It's a handsome looking unit, almost like it was styled for A/S use. Looking forward to reading about the longer range tow "feel" feedback.
Though the design is the evolution of Hensley's original, there don't seem to be major visible differences, other than the bracing running under the gas tanks, and shorter struts holding the main assembly. Am I missing others?
__________________ 2008 Safari Sport 22
2003 Ford Explorer NBX, 4.6L, 3.73
Hensley Arrow Hitch, McKesh Mirrors
As a point of comparison, how far is the truck moved forward from the front of the trailer body compared to the original hitch? (Mine, on an S/S, not A/S, is now at 64").
I copied off a few of those pictures so as to compare to the H/A I have, (still need to get W/D correct), and am, of course, curious to hear all that you'll have to say about the hitch.
It certainly looks good, and I like what I see of adjustment possibilities.
Jim! Great install pics. The first time I've seen one in the wild! Ditto 2air's points above. Also, you won't need much extra slack in the umbilical and breakaway wires. Too much and they can get caught on something.
Great catch on the chains 2air'. This morning I was actually thinking that I didn't look at the chains when I commented on Jim's install yesterday so thanks for catching it.
Thanks for the feedback. I thought I might be slightly nose high but not sure, The long shot picture is on pretty level ground I love the idea of marking with the paint. Thanks! Jim
Not having ever used a HaHa or PP my question for both is why can't the tensioners be replaced with the Reese chains and hangers. I would think it would be a lot faster hitch up and a much smoother looking installation if they were used. Besides the chains would give a consistent tension for weight distribution.
They have aways looked like an under engineered after thought.
...why can't the tensioners be replaced with the Reese chains and hangers...
with a bracket modification this could happen...
BUT IT WOULD BE A HUGE STEP BACKWARD...
the screw jacks are a significant improvement over chains...
-much easier to tension
-way more increments of adjustment
-i've measured weight transfers for every turn, which is about 5-6 increments "per link" of conventional chain...
-it LOOKS much better/cleaner imo...
-the "consistent tension" should be indentical for the screw jacks (actually better since chains can be twisted)
-hook up is MUCH faster (related to the screw jacks) because they are "always" on...
-and fine tuning w/d during travel/after hookup is SO MUCH quicker and easier...
-there is NO need to hook up chains ever after the primary installation...
using a power drill is faster than using the manual rachet/wrench but even that is easy...
the funny thing about your observation howieE is that i've always had the opposite view...
and IF using the reese or "sob" hitch, i'd be looking for ways to ADD THE SCREW JACKS!
lastly because of the issues related to hooking up with a hitch of this design,
being able to quickly and in small increments reposition the hitch/stinger box is essential to hook ups...
moving the box with chains would be cumbersome and much less precise...
cheers
2air'
__________________ all of the true things that i am about to tell you are shameless lies. l.b.johnson
we are here on earth to fart around. don't let anybody tell you any different. k.v.
Last edited by 2airishuman; 06-05-2008 at 04:12 PM.
my understanding is that NO HOLES are drilled into the A frame for the mounting?
while that seems like a nice change it also means the frame brackets,
and by extension the strut bars are only held secure to the A frame by the U bolts... at the aft position...
IF that's correct, i'd be VERY uncomfortable leaving the stainless sleeves on the A frame...
not only can water get under the sleeves and cause rust (and it will happen)...
but the secure point created by the U bolts has got to be affected, by the additional loose layer over the A frame...
the rust issue (under the sleeves) is real on the haha,
but the U bolts are backed up by the shear bolts, so the stainless sleeves are less of slippage issue....
is there something different in the new design that makes slippage on the A frame less likely?
neither of these hitches would perform well IF the strutbars n framebrakets move...
cheers
2air'
There are no forces directed along the frame that the aluminum cover would make the u-bolt slip. Due to the design of the yoke, the yoke tail forces are almost perpendicular to the frame and against the down tubes of the frame bracket.
One customer did not use the u-bolt plates under the frame bracket. (I'm not sure why but they weren't there when I got the picture.) He only had the 7/16" SAE washers holding the u-bolts in the slot on the bracket. The bracket shifted but it shifts in a side direction and the u-bolts tightened up and secured the bracket. This is not a front to back shift as in the frame bracket on the haha. This shift does not cause the yoke to become loose and allow pivoting on the ball.
All that said, the rust issue under those covers is a real one. I have installed many hahas on Airstreams and there is always rust under those covers.
ON EDIT:
UPON FURTHER REVIEW...The frame bracket u-bolts are not installed over the covers. The jack bracket u-bolts are but there is no sliding force whatsoever on those. They do not take any force ALONG the frame as the haha bracket does.
Quick Links
nice install details
Dennis & 
Ellen
Linear Mode
