Do we really need a braking system in our toads?

[Mich F]

Originally Posted by TwelveVolt

My example was intended only to demonstrate what is possible under the umbrella of statistical probability.

But we are here to discuss, so lets discuss. The purpose of the aux brake is to take the weight of the toad off the MH in an emergency braking situation. By implication this means fast and hard. Why is your aux brake being applied in a leisurely fashion on a break-away event? Is this giving the toad enough distance to cross the median?

Drive your toad down the road. Shift to Neutral; no, not Reverse, just Neutral; never mind, just take your foot off the accelerator. Now let go of the wheel. The vehicle is now coasting and slowing down. How long it takes to come to a stop depends on the vehicle. If there is any crown to the road at all, the car will turn to the right shoulder.

The only problem with this test scenario is that in a real situation, unless both attach points on the toad broke away simultaneously, there is probably something dragging on the ground in front of the toad. The spare parts dragging on the ground will likely induce a turn in one direction or the other. However, they may also have a braking effect on the toad (design engineers, listen up).

Who's saying the brakes are being applied in a liesurely fashion in a break away event? It doesn't seem that you realize how far a vehicle will travel even when brakes are applied in a panic stop. I can't even imagine how far a vehicle going 60-70MPH would travel, before coming to a complete stop, without brakes being applied.
Here's one article that gives an idea of Stopping Distances at Different Speeds

[IMDSailor]

TwelveVolt;2197787
Here we go with the doom and gloom scenarios again. The common theme is that the doom will befall the owner without the aux brake. You know, "Probability". Some seem to be using the word as if it means "Certainty". The problem is that statistical probability works both ways.

A MH without aux brakes is going down the road. The toad breaks away. The other drivers on the road immediately become aware of this erratic "driver" among them moving in the same direction and take evasive action. The toad takes out a power pole and ends up in the ditch. A total write-off. Did the owner ALLOW this to happen by not having an aux brake?

Yup. The laws in both our countries are based on what a "Reasonable person" would do. Notwithstanding the quoted legal statutes a "Reasonable person" would understand that an AUX brake will assist in stopping a runaway vehical.

The next day an identical MH is going down the same road, driven by the proud owner of an aux brake. The toad breaks loose at the same pothole because of the same fault in the hitch welding. Drivers are surprised by the abrupt stopping of this vehicle with no brake lights, including the following semi, who cannot avoid the toad without taking out a couple of cars in the next lane. Seven vehicle pile-up with fatalities. Did the owner CAUSE this outcome by having an aux brake?

Nope, in this scenario you have laid out a case where the driver of the simi, who in reacting in the way he did caused the accedent. Why? Because he was following to close and driving with undue care and attention. The tow when seperated or started to seperate it would as you say will act erratically, his first indication. He should be backing off. In your scenario he didn't. He then had to exicute radical manouvers to over come his following to close and prior lack of attention causing the follow on catastrophy. The owner to the Toad did what he was reasonably expected to do and installed an AUX brake. It did exactly what it was designed to do, it stoped the runaway toad (which won't stop absolutly dead on seperation).

My point is simply a caution on assuming that probability is always in favor of your desired outcome. The fact is that "Probability" implies "Uncertainty". No, "Probability" implies "Certainty" that an event will happen. The only "Uncertainty" is when it will happen, and to whom.

[Gordon Dewald]

[QUOTE=Ramzfan;2197937]

Originally Posted by TwelveVolt

Here we go with the doom and gloom scenarios again. The common theme is that the doom will befall the owner without the aux brake. You know, "Probability". Some seem to be using the word as if it means "Certainty". The problem is that statistical probability works both ways.

TwelveVolt, I agree completely. That's what I've been trying to say all along here...Anyone can create a scenerio of doom & gloom. I have seen vehicles along the highway that lost a wheel while driving. What do you do in those cases? Add an auxiliary NET to the body of the coach to protect others from a 100 lb. rolling missle that MIGHT come loose,,,? To be real honest, I have driven over a million miles in these United States and have NEVER seen an accident caused by a tow-hitch breaking loose from the tow vehicle.

Nope - Probability means what are the chances of an event occuring. That is how insurance rates (car and health) are set. My father in law was an actuary who calculated the chances of events occuring and established health care systems for several jurisdictions. They worked out the probabilities of how long people would live and how much care they would require during their lifetime.

When you say gloom and doom you say it almost as if a toad getting away or failure to stop within required parameters will not have undesired consequences when it occurs. The reason we have brakes of any sort is to stop our conveyance before undesired events (gloom and doom) occur. Sadly it was the law that had to make minimum standards mandatory because left to our own or industries inititive it was substandard. Ralph Nader should come to mind for his efforts to make our drive safer.

