RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Towing: Which Choice?

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  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Towing

Open Roads Forum  >  Towing

 > Which Choice?

This Topic Is Closed  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 2  
Prev
Sponsored By:
Ron Gratz

full time RVer

Senior Member

Joined: 12/27/2003

View Profile



Posted: 08/22/11 05:38pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

nvreloader wrote:

Question: Is using the front height (19") a reliable enough factor to set the links used for the load being towed?
Don,

Your front-end height and axle load measurements show a strong linear correlation -- especially the 3-Washer measurements.
I think it would be sufficiently reliable to use height as a means to estimate load.

The 3-Washer data closely follow the relationship:

Front axle load = {530# X (28-1/8 - front height) } - 20#

with load in pounds and height in inches.

The calculated loads typically should be accurate to within +/- 20# if the same measuring procedures are used.

A conversion table, with calculated loads rounded to the closest 20#, is given below:

Front ____ Front
Height __ Weight

18 1/2 ___ 5080
18 5/8 ___ 5020
18 3/4 ___ 4940
18 7/8 ___ 4880
19 ______ 4820
19 1/8 ___ 4760
19 1/4 ___ 4680
19 3/8 ___ 4620
19 1/2 ___ 4560
19 5/8 ___ 4480
19 3/4 ___ 4420
19 7/8 ___ 4360
20 ______ 4280

Ron

hawkeye-08

Northwest

Senior Member

Joined: 01/25/2008

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 08/22/11 05:56pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

If you are going to use front height, you should log the tire pressures also.

Ron Gratz

full time RVer

Senior Member

Joined: 12/27/2003

View Profile



Posted: 08/22/11 06:38pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

That's a good point.

Most measurements are taken from the ground to a point on the body.

A better way is to measure from the center of a wheel to a point on the body.
This eliminates possible effects of varying tire inflation and possible errors due to not having a good "ground" reference.
However, since most height data are used for relative comparisons, tire inflation should not be a factor unless it varies during the measurement period.

I believe Don's heights are measured at a point on the bumper (hence values in the range of 18-20").
As meticulous as he seems to be, I'm guessing he checks tire pressures whenever he begins a measurement session.

Ron

nvreloader

Western Nevada

Senior Member

Joined: 12/08/2006

View Profile



Posted: 08/22/11 11:26pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Ron Gratz wrote:

That's a good point.
Most measurements are taken from the ground to a point on the body.
A better way is to measure from the center of a wheel to a point on the body.
This eliminates possible effects of varying tire inflation and possible errors due to not having a good "ground" reference.
However, since most height data are used for relative comparisons, tire inflation should not be a factor unless it varies during the measurement period.
I believe Don's heights are measured at a point on the bumper (hence values in the range of 18-20").
As meticulous as he seems to be, I'm guessing he checks tire pressures whenever he begins a measurement session.Ron

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Guys,
Yes, the tire pressure was checked before each weigh session, the really big differences were noted when the TV/TH sat over night, then the reading for heights was taken, there was a big difference in measurements.

I found out, that if I would drive around the block, 4+ miles and then do the measurements to the spot on my license plate, they matched what I had done before, when I parked in the same spot for measuring, etc.

I can see where the ground measurements can be varied etc. I will find a spot on the front axle 4x4 hub to inside of the wheel well to take measurements from now on, after I confirm that the front heights are correct, that way I'll reduce the error factors as much as possible etc.

I may do a 2 washer and the full link series of 9 down to 6, just to see what the results are, (FSGG) as compaired to 3 washer series. I know, I will not be able to get enough weight returned to the front.

I will also finish the Tongue weight measurements with each indivigual grey/black and fresh tanks filled with loaded and unloaded ATV weights, just so I have that information also.

Tia,
Don


2010 F-350,6.4PSD, 6spd man trans,CC,SWB,SRW, Caravan camper shell,50 gal bed tank,17,000lb Husky WD hitch,Northwoods 2008 28KS Desert Fox Toy Hauler,2005 Honda 500 Rubicon ATV w/rumble seat,1 Aussie waiting,watching and ridin shotgun on the whole outfit.

nvreloader

Western Nevada

Senior Member

Joined: 12/08/2006

View Profile



Posted: 08/31/11 04:39pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Ron,
Here is the reply I just received from Ford on the J2897 towing standards for the 2010/2011 yr trucks. See info here:


Hello Don,
This is Marjorie again with the Ford's Customer Service. I appreciate and thank you for your patience while I am working on your inquiry.

According to our Technical Subject Matter Expert, the new J2807 Towing Standards would not be retro-active and would only apply to model year 2013 and later vehicle. The information regarding use of the weight distribution hitch can found in the Towing Guides. For further details, please refer to the weblinks below:

2010 Super Duty:
http://www.ford.com/assets/pdf/towing/10FLMrvSUPERDUTYsep09.pdf

2011 Super Duty:
http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/general/pdf/towingguides/11FLMRVTT_SuperDtyNov18.pdf

I hope this information helps you. If you have other concerns and/or inquiries please feel free to contact us and we will be happy to assist you.

Thank you for contacting Ford Motor Company and have a good day!

Sincerely,
Marjorie
Customer Relationship Center
Ford Motor Company

Sometimes e-mail communication does not allow us to gain additional information that may be helpful in responding to your inquiry. Should you feel that we have not adequately addressed your questions, please feel free to contact us via telephone at (800)392-3673 between the hours of 8am and 5pm, local time, Monday through Friday. Hearing-impaired callers with access to a TDD may contact 1-800-232-5952.

For online support visit us at: www.customersaskford.com which contains answers to frequently asked questions and links to other key product and service information.

Ford Confidentiality:
--------------------
For security reasons, please do not submit any sensitive personally identifiable information, such as credit card numbers, driver license number, SSN, DOB, etc. Thank you.

THREAD ID:1-5X1DGX



Question:
I have been going over the TW for the full loading of the Grey/Black tanks and using the formulas you provided, and I can not understand why the TW is 2000#'s with no ATV and 1750#'s w/ATV.

I have check the formuals and I am using them right, (have been double checked by a smarter math person than me, the better half).

Using the 97 gal total combined, the only thing I have found so far is that the tanks appear/measure larger than the gallons indicated, 47gal indicated that it will hold 57gals+ and the 50 gal tank indicates that it will hold 60gal+,(have lowered the belly covering to check the wiring path for the solar setup and have measured the tanks, while under there etc.)

Any thoughts or suggestions?
Tia,
Don

BarneyS

S.E. Lower Michigan

Moderator

Joined: 10/16/2000

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member


Posted: 08/31/11 05:33pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Quote:

I have been going over the TW for the full loading of the Grey/Black tanks and using the formulas you provided, and I can not understand why the TW is 2000#'s with no ATV and 1750#'s w/ATV.

Probably because the ATV is located behind the axles and takes weight off of the the tongue when it is loaded on the trailer.

As far as the gallons goes, are you taking into consideration the capacity of the water heater? (Just a guess [emoticon])
Barney


2004 Sunnybrook Titan 30FKS TT
Hensley "Arrow" 1400# hitch (Sold)
Not towing now.
Former tow vehicles were 2016 Ram 2500 CTD, 2002 Ford F250, 7.3 PSD


Ron Gratz

full time RVer

Senior Member

Joined: 12/27/2003

View Profile



Posted: 08/31/11 07:58pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Don,

I'm afraid you asked Ford the wrong question.

You should have asked specifically if the procedure described in the section titled

"Weight-distributing hitch"

on page 252 of the

2011 F-250/350/450/550 (f23)
Owners Guide, 4th Printing
USA (fus)


also could be applied to your 2010 F-350.

And then, assuming the answer is "No", you might want to ask them why not.

Ron

nvreloader

Western Nevada

Senior Member

Joined: 12/08/2006

View Profile



Posted: 09/01/11 10:39pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

BarneyS wrote:

Quote:

I have been going over the TW for the full loading of the Grey/Black tanks and using the formulas you provided, and I can not understand why the TW is 2000#'s with no ATV and 1750#'s w/ATV.

Probably because the ATV is located behind the axles and takes weight off of the the tongue when it is loaded on the trailer.

As far as the gallons goes, are you taking into consideration the capacity of the water heater? (Just a guess [emoticon])
Barney


Barney,
Sorry for the confusion,
Ron had given me some figures/estimates on the possible TW of the TH when loaded with different options etc.

He had these estimates for this options:
Let's look at some theoretical Tongue Weights for possible loading cases:
3) No toys,no H20, full Grey/Black- TW = 1751# = 250# difference

6) ATV only,no H20, full Grey/Black- TW = 1531# = 220# difference

When I did the last weigh session, I had a Weight of 2000#'s for 47/50 gals full, and with the ATV loaded the TW was 1750#'s.

I checked the formulas and I did everything correctly.

While under the TH, I roughly measured the Grey/Black tanks and found that the sizes indicated that the tanks would hold more about 10? gallons more in each tank, than what the OEM spec's indicate.

I did/had not thought of the HW heater 6 gallons being included, along with the plumbing hoses etc.

So,I guess the weighed weights are real close, after including the extra gallons of the tanks + HW heater etc.
Thanks,
Don

nvreloader

Western Nevada

Senior Member

Joined: 12/08/2006

View Profile



Posted: 09/01/11 10:43pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Ron Gratz wrote:

Don,
I'm afraid you asked Ford the wrong question.
You should have asked specifically if the procedure described in the section titled

"Weight-distributing hitch"

on page 252 of the

2011 F-250/350/450/550 (f23)
Owners Guide, 4th Printing
USA (fus)


also could be applied to your 2010 F-350.

And then, assuming the answer is "No", you might want to ask them why not.Ron

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ron,
Sorry about that, [emoticon] [emoticon]
I will send them the correct information, and will post the information when I get a reply back.
Tia,
Don

This Topic Is Closed  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 2  
Prev

Open Roads Forum  >  Towing

 > Which Choice?
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Towing


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

Adjust text size:




© 2020 CWI, Inc. © 2020 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved.