So I guess a 1/2-ton truck is enough

[dznf0g]

All I can say to this one is, over the many years, i have had the "opportunity" to take evasive actions with a variety of TVs, Trailers and hitches at highway speeds. Unquestionably, my ppp is the most predictable and stable of any setups I have had.
And yes, I am and always have been as anal about loading and setup as I am about understanding the physics.
You'll get no argument from me about the necessity of of that.

Originally Posted by out of sight

Inappropriate driver input, like trying to avoid a kid chasing a ball into the street. Yes. Rigs with Hensley hitches can and do jackknife. The question is, are they more prone to jackknifing than other hitches? A couple of things to consider is the distance from the axle to the articulation point, and the weight at the articulation point. Both of these will cause problems.

[Profxd]

Originally Posted by SailorSam205

What isn't getting thru their tin foil caps is what is important is where the weight transfer occurs. On a Hensley design, weight transfer is 4-6" closer to the TV rear axle than a traditional ball mount hitch. Additional distance is between the trailer axles and the weight transfer point, putting more weight on the trailer tires.

My concern is not what’s happening in the horizontal plane it’s the vertical. Do you have scale tickets to show empty, no WD and then WD for your setup?

[out of sight]

Originally Posted by dznf0g

All I can say to this one is, over the many years, i have had the "opportunity" to take evasive actions with a variety of TVs, Trailers and hitches at highway speeds. Unquestionably, my ppp is the most predictable and stable of any setups I have had.
And yes, I am and always have been as anal about loading and setup as I am about understanding the physics.
You'll get no argument from me about the necessity of of that.

The question of jackknife could easily be settled by full scale testing. To my knowledge there has never been any such test results published.

Truck manufacturers now have to certify their towing claims by passing a stability test (among other things). Why not use the same test to compare the effect of the different types of hitches? I suspect many hitch manufacturers would resist.

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by out of sight

The question of jackknife could easily be settled by full scale testing. To my knowledge there has never been any such test results published.

Truck manufacturers now have to certify their towing claims by passing a stability test (among other things). Why not use the same test to compare the effect of the different types of hitches? I suspect many hitch manufacturers would resist.

Well now you're just living in a world where, "If every day were Christmas day......."

[Profxd]

So I come across 2 other scale tickets sets that show that the HA/PP does indeed act like a hitch extension not a tongue extension and increases the weight removed from the front axle vs a standard WDH. Those 2 examples indicate a 18-20 in. increased extension effect on paper in black and white. Even though I agree very little with what Andy Thompson does, I must agree that keeping the rear axle to the connection point as short as possible reduces the TW impact on the TV.

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by Profxd

So I come across 2 other scale tickets sets that show that the HA/PP does indeed act like a hitch extension not a tongue extension and increases the weight removed from the front axle vs a standard WDH. Those 2 examples indicate a 18-20 in. increased extension effect on paper in black and white. Even though I agree very little with what Andy Thompson does, I must agree that keeping the rear axle to the connection point as short as possible reduces the TW impact on the TV.

Are you strictly confining your analysis to WD application, and not the effects of a longer hitch on lateral stability?

Could you define "connection point"?

What does "acts like a hitch extension" mean in your context?

[Profxd]

Originally Posted by dznf0g

Are you strictly confining your analysis to WD application, and not the effects of a longer hitch on lateral stability?

Could you define "connection point"?

What does "acts like a hitch extension" mean in your context?

1. No
2. Connection point is where the trailer coupler connects to ball.
3. A hitch extension moves the connection point away from the TV and increases the weight removed from the front axle.

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by Profxd

1. No
2. Connection point is where the trailer coupler connects to ball.
3. A hitch extension moves the connection point away from the TV and increases the weight removed from the front axle.

Thanks for clarifying a bit.

1) Since no one produces a longer stinger than OEM for PPP hitches, and they are designed with their projection point calibrated to their stinger dimensions, I believe the discussion over the longer distance to the ball from the receiver mouth is irrelevant from an increased sway issue. PPP sets its pivot point 52" forward of the ball. That places it 7" aft of my center of rear axle, and most pickups and full sized SUV are in that ballpark. Now one of those old Dodge and Ford extended full size vans increase that point to axle dimension and reduce PPP effectiveness.

