Free 7 Day Trial RV GPS App RV Trip Planner Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Free 7 Day Trial ×
 


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-12-2020, 08:41 AM   #381
Rivet Master
 
gypsydad's Avatar

 
2017 28' Flying Cloud
2014 25' FB Flying Cloud
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Georgetown (winter)Thayne (summer) , Texas & Wyoming
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by dznf0g View Post
Hmmm, 10.6 for me would be with a moderate head wind. Still air = north of 12. Day before yesterday, 570 miles with a moderate tailwind = 13.4.
I drive 65.
2015 ltz 6.2, 8 speed.
2007 30' classic @ 9k.
Just averaged 12.6 MPG towing the 28' with the F250 6.7L from TX to WY 65-70mph most of the way...after few days in Tetons, headed to cabin in Lincoln MT...averaged 13.2 at 65-68mph... Wed., drove down to visit our new "Vacation lot" in Star Valley Ranch RV park in Thayne, WY. Averged 17.8 at 75-80 mph, without the AS attached....

(side bar- not trying to take this thread in a different direction....but sharing my trip) We found this seasonal RV resort in Thayne while visiting friends 2 weeks ago on our way to our place in MT and made an offer...now I own a seasonal lot with lots of golf, 40 min from Jackson, along with a 2014 Big Sky 5th wheel! Need to sell the 5th wheel so I can park my AS here when we come in summer. Beautiful area if you like to fish, camp, golf, and hang out in the summer!) Anyone interested in a 2014 Montana Big Sky! (seriously, though!)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	5th wheel and lot in Thayne.jpg
Views:	49
Size:	408.4 KB
ID:	370090   Click image for larger version

Name:	Haystack.jpg
Views:	15
Size:	173.4 KB
ID:	370091  

__________________
Empty Nesters; Gypsies on the road!
2017 28' Twin Flying Cloud
2017 F250 King Ranch, 4X4, 6.7L, Blue-Ox WDH
Summer-Star Valley Ranch RV Resort (Thayne, WY); Winter-Sun City (Georgetown,TX)
gypsydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2020, 08:00 PM   #382
Rivet Master
 
2017 23' Flying Cloud
Bartlett , Tennessee
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by BayouBiker View Post
I was hoping someone here might know.
I am not a physicist. I am not an engineer. However, I think that telling new people that it is OK to "modify" their OEM ratings is irresponsible. You don't know the person. You don't know the tow vehicle. You don't know the trailer. Telling someone who is trying to learn that they can ignore the manufacturer's ratings is dangerous. "The payload rating is 1300#? That's OK. You can put 1700# on there just fine. Your WDH takes that 400# back off." No. Let's educate them on the most conservative route, then if they want to modify that, on their own, that is up to them.

You may be on here trying to get a scientific debate started for your own edification, but I am on here trying to educate new RVers and keep them safe while they learn.
__________________
Bobbo and Lin
2017 F-150 XLT 4x4 SuperCab 3.5l EcoBoost V6
2017 Flying Cloud 23FB "BobLin Along"
Bobbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2020, 08:52 PM   #383
Rivet Master
 
2018 25' International
Slidell , Louisiana
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 3,477
It's not clear to me it would be ignoring OEM ratings if the OEM did not specifically describe how to determine payload. Tongue weight is not a mass you can weigh and then pile into the vehilce, it is a force generated by a lever moment and when you add a counter moment, the net load is reduced. Once you rig up and drive on the scales that shifted load is not on the vehicle, and if its not on the vehicle, and the OEM is silent about it, its hard to argue it should be counted. It would be the same as arguing a crane capacity should not be increased as counter balances are added (which shifts the load moment to the supporting center) because after all the original force has not been removed. This is not a poor analogy, it is exactly the same thing.