We ride motorcycles and one of the things we were taught was "it is not if an accident is going to happen it is when". If you drive long enough or far enough you will have an accident. If you include scrapes I think there will be very few people who will be able to claim they went their entire driving career without having an accident.

Again we are talking about a fine line here. Some might argue that brushing against a gate post was not a serious as a head on and they would be right. But that is all they are arguing about. It is still an accident and still has cost.

So it is not gloom and doom but it is practicality and the extent of what could happen when something does happen.

We see many rear end accidents where tickets are written for following too close. No physical measurements are taken but the ticket is written based on failure to stop when the vehicle ahead stops or slows. If you are driving along and leave a reasonable gap, someone pulls in front of you and brakes and you hit them whose fault will it be?

[TwelveVolt]

Originally Posted by Gordon Dewald

So it is not gloom and doom but it is practicality and the extent of what could happen when something does happen.

If you re-read the post I was responding to, you will see that the author went from not having an aux brake to a conviction of negligent homicide in two sentences. No science, no actuarial tables, no real life event where this occured. That is what I call doom and gloom.

Anyone who has rented an Enterprise car in the past year or so probably knows what I have experienced on several occasions at different locations. It is the counter agent's duty to sell you as much insurance as possible. The entire sales pitch is based on the dire premise that if you rent an Enterprise car in this town today, it is inevitable that despite your clean 30 year driving record, bad things will happen in the next seven days and therefore you really must hand over an extra $10 to $20 per day. Even if you already have insurance, they will explain how your company will not step up in time, and you will have to cover all kinds of expenses yourself. It goes on and on until I start asking about accident statistics at this rental location. Then they just smile and drop it.

There are solid reasons to buy insurance and there is complete nonsense. I prefer to hear the former.

[Dan_public]

[QUOTE=Gordon Dewald;2198132]

Originally Posted by Ramzfan

Nope - Probability means what are the chances of an event occuring. That is how insurance rates (car and health) are set. My father in law was an actuary who calculated the chances of events occuring and established health care systems for several jurisdictions. They worked out the probabilities of how long people would live and how much care they would require during their lifetime.

When you say gloom and doom you say it almost as if a toad getting away or failure to stop within required parameters will not have undesired consequences when it occurs. The reason we have brakes of any sort is to stop our conveyance before undesired events (gloom and doom) occur. Sadly it was the law that had to make minimum standards mandatory because left to our own or industries inititive it was substandard. Ralph Nader should come to mind for his efforts to make our drive safer.

We ride motorcycles and one of the things we were taught was "it is not if an accident is going to happen it is when". If you drive long enough or far enough you will have an accident. If you include scrapes I think there will be very few people who will be able to claim they went their entire driving career without having an accident.

Again we are talking about a fine line here. Some might argue that brushing against a gate post was not a serious as a head on and they would be right. But that is all they are arguing about. It is still an accident and still has cost.

So it is not gloom and doom but it is practicality and the extent of what could happen when something does happen.

We see many rear end accidents where tickets are written for following too close. No physical measurements are taken but the ticket is written based on failure to stop when the vehicle ahead stops or slows. If you are driving along and leave a reasonable gap, someone pulls in front of you and brakes and you hit them whose fault will it be?

Gordon,

Excellent post. IMO, this is an excellent example of applied statistics - the probability of an event occurring and the probability of negative outcome of that event given a set of conditions. This can be extremely complex.

For example, if some "individual" suddenly pulls in front of you and then slams on the brakes, what's the probability of YOU getting the ticket? If you have a dashcam? If you do NOT have a dashcam? Change ONE parameter in the equation and the probability of you getting the ticket could change drastically.

Or...

Some folks argue strenuously about having or NOT having toad brakes. In the scenario above, what's the probability of having an accident or other problems if you're driving a 45' DP with a 600HP engine, pulling a Mini? OK, now what about a 32' gasser with a smaller engine pulling a Jeep Grand Cherokee? To me, the probabilities change drastically and associated risk change significantly.

To me, it's just a matter of the probability of a specific scenario occurring and the your willingness to accept the associated downside risk. There's no right or wrong answer. It's just finding the right answer for your situation.

We just purchased (late May, 2014) a 41' DP with 500hp engine (1500 ft/lbs of torque) with a 10,000 lb tow rating. The toad is a Honda CRV - 3,250 lbs purchased as a combo deal with the coach. It's a great combo and I can't even feel the CRV back. That said...

