Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-01-2010, 12:54 PM   #57
1 Rivet Short
 
1989 25' Excella
By The Bay , Rhode Island
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,547
Images: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrawfordGene View Post
I do recall reading of someone who added Timbrens to their Tundra and was happy with that while towing a 27'. I can't remember who since it was a couple of years ago.
Note; Unless there is an over-load spring on that 1/2 ton...the Timbren is useless...
In any case, does nothing to increase capacity.

B
__________________

__________________
*Life is Good-Camping all around the Continent*
*Good people drink good beer-Hunter S Thompson*
BillTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 02:38 PM   #58
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Bill, if the Timbren operates to prevent the leafs from hitting the stops, doesn't it increase carrying capacity by taking up some of the load? I don't pretend to understand suspension engineering. Seems to me overload springs do the same thing but in a different place. I see that overload springs have prices all over the place and I don't know if that indicates quality or not. And if you install overload springs, why get Timbren rubber springs or air bags?

It also seems to my non-engineering mind that if you install overload springs, air bags or rubber "springs" it won't do any good beyond that if all the other things aren't upgraded. The Tundra appears to be upgraded except for the rear suspension (has anyone commented on the front suspension?) and there's enough info to indicate the rear differential certainly can handle more than a typical 1/2 ton truck. But do we really know about the brakes or drive line or transmission? If Toyota made everything but the leaf springs 3/4 ton, one more leaf is cheap and why didn't they install it and call it a 3/4 ton? That seems like a good selling point—"A 3/4 ton truck at a half ton price".

And as 2air' has written elsewhere more than once, 1/2 ton trucks can handle weight better than they used to. Someone else (I think) said these differences (1/2, 3/4, 1 ton) are more about differentiating models than actual capacity. After all, a 1/2 truck that has a payload of 1,500 lbs. seems like a 3/4 ton to me.

Gene
__________________

__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 02:46 PM   #59
2 Rivet Member
 
carl28's Avatar
 
Currently Looking...
Colorado Springs , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 24
This is the best picture I can paint so far - not having buyed and tried yet:


TUNDRAS and AIRSTREAM 27S and 28S:

Q: will a tundra haul a 27 or 28 ft airstream within factory limits?
A: yes, with some restricions

Q: is the engine powerful enough?
A: yes

Q: is the transmission and drivetrain good enough?
A: yes, plenty of torque and overall power, big ring gear, good 6-speed

Q: Are the brakes good enough?
A: yes the brakes are great

Q: Does it burn a lot of gas to haul a bigger load?
A: yes

Q: Will it go fast uphill?
A: probably about as fast as you want, the gas will go fast

Q: Can you bring a lot of stuff and stay under the factory payload rating for a 27/28?
A: No not really - maybe if you are by yourself and you pack lightweight objects

Q: Can you bring 2-3 passengers + lots of stuff and be in the factory payload?
A: No its not possible. Even if the trailer is dry it probably wont work.

Q: Does it matter how you load everything, truck and trailer?
A: Yes it matters, you could easily go over because it looks and acts like a big truck

Q: Does anybody know where safety factor limit really is if you want to overload it?
A: no - but hardly anyone is reporting any serious problems (telling others) for being over, some issues may be invisible to the eye until high miles

Q: will the tundra be in the shop less than other brands?
A: not sure maybe / probably - if you dont drive it badly or severly overload it

Q: In terms of safety, does hitch assembly and driving habits and choices of routes / interstates / bumpy roads matter perhaps as much as a few hundred pounds over payload?
A: most likely yes

Q: can you modify the truck to make it better on payload
A: you can add air bags or a leaf, so it doesnt sag, but it doenst change the axle, the wheels, the lug nuts parts of the system

Q: does tundra offer some good and equal amenities
A: yes it has great crewmax space, great ride, reliability, back up camera, tow package, large sliding rear window, and more

THANKS for everyone's input - every poster has added something
__________________
carl28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 03:03 PM   #60
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Boiling it down—good work Carl.

