New 180 owner...

The term "and using it" is ambiguous. If you meant that you should not use getting a higher rated axle to justify increasing the max gross trailer weight then I certainly agree, and I doubt anyone on this forum who has followed the rPod axle/spinde/frame/floor failure discussion over the past couple of years would disagree. That number is set by the trailer manufacturer based on DOT requirements. 

But no one, including Desert Wanderer, has suggested that. A more reasonable interpretation of "and using it" would be to use the higher rated axle to provide a better safety factor to reduce the risk of bending an axle on rough or potholed roads. In fact that kind of usage is what has been reported to have caused the original problem. Many folks have bent rPod axles that way, without having overloaded their trailers. I have run the axle tube calcs and the safety factor is under 2, while transport engineers generally recommend numbers more like 3 or higher. Several of us have now reinforced our axle tubes to mitigate this problem.

That was my interpretation of your statement.  I do agree that the trailer frame, although better able to handle positive g loads than the axle, is the next weakest link in the chain, There has been at least one bent frame reported on this forum, right where the FEA analysis shows the highest moments imposed by the torsion axle should occur. I simply pointed out that leaf spring axles have significant advantages over torsion axles in reducing bending moments on trailer frames, and provided a link to an engineering analysis demonstrating that.  

So perhaps I am not the one that has flown off the handle here. Choose your words more carefully next time.