Weight Distributing / Anti-sway Hitch

[Sean Woodruff]

mstephens - I agree with all of that but I still find it interesting. Different criteria IS used for purchasing different products. An Airstream isn't purchased through the filter of "solving a shelter problem." Some people purchase a product that is engineered to match more criteria and do not do it through the "solving a problem" filter. I think many people who do not own the ProPride 3P (or Arrow) believe that most people purchase it to "solve a towing problem." I can tell you that about 80% of my customers (Airstreamers overwhelmingly are in this category) DO NOT purchase it to solve a towing problem. They purchase it to have the best chance of preventing a problem if the conditions that cause a problem exist. And, if one tows a trailer long enough, many conditions will eventually line up and exist.

awchief - Yes, wants and needs. I prefer to use criteria. As for the heavy, over-priced opinion you have I would also find it interesting that the criteria you base that opinion on is not used on other products. You clearly don't use the same criteria for purchasing camping shelter. Interesting, huh?



-

[mstephens]

Originally Posted by Sean Woodruff

mstephens - I agree with all of that but I still find it interesting. Different criteria IS used for purchasing different products. An Airstream isn't purchased through the filter of "solving a shelter problem." Some people purchase a product that is engineered to match more criteria and do not do it through the "solving a problem" filter. I think many people who do not own the ProPride 3P (or Arrow) believe that most people purchase it to "solve a towing problem." I can tell you that about 80% of my customers (Airstreamers overwhelmingly are in this category) DO NOT purchase it to solve a towing problem. They purchase it to have the best chance of preventing a problem if the conditions that cause a problem exist. And, if one tows a trailer long enough, many conditions will eventually line up and exist.

awchief - Yes, wants and needs. I prefer to use criteria. As for the heavy, over-priced opinion you have I would also find it interesting that the criteria you base that opinion on is not used on other products. You clearly don't use the same criteria for purchasing camping shelter. Interesting, huh?



-

Sean,
You might be making assumptions about everyone's methods. When you declare, "An Airstream isn't purchased through the filter of "solving a shelter problem." How do you know it isn't chosen through solving a shelter problem for some people? Really, that's quite a claim you are making there!

Let's give it a try, ok? I'll set out some parameters to define my problem, I'll devise a solution, and you tell me if that is "problem solving" or not.

PROBLEM - Camping Shelter Choice

I have a desire to camp travel extensively. Here's my list of requirements for a camping shelter:

1. Bedroom: Must have a comfy queen sized bed for two people with severe arthritis. Since we travel for weeks, must have closet and storage space
2. Kitchen: Must have a full kitchen so we can cook regular meals. We need burners, oven and a microwave as well as a refer and freezer to store food. We need enough storage space for cooking and eating utensils, and of course packaged food.
3. Dining: We need a comfortable dining area for two which can also double as a workstation since one of us will be working on the road. That means computers, papers, mice, and all the usual work tools.
4. Comfort: We will be traveling year round and do not want to be wet, blown apart by wind, or suffer heat stroke. So, we need an HVAC system capable of making an environment comfortable - say 62F to 90F as the extremes.
5. We have a budget and can not spend more than $75K.
6. We would like it to last for 15 years of moderate to heavy use.
7. We have to be able to store it in front of our house.

My selection logic in brief:
- Tents don't meet most of the requirements
- PU campers might work, but be so crowded as to be too much sacrifice.
- Motorhomes are out of the budget
- Trailers would work - but which ones?
- Most trailers won't last the 15 years we want to get
-Voila! A 25 Flying Cloud seems to meet all the requirements. Problem solved!


How is that not problem solving Sean?

[Sean Woodruff]

Originally Posted by mstephens

Sean,
PROBLEM - Camping Shelter Choice

Why is "Camping Shelter Choice" a problem?

[dkottum]

Sean, the Pro-pride is a great hitch as many have found. I wanted one when I bought my first Airstream in 2009 but the dealership (whom I don't regard highly) gave me a bunch of grief about it. Hard to install, leave your tow truck here with the trailer for service, Equal-I-Zer just as good for the money, that sort of stuff.

Different dealers push or discourage different products, and like on this thread can justify anything they say.

doug k

[Ag&Au]

Originally Posted by mstephens

........................................

An AS trailer connected to a well chosen TV doesn't have a lot of sway - really. And some combinations really have none to speak of. It's simplistic in the extreme to imagine that everyone with an AS trailer has an extreme sway problem needing a very expensive hitch. Would that kind of analysis be useful to a person on a budget? I don't think so. Should every person buy more than they need? I don't think so.

.................................................. ....................................

.

As long as we are gonna to analyze what you really said, I have a problem of what you said above and what I believe it implies. First of all every tow vehicle and everything towed in a real world will have some degree of sway. That is an absolute fact. There is no such "none to speak of". This is because no matter how well you design the components, there will always be external forces beyond your control that cause some degree of sway to be induced. The purpose of all the sway control systems is to keep this to a minimum. The reason for this is primarily safety. I don't think that it is a point of dispute that some systems do it to a greater degree than others. I think it is also obvious to state that all other factors being equal, the hitch system that reduces sway to the greatest degree is safer to tow with. So what this all boils down to is how big a gamble are you going to take with your safety. I agree that no one choice fits all, because we all are willing to gamble to some degree or we wouldn't be towing a trailer simply for pleasure. We would drive an automobile and stay in resorts. However this is not a case of going up the choice of hitches from bottom to top and stopping at the one that achieves total safety. Total safety is not achievable.

My personal choice is to scrimp on luxuries and spend the maximum on safety. It is also my desire that others do the same. Somewhere down the road, their choice of less than maximum safety may have a devastating affect on me.

Ken

[Sean Woodruff]

Originally Posted by dkottum

Sean, the Pro-pride is a great hitch as many have found. I wanted one when I bought my first Airstream in 2009 but the dealership (whom I don't regard highly) gave me a bunch of grief about it. Hard to install, leave your tow truck here with the trailer for service, Equal-I-Zer just as good for the money, that sort of stuff.

Different dealers push or discourage different products, and like on this thread can justify anything they say.

doug k

Yeah, that's the reason I have never based my business (ProPride or Hensley) on dealers being able to sell the product. Most dealers want to "sell" the product to "their" customer is when they call me and ask for their dealer discount.

It usually goes something like, "My customer wants your product, what's my discount?"

Thanks for wanting one...

[JimGolden]

Switz, your post there a few back indicates to me that you're going to be in excellent shape with that rig set up the way those guys will do it. Good show!

I've used the Reese Dual Cam and it's a good hitch. Personally, I prefer the Equal-I-Zer over it because I don't like messing with the chains. But to each their own; I see that comparo as a Ford vs. Chevy kind of thing. Both are good.

Sean's hitch is heads and shoulders better than either of the previous mentioned two. Simply physics dictates it. I will have one some day (if I don't get one of those Avion 5th wheels first )

See you on the road,

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

Originally Posted by Sean Woodruff

Yeah, that's the reason I have never based my business (ProPride or Hensley) on dealers being able to sell the product. Most dealers want to "sell" the product to "their" customer is when they call me and ask for their dealer discount.

It usually goes something like, "My customer wants your product, what's my discount?"

Thanks for wanting one...

Hi, Sean. So as a manufacture of an RV product, you don't wholesale or jobber to retailers? Does that mean that a retailer has to buy your product at retail/list price and have to mark it up to make a profit? I find this very unusual for a retailer to sell a product at list price and not make any profit from it.

[mstephens]

Originally Posted by Sean Woodruff

Why is "Camping Shelter Choice" a problem?

Because there are conflicting variables, a possibility of several choices, and a promise of compromises that one must endure. Isn't that what defines a "problem?"

[Sean Woodruff]

Originally Posted by ROBERTSUNRUS

Hi, Sean. So as a manufacture of an RV product, you don't wholesale or jobber to retailers? Does that mean that a retailer has to buy your product at retail/list price and have to mark it up to make a profit? I find this very unusual for a retailer to sell a product at list price and not make any profit from it.

No, not as standard practice. If a retailer can explain the value they bring to the table I do work with them. But, I'm a "you work for what you get" kind of guy. If a dealer thinks they get a discount because they are a dealer I don't think that works in today's world. Most dealers don't understand the hitch, don't take the time to understand it and lump it in with all the other hitches. They literally want to be compensated for something because they sell something else. I just can't get my head around that thinking. If I called an Airstream dealer and said, "I manufacture and sell hitches and one of my customers wants an Airstream, what's my price?" they would laugh at me.