We've towed 33,000+ miles and the Tundra has another 20,000 on it. No problems apparent. We've been pretty maxed on some long, long trips. The longest was this year and was more than 10,000 miles, some of it on bad roads, and no problems.

It has been noted the Tundra has 5 lugnuts, not 6. I believe they are larger than the usual 6, but haven't measured them. Mine came with Load Range C tires, I upgraded better quality tires and to LR E after 18,000 miles as I was dissatisfied with crappy OEM Goodrichs.

I think the difficult thing about this is the 25 FB is not a problem. The 27 and 28 don't weigh that much more, but maybe a little too much more, and it easy to juggle numbers to make things come out critically differently.

Steve's enormous tongue wt. is disturbing. Like any experiment, I think someone else needs to replicate it before we accept the numbers.

Gene
__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 03:13 PM   #61
1 Rivet Short
 
1989 25' Excella
By The Bay , Rhode Island
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,547
Images: 3
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrawfordGene View Post
Bill, if the Timbren operates to prevent the leafs from hitting the stops, doesn't it increase carrying capacity by taking up some of the load? I don't pretend to understand suspension engineering.
Timbren's engage the over load spring earlier than factory bump stops. If you have over load springs (most 1/2 ton's don't) this is how Timbren's would help. They don't increase capacity, they may help to add some stability when operating at the upper range of your suspension...if you have overload springs.
Quote:
Seems to me overload springs do the same thing but in a different place. I see that overload springs have prices all over the place and I don't know if that indicates quality or not. And if you install overload springs, why get Timbren rubber springs or air bags?
See above about springs and Timbrens. Airbags will help overall stability by giving you the ability to fine tune when/how your spring pack engages the overload and also in firming up the ride of the standard springs (they take some of the weight off the springs and place it directly on the axle or bracket...don't know if/how they would mount on a yota' some truck mount on axle some years of Dodge mounted to a bracket...which was problematic). Air bags are nice because they are adjustable...unlike adding springs, which are not adjustable. Adding a leaf will result in a harsh ride all the time. Some claim the Super Springs are adjustable so do not affect unladed ride...I don't know that I would want to slide under a muddy truck and adjust that bracket very often...
Some Folks will add all of the above plus stabilzer bars, Rickson tires/wheels, etc...all of this does not change your trucks rated capacity. It helps you handle it better, and adjust how your truck reacts to a load.

Quote:
It also seems to my non-engineering mind that if you install overload springs, air bags or rubber "springs" it won't do any good beyond that if all the other things aren't upgraded.
True. All of these do not increase any capacity, they aid in handling at a trucks rated capacity
Quote:
The Tundra appears to be upgraded except for the rear suspension (has anyone commented on the front suspension?) and there's enough info to indicate the rear differential certainly can handle more than a typical 1/2 ton truck. But do we really know about the brakes or drive line or transmission? If Toyota made everything but the leaf springs 3/4 ton, one more leaf is cheap and why didn't they install it and call it a 3/4 ton? That seems like a good selling point—"A 3/4 ton truck at a half ton price".
That is pretty funny...refer to your door sticker for rated capacity.

Quote:
And as 2air' has written elsewhere more than once, 1/2 ton trucks can handle weight better than they used to. Someone else (I think) said these differences (1/2, 3/4, 1 ton) are more about differentiating models than actual capacity. After all, a 1/2 truck that has a payload of 1,500 lbs. seems like a 3/4 ton to me.

Gene
All trucks are in a constant war of increasing capacity...whether they be 1/2, 3/4, or 1 ton. This increased capacity is not unique to 1/2 tons...the consumer benefits...if you use a truck like a truck. For the Gentleman farmer that likes to go to the garden center on weekends and only cares about a plush ride...well none of this matters. For those that are pulling big loads...it matters a lot.
Some Folks are comfortable travelling at their max. I am not. I sometimes travel heavy (most of the time...we like to bring toys) and I am not one for fretting over every pound or constantly tweaking my hitch, so went for the easy answer; plenty of truck, and never regretted that decision.

Maybe I am just lazy...

