Is A Hensley Hitch Worth The Money
Any other alternatives?
Thanks
Tow vehicle is a 2007 Toyota Tundra with a husky WD hitch.
Thanks for your help!
* This post was edited 12/08/08 03:54pm by colaman *
2011 F-150 HD Ecoboost 3.5 V6. 2550 payload, 17,100 GCVWR -
2004 F-150 HD (Traded after 80,000 towing miles)
2007 Rockwood 8314SS 34' travel trailer
US Govt survey shows three out of four people make up 75% of the total population
2001 F 350 CC PSD 373 rear,auto
RBW X16 slider,Bedsaver,Prodigy,Fold A Cover,Pressure Pro!
2011 Crossroads Cruiser cf32mk Patriot edit. 5th wheel Fibreglass and all the goodies necessary,Dish,comfy loungers,and a nickel to spend,
Mr & Mrs and the PUP.
"If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane."
Arctic Fox 25Y
GMC Duramax
Blue Ox SwayPro
With only a 21 foot Outback, I don't know whether you really need a Hensley...especially since you haven't mentioned what you're towing it with. If you have a good tow vehicle, you would probably be fine with a good Reese dual cam or Equalizer hitch.
On the other hand, if it's likely that you'll move up to a bigger travel trailer, the Hensley would ready for it.
If you've done a search for Hensley hitches on the forum, you know that the topic is frequently debated. It's hard to find a Hensley owner that isn't happy with the performance of their hitch......but at the same time, that can be said about Reese dual cam and Equalizer owners.
If you are already towing the Outback......why are you looking to change hitches?? What is your current set up? This information will give you a better chance of getting some good replies rather than a zillion replies by happy Hensley owners and another zillion replies from people that think it is absurd to spend that amount of money on a hitch.
There's isn't an easy answer here.........owning the Hensley can't hurt, but it may not be needed with your current rig.
Hope this is helpful in some way!
2012 Newmar Bay Star 3302
Blue Ox Avail
BrakeBuddy Advantage
2015 Malibu
"Get busy living, or get busy dying."
Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption
TT: 08 Monterey 27 PT by Extreme RV
TV: 05 Eddie Bauer Expedition w/5.4L 3.31 Gears ">
Hitched with a Husky WD & SC.
Powered by Champion 3500
Here is a link to their page:
Hensley Arrow Cub
Hope this helps.
Fraser.
Fraser
DW
2 sons 15+18
2008 Jayco 213 Exp
2005 Dodge Durango 5.7 Hemi
Performance exhaust
Factory tow package
Prodigy brake controller
Husky WD hitch, friction anti-sway
McKesh tow mirrors
A bad day of camping is better than ANY day stuck in the city!!
Go Jays!
 (2).jpg)
colaman wrote:
Looking for an opinion on weight distributing hitch. Towing an '09 21 ft Outback. Thanks
What is your opinion on the Hensley Arrow Hitch?
One of best hitches on the market today...
Is it worth the money?
Depends on your point of view... Some say they are not worth it, some say they are... If you want the best performance (towing stability) in a hitch, then Hensley ( or similar hitch) is probably what you want.
Any other alternatives?
