Thread: Towing Capacity

Perentie army personal introduction information

I point out the towing capacity on a 101 Landrover legal for Australian roads Is 2000kg as the army plate on the vehicle states that and is what the vehicle was tested for.
It is able to tow more in the real world as it has better drive train to do so than a Defender,Perentie, or Range Rover etc........beening not tested or plated for it as the vehicle was rated for on and off road the same and was only intended by the military to pull and gun or power driven trailer etc of 1500kg
It is almost the same story as the perentie 4x4.......both used by the Australian army and similar drive trains.....infact the perentie uses the 101s gearbox and transfercase and why they were able to produce the 6x6 as the 6x6 rear axle drive was really the power driven trailer drive.
Both the 101 and perentie are military only designs.
I note the Australian army are able to change the payload of the vehicle as they seem fit after there own testing and needs.
The Australian 101s have a 1500kg payload on the tray whisle all others...ie imported from UK ect are 1000 kg.
It follows though in civie street the payload of the Australian 101s being different to the UK ones even though the vehicles are exactly the same.......the civie rating is the same as the military one as that is what the vehicle was tested to and only a engineers cert will change things legally as you are driving a Perentie and not a 110
Engineers cert is the only way to cover yourself for civie use if you want to tow more than what the army tested the vehicle to do.
I note with my own dealings with the RTA/RMS in NSW when I was chasing LPG installation and govt rebates I had the vehicle over the pits.
I missed out on a rebate because they found the army plate in the cabin with a GVM of over 3500kg when previously they were all set to pass it best on civie figures and information.
I was welcome to have the vehicles GVM changed lower with a engineers cert, very simple, like changing to slightly lighter duty tyres than standard and would have not cost that much, but I wanted the higher GVM.
Fit your vehicle with a electric brake controller and specs for a civie 110 landy to help the process and the engineer should be happy to do it and it shouldn't cost too much as the engineer is not sticking his neck out much to do it.

Thanks Ron

Its late, I have read through those specs but may have missed something.
With regards the 6x6 it does give a GVM and GCM but it doesn't state a maximum permissible towed load.

That’s the sort of document I would consider to be a manufactures statement. I assume that exists because the 6x6 was available to the public and therefore unlikely for the 4x4 which wasn't (to the same spec). Till now!

One other point I will make is the Perenties use in replacing the 101 landrover for the rapier missle system which in Australian use is Three vehicles and Three trailers
1/ Launcher trailer
2/Radar trailer
3/ Resupply/reload trailer

The 4x4 perentie was not used to replace the 101, but the 6x6 was used simply because of the 6x6s slightly larger towing capacity over the 4x4 as the towing loads can be 1500kg .
I believe the 101s increase in payload for Australia after Army testing was for the Rapier missle system..........they used it in the UK, but not in the way Australia did and didn't need the payload or towing increase.
None of the above vehicles were tested or designed for anything more than non braked trailers/guns or over ride brakes and therefore not tested for more unlike any civie developed versions of the vehicles.

Originally Posted by rathgar

Thanks Ron

Its late, I have read through those specs but may have missed something.
With regards the 6x6 it does give a GVM and GCM but it doesn't state a maximum permissible towed load.

That’s the sort of document I would consider to be a manufactures statement. I assume that exists because the 6x6 was available to the public and therefore unlikely for the 4x4 which wasn't (to the same spec). Till now!

If you know the GVM and the GCM sub tract one from the other and you get very close..........draw bar weights come into play.

GCM......7050kg
GVM.....5500kg

you end up with 1550kg.........less draw bar weight.........so something like 1500kg with over ride brakes in the real world on Aussie roads both military and civie as designed.

I will be having this problem with my 101 landrover in a few years.
Its military towing/civie towing is 2000kg and is the maximum you can tow in civie street with over ride brakes.
I have a WW2 Wiles cooker which is well over 3000kg.
As last used in the services they were air braked.
I in tend to tow with Three different vehicles
1/
Alvis stalwart.....towing cap 10 tons , air braked.......no problem except it is (a very poor towing vehicle from a running cost point of view.)
2/
Studebaker 6x6.........military rated to tow up to 5000kg with vacuum brakes
( not legal above 2000kg in civie street and no air brakes.
3/
101 landrover 2000kg with override/vacuum brakes
( no air brakes and not enough towing capacity)

My answer is I should be able tow the Wiles cooker with all Three vehicles with simple engineering certs
The trailer brakes are air over hydraulic.
In recent years electric/battery/hydraulic systems have been advailible for trailers and are straight forward common to engineers cert trailers up to 4000kgs for these systems.
I should be able to leave the air brakes in place too.

The Studebaker will need a civie electric brake controller fitted and no engineering because of its mass is well over 4000kg unladen and rated army/ manufactures tow rating.

The 101 will need engineers cert for electric trailer brakes and upping the rated towing.
I should be able to get this cheaply as the hard work is already done for the engineer.
Correctly rated pintle hook is already fitted to vehicle and a extra renforcing plate at back of chassis of pintle hook bolts fitted.
The vehicle has drive train improved or equal to similer civie vehicles by the same manufacturer with 4000kg tow rating.
The vehicle has improved brakes( discs fitted to front and silicone brake fluid.)
Tyre specs fitted are well with in possible loads.
Why would a engineer and RTA/RMS not pass it ..........I found if you don't fight the system , but cover the pen pushers bum with safety they are happy to help you.
This towing thing with a military only design I have been looking into carefully.
Yes it will cost some money...........

Originally Posted by rathgar

Thanks Ron

Its late, I have read through those specs but may have missed something.
With regards the 6x6 it does give a GVM and GCM but it doesn't state a maximum permissible towed load.

That’s the sort of document I would consider to be a manufactures statement. I assume that exists because the 6x6 was available to the public and therefore unlikely for the 4x4 which wasn't (to the same spec). Till now!

I should point out that the difference between the perentie 6x6 and civilian 6x6 is much greater than the difference between the perentie 110 and civilian 110. For a start, the cabs are completely different and the track is significantly different.

John

Blacknight
"..you might want to read all of this post carefully and do some inferring of things that I am not coming out and "openly saying based on things that I have said."

I'd prefer not to infer anything but state all the facts . I'm not sure what you are getting at there.

To look at this from another angle. The process and not the outcome.
Can I ask, given your knowledge ( I mean that and in no way am I trying to be rude) of the military documents and processes;
What testing procedures did the military use?
Are the tests and calculation documents available?

ADR 62 sets out various loads (longitudinal, torsion, etc) that a towing system must meet.
Perhaps the military testing may prove compliance with ADR62 (for which the vehicles don’t need to comply). Just that the military used a greater margin of safety when establishing there towing loads.
If so I think this would make any engineering approval process far easier.