RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Search

RV Blog

  |  

RV Sales

  |  

Campgrounds

  |  

RV Parks

  |  

RV Club

  |  

RV Buyers Guide

  |  

Roadside Assistance

  |  

Extended Service Plan

  |  

RV Travel Assistance

  |  

RV Credit Card

  |  

RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  



Open Roads Forum  >  Search the Forums

 > Your search for posts made by 'Huntindog' found 550 matches.

Sort by:    Search within results:
Page of 28  
Next
  Subject Author Date Posted Forum
RE: 28,500 lbs Ford vs Ram 1 ton DRW

Huntindog, You sure like to share your selective memory on this topic don't you! LOL All three use SAE test standards for measuring power: Cummins - J1995 Power Stroke - J1349 Duramax - J2723From Wards Auto in 2005:In some past cases, manufacturers have taken advantage of J1349's loopholes to generate horsepower ratings that only could be achieved under the rarefied conditions of an ideal testing environment - but were unlikely to be replicated in the real world. Last August, after roughly a year's work, the SAE finalized an updated version of J1349 that more precisely defines certain engine-operation parameters used when testing an engine to rate its horsepower and torque. These stricter definitions, Lancaster says, close J1349's loopholes and ensure “a realistic condition the customer will actually see in the vehicle.” In concert with the updates to the J1349 engine-testing standard comes an important new component: a voluntary test procedure - witnessed by an independent third party - that must be undertaken to earn the new “Certified” rating. All auto makers now will test engines in compliance with the new J1349 procedure, but the certification test is optional - and likely to be at least somewhat controversial. Lancaster says GM is fully committed to the certification component and strongly believes in the new level of procedural assurance it guarantees. The new J1349 testing standard “tells you how to run (the improved) test,” he says. “But how do you get people to adhere to the test?” That's where the voluntary test, certified by a qualified witnessing party, assures the testing process subscribes to provisions of the new J1349 standard, says Lancaster. The voluntary certification test - SAE standard J2723 - was finalized March 31. It closely mirrors the ISO 1585 process auto makers undergo to certify engines under Europe's homologation rules. GM, in fact, says it has the world's first production engine to bear the SAE “Certified” label for its horsepower and torque figures: the all-new LS7, a 7L OHV V-8 that powers the ultra-high-performance Corvette Z06 coming later this year. A GM Powertrain spokesman says the LS7's Certified power rating is 505 hp at 6,300 rpm and 470 lb.-ft. (637 Nm) of torque at 4,800 rpm. It is unclear, however, how many manufacturers will perform the voluntary new J2723 certification test, or if they do, what strategy will apply for selecting which engines in an auto maker's powertrain portfolio will be selected to undergo the certification process. GM, at least, is fully committed to the new procedure. “Within a couple of years, the vast majority of our engines will be SAE certified,” says Lancaster. “We are going to report numbers that are as honest as we can make them.” Frank Sadni, Ford director of V-engine engineering, says the cost of the certification procedure is an issue that has yet to be addressed. Ford is likely to get more detailed cost information from potential qualified witnessing entities. “It's going to cost some money to do that,” Sadni says. Regardless of whether cost is a prohibitive factor, Jerry Beamer, Ford engine performance development manager, says Ford is testing a variety of '06 model engines in compliance with the new J1349 standard, but currently has no plans to put engines through the voluntary J2723 certification test. Ford, he says “is confident that our (internal) process for rating engines is very robust,” and the company sees no need to have its engines' horsepower and torque figures verified by a third party. “Right now, this is about cost to the company,” says Sadni. “There's no value added (in undergoing the voluntary certification). (Customers) will get what we rate.” So there you have it. GM tests to 1349 under 2723 rules... Which means that SAE witnesses the testing. Ford skips the 2723 certification rules, and says "trust us" Then gets beat in hill climb after hill climb. Link to the Ward article: Ward article I have been unable to find anything about Ford recently or ever adopting the 2723 procedure. I know they had not in that thread on this forum I spoke of earlier. IIRCC, that was around 2014-2015. Well after I had my 2011.
Huntindog 04/23/18 08:11pm Tow Vehicles
RE: Broken stabilizer - am i expecting too much?

