Weight Distribution Hitches |
Post Reply | Page 123 5> |
Author | |
JP Dub (W)
Newbie Joined: 23 Jan 2023 Location: FL Online Status: Offline Posts: 2 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: Weight Distribution Hitches Posted: 23 Jan 2023 at 5:00pm |
I have the 2021 RPOD 196, 22.2 ft. I tow it with a 4 door Toyota Tacoma SR5 6 cylinder. I have only towed it twice so far. What weight distribution hitch should I get for it? Thank you!!
|
|
Skip
Newbie Joined: 08 Jul 2020 Location: NE Ohio Online Status: Offline Posts: 21 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 23 Jan 2023 at 5:51pm |
I heard Forest River uses so thin of a frame that WDH is not recommended!
|
|
Camper owner 47 years, 2 tents, 6 trailers seem to think I’ve seen it all!
|
|
StephenH
podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 29 Nov 2015 Location: Wake Forest, NC Online Status: Offline Posts: 6288 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 23 Jan 2023 at 6:12pm |
Skip, go by the experience of others in this forum, not by hearsay about what FR uses.
Popular weight distribution hitches used by others in this forum include: Equal-i-zer (what I have) 4-point sway control (means you don't need a separate sway bar). Progress E2 (2 point sway control) Andersen No-Sway (much lighter weight, also provides both WD and sway control) Others such as Blue Ox or other brands have been used also. Any of the weight distribution hitches, especially with sway control, will improve the driving feel and give you more confidence when you are hit by crosswinds or passed by tractor trailers and busses. In addition, it will depend on your suspension, but you may want to look into SumoSprings. I installed them in our Frontier and they made a big difference, even with the WD hitch. |
|
StephenH
Happy is the man that findeth wisdom,... ouR escaPOD mods Former RPod 179 Current Cherokee Grey Wolf 24 JS |
|
Skip
Newbie Joined: 08 Jul 2020 Location: NE Ohio Online Status: Offline Posts: 21 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 23 Jan 2023 at 6:22pm |
Actually I have 54 years towing and currently use an Anderson WDH, but the facts are the frame is so thin it is a joke. Call Forest River and ask, you may be surprised! Might even twist enough to pop a few front windows before they changed windows. Think they changed for no reason? I love my 189 but flimsy it is.
|
|
Camper owner 47 years, 2 tents, 6 trailers seem to think I’ve seen it all!
|
|
lostagain
Senior Member Joined: 06 Sep 2016 Location: Quaker Hill, CT Online Status: Offline Posts: 2587 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 23 Jan 2023 at 6:41pm |
Skip, where did you hear that a WDH is not recommended for rPod trailers? Who was making this recommendation? If FR has put such a recommendation in writing, it would be very interesting to read their recommendation and the reasons for making it.
|
|
Never leave footprints behind.
Fred & Maria Kearney Sonoma 167RB Our Pod 172 2019 Ford F-150 4x4 2.7 EcoBoost |
|
gpokluda
Senior Member Joined: 11 Nov 2018 Location: NM Online Status: Offline Posts: 275 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 23 Jan 2023 at 8:14pm |
Skip, I towed a 2017 179 for ~60K miles with a Fastway E2 WDH. It still has all of it's windows, doors and the frame is straight as an arrow.
I would highly recommend a WDH for the Rpod. Listen to the folks on this forum. They are our there towing all the time and a wealth of knowledge.
|
|
Gpokluda
2017 Rpod 179(sold 2023) 2022 Escape 5.0TA 2022 Ford F150 4X4 3.5EB Triumph T120 |
|
Skip
Newbie Joined: 08 Jul 2020 Location: NE Ohio Online Status: Offline Posts: 21 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 23 Jan 2023 at 8:34pm |
I said I use an Anderson, one of the best, see above.
Call Forest River, ask what WDH they recommend on a r pod bet you won’t get an answer, then ask do they recommend still no answers. Try it , that’s all I’m saying. Again I’m using an Anderson. Not interested in arguing, just saying you won’t get it in writing or verbally.
|
|
Camper owner 47 years, 2 tents, 6 trailers seem to think I’ve seen it all!
|
|
StephenH
podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 29 Nov 2015 Location: Wake Forest, NC Online Status: Offline Posts: 6288 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 23 Jan 2023 at 8:42pm |
Forest River does not install them. They are a dealer installed option. Forest River did not reject a warranty claim because I had used a weight distribution hitch. I think that is evidence enough that while they won't recommend them, they won't penalize because of them.
Edit: Skip, you may be an old hand at towing, but you are new to the forum from the post count. Some of us have been here for years. The total years of towing experience here are much more than your experience. Your original post did not say that you used a WD hitch, just that you heard that FR's frames were so thin that WD hitches were not recommended. You and I both used WD hitches because the benefit of having them outweighs the low probability of it causing a problem with the frame.
|
|
StephenH
Happy is the man that findeth wisdom,... ouR escaPOD mods Former RPod 179 Current Cherokee Grey Wolf 24 JS |
|
offgrid
Senior Member Joined: 23 Jul 2018 Online Status: Offline Posts: 5290 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 24 Jan 2023 at 3:08am |
Just going to "weigh" in here a little. he he.
