Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-08-2015, 01:41 PM   #799
Rivet Master
 
richw46's Avatar
 
2006 23' Safari SE
Lexington , Kentucky
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,671
Images: 6
The spring arms aren't attached, that's just friction on the L brackets. (I had a spring arm come off the L bracket because I made too sharp a turn at a gas pump.) So if the hitch ball AND chains came loose, the trailer would drop and fall away, pulling the breakaway cable.

I changed my cable to be on the left side transport tie down. I drove about 500 miles but never thought to see how it was doing. I guess the wind whipped the loose cable around and it scraped paint off the bumper. So I hooked it back to the hitch. I'm going to find someplace else to hook it up, I probably need to add something near the center that's not on the hitch.

Many states have laws that require that breakaway cable. I hope I never have it deploy but if I'm stopped I want it to be there to avoid a ticket.
__________________

__________________
-Rich

Rich & Yvonne
2006 Safari SE -Dora-
2004 4Runner SE

richw46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2015, 01:45 PM   #800
Rivet Master
 
Al and Missy's Avatar

 
2002 30' Classic S/O
Melbourne Beach , Florida
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,539
Actually the chain attachment points on my hitch are a plate welded to the receiver tube. If (and I understand this has happened) the welds holding the receiver tube were to fail, the tube, hitch shank, and safety chain plate would all come away as an assembly. That's why I connect mine to the bumper bracket.

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 09-08-2015, 03:40 PM   #801
Rivet Master
 
Al and Missy's Avatar

 
2002 30' Classic S/O
Melbourne Beach , Florida
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,539
Equalizer Weight Transfer Surprising

I picked up my trailer today for an imminent trip and decided to weigh it since I have not validated the setup on the new TV. The numbers were surprising, probably because I don't understand something.

As a preface, I checked the trailer level at the storage facility where they have a nice flat level space. It looked a little tongue high to me so that is the first thing I need to correct.

TV - 2013 Ram 2500 Laramie 4x4 CTD with 3.42
TT - 2001 Safari 25

The curious thing about the weights is that very little weight was transferred to the trailer. 200# came off of the rear axle. 180# of it went to the front. That amount put me right at 50% restoration of the weight that lifted off when I hooked up without WD. Only 20# went to the trailer. Is that a function of the stiff suspension of the 3/4T truck? It may be a good thing, because I'm over the TT GVWR, but I was too lazy to put a lot of stuff that normally goes in the TV and was stored in the TT into the TV before going to get weighed, and I think the Gray and Black tanks are close to full with the softener/detergent cleaning solution. I think I'll probably be under the limit when I empty tanks and put the TV stuff in the TV.

Here are the numbers:



The facility I used has only a single long scale. I weighed the TV front, whole TV, and the TT. The TV Rear is calculated. I have checked this scale against a CAT scale and it is very close. The few check numbers I ran, like the GCVWR for both hitched cases, agree to within less than 1%.

Al - Confused Again......
Attached Images
File Type: bmp Trailer Weights.bmp (314.9 KB, 233 views)
__________________

"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 09-08-2015, 07:23 PM   #802
Rivet Master
 
Al and Missy's Avatar

 
2002 30' Classic S/O
Melbourne Beach , Florida
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,539
The line in my table called on/off average is mis-named. It should be unhitched/no WD. For the front axle it defines the weight at which half of the weight is restored to the axle.

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 09-08-2015, 07:37 PM   #803
4 Rivet Member
 
Livingston , Texas
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al and Missy View Post
The curious thing about the weights is that very little weight was transferred to the trailer. 200# came off of the rear axle. 180# of it went to the front. That amount put me right at 50% restoration of the weight that lifted off when I hooked up without WD. Only 20# went to the trailer.---
Al, here's the way I would interpret your scales data:

First, I find it easier to make sense of the numbers if the two GCWs (with TT attached) are equal.
Your numbers, 15300" for the second data set and 15340" for the third set, differ by 40# -- which is not uncommon.

Since GCW is made up of TV front and rear axle loads and TT axle loads, errors in any of them could result in unequal GCWs.
For simplicity, I would arbitrarily increase the two TV axle loads from the second set by 10# each, and decrease the two TV axle loads from the third set by 10# each.
This "adjustment" changes the respective values to
4590 + 4870 + 5860 = 15320 and
4750 + 4650 + 5920 = 15320

However, adjusting the data to make the GCWs equal doesn't completely address your correct observation about the indicated small (20# or 60# depending on how calculated) load transfer to the TT axles.
With independently-suspended TT axles, a nose-down attitude will cause the apparent tongue weight (the load transferred to the TV) to be smaller than the actual tongue weight.
Even with a 3/4 ton truck, a 1000# TW, without WD applied, can cause enough rear-end sag to put the TT into a nose-down attitude.
With your data sets, the difference between the indicated TW and actual TW cannot be measured directly, but it can be estimated from the measured values.

