Epiphany Gets new Axles

[HiHoAgRV]

Originally Posted by 87MH

Interesting note on the differences on the build practices from '64 to '78....On the '78...There was a 1" gap between the top of the old Henschen Low Profile mount and the bottom of the AS main beam top flange when the unit came from the factory.

How about this, my Henschen touches the main rail and the bracket looks exactly like the Dexter HP. Both the Dexter and the Henschen have similar top-of-pad to center-line-of-axle dimensions.
I guess they used whatever was available at the time the trailers were built.

[HiHoAgRV]

Originally Posted by 87MH

...I really like 47WeeWind's suggestion of a void shim - wonder if you could pick one up at the local Homer Despot?

I ran to the Home Depot to get a Void Shim but all of the boxes were empty..

[crispyboy]

Will Dexter allow rewelding of the brackets by the dealer so it is still warrantied or will this destroy the rubber torsion inside the tube?
I'm thinking a slow tack weld process with a lot of time for the metal to cool down..... Just a thought.

[47WeeWind]

Originally Posted by 87MH

Interesting note on the differences on the build practices from '64 to '78. Fred mentions that the High Profile (HP) actually raised his body height by an inch. On the '78, using the Dexter HP mount and the Dexter supplied mounting holes, the top of the Dexter HP mount flange just nested onto the bottom of the Airstream main beam top flange, so the HP mount made no difference on my body height. There was a 1" gap between the top of the old Henschen Low Profile mount and the bottom of the AS main beam top flange when the unit came from the factory.

Hi Dennis:

Yup, my 1964 Globe Trotter's original Henschen DuraTorque axle had the Low Profile mounting bracket that was barely higher than the thickness of its top surface, and the bottom of frame rail sat right on it. So I gained an extra inch in body height by specifying the High Profile bracket, the top of which also rests on the bottom of the frame rail.

That slightly higher stepup into the trailer will keep me limber and fit in my advancing years. And Oldtimer's Disease will cause my trailer to become my everyday Stairmaster as I keep forgetting things left inside it. Am I all planned out, or what?

[87MH]

For those of you who may be contemplating an axle change out I am referring to the Dexter Axle Torflex catalogue here -

http://dexteraxle.com/i/u/1080235/f/...-05_80_res.pdf

Pages 7 and 8.

I refer to Dexter information here since HiHo's is documentating HIS axle installation.

From the graph on page 7, refering to a high mount bracket, the difference between a loaded 22.5 degree starting angle height (2.52") and a loaded 45 degree starting angle height (4.81") is (4.81") - (2.52") = 2.29".

So, with my 45 degree start angle, my trailer will sit about 2.3 inches higher than HiHo's 22.5 degree start angle, given we both use the "original" mounting holes and do not adjust the axle bracket holes. The increase in ride height has worked for me, all is well within the adjustment capabilities of my Reese Dual cam, and, so far, the axles seem to give an acceptable ride in the interior - have not noticed anything falling out of place while on the road.

Now, here's the kicker about "start angle".

If you notice on page 33 (pic 1 below) the "start angle" is the angle between the extended trailing arm and the TOP of the MOUNTING FLANGE!!! - NOT the angle between the extended trailing arm and the CENTER LINE OF THE MAIN TORQUE SHAFT!!!

This means that the ACTUAL "trailing arm angle" is significantly LESS than the angles that Dexter uses in their publications.

I know that this is a bit difficult to follow, but to those of you interested, it is worth looking into. On the flip side, I do not know which angle Henschen uses in their descriptions (trailing arm top of mount vs. trailing arm center line of torque shaft).

It would seem to me that the trailing arm center line of torque shaft would be the more important consideration, since that is the angle that you really must compare the difference in ride degradation between the 45 and 22.5 (or other) start angles.

Double Click each pic to enlarge.

These are reproductions from "Dexter" publications - I take sole responsibility for copy infringements if any.

[HiHoAgRV]

Thanks Dennis for posting the details on the angles. If I find myself with no other options, I have a scheme to use these axles in conjunction with a 2x2 thick wall sq tube that would raise me up 2". It looks like our ride height would then be the same. The lower left diagram also shows the challenge of Crispy's suggestion. The flange wraps completely around the tube so the only way to relocate it is to grind all the welds loose and slide it to the new location. Some of the welds are very difficult to access with an angle grinder.

[crispyboy]

Hiho,
If you cannot get to the welds with a grinder then try a carbide tipped bit on the end of an die grinder. Those carbide tipped bits can do wonders! They are also useful in elongating the holes in the Dexter brackets.

[binkers]

Now, here's the kicker about "start angle".

If you notice on page 33 (pic 1 below) the "start angle" is the angle between the extended trailing arm and the TOP of the MOUNTING FLANGE!!! - NOT the angle between the extended trailing arm and the CENTER LINE OF THE MAIN TORQUE SHAFT!!!

This means that the ACTUAL "trailing arm angle" is significantly LESS than the angles that Dexter uses in their publications.

Dennis, The 22.5 angle is the same if referenced from the top of mounting flange or centerline of main torque shaft...the two "lines" are parallel. Are you saying that a 45 degree angle is acceptable? Maybe I'm not following your argument? I'm looking at replacing my axles and enjoying this thread.

[87MH]

Originally Posted by binkers

Dennis, The 22.5 angle is the same if referenced from the top of mounting flange or centerline of main torque shaft...the two "lines" are parallel......

Binkers - you are quite correct - thank you for pointing out the error of my ways - I say it's the Chemo that makes me say stupid stuff - - that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

It's a good thing I don't have to take any more High School Trig tests.

