Suddenly totally baffled by hitches .. clock ticking

[slowmover]

And where were the Propride and Hensley bars?

Neither of these depends on bar flex for anti-sway "tension".

WD and antisway operate independently of one another (not that proper TV/TT "loading" via leverage isn't part of best practice).

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by ROBERTSUNRUS

Hi, Lets review Andy's chart on spring bar flex. The Equal-i-zer and the Reese 1000# bars had the same flex all the way up to their 1000 lb ratings. The Easylift was obviously weaker, but still rated at 1000#s, and fell right in between the 800# bars. The other bars tested showed quite a bit more flex, but were 800 lb bars. [DUH] And where were the Propride and Hensley bars? Conclusion; This test is/was useless. [my opinion]

I don't think so Robert. (IMHO,Reeeeaaaaally don't want to start something here) I believe that the recommendation to "match" max tongue weight with bar rating is improper. (Many times we hear of bar ratings far in excess of max tongue load rating) In my case I made the switch from 1000# Eq bars to 800# Reese.
What I think we need to look at on the graph is not the flex up to....say 1000#....but what happens on up the slope, when the forces get high enough to presumably do damage.

It's more about the flexibility of the bars when put under extreme flex situation, like a steep drive entrance.

I believe I would be "over-barred" with a 1000# Eq or a 1000# Reese.
Now compare the slope of an 800# Reese to a 1000# Eq.

In my case, let's assume I have about 1.5" of flex sitting level and WD adjusted properly per weights and measures. (800# Reese) I have about 1000# of force exerted at the chain snap-up.

With the EQ (1000#) at the same force (1000#) I am flexed 1"

Now I am going to enter a steep gas station drive in which the angle between the TV frame and AS frame requires 2.5" (an additional 1" over static) of bar flex. With the 800# Reese I am at around 1600#.. With the EQ (at 2" total, or 1" additional flex) I am at about 2200#.

You have to extrapolate the lines out to get the enormous loads at higher flexes, but we know the slopes will stay relatively constant.

All that being said, IMHO there are only 2 things wrong with Eq:
1) They don't offer the ability to lower your bar rating with a sufficiently rated head. (ie, I would choose a 600# bar, but NEED a 10,000# head.....can't do it!)

2) I believe the non-tapered bar does not allow for the bar tip flexibility to give a reduced vibration and shock load during normal driving on level pavement. (sorta like two fishing rods with the same rating: one has the same diameter all the way to its tip and the other is tapered like we're all used to. Which one is more sensitive and flexible?)

All this is MY OPINION base on towing with an Eq (1000/10,000) and a Reese dual cam (800/10,000) and backed up by data and quite a few OPINIONS of those on this forum whose opinions I have grown to trust.

Edit: Corrected loads at RELATIVE flex change...sorry.

[SteveH]

Originally Posted by ROBERTSUNRUS

Hi, Lets review Andy's chart on spring bar flex. The Equal-i-zer and the Reese 1000# bars had the same flex all the way up to their 1000 lb ratings. The Easylift was obviously weaker, but still rated at 1000#s, and fell right in between the 800# bars. The other bars tested showed quite a bit more flex, but were 800 lb bars. [DUH] And where were the Propride and Hensley bars? Conclusion; This test is/was useless. [my opinion]

I tend to agree with your opinion. First of all, the bars are rated as to weight, in sets. If he had actually tested the bars, the weight they would have carried, and flexed from, would have actually been half of the pair's stated weight. The other thing is, he had a point he was trying to prove about the Reese bars and hitches he actually sells. The last thing is, if he had actually gone to the trouble of constructing a jig to do these tests with, he would have documented it all with photos, etc. Can you say boilerhouse? And last, there is no "tortion" going on with any weight distribution bar. If you don't believe me, look up the definition, and search all of the hitch mfgs. sites. I have.

[dznf0g]

Steve, I see where you are coming from, but again, IMHO it's is more about the ramp up of stresses as the required flex changes due to the angle change between the AS frame and the TV frame. The SLOPE is what is important.

I am sure if Andy wanted to be an Eq dealer, he could. Why doesn't he?

Torsion is an old colloquialism in the trailer hitch industry......as incorrect as it is....I have noted MANY people who have been in the industry for a long time use the phrase. It is a mis-nomer, non-the-less.

[Inland RV Center, In]

How in the world could the tests be made without a jig?

I am waiting for someone else, anyone else, to spend some time and money making similair tests with other brands.

While some may disagree, it's interesting to note what circumstnces they, in their opinion state, having zero actual facts.

Those tests were done to demonstrate that there is a difference between brand ratings.

What we sell, is what the public usually asks for.

We are not a research institute, but simply an Airstream dealer having the desire to help the majority.