Bill
__________________
*Life is Good-Camping all around the Continent*
*Good people drink good beer-Hunter S Thompson*
BillTex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 03:26 PM   #62
4 Rivet Member
 
steverino's Avatar
 
2010 27' FB Flying Cloud
Ivins , Utah
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 276
Images: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrawfordGene View Post
Boiling it down—good work Carl.

Steve's enormous tongue wt. is disturbing.
Gene
900 lbs is enormous? Trailer is 980 lbs under GVWR, and tongue wt is 13% of actual trailer wt.
__________________
steverino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 03:32 PM   #63
_
 
. , .
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrawfordGene View Post
..And as 2air' has written elsewhere more than once...
gene it is time to adjust the meds...

u are MAKING UP things never written here OR elsewhere.

stop it.
___________

what IS posted into this thread and has been posted elsewhere is this...

the f-150 (from the last 5-6 years at least) can be spec'd...

with PAYLOADs ranging from ~1400 lbs to ~3,000 lbs.

those 150s with HIGHER payloads do have UPrated bits to support the load.

the uprated parts include brakes, springs, shocks, hubs, axles (even bolt/lug nuts) rims and tires.

and drivetrain parts (tranny, coolers, gearing) to support the payloads.
_________

so it IS possible to increase payload (and tongue carrying capacity) at the oem level,

without going to the NEXT platform size (250/350 or 450)...

in fact there are some 150s with HIGHER payload ratings than 250/2500 trucks.

this range of payloads is simply NOT available on the toy' truck offerings to date.

and as the OP points out, many owners on the t' enthusiasts forums try hard to extend the range of their trucks...

since the manufacturer doesn't supply a 3/4 or 1 ton product here.

cheers
2air'
__________________
all of the true things that i am about to tell you are shameless lies. l.b.j.

we are here on earth to fart around. don't let anybody tell you any different. k.v.
2airishuman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 03:55 PM   #64
2 Rivet Member
 
carl28's Avatar
 
Currently Looking...
Colorado Springs , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 24
2air'

this is what you said:

"i find the 1/2, 3/4 1 TUN labels about as useful as the a/s length and published weight info...and since folks just MAKE UP fractional tonnage labels now, these old established markers are even MORE useless. They do help the makers LUMP things 2 sell, folks like neat clumping even when it is murky. Your 'dra has ~ 4000 lb axles and a gvwr of ~72-7400 lbs and probably does NOT have E rated tires.
this is similar to other trucks in the same "class" but not all of them. for example some of the 150s have gvwr OVER 8000 lbs and axle ratings OVER 4500 lbs...
these UPsized bits allow payloads of nearly 3000 lbs...in a "1/2 ton truck" and they come with SPRINGS to support it."

This seems pretty close

STEVERINO - your 900 lb was the WD load, we had been looking at about 750 or so for the WD load. This is "disturbing" I think, because the 25s, 27s, and 28s are all the same overall GVWR. If your WD load was this high, its possible others even with 25s are missing it if they are packing the trailer like you do and are not going to the scales - all this being an issue because the margin of the tundra on these trailers (25-28s) is at issue within a few hundred pounds
__________________
carl28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 03:55 PM   #65
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,569
Images: 1
2air's wimpy suspension that eventually went bad while within payload limits is anecdotal and only proves either (1) he overloaded it without knowing it, or (2) the brand (unstated, but surely not Tundra) either puffs up payload or uses wimpy suspensions (both alternatives are really the same).

Well, it IS a Phord, but 2Air sez he has a regular stack of scale tickets during the five years +/- he used it so I doubt it was overloaded on a regular basis AND I imagine that the 10% of people who even noticed spring sag wouldn't have added another leaf. (But at least we know the true working life of a Ferd is about five years). And that appears a bit better than the 53k working life for a 5-lug Toyo (which is ONE reading of your post as written, CrawfordGene).

Real trucks have 8-lugs. Medium Duty Class engines. And springs that deflect less than one-inch with a 1k load.
One brand. (One Ring to . . ).