2) Connection point is a bit of a fuzzy topic. The ball does in fact connect the PPP upper head to the trailer, but it's only function is to provide the flexibility of tilt side to side and fore and aft. Connection point, for this discussion purposes, is where the "work is done"....ie. turning and WD application. With a PPP hitch, those functions take place several inches forward of the ball. The arc swung during turning is an imaginary line somewhere between the front set and the rear set of bearings, again several inches forward of the ball. The spring bar end pockets are a little over 2" forward of the ball, whereas a conventional WD hitch places them pretty much in line with the ball.

3) So, the "connection point" for the WD spring bar on a PPP hitch is a bit over 13" from the receiver mouth and my Reese dual cam is 9.75" from the receiver mouth, equipped with the drawbar it came with as a package. So your 18 to 20" extension is way off. The effective spring bar lengths are 29" on both hitches, so there is no mechanical advantage/disadvantage with either.

While the "hitch extension" you defined is true, it is only a bit over 3", and is certainly within the weight distribution window needed....even when I have 1000#s in the bed of the truck.....although that is about the limit of both truck and WD ability of the hitch with 1K spring bars.

[Profxd]

Originally Posted by dznf0g

Thanks for clarifying a bit.

1) Since no one produces a longer stinger than OEM for PPP hitches, and they are designed with their projection point calibrated to their stinger dimensions, I believe the discussion over the longer distance to the ball from the receiver mouth is irrelevant from an increased sway issue. PPP sets its pivot point 52" forward of the ball. That places it 7" aft of my center of rear axle, and most pickups and full sized SUV are in that ballpark. Now one of those old Dodge and Ford extended full size vans increase that point to axle dimension and reduce PPP effectiveness.

2) Connection point is a bit of a fuzzy topic. The ball does in fact connect the PPP upper head to the trailer, but it's only function is to provide the flexibility of tilt side to side and fore and aft. Connection point, for this discussion purposes, is where the "work is done"....ie. turning and WD application. With a PPP hitch, those functions take place several inches forward of the ball. The arc swung during turning is an imaginary line somewhere between the front set and the rear set of bearings, again several inches forward of the ball. The spring bar end pockets are a little over 2" forward of the ball, whereas a conventional WD hitch places them pretty much in line with the ball.

3) So, the "connection point" for the WD spring bar on a PPP hitch is a bit over 13" from the receiver mouth and my Reese dual cam is 9.75" from the receiver mouth, equipped with the drawbar it came with as a package. So your 18 to 20" extension is way off. The effective spring bar lengths are 29" on both hitches, so there is no mechanical advantage/disadvantage with either.

While the "hitch extension" you defined is true, it is only a bit over 3", and is certainly within the weight distribution window needed....even when I have 1000#s in the bed of the truck.....although that is about the limit of both truck and WD ability of the hitch with 1K spring bars.

You can say that 18-20 inches is off but the scale numbers indicate it is not. There could be much more to reason it shows as such but it is still there. When have time I’ll do a bit more looking into it and had only considered using a HA/PP if one came on the used market at a reasonable price. I don’t need one and have no issue with sway but liked the idea because sway control and WD were independent of each other.

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by Profxd

You can say that 18-20 inches is off but the scale numbers indicate it is not. There could be much more to reason it shows as such but it is still there. When have time I’ll do a bit more looking into it and had only considered using a HA/PP if one came on the used market at a reasonable price. I don’t need one and have no issue with sway but liked the idea because sway control and WD were independent of each other.

Hey, that's how I got mine. I really like my reese dual cam, and it is still my backup. Hated my eq.
My brother in law was friends with an AS dealer and he was walking through his service dept. There in the corner was all the bits and pieces of an Haha. It was on a trailer that came in on trade and the dealer didn't want to mess with it. So, I was curious about what everyone was talking about. Called dealer and he said $1k. I said I wasn't $1k curious, but I was $800 curious. He said ok.
BTW, ppp, I my opinion is incrementally better that reese dual cam and a lot better than eq. I have no experience with my large AS with any others.

