Do I NEED sway control??

[Relentless]

The people who have responded to this thread represent 100s of 1000s of miles of towing experience. They overwhelmingly recommend a sway control/eliminator hitch.

Listen to them! You will have a much more enjoyable, less white knuckle, trip if you do. When a semi blows by you at 70+ you will not have to change your undies at the next rest stop.

John

[2airishuman]

Originally Posted by w7ts

...Well, I said that and I feel better...

i c...

so the real reason 4 posting is to FEEL better?

i OBJECT!

just kidding.

but calls for sensible, reasoned postings are...

INsensible and totally UNreasonable!

just kidding.

when the spooks go BOOOOO!

does it scare you?
__________

in other words, pictures and stories are ONLY scare tactics IF the viewer is scared by them.

accident pics, stories about crashes and so on, have never scared me and i seldom think about the posters motivations for sharing.

they are just pixels on a screen and typically PEAK my curiosity...

but then again real blood has never bothered me either.
___________

now, taking kens approach go back to the TEXT of the o.p.

Originally Posted by THEPILL

I will tow my Airstream with a 2007 Powerstoke diesel Crew cab 4x4.

It has the camper/towing package.

But no sway bars.

Is this required?

Is it a necessity?

Noone at the dealer even recommended it...

interpret as you like but the message i read in/from the above and WITHOUT any follow up details is...

-it's a BIG TRUCK...

-the op may not understand what 'sway bars' are...

-sway bars are NOT required or a necessity...
_______

however from other older threads by the same poster,

my recollection is that the op has towed a lotta horses or cattle and never felt the need for 'hitches or sway bars'...

and made several posts suggesting this rv/trailer stuff... 'must be pretty much the same, right?'

take a tour back into the early 'argosy threads for some details...

and decide youSELF...
_________

so then the early BRIEF answers roll in TO the original question, with just Y or N...

and some1 mentions wdh, the o.p. asks WHAT is that?

then the longer posts start, AND the attempts to splain things...

the o.p., still not on board asks...."does anyone tow withOUT one?"

then the debates and counterdebates....

i actually had a ONE line post (a record for me) but deleted it since it might have been interpreted as a SCARE tactic...

it wasn't a scare tactic and here it is again in total, the whole post'chalada...
__________

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f464...rol-17986.html
__________

the title and info just seemed to fit with the questioners TITLE here...

that thread has a LOT of spirited exchange, some name calling, humor and even some EXPERIMENTs...

to prove/disprove beliefs held by some and disputed by others...

NO blood was shed in that thread and we ALL lived happily ever after in cybertown...

of course THAT thread didn't start with a newer member asking a QUESTION, perhaps that's the issue here for some...

so perhaps the DEBATE and debaters should go THERE and start hammering again.

it's ok with me (and i now feel better too ken )
__________

but keep in mind some folks are even scared of clowns and santa...

and perceptions are reality, even when the perceptions are not shared by all and may be WACKY...

cheers
2air'

[Ganaraska]

Has anyone pointed out that sway control costs like $100 bucks extra or less? If you are buying a name brand weight distributing hitch (EZ Lift or Reese) the additional cost is really trivial.

I still think the original questioner was confusing truck sway bars with trailer sway control. I get the feeling he was a new Airstream owner not conversant with the fine points of hitch design and application.

If this is the case, he can't claim to be uninformed now lol. That is if this thread hasn't scared him off.

[Boondocker]

lick frozen flag poles
porcupines are good to hug
no need for sway control
what could possibly go wrong

[ROBERT CROSS]

Originally Posted by Gen Disarray

lick frozen flag poles
porcupines are good to hug
no need for sway control
what could possibly go wrong

Thank you Rodney....this debate is finally OVER!!

[Ag&Au]

Originally Posted by 2airishuman

i c...

so the real reason 4 posting is to FEEL better?

i OBJECT!

just kidding.
.................................................. ............................

2air'

It is my belief that every action of every living thing is done with the INTENTION of making itself feel better. Even a masochist feels better when he hurts himself.
It makes me feel better when I trim your posts.
Regards,
Ken

[Ag&Au]

Originally Posted by ROBERT CROSS

Thank you Rodney....this debate is finally OVER!!

Bob,
This thread may die away, but I am pretty certain that the debate will rise again to torment mortals. I think that the next time, I will test the ignore thread feature.

Regards,
Ken

[THEPILL]

So in other words you really don't NEED sway control. Unless you think you need sway control. So if I don't think about it you don't need it.

Perfect!!










Just kidding, better to safe than sorry. Right? <darn. there I go again.>

Shane

[bryanl]

I think those after perfect safety should perhaps not have an RV and should not travel ...

But then, by that reasoning, you shouldn't use the bath or kitchen, either, as that is where most accidents happen.

Every choice you make, everything you do has a risk. The debate is about that risk. It is renewed every time you make a decision.

Debate over?

Perhaps only as an indication of death.