Without going into details, your apparent TW appears to be about 40# lower than it should be.
If so, the previously adjusted values from the second data set should be further adjusted to
4575 + 4925 + 5820 = 15320

So, IMO, your data reasonably could be interpreted to yield an actual TW of 1040# with a load of 100# being transferred to the TT's axles.
The load removed from the front axle would be 4960-4575 = 385#, and
the load restored to the front axle would be 4750-4575 = 175#,
giving a FALR of 175/385 = 45%.

Ron
__________________
Ron Gratz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2015, 10:13 PM   #804
Rivet Master
 
Al and Missy's Avatar

 
2002 30' Classic S/O
Melbourne Beach , Florida
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,539
Thanks Ron.
The trailer attitude was tongue high when hooked up and WD on. When I got home this afternoon I lowered the hitch head one hole set. This should, I think, have the dual effect of lowering the front of the trailer and increasing the WD action. If I have time tomorrow I may try to do another weighing.

The scales were at a moving and storage company and I have compared them to a CAT scale in the past. The CAT scale data was less accurate. It took mre a while to figure it out but on one of the three weighings the operator jumped the gun and weighed me with me out of the truck. I had to get out to reach the call button.

I towed with this setup about 2000 miles and it felt fine. It can only get better if i get it level and increase the WD a little.

Thanks again,

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 09-09-2015, 03:09 PM   #805
4 Rivet Member
 
Livingston , Texas
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al and Missy View Post
The trailer attitude was tongue high when hooked up and WD on. When I got home this afternoon I lowered the hitch head one hole set. This should, I think, have the dual effect of lowering the front of the trailer and increasing the WD action. If I have time tomorrow I may try to do another weighing.
Al, if you have time on the next weighing, it would be good to measure how much the tongue drops (relative to level) when the TT is attached with no WD applied.

Also, when the "TV Only" weighing is made, the WDH should be in the receiver and the bars should either be in the hitch head or placed in the far rear of the truck bed.
I note that you subtracted 114# (for "Hitch") from the "Receiver" weight to calculate a "Tongue" weight.
This is the correct thing to do if the WDH and bars were not included in the "TV Only" weight.

However, not having the WDH and bars in place for the first set of weights would mean not enough load (about 42#) was removed from the front axle, and not enough load (about 156#) was added to the rear axle.
Had the WDH & bars been in place, the resulting "TV Only" front axle load would have been about 4960-42 = 4918# and the rear axle load would have been about 3500+156 = 3656.
The load removed from the front axle (using my adjusted values) would be 4918-4575 = 343#.
The FALR then would be 175/343 = 51% versus the 45% which I calculated using your "TV Only" axle loads.

If your objective is to increase the amount of load transfer, each additional pound transferred to the TT's axles will cause about 1.7# to be added to the TV's front axle and about 2.7# to be added to the rear.

Ron
__________________
Ron Gratz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 08:18 AM   #806
4 Rivet Member
 
Livingston , Texas
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Gratz View Post
If your objective is to increase the amount of load transfer, each additional pound transferred to the TT's axles will cause about 1.7# to be added to the TV's front axle and about 2.7# to be added to the rear.
Please note the "added to" in my previous post is incorrect.

The sentence should read:

If your objective is to increase the amount of load transfer, each additional pound transferred to the TT's axles will cause about 1.7# to be added to the TV's front axle and about 2.7# to be removed from the rear.

Ron
__________________
Ron Gratz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 09:00 AM   #807
Rivet Master
 
mefly2's Avatar
 
2015 25' FB Eddie Bauer
Western , ** Big Sky Country ** Montana
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,252
When the Rock Tamers are attached to the shank, I just straddle the hitch, lift by the RT tubes and duck walk it to the TV. However, when the RT are not on the hitch, I have an "S" hook attached to some heavy sailing line that provide a very nice handhold for maneuvering the hitch into storage or installation on the TV...

