 |
|
|
| |
Subject |
Author |
Date Posted |
Forum
|
 |
RE: Swingout extensions?
Don't have a dog in this, never loaded a camper in a pickup. (Is it similar to loading salt spreader in dump truck?)
My question is how much tolerance do you have between camper and inside of bed? Could using the extra space fender/jack put extra strain on mounts when bed hits camper?
I have about 1" or a little less each side inside the tailgate, and about 3/4 or so each side between the jacks and dually fenders. It is a little fiddly, but I've done it dozens of times. I actually don't want too much clearance outside the fenders, because it is a pretty good guide to what's happening in the box, and much easier to see in the mirrors.
Someone will make a nice dual wireless camera setup to make it easy. Pretty cheap these days too. I should do it but not motivated enough I guess.
|
HMS Beagle
|
03/11/23 06:46pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Swingout extensions?
3/4" is plenty :). That is about what I have. On my previous truck and camper (F350Dually and 1996 BigFoot 25C9.4), the Happijack swingouts were insufficient for any clearance. I made extensions, by bolting a piece of 2 x 2 steel tube between the jack mount and the swingout bracket. My concern was that the further out the jacks are, the more torque is put on the jack mounts, trying to twist them off. They are not well designed to resist this kind of load. The stock swingout puts them out about 6" or so, adding 5" will nearly double that offset torque.
On my extensions, I welded 1" tube across the camper from one extension to the other, so that the offset torque was resolved between the two extensions and not transmitted to the camper jack mounts. It worked without problems for 15 years when I sold the camper to someone with singles, and he took it off.
|
HMS Beagle
|
03/09/23 09:57am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Happijac motors
I also spoke with Bigfoot Industries regarding the clearance issue for the new jack motors and they had to alter the jack mount to the swing out brackets to achieve clearance. This lowered the jack height to the road a few inches. Happijac says the new style motors are 8” above the top of the jack
I have a Bigfoot 10.4, 2008, same as you. I recently replaced the jacks with 4800, and at the time measured the motor clearance thinking I might need new motors. As I recall, I decided they would fit. My old motors still worked so I didn't change them. I'll measure them again but pretty sure you don't have an issue.
I replaced my front jacks with4800’s. The rear jacks are original 4150’s from 2008. If the clearance is ok for the fronts to swing in under the cab over that would be great. Does the control board need to be changed? Mine is original,with the cord.
OK, I just measured it again. I have 8 1/2" from the top of the jack tube to the camper overhang. From the PantherRV website (where I bought the 4800 jacks):
"Will not work with every camper
Requires 8-1/2" of clearance from the top bolt to the top of the motor. Some cab overs don't allow for the clearance necessary to install the motor on the front jacks. Please measure carefully before ordering."
The top bolt is the one fixing the motor to the jack. From that bolt, I have 9 1/8. It is the same both sides. From that description I'd say I have enough. What you posted shows 9 1/8 for that measurement, not 8 1/2". If that description is correct it would just touch. You might be able to drill new holes on the dually bracket, probably need to be 3/4 down to have clearance betwen the two 3/8 hole sets. It might be fine just touching - this is in the folded and unloaded position after all.
The board doesn't really care, it just puts out a reversing current. From the descriptions of everything, the 4800 jacks with the new motors might draw more current at the limit, and might blow fuses in the old board (15A vs 20). The old motors have a ball clutch in them which slips in the event of overload. Apparently the new ones don't, and rely on a current sense scheme in the board to prevent overload. This would not bother me, I'd just be careful at the ends of travel - I am anyway. The 4800 jacks may require a little more current than the 4150 as they are Acme rather than ball screw. But they seem to run just about as fast as the 4150 that I took off. The load rating on the 4800/new motor is quite high, and a 10.4 doesn't push that limit at all.
|
HMS Beagle
|
02/15/23 03:40pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Happijac motors
I also spoke with Bigfoot Industries regarding the clearance issue for the new jack motors and they had to alter the jack mount to the swing out brackets to achieve clearance. This lowered the jack height to the road a few inches. Happijac says the new style motors are 8” above the top of the jack
I have a Bigfoot 10.4, 2008, same as you. I recently replaced the jacks with 4800, and at the time measured the motor clearance thinking I might need new motors. As I recall, I decided they would fit. My old motors still worked so I didn't change them. I'll measure them again but pretty sure you don't have an issue.
|
HMS Beagle
|
02/13/23 11:11pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Frame Stiffing to reduce Porpoising?