Q: Does anybody know where safety factor limit really is if you want to overload it?
A: no - but hardly anyone is reporting any serious problems (telling others) for being over, some issues may be invisible to the eye until high miles


Lay good money on tire ratings, and a lesser bet on the axle rating. Combined tire rating should be over the axle rating and is "likely" the absolute. But only on your truck, not mine. (An "assertion" better laid on 1T truck axles such as the AAM 11.5").



I find it a bit funny that the 28' A/S of today has virtually the same weight numbers as our 34' Silver Streak of 1983 did. The wrong kind of funny.

.
__________________
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 10-01-2010, 04:03 PM   #66
_
 
. , .
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by steverino View Post
900 lbs is enormous? Trailer is 980 lbs under GVWR, and tongue wt is 13% of actual trailer wt.
i agree there is nothing 'enormous' about the approximate tongue weight as u have reported...

it is right in line with what others have measured for the 27-28 foot streams of recent production.

cheers
2air'
__________________
all of the true things that i am about to tell you are shameless lies. l.b.j.

we are here on earth to fart around. don't let anybody tell you any different. k.v.
2airishuman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 04:06 PM   #67
2 Rivet Member
 
carl28's Avatar
 
Currently Looking...
Colorado Springs , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 24
Its hard to believe all this discussion is about something that appears to be within about 500 lbs. But if I go do some pushups, or try to lift my 45 lb dumbells more than a few times, I start thinking.....
__________________
carl28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 04:12 PM   #68
_
 
. , .
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,812
Quote:
Originally Posted by carl28 View Post
we had been looking at about 750 or so for the WD load...
who is 'we' ?

and there is NO legit parameter called "wd load"

it would appear from the many recent references,

that U are trying to take the '1/3-1/3-1/3' notion or the '2/3-1/3' myth...

and use THAT to calculate tongue weight.

1. it doesn't apply to trucks
2. it doesn't work with LONG trailers.
3. it is on old notion and isn't useful now.
______

many folks with 'marginal payloads' believe the ACTUAL TONGUE weight can be ignored...

and instead use some invention that suggests only the "distributed tongue load matters"...

that is simply incorrect.

the tongue weighs what it weighs.

w/d is used to RELOAD the steering axle,

it is NOT a means of adjusting OVERcapacity or OVERratings to gain some load margin.

folks trying to use this perversion of the math because they are OVER or close to the limits should take another approach....

cheers
2air'
__________________
all of the true things that i am about to tell you are shameless lies. l.b.j.

we are here on earth to fart around. don't let anybody tell you any different. k.v.
2airishuman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 04:22 PM   #69
Vintage Kin
 
slowmover's Avatar
 
Fort Worth , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,569
Images: 1
that is simply incorrect.

Was asked in post #27 what the Toyo guidelines are. Likely it is to return the Steer Axle to unloaded height & weight. Anyone?


UNIVERSITY OF TOYOTA
http://www.toyota.com/pdfs/towguide_Part2.pdf

Quote: A weight-distributing hitch uses an adjustable spring-bar system under the trailer tongue that joins the trailer to the hitch head and receiver to distribute weight evenly among all axles of the tow vehicle and trailer. It effectively takes the normal center of the weight off the hitch and redistributes it forward to the vehicle axles and back to the trailer axles.

The GUIDE infers the "rules" 2Air sez are defunct. (And even J2807 indicates is no longer correct).

.
__________________
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 10-01-2010, 04:46 PM   #70
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by steverino View Post
900 lbs is enormous? Trailer is 980 lbs under GVWR, and tongue wt is 13% of actual trailer wt.
I thought tongue weight was 1,300 and after WD was figured, it was 900. The 1,300 seems enormous when the Airstream specs are 791 for a 27.

Gene
__________________

__________________
Gene 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
Leaf to torsion..... when Chiefy Axles 9 10-25-2009 06:32 PM
MUST SELL, MUST SELL--BUY NOW 1994 Airstream Land Yacht eBay Watch Airstreams on eBay 0 07-31-2009 09:00 AM
Leaf springs markdoane Axles 2 09-27-2003 12:26 PM
Leaf Springs ALANSD Airstream Motorhome Forums 7 09-26-2003 12:55 PM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:57 PM.


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.