There will be, however, a roll around / caster unit built in the near future as my back is aging! The biggest issue for me is storing the RT equipped hitch when not on the TV ...
__________________
~~~~~~ mefly2 ~~~~~>>>
AIR 44105 /WBCCI - formerly 2015-1; Yamaha XT250
:>) ducts are now in a row w / 2015 ducted air :>)
* 2015 Duramax 2500 Diesel * Honda EU3000iS
<>2015 International LE Eddie Bauer FB25<>
mefly2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 09:36 AM   #808
Rivet Master
 
KJRitchie's Avatar

 
2008 25' Classic
Nixa , Missouri
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by dznf0g View Post
Never mind. Found your picture up thread. Make the top floor about an inch lower than the distance from the ground to the bottom of your eq head. Mock up a block fixture to hold the assembly upright.
I'm wondering if I could attach a scissors jack to a rolling base then a platform on top of the scissor pad then I could crank up the platform to the desired height.

Something like this but on a smaller scale.

__________________
2008 Classic 25fb "Silver Mistress"
2015 Ram 2500 6.7L Cummins. Crew Cab, 4x4, Silver
2010 Tundra 5.7L, Double Cab, 2wd, White
KJRitchie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 01:09 PM   #809
Senior Member
 
sheriff1's Avatar
 
2010 27' FB Flying Cloud
Sparks , Nevada
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 278
http://m.harborfreight.com/1000-lbs-...art-69148.html
One of the handiest things I have in the shop. Lifts generators into trucks, removes evap coolers from windows, etc.


2015 F350 CC 4X4 6.7 Diesel
2010 27FB Silver Cloud "The Silver Spoon"
__________________
sheriff1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 01:53 PM   #810
Rivet Master
 
Al and Missy's Avatar

 
2002 30' Classic S/O
Melbourne Beach , Florida
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Gratz View Post
Al, if you have time on the next weighing, it would be good to measure how much the tongue drops (relative to level) when the TT is attached with no WD applied.

Also, when the "TV Only" weighing is made, the WDH should be in the receiver and the bars should either be in the hitch head or placed in the far rear of the truck bed.
I note that you subtracted 114# (for "Hitch") from the "Receiver" weight to calculate a "Tongue" weight.
This is the correct thing to do if the WDH and bars were not included in the "TV Only" weight.

However, not having the WDH and bars in place for the first set of weights would mean not enough load (about 42#) was removed from the front axle, and not enough load (about 156#) was added to the rear axle.
Had the WDH & bars been in place, the resulting "TV Only" front axle load would have been about 4960-42 = 4918# and the rear axle load would have been about 3500+156 = 3656.
The load removed from the front axle (using my adjusted values) would be 4918-4575 = 343#.
The FALR then would be 175/343 = 51% versus the 45% which I calculated using your "TV Only" axle loads.

If your objective is to increase the amount of load transfer, each additional pound transferred to the TT's axles will cause about 1.7# to be added to the TV's front axle and about 2.7# to be added to the rear.

Ron
Ron,

Thanks for the continuing review. The hitch head and bars were not on the truck when I weighed the truck only. They were both times when I weighed the combination.

While I understand your comment about the weight transfer and whether the hitch and bars were on the truck for the truck only weighing, for maintenance of steering control, wouldn't we want to be trying to preserve the front axle load of the truck alone, not with the extra weight of the hitch and bars on the back?

I was going to comment on the math in your last sentence, but I see you caught it. I'm going to try to get a weighing in on the way out of town tomorrow. Not going to have time today.

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 09-10-2015, 02:02 PM   #811
Rivet Master
Airstream Dealer
 
Inland RV Center, In's Avatar
 
Corona , California
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 16,501
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al and Missy View Post
I picked up my trailer today for an imminent trip and decided to weigh it since I have not validated the setup on the new TV. The numbers were surprising, probably because I don't understand something.

As a preface, I checked the trailer level at the storage facility where they have a nice flat level space. It looked a little tongue high to me so that is the first thing I need to correct.

TV - 2013 Ram 2500 Laramie 4x4 CTD with 3.42
TT - 2001 Safari 25

The curious thing about the weights is that very little weight was transferred to the trailer. 200# came off of the rear axle. 180# of it went to the front. That amount put me right at 50% restoration of the weight that lifted off when I hooked up without WD. Only 20# went to the trailer. Is that a function of the stiff suspension of the 3/4T truck? It may be a good thing, because I'm over the TT GVWR, but I was too lazy to put a lot of stuff that normally goes in the TV and was stored in the TT into the TV before going to get weighed, and I think the Gray and Black tanks are close to full with the softener/detergent cleaning solution. I think I'll probably be under the limit when I empty tanks and put the TV stuff in the TV.

Here are the numbers:



The facility I used has only a single long scale. I weighed the TV front, whole TV, and the TT. The TV Rear is calculated. I have checked this scale against a CAT scale and it is very close. The few check numbers I ran, like the GCVWR for both hitched cases, agree to within less than 1%.

Al - Confused Again......
Your rigging is within 100 pounds of being PERFECT

Find something else to worry about.

Andy
__________________
Inland RV Center, In is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2015, 09:02 PM   #812
4 Rivet Member
 
Livingston , Texas
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al and Missy View Post
While I understand your comment about the weight transfer and whether the hitch and bars were on the truck for the truck only weighing, for maintenance of steering control, wouldn't we want to be trying to preserve the front axle load of the truck alone, not with the extra weight of the hitch and bars on the back?
Al,

The WDH and bars, in effect, become part of the truck.
They add to the mass of the truck and cause the center of mass to move slightly rearward.

The WDH and bars do cause a slight reduction in load on the front axle and a slight increase in load on the rear.
However, since the CM has moved slightly rearward, the effect of decreased load on the front multiplied by increased distance to CM tends to be balanced by the effect of increased load on the rear multiplied by decreased distance to the CM.

In short, it is neither necessary nor desirable to restore/remove the axle loads which are subtracted/added by the weight of the WDH and bars.
The added mass of the WDH and bars automatically compensates by moving the center of mass of truck and cargo rearward.

The "TV Only" weight should include everything which is going to be in/on the TV while towing.
The WDH and bars are part of the TV's cargo.

Ron
__________________

__________________
Ron Gratz 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



Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by



Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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