EscaPOD Adventures - 2022 edition

But StephenH, your TV frame went over the same surface and didn't get damaged did it? And many others have reported bent axles, frames, damaged floors, slide structures, etc. You've had a bent axle already too IIRC?

My point being that lower end travel trailers like rpods are just not designed with adequate structural safety margins. They aren't required to, and consumers are apparently willing to tolerate damage to their trailers that would be unacceptable in their other vehicles.

The tongue and tongue to frane attachment does not see as high loading as the frame in the axle attachment area does, so it shouldn't be surprising that your frame failed where it did. That's because the moment due to the load at the rear of the trailer pushing down is combined with that from the torsion axle rotating upwards.

I analysed this a few years ago when olddogsrule (IIRC) reported a bent frame at that same location. I think he ended up with the solution below.

The best way to reinforce the frame at the axle location would be to remove the riser and substitute a piece of 4x2 inch tubing (the same tubing that the frame is made from) welded under the frame.


That will both provide a 4 inch riser but also greatly strengthen the frame, much more so that just adding pieces of steel to the sides and bottom of the existing tube.

Why? Because the section modulus (the property that resists bending) of a rectangular tube increases with the square of the height in the direction the bending force is applied. So doubling the height of the frame to 8 inches increases it's ability to resist bending by a factor of 4.

That's not to say that StephenH's approach won't work, just that it's not he most efficient way to strengthen the frame. So the added steel would need to be much thicker to obtain the same results.

The welds will be less critical as well because the attachment between the two tubes occurs at the neutral axis (the location where stresses are minimized) of the doubled tube.

Whatever you do, the reinforcement should extend forward and back a significant distance from the axle attachment point or the frame will just bend again where the reinforcement ends. I did the length calc for the 179 when I looked into this before, you can use the advanced search to find it. IIRC the tube needed to extend behind the axle about 2-3 feet and 1-2 feet in front (stresses in front on the axle are lower).

Two 5ft long 4x2x0.1 steel tubes would add about 40 lbs to the rpod total weight. No too bad.

I think the repairs that were done (with heavier steel than the original frame) will hold up but your solution would be better. Ultimately, we will probably look for a newer trailer, one with a walk-around bed. With all the modifications and as many miles as we have been with our RPod, it will be tough to switch though.

Based on the anecdotal information on this forum and others, something happened with Forest River's quality control around 2016-2017. Our 179 indicates it is a 2017 model, but it wears the green colors of the 2016 variety and not the blue. Additionally, despite some really rough treatment over its 45,000+ miles, including thousands miles on forest roads and BLM land, it has not experienced nearly the same number of issues as later models (knocking on wood as I write this), so I am grateful for that. It's the build quality inconsistency that I find interesting, especially in this day and age of improved manufacturing methodologies. It's almost like we are talking about a GM/Ford/Chrysler car built in the 70's!