OK. Agreeing that the front of 543/816/936 is a little on the light side and
would benefit from more lbs - be it useless plates or ground anchors/pins (Scammell/AEC/Martian etc.) or Bii lockers behind the bumper... Maybe we could look at the simple mathematic equation from the other standpoint, namely the rear pivot..
As Ron has said, the 819 "tractor wreckers" perform better as a suspend tow vehicle, due to the greater distance of the rear lift point relative to the CG of the overall mass of the truck; how about introducing a couple of air springs somewhere on the rear axle, inflated at the flip of a switch only when sus'towing.
I had a look under my 816 and think that at the expence of a little off road axle travel, a pair of air bags could stiffen up the rear bogie, hence moving the pivot point back from the center of the bogie, to the center of the rear most axle.
As discusses eariler/elsewhere, axle lock outs would help for side lifting instead of deployment of the stabilisers, in the same way, stopping the bogie from pivoting, would significantly effect the nose weight... think 100's of ft/lbs since we are talking torque or rotational effort... like a see-saw;
value in "tons" under front axle of equivalent reaction to load on rear, so almost 1 ton less needed to keep front wheels on ground not taking into account inherant vehicle weight.
Before anyone shouts out "overloading of rear tires" think about the truck with no suspension. The deformation of the rear tires would occur at a tangent to the front axle, many feet infront, so for a compression of 1/2" of the second axle, the rear axle would only compress 1/2" plus a small fraction more.
Since we are not changing the capacity of the truck, simply shutting down the ability of the suspension to follow uneaven ground - this could be a weight saving and valuable mod for porely designed (or compromised capabilities of multi purpose..) wreckers.