Out of curiosity.... Do you have shear pins, or were they actually a press fit?
Huntindog 04/23/18 03:07am Travel Trailers
RE: 28,500 lbs Ford vs Ram 1 ton DRW

Huntindog, You sure like to share your selective memory on this topic don't you! LOL All three use SAE test standards for measuring power: Cummins - J1995 Power Stroke - J1349 Duramax - J2723Not selective at all. I did say at the time of the discussion on this board. I also said that I thought Ram was now using the same SAE standard. I had not seen/heard anything on the Ford. However, it is interesting that they are all using a different SAE Standard. Once again, the hill doesn't care which standard is used. It will show the truth in the performance as to which truck really has the most power.
Huntindog 04/22/18 03:03am Tow Vehicles
RE: 28,500 lbs Ford vs Ram 1 ton DRW

HP and TQ are commonly referred to as "advertised". There are a few different ways to come up with the figures. A while back there was some discussion here about this. At that time, GM was the only one of the big 3 to use the strict SAE standard. There are several stipulations in that. One is that an independant facility does the test under the supervision of SAE personal. The other is that the rated power must be produced for specified lengths of time. Ford at that time used in house testing. They were free to do what ever they wanted. It was pretty obvious that their standards were more like peak HP than continuous. It is pretty easy to produce a big number for a short period of time, then the computer can dial back the power to keep the motor from hurting itself. This is why the hill climb testing really tells the tale. The hill doesn't care or lie or change. It is just there. It takes a certain amount of power to go up it at a given weight and speed period. It doesn't matter what the "advertised" number is. That is why the GM has consistently best the Ford over the last 17 years in spite of having less "advertised" power. I am pretty sure that Ram went to the SAE standard at some point. I don't think Ford has.VIDEO $80,115 MSRP Ram 3500 385hp/930tq, 4.10 rear, 5690# payload as configured, 11 brake applications on the way down. 2.7 mpg and 11 min 41 sec on the uphill portion. $83,015 MSRP Ford F350 450hp/935tq, 4.10 rear, 5400# payload as configured, 10 brake applications on the way down, 2.4 mpg and 11 min 43 sec on the uphill portion. Basically a tie. Anyone else surprised the 65hp advantage the Ford has didn't result in a quicker time? It sure did in the drag race they did.
Huntindog 04/21/18 04:40pm Tow Vehicles
RE: Broken stabilizer - am i expecting too much?

What happened to the stabilizer to make it inoperable? They are pretty simple devices. It should be obvious what is wrong. You have 3 working ones to compare it to. The most likely thing to have happened is you put too much pressure on it and over loaded it. Being as you seem to be new at this.... That is my guess. That would make it a non warranty repair. It is important to know this for two reasons. 1. to keep it from happening again. 2. If it was your fault, the dealer will likely deny coverage upon inspection... Meaning that all the trouble of getting the unit to him, or the part etc. was a waste of time. Don't get offended about this. Many Many people misunderstand how to properly use stabilizers (and many other RV systems) if this is the case, then it is a small mistake, easily fixed, and you are now on a board where you can learn a lot to keep from making other mistakes. Two fold issue (1) end of the jack where the tool attaches (turn it, turns threaded rod which raises and lowers jack) became loose (it appears to be pressed in) so turning the end didn't turn threaded rod. (2) threaded rod that was pressed into the end broke so the end came off completely. No way to attach tool.Take a close look at your good jacks. The ones I have had use a pin to hold the end on the threaded rod, in this case a shear pin that is designed to shear off when overloaded. When it breaks the pieces can fall away, so you would think they were pressed in. Your good jacks should have them.
Huntindog 04/20/18 03:49pm Travel Trailers
RE: Broken stabilizer - am i expecting too much?

What happened to the stabilizer to make it inoperable? They are pretty simple devices. It should be obvious what is wrong. You have 3 working ones to compare it to. The most likely thing to have happened is you put too much pressure on it and over loaded it. Being as you seem to be new at this.... That is my guess. That would make it a non warranty repair. It is important to know this for two reasons. 1. to keep it from happening again. 2. If it was your fault, the dealer will likely deny coverage upon inspection... Meaning that all the trouble of getting the unit to him, or the part etc. was a waste of time. Don't get offended about this. Many Many people misunderstand how to properly use stabilizers (and many other RV systems) if this is the case, then it is a small mistake, easily fixed, and you are now on a board where you can learn a lot to keep from making other mistakes.
Huntindog 04/20/18 03:13am Travel Trailers
RE: Broken stabilizer - am i expecting too much?