I don't expect ANYONE to sell a product and not make a profit. I do expect them to SELL the product to make a profit.

[Sean Woodruff]

Originally Posted by mstephens

Because there are conflicting variables, a possibility of several choices, and a promise of compromises that one must endure. Isn't that what defines a "problem?"

That's where we differ. I don't define that as a problem. I don't believe there are conflicting variables. Only conflicting valuations of the variables.

I can tell you there is no right or wrong answer to all this. I've been doing it for 15+ years and the argument can go 'round and 'round.

Some people will value some things at different levels. That's what makes it all interesting to me.

[mstephens]

Originally Posted by w7ts

As long as we are gonna to analyze what you really said, I have a problem of what you said above and what I believe it implies. First of all every tow vehicle and everything towed in a real world will have some degree of sway. That is an absolute fact. There is no such "none to speak of". This is because no matter how well you design the components, there will always be external forces beyond your control that cause some degree of sway to be induced. The purpose of all the sway control systems is to keep this to a minimum. The reason for this is primarily safety. I don't think that it is a point of dispute that some systems do it to a greater degree than others. I think it is also obvious to state that all other factors being equal, the hitch system that reduces sway to the greatest degree is safer to tow with. So what this all boils down to is how big a gamble are you going to take with your safety. I agree that no one choice fits all, because we all are willing to gamble to some degree or we wouldn't be towing a trailer simply for pleasure. We would drive an automobile and stay in resorts. However this is not a case of going up the choice of hitches from bottom to top and stopping at the one that achieves total safety. Total safety is not achievable.

My personal choice is to scrimp on luxuries and spend the maximum on safety. It is also my desire that others do the same. Somewhere down the road, their choice of less than maximum safety may have a devastating affect on me.

Ken

It's ok that we disagree, but let's be clear about what the disagreement looks like, ok?

"None to speak of" is a subjective and relative term. I use it to mean I have had rigs in which the sway was "none to speak of." It means that it didn't cause much of a noticeable problem. Didn't require steering corrections. Didn't create driving panic. That was my subjective experience. So, when you claim there is "no such thing as none to speak of," you are substituting your subjective experience for mine. That's not generally a legitimate argument.

The rest of your comment is about risk and safety. In your own words, "what this all boils down to is how big a gamble are you going to take with your safety." That's what it boils down to for you. For others, the boil down might consist of other factors too. Cost and convenience are some other things that it might boil down to. If only safety was the goal, the obvious choice is not to tow anything. In fact, not to even drive. That's just an obvious statistical observation. How about this - - if you really want to improve your safety, reduce your speed by 10MPH across the board. That doesn't even cost you anything.

It's fun to rule out cost as a consideration in all these choices. But only a small percentage of people can do that. What the rest of the people usually want to do, is manage the compromise between what they can afford and what the risks are. In short, they use a relative methodology, not an absolute one. That's where our disagreement lies - you are suggesting everyone follow an absolute rule, and I am suggesting that if they can't afford that, they should follow a relative path. We'll just have to disagree on that.

[mstephens]

Originally Posted by Sean Woodruff

That's where we differ. I don't define that as a problem. I don't believe there are conflicting variables. Only conflicting valuations of the variables.

I can tell you there is no right or wrong answer to all this. I've been doing it for 15+ years and the argument can go 'round and 'round.

Some people will value some things at different levels. That's what makes it all interesting to me.

You don't believe there are conflicting variables? How about cost vs. comfort? How about comfort vs. size? How about size versus safety? How about comfort vs. weight? How about increased complexity vs. long term reliability? How about complexity vs. being stranded in the wild with an inoperable unit?

I could name another dozen conflicts between just the parameters I initially listed as part of the problem, but I think the point has been sufficiently made that buying a "camping shelter" is generally a problem solving task just like buying a car or a house or a camera.

I have never met anyone who argued that such purchases didn't require problem solving methodologies. There's always a first! We're just going to have to disagree on this one Sean.

[mstephens]

I forget along the way here to say this: I might in the future be a customer of yours. But if I was, it would be as a result of me concluding that your hitch was the right solution for me to a problem I was having.

[Sean Woodruff]

Originally Posted by mstephens

It's fun to rule out cost as a consideration in all these choices. But only a small percentage of people can do that. What the rest of the people usually want to do, is manage the compromise between what they can afford and what the risks are. In short, they use a relative methodology, not an absolute one. That's where our disagreement lies - you are suggesting everyone follow an absolute rule, and I am suggesting that if they can't afford that, they should follow a relative path. We'll just have to disagree on that.