On your question on my 45 degree start angle - I recognize I have a harsher ride than a comparable 22.5 degree start - but I have found the ride to be acceptable. If I had to do it over again I would seriously consider a 35 degree start.

[HiHoAgRV]

Originally Posted by 87MH

...On your question on my 45 degree start angle - I recognize I have a harsher ride than a comparable 22.5 degree start - but I have found the ride to be acceptable. If I had to do it over again I would seriously consider a 35 degree start.

Out of curiosity, how much do they deflect from the 45 degree angle when the trailer is on level ground? I am guessing they will end up at 30-35 degrees.

FYI Shock brackets - Dexters drawing shows how they are supposed to place the bracket for welding but it's dimensioned so the 22.5 degree is part of the setup. Thus their hesistancy at doing a 35 degree axle with shock mounts.

[TN-TUNDRA]

Sorry to hear about your problems. Mine spec'ed out the same as Pizza's and I went to the TruckPro and sat there with them while they ordered. I was kinda picky about what was needed and told the guy more than once the specs. The "ghost" bracket was NOWHERE on any Decter sheet. Mine installed very tight but was perfect. Also a "High" braket would do no good the axle it doesn't ride on the frame but is bolted in. Maybe it is just a taller bracket with the bolt holes higher? My AS sits soo much higher now and is level with my truck I don't have to use a drop hitch. So going any higher than the 22.5 would have been overkill. My truck is a 07 Tundra (if you haven't figured that out yet!). It sits A LOT higher than the PO 02 Chevy. Hope it works out good for you! Keep us posted...

[HiHoAgRV]

Originally Posted by TN-TUNDRA

... My AS sits soo much higher now ...

TN,
Wasn't yours the one that had the Gansta Low ride look prior to the swap ?

BTW, mine spec'd almost exactly the same as yours also.

[binkers]

Thus their hesistancy at doing a 35 degree axle with shock mounts... -HiHoAgRV

Also a "High" braket would do no good... -TN-TUNDRA

So, if one intends to use shocks with new Dexter axles, it would be appropriate to order 22.5 down, not special order 35's? Also, are the high-profile (HP) and low-profile (LP) options simply a choice to elevate or not-elevate the trailer from the axle? And, does choosing HP or LP have any influence as to whether or not the shocks will fit? Thanks.

[Jim & Susan]

Great questions about the shocks, Binkers. Vern, are you using shocks? I think I read earlier that you were leaning in the direction of no shocks. Is that right?

Jim

[3Ms75Argosy]

Can someone post a pic of the Dexter mounts? I'm not sure I understand when PC and GP state that one doesn't need the mounts. Isn't this what bolts to the side plates? OR is there a mount already there (as above in the Dexter drawing) and the "side mount" goes over the existing mount? If so, why is the side mount extra metal even offered?

confused...
Marc

[HiHoAgRV]

Jim,
I ordered High brackets 'cause it matches the OEM that's currently on the trailer, so no change there. I also ordered shock brackets. I intend to test the ride quality with the current (worn out?) axles and old shocks then with the new axle w/o shocks. I will most likely install the old shocks to see the difference, if any, they make. I'll make a judgement call on springing for new shocks (or solicit for some new test samples )
Since I currently have nothing to install , I'll start the data generation tomorrow on the old setup.
Binkers,
The brackets would have a minor effect if your trailer uses a low bracket and you select a high. I suspect the shocks would still reach.
The 22.5 angle is the only one that Dexter will weld mounts on. If you choose any other angle you will need to recycle your old brackets and weld them on as you see fit.

[HiHoAgRV]

Originally Posted by 3Ms75Argosy

Can someone post a pic of the Dexter mounts? I'm not sure I understand when PC and GP state that one doesn't need the mounts. Isn't this what bolts to the side plates? OR is there a mount already there (as above in the Dexter drawing) and the "side mount" goes over the existing mount? If so, why is the side mount extra metal even offered?

confused...
Marc

It seems we all ended up with a pair of these brackets that Dexter simply bolts to the axle hangers. I suspect it SOP since if ordering an axle for a new trailer it would come in very handy

[Inland RV Center, In]

Replacement Henschen axles, automatically come with a 35 degree starting angle, for all years.

Shock brackets are factory installed on all axles for the 1969 and newer trailers.

Shock brackets for 1968 and older trailers are shipped loose, so that they can be installed as necessary, since there is a large difference in the wheel well positions and dimensions.

Andy

[TN-TUNDRA]

Originally Posted by Inland RV Center, In

Replacement Henschen axles, automatically come with a 35 degree starting angle, for all years.

Shock brackets are factory installed on all axles for the 1969 and newer trailers.

Shock brackets for 1968 and older trailers are shipped loose, so that they can be installed as necessary, since there is a large difference in the wheel well positions and dimensions.

Andy

I guess with smaller dia. tubes you have to start higher??

[HiHoAgRV]

Here is a section of the baseline data. The graphs are vertical acceleration and the scale is +-.8 G's. The datalogger was bolted to the floor of the trailer just inside of the curbside front tire (under the stove). For the trucks data, it was centered in the rear floorboard and the truck was empty, no trailer in tow. The top graph is Airstream WithOut Weight Distribution, the next is With Weight Distribution and the bottom is the truck. The event I selected is a newly paved section of county road with 3 bridge 'bumps", clearly visible in the Truck graph.
Items of note -

-The shocks on my unit are ineffective. They either have the wrong damping frequency, they are completely shot or the suspension rate has shifted away from the norm and the shocks don't work at that frequency. Thus trailer bounces down the road at a consistant frequency. This may be what caused my wall damage, the consistant hammering.

-The suspension is not bottoming as this would be observed by a huge spike.

-The ride differs considerably inside the truck and the camper.

More data as I crunch it.