Meanwhile, I'm not going to be sorry by putting absolute safety as paramount and not doing anything.

I am going to undertake some safety risk and get my rig out on the roads and go camping. I'll take due precautions, sure, but I'm not going to let fears of extremely low odds events deter me. I'd be sorry about the missed experiences I gain from undertaking that risk. As long as that gain has a comfortable (to me) margin over the risk and I can afford the costs, I'm for it.

[Inland RV Center, In]

Originally Posted by bryanl

I think those after perfect safety should perhaps not have an RV and should not travel ...

Every choice you make, everything you do has a risk. The debate is about that risk. It is renewed every time you make a decision.

Debate over?

Perhaps only as an indication of death.

Meanwhile, I'm not going to be sorry by putting absolute safety as paramount and not doing anything.

I am going to undertake some safety risk and get my rig out on the roads and go camping. I'll take due precautions, sure, but I'm not going to let fears of extremely low odds events deter me. I'd be sorry about the missed experiences I gain from undertaking that risk. As long as that gain has a comfortable (to me) margin over the risk and I can afford the costs, I'm for it.

The risks you wish to take, of course, is your sole decision.

But, when the driver in control, makes a decision, that to whatever degree, may compromise safety, does he/she offer that same choice to the passengers?

The answer obviously is no.

That then becomes a downer, since the driver in control, has compelled the passengers, to go along with his/her safety issue decisions, and "ALL" without being reasonably informed of such, and allowed to make a choice, of riding along, or not.

You say "everytime you" make a decision, but that doesn't hold any water for the passengers, who have just as much right to maximized safety, when the "you" makes the sole decision, and makes no effort to communicate the facts with them.

The person in control of a motor vehicle, aircraft, boat, train, or bus, has a moral responsibility to assure total safety of the passengers, to the very best of their abilities.

An ill informed passenger, becomes the scapegoat, but without knowing so.

Bummer.

Andy

[Diesel1]

Originally Posted by Inland RV Center, In

The risks you wish to take, of course, is your sole decision.

But, when the driver in control, makes a decision, that to whatever degree, may compromise safety, does he/she offer that same choice to the passengers?

The answer obviously is no.

That then becomes a downer, since the driver in control, has compelled the passengers, to go along with his/her safety issue decisions, and "ALL" without being reasonably informed of such, and allowed to make a choice, of riding along, or not.

You say "everytime you" make a decision, but that doesn't hold any water for the passengers, who have just as much right to maximized safety, when the "you" makes the sole decision, and makes no effort to communicate the facts with them.

The person in control of a motor vehicle, aircraft, boat, train, or bus, has a moral responsibility to assure total safety of the passengers, to the very best of their abilities.

An ill informed passenger, becomes the scapegoat, but without knowing so.

Bummer.

Andy

To quote Charlie Brown"Good Grief"

[bryanl]

The person in control of a motor vehicle, aircraft, boat, train, or bus, has a moral responsibility to assure total safety of the passengers,

The fact is that there is no "total safety" in the real world.

The safest driving will need to be with the understanding that there is always risk and one must never get complacent by thinking he has it 'solved' with some gimmick that supposedly assures "total safety."

to the very best of their abilities

This is the issue at hand. Some of the attributes could include good and accurate information not tainted by wishful thinking, fantasy, or myth; proper adjustments for circumstances and conditions; proper training. Then there is the matter of paying attention to what you are doing (distracted driving is the number one cause of crashes).

It may be a "bummer" that we live in the real world and have to face its limitations, costs, and risks but that is what it is. To me, it is more of a bummer that there are so many who seem to want to avoid reality and try to force these discussions out of it.

There are very many variables that the responsible driver has to consider against each other and adjust to accommodate. Fortunately, the actual history shows that the great majority of TT RVers do a good job of that and are some of the safest drivers on the road.

[fmr.capt.evi]

For those in doubt, see post #54.......if you're STILL not convinced, try this: let the WIFE make the final decision! If I lose control while towing without sway control (or any other recommended safety-related device), I wouldn't want THAT "held over my head" indefinitely!!

[Inland RV Center, In]

Originally Posted by bryanl

The fact is that there is no "total safety" in the real world.

This is the issue at hand. Some of the attributes could include good and accurate information not tainted by wishful thinking, fantasy, or myth; proper adjustments for circumstances and conditions; proper training. Then there is the matter of paying attention to what you are doing (distracted driving is the number one cause of crashes).

Obviously, your convinced that a sway control is not for you. Great.

BUT, when another driver, or a foreign object was dropped on the road in front of you and causes you to swerve your rig, you don't have time to play games.

That, is real life, and far from a myth, wishful thinking, or a fantacy.

The number one cause for loss of control accidents, specifically towing an Airstream, is not inattention, but indeed it is improper rigging.

The old boy scout motto still rings the bell, loud and clear.

BE PREPARED

Any argument against maximizing safety, IS wishful thinking, that's awarded with a blue ribbon.

