

Under the most extreme case secanio, a 50% spring rate increase needs to be
Front: 750 lbs/in
Rear: 255 lbs/in

If using Old Man Emu springs, front springs 2701 and 2703 have a rate of 720 lbs/in. Not quite to the 750 mark, yet most weight is placed to the center and rear of the vehicle, while it wouldn't bother me, you need to determine if you are comfortable with that. If using a BP-51, that spring rate is 750 lbs/in, so that meets the mark, and more so as you can further increase preload.

For the rear spring, 2721 and 2722 have a spring rate of 270 and 275 respectively, and meets the mark. Obviously, 2723, 2724 and 2725 are even heavier at 340, 400, and 440 lbs/in respectively.

With variables still unknown, like what spring rate Lovells is actually using outside of knowing their springs are not heavier than 50% more of the stock spring. I feel safe with my BP-51s, and 2724 rear springs (and E rated tires, which the Lovells kit never mentions being required) carrying up to 8,375 lbs.

Also, please check your weight on a certified Cat Scale completely loaded with all people, equipment and full fuel tanks. It's the only way to actually know your weight.

View attachment 1427411
View attachment 1427412

So have you weighed your truck recently all loaded with gear? Curious since I just weighed mine this week.

 

[Taco2Cruiser]

So have you weighed your truck recently all loaded with gear? Curious since I just weighed mine this week.

I have a lot of new armor items and am still working on a few other things. That said based on my last weigh in, as I've been checking the weight on these additional items I should be at around 8,000 lbs when absolutely loaded to the max of additional fuel, water, food, and clothes to be good for 5-6 days of remote wheeling.

 

[gaijin]

Let's examine the contents of this label and compare to a stock US-Spec LC200:

Tires are P285/65R17 inflated to 33psi. This equals a Load Limit of 2598 lb/tire or 5196 lb/axle.
Stock are P285/60R18 inflated to 33psi. This equals a Load Limit of 2512 lb/tire or 5024 lb/axle
Front GAWR is 1800 Kg (3960 lb) Tire Load Limit:GAWR Ratio = 1.31:1 (31% safety margin for Live Loading)
Stock Front GAWR is 1630 Kg (3595 lb) Tire Load Limit:GAWR Ratio = 1.40:1 (40% safety margin for Live Loading)
Rear GAWR is 2000 Kg (4400 lb) Tire Load Limit:GAWR Ratio = 1.18:1 (18% safety margin for live loading)
Stock Rear GAWR is 1950 Kg (4300 lb) Tire Load Limit:GAWR Ratio = 1.17:1 (17% safety margin for Live Loading)
GVWR is 3800 Kg (8360 lb) Total GAWR:GVWR Ratio = 1:1 (No safety margin for ancillary systems/towing)
Stock GVWR is 3345 Kg (7385 lb) Total GAWR:GVWR Ratio = 1.07:1 (7% safety margin for ancillary systems/towing)

Looks like all the ratios are good except the GVWR. This could confirm that there is no margin in the increased GVWR for towing without trailer brakes.

Just for a point of reference, if one were to fit LT285/70R17 tires (e.g. BFG AT T/A KO2) on this rig, and follow their Cold Tire Inflation Pressure recommendation, the BFG's would have to be inflated to 42psi F/R to handle the increased load.

HTH

 

[AutoCraft Aus]

We have fitterd out 200s that go to 4.7 tonne single axle, not with GVM upgrade stamped as you cant for that, but they cope of the suspension wheels and tyres suit the load.

With a rear axle housing mod we can get to 4.2 tonne gvm upgrade single axle wagon, and even 4.5 with a new housing with 79 bearing spindles.

Also 6.0 tonne gvm using same housing mods and another housing for 6x6 in the 200 as well.

Thread here 200 pick up cuts and 6x6 versions

We have carbon pads and slotted rotors to pass the brake tests for federal approval with that one. [pic is 3" lift on 35s with 18x9 25 pos rims as well.]

All have our custom long travel suspension kits, shocks we have made by icon, and our Upper control arms to fix the wheel alignment with lift.

We have been using Method wheels with the higher load rating but Icon has been testing the 17 x 8.5 six speed for a higher load rating as well so we will also be able to use these soon as they are done.