Include in your tool kit some duck tape, WD-40, volt meter, and grease. Make sure you keep everything oiled or greased.You forgot the instruction manual for your tool kit: If it moves and shouldn't- Duct tape. If it doesn't move and should- WD40 or grease.
Huntindog 04/19/18 05:24pm Travel Trailers
RE: Travel Trailer trade-in value

When I traded our 05 in for our 07 at the same dealer, they gave us $1500 less than what we paid. And we didn't over pay for the 07 as it was priced the same all over the country. A good dealer will not try and take advantage of its customer. Because of that, its why we will go back to them when we buy our next RV. The only way this makes sense is if the dealer already had a buyer lined up for your trade, or perhaps wanted it for his personal unit. Dealers have a LOT of overhead that MUST be paid for somehow... Giving out deals like you describe won't get it done.
Huntindog 04/16/18 01:26pm Travel Trailers
RE: Travel Trailer trade-in value

We have a Keystone Springdale travel trailer/toy hauler (2014 but purchased in 2015). My question is how do we find out what our trailer is really worth? I went to NADA but couldn't even locate our trailer's model number or anything close. We would really love to upgrade, but we are afraid we will end up losing too much. To you this 2014 trailer, likely manufactured sometime in 2013, probably still seems relatively new but with 2019 models now being manufactured it's at least 5 yrs old, with some arguing it's 6 yrs old based on it's manufacturing date. Retail market value, based on a unit's wholesale value, may apply to newer units but with any 5 yrs and older market value sadly has little to do with it so at this stage your trailer is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. If you truly had wanted market value you should have sold much sooner when the rig was only a couple or three years old at most.That is the most convoluted messed up description of market value I have ever heard. Market value is real simple. Whatever a buyer is willing to pay, period. FWIW, I never do trade ins. Sell it yourself, then you can actually get market value. The only reason to do a trade, is if you are upside down... Not good idea, but lots of people do it.
Huntindog 04/16/18 03:18am Travel Trailers
RE: 3:31 Gearing

First off, when one is into these big trucks... Fuel economy is a secondary consideration to performance for most. Second, just looking at the highway cruising gear of the trannys performance, misses a lot. I have changed a R&P or two lowering the gear ratio in each case. It totally changes the personality of the vehicle. It accelerates better in EVERY gear, and the engine BRAKING is better as well. In short it is like a totally different truck. Certain components such as brakes, u joints and the tranny will live an easier life, likely resulting in lower long term repair costs Cool....I guess I should start driving with my transfer case in low range.Now that is just being silly. Most have a 2.62-1 low range. That would really change your effective ratio a lot. Too much to drive at highway speeds. I have rebuilt a few of todays chain driven TCs as well. They are not really meant for constant use.
Huntindog 04/14/18 02:39am Tow Vehicles
RE: 3:31 Gearing

First off, when one is into these big trucks... Fuel economy is a secondary consideration to performance for most. Second, just looking at the highway cruising gear of the trannys performance, misses a lot. I have changed a R&P or two lowering the gear ratio in each case. It totally changes the personality of the vehicle. It accelerates better in EVERY gear, and the engine BRAKING is better as well. In short it is like a totally different truck. Certain components such as brakes, u joints and the tranny will live an easier life, likely resulting in lower long term repair costs
Huntindog 04/13/18 08:20pm Tow Vehicles
RE: 3:31 Gearing

Well folks, now that I am totally confused:h:?. I am still pondering the Super Duty with the 3:31s but will continue to look for the "perfect" truck for my needs. Not sure exactly what that is but I guess I will know it when I find it.:B I want to thank everyone for all of the suggestions and advice, it is greatly appreciated. Whatever you decide, you need to get that 3.31 thing out of your mind, it is absolutely no issue. Zero, Zip, Nadda. X2.Balderdash. The rules of physics haven’t changed. A lowered geared truck will ALWAYS tow better than an identical taller geared truck while consuming more fuel. The reverse is also true. One may be ok with the lower performance of a taller geared truck, and that can be ok. Just stop pretending that there is no difference.
Huntindog 04/11/18 04:51pm Tow Vehicles
RE: 3:31 Gearing