The CRV does not have a braking system and I'm not willing to accept the risk I perceive. My choice is to get a braking system - probably an Air Force One.

Regards,

Dan.

[Gordon Dewald]

Thanks Dan;
You can be proactive or reactive. There are proponents of both strategies. I worked for years in Asset Management (getting the most bang for your buck on deteriorating assets) and it was easy to show the proactive strategy gave you better assets for the same money or the same assets for less money than reacting to crisis's.

[TwelveVolt]

Originally Posted by IMDSailor

The next day an identical MH is going down the same road, driven by the proud owner of an aux brake. The toad breaks loose at the same pothole because of the same fault in the hitch welding. Drivers are surprised by the abrupt stopping of this vehicle with no brake lights, including the following semi, who cannot avoid the toad without taking out a couple of cars in the next lane. Seven vehicle pile-up with fatalities. Did the owner CAUSE this outcome by having an aux brake?

Nope, in this scenario you have laid out a case where the driver of the semi, who in reacting in the way he did caused the accedent. Why? Because he was following to close and driving with undue care and attention. The tow when seperated or started to seperate it would as you say will act erratically, his first indication. He should be backing off. In your scenario he didn't. He then had to exicute radical manouvers to over come his following to close and prior lack of attention causing the follow on catastrophy. The owner to the Toad did what he was reasonably expected to do and installed an AUX brake. It did exactly what it was designed to do, it stoped the runaway toad (which won't stop absolutly dead on seperation).

You are certainly getting on the trucker's case. Hope he has a good defense attorney.
If we are going to write the whole story, we may as well make it a good one.

It was a dark and stormy night. The trucker had finished his run and was on his way home. No hurry, so he was content to fall in behind that rig up ahead. Some rain falling, but still easy to see the six tail lights and five clearance lights in front of him. Two of the six running lights disappear. Not a problem, since four are still clearly visible, but he will mention this electrical problem to the other driver if they happen to pull into the same truck stop. And then...

Should the break-away event include turning on the hazard flashers? The answer is yes, but if it was easy, we'd all be doing it.

[tedgard01]

Originally Posted by Ramzfan

... I want you to know that I just purchased a Roadmaster "Invisibrake" for my toad. ...

Okay, an interesting change for you.....

So has it been installed yet? Did you install it or have it installed? Have you used it yet?

Just a word of caution, be sure you have read the device manual and understand how to use it and set the sensitivity correctly, etc.

After you have used it for several thousand miles, hooking up and disconnecting, and many varied breaking conditions, I'd be interested in getting some candid feedback in regard to your decision and experience with the breaking system.


Ted

[IMDSailor]

TwelveVolt

You are certainly getting on the trucker's case. Hope he has a good defense attorney.
If we are going to write the whole story, we may as well make it a good one.

It was a dark and stormy night. The trucker had finished his run and was on his way home. No hurry, so he was content to fall in behind that rig up ahead. Some rain falling, but still easy to see the six tail lights and five clearance lights in front of him. Two of the six running lights disappear. Not a problem, since four are still clearly visible, but he will mention this electrical problem to the other driver if they happen to pull into the same truck stop. And then...
No change to my original thoughts. Still following to close. Face it if someone hits something from behind, the odds are very strong that it will be they're fault. Why? Because they didn't leave enough room to react to a situation ahead, and most time it doesn't matter what the situation is. The situation can mitigate the punishment, but your still at fault. Similarly if you leave your lane to avoid an accedent but wind up causing one you are at fault. It's pretty simple.
I'm not standing ontop of an Ivory tower here wagging my finger. As they say been there, done that, and I have(had) the guilty verdict against me. It was years ago when I was young, dumb and full of...well you get the point. I rear ended a vehicle. I knew I was guilty, I walked into court and pled guilty. The court agreed I was guilty and I was charged as such. Period. I now leave lots of room between me and the vehicle ahead, backing off if someone wants that space. It cost me, but I learned my lesson.

Should the break-away event include turning on the hazard flashers? The answer is yes, but if it was easy, we'd all be doing it.
Yes I agree absolutly that this should somehow be part of the breakaway system. When the wire is pulled from the switch there should be a method of engageing the fourways.

[Ramzfan]

Originally Posted by tedgard01

Okay, an interesting change for you.....

So has it been installed yet? Did you install it or have it installed? Have you used it yet?

Just a word of caution, be sure you have read the device manual and understand how to use it and set the sensitivity correctly, etc.

After you have used it for several thousand miles, hooking up and disconnecting, and many varied breaking conditions, I'd be interested in getting some candid feedback in regard to your decision and experience with the breaking system.