Andy

[Boondocker]

Originally Posted by ROBERT CROSS

Thank you Rodney....this debate is finally OVER!!

See

[bryanl]

re: "Obviously, your convinced that a sway control is not for you."
-- this is the logical fallacy that is called the 'reduce to the absurd'

My position is that people should (1) avoid complacency by thinking they have 'total safety' when on the road, (2) prepare both their rig and themselves adequately , (3) pay attention to their driving task, and (4) know a 'snake oil salesman' when they see one so they can avoid misdirection and bad decisions for their circumstances.

re: "The number one cause for loss of control accidents, specifically towing an Airstream, is not inattention, but indeed it is improper rigging."
-- I would like to see the support for this assertion. I agree that there are lot of rigging faults on RV's, but I think causative factors are being confused with contributing factors. If you look through this thread, a critical reading will determine that every scare story here has some cause that prompted the instability and that cause was not sway control. The stories here also do not provide sufficient evidence that a sway control device would have made any difference. They don't even get into the type or nature of the sway control or any of the other pertinent variables.

Besides logical fallacies, one might look at the idea of falsifiable hypothesis. e.g. if crashes were caused by lack of sway control, then why can people run without it and not crash? Many of the frightening assertions made in this thread fail when considered in such a rational fashion. That is why I think they are exagerated and over-hyped and misleading. If anything is going to reduce safety, it is that misdirection because it leads people away from a careful consideration of their own environment, self, circumstances, and context.

[Inland RV Center, In]

Originally Posted by bryanl

re: "Obviously, your convinced that a sway control is not for you."
-- this is the logical fallacy that is called the 'reduce to the absurd'

My position is that people should (1) avoid complacency by thinking they have 'total safety' when on the road, (2) prepare both their rig and themselves adequately , (3) pay attention to their driving task, and (4) know a 'snake oil salesman' when they see one so they can avoid misdirection and bad decisions for their circumstances.

re: "The number one cause for loss of control accidents, specifically towing an Airstream, is not inattention, but indeed it is improper rigging."
-- I would like to see the support for this assertion. I agree that there are lot of rigging faults on RV's, but I think causative factors are being confused with contributing factors. If you look through this thread, a critical reading will determine that every scare story here has some cause that prompted the instability and that cause was not sway control. The stories here also do not provide sufficient evidence that a sway control device would have made any difference. They don't even get into the type or nature of the sway control or any of the other pertinent variables.

Besides logical fallacies, one might look at the idea of falsifiable hypothesis. e.g. if crashes were caused by lack of sway control, then why can people run without it and not crash? Many of the frightening assertions made in this thread fail when considered in such a rational fashion. That is why I think they are exagerated and over-hyped and misleading. If anything is going to reduce safety, it is that misdirection because it leads people away from a careful consideration of their own environment, self, circumstances, and context.

Experience and accident investigations, offer tons of support, always has, always will.

Insurance company data, is seldom offered, especially when an individual may seek it. An industry can ask, and they did, and it was provided, some 40 years ago.

Andy

[ROBERT CROSS]

Originally Posted by Gen Disarray

See

I guess we have a ways to go until we reduce it to the absurd.

Stream Absurd...

[Diesel1]

BUT, when another driver, or a foreign object was dropped on the road in front of you and causes you to swerve your rig, you don't have time to play games.


At the Proving Ground we also conduct trailer tow tests (at max GVW) out on the VDA ( vehicle dynamics area) which is a huge paved area with specific friction coeficient. We acually do slaluem tests,testing vehicle stability. we still don't use sway control. What we do is properly rig and load the trailers. I can hear the screams now,so yes these guys &gals are trained drivers. How ever its interesting in the pursuit of safe towing (which is what we are testing for in this instance) that one of the big three does not use sway control even in their on grounds testing. On our actuall highway testing with drivers of all skill levals we also use no sway control.In the last five years I am aware of one trailer tow crash off site. There may be more that I am unaware of but I don't think so. Two young inexperianced engineers left Michigan a couple of years ago with a 1/2 ton truck pulling a steel decked flatbed tandon axled trailer.Torsoin bar suspension, with another 1/2 ton pickup loaded backwards on the trailer. They were tongue light. Just west of Flagstaff, Az on I-40 they crsahed on a 6% downgrade. There was no sway control hitch. It was a horific crash but fortuatly only involved them. The two youngsters walked away unscahed other than some under garment staining.Both trucks were totaled and the trailer took new tongue rails and lots of tweaking to get right. The cause was determined to be negitive tongue weight. A condition no amount of sway control can deal with. We still do tens of thousands of miles a year of trailer tow on public highways and we still use no sway control devices. Adios, John

[Road Ruler]

Originally Posted by Diesel1

BUT, when another driver, or a foreign object was dropped on the road in front of you and causes you to swerve your rig, you don't have time to play games.

Agree! and even with a top of the line sway control hitch like the Hensley a large, heavy TV has limitations as in slower speed to complete the maneuver safely. Without the safety devices their limitations are amplified.