Looking into....a 2012 F250 with a 6.7 and 3:31 gears. I realize that 3:31s are not normally the ideal choice for towing but since this is a diesel, it may be different. I realize that 4:10s or 3:73s would be a better choice. In previous truck generations when 3 or 4 speed transmissions were your only options, lowering the axle gear ratios was the only good way to increase applied torque to the wheels. Newer transmissions with 6, 8, and 10 gears let the manufacturers reduce axle ratio for fuel efficiency and allows for using lower ratios on gears 1 & 2 to give you 'off the line' grunt even with a higher axle ratio. So, diesel or gas, the increased # of gears in the transmission makes up for the higher axle ratios. KJ Ummm, the truck in question does not have 8 or 10 gears. It has 6. Two of which are overdrives. So in effect it is similar to the old 3-4 speeds you are talking about... A double OD tranny will work really well with lower gears. 3.31s,,,,not so much. I can't understand why guys are so fixated on just the rear axle ratio without considering transmission gearing. But the engineers who design the trucks do. The Ford 6R140s ratios are lower across all gears except reverse compared to an Allison 1000. The first 3 gears of the Ford with 3.31s are close to the Allison with 4.10s, and the top 3 roughly the equivalent of the Allison with 3.73s, and I think everyone agrees that the Duramax pulls well with those ratios.You are forgetting the effect of tire size on gear ratio. The Duramax does NOT come with 4.10s. But most (maybe all) all have smaller tire diameters than the Fords. You cannot just fixate on gears.
Huntindog 04/11/18 03:18am Tow Vehicles
RE: Spare Tire Watch-Out

Yeah, I discovered that too one day just by luck. It would sure be nice if the RV company's would correct this simple oversight. As I said, spare tire brackets are supplied by third party manufacturers, are generic, and have nothing to do with the RV manufacturers which simply buy what's available.Car and truck makers buy their stuff from 3rd party makers as well. But it always fits what is needed to change a tire. No excuse for this.
Huntindog 04/10/18 05:39pm Travel Trailers
RE: 3:31 Gearing

Looking into....a 2012 F250 with a 6.7 and 3:31 gears. I realize that 3:31s are not normally the ideal choice for towing but since this is a diesel, it may be different. I realize that 4:10s or 3:73s would be a better choice. In previous truck generations when 3 or 4 speed transmissions were your only options, lowering the axle gear ratios was the only good way to increase applied torque to the wheels. Newer transmissions with 6, 8, and 10 gears let the manufacturers reduce axle ratio for fuel efficiency and allows for using lower ratios on gears 1 & 2 to give you 'off the line' grunt even with a higher axle ratio. So, diesel or gas, the increased # of gears in the transmission makes up for the higher axle ratios. KJ Ummm, the truck in question does not have 8 or 10 gears. It has 6. Two of which are overdrives. So in effect it is similar to the old 3-4 speeds you are talking about... A double OD tranny will work really well with lower gears. 3.31s,,,,not so much.
Huntindog 04/10/18 05:35pm Tow Vehicles
RE: Packing ez lube bearings

Larry are you referring to me? I see a lot of agreement in your post. Crabby already had seal failures and grease on his brakes... He then cleaned up that mess, installed new parts did a manual repack,,,, and THEN pumped more grease in. My point was that since he had already had failures, that doing the same thing over again would likely mean the same result... But if he was to disassemble it NOW before using it and discover the grease that it could be a simple easy fix. If you disagree with that thinking then I suppose you can go help him clean up the next mess if it happens again.
Huntindog 04/10/18 05:21pm Tech Issues
RE: Packing ez lube bearings

I did ad 5 pumps per axle. So from now on I will just do what I have always done. Every spring as part of my wake up ritual, Im just going to repack the bearings and forget about those zerc fittings. I don't trust it enough to lose my brakes. What do you think? I think you should pull the drums off now and check for grease where it doesn't belong. By adding 5 pumps per wheel after a proper repack, it is very possible that you have fresh new grease in the brake area. Finding it now MAY be easier than finding it later.
Huntindog 04/10/18 01:34pm Tech Issues
RE: Packing ez lube bearings