Ted

Yes, it's been installed by CW and I am presently on the road heading for South Dakota. [ moderator edit]I have not noticed much difference in the braking as yet.
I will let you know after this trip. As I said, my main reason for buying the system was to cover my A in case of an accident.

[Gordon Dewald]

Originally Posted by Ramzfan

Yes, it's been installed by CW and I am presently on the road heading for South Dakota. I have not noticed much difference in the braking as yet.
I will let you know after this trip. As I said, my main reason for buying the system was to cover my A in case of an accident.

While your in the area a favorite of mine is the Crazy Horse Memorial. Have been there several times to see the evolution of the work. I will be done before it but it is still worth the view IMO.

[JohnRR]

Originally Posted by IMDSailor

TwelveVolt


Yes I agree absolutly that this should somehow be part of the breakaway system. When the wire is pulled from the switch there should be a method of engageing the fourways.

With my SMI Stay N Play Duo on the MKX the brakes don't take long to be fully applied and locked with the toad brake lights on using the toad electric system if the plug is pulled out.

I'm positive given the design of a cross over if the system is activated on a Interstate because of a break a way the MKX will find a way to rollover before it comes to a stop unless it hits something first.

[Clayobx]

Ramzfan, FWIW I've used the Invisibrake for the past three years. I do notice a difference in braking, ie: distance and ease. If I may make a couple of suggestions on its use, the control regulating pressure is pretty sensitive. Had DW operate the braking system while I monitored the pressure on the brake pedal as a check to insure full downward thrust. This required several small adjustments. Also the linkage had to be adjusted due to too tight hookup at the brake pedal on the toad. Only way I noticed this was late into the evening the activation light on the coach dash was flickering on our trip home. The brake pedal had constant pressure and may have worn the pads down prematurely. The correction was a couple of washers in line at the link to the toad brake pedal. Perhaps your installer took all this into consideration? Hope this helps. Our system has worked without fault.

[worob]

Going west on I-40 just coming into Memphis at sunset, I got confused about freeway lanes where they loop over to go right from the left lane. Ended up rear ending a tractor trailer at about 15 MPH. About $35000 damage to my "NEW CAYMAN". I was towing a PT Cruiser on a tow dolly with out any brakes. I'm not sure if a brake would have mad any difference, but if I was towing 4 down with brakes, I'm sure it would have. You don't have to be going very fast to play hell with fiber glass. Just bought a 2012 Equinox and am installing MG Engineering Brake System. Their website has brake and brake away requirements in all states.

[greystroke]

Originally Posted by worob

Going west on I-40 just coming into Memphis at sunset, I got confused about freeway lanes where they loop over to go right from the left lane. Ended up rear ending a tractor trailer at about 15 MPH. About $35000 damage to my "NEW CAYMAN". I was towing a PT Cruiser on a tow dolly with out any brakes. I'm not sure if a brake would have mad any difference, but if I was towing 4 down with brakes, I'm sure it would have. You don't have to be going very fast to play hell with fiber glass. Just bought a 2012 Equinox and am installing MG Engineering Brake System. Their website has brake and brake away requirements in all states.

Thank goodness your ok. We will never know if sup braking would have prevented the accident but you would have had a better chance.

[tedgard01]

Originally Posted by worob

Going west on I-40 just coming into Memphis at sunset, I got confused about freeway lanes where they loop over to go right from the left lane. Ended up rear ending a tractor trailer at about 15 MPH....

I just wanted to say, I fully understand the confusion in Memphis.... The lane changes are bad enough, but the drivers all seem bent on making it into a bumper car challenge as well... I have to travel that route many times, it is not good at any time of day or night.


Ted

[NeilV]

Originally Posted by TwelveVolt

If you re-read the post I was responding to, you will see that the author went from not having an aux brake to a conviction of negligent homicide in two sentences. No science, no actuarial tables, no real life event where this occured. That is what I call doom and gloom.

Anyone who has rented an Enterprise car in the past year or so probably knows what I have experienced on several occasions at different locations. It is the counter agent's duty to sell you as much insurance as possible. The entire sales pitch is based on the dire premise that if you rent an Enterprise car in this town today, it is inevitable that despite your clean 30 year driving record, bad things will happen in the next seven days and therefore you really must hand over an extra $10 to $20 per day. Even if you already have insurance, they will explain how your company will not step up in time, and you will have to cover all kinds of expenses yourself. It goes on and on until I start asking about accident statistics at this rental location. Then they just smile and drop it.

There are solid reasons to buy insurance and there is complete nonsense. I prefer to hear the former.

It was not meant as an attempt at a college level dissertation or an venture into esoteric's.

We live in a society with laws that govern these things and establish best practices. The laws and best practices we have in place today dictate that a braking system with a breakaway feature be used on anything towed over 1,000 some odd pounds in many jurisdictions. Regardless of ones personal opinion on the correctness of these laws they are in place and we are bound by our legal system to observe them.

In our society so fond of litigation, if you flaunt best practice and the law regardless of your reasons you can and most times will be held responsible for any negative outcomes.

You won't need a clinical study to understand that without a doubt if your toad breaks loose without a braking system on it with a breakaway feature installed, hooked up and maintained to ensure functionality that I will sue you if your towed vehicle comes loose and causes me or mine damage charging negligence on your part for not being in compliance with the law or for not following best practice. If someone dies my lawyer will be pursuing you for a negligent homicide. This is a given that is pretty much carved in stone and just about anyone I know would be reacting similarly.

Not gloom and doom just the facts of life. Also it is nonsense to endorse what is in many places considered illegal.

The need is dictated not by your home states laws either however by the requirements of the states you will be passing through which means on the East Coast if you will be passing through New York or North Carolina you need to have a towed vehicle braking system if what your towing is over 1,000 lbs. Quebec requires them at 2,000 lbs. On the West coast the law for California, Nevada and Idaho is 1,500 lbs with a 2,000 lb requirement for Utah. The norm for most other state is then 3,000 lbs however there may be other regulations that could come into play regarding minimum stopping distances that could lower the weight at which brakes would be then mandated by law.

Towing Laws | BrakeBuddy - Braking systems for motorhomes towing a vehicle


Yes those number are subject to change however the reasonable expectation is that the States currently with higher limits will be lowering them not the other way around.

I take the Insurance at Enterprise as too many times I have been given cars by them with defective brakes that were obviously leaking. Once the counter agent expected me to drive off after he pulled out a bottle of brake fluid and just topped them off. He could not understand my refusing to accept the vehicle. For the rare occasion I rent a car I do not chance their poor maintenance procedures garnering me a rate increase on my own policy and take the unlimited coverage for that rare one or two day rental. I do not just take the keys and drive off when I rent a vehicle and do my own inspection the same as when I drove delivery trucks in Boston and too many times I am not happy with what I find.

[Ramzfan]

NeillV, I agree completely with your opinion that we live in a society that loves to litigate. That being said, I disagree that everyone would automatically sue you if your tow car broke loose and destroyed or killed someone. It all depends on the circumstances. I myself have never sued anyone, even though I have had many chances and many reasons. I lost two sons in vehicle accidents that were not their fault and I refused to sue. I lost a wife due to a faulty biopsy on the wrong lung and still I refused to sue.
Life is not about money...it's about what's right and wrong. A person might be guilty of making a mistake, but if there was no malice intended, why try to ruin the person for your own gain...?

[IMDSailor]

Ramzfan, I'm terribly sorry for you considerable losses.
You have exercised tremendous restraint in a day and age where, I'm guessing, there were other opinions urging you otherwise.
In my previous posts I spoke of "what if". Adjunctive to that is "you never know who, or when". This is why people, myself included, were urging you to get a Aux Break. Should the worst occur other victims may not be so lenient or as kind as you were.
I would like to think that at this point, you having purchased an Aux break, that there is atleast a small load or worry off your mind. Satisfied that you did the right thing. Because you never know when you hitch may fail or who will sue.

All the best and stay safe,
Stewart


Sent from my iPhone using iRV2 - RV Forum

[NeilV]

Originally Posted by Ramzfan

NeillV, I agree completely with your opinion that we live in a society that loves to litigate. That being said, I disagree that everyone would automatically sue you if your tow car broke loose and destroyed or killed someone. It all depends on the circumstances. I myself have never sued anyone, even though I have had many chances and many reasons. I lost two sons in vehicle accidents that were not their fault and I refused to sue. I lost a wife due to a faulty biopsy on the wrong lung and still I refused to sue.
Life is not about money...it's about what's right and wrong. A person might be guilty of making a mistake, but if there was no malice intended, why try to ruin the person for your own gain...?

Yes I agree and condolences on your loss however for those who openly flaunt their disregard for the law and encourage others to do the same then its open season on them when an incident occurs. Remember I was speaking only to those who felt they were above it all and needed a clinical study before they would consider compliance.

I learned my lesson on refusing to sue when my father-in-law was killed by a negligent doctor. Two others died at this doctors hands the following month and now I have to live with knowing two other people might still be alive today if we had taken immediate action to stop this person from doing further harm.