So if the OEM provides specific guidance on calculating or weighing payload, I'm with you. If the OEM does not provide guidance then you are simply speculating on how it should be figured and it is no less irresponsible for you to presume it should be counted than for someone else to suggest it shouldn't. Realize also we are talking about a difference of less than 3% of the gross vehicle weight, well within the engineering margins and since it is phantom payload we are talking about it is important primarily for passenger comfort. You describe exceeding payload as dangerous when in fact additional mass as a substitute for a load that is no longer there actually improves all the most critical safety parameters in play when towing, while at the same time not exceeding any structural limits. So please make sure you understand what you're talking about before schooling me on what is dangerous.

To be clear, I would not advise anyone to ignore specific guidance from the manufacturer without a solid rationale.
__________________
Brian
BayouBiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 02:59 AM   #384
4 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Baltimore , Maryland
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by BayouBiker View Post
It's not clear to me it would be ignoring OEM ratings if the OEM did not specifically describe how to determine payload. Tongue weight is not a mass you can weigh and then pile into the vehilce, it is a force generated by a lever moment and when you add a counter moment, the net load is reduced. Once you rig up and drive on the scales that shifted load is not on the vehicle, and if its not on the vehicle, and the OEM is silent about it, its hard to argue it should be counted. It would be the same as arguing a crane capacity should not be increased as counter balances are added (which shifts the load moment to the supporting center) because after all the original force has not been removed. This is not a poor analogy, it is exactly the same thing.

So if the OEM provides specific guidance on calculating or weighing payload, I'm with you. If the OEM does not provide guidance then you are simply speculating on how it should be figured and it is no less irresponsible for you to presume it should be counted than for someone else to suggest it shouldn't. Realize also we are talking about a difference of less than 3% of the gross vehicle weight, well within the engineering margins and since it is phantom payload we are talking about it is important primarily for passenger comfort. You describe exceeding payload as dangerous when in fact additional mass as a substitute for a load that is no longer there actually improves all the most critical safety parameters in play when towing, while at the same time not exceeding any structural limits. So please make sure you understand what you're talking about before schooling me on what is dangerous.

To be clear, I would not advise anyone to ignore specific guidance from the manufacturer without a solid rationale.
You’re wrong again about tongue weight Brian. It is a mass that is measured and supported by the TV fully. The tongue mass is supported by the hitch ball, which is attached to the shank which is inserted into the receiver which is attached to the truck frame. The truck frame fully supports the tongue mass/weight always. The torque created by the WDH bars cancel themselves out since it is equal on each end of the bar. You change the weight felt at the TV axles, the frame of the TV feels the tongue weight and bar torque simultaneously. Tongue weight is not cancelled out.
Profxd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 06:10 AM   #385
Rivet Master
 
2018 25' International
Slidell , Louisiana
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 3,477
All i can say Profxd is you may want to go back and review your statics lessons. We are saying nearly the same thing, but not quite. Note I specifically used the therm "not removed" However I also accurately noted that "net load" (the sum of all the forces) is reduced.

I finished an analysis of the situation and the results may be surprising to some. Stability and safety is maximum while towing when additional payload is added to the tow vehicle that compensates for the net load reduction from Weight Distribution tension. The system is most stable and handles best with cargo carried in the tow vehicle rather than the trailer. Further, the more cargo you are able to fit in the tow vehicle, the better up to the point the tow vehicle can no longer competently manage that load.

During normal driving conditions the tow vehicle tires, axles, suspension, steering, frame and brakes receive the greatest loads and stresses with no weight distribution tension. Only the receiver and mount experiences greater stresses with weight distribution and even then it is only the twisting moment that is increased.

So from a technical perspective, it is best to make use of the payload capacity shifted to the trailer axles by removing cargo from the trailer and adding it to the tow vehicle to bring the tow vehicle up to maximum payload as measured at the tires by a scale after WD is applied. The single exception is if your receiver or mount is weak, but then you should sh** can it and get a new one.
__________________
Brian
BayouBiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 06:24 AM   #386
CLOUDSPLITTER "Tahawus"
 
ROBERT CROSS's Avatar

 
2003 25' Classic
Zanadude Nebula , Milky Way
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18,154
Images: 1
{QOUTE} Snip....Further, the more cargo you are able to fit in the tow vehicle, the better up to the point the tow vehicle can no longer competently manage that load.


