Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-07-2013, 07:18 AM   #1779
4 Rivet Member
 
eheffa's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Victoria , BC
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowieE View Post
If you have to pull the latch forwards, to the TV, before lifting it odd are you have the Atwood with the shark fin. The coupling that is having failures. Also the vintage of your trailer point in that direction.

Thanks HowieE.

I looked again & there are no model numbers I can see but that is the mechanism you describe alright.

Too bad, as this would make this into a much bigger change...

-evan
__________________

__________________
eheffa is offline  
Old 05-07-2013, 11:11 AM   #1780
3 Rivet Member
 
Ramble On's Avatar
 
2004 28' International CCD
rockwall , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 124
Images: 2
Switching to an Andersen

I'm looking for advise on replacing my atwood 88010 with the atwood 81911. I understand that there are dimensional differences. Do I need to remove the entire old coupler or just cut off the head? Does atwood include the welding specifications?
__________________

__________________
Ramble On is offline  
Old 05-07-2013, 01:49 PM   #1781
Rivet Master
 
HowieE's Avatar
 
1991 34' Excella
Princeton , New Jersey
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,814
Images: 12
The limiting factor is the alignment of the jack post holes. Remove the jack and put the new coupler over the holes. That will tell you if you can just cut off the front half of the old coupler or if you have to remove all of it to get to the a frame.

As far a welding just weld all edges including the inside vertical edge of the A frame to the inside of the coupler.
__________________
WBCCI 12156 AIR 3144 WACHUNG TAC NJ6
2004 Excursion 4x4
1991 34 ft. Excella +220,000 miles, new laminated flooring, new upholstery, new 3200 lbs axles

HowieE is offline  
Old 05-07-2013, 05:10 PM   #1782
3 Rivet Member
 
Ramble On's Avatar
 
2004 28' International CCD
rockwall , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 124
Images: 2
I read somewhere on this thread that it was not necessary to remove the entire coupler, just the front part, as the 81911 was slightly bigger and would fit over the existing coupler and the jack holes would aligned. If that is the case it would make for an easier job, but I wonder if doing it this way allows for enough welding surface since you have eliminated any welding surface underneath. I also read that the welder had to use 1/4" spacers on each side to get the jack in the right location when they removed the entire coupler. Any thoughts?
__________________
Ramble On is offline  
Old 05-08-2013, 06:48 AM   #1783
2 Rivet Member
 
floridalarry's Avatar

 
1966 20' Globetrotter
Ormond Beach , Florida
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 95
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by eheffa View Post
Thanks HowieE.

I looked again & there are no model numbers I can see but that is the mechanism you describe alright.

Too bad, as this would make this into a much bigger change...

-evan
Here is a picture of the Atwood 88010 as well as description. There were no numbers on mine either
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0984.JPG
Views:	83
Size:	820.4 KB
ID:	185384  
Attached Files
File Type: pdf H2.pdf (336.5 KB, 40 views)
File Type: pdf H4.pdf (231.5 KB, 25 views)
__________________
Larry & Linda Scovotto
WBAC #1021
Ormond Beach, FL
1966 20' Globe Trotter
2015 Nissan Frontier SL
floridalarry is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 11:25 AM   #1784
Rivet Master
 
AWCHIEF's Avatar
 
2006 23' Safari SE
Biloxi , Mississippi
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 8,138
Images: 33
I just got back from a 2500 mile trip. I know this will disappoint some people, but I did not have any blowouts with my Goodyear Marathons and my Marvel coupler is still in one piece. I am thankful that I had the Andersen WD system for this trip as I ran into just about every type of weather and crazy highway drivers on record. In west Texas had a stretch of highway with heavy rain, est. 40 kt cross winds and multi trailer trucks that thought they were the only vehicles on the road. I managed to only have two panic stops/swerves to avoid them. No sway and felt under total control at all times.
The Ford F150 Ecoboost ran like a Swiss watch and the only issue with the trailer was the propane regulator decided to work only on one side. No biggy, I have a new auto change over one along with new hoses on order that should be here tomorrow.
__________________
MICHAEL

Do you know what a learning experience is? A learning experience is one of those things that says "You know that thing that you just did? Don't do that."
AWCHIEF is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 11:29 AM   #1785
Rivet Master
 
SteveH's Avatar
 
2005 39' Land Yacht 390 XL 396
Common Sense , Texas
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by AWCHIEF View Post
I am thankful that I had the Andersen WD system for this trip as I ran into just about every type of weather and crazy highway drivers on record. In west Texas had a stretch of highway with heavy rain, est. 40 kt cross winds and multi trailer trucks that thought they were the only vehicles on the road. I managed to only have two panic stops/swerves to avoid them. No sway and felt under total control at all times.
Michael,

I've said it before on here, and your results confirm my statements, IMHO.

The Andersen WD No Sway hitch seems to be an excellent hitch, when used with a small, light trailer.
__________________
Regards,
Steve
SteveH is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 12:20 PM   #1786
Rivet Master
 
dkottum's Avatar
 
2012 25' Flying Cloud
Battle Lake , Minnesota
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,716
Michael, having used the Andersen before I took it off due to the coupler incompatibility problem, I agree with your statements on sway control and agree with SteveH that it may be okay with small, lightweight trailers.

Three concerns remain:

1) When I removed the Andersen brackets that I had bolted on, the holes I had drilled for the mounting bracket set screws were elongated, oval shaped, indicating too much tension for the frame steel to hold them. Maybe welding would hold better.

2) When weight distribution is applied to the urethane bushings, there is very little compression left in the bushings (my trailer has about 900-1000# tongue weight). There is almost no flexibility left to accommodate roadway rises/falls or driveway entrance dips. It seems the hitching system must lift the back of the truck and the front of the trailer up to go through them. That puts a lot of stress on the truck receiver and the trailer A-frame as well as the Andersen mounting hardware. More flexibility is needed than what the urethane bushings presently have.

3) If the coupler latching system fails for any reason (and there are a lot of old, worn couplers being used), the forces applied by the Andersen pull chains pushes the coupler upward tending to uncouple it. Knowing what we know about the Atwood 88000 series incompatibility for example, I believe a safety mechanism to ensure no coupler will come undone should be provided.

doug k
__________________
dkottum is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 12:44 PM   #1787
Rivet Master
 
TG Twinkie's Avatar
 
1974 Argosy 26
Morrill , Nebraska
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,140
Images: 2
Blog Entries: 5
Belts and Suspenders

Here is what I came up with to prevent uncoupling. The chain over the tongue of the trailer will not allow the coupler to move high enough to uncouple.

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/...pler/photo.jpg

It looks to me like the photo of the new coupler above still has the "fin". I don't see how that is going to work.
__________________
Knowledge: "A gift to be shared. A treasure to receive."
TG Twinkie is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 01:14 PM   #1788
Rivet Master
 
HowieE's Avatar
 
1991 34' Excella
Princeton , New Jersey
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,814
Images: 12
TG

That is an interesting idea and a cost effective way to eliminate the Atwood problem. My only thought is I would install a safety hook one end of the chain to make it easy to release as you uncouple.

It great to see people think of a way to solve a problem, with an older product, rather than continually wine about it in an attempt to dissuade others from the using a new idea.

For those who may have a question of the trailer size limits to which the Andersen can be applied mine is a 34 fter and the towing characteristics are superior to those of a bar WD system.
__________________
WBCCI 12156 AIR 3144 WACHUNG TAC NJ6
2004 Excursion 4x4
1991 34 ft. Excella +220,000 miles, new laminated flooring, new upholstery, new 3200 lbs axles

HowieE is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 01:42 PM   #1789
Rivet Master
 
dkottum's Avatar
 
2012 25' Flying Cloud
Battle Lake , Minnesota
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkottum View Post
Michael, having used the Andersen before I took it off due to the coupler incompatibility problem, I agree with your statements on sway control and agree with SteveH that it may be okay with small, lightweight trailers.

Three concerns remain:

1) When I removed the Andersen brackets that I had bolted on, the holes I had drilled for the mounting bracket set screws were elongated, oval shaped, indicating too much tension for the frame steel to hold them. Maybe welding would hold better.

2) When weight distribution is applied to the urethane bushings, there is very little compression left in the bushings (my trailer has about 900-1000# tongue weight). There is almost no flexibility left to accommodate roadway rises/falls or driveway entrance dips. It seems the hitching system must lift the back of the truck and the front of the trailer up to go through them. That puts a lot of stress on the truck receiver and the trailer A-frame as well as the Andersen mounting hardware. More flexibility is needed than what the urethane bushings presently have.

3) If the coupler latching system fails for any reason (and there are a lot of old, worn couplers being used), the forces applied by the Andersen pull chains pushes the coupler upward tending to uncouple it. Knowing what we know about the Atwood 88000 series incompatibility for example, I believe a safety mechanism to ensure no coupler will come undone should be provided.

doug k
If a large trailer is towed with the Andersen hitch, I would add to my concerns:

4) There have been reports the Andersen does not have enough leverage to distribute enough weight, such as large trailers or light suspension tow vehicles may need for safe handling. Perhaps it can, but it hasn't been sufficiently demonstrated with weight scales to remove the question.

My experience with the Andersen felt very good, but the above concerns were never resolved, so I no longer use it.

doug k
__________________
dkottum is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 02:00 PM   #1790
Rivet Master
 
HowieE's Avatar
 
1991 34' Excella
Princeton , New Jersey
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,814
Images: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkottum View Post
4) Perhaps it can, but it hasn't been sufficiently demonstrated with weight scales to remove the question.
doug k
doug k

You are beating a dead horse. Any present day vehicle light enough to require the Old School WD requirement is more than likely TOO SMALL to a larger trailer.

40 years ago when people were towing with sedans there was a need to remove weight off the real axle and apply significantly more to the front axle. The current stable of TV does not have this requirement and the application of those standards should not be used. Today one only need be concerned with can the hitch return the front axle to it's original height. It is now a consideration of steering geometry retention rather than reducing the rear end drag.
__________________
WBCCI 12156 AIR 3144 WACHUNG TAC NJ6
2004 Excursion 4x4
1991 34 ft. Excella +220,000 miles, new laminated flooring, new upholstery, new 3200 lbs axles

HowieE is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 02:12 PM   #1791
New Member
 
2007 27' Classic FB
Ocean View , Delaware
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3
Please forgive me if this has been asked before, but I have a very simple question. Can anyone who has the Andersen hitch tell me if there is room to drop the tailgate fully on a Ford F150 or F450 (I have both) without hitting the electric jack post? No problem in this regard with my current Hensley, but I've about had it with the PIA hook-up process of this hitch and am looking for something lighter and simpler.
Thanks in advance,
Ted Miller
Delaware Airstreamer
__________________
chickenrx is offline  
Old 05-09-2013, 02:25 PM   #1792
Rivet Master
 
HowieE's Avatar
 
1991 34' Excella
Princeton , New Jersey
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 6,814
Images: 12
With the standard shank I think that is a question you should ask Andersen directly. They clearly can provide a longer shank if that is an issue.

From a design standpoint reducing the length of the shank is a consideration towards reducing the effects of the trailer, reduced leverage. But that said there are configurations that may require a longer shank. That is not a limiting factor.
__________________

__________________
WBCCI 12156 AIR 3144 WACHUNG TAC NJ6
2004 Excursion 4x4
1991 34 ft. Excella +220,000 miles, new laminated flooring, new upholstery, new 3200 lbs axles

HowieE is offline  
Closed Thread


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




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:51 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.