On heavy mine spec exploration vehicles, with bar winch, dual carriers, long range tanks, 5 guys and all their gear to get to remote desert camps and back we have been using up to 900lb front coils and 350 lb rears in dual rate. You have to ensure a minimum 3" droop from ride height with this set up though to protect the strut on the fully extended stroke from the extra spring rate.

the first 3 we built for a customer to get to and from the remote desert location with the std yellow twin tube set ups they bought pallets of and swapped out every month or so, cut the drive time from 24 hrs to under 18 hrs each way, and we got 9 months and over 55,000km per vehiclefrom the set ups before they adjusted the height on the front of 1 and it had a shaft issue due to topping out with the heavier coils on the coil overs. [the aus versions have the twin turbo diesel which is about 180kg heavier on the front too than the "gas" models]

2.5 years later, still operating.

In the rear we have slightly softer rate taller free height coils we use that come back to the right height for the load, but ride better unloaded for most Cruiser set ups, and her ein Aus the average overland tourer goes 3.8 tonne to 4.3 tonne fully loaded and packed with people on board.

We have these 270, 320, 330, and 495 lb for armoured and extra heavy applications too.

We also will run the red bags ijn the rear coils, not so much to hold the vehicle up, but to run max 8-12 psi pressure when fully loaded, to add to the compressed spring rate, but have them not touching top or bottom when unloaded so as not to effect the unloaded on road ride quality.

Tyre wise we only use the Good Year MTR with its high load ratings, or the Nitto Trail Grappler, as these are made to suit the heavy pick up market for the USA and have high load ratings on the tyres in suitable sizes.

 

[Sandroad]

Here is the Lovells kit. I see it is not approved for aftermarket; to be legal it has to be installed by Lovells prior to first registration. I know that's not the point of this thread, but it's an interesting piece of bureaucracy.


Lovells Suspension - For The Ride of Your Life - Company Profile - Products: GVM Upgrades - Toyota Landcruiser 200 Series

 

[linuxgod]

We have been using Method wheels with the higher load rating but Icon has been testing the 17 x 8.5 six speed for a higher load rating as well so we will also be able to use these soon as they are done.

I'm curious if you have any update on Icon's testing of these wheels for >2500#? Thanks!

 

[xkennx]

Well coming from the armored car world, I have made FB7/BR7 TLC and LX570 a number of times. After the 10 mm ballistic steel and the 70+mm glass they are at 4800 KG curb weight. The suspension and wheels have to be upgraded and recommended to change the brakes. But since 2008 havent had any problems with any of the other parts with normal maintenance. Body mounts do have to be tighten each yr though.

 

[Taco2Cruiser]

Well coming from the armored car world, I have made FB7/BR7 TLC and LX570 a number of times. After the 10 mm ballistic steel and the 70+mm glass they are at 4800 KG curb weight. The suspension and wheels have to be upgraded and recommended to change the brakes. But since 2008 havent had any problems with any of the other parts with normal maintenance. Body mounts do have to be tighten each yr though.

Now that is some real world feedback! Thank you. You wouldn't happen to remember what the front and rear weights were? And what type of upgraded tires and wheels, load ratings and such?

 

[xkennx]

Now that is some real world feedback! Thank you. You wouldn't happen to remember what the front and rear weights were? And what type of upgraded tires and wheels, load ratings and such?

Right now I'm in the USA, I will send an email back to the office in Dubai and get the weights for you. The tires were normally TOYO E-load with a load index of 123 or higher. The wheels I had 3 options, OEM steel wheel the cheapest but easy to get replacements ($200 each). Steel wheel from Australia (was made for mining industry with a 1500kg load $250 each), or custom alloy wheels with a 1600-1800kg load capacity ($1200 each).

 

[linuxgod]

FYI I got ahold of Lovell’s a while back and the GVM upgrade with 2” lift spring rate specs are as follows:

Front: TFR-121 – 675lbs/inch
Rear: TRR-122HD – 320lbs/inch

The front is less than the 750# you estimated above, but the rear is significantly higher.

For those who are interested in pushing the 3800kg limit of the GVM upgrade (which is 1200# more than factory) and are in the US, it’s reasonable to assume that other manufacturer suspensions with similar specs would also be capable of the increased load. Of course in the US the GVWR and GAWR are only set at manufacture time, so officially those numbers would still not be increased.