You only picked up on one exclusion, there are 3.
Here's an excerpt from RCW 46.37.340 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.37.340)
I think that (c) is the important one. Here's a link to RCW 46.37.351. Basically, it says that if your truck/trailer combo can generate enough braking force, then your are exempt from the "brakes acting on all wheels" requirement. Here is the summary definition of "enough force" for a truck with trailer:(3) Brakes on all wheels. Every vehicle shall be equipped with brakes acting on all wheels except:
(a) Trailers, semitrailers, or pole trailers of a gross weight not exceeding three thousand pounds
(b) Trailers, semitrailers, or pole trailers manufactured and assembled prior to July 1, 1965
(c) Any vehicle being towed in driveaway or towaway operations, provided the combination of vehicles is capable of complying with the performance requirements of RCW 46.37.351
- generate braking force greater than 43.5% of gross weight
- decelerate faster than 14 ft/s^2
- do 20-0 mph in less than 40 ft
I don't know for sure but I'd wager a bet that the boat manufacturers have analyzed the braking system and determined that brakes acting on only a single axle can meet this independently of the truck (i.e. the brakes generate at least this much force on their own and don't depend on any part of the truck breaks to meet this requirement) I can't figure any other way that the boat manufacturers could legally sell them otherwise.
If I were in WA, I would feel comfortable that my Moomba on its tandem axle trailer with single axle brakes was legal.
Results 21 to 30 of 35
03-06-2014, 11:41 PM #21Senior Member
2007 Mobius LSV
- Join Date
- Oct 2013
- Ft. Collins, CO
1989 Sanger Skier DX - sold
03-07-2014, 02:18 PM #22
Perhaps, but keep in mind mine is 13 going on 14 yrs old and came from another state that doesn't have this law. I don't know if I'd want to jump through any hoops to prove the stopping capability. If I ever were in a sticky situation I don't want to have to explain why I only have them on the front when you know they're going to be telling me otherwise. Plus the added stopping power definitely can't hurt.
So far the parts list direct from BoatMate is starting to look a little better than the original sticker shock I was facing. But definitely not what I had in mind.
Daze - yes, the plan of attack right now is to rebuild the fronts and add a kit with mounts, calipers, rotors, etc to the rear axle and extend lines to plumb them in. Probably going to end up replacing/upgrading the entire front actuator in the process as well.Old enough to know better, young enough to do it anyway.
03-07-2014, 04:05 PM #23
A few people I talked to only have brakes on two wheels so I think you are in company with a lot of others.1998 Mobius
310 HP PCM
03-07-2014, 04:19 PM #24
03-07-2014, 06:30 PM #25
I wonder if this would be covered under a "Grandfather Clause" just like older cars that didn't come with seat belts. Law does not require you to add anything that wasn't required when something was built.Joe
2010 Outback V - Sold
03-07-2014, 06:47 PM #26
I asked the State Patrol that specifically and they said no. No exceptions. Well, unless it was pre 1965.Old enough to know better, young enough to do it anyway.
03-08-2014, 12:10 AM #27Junior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
- edmonds, wa
that is interesting, i have never checked my trailer to see if only one axel has breaks. i do have disc breaks so it stops well and the guy i got the boat from had only towed it once to eastern wa since he had bought it new. i will have to take a look at them to see if both axels have them or not.2002 outback lsv 320 tbi
2000 explorer ltd v8
03-08-2014, 01:25 AM #28My Mom said I'm not allowed to get wet!
2000 Outback LS (sold)
03-08-2014, 08:49 AM #29
WA Trailer Brake Law - both axles. Great...
Just buy 2 of these and fake it
New ride: 2012 Mojo
Old ride: 2008 OBV
03-08-2014, 10:30 AM #30
Heh, heh, heh. That would work great going down the mountain.My Mom said I'm not allowed to get wet!
2000 Outback LS (sold)