OP: are you sure you're not just seeing the camper rock back and forth, the spring loaded Fastguns doing their job?
I always get a kick out of these sorts of comments. :)
So a flat hard object sitting flat on another flat hard object is "rocking"??!?!??! hahahahahahahaha
.
Clearly you have little knowledge of material science. "Hard" and "flat" are relative terms. Steel is quite flexible, fiberglass very flexible, and any rubber map between them extremely flexible. Neither the bottom of the camper, nor the bed are flat, nor do they stay flat running down the road.
Granted nothing is hard/flat like a rock or chunk of concrete and almost everything has 'flex'.
The $64 question is how much? So flat camper sitting on flat bed on top of flat side of frame rails.
Is the camper compressing/expanding? Not likely.
Is the bed compressing/expanding? Again no. However given the support is in the center of it surely if enough force were applied to ether far side or single corner it might 'twist' or 'rock' side to side.
Is the camper 'rocking in the bed'? Again no. (unless it is on a thick soft rubber mat (horse stall mat comes to mind here)
Is the bed moving around on the mounts to the frame? Maybe, many have rubber mounts (to account for frame flex/twisting, see the side2side above).
Is the frame flexing/twisting? Sure, they are known to do that.
IMHO: Given the pivot point is the center of the frame and the camper nose is ~6-8' forward of that what the OP is seeing is minor frame flex amplified by the distance between pivot point and tip.
- Mark0.
Does the camper flex? Absolutely. A Bigfoot probably more than some other brands due to the construction method. You can sit one on rigid supports or concrete, and get the nose bouncing a bit just with your hands. Does the bed flex? Again, absolutely. I carry machine tools in the bed, about the same weight at a camper, CG much lower, the tools themselves are VERY rigid being cast iron and designed specifically for rigidity, yet you will see them visibly rocking forward and backward as you drive. That will be true even when placed on 6x6 sleepers directly over the frame. The bed is after all just thin sheet metal, supported by sheet metal hats of low section. On an F350, no rubber, bolted directly to the frame. The cab supports have rubber.
I'd agree the question is, how much? It is easy enough to test, just tape a piece of wire onto the overhang so that it comes close to the windshield or mirror or some other point of reference, mark that with some tape. Movement is pretty easy to see, how much is difficult to estimate without a close reference.
|
HMS Beagle
|
02/01/23 11:02am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Frame Stiffing to reduce Porpoising?
OP: are you sure you're not just seeing the camper rock back and forth, the spring loaded Fastguns doing their job?
I always get a kick out of these sorts of comments. :)
So a flat hard object sitting flat on another flat hard object is "rocking"??!?!??! hahahahahahahaha
.
Clearly you have little knowledge of material science. "Hard" and "flat" are relative terms. Steel is quite flexible, fiberglass very flexible, and any rubber map between them extremely flexible. Neither the bottom of the camper, nor the bed are flat, nor do they stay flat running down the road.
|
HMS Beagle
|
01/31/23 09:52am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Frame Stiffing to reduce Porpoising?
Actually fatigue isn't typically from (permanent) deformation of the metal. Most metals (and most materials) will suffer loss of strength and stiffness even if cycled well below the yield stress. Steel is almost singular in having a critical stress value (well below yield) that if the max stress in cycling is under that value, you can cycle it indefinitely. Almost no other material has this characteristic, which is why steel is so popular with engineers!
Making a frame stiffer, and then hitting it with the same shock impulse, may increase the peak stress that it experiences. The stiffer frame resists immediately and over a short deflection, the floppier frame may flex over a longer deflection and the stress can be less. It depends on how the stiffness was added. One big difference between 1999 and 2016 is that in 2016 I'm quite sure the frame was subjected to extensive FEA engineering, in 1999 probably not.
