Registering your TOAD as a trailer.

Pausim said:
I don’t think you can tell someone else what they should feel strongly about and campaign for. I don’t share TonyEmm ’s views about A frames but I do defend his right to free speech and personal opinions.

You want someone else to campaign about Smart Motorways but that is also open to interpretation. Some Smart Motorways have a hard shoulder so the first thing is to establish whether you mean all Smart Motorways or just the ones without a hard shoulder. The motorways without a hard shoulder are called ALR Motorways, which stands for All Lane Running. Then there is the question of what would happen if the extra lane was removed and turned into a hard shoulder. Would it cause traffic jams and force motorists back onto the even less safe non motorway routes?

Perhaps you should raise another thread to air your concerns about Smart Motorways because this one was originally about registering toads as trailers, which I found interesting because I had no idea that it had ever been possible.

ps I am about to attach my toad to the back of my motorhome to move on to my next campsite.
Click to expand...
You've just denied me my freedom of speech!🤣🤣🤣
 
Realist said:
God here we go again, man on a mission part 1001 I name no names.

Can Jim close this before it gets out of hand again like all A frame threads.

Haaaaaaa does my head in.
Click to expand...
Amen to that……i have a shed that needs painting if anybody has so much spare time in their hands this weekend! 😳😜😆….only saying! oh and I have sinned…..I tow a Fiat Abarth on an electronically braked A Frame 😁
 
I don't understand the venom in some posts, all that is being proposed is to make sure that the arrangement is safe by ensuring the car being towed is structurally sound enough to be. This means that the points where the A-frame attachments are made can take the load of being towed without issue or that the car is modified by the A-frame supplier to ensure it is, if not then no A-framing is allowed for that vehicle.
 
As an impartial observer (I don't have an A frame, a toad or an inclination to have one) I don't understand the objections to having additional legislation to create safety standards and testing regimes for A frames and there usage, I realise that they will likely cause extra expense and that A frame accidents are rare but surely we are all interested in the safety of ourselves, our loved ones and the general public? Just my 5p's worth.
 
Minxy said:
I don't understand the venom in some posts, all that is being proposed is to make sure that the arrangement is safe by ensuring the car being towed is structurally sound enough to be. This means that the points where the A-frame attachments are made can take the load of being towed without issue or that the car is modified by the A-frame supplier to ensure it is, if not then no A-framing is allowed for that vehicle.
Click to expand...
Standard form on here. They want laws to stop/regulate anything they don‘t like, but want to be able to do anything they choose, however unpractical.
 
Pausim said:
I don’t think you can tell someone else what they should feel strongly about and campaign for. I don’t share TonyEmm ’s views about A frames but I do defend his right to free speech and personal opinions.

ps I am about to attach my toad to the back of my motorhome to move on to my next campsite.
Click to expand...
Perhaps one day that privilege may not be available to you as a result of someone’s negative views and efforts to change or stop what is in fact a very safe method of towing.
 
ChrisL said:
As an impartial observer (I don't have an A frame, a toad or an inclination to have one) I don't understand the objections to having additional legislation to create safety standards and testing regimes for A frames and there usage, I realise that they will likely cause extra expense and that A frame accidents are rare but surely we are all interested in the safety of ourselves, our loved ones and the general public? Just my 5p's worth.
Click to expand...
If incidents are rare and to date there is no evidence that anyone has been injured or killed using this method then why increase legislation to complicate what is a safe way of towing.
 
TonyEmm said:
You miss the point, it isn‘t the a-frame (usually) that’s the issue, it’s what they fastened to. 1,000’s may use them without issue but, they are not fool-proof!
The photo is IIRC, an American made Blue Ox a-frame, one of the most respected anywhere. It was towing a Suzuki in Australia…. 😏
Click to expand...
So what does that photo prove? It proves that if you supply sufficient force as in an accident you can rip the chassis apart, no doubt there are pictures of correctly fitted towbars ripped from the backs of cars in accidents, so why not post them and say rear towbars shouldn't be allowed?
Your original post on this was about one badly fitted A frame where the attachment point was the original crossmember, this was clearly not strong enough to do the job, your latest picture shows that the chassis has been torn apart, so the A frame wasn't badly fitted, it was fitted so well it tore the chassis apart likely in an accident.
I seems to me you have scoured the internet to find pictures showing badly fitted A frames and this was the only one you came up with, you should work for the gutter press with these sort of bogus pictures.