YEP...Load to the MAX, that's our credo. 🤓
If you can't take it with you, what's the point of having it.

Bob
🇺🇸
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	6E676B74-A15F-4EEB-A4E5-A8510E7C80BC.jpg
Views:	13
Size:	326.9 KB
ID:	370176   Click image for larger version

Name:	6FCAB48B-C9F0-419D-8690-E3BBC08DFB57_1_105_c.jpeg
Views:	46
Size:	118.4 KB
ID:	370177  

__________________
Tahawus

Love for the Adirondacks

"It is more wiser to ponder all things with diligent suspicion, than follow with blind assumption."
RLC
ROBERT CROSS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 07:00 AM   #387
Rivet Master
 
2017 23' Flying Cloud
Bartlett , Tennessee
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by BayouBiker View Post
So if the OEM provides specific guidance on calculating or weighing payload, I'm with you.
The OEM DOES give specific guidance on calculating or weighing payload. You WEIGH it. What the OEM does NOT say to do is to reduce the number you got WEIGHING it because of a static study you did that 99.9999999% of new people have never even heard of. If you recommend having to rely on complicated statistical analysis type calculations to determine what weight to use as payload, you are doing a HUGE disservice to new RVers when you tell them they should, or even just can, go over the OEM payload ratings because of formulas. Remember, we are trying to help John Q Public, not structural engineers. We have to keep it simple. We have to keep it safe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BayouBiker View Post
it is no less irresponsible for you to presume it should be counted than for someone else to suggest it shouldn't
I disagree. Telling people they don't have to honor the OEM's ratings is irresponsible. Telling them not to count all of the tongue weight against their payload is telling them not to honor the OEM's ratings. Telling people the OEM ratings need to be honored is never irresponsible.
__________________
Bobbo and Lin
2017 F-150 XLT 4x4 SuperCab 3.5l EcoBoost V6
2017 Flying Cloud 23FB "BobLin Along"
Bobbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 07:21 AM   #388
CLOUDSPLITTER "Tahawus"
 
ROBERT CROSS's Avatar

 
2003 25' Classic
Zanadude Nebula , Milky Way
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18,154
Images: 1
Why don't you just take your payload and load it...it really ain't all the difficult.
Stay under axle & tire ratings and I doubt anything will disintegrate while towing.

Try not letting the brain interfere with common sense. 🤓

Been working well here for 45+ years of Streaming.

Bob
🇺🇸
__________________
Tahawus

Love for the Adirondacks

"It is more wiser to ponder all things with diligent suspicion, than follow with blind assumption."
RLC
ROBERT CROSS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 07:50 AM   #389
Rivet Master
 
2018 25' International
Slidell , Louisiana
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 3,477
bobbo, not statistics, statics. A branch of physics that deals with stable loads and ensuring things remain stable like buildings, bridges, anything load carrying. I also did a dynamic analysis to to address impulse responses from bumps etc. and kinematic analysis for corning.

Sure you weigh it, but since tongue weight and WD tension are not objects rather they are torque induced loads, where you weigh it makes a difference. My Ram manual does not provide guidance on how one should measure these loads nor on how they should be summed to arrive at payload.

My OEM owners manual and the door sticker defines payload as the sum of passengers and cargo. The load generated by torque acting on the ball is not a passenger and it is not cargo. Interpreting my manual literally as written and in complete context, following the provided instructions exactly, I could load my vehicle with fluids, passengers and cargo to max GVWR. Then I could hitch up the trailer and WD and head to the scales. So long as I have not exceeded either axle limits and have not exceeded Combined limits, I have not violated any of the OEM instruction for my vehicle. In fact I have followed OEM ratings and instructions to a tee and have honored all the OEM ratings. This reality is exactly consistent with the results of my analysis.

