The Andersen WD Hitch User Thread

[HowieE]

Way back in my instrumentation classes I recal that there were 2 components to Friction. Initial force to overcome the at rest state and the force to maintain motion. Without extensive experimentation my first reaction is this. The initial force to start movement while using a metal to metal device, especially a cam, is quite high while the continuing force is not that high. I envision the forces involved in the Andersen are much closer, with the initial force being less than metal to metal and the continuing force to being much more. This may account for the smoothness with which the Andersen is applied damping to sway. It may also mean that the initial force is already less than that of the traditional WD systems.

I can't quantify this but question this.

[dmand001]

Originally Posted by MrUKToad

I'm still a little surprised about how defensive you all get about the Andersen. I simply asked if not being able to turn the anti-sway off was a concern and it morphs into criticism of Andy Thompson.

Forgetting individuals, if you're caught out in a situation where it's very wet or staring to get icy, is the fact that you can't alter the friction in the Andersen's anti-sway system a concern to you? Advice offered by the manufacturers of the traditional friction arm will recommend loosening the device in potentially slippery situations, what is the view of Andersen users given that there is no adjustment available. There is no criticism of the Andersen intended in asking this question, I'm just interested to know what current users think.

Just to follow your logic....I would do likewise lessening the WD by lossening the tension on the Andersen hitch chains by adjusting the nuts. What's the difference from loosening the spring bars?

[SteveH]

Originally Posted by dmand001

Just to follow your logic....I would do likewise lessening the WD by lossening the tension on the Andersen hitch chains by adjusting the nuts. What's the difference from loosening the spring bars?

In MrUKToad's defense, I think he and Andy are advocating loosening the tension on the friction anti-sway bar, not the tension on the WD bars.

[HowieE]

To reduce tension or not to reduce tension that is the question. It all come back to which horse are they riding. Reducing the resistance to movement at the ball or reducing the weight on the front axle. Andy has criticized the Andersen from both sides and I them as opposites.

There may be an argument for reducing the resistance to movement at the ball but I doubt that trumps the need for weight on the front axle. The force needed to overcome friction is, F=UN, Force equals the Coefficient of Friction Times the Load. If there is one thing you do not want to do is to reduce the load on the steering axle while traveling on a slippery surface. That is basic physics that is independent of what ever you are using.

[MrUKToad]

Originally Posted by HowieE

Way back in my instrumentation classes I recal that there were 2 components to Friction. Initial force to overcome the at rest state and the force to maintain motion. Without extensive experimentation my first reaction is this. The initial force to start movement while using a metal to metal device, especially a cam, is quite high while the continuing force is not that high. I envision the forces involved in the Andersen are much closer, with the initial force being less than metal to metal and the continuing force to being much more. This may account for the smoothness with which the Andersen is applied damping to sway. It may also mean that the initial force is already less than that of the traditional WD systems.

I can't quantify this but question this.

Now that is the kind of answer I was after. I understand that testing this sort of thing is always going to be difficult but I can see the logic and the crumb of comfort offered with the smoothness of the sway damping tends to lend some credence to the argument. I have no idea if the Andersen designers considered possible issues on slick roads but it's interesting to hear the experience of users.

I shall keep off the subject of commercial members except to say that you're all on dodgy ground with this constant sniping.

[polarlyse]

I agree with Howie's assessment. Loosening the AH chains would simply negate the weight distribution. The only way to lessen / eliminate the sway control would be to remove the triangle plate and use the spacer provided but that would also eliminate any WD, so not an option. If/when I find slippery conditions I would simply slow down to a speed where I can maintain safe control. That's it. No other choice besides stopping. To reduce sway control so that you can hopefully maintain speed under slippery conditions is, in my opinion, simply irresponsible. That's my story and I'm stickin to it.

[HowieE]

Originally Posted by SteveH

In MrUKToad's defense, I think he and Andy are advocating loosening the tension on the friction anti-sway bar, not the tension on the WD bars.

If that is their position I would ask them to state it that way and not post a completely misleading comment. With more than likely less than 10% of those using a WD hitch using the Friction Plate Sway Control it should not be presented as a comment on WD Hitches in general. I can't remember when I last saw one of those in use so my percentage may be generously high.

[dmand001]

Originally Posted by SteveH

In MrUKToad's defense, I think he and Andy are advocating loosening the tension on the friction anti-sway bar, not the tension on the WD bars.

Awaiting Andy's answer. But Steve...loosen the chains you decrease the friction of the tapered shank of the Andersen. It was designed to do so. I think that Andy's ignorant of the Andersen. The Andersen hitch is here now and the hitch of the future.
Also Andy wondering what the rigid spring bars do long term on trailer wear as opposed to the Anti-Bounce smooth ride of an Andersen.

[MrUKToad]

Originally Posted by dmand001

Awaiting Andy's answer. But Steve...loosen the chains you decrease the friction of the tapered shank of the Andersen. It was designed to do so. I think that Andy's ignorant of the Andersen. The Andersen hitch is here now and the hitch of the future.
Also Andy wondering what the rigid spring bars do long term on trailer wear as opposed to the Anti-Bounce smooth ride of an Andersen.

