Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-24-2016, 11:19 AM   #43
2 Rivet Member
 
2016 28' International
San Marcos , California
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 96
From what I can find in the web the hitch is built into the frame and extends farther forward than a traditional hitch which would possibly account for better weight distribution.

Ford has published the specs, limit is 17,600 for a diesel 4x4 SRW.

http://www.ford.com/trucks/superduty...ations/towing/
__________________

__________________
Mgieselman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2016, 09:06 AM   #44
Rivet Master
 
m.hony's Avatar
 
2013 30' Classic
Greenwood , Mississippi
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 11,690
Kinda sorta like a built-in Hensley or ProPride?


Sent from my iPad using Airstream Forums
__________________

__________________
2013 Classic 30 Limited
2007 Silver Toyota Tundra Crew Max Limited 5.7 iForce
2006 Vivid Black Harley-Davidson Road King Classic
1999 Black Nissan Pathfinder LE
TAC #MS-10
WBCCI #1811, Region 6, Unit 56
Airforums #70955
m.hony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2016, 09:55 AM   #45
jcl
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by m.hony View Post
Kinda sorta like a built-in Hensley or ProPride?
No, nothing like that.

If anything, more kinda like how some reinforce their hitch receivers with a strut running fore and aft.
__________________
jcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2016, 11:40 AM   #46
Rivet Master
 
tjdonahoe's Avatar
 
2013 31' Classic
billings , Montana
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgieselman View Post
From what I can find in the web the hitch is built into the frame and extends farther forward than a traditional hitch which would possibly account for better weight distribution.

Ford has published the specs, limit is 17,600 for a diesel 4x4 SRW.

http://www.ford.com/trucks/superduty...ations/towing/
What difference would that make? The hitch and ball are behind the pickup,
__________________
tjdonahoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2016, 11:54 AM   #47
Rivet Master
 
Al and Missy's Avatar

 
2002 30' Classic S/O
Melbourne Beach , Florida
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,220
I think the Ford statement is only addressing the weight capacity of the hitch. With previous hitches, the hitch itself had separate ratings for weight bearing and weight distributing hitches. Now they say that distinction doesn't exist. So if you can tow 21,000 pounds, anticipating a 15% tongue weight, the hitch can carry 3000 pounds tongue weight. But clearly from OP's picture there is less weight on the front end and therefore more weight on the rear. Consequently steering force might be compromised and the rear axle might be overloaded. Even if they have a rear axle with sufficient margin, IMO there is no getting around the reduced steering and braking force on the front axle. Steering and braking are both dependent on the friction force of the front tires at the road surface and that force is directly proportional to the weight load on the tires.

Al
__________________

"You cannot reason someone out of a position they have not been reasoned into"

Al, K5TAN and Missy, N4RGO
2002 Classic 30 Slideout
S/OS #004
2013 Dodge 2500 Laramie 4x4 Megacab Cummins
2001 Safari 25 RB Twin (Gone, but not forgotten)
WBCCI 1322, TAC FL-39, AIR 82265

Al and Missy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2016, 07:35 PM   #48
Rivet Master
 
crispyboy's Avatar
 
1994 30' Excella
alexandria , Kentucky
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,649
Images: 3
Al gets it right on his post!
__________________
Steve, Christy, Anna and Scout (Border Collie deceased 11-30-2016)
1994 Classic 30'11" Excella - rear twin
2009 Dodge 2500, 6 Speed Auto, CTD, Quad Cab, Short Bed
Hensley with adjustable stinger
WBCCI # 3072
crispyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2016, 08:04 PM   #49
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,310
Images: 1
Ford says no WD hitch required on 2017 SD.

Moving hitch attachment points forward (given a crossmember integrated receiver) decreases frame flex. Makes adjusting a WDH properly a closer thing. If report is correct it's only about 35-years overdue.

And, whether the truck "can" doesn't take into account wind loads on TTs or the high COG of conventional TTs per J2807 (it's most glaring deficiency). "Weight" is relative, not absolute.

Besides likely better handling, steering and braking in which every pickup is deficient (along a scale; a pickup with IFS and 4-whl disc brakes superior to other designs), maxing WD force increases weight at the TT wheels making them more effective at braking the combined rig.

Trailer braking matters far more than how much a given TV can tow per "ratings". Same for steering and handling.
__________________
1990 35' Silver Streak Sterling; 9k GVWR.
2004 DODGE Cummins 305/555; 6-manual; 9k GVWR.
Hensley Arrow. 9-cpm solo, 15-cpm towing
Sold: Silver Streak Model 3411
slowmover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2016, 09:20 PM   #50
4 Rivet Member
 
silverlabs's Avatar
 
2015 28' Flying Cloud
2014 25' Flying Cloud
Waxahachie , Texas
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 342
Blog Entries: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al and Missy View Post
I think the Ford statement is only addressing the weight capacity of the hitch. With previous hitches, the hitch itself had separate ratings for weight bearing and weight distributing hitches. Now they say that distinction doesn't exist. So if you can tow 21,000 pounds, anticipating a 15% tongue weight, the hitch can carry 3000 pounds tongue weight. But clearly from OP's picture there is less weight on the front end and therefore more weight on the rear. Consequently steering force might be compromised and the rear axle might be overloaded. Even if they have a rear axle with sufficient margin, IMO there is no getting around the reduced steering and braking force on the front axle. Steering and braking are both dependent on the friction force of the front tires at the road surface and that force is directly proportional to the weight load on the tires.

Al
I think Al is correct in his assessment. The no WD reference applies to those vehicles with the Max Tow package which gives a little stiffer front springs and the new hitch with the 3" receiver. On my 2017 F250 I did not opt for Max Tow as didn't need the extra little payload it provided and didn't want to use two reducers to use the 2" stinger on my PP. All I have read is exactly what Al refers to.

Chuck
__________________

__________________
silverlabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NorCal : 2017 Olema Spring Rally April 7-9, 2017 (formerly at Casini) HootMon-Frau Forum Rallies & Meet Ups 14 04-01-2017 12:46 PM
2017 Ford Super Duty paiceman Tow Vehicles 13 08-07-2016 08:37 PM
2017 Ford Super Duty Review pappy19 Tow Vehicles 15 03-06-2016 05:59 PM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.