I will not tell someone with a different vehicle to follow the guidance provided for my vehicle. I will tell them to follow their OEM manual, thus I am also dooing what you suggest is prudent as well.

Having said all that, I stand by my analysis that the system is most stable when the tow vehicle carries as much of the cargo as it competently can carry so you can keep the trailer as light as possible. The primary limit while towing is that the suspension become under damped and squishy so comfort is compromised, the receiver gets over stressed if it is weak, or the rear suspension bottoms out, resulting in unpredictable impulse responses which need to be be avoided.
__________________
Brian
BayouBiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 08:19 AM   #390
CLOUDSPLITTER "Tahawus"
 
ROBERT CROSS's Avatar

 
2003 25' Classic
Zanadude Nebula , Milky Way
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18,154
Images: 1
In our case keeping the trailer as light as possible is an absolute necessity...having a CCC of a whopping 676lbs, with a GVWR of 7300lb on two 3500lb axles.🤔

Bob
🇺🇸
__________________
Tahawus

Love for the Adirondacks

"It is more wiser to ponder all things with diligent suspicion, than follow with blind assumption."
RLC
ROBERT CROSS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 06:48 PM   #391
Rivet Master
 
2017 23' Flying Cloud
Bartlett , Tennessee
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by BayouBiker View Post
My OEM owners manual and the door sticker defines payload as the sum of passengers and cargo. The load generated by torque acting on the ball is not a passenger and it is not cargo. Interpreting my manual literally as written and in complete context, following the provided instructions exactly, I could load my vehicle with fluids, passengers and cargo to max GVWR. Then I could hitch up the trailer and WD and head to the scales.
Except, the tongue weight is part of the cargo, and you are excluding it. Unless your tongue weight is 0 pounds, when you hitch up the trailer, you are adding cargo weight. I think your definition of cargo is screwy. You seem to think cargo is what is inside the truck's walls. Cargo is weight the truck is carrying. When you put the tongue on the hitch, the truck is carrying the tongue weight. That makes the tongue weight cargo which must be factored in.
__________________
Bobbo and Lin
2017 F-150 XLT 4x4 SuperCab 3.5l EcoBoost V6
2017 Flying Cloud 23FB "BobLin Along"
Bobbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 07:35 PM   #392
2 Rivet Member
 
Phoenix , Arizona
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 49
I wish all trucks had the new GM trailering and weight information sticker. This would solve a lot of headaches based on the clearly defined limits.

Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6426.JPG
Views:	23
Size:	489.0 KB
ID:	370240
PhxTrotter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2020, 07:40 PM   #393
3 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Highlands Ranch , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhxTrotter View Post
I wish all trucks had the new GM trailering and weight information sticker. This would solve a lot of headaches based on the clearly defined limits.

Attachment 370240
That is very impressive. Everybody else makes you search for it and even when you find the right document it's still unclear. Yes, Ford, I'm talking about you.
HRTKD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2020, 01:00 PM   #394
2 Rivet Member
 
2011 25' FB Flying Cloud
Pugetropolis , Washington
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcanavera View Post
I've never regretted moving to a 3/4 ton vehicle from my previous 1/2 vehicles and moving up from a 28' Safari to a 31' Classic Slide out.

Jack
I just recently moved up to a 2020 GMC 3500 from my trusty old Nissan Titan. I loved that truck for so many reasons and it reliably towed the Airstream to many good adventures. However, almost all of those adventures were relatively local, within 200 miles, and I could always feel exactly what I was towing. Worth mentioning is that the stock rotors were replaced with Frozen Rotors and I had confidence in the brakes...at conservative tow speeds. One trip to eastern Washington made me quite aware of the limitations of that truck. Towing through the Gorge on I-90 was doable and I managed an easy 50 mph uphill but I did watch the transmission temperature gauge going crazy, and it wasn't a hot day for eastern Washington. With the Titan now 15 years old, I agonized and researched for months trying to avoid the "big truck" and was positive I didn't want a diesel, even though 3/4 of the truck miles were towing. Finally bit the bullet on a deal too good to pass up and it took exactly one ride with the Airstream hooked up to make me realize that the right choice was made. Having survived 8 seasons of enjoyable "streaming" in the Titan, I totally understand both sides of the debate on tow vehicles. You can always get a job done with various tools but it is always easier with the proper tool. I wouldn't change back in a hot minute.
AL13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2020, 07:37 AM   #395
Rivet Master
 
gypsydad's Avatar

 
2017 28' Flying Cloud
2014 25' FB Flying Cloud
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Georgetown (winter)Thayne (summer) , Texas & Wyoming
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by AL13 View Post
I just recently moved up to a 2020 GMC 3500 from my trusty old Nissan Titan. I loved that truck for so many reasons and it reliably towed the Airstream to many good adventures. However, almost all of those adventures were relatively local, within 200 miles, and I could always feel exactly what I was towing. Worth mentioning is that the stock rotors were replaced with Frozen Rotors and I had confidence in the brakes...at conservative tow speeds. One trip to eastern Washington made me quite aware of the limitations of that truck. Towing through the Gorge on I-90 was doable and I managed an easy 50 mph uphill but I did watch the transmission temperature gauge going crazy, and it wasn't a hot day for eastern Washington. With the Titan now 15 years old, I agonized and researched for months trying to avoid the "big truck" and was positive I didn't want a diesel, even though 3/4 of the truck miles were towing. Finally bit the bullet on a deal too good to pass up and it took exactly one ride with the Airstream hooked up to make me realize that the right choice was made. Having survived 8 seasons of enjoyable "streaming" in the Titan, I totally understand both sides of the debate on tow vehicles. You can always get a job done with various tools but it is always easier with the proper tool. I wouldn't change back in a hot minute.
You didn't say...gas or diesel on your new TV?
__________________
Empty Nesters; Gypsies on the road!
2017 28' Twin Flying Cloud
2017 F250 King Ranch, 4X4, 6.7L, Blue-Ox WDH
Summer-Star Valley Ranch RV Resort (Thayne, WY); Winter-Sun City (Georgetown,TX)
gypsydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2020, 08:34 AM   #396
3 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Highlands Ranch , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by AL13 View Post
I just recently moved up to a 2020 GMC 3500 from my trusty old Nissan Titan. I loved that truck for so many reasons and it reliably towed the Airstream to many good adventures. However, almost all of those adventures were relatively local, within 200 miles, and I could always feel exactly what I was towing. Worth mentioning is that the stock rotors were replaced with Frozen Rotors and I had confidence in the brakes...at conservative tow speeds. One trip to eastern Washington made me quite aware of the limitations of that truck. Towing through the Gorge on I-90 was doable and I managed an easy 50 mph uphill but I did watch the transmission temperature gauge going crazy, and it wasn't a hot day for eastern Washington. With the Titan now 15 years old, I agonized and researched for months trying to avoid the "big truck" and was positive I didn't want a diesel, even though 3/4 of the truck miles were towing. Finally bit the bullet on a deal too good to pass up and it took exactly one ride with the Airstream hooked up to make me realize that the right choice was made. Having survived 8 seasons of enjoyable "streaming" in the Titan, I totally understand both sides of the debate on tow vehicles. You can always get a job done with various tools but it is always easier with the proper tool. I wouldn't change back in a hot minute.
My '07 Titan was a towing beast for the first 5 years. Zero issues, no transmission heating at all. After that, I had to pay very close attention to the gauges and manage the transmission gearing any time there was an extended uphill climb. Moving up to an F-350 made the drive so much easier.
HRTKD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2020, 03:44 PM   #397
Rivet Master
 
2019 30' International
Pennsylvania , Pennsylvania
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 833
'17 F250 gasser, 3,100 pound payload, 30 foot airstream.