When you stick to the facts your posts are quite interesting and I entirely agree classing a towed car as a trailer seems bonkers to me, but while the DVLA say it is I will keep towing mine. :giggle:
A quote from the book Shogun "The law may overcome reason, but reason may not overcome the law"
 
I don’t have a Motorhome or tow a car anymore but out of interest can anyone say how many accidents have there been through……..

A frame use?

Or

People miss using such a setup.

I’m not interested in what’s law or what should be the law I’m only after facts as above just out of interest.
 
Larrynwin said:
Perhaps one day that privilege may not be available to you as a result of someone’s negative views and efforts to change or stop what is in fact a very safe method of towing.
Click to expand...
Larrynwin said:
If incidents are rare and to date there is no evidence that anyone has been injured or killed using this method then why increase legislation to complicate what is a safe way of towing.
Click to expand...
It is ONLY safe if the structure of the vehicle being towed is able to withstand the forces being placed on it by the A-frame, that's what this is all about. Your set-up may be safe but that doesn't mean that all of them are nor that a proper inspection shouldn't be implemented at a sensible interval to ensure they remain so.

One of the common comments you hear by many who tow cars in this way is that they don't realise it's there which could easily mean that they don't drive with towing in mind. If so then the tow car is likely to take a fair old hammering being dragged about over speed bumps, potholes etc, all of which can damage the car never mind compromise the integrity of the towing attachment.

I can't be the only one who's seen people with a toad on the rear hammering down roads with the tow car being bumped around, often at way higher speeds than the legal limit for towing. A mandated check would help to ensure the toad is safe to tow and drive.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
TonyEmm said:
Enforcement in Spain is definitely sporadic. I guess it depends how sociable el policía is feeling. One thing for sure trying to con him isn’t going to aid anyone’s cause! This amendment to legislation closes that loophole at least
Click to expand...
TheTwoOfUs said:
AFAIK it could be classed as illegal on two counts,
1. As brakes are fitted to the rear wheels , these should be operational when the towing vehicle is braking.
2. Any dolly that lifts the front wheel(s) off the road should only be used for recovery purposes and as such restricted to 40mph.
Of course I could be talking total ******s (I'll let you fill in the blanks). ;)
Click to expand...
no your right on the dolly for recovery only
 
Jamesh said:
Why not campaign against something like smart motorways which are really dangerous rather than banging on about A frames which are hardly dangerous in the grand scheme of things....?!
Click to expand...
I campaign about what I know about, which is towing.. Norfolk has never heard of Smart motorways, we don’t even have a motorway!

now there’s a good trivia answer for you, it‘s the only county in England with no motorways! 👍😏
 
olley said:
So what does that photo prove? It proves that if you supply sufficient force as in an accident you can rip the chassis apart, no doubt there are pictures of correctly fitted towbars ripped from the backs of cars in accidents, so why not post them and say rear towbars shouldn't be allowed?
Your original post on this was about one badly fitted A frame where the attachment point was the original crossmember, this was clearly not strong enough to do the job, your latest picture shows that the chassis has been torn apart, so the A frame wasn't badly fitted, it was fitted so well it tore the chassis apart likely in an accident.
I seems to me you have scoured the internet to find pictures showing badly fitted A frames and this was the only one you came up with, you should work for the gutter press with these sort of bogus pictures.

When you stick to the facts your posts are quite interesting and I entirely agree classing a towed car as a trailer seems bonkers to me, but while the DVLA say it is I will keep towing mine. :giggle:
A quote from the book Shogun "The law may overcome reason, but reason may not overcome the law"
Click to expand...
The photo proves that regardless of how good or strong the a-frame is, you cannot treat it as an isolated item. It’s the combination of a vehicle and a-frame that needs testing!
I have no objection to rear Towbars, while there has been (rare) recalls on them, they are at least tested and type approved, and much safer now than pre 1998.
One reason there has been the occasional recall is solely down to the type approval issue.
That facility does not exist for a-frames and the responsibility for that lies entirely with the DfT.
 