I understood the friction for the anti-sway element was as a result of the downward pressure on the ball from the weight of the tongue. However, I can see that loosening the chains will result in some change of friction. Would loosening the chains not affect the weight transfer towards the TV front axle, though?

[TG Twinkie]

I don't believe loosening the chains will reduce the friction. The idea behind WD is to remove weight from the rear axle of the TV shifting it to the front axle of the TV. Therefore, the actual tongue weight on the rear axle is lessened.
Whether the actual weight on the ball is lessened? One would assume so, since weight is transferred to the front axle of the TV and the trailer axles.
By loosening the chains, the WD is removed and all of the tongue weight is on the ball. Which increases the friction in the tapered socket of the Andersen hitch.
The previously mentioned problems with the Atwood coupler seem to prove this. Since the damage to the shark fin is a result of the forward and upward forces of the coupler by the Andersen.
While tight chains put more force on the back (trailer) side of the brake material in the tapered socket. They also cause a lifting motion in the coupler to ball combination. More lift, less friction. Whether the lift force is enough to over come the rearward force is still to be answered.
IMHO

[SteveH]

Originally Posted by MrUKToad

I Would loosening the chains not affect the weight transfer towards the TV front axle, though?

Yes, it would.

[dkottum]

Steve, also known as Mr. UK Toad,

It should be clear to you by now the Andersen is not unique on the adjustable friction issue you are trying to drum up, all w.d. hitches with built-in sway control have no adjustment without taking off weight distribution.

So, no this does not concern me. It would not concern me with a Equal-I-zer, Reese, or any others with built-in sway control either. That's just the way they work.

For those who are concerned, stay away from all w.d. hitches with built-in sway control.

doug k

[gmw photos]

For what it's worth, BlueOx, which is a WD hitch with built in sway control, recommends leaving the settings the same whether on slick or dry surfaces.

[dkottum]

Originally Posted by dkottum

I've been cautious of the Andersen since first reading the coupler issue. As this is Andersen's position, I need to change something.

I like how the Andersen performs, especially smoothing roadways, sway resistance, and quiet smooth turns back or forward.

For me, I'm leaning toward a Propride hitch because it has good reviews, great service, and plenty of experience, and is the only hitch that equals and surpasses the Andersen's sway resistance.

I am also drawn toward the Quickbite coupler because it is easier to use than the Atwood while I "think" it is compatible with the Andersen.

Checking Andersen website I see no mention of this coupler issue. The right thing for them to do is offer a buyback, or replacement costs of the coupler,

because we were not advised at purchase of the incompatibility.

Good company's are not afraid to innovate, and some things are not foreseen in the world of invention. This hitch design is a revolutionary, greatly improves the towing experience, and well worth pursuing.

Good company's also stand behind what they sell, compensating customers for their loss. We'll see what the company is made out of.

doug k

I've got a 2,000 mile trip coming up next month. All things considered and being ticked off about this Atwood/Andersen incompatibility issue, I ordered a Propride hitch.

doug k

[Road Ruler]

Originally Posted by dkottum

I've got a 2,000 mile trip coming up next month. All things considered and being ticked off about this Atwood/Andersen incompatibility issue, I ordered a Propride hitch.doug k

Doug, once you get a chance to use the Propride it would be interesting to here your comments about how it compares to the Andsn. Thnxs

[dkottum]

Road Ruler, I will. Quite pleased with Andersen performance over my Equal-I-Zer.

There was only one direction to improve the Andersen, and that is Propride.

doug k

[AWCHIEF]

I bet there is a thread somewhere that people can talk all about the other brands. This was intended as an Andersen users thread. At least that is what the title says. Of course that has never stopped the anti-Andersen crowd.

[Rendrag]

Originally Posted by AWCHIEF

I bet there is a thread somewhere that people can talk all about the other brands. This was intended as an Andersen users thread. At least that is what the title says. Of course that has never stopped the anti-Andersen crowd.

Amen. I follow the RV world on various forums and see problems related to other brands, but the Andersen really gets a lot attention (criticism) for being new and "different". I think a lot of the negative stuff comes from people who have never used one. I have no vested interest in the Andersen Hitch, but I think many of its detractors may be involved with other brands. It is pretty easy to get an anonymous ID and plant misinformation and falsehoods about the competition. It is good to hear the problems and successes of actual users.

[HowieE]

Originally Posted by dkottum

I've got a 2,000 mile trip coming up next month. All things considered and being ticked off about this Atwood/Andersen incompatibility issue, I ordered a Propride hitch.

doug k

Since the Andersen is so easy to install and only weighs 60 lbs why don't you take it with you so you can at less have a comfortable ride on the way home. 1,000 miles should be enough to convince you.

[SteveH]

I own and use an Andersen hitch, and love the way it works, but it's not on my Airstream.

I think it would be a great hitch on the Airstream also, if it weren't for the Atwood coupler. Personally, I don't think the Atwood coupler is worth a crap, regardless of the WD system.

If you think I'm being overly critical of the Atwood, do this test.....take a bare 2 5/15" ball, and insert it into the Atwood, latch, and then test it to see how much play is present between the Atwood and the ball.

This play has got to be contributing to instability of the trailer behind the tow vehicle. It's just a little bit better than a pintle hitch.