I load that truck, leer topper, bikes, propane, grill, propane fire bowl, jacks, toolbox, other tools, chairs, ladder, metal detector, books, firewood, folding table, case water, yeti cooler, cricut and supplies, lovely navigator....airstream loaded, fridge, full water, food, dishes, clothes, the works.

No worries here. 10mpg, maybe, if I behave. Otherwise 9.5.
__________________
If you ain't havin' fun you ain't doin' it right

2017 Ford CCSB F250 XLT 6.2L Gas 4x4 Ruby
2019 International Serenity 30 Rear Twin
majorairhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2020, 05:15 PM   #398
Rivet Master
 
2018 25' International
Slidell , Louisiana
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 3,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbo View Post
Except, the tongue weight is part of the cargo, and you are excluding it. Unless your tongue weight is 0 pounds, when you hitch up the trailer, you are adding cargo weight. I think your definition of cargo is screwy. You seem to think cargo is what is inside the truck's walls. Cargo is weight the truck is carrying. When you put the tongue on the hitch, the truck is carrying the tongue weight. That makes the tongue weight cargo which must be factored in.

If tongue weight is part of cargo, and since it is not direct mass but is instead a load generated by torque then it would stand to reason all loads generated by torque would count as cargo. When I put the tongue on the the hitch then the truck is indeed carrying that weight, but when I put tension on the bars weight is removed. It is arbitrary to count one event and not the other.

On the other hand if Cargo is the weight the truck is carrying then one could not possibly count weight the trailer axle is carrying. It is ironic how inconsistent you are....
__________________
Brian
BayouBiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2020, 06:05 PM   #399
4 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Baltimore , Maryland
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by BayouBiker View Post
If tongue weight is part of cargo, and since it is not direct mass but is instead a load generated by torque then it would stand to reason all loads generated by torque would count as cargo. When I put the tongue on the the hitch then the truck is indeed carrying that weight, but when I put tension on the bars weight is removed. It is arbitrary to count one event and not the other.

On the other hand if Cargo is the weight the truck is carrying then one could not possibly count weight the trailer axle is carrying. It is ironic how inconsistent you are....
Tongue weight is indeed direct mass carried by the TV. The rotational torque created by the WDH is completely independent of the mass of the trailer tongue. The weight transferred by the WDH could be claimed to be the spare tire weight, the actual truck bed itself, the bumper. The rotational torque from the WDH at the hitch head lifts the rear of the TV as a whole not just trailer tongue mass. Here is picture I stole from another forum(not mine), showing what’s going at the hitch. The vertical hitch load and rotational torque generated are happening simultaneously but are completely independent of each other.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	9C5DF7A0-3A1B-49FA-9118-78C455A3B0A7.jpeg
Views:	12
Size:	60.1 KB
ID:	370441  
Profxd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2020, 06:10 PM   #400
Rivet Master
 
2018 25' International
Slidell , Louisiana
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 3,477
Tongue weight is not direct mass. Looking at the arrow the mass is maybe 5 lbs at most. The balance of tongue weight is torque generated.
__________________
Brian
BayouBiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2012 27 foot AirStream Classic - 1/2 ton vs 3/4 ton Truck Question westie 978 2011 - 2015 Classic (all lengths) 82 07-14-2018 08:43 AM
Hitch system for 3/4 ton or 1 ton truck (GMC) Crazycanucks Tow Vehicles 31 04-02-2017 06:13 AM
1/2 Ton Silverado enough? IceCactus Tow Vehicles 22 11-11-2007 06:47 PM
Insurance - When is enough enough Poprivet Insurance & Claims 6 06-27-2007 07:29 PM


Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Disclaimer:

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.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.