Minxy said:
It is ONLY safe if the structure of the vehicle being towed is able to withstand the forces being placed on it by the A-frame, that's what this is all about. Your set-up may be safe but that doesn't mean that all of them are nor that a proper inspection shouldn't be implemented at a sensible interval to ensure they remain so.

One of the common comments you hear by many who tow cars in this way is that they don't realise it's there which could easily mean that they don't drive with towing in mind. If so then the tow car is likely to take a fair old hammering being dragged about over speed bumps, potholes etc, all of which can damage the car never mind compromise the integrity of the towing attachment.

I can't be the only one who's seen people with a toad on the rear hammering down roads with the tow car being bumped around, often at way higher speeds than the legal limit for towing. A mandated check would help to ensure the toad is safe to tow and drive.
Click to expand...
I couldn’t agree more with your comment. Living where I do, close to the A17 on the gateway between Lincolnshire and Norfolk, I regularly see TOADS. Many look relatively ok but there are some that give me cause for concern!
As we walk around there, horse ride around there and cycle around there, it’s definitely an issue for me!
#TowSafe4Freddie

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Don't think your trivia knowledge is particularly good when it comes to non motorway counties, I think you will find that Northumberland certainly doesn't have any, but then again it's more probably that you are so infatuated with your skewed views on A frames that you can't see the wood for the trees.

Oh and by the way my FIStructE status does allow me to make informed decisions on use of my toad and A frame, so I don't need a constant diatribe of piffle from someone carrying out a single-minded campaign against a means of towing that is not classed as illegal by DVSA, DfT or any other statutory body the UK.
 
Sasbo said:
Don't think your trivia knowledge is particularly good when it comes to non motorway counties, I think you will find that Northumberland certainly doesn't have any, but then again it's more probably that you are so infatuated with your skewed views on A frames that you can't see the wood for the trees.

Oh and by the way my FIStructE status does allow me to make informed decisions on use of my toad and A frame, so I don't need a constant diatribe of piffle from someone carrying out a single-minded campaign against a means of towing that is not classed as illegal by DVSA, DfT or any other statutory body the UK.
Click to expand...
Looks like my info about about trivia might be flawed, but it’s exactly that, trivia!

you may be well qualified to make Informed judgments about your a-frame/toad combination but the great majority of folk have to rely on info provided by the supplier/fitter.
Sadly, this is often more flawed than my opinion on motorways (which is exactly why I don’t campaign about them).

For info, I don’t only campaign about a-frame towing. You will soon see an issue regarding type approval of trailers with under spec’d wheel rims. This bothers me greatly as, it turns out, I have one!
 
Minxy said:
I don't understand the venom in some posts, all that is being proposed is to make sure that the arrangement is safe by ensuring the car being towed is structurally sound enough to be. This means that the points where the A-frame attachments are made can take the load of being towed without issue or that the car is modified by the A-frame supplier to ensure it is, if not then no A-framing is allowed for that vehicle.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand it either but it seems to be some sort of game played exclusively by a small sector of this particular forum.

Anything I say about a-frames is immediately jumped on by a small minority and I am vilified.

Will there reaction be different when I post about an issue with the type approval of trailers? 🤔
 
Pausim said:
Could add Dorset and Cornwall to the list too, though some might argue that Cornwall is a separate country.😀
Click to expand...
Okay, I hold my hand up, my trivia knowledge is crap! 😂🤣. This from Wikipedia “Dorset is one of only five non metropolitan counties in England to not have a single motorway”. But it’s why I don’t campaign about them! 🧐😠🤓
looks like I’ve failed the million pound question!

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
TonyEmm said:
I campaign about what I know about, which is towing.. Norfolk has never heard of Smart motorways, we don’t even have a motorway!

now there’s a good trivia answer for you, it‘s the only county in England with no motorways! 👍😏
Click to expand...
Maybe I should change my answer to it’s the most easterly county in England with no motorways! 🙄🤓
 
TonyEmm said:
I campaign about what I know about, which is towing.. Norfolk has never heard of Smart motorways, we don’t even have a motorway!

now there’s a good trivia answer for you, it‘s the only county in England with no motorways! 👍😏
Click to expand...
Interesting……what motorway is in Cornwall then?
 
No motorways in Suffolk either.
 
No motorways in Hartford;););)

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Join us

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Back
Top