First, Skip and JPDub, welcome to the forum. Skip, you are absolutely right on two of your points. Rpod frames are undesigned. And, WDHs do increase frame loading. But, that doesn't mean that the wdh is the reason the trailer frame might fail in any specific case. There are many factors involved. The forces and moments imposed by the wdh depend on its design and how much its tensioned. Those forces and moments act in combination with the ones imposed by the way the trailer and tow vehicle are loaded, the shape of the pothole or curb you hit (you're not going to bend your trailer frame while your parked after all), the rig speed, the axle torsion arm attachment position, the presence or absence of a trailer lift kit. There might be some other factors I'm forgetting at the moment. IOW it's complicated. So let's look at this from the manufacturer's perspective. FR and Lippert (who produce and warranty the frames and suspensions for FR) are well aware that WDHs are in widespread use by their customers. They know they would kill their sales if they disallowed them. So they aren't going to do that. They also know better than anyone how lightly constructed their trailers are. They deal will the warranty claims and repairs every day. So they're not going to formally approve use either. Because if they did, they they'd have to establish limitations. And that opens that whole complicated can of worms. Even if they could distill all that into a set of restrictions, which I doubt, they would have to try to write that section of their warranty in a way that a consumer could understand. And then they would be forever dealing with questions and evaluations of customers specific use cases. They'd probably have to hire a bunch of engineers, customer service reps, and attorneys just to deal with that one issue. So they're not going to do that either. So their approach, and I think most other manufacturers', is to neither approve or disapprove, and deal with each customer's warranty claim as it comes up. If that claim can be attributed to something that is excluded in their written warranty terms, they won't fix it. If it can't, then they will. This approach isn't unique to the trailer industry btw. No product warranty exclusions I've ever seen, and I've written many myself, can address every possible issue that might occur. Customers are very creative and are always finding new ways to break the stuff you sell them. So where does that leave us as owners? Right where StephenH said. Be an educated user. Evaluate the risks (bent trailer frame) and rewards (safer and more stable towing) of using a wdh on your particular rig loaded as you prefer to travel, on the road surfaces you like to travel on. Use this and other forums to learn. Please actually weigh your loaded rig so you have real data and you're not guessing. Then decide for yourself if the benefits outweigh the risks. FWIW, most of us here with tow vehicles lighter than an F150 have decided using a wdh is worth it. Most folks with a TV in the F250 category or higher have not, and in that half ton truck range in the middle some do and some don't. I can tell you what I decided to do after analysing the forces and moments of my particular pretty extreme use case as best I could by hand calcs lacking access to a conputer finite element model of the trailer. In my case (heavily loaded 179 with 5000 lb rated TV, lots of boondocking on rough forest service roads), I decided a wdh was absolutely necessary. It increased trailer loads at two locations: roughly where the tongue assembly is welded to the frame rails, and at the axle and the axle to frame attachment point. The tongue area loads weren't that bad, but the axle area loads were, even without a wdh. The wdh increased them by about 5 to 10 percent IIRC. So I tried to keep the weight behind the axle as low as possible by moving all my heavy supplies forward in the trailer. No bicycles or other stuff except the spare hanging off the back. Kept holding tanks located behind the axle empty as much as possible. I also reinforced the axle itself, as others on this forum have done. If I'd kept the rpod I would have probably reinforced the frame at the axle attach point too, but I decided to sell it for other reasons before could get to that. |
|
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft 2015 Rpod 179 - sold |
|
lostagain
Senior Member Joined: 06 Sep 2016 Location: Quaker Hill, CT Online Status: Offline Posts: 2587 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 24 Jan 2023 at 5:55am |
Skip, I can only speak for myself but I'm sure it applies to the other board members too, no one was trying to argue with you. Your comment about the frames being very thin are well known and have been discussed considerably on this board. Virtually everyone who has posted on that topic agrees with you. You said you "heard" that WDH's are not recommended. My question about who made the recommendation that you heard, or where you heard it, was in good faith. There is so much stuff published in the internet that is questionable, that knowing the source can help sort out whether such a "recommendation" is credible. I agree with OG and StephenH that FR and many other trailer manufacturers may be ambiguous or ambivalent about the use of WDH's, but I am not aware of any outright recommendation against their use for rPods or other equivalent FR products. When I bought our 172, the rPod dealer sold me a WHD, which I, through more luck than brains, thought was a necessary accessory for the trailer. I'm glad I got it and still use the same E2 on with my Sonoma.
|
|
Never leave footprints behind.
Fred & Maria Kearney Sonoma 167RB Our Pod 172 2019 Ford F-150 4x4 2.7 EcoBoost |
|
Post Reply | Page 123 5> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |