Vaquero Weight Limitations

[MPSS]

Hi all, was reading the owners manual for my Vaquero and noted a weight limitation of 395lbs to include driver, passenger and any luggage? Doesnt seem to be a whole lot when me, the driver, is coming in just over 200lbs?

[tonik]

Yea, we Voyager owners scratch our head on that one too. Makes no sense.

[Silent Sam]

Might be a mfg'er's CYA to deny any responsibility, in case of a structural failure, or any mishap ! ?

[robjob]

Maybe someone who knows will chime in but is it anything to do with the spongy air shocks that come with it ??

[Gypsy Dragon]

It should have to do with a combination of the GVWR of the tires, the shock's load rating, and possibly the frame design or material. The frame part is speculation, but I'm pretty sure about the tires and shocks.

[robjob]

Just as a comparison, my 750 Shadow I traded last year for the Nomad had a load limit of 397lbs. 1700 Nomad - 395lbs. What the heck??

[Gypsy Dragon]

has anyone added up the GVWR of both tires, then subtracted the weight of the bike? I would do it, but my Vaq is 1000 miles away.

[tonik]

Originally Posted by Gypsy Dragon

has anyone added up the GVWR of both tires, then subtracted the weight of the bike? I would do it, but my Vaq is 1000 miles away.

You nailed it. While I have Mich Comd II's on mine and can't find the load ratings for the factory Flintstones I think it is safe to assume they are in the same general range. 389 pounds after you subtract the bike weight.

[Snake Ranch]

When I started looking at the load rating for my skoot I thought those factory boys didn't build this thing to carry much. I just figured they are being conservative. Especially when you stop and think how these skoots can be used. I put an M.C.A trunk on my ride and it will carry a LOT. My wife and I took a 2 week vacation last year. I had just finished installing the light bar and trunk and had no driving time to check out my electrical or machine work sooo I had a few tools with all our travel things. We left California and in Oregon I drove over some on-highway truck scales. I had just fueled up. The scale readout displayed 1400 pds exactly. All I could think was WOW this thing is heavier than I thought. After leaving the scales I thought that thing might not have been accurate, plus I should have checked each tire or axle weight. I knew of another truck scale up the road and with a full tank I got the same reading. This time I rolled on the scale slow. The front tire weighed in at 450 pds. Total gvw was 1400 pds again. So my rear axle weight was 950 pds.

This skoot didn't give any indication of stability issues, and my read out showed I could still get 40 to 42 mpg.

I checked the rear tire maximum rating and it was 835 pds if I remember correctly. Well we boxed up 32 pounds of clothes and tools and sent them home.

In the trucking world your normal trucks can have 20,000 pds on all the axles except the front axle which is 12,500 pds if my memory is correct. THAT is providing the tire has a rating that will total 20,000 for the number of tires on that axle. SO if you have 2 tires that are rated for 10,000 pds, then two tires get you to the maximum weight for that axle. If you have more weight then you start exceeding the brakes, axle design etc.

I figure Kawasaki probably designed these skoots with some of the same considerations.

I know this Vaquero will carry a lot an it doesn't even know its there. The wheel base length, height of the center of gravity, tires, tire pressure and suspension can play a big part in how your skoot carries itself. Another thing that might come into play is the height of your wind shield. If I'm correct it will provide some downward push, due to deflection, on the front axle.

I think it is easy to overload these beasts but with a little consideration you can manage it.

[Silent Sam]

Those "freebee", Weigh Stations in Oregon are just really handy...all states should have them...

[MPSS]

So, I went back to a downloaded pdf for the oweners manual. The front tire for the Vaquero is 130/90, 16mc, 67H. The 67 represents the weigt load for the tire/tyre(for our our UK friends), at 307 kgs or 677lbs.

the rear tire is 170/70, 16mc, 75H. The 75 represents the weight load at 387kgs or 853lbs. The H rating is speed, rated at a top speed of 130mph.

The bike weighs approx 850lbs, subtract the tire loads at 1530lbs, which gives me approx 680lbs of play, passenger, rider and luggage. I suspect other things come into play as well?

[fudd]

Like it when there is a math quiz! I am thinking that regardless of the individual tire weight ratings you should only consider the rating of the lighter (front) and doubling it? What is the percentage of weight carried per axle? My brain sez 50/50 but am open to the correct answer.

[Silent Sam]

...According to my "Bike-Jack" the empty weight of my bike is aprox 50/50....but add my 255 lbs...two hard bags full of "gear"...my Pack's -Or pack w/passenger- and a huge % of the total weight shift to the rear tire...

[ponch]

You have to figure what's the weakest link. Sure the tires can handle more, but what of the axles/bearings and shocks/springs? I think the Cross Country load capacity is 560. That's about as high as I've seen. My bike is 520, but weighs 570 wet. Sometimes I wonder what good is all the extra weight. That said, the Vaquero should do better than 395.

[Snake Ranch]

Originally Posted by ponch

You have to figure what's the weakest link. Sure the tires can handle more, but what of the axles/bearings and shocks/springs? I think the Cross Country load capacity is 560. That's about as high as I've seen. My bike is 520, but weighs 570 wet. Sometimes I wonder what good is all the extra weight. That said, the Vaquero should do better than 395.

The Vaquero does do better. I thing Kawasaki is just being very conservative on paper. I would like to know their engineering reasons for such a light weight rating though. When there was 950 pds rear and 450 front on my skoot I didn't experience any issues other than the concern that 950 pds was over the 835 pds rating for the rear tire. My thought was to find a tire with a higher load rating as the center of gravity does shift to the rear quite rapidly. The trunk is located behind the rear axle, the saddle bags are in line with the axle and my wife sets just in front of the axle. The back end really carries a big load. Being aware of the changes and changing your driving habits to meet the conditions might be a way to stay inside the safety envelope. I see that 395 pd rating as a suggestion or a recommendation Kawasaki is comfortable with.