We feel that since we to date, are the "ONLY" company that has run comparitive tests on what we call "torsion bars", and published it, that hopefully someone else may become interested enough to continue where we left off.

That, we feel, would be productive to the industry.

It's sort of sad, how sometimes an opinion can stray into hogwash.

We publically wish to thank those that have sent us letters, e-mails, and even phone calls, to thank us for taking the effort and under going the expense, to provide what we did with the chart.

Perhaps someday, some other company will continue where we left off.

Andy

[Inland RV Center, In]

Originally Posted by SteveH

I tend to agree with your opinion. First of all, the bars are rated as to weight, in sets. If he had actually tested the bars, the weight they would have carried, and flexed from, would have actually been half of the pair's stated weight. The other thing is, he had a point he was trying to prove about the Reese bars and hitches he actually sells. The last thing is, if he had actually gone to the trouble of constructing a jig to do these tests with, he would have documented it all with photos, etc. Can you say boilerhouse? And last, there is no "tortion" going on with any weight distribution bar. If you don't believe me, look up the definition, and search all of the hitch mfgs. sites. I have.

Fortunately, anyone can name anything they may so choose.

Hitch bars are sometimes used as a boat anchor.

The subject matter was performance, not a name.

Could a person, in this case, interpret boilerhouse to mean "falsely?"

No further comment we feel, is necessary, relative to a persons individuals objections and/or statements.

Andy

[SteveH]

Originally Posted by dznf0g

I don't think so Robert. (IMHO,Reeeeaaaaally don't want to start something here) I believe that the recommendation to "match" max tongue weight with bar rating is improper. (Many times we hear of bar ratings far in excess of max tongue load rating) In my case I made the switch from 1000# Eq bars to 800# Reese.
What I think we need to look at on the graph is not the flex up to....say 1000#....but what happens on up the slope, when the forces get high enough to presumably do damage.

It's more about the flexibility of the bars when put under extreme flex situation, like a steep drive entrance.

I believe I would be "over-barred" with a 1000# Eq or a 1000# Reese.
Now compare the slope of an 800# Reese to a 1000# Eq.

In my case, let's assume I have about 1.5" of flex sitting level and WD adjusted properly per weights and measures. (800# Reese) I have about 1000# of force exerted at the chain snap-up.

With the EQ (1000#) at the same force (1000#) I am flexed 1"

Now I am going to enter a steep gas station drive in which the angle between the TV frame and AS frame requires 2.5" (an additional 1" over static) of bar flex. With the 800# Reese I am at around 1600#.. With the EQ (at 2" total, or 1" additional flex) I am at about 2200#.

You have to extrapolate the lines out to get the enormous loads at higher flexes, but we know the slopes will stay relatively constant.

All that being said, IMHO there are only 2 things wrong with Eq:
1) They don't offer the ability to lower your bar rating with a sufficiently rated head. (ie, I would choose a 600# bar, but NEED a 10,000# head.....can't do it!)

2) I believe the non-tapered bar does not allow for the bar tip flexibility to give a reduced vibration and shock load during normal driving on level pavement. (sorta like two fishing rods with the same rating: one has the same diameter all the way to its tip and the other is tapered like we're all used to. Which one is more sensitive and flexible?)

All this is MY OPINION base on towing with an Eq (1000/10,000) and a Reese dual cam (800/10,000) and backed up by data and quite a few OPINIONS of those on this forum whose opinions I have grown to trust.

Edit: Corrected loads at RELATIVE flex change...sorry.

Being that the Equilizer bars are perfectly square, I would not hesitate for a minute to sleave a 600 pound bar for use in a 10,000 pound head.

What's the worst that could happen? The bar could break? I've heard of several Reese bars breaking, and everyone survived.

You could even do a test to see at what point the bar broke, but if you do, please provide us with documentation.

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by SteveH

Being that the Equilizer bars are perfectly square, I would not hesitate for a minute to sleave a 600 pound bar for use in a 10,000 pound head.

What's the worst that could happen? The bar could break? I've heard of several Reese bars breaking, and everyone survived.

You could even do a test to see at what point the bar broke, but if you do, please provide us with documentation.

Does anybody have a pair of 600# EQ bars laying around. I have the rest of the setup. If you want to donate (or loan) I'll have a set of sleeves made up and test them out.

[Inland RV Center, In]

Originally Posted by SteveH

I tend to agree with your opinion. First of all, the bars are rated as to weight, in sets. If he had actually tested the bars, the weight they would have carried, and flexed from, would have actually been half of the pair's stated weight. .

One of each of the bars tested was used. The weights in the chart are for 2 bars, not one.

As an example, when we applied 200 pounds to one bar, we posted that as being 400 pounds, which is for 2 bars.

Testing one bar or two, makes no difference as long as the correct weight is charted correctly.