By the way, I agree with you. As I stated earlier, it's ONLY INTERESTING to me that one will follow a relative path in one category using cost as a consideration, and will follow it in another category not using the same consideration.

As for the "conflicting" variables - isn't it the valuation of the variables that makes them conflicting?

[Ag&Au]

Originally Posted by mstephens

It's ok that we disagree, but let's be clear about what the disagreement looks like, ok?

"None to speak of" is a subjective and relative term. I use it to mean I have had rigs in which the sway was "none to speak of." It means that it didn't cause much of a noticeable problem. Didn't require steering corrections. Didn't create driving panic. That was my subjective experience. So, when you claim there is "no such thing as none to speak of," you are substituting your subjective experience for mine. That's not generally a legitimate argument.

The rest of your comment is about risk and safety. In your own words, "what this all boils down to is how big a gamble are you going to take with your safety." That's what it boils down to for you. For others, the boil down might consist of other factors too. Cost and convenience are some other things that it might boil down to. If only safety was the goal, the obvious choice is not to tow anything. In fact, not to even drive. That's just an obvious statistical observation. How about this - - if you really want to improve your safety, reduce your speed by 10MPH across the board. That doesn't even cost you anything.

It's fun to rule out cost as a consideration in all these choices. But only a small percentage of people can do that. What the rest of the people usually want to do, is manage the compromise between what they can afford and what the risks are. In short, they use a relative methodology, not an absolute one. That's where our disagreement lies - you are suggesting everyone follow an absolute rule, and I am suggesting that if they can't afford that, they should follow a relative path. We'll just have to disagree on that.

I am sorry, but I totally fail to get your point or intent. You use ambiguous terms and attempt to define others intentions for them. I in no manner am suggesting people follow an absolute rule. You seem to me to simply enjoy arguing for sake of eventually wearing people down and then feeling good because you "won". I don't particularly enjoy that and value my time more than that. In my opinion convincing you of anything is not worth my time, even if I could. So carry on with your nonsense if you can get anyone else to waste their time replying.


Ken

[Sean Woodruff]

Originally Posted by mstephens

I forget along the way here to say this: I might in the future be a customer of yours. But if I was, it would be as a result of me concluding that your hitch was the right solution for me to a problem I was having.

Thanks... and since you define all purchases as a problem I'll look forward to providing you with the best solution available to the hitch purchase problem. (I have my tongue firmly planted in my cheek while I type this... )

[64GlobeTrotter]

I hit a big "whoop" in the road and the TV exerts a tremendous force on the trailer frame causing it to bend. The body of the trailer has to absorb these frame deflections. Over time, this results in rivet pops, bending and cracking the aluminum skin, loosening of interior cabinetry & body from frame.
I have a vintage AS with a 4" C channel frame and I think the WD hitch is just destroying my trailer.
Setting up a WD hitch requires more than a static formula - not sure what the answer is other than experience and common sense.
"Over-hitched". Probably a lot of older trailers are.

[mstephens]

Originally Posted by w7ts

I am sorry, but I totally fail to get your point or intent. You use ambiguous terms and attempt to define others intentions for them. I in no manner am suggesting people follow an absolute rule. You seem to me to simply enjoy arguing for sake of eventually wearing people down and then feeling good because you "won". I don't particularly enjoy that and value my time more than that. In my opinion convincing you of anything is not worth my time, even if I could. So carry on with your nonsense if you can get anyone else to waste their time replying.


Ken

So your complaint is that you don't like arguing, and you are going to make that point by continuously arguing? In other words, it's ok for you to post what you want to say, but not me? Well, that's humorous at least.

[64GlobeTrotter]

I hit a big "whoop" in the road and the TV exerts a tremendous force on the trailer frame causing it to bend. The body of the trailer has to absorb these frame deflections. Over time, this results in rivet pops, bending and cracking the aluminum skin, loosening of interior cabinetry & body from frame.
I have a vintage AS with a 4" C channel frame and I think the WD hitch is just destroying my trailer.
Setting up a WD hitch requires more than a static formula - not sure what the answer is other than experience and common sense.
"Over-hitched". Probably a lot of older trailers are.