The misinformation in this thread is astounding. Where did the first batch of new grease come from. There is but one grease galley once you see clean grease the old has been moved out. There may still be some old, I concur and if the same grease is used it should not present an issue. With drum brakes Easy Lube spindles are a waste as the drum needs removal to inspect the magnet and linings. Disc brakes benefit from this feature because the pads and spindle seal can be inspected assembled. Pump or pack = personal preference for disc brakes IMHO.I can tell you haven't packed any bearings. If you had, you would have noticed that the grease changes color only in the bearings and races. Any grease in the hub cavity stays new looking. Part of the reason is that there will always be some outside infiltration of contaiminents thru the grease seal, and cap areas. the rest is from use and some slight wear of the bearings/races. The grease in the middle is basically unused. There ARE some variables. On the initial grease gun use at the first scheduled servicing.... How much grease was installed at the factory??? Reports vary on this. So will the users first servicing. If basically no grease was in the cavity to start with, then at the first servicing, all of the dirty grease will exit at once. This is because the new grease pushes the old inner bearing grease out thru the empty cavity until it hits the outer bearing old grease and then it all exits at once. After that, there will be two bands of dirty grease that need to be purged. In either case, using this feature will take several tubes at every servicing. 3.5 tubes have been reported here for a tandem axle servicing There is yet another likely scenario: At some point, the entire cavity is filled with new grease. Then the owner does a servicing by pumping some grease into the zerk... Lets say it is done perfectly, and a band of dirty grease emerges followed by clean grease, just as in the Dexter video. Maybe the owner gives it a few extra pumps for good measure, then calls it good and grabs a beer.... Unaware that the dirty grease from the inner bearing is still in the hub cavity. At the next servicing the same thing happens and the dirty grease from the previous servicing is pushed further along towards the outer bearing by this servicings dirty grease. The owner sees clean grease emerging, calls it good and grabs a beer. Unaware of the Tsunami of dirty grease that is approaching the outer bearings. At some servicing point, it will enter the outer bearing. The owner may not be aware of it, as he may just see the clean grease exiting the outer bearing, call it good and grab a beer. A bearing failure will be a risk from the old grease... But that may never happen, as the whole mess will likely be taken apart first to fix the brakes that are coated with grease. Keep in mind that there are other variables as well. Perhaps the owners grease pumping/tire rotating is not perfect, and some dirty grease is not purged from the inner bearing, or it advances in the hub cavity unevenly... Lots of variables, and no way to know for certain just what is happening in there
Huntindog 04/10/18 02:33am Tech Issues
RE: Packing ez lube bearings

Here is the facts on how this works. The zerk feeds a hole that will attempt to grease the inner bearing. How well this will work depends on the condition of the seal/hub interface, and the skill of the person doing it. He needs to slowly turn the wheel while steadyling pumping the grease... It is working blind as you cannot see what is really going on in there. Is the fresh grease getting evenly distributed in the bearing? Or are spots being missed/skipped? Is the seal really in good shape? or is grease seeping past it onto the brakes? One simply cannot be sure. All seals age and leak at some point. Sometimes a brand new seal is nicked during installation... Without superman vision, one cannot know. But the potential problems don't stop there. In order to grease the outer bearing, the grease must travel thru the inner bearing, and the hub cavity to the inside of the outer bearing. This takes a considerable amount of grease... Several tubes each time for a dual axle TT... That's right EACH TIME... The video on Dexters (Both the Dexter and Lippert systems work the same) site is misleading. The dirty grease that they show exiting the hub is only from the outer bearing. The dirty grease from the larger inner bearing is still in there some where.... Some of it may have even made it to the inside of the outer bearing!! Without xray vision, one cannot know exactly where it is... So one must keep pumping and pumping and pumping,, until a second section of dirty grease emerges. Even then one cannot know if all the dirty grease is purged. It is a long trip for the grease, and it probably will not travel evenly around the hub.. With all of the pumping that must be done, a compromised seal will likely fail greasing the brakes... But hey, I hear that well greased brakes never wear out.:B So you see it is not as simple as the marketing makes it out to be. Now knowing all of the facts, if one still wants to use this "feature" I wish them well.
Huntindog 04/09/18 05:55pm Tech Issues
RE: Who's Getting One??

I don’t see it being used at campgrounds as they are set up for tts. They could be just the solution for those that have a difficult to impossible parking situation at home. It is easy to find a campsite you can park in. Not so easy for some with a house that is perfect except for the RV parking.
Huntindog 04/08/18 06:01am Travel Trailers
Sort by:    Search within results:
Page of 28  
Next


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:

© 2018 CWI, Inc. © 2018 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Terms of Use | PRIVACY POLICY | YOUR PRIVACY RIGHTS