[BayouBiker]

Originally Posted by Profxd

If 1200lbs removes 700+lbs off your front axle, the Hensley effectively adds 20-24 inches to the distance from the rear axle to the hitch point and acts like a hitch extension. Never mind I don’t want one now.

Profxd, If you're using a simple WD calculator or simple torque and lever moments as your basis and I suspect you are, please remember you are comparing your estimate to a live measurement. In the real world suspension components have tie points that are extended from the axle centerline and the suspension geometries shift so your 20-24 inch estimate is suspect.

Why not just go to the Hensley website? They provide the relevant measurements. Here is a summary of extension distances from end of receiver for comparison.

Standard minimal extension non-WD with drop shank 9 1/2
Typical WD extension with drop shank 12
Hensley with drop shank 24

So using a typical WD hitch as a realistic basis, no WD can subtract 2 1/2 and Hensley adds just 12.

[BayouBiker]

Originally Posted by out of sight

Inappropriate driver input, like trying to avoid a kid chasing a ball into the street. Yes. Rigs with Hensley hitches can and do jackknife. The question is, are they more prone to jackknifing than other hitches? A couple of things to consider is the distance from the axle to the articulation point, and the weight at the articulation point. Both of these will cause problems.

But as has been pointed out to you the effective pivot point for a Hensley type hitch is not at the trailer coupler, it is 7 inches in front of the coupler and ball. Let's review the distances with this information

Pivot Point:

No WD close coupled drop shank receiver end plus 9 1/2 inches

Standard WD drop shank receiver end plus 12 inches

Hensley drop shank receiver end plus 17 inches.

In the case of managing yaw inertia the relevant dimension is not distance to the rear axle, rather it is distance to the center of gravity so the relative increase is about 6-8%. Not a major issue. It has roughly the same effect as towing with a full water tank. How many here would describe those who carry fresh water as foolish?

[dznf0g]

So, in order to try and bring this to OP and his title, here are my specs from my extended Florida trip last winter (which ended early due to covid!!)

2015 Chevy Silverado 1500 double cab; 6.2L, 8 speed, MaxTow package
Ratings: Payload = 2034
GCWR = 17,700
Trailer Rating = 11,900
Receiver rating = 1200
GVWR = 7600
FGAWR = 3950
RGAWR = 4300
Base curb weights
FA = 3160
RA = 2380
total = 5540

Loaded for trip weights
truck Payload = 1602 79% of capacity
FA = 3334 84.4% of capacity
RA = 3808 88.6% of capacity
Receiver = 1081 90.1% of capacity
GVW = 7142 94% of capacity
gcvw = 15734 88.9% of capacity
2007 Classic 30' with Hensley
Ratings: GVWR = 10,000
GAWR = 10,000
TWR = 1000

Loaded trip weights
TW = 1010 101% of capacity OOPS!!!!
GAW = 8592 85.9% of capacity
GVW = 9461 94.6% of capacity (Full tank of fresh water;empty gray and black)
GCVW = 15,734 88.9% of capacity

SO, Yes, a half ton can do it....Nicely, if spec'ed correctly

Now for some of the drift numbers:
WD removed 434# from rear axle
restored 293# to the front axle
added 142# to AS axles

[mkcurtiss]

Good Lord, all the geometry, calculus, tape measures, trips to scales, nights scratching the proverbial noggin, and it could have all been negated by just buying a truck capable of towing your camper, without all the smoke and mirrors of making you feel like it was safe....Twisting your hitch and frame can create a scenario that sounds safe, but there is no substitute for mass and substance......Its a free country, (or it was) but the desperation to create the facade that an f-150 is as capable as an f-250 is a comical exercise! Press on, but it is not possible !
Big heavy trucks have a purpose! To haul big heavy loads with ease,and without destroying themselves, and being safe! When you wrap that f-150 **** around a telephone pole, you can whip out a scale ticket, and argue with that telephone pole about how it should not have been there, but it was still there! Good Lord give it a rest! This argument is ridiculous!