Andy

[RUMSHIP]

Ok I know I shouldn't ask and get dragged into this may lay but here I go anyway. If your talking about slope as getting into a gas station or any other up hill grade from the street, wouldn't your WD bars just transfer more weight to the front of your TV and not bend the A frame? That is after all what their designed to do, isn't it? I'm also not a fan of the duel cam that rease has after mine started to pull of the frame ( the front mounts for the arms ) and twist the arms which made them then cut into the sides of the cam lobes. I don't have pics I know, and I no longer have the set up, seeing no need to keep something that failed. I just think its a poor design. But I'm sure it's been improved and is no longer sold. I knew I should have taken pics before it was removed. Any thoughts?

[A W Warn]

Originally Posted by RUMSHIP

Ok I know I shouldn't ask and get dragged into this may lay but here I go anyway. If your talking about slope as getting into a gas station or any other up hill grade from the street, wouldn't your WD bars just transfer more weight to the front of your TV and not bend the A frame? That is after all what their designed to do, isn't it? I'm also not a fan of the duel cam that rease has after mine started to pull of the frame ( the front mounts for the arms ) and twist the arms which made them then cut into the sides of the cam lobes. I don't have pics I know, and I no longer have the set up, seeing no need to keep something that failed. I just think its a poor design. But I'm sure it's been improved and is no longer sold. I knew I should have taken pics before it was removed. Any thoughts?

I had the same issues. I did not like the dual cam either. Never again will I have one.

[overlander63]

Originally Posted by RUMSHIP

Ok I know I shouldn't ask and get dragged into this may lay but here I go anyway. If your talking about slope as getting into a gas station or any other up hill grade from the street, wouldn't your WD bars just transfer more weight to the front of your TV and not bend the A frame? That is after all what their designed to do, isn't it? I'm also not a fan of the duel cam that rease has after mine started to pull of the frame ( the front mounts for the arms ) and twist the arms which made them then cut into the sides of the cam lobes. I don't have pics I know, and I no longer have the set up, seeing no need to keep something that failed. I just think its a poor design. But I'm sure it's been improved and is no longer sold. I knew I should have taken pics before it was removed. Any thoughts?

If it was the U-bolts loosening up, and causing those problems, I had the same trouble, and added a third U-bolt to the cam mount. Since then, I've had no more trouble. Reese should have put three, not two, U-bolts in the kits. There are enough holes pre-drilled in the mount.

[Silver Goose]

Originally Posted by overlander63

If it was the U-bolts loosening up, and causing those problems, I had the same trouble, and added a third U-bolt to the cam mount. Since then, I've had no more trouble. Reese should have put three, not two, U-bolts in the kits. There are enough holes pre-drilled in the mount.

Yes I agree, there was provision for a 3rd U-bolt. The stresses allowed the cam arms to gradually move along the frame. I couldn't find the bolts locally so once I got the mounts where the needed to be, I tack welded a short piece of bar stock to the frame to prevent the mount from slipping on an earlier SOB.

Reese has since changed the design and went to a bracket that bolts to the frame. Some drilling required :-( The turnbuckle allows for adjustment.

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by RUMSHIP

Ok I know I shouldn't ask and get dragged into this may lay but here I go anyway. If your talking about slope as getting into a gas station or any other up hill grade from the street, wouldn't your WD bars just transfer more weight to the front of your TV and not bend the A frame? That is after all what their designed to do, isn't it? I'm also not a fan of the duel cam that rease has after mine started to pull of the frame ( the front mounts for the arms ) and twist the arms which made them then cut into the sides of the cam lobes. I don't have pics I know, and I no longer have the set up, seeing no need to keep something that failed. I just think its a poor design. But I'm sure it's been improved and is no longer sold. I knew I should have taken pics before it was removed. Any thoughts?

Any and all weight transferred to the front axle and trailer axle(s) is accomplished by the flexing of the WD spring bars. Compression of ANY spring doesn't happen for free (energy wise). That compression when going up a drive entrance, for example comes from the relative change in angle between the TT and TV (ultamitely from the TV fuel burned to accomplich the task) and the force exerted by the WD spring bars.
When this occurs, if you were standing at the hitch on the driver's side, the increase in angle and thus WD bar flexion is trying to rotate the TV counter-clockwise (lift the rear of the truck and compress the TV front suspension) and the TT clockwise, (compress the AS suspension, with ALL the pressure at the chain snap up bracket or EQ L-bracket, as well as a twisting force at the hitch head pockets) with the hitch ball being the fulcrum.

All that said, yes some of the flex is released to perform suspension compression. THAT OPENS THE WHOLE OTHER CAN OF WORMS RELATIVE TO BEING OVER TRUCKED!!!! Do you reallly want to go there.
Remember too, that a portion of any weight in the back of the TV (toys, etc) will need to "lifted" along with the rear of the truck in these scenerios, further aggravating the spring bar flex being offset by front TV/AS suspension compression.

Please also note that the example of increases in weight in my previous post is a pretty mild example. When you consider, say a 6" rise in TV front wheels, think about the distance change between the AS frame and the spring bar ends (if they were unhooked from the snap up or L-brackets) . In this scenerio the front hubs and the spring ends are rotating around the rear TV axle. Let's assume a TV wheel base of 135" and a rear overhang (to ball of 60") and spring bars of 30".
A 6" rise in front hub lowers the spring bar tips approx. 4"
An 8" rise = 5.3"
a 12" rise = 7.9"

Don't forget to add the flex already present for distributing your tongue weight on the flat and level. (if the bars were "snapped in place")

Now revisit the chart and extend the slope of the graph to these numbers.
Pressures on the AS frame rise dramatically.

OF COURSE all these true figures are dependent on TV wheelbase, rear overhang, ball to AS axle(s), tongue weight, TV rear axle weight, TV suspension, etc.

[CalamonTin]

Originally Posted by redwoodguy

The first problem is getting the new A/S home. All these fancy hitches seem to only be sold mail order. So, I am not going to have a fancy hitch on my car by next Thursday when I go to get my trailer. Can I safely tow my rig home (300mi) without a fancy hitch?

Alternatively----if anyone here knows a shop in the Eugene, Or. area that sells these fancy hitches, I could drag my new rig over to a shop right after I pick it up, and get something installed?

Redwoodguy,
I was faced with the same situation, the need to get my unit a couple of hundred miles to where I lived and no conclusion about which hitch and no ability to resolve the question by the day/time to move the unit. Rather than jumping in with any investment, under considered, I decided to hire a professional to pull and deliver my unit. The expense was minimal and I was confident that everything would go smoothly, that is to say, no risk because of my ignorance and my inability to land on a consensus from the threads on the forums. In the end I was really happy I did it that way because I was comfortable with both the delivery of the unit and my ability to complete my research. I ended up with the 3P. Had a dealer install it and Sean got on the phone with them a couple of times during the install. Install went fine. Then Sean has helped me fine tune the "dial in" adjustments. Seems to me that my ride is better than expected, the clothes are still on the hangers and me and the hook and unhook process has become a thoughtful process (with my check list) but no longer daunting.

Overall I am thrilled with my entire experience from guidance from the forum, purchase of the AS, purchase/install/service on the hitch and camping overall.

[redwoodguy]

Thanks Peter! There have been tons of great response and I learned a lot. I finally did decide yesterday and we are loading up today for the trip up to Eugene tomorrow to pick up our FC.

In the end, the subject required more experience than I could muster in a week. If funds were no object, the answer would be easy, but around here funds are always a consideration and so the choice became a matter of juggling the compromises, and I don't have enough direct, meaningful experience with trailers to do that.

Both the A/S dealer, and the local hitch installer guy recommended the same hitch. I have to weigh that as a reasonably prudent course then, which probably trumps my current "expertise" (which is about zero!). It might mean that in a year, or after some towing, I will change it, but I think that is now a reasonable risk to take.

We will get the Equal-i-zer installed at the local hitch guy and save a couple hundred over the dealer install. One thing I like about this choice was that given my extreme arthritis in both elbows, the hookup looks nominally a little easier than with some other brands. I actually wasn't looking forward to using leverage pipes to snap chains on and so forth.

For right now, I think it will be ok, and then I can actually accumulate my own direct experience. I can always change it, right?

Thanks for all for the really GREAT replies which helped me a lot. I'm excited to get the new Flying Cloud!

[RUMSHIP]

Oh my head hurts

[RUMSHIP]

Not only do I have to worry about damage to my TT because I'm over hitched now I have to worry about the fact that I'm most likely over trucked? What to do? I suppose it's eather buy a VW Jetta and take it to Can Am to have it modified so that it does crack under the overload of pulling my 32', that I'm sure would nether by over hitched or now over trucked. Or it's time to just dead bolt the doors, shutter all the windows and watch the world implode on CNN. It is almost 2012, and you know what they say is going to happen then!

[phbarnhart]

Good luck! Let me know if you need any dining or hotel recommendations in the Eugene area. I've only lived here for 30 years but I might have some ideas that are better than McDonalds

[GCinSC2]

Originally Posted by redwoodguy

We will get the Equal-i-zer installed at the local hitch guy and save a couple hundred over the dealer install. One thing I like about this choice was that given my extreme arthritis in both elbows, the hookup looks nominally a little easier than with some other brands. I actually wasn't looking forward to using leverage pipes to snap chains on and so forth.

Redwoodguy,

I think you'll easily hook up the bars by raising the hitch with the power jack enough to hook the bars w/o a lot of arm, but the head ain't light and the bars are hefty also.

Good luck.