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
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?
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."
2005 39' Land Yacht 390 XL 396
Common Sense
, Texas
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by AWCHIEF
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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
Ted, on my 2012 F150 there is not room enough to drop the tailgate using the standard Andersen supplied shank. They can provide an extended shank on request. You can contact Andersen directly for further information and recomendations on what you need for your TV/trailer combination.
__________________
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."
Howie
On my setup. It is not necessary to remove the chain over the tongue. Once you remove the tension from the WD chains. Just pull the pin on the triangular plate. The plate will drop down and hang on the safety chain I installed.
I disconnect the Andersen at the plate end instead of removing the chains from the square tubes. Fewer parts to get lost. Then hang the Andersen chains over the tongue until I am ready to hitch up again.
Doug
Thank you for repeating all that once again. I am sure someone did not read your other post stating the same reasons for you no longer using the Anderson system.
__________________
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."
Howie
On my setup. It is not necessary to remove the chain over the tongue. Once you remove the tension from the WD chains. Just pull the pin on the triangular plate. The plate will drop down and hang on the safety chain I installed.
I disconnect the Andersen at the plate end instead of removing the chains from the square tubes. Fewer parts to get lost. Then hang the Andersen chains over the tongue until I am ready to hitch up again.
OK That works.
__________________ 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
Maybe there are 2 different hitches out there.
One is Anderson and the other is Andersen.
Obviously we are talking about 2 different WD hitches.
There are at least two hitches. The first one is the one that people buy which is the first generation of an interesting and innovative design with some challenges. The buyers are mostly happy, with reservations. It has some problems, which both customers and Andersen are addressing.
There is the second, which nobody has actually purchased. Some self appointed "experts" condemn the second one for their own reasons, mostly because it conflicts with what they have spent thirty or forty years learning about. They were never going to buy one, but state their opinions over and over.
This forum is a great place for users to share their problems and successes. Keep it coming.
I think you have hit on the head. This and most other Forums are composed of individuals that have a common interest. That interest often centers around the the use or ownership of a common products. Given this common interest it is not to say that all commons posted are reserved to praise and satisfaction. But rather most often questions or comment on how to improve the utilization of the products. It is uncommon to have individual repeatedly post commons of dissatisfaction. Most dissatisfied individuals would likely post that once and move on. Unless one has an agenda repeated dissatisfaction gains then nothing within the Forum community.
__________________ 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
2005 39' Land Yacht 390 XL 396
Common Sense
, Texas
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,319
And then there are those that repeatedly defend a product that obviously has flaws in it's intended/designed use either just because they own one, or possibly because they are compensated to do so?
By the way HowieE, you never answered my question in post #1721.
This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Airstream, Inc. or any of its affiliates. Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.
WBAC #1021
Linear Mode