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by mkcurtiss

Good Lord, all the geometry, calculus, tape measures, trips to scales, nights scratching the proverbial noggin, and it could have all been negated by just buying a truck capable of towing your camper, without all the smoke and mirrors of making you feel like it was safe....Twisting your hitch and frame can create a scenario that sounds safe, but there is no substitute for mass and substance......Its a free country, (or it was) but the desperation to create the facade that an f-150 is as capable as an f-250 is a comical exercise! Press on, but it is not possible !
Big heavy trucks have a purpose! To haul big heavy loads with ease,and without destroying themselves, and being safe! When you wrap that f-150 **** around a telephone pole, you can whip out a scale ticket, and argue with that telephone pole about how it should not have been there, but it was still there! Good Lord give it a rest! This argument is ridiculous!

I wonder how many times in the 10 years I have been participating in this forum that people have complained that there aren't any folks around who can spec a truck anymore????
Then when they appear, they become a target.
And since when did math and physics become "smoke and mirrors"????

If you want to over-spec, that's fine and there's nothing wrong with that. There's certainly nothing wrong with spec'ing exactly the right equipment for the intended job. Yes, it is still (mostly) a free country....at least in this regard.

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by out of sight

Take a look at the video on the Hensley site. You will see that the rig pivots at the hitch when the tow vehicle initiates the turn. The Hensley hitch prevents sway but it does not prevent jackknifing.

Correct. Only proper driver skill can do that.

[Profxd]

Originally Posted by BayouBiker

But as has been pointed out to you the effective pivot point for a Hensley type hitch is not at the trailer coupler, it is 7 inches in front of the coupler and ball. Let's review the distances with this information

Pivot Point:

No WD close coupled drop shank receiver end plus 9 1/2 inches

Standard WD drop shank receiver end plus 12 inches

Hensley drop shank receiver end plus 17 inches.

In the case of managing yaw inertia the relevant dimension is not distance to the rear axle, rather it is distance to the center of gravity so the relative increase is about 6-8%. Not a major issue. It has roughly the same effect as towing with a full water tank. How many here would describe those who carry fresh water as foolish?

The TV COG position and the distance from the rear axle to the connection point are both relevant to stability. 6 inches of addition distance to the connection point is significant. Below is a picture of my Equalizer shank which inserts fully up to the bottom gusset.

[out of sight]

Another thing to consider:

Simple ball mount 10 lbs
Typical WD hitch 80 lbs
PPP hitch 200 lbs

So if you are swerving around a moose in the road at an angular acceleration of 1 g there will be up to 200 lb perpendicular force on the hitch point in addition to the 800-900 lbs force from the trailer tongue weight.

[Kalashnikov]

Originally Posted by mkcurtiss

Good Lord, all the geometry, calculus, tape measures, trips to scales, nights scratching the proverbial noggin, and it could have all been negated by just buying a truck capable of towing your camper, without all the smoke and mirrors of making you feel like it was safe....Twisting your hitch and frame can create a scenario that sounds safe, but there is no substitute for mass and substance......Its a free country, (or it was) but the desperation to create the facade that an f-150 is as capable as an f-250 is a comical exercise! Press on, but it is not possible !
Big heavy trucks have a purpose! To haul big heavy loads with ease,and without destroying themselves, and being safe! When you wrap that f-150 **** around a telephone pole, you can whip out a scale ticket, and argue with that telephone pole about how it should not have been there, but it was still there! Good Lord give it a rest! This argument is ridiculous!

Quite the rant given that the poster immediately above showed an F150 set up to tow within spec.

[dznf0g]

Originally Posted by Kalashnikov

Quite the rant given that the poster immediately above showed an F150 set up to tow within spec.

OK, it was a good truck, not an F150. Jus' skiddin'. But I do know that Ford F150 has the options to equip very similarly.

The point is, if you're buying off the lot, don't settle. Not a lot of dealers carry the unique specs we need for trailer towing.