Boxing a frame mostly increases the frame's stiffness in torsion, it does not increase the frame's stiffness in bending (other than that due to metal added). In other words if the boxing metal had instead been added to the C section, the bending stiffness would be increased the same amount, but torsional stiffness increased only a fraction. The infamous Chevy commercials of a few years back demonstrated torsional stiffness, and nothing else.
|
HMS Beagle
|
01/26/23 09:43am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Frame Stiffing to reduce Porpoising?
I have added an air dam to the front of my Bigfoot overhang, it is within about 2 inches of the cab right at the top of the windshield. This makes any motion very obvious. There is a fair amount of motion, more so when the frame twists due to uneven roads (for example exiting a service station ramp at an angle) but also just up and down over bumpy roads. It never hits or comes close to hitting, so less than 2" of motion.
There are many flexible parts in the system: the camper itself, the camper sitting on the rubber mat or bed spacer, the bed, and the frame. The overhang is about 7' from the front bulkhead, the bulkhead 4' from the middle of the bed which we might guess is the center of rocking motion. If the ends of the box rock 1/4" (4' away) then the front of the overhang will rock nearly 3/4 of an inch (11' away). "Everything is made of rubber", some parts (like steel) are stiffer rubber than others (like fiberglass). You might remember back when some campers had cowl braces from the overhang down to the hood cowl to try to control this.
I think I would ignore it, unless excessive.
|
HMS Beagle
|
01/25/23 10:23am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Frame Stiffing to reduce Porpoising?
That contrasts with the 1999 with Max Payload for the Crew Cab Dually Long Bed 2x4 appears to be 5355lbs and the 4x4 is 4910lbs.
https://www.xr793.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/1999-Ford-Super-Duty.pdf
So, with basically the same frame, how did they manage to get another 1500+ pounds of payload capacity out of it?
You should go by the Ford bodybuilders manual that I referenced, not by that brochure. The bodybuilders manual gives the specific configurations, in California - less, diesel engine - less. Because the empty truck weighs more. The bodybuilders manual does not give the diesel 4x2 DRW crewcab, but does give the 6.8L, and the diesels are less by about 500 lbs in all models. You could just weigh the empty truck, the GVWR is 11,200 for all models of DRW pickups in those years.
The frame configuration and layout is nearly identical between 1999 and 2015, but the material may be thicker. That is also listed somewhere in the bodybuilders manuals, haven't bothered to look. You probably can't go from 11,200 to 14,000 without doing something.
|
HMS Beagle
|
01/24/23 09:30am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Frame Stiffing to reduce Porpoising?
You can still download the bodybuilders manual for the 1999, though I'd suggest instead the 2000 year model as it is far more complete.
https://fordbbas.com/publications
It lists a 4x2 DRW 6.8L V8 crew cab for California at 4610 max payload. It does not list the 7.3L, but in the chassis cab for example, that takes about 500 lbs off of the payload vs. the 6.8L, so probably 4100 lbs.
You do have to weight the Bigfoot to see what it really is - I've owned three, every one has been substantially over the sticker weight. In fact every RV I've ever owned has been over the sticker weight.
|
HMS Beagle
|
01/23/23 09:49am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Frame Stiffing to reduce Porpoising?
A crew cab truck has a long frame, and it is going to be more flexible. I've had a 1999 Supercab, followed by the current 2015 Supercab which is identical in almost all respects except the powertrain. One thing I found on both of them was the porpoising was greatly reduced by increasing the shock resistance on the front. Even though the front carries very little of the weight of the camper. With the camper onboard, when cyclical pitching starts it contains a lot more energy, not so much from the longitudinal position of the CG, but the vertical position.
I had (have) Rancho 9000 shocks, when I loaded the camper I'd leave the front ones on 4 or 5 and dial the back ones up to 9. I found that putting the front ones up to 8 significantly helped the porpoising. If it is caused (or aggravated) by suspension movement, then the shocks are the only way that movement is dampened.
|
HMS Beagle
|
01/22/23 10:13am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Any Ideas to RepaIr Loose Ceiling on NLcamper?
You may be able to do a careful, straight knife cut around the panel that needs to come down and put it back without is being that noticeable. I don't remember the headliner in an NL but I think kinda like indoor/outdoor carpet?
The advantage of using new foam (beyond using better foam) is it starts clean with no old adhesive. The fiberglass can be cleaned even with very harsh chemicals, it won't be hurt by it (acetone, MEK, laquer thinner, etc.). The luan plywood will be a little more of a challenge but can probably be cleaned up. You should test whatever adhesive you are thinking of using, polystyrene of both types is quite chemically sensitive.
|
HMS Beagle
|
12/06/22 09:53am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: DC to DC charger
How large is the LFP bank again? It sounds like the DC-DC is severely limiting the charge that could be put into even a reasonably large bank.
On a boat, where this stuff is much more advanced, you'd have an external regulator on the alternator, large cables to the house battery, and be charging them at 100A. The charge profile can be set for LFPs and is close enough that an AGM start battery will tolerate it. Even with a 160A alternator, you'd still only charge at around 100A because the external regulator has a temp sensor on the alternator, and will derate it at about 100 deg C frame temp to keep it from frying itself.
A big advantage of LFP over AGM is that its charge acceptance does not fall off rapidly as it gets close to full. It is actually that, not any ability to accept more maximum charge (often less than good AGM in similar sizes) that allows faster recharge. If you are sitting in a campsite running low and want to start the engine to charge, you want to put in 100A for half and hour, not 25A for 2 hours.
|
HMS Beagle
|
12/06/22 09:47am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Any Ideas to RepaIr Loose Ceiling on NLcamper?
what is bead board?
It is foam board or rigid foam insulation made of small round balls or beads of various sizes, usually around 1/8 inch in size that are formed together into sheets of various thicknesses of rigid foam board. Northern lite uses this for insulation because it is less rigid and will glue and flex onto compounded curves and shapes to insulate and strengthen the fiberglass shell. Keeping it lightweight.
I am a little more cynical - they use it because it is cheaper than something better. There are plenty of choices in structural foam that are much better than bead board for this application. They cost more. XPS costs only a little more, a PVC or SAN core (which is what would be used in a boat) costs quite a bit more.
If I was pulling down the ceiling for a repair, I'd put back XPS rather than EPS.
|
HMS Beagle
|
12/05/22 07:13pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Any Ideas to RepaIr Loose Ceiling on NLcamper?
The bead board is a structural element, especially in the roof of a NL or Bigfoot. The structure is made up of the outside fiberglass skin, the core of bead board, and the inner paneling, forming a composite sandwich panel. When one of them or the glue bond fails, the individual pieces are quite flexible.
It might be possible to inject an adhesive through the fabric and panelling, but since both sides are covered in the contact cement they use, the new adhesive may not adhere very well to either side, sticking only to the failing contact cement. You likely have nothing to lose by trying it. The alternative is to pull the interior paneling down, clean up the surfaces, and re-glue.
It is a shame that BF and NL do not use a proper structural foam rather than bead board. We always hear about how these are"built like a cored boat" but in fact no cored boat would use bead board as a structural material. My first Bigfoot had extruded polystyrene core, much more suitable than bead board (expanded polystyrene) but still well short of a boat structural core which is typically PVC or SAN material and much stronger both in shear and bond strength. Bead board you can easily crumble in your hand. The issue for them is too much cost I guess.
|
HMS Beagle
|
12/04/22 09:47am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: DC to DC charger
The lead acid were replaced with telcom jars, and whoops there was no charging from the alternator to the house unless I was running the microwave or other heavy draw. In fact it regularly sent power to the alternator. I replaced the starter battery with an AGM. No improvement.
No idea what you mean by "telcom jar batteries", perhaps they have particularly high voltage.
Anyone interested in house battery charging from the alternator, or mixing battery types, needs to do some basic measurements: voltage and current with batteries fully charged and engine running well above idle, and voltage and current with house batteries discharged at least 50%. Measurements done at truck engine compartment (say at the start battery) and at the house battery. This is important in some cases to insure there is actually a charge, and in some cases to prevent a fire from overcharging. From those two measurements you can determine if the wiring is adequate, if you are getting sufficient charge, and if you are overcharging.
There is a range of trucks here spanning 30+ years, charging strategies and regulation have changed in those 30 years and between brands. A DC-DC boost-buck charger can cover a lot of sins in a charging system, but may not be necessary, or may not be the only thing necessary, or may actually be detrimental. You need measurements to know.
|
HMS Beagle
|
11/29/22 09:41am |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: DC to DC charger
With a modern vehicle the charge voltage will be at least 13.5 volts, probably more. That will charge the house batteries 100%, though it may take a long time, and only if the charge wire to the camper is large enough to service the house loads. If you have your refer on DC for example, it is drawing around 30 amps. The #10 typical of a 7 pin harness will be dropping about 1.8V in the 60' round trip on the wire. Now your 13.5V is only 11.7 and, yeah, no charge, in fact it will drain the house. May burn up the 7 pin too. Change that wire out to #6 with a proper connector, and even at the same length and amperage, you will have a 0.7V drop, your 13.5 volts is now 12.8, almost no charge but at least not draining the house battery
A DC to DC charger placed near the alternator, without remote sense, does not solve this wiring problem, voltage will still be low. Placed near the load, or with remote sense near the load, it band-aids the problem: It will boost the voltage back to where is it supposed to be, at the cost of drawing even more current through the inadequate wires.
You need to address the wiring problem first, then consider a DC to DC charger. Or don't run large house loads (like the refer) on DC.
|
HMS Beagle
|
11/26/22 07:09pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Guide for Narrowing Bigfoot Cabovers?
I had a mid nineties 9.5, it weighed 2800 lbs on real scales though the door decal said 2100. It also depends on whether a 2500 or 1500 series model.
You can't just "peel back the skins" on a molded fiberglass camper. You have to sawsall a significant piece of the underside off, then relaminate it and repair whatever damage you've done to the furniture. The wide part goes all the way up to the wheel wells and has stuff in it, that's why the make it wide.
I bought a Dodge in 94 that had a bit narrower tailgate than the Ford or Chevy at the time, and a Bigfoot wouldn't fit. The solution proposed was to widen the tailgate, basically by reducing the width of the reinforcing at the end of the box. Apparently it was a thing with early Dodges, I contacted a couple of body shops that said they had done it.
|
HMS Beagle
|
11/13/22 02:41pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Yet another Air Dam/Spoiler/Airfoil thingy
Another update on mine. Stiffening the lip eliminated the folding back. For the last trip (only 350 miles but in bug country) I cleaned the camper bulkhead and overhang. No bugs on the bulkhead except right outboard. No bugs on the overhang except in a pattern near the edges of the valence. Still haven't noticed a marked difference in mileage, headwind/tailwind makes far more difference than anything. I think the noise reduction is real.
|
HMS Beagle
|
06/26/22 03:19pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Yet another Air Dam/Spoiler/Airfoil thingy
Update:
I added a stiffener to the lip of the valence, 1/4 x 3/4 aluminum fit behind the molded lip nicely, just bent it to shape screwed through to some tapped holes.
Second 900 mile trip from home to Anacortes, WA, about 900 miles, this time with the wife. She immediately noticed the reduction in wind noise. The valence held its shape. From the rain pattern, it seems to be different when it stays in shape. The camper bulkhead is dry, even in fairly heavy rain. There is an arc of wet about 12 - 18" behind the valence on the overhang, this seems to be where the jet of air squeezes between the windshield and the valence. The V of water from there back where the valence folded is gone. I should have cleaned the bugs from the bulkhead before I started this trip, can't tell if that is different because the old bugs are still there.
Fuel mileage last trip was reported as 12.0 mpg last time, 13.8 mpg this time, but I think most or all of that can be accounted for by better weather conditions. Last time persistent headwinds, sometimes quite strong, this time more even handed and not all that strong. I don't think mileage has been affected significantly either way.
|
HMS Beagle
|
05/08/22 09:28pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
|
|
|
|