Yes, there are... Assuming you want the same or better performance in a hitch like the Hensley, there is also the ProPride which is another 4 bar linkage type hitch designed by the same person that designed the Hensley, or you can go with a Pullrite hitch... The Pullrite hitch is essentially a 5th wheel hitch installed UNDER your truck... IMO, the Pullrite is the best hitch on the market today... I have towed with both the Hensley and the Pullrite and that is my unbiased personal opinion after towing with both hitches... For lesser performance in a hitch you can go with a Reese Dual Cam, or Equal-i-zer, or even a standard weight distributing hitch with friction bars attached... The Reese Dual Cam, Equal-i-zer, and friction bar type w/d hitch ALL rely on friction for sway control... They just accomplish the task with slightly different methodoligies... The Hensley, Propride, and Pullrite minimize or eliminate (depending on your point of view) sway by moving the hitch pivot point further forward than the rear of the truck or tow vehicle... My personal opinion for your setup is that you don't need a premium hitch such as the Pullrite, Hensley, or Propride... Your Tundra 1/2 ton truck should handle that 21' TT just fine with any of the other hitches... Now if you want one of the 3 best hitches, then choose from Hensley, ProPride, or Pullrite... You could go with the Hensley Cub as the other poster suggested but if it were me, I would go with the standard Hensley if that's the way your thinking... Why??? Resale... If you decide to dunp it, you'll have a much larger resale audience with the full size hitch... And if you decide to upgrade to a larger TT some time later on, you won't have to buy another expensive hitch... I have towed with "premium" hitches for some time now... For me, they're worth the extra money for the extra peace of mind, and a relaxed non-white knuckle drive to destination... But it's also worth mentioning that I have also towed with a standard w/d hitch with single and dual friction bars for several years on several different trailers and that also worked well for me... I tow a 31' (almost 34' overall) TT with a 3/4 ton truck... The trailer weighs near #10,000 when fully loaded and has a large side area... I figure with a load like this, I need all the stability I can muster from whatever resource I can find, so I use a premium anti-sway hitch... In addition to the hitch you choose, proper hitch setup and trailer balancing is also a key issue, as is tire pressures, alignment, proper tongue weight etc, etc,... Take the time to properly setup whatever hitch you choose, and make sure the TT is level and has the proper tongue weight for a stable tow... Les
* This post was last edited 12/09/08 07:06pm by LAdams *
2000 Ford F-250SD, XLT, 4X4 Off Road, SuperCab
w/ 6.8L (415 C.I.) V-10/3:73LS/4R100
Banks Power Pack w/Trans Command & OttoMind
Sold Trailer - not RV'ing at this point in time
HUNTER THERMOSTAT INSTALL
HOME MADE WHEEL CHOCKS
If you find you are white-knuckled on the road and worn out at the end of the day, you will be very happy to spend the dinero on a Hensley... especially after you see and feel the difference.
I traded a Dual-Cam for a Hensley and never looked back. But then again, we needed it.
Hope this helps,
![[emoticon]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tZVIaFRaFXUdRB_DLAlQxmdoHJsrJQyyCXTL-LglkoWd6izHhmfZNJYYtu_6X2J-NNagSlj3pTWK1UGkcEVTCG8lqP1VhAlalK700NRvI2PtXL7VnjUeo=s0-d "smile")
Terry & Shay
Coachman Apex 288BH.
2013 F150 XLT Off Road
5.0, 3.73
Lazy Campers
colaman wrote:
Looking for an opinion on weight distributing hitch. Towing an '09 21 ft Outback. What is your opinion on the Hensley Arrow Hitch? Is it worth the money?
Any other alternatives?
Thanks
Tow vehicle is a 2007 Toyota Tundra with a husky WD hitch.
Thanks for your help!
*The Hensley is a great hitch for those who do not want to take the time to properly set up one of the other fine hitches available for a lot less money
*Not IMO
*Reese HP Dual Cam
This member is not responsible for opinions that are inaccurate due to faulty information provided by the original poster. Use them at your own discretion.
09 SuperDuty Crew Cab 6.8L/4.10(The Black Pearl)
06 Keystone Hornet 29 RLS/(The Cracker Cabana)
Dick_B
2003 SunnyBrook 27FKS
2011 3/4 T Chevrolet Suburban
Equal-i-zer Hitch
One wife, two electric bikes (both Currie Tech Path+ models)
I have, however, towed a 35' TT for years with an Equal-I-Zer (brand) hitch and never, ever experienced any sway.
2017 Weekend Warrior (by The RV Factory)
2013 Ram 3500 Longhorn LB DRW 4x4 Aisin 4.10
Previous:
2014.5 DRV Mobile Suites 41'
2006 DRV Mobile Suites 38'
Volvo 770
fla-gypsy wrote:
The Hensley is a great hitch for those who do not want to take the time to properly set up one of the other fine hitches available for a lot less money
Whoaaaaa there gypsy!!! Give us Hensley owners a little credit OK??? Even the almighty Hensley has to be setup properly to work as it should... Took me and my dealers tech about 2 1/2 hours to install and set up my Hensley... You don't just throw the Hensley on the trailer and it magically removes all bad habits of the rig and driver ![[emoticon]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sAfzx_nmsDrvif8d_m6ILf9PmGC8rfwBxAHMG5X95a3cV-Q0n8o9nFIfAkQpZseWk6rgMKw2CWmQTgN-ubS7evSQ8xB4eN9jLJnUeuPy3vCr1HJrDf2UNI96E=s0-d "rolleyes")
Les
Moved up to a new & much taller 29' 10,000# TT and upgraded to the Reese Dual-Cam. It towed OK, but it was clear to me that the tail could wag the dog if it wanted to. I'm sure that many of the folks around here would have felt that it was just fine, but I upgraded to the Hensley. No regrets. The TT behaved perfectly no matter the road conditions or the weather.
We move up to a 12,600# 32' (35' actual length). We were now at the towing limit of the F350, and sometimes over, yet the TT behaved perfectly. Even in a nasty storm Saskatchewan that tore loose two separate pieces of siding the TT towed like a dream. I could drive completely relaxed while sipping my coffee in gusting 50-60 MPH sidewinds.
I think it's worthwhile noting that Gunship Guys's 35' TT weighed nearly 3000# less than ours and his TV was a 3500 Dodge dually. Nobody's going to accuse him of bringing a knife to a gunfight. ![[emoticon]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tKTdJ95a5ONdxMJUjLtqqEL2_Aiot9LG1suxOD0b57WAIeUmiFo1OjSZT9KVSRB5toVxhTnFamlSxlZk8MiC_cUnDmyrkrSkAqA0AytXLVSY4c-vs=s0-d "eek")
We are almost done with our switcharoo from Hensley to PullRite on our '05 2500HD Chevy, so hopefully in a couple of days we'll pull the 10,000# Arctic Fox out of the barn and see what life is like pulling a virtual 5th wheel.
After having owned 3 different types of hitches on the same F350 on 9,000 to 15,000 mile trips, you can be sure that you'll never see us towing with anything less than a 'premium' hitch.
As for it being worth it? It's a personal decision, but one we said "Yes!" to 3 times.
Steve & C. J.
Gracie Rough Collie
Bo'sun Bichon Frise
Marli Lab
2011 Fox Mountain 245RKS
1998 Bigfoot 25C9.6B
2010 Dodge Ram Laramie 3500 4X4, Cummins 6.7, Crewcab SRW LB
TrailerSaver BD3 & MOR/Ryde
Our Arctic by RV trip
Our Beaver motorhome Technical page
LAdams wrote:
fla-gypsy wrote:
The Hensley is a great hitch for those who do not want to take the time to properly set up one of the other fine hitches available for a lot less money
Whoaaaaa there gypsy!!! Give us Hensley owners a little credit OK??? Even the almighty Hensley has to be setup properly to work as it should... Took me and my dealers tech about 2 1/2 hours to install and set up my Hensley... You don't just throw the Hensley on the trailer and it magically removes all bad habits of the rig and driver
Les
Not intended as an all inclusive statement, sorry!. Many times it becomes the solution for folks who have a bad combination to begin with and want a band aid instead of fixing the real problem. My apologies!
SteveRankin wrote:
I think it's worthwhile noting that Gunship Guys's 35' TT weighed nearly 3000# less than ours and his TV was a 3500 Dodge dually. Nobody's going to accuse him of bringing a knife to a gunfight.
Guilty ![[emoticon]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_syKWjeMZPR8rdEOAboS6IWDtNjGA5b_aARYaqhisBO_cLhqNWoEtvpqsgR0wFHVSB-aLabUBD7DVgMN_M3R-LUM7cZCDZKIHSIpBq1Bjop51_1lCnhK_k=s0-d "awink")
Drove in 40mph winds, semi's passing doing 80mph.
Hensley gives me peace of mind because my SUV is 119 inch wheel base towing 28 foot travel trailer. SUV 6500lbs, Trailer 6200. weight not issue it was wheel base drove me to the Hensley.
If I ever sell my trailer will probably get $1500 back for my hitch.
for my situation it made sense.
In your case the trailer of 21 foot I would probably only go with a Hensley if you plan to get a much larger travel trailer down the road. If money is very tight you would do fine with most hitches used by members in this forum - don't sweat it ! good luck
2018 Prime Time Crusader 29RS
fla-gypsy wrote:
Not intended as an all inclusive statement, sorry!. Many times it becomes the solution for folks who have a bad combination to begin with and want a band aid instead of fixing the real problem. My apologies!
No problem Gypsy - no apologies necessary ![[emoticon]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vQuwBHWDR5JQsXpeBtkF8Qg0ZNUEAgaUzn1lKjGO0Pu8Lw_uWt8y86VbDB8QrRr64bj3L2Iazd_iK8nle3wJJCcJwEu7MYIBKrA-1GrI5RalozlB07q7uF=s0-d "biggrin")
Seriously, The Prodigy has a huge following so it must be a good controller... It's just my personal preference that I never have liked inertial type controllers and choose to follow a different path...
BTW, for those following this thread, I recently picked up a brand new Jordan from our Towing Forum Moderator BarneyS... Barney had bought it off E-Bay and was going to install it and changed his mind... I had previously told him if he didn't want it I'd take it off his hands, so the point is, there are Jordan controllers out there floating around - you just have to look for them... I'll hang on to my new one in case my old Jordan decides to take a yak some day...
Les
2015 Ram 3500 SRW 4x4 Laramie Crew Cab Long Box, Cummins diesel
2002 Lance 811 Slide-In Camper
SOLD: 2008 Terry 34' TT
SOLD: 2001 K2500LT 8.1L Suburban
Lance 811 Renovation Story!
Project Complete!
Maiden Voyage!
BurbMan wrote:
"Take a yak?" Must be a Midwest thing.....
Yea, Les has a thing about Yaks!
![[image]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sF3h8rNqakMXGE5_P5rxp27EH1X6-k5BhwwzaX5mlW_5JoPFzrRUysQ73S2Z-8pXBSbVHmO4l94-Fvoe3L3qYqzJ27CVeQCB0v2hkCJj5PtGaKNgN4l0h7OXhaWP0Yd5tObhZ0X_2Gda98=s0-d)
Barney
* This post was edited 12/09/08 08:03pm by BarneyS *
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
I think "worth it" has to be a personal decision and can't really be answered by anyone here.
I went with a ProPride because it was "worth it" to me. The worth it equation went up for me when I could get the Hensley style hitch for much less money than the $3000+ they were going for. I got my ProPride for $1000 less than that and haven't had ANY sway since. So, for me it wasn't "worth it" at $3000 but it was at $2000. We all have our own "worth it" thresholds.
The Cub may be an option with your size trailer but for me it seems rather limiting when you can get a ProPride at near the same price. Limiting not only in your own future needs but, as Les said, also in the resale should you ever want to go to a different type of RV.
However, one thing I will say: Regardless whether you are towing a 38' TT with a motorcycle (haha), or a 15' teardrop trailer with an F350 dually, a Hensley (or almost any other premium hitch for that matter) is almost NEVER a bad decision/investment, nor is it ever a waste of money (contrary to what some people would have you believe).
Regardless how well set up your rig is or is not, a Hensley reduces the odds of you ever having a serious sway problem. No denying that. Just how much it reduces those odds, varies depending on several things. Regardless whether you 'feel' any difference in a Hensley vs a conventional hitch in everyday towing, fact is, your chances of catastrophic sway problems ARE reduced somewhat, due to the design of these hitches.
Now, just how you put a price on that, and how you determine just how much your specific chances of sway problems will be reduced and if its enough to make a hitch like this worthwhile.....Well, thats where all the 'controversy' on this topic comes from.
Even if you don't 'need' it, and one of the conventional hitches would work fine for you, consider this: These 'premium' hitches like the Hensley are built solid as a rock. They will last FOREVER basically, if properly taken care of. As a result, there has always been an EXCELLENT market for used ones. You can get one, use it for a few years, then later on if you move up to a motorhome, 5th wheel, or retire completely from RVing, you can sell the hitch and get most of your money back out of it. You will NOT be able to do that as well with conventional hitch setups. They (conventional hitches) don't hold their value anywhere near as well.
Soooo, in the long term, even if you determine that you don't need one of these hitches, buying one is NOT a bad investment, strictly in terms of $$ spent over the long haul.
Anyway, as already said, 'worth it' is something you must answer for yourself. None of us can answer that for you.
Will and Cheryl
2021 Newmar Baystar 3014 on F53 (7.3 V8) Chassis
See it here
I don't think I've seen anyone say that the Hensley doesn't do a good job.
When I bought my TT, I hadn't even yet pulled anything longer than ten feet. I paid about $25,000 for my 28' TT and decided to play it safe. The price of the Hensley didn't seem to be too much for the peace of mind it gives me.
I guess it depends on what you want, how much money you have, how much you know, what you believe and how much experience you have.
ImaHeadaU - Vancouver, B.C. Canada
'05 Alpenlite Aspen 28RL
'03 Ford F250 6L. Diesel
After spending several weeks visiting various TT dealers before the end of the season, I was unsuccessful in closing a deal on a new TT. However, I have decided that, one way or another, I am going to keep the PP hitch.
My current plan is that irrespective of whether I really go through with the trade or not, I will still install the PP hitch on my truck next spring anyway. I am sure some people will tell me that it will be an overkill if I end up using the PP hitch to pull a 24 ft HTT. To me, however, spending $2,000 for some additional confidence and enjoyment in towing is definitely worth every penny of it.
2010 Jayco Eagle SuperLite 298RLS
2010 Silverado 2500HD LT, Duramax, CCSB, 4x4
ProPride 3P-1000
2016 Winnebago ERA 70A
I would not hesitate to buy another Hensley. If I ever downsize the TT, I will buy the Hensley Cub.
No matter what hitch you buy, your TT will try to sway. THe Hensley, IMHO, stops the sway just as advertised.
TV: 05 Chevy 2500 8.1L
5er: 2010 Open Range 385RLS
Hensley Arrow and P3
I LOVE YAKS!!!
Their rugged all terrain look reminds me of my truck
Les
Also Les great post on page one!!!
The funny thing about this time honored topic of 'worth it' on the Hensley (and now ProPride) that tickles me is that it garners such 'PASSION' from people about how someone could spend THAT MUCH on a hitch...the funny part is many like to jump on that band wagon about a hitch yet people pull 7000# TT's all over the place on these boards and they do it with a diesel motor'd truck...do they really NEED a diesel for a 7000# trailer...it really doesn't matter...they WANT it and it is THEIR money...same logic goes with choice of truck, trailer, woman, dog, house, etc...
If someone chooses to do something because it makes THEM feel better...what business is it for anyone on here?...but that doesn't stop the banter...mention the "H" word and emotions flow like a pre-teen girl
Is a premium hitch 'needed' in this setup...probably not...but we don't buy sway control for GOOD DAYS...we buy sway control and haul it around for much of our towing miles just sitting there passive WAITING to be called upon for when conditions are just WRONG that it tries to start our setup into oscillatory motion. I towed this past summer 1800 miles in 4 days (2 of them 12 hour 600 mile days)...I fought a 30+ mph CROSS WIND the whole time thru Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona...what a nightmare...the winds in Oklahoma were unbelievable...yet I still towed 12 hours and 600 miles...why?...because of my setup...and my Hensley is an integral part of MY setup...would I trade it for a DC or Equal-i-zer...NO WAY...and you know what...my DW said to me on day four...I'm really glad you spent the money on that ugly orange hitch!
So while the OP likely doesn't need a high end hitch on the surface...if he WANTS one he should GET one and it is nobody's business but his and his partners...
I have no knowledge of the Yak club...
although Barney told me that I had to sacrifice one after I bought my Hensley
Joe.
2007 Tiffin Phaeton 40 QSH 350Cat (3 women and 4 slides...Just RIGHT! ">)
2012 Jeep Liberty Sport (toad)
2005 Ford Excursion V10 w/4.30's (Sold)
- and give me a call - I'll tell you where to get your YAK Les
LAdams wrote:
Their rugged all terrain look reminds me of my truck
Huh? You drive a Ford......
crappie_fisherman wrote:
...my DW said to me on day four...I'm really glad you spent the money on that ugly orange hitch! Joe.
I'm not going to re-post what you guys have already articulated, but caught this snippet, because my DW uttered those same words. Cheesy as the HA promotional video is, the part with the sniveling wife talking about the HA saving her marriage is not wildly inaccurate, even if a little over dramatic.
Burbman wrote:
Huh? You drive a Ford......
YOU BETCHA!!! LOTS'A TRUCK, LOTS'A MOTOR - Why?? Is there anything else ![[emoticon]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_t72wbfDKXcFf6uAtazGp17vzpccf8fZE0gfLKd2ovL4YUINEEqi4EGE21Mt9J0g9usqIDqpTX-nzXBg-Znhg-OpfbztUPqfj6zxhTuGXG1H_BwtmUer20j4WqqAg=s0-d "scratchead")
Crappie_Fisherman wrote:
my DW said to me on day four...I'm really glad you spent the money on that ugly orange hitch! Joe.
Joe's DW is tough!!! He's probably lying to us and just trying to impress us although I give him credit for the verbiage - it was rather convincing
Les
fla-gypsy wrote:
Not intended as an all inclusive statement, sorry!. Many times it becomes the solution for folks who have a bad combination to begin with and want a band aid instead of fixing the real problem. My apologies!
It seems to me that when someone has a bad combination, installing a Hensley is a fix.
IMO, a bad combination is TV that's overwhelmed by the TT. In other words, that combination of TV & TT is less than good and as a result is prone to behavior problems. That could be because of the TT's weight, length, sail area or even possibly a marginal design that makes getting a good balance difficult.
A mal-adjusted hitch is just that, a mal-adjusted hitch and that does not make the TV/TT combination a bad combination.
There was nothing wrong with our combination when we had the Reese Dual-Cam: an F350 crew cab diesel is more than adequate for pulling a 10,000# 30' TT. But, I could still feel the trailer
trying to push the truck around. Some folks might not mind, care or even notice that the TT is trying to push the truck around as long as it doesn't get severe enough to scare them. Personally, I don't mind getting squirrelly on the road except when I'm towing. When I'm towing with the Hensley, the combination was actually more stable in most conditions that cause sway than the truck was without the TT. You just can't say that with any friction-based sway control. LAdams wrote:
Well said Joe
Les
Joe, I can top that! If you will send me the appropriate amount, I will give you my YAK! (shades of Illinois politics
)Barney
SteveRankin wrote:
fla-gypsy wrote:
Not intended as an all inclusive statement, sorry!. Many times it becomes the solution for folks who have a bad combination to begin with and want a band aid instead of fixing the real problem. My apologies!
It seems to me that when someone has a bad combination, installing a Hensley is a fix.
I agree, Steve.
When I was researching my change from the dual-cam I read that logic many times in posts here. It seems that many people think that installing a premium hitch is a band aid to a larger problem. I "fixed" all of what people said were a "problem" and still could not dial in the dual cam. The only thing that made it comfortable was purchasing the ProPride hitch.
I read on another forum that ProPride is now selling the dual-cam to people who do not want to buy their hitch and if it doesn't work for the customer they will give a purchase credit toward purchasing the ProPride hitch. That might be an option for the OP. At least if it doesn't work you won't have a useless hitch on the garage floor.
Last summer I sold that TT (with the Hensley) and received almost $2000 more than what I paid for the 7 year old TT and the 2 year old used hitch combined. The Hensley was the deal clincher as the buyer refused to purchase the TT without the hitch! In essence, that hitch cost me $0!
Ron
Ron & Sandie
2013 Tiffin Phaeton 42LH Cummins ISL 400hp
Toad: 2011 GMC Terrain SLT2
Tow Bar: Sterling AT
Toad Brakes: Unified by U.S. Gear
TPMS: Pressure Pro
Member of: GS, FMCA, Allegro
RETIRED!! How sweet it is....
chase9774 wrote:
SteveRankin wrote:
fla-gypsy wrote:
Not intended as an all inclusive statement, sorry!. Many times it becomes the solution for folks who have a bad combination to begin with and want a band aid instead of fixing the real problem. My apologies!
It seems to me that when someone has a bad combination, installing a Hensley is a fix.
I agree, Steve.
When I was researching my change from the dual-cam I read that logic many times in posts here. It seems that many people think that installing a premium hitch is a band aid to a larger problem. I "fixed" all of what people said were a "problem" and still could not dial in the dual cam. The only thing that made it comfortable was purchasing the ProPride hitch.
I read on another forum that ProPride is now selling the dual-cam to people who do not want to buy their hitch and if it doesn't work for the customer they will give a purchase credit toward purchasing the ProPride hitch. That might be an option for the OP. At least if it doesn't work you won't have a useless hitch on the garage floor.
There seems to be a mentality among many folks with TTs and conventional hitches that anyone that spends $3000 on a premium hitch is plain stupid. There's a guy across the road from me that wondered what my Hensley was when he first saw it and I simply told him "Don't even try to figure it out, you're not smart enough to use one of these."
The folks at ProPride are no dumbies when about marketing their hitch. Offering the customer a full refund on a Dual-Cam if they come back and upgrade to the ProPride is an excellent idea.
We paid $622 for our Reese Dual-Cam and sold it for $461, less eBay fees & shipping costs. I figure we lost about $200 in that part of the transaction.
SteveRankin wrote:
---The folks at ProPride are no dumbies when about marketing their hitch. Offering the customer a full refund on a Dual-Cam if they come back and upgrade to the ProPride is an excellent idea.---
That might be an excellent idea; but, I don't think that's what they're offering.
Anyone who's counting on a full refund ought to check with them first.
Ron
LAdams wrote: Burbman wrote:
Huh? You drive a Ford......
YOU BETCHA!!! LOTS'A TRUCK, LOTS'A MOTOR - Why?? Is there anything else
Les
Yeah, the same Ford with a DIESEL ! ![[emoticon]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sOOS4XrjiLPmPt2GWrFsN_Lh721SIXdI1ecJgIJFbWgf3Cj_Lzf4ZNP-79gX7BSVDJTjgQVItLLSu88yPxVztBIGSzqoFa9rkniAypZNSwLFvV4dUH_HIw=s0-d "tongue")
Mike
BTW - diesel is $1.10 per gallon HIGHER than gas here now Les
SteveRankin wrote:
---When I'm towing with the Hensley, the combination was actually more stable in most conditions that cause sway than the truck was without the TT. You just can't say that with any friction-based sway control.
Actually, an almost identical statement has been made by at least one user of a Dual Cam.
Also, when I towed an Award TT with a Ford Explorer using a single friction sway bar, it was my opinion that the combination was more stable than the Explorer was without the TT.
There are several explanations for why a properly-connected TV and TT might be more stable than the TV by itself. The additional vertical force imposed on the TV, when properly distributed between front and rear axles, can improve braking, steering, and lateral stability.
Also, a friction-based sway control resists relative yaw between TV and TT and tends to turn the TT into a "tag axle" for the TV. A single friction bar can generate about 500 ft-lb of yaw-resisting torque. A Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer can generate several times that amount.
Up to a point, a friction-based sway control tends to make a TV/TT combination act like a single unit with better yaw resistance than the TV alone. Depending on the characteristics of the particular TV/TT combination, most conditions that cause sway might be resisted by torque-generating capability of the sway control.
I think it's interesting to note that a Hensley Arrow does not generate yaw-axis torque unless there is some amount of relative yaw between TV and TT. It does not tend to "lock" the TV and TT together as a friction-based control does. Instead, the HA works by moving the pivot point closer to the TV's rear axle.
The HA does not significantly reduce the amount of lateral force imposed on the TV by the TT. The HA does significantly reduce the amount of "steering torque" imposed on the TV. Perhaps the large reduction in steering torque plus the additional vertical force on the TV is what makes the HA appear to make a combination more stable than the TV alone for some TV/TT combinations.
Ron
Ron Gratz wrote:
The HA does not significantly reduce the amount of lateral force imposed on the TV by the TT. The HA does significantly reduce the amount of "steering torque" imposed on the TV. Perhaps the large reduction in steering torque plus the additional vertical force on the TV is what makes the HA appear to make a combination more stable than the TV alone for some TV/TT combinations.
Ron
Ron,
Your posts are always very enjoyable for me to read as it makes my engingeering mind process and think about what you wrote.
I can ONLY speak for an Excursion...but that statement of yours that I highlighted in red I believe is EXACTLY why an Excursion benefits so much from a HA and here is why I think that.
You can read countless threads on RV.net as well as FTE about the 'rear steer' phenom the Excursions seem to be prone to because Ford uses a relatively tall spacer block between the axle and the relatively light spring rate leaf springs in the rear. That combination of soft springs a good distance from the rear axle coupled with the tongue weight of the TT PUSHING on the rear of the Ex and 'steering' it does infact contribute to the Ex's phenom of 'rear steer' I believe.
I felt this phenom very predominantly when I stepped up to my current 9000# 34' ball to bumper TT with 1100-1200# of tongue weight. I did not notice the phenom of rear steer with my previous 7500# 30' ball to bumper TT with 900# of tongue weight pushing on the rear of the Ex. But once I got my current TT...my once well behaved Ex with a DC suddenly became a new animal. Remember that I tow 12-14 hour days when traveling to and from our vacations and I am the ONLY driver so I MUST have a stable and comfortable TV...and this new TT with DC was not going to be something I would be able to tolerate or accept...even after I spent a day at the scales tweaking the DC and tongue weight. Perhaps I could have tweaked more...don't know...don't care but I'm sure it is a combination of load INSIDE the Ex plus the tongue weight for a total load on the rear springs and when you exceed the forces on those springs to cause axle wrapping so I was likely just over the rear spring wrapping point and was fighting a losing battle (at least in my mind)...so I get the HA and whalla my normally well behaved Ex is BACK...hmmmmm....FWIW...I towed two 12 hour 600 mile days this summer in 30+ mph cross winds...and sure I had to correct the steering wheel when getting blasted by those winds with semi's passing and unloading the wind and then instantly reloading the wind as they passed...but the rig is PREDICTABLE...and that is critical in towing...
So the interesting part of your post at least to me as an Excursion owner...I believe you have nailed in my mind WHY so many Excursion owners benefit from a VPP style hitch.
Thanks for provoking more thought...keep up the great work!
Joe.
I also like the fact that other than the stinger, the hitch is one piece that stays with the trailer; there's no messing around with greasy spring bars for example.
To me, when you list all of benefits the Hensley (or ProPride), the additional cost over any other hitch is a minor consideration. Even though we've since downsized from our former 30 footer, I wouldn't sell the Hensley for anything.
2001 Airstream Safari 25SS tugged by 2011 Chevy Traverse 3.6L AWD
Hensley Arrow • DirecLink • Mckesh
Set up by Can-Am RV
Garfie|d wrote:
once its installed all you have to do is lubricate it once a year and that's it.
Hensley says
Quote:
Spring bars should be greased before an extended trip and at 500 mile intervals. (Cannot be over greased)
I ignored this advice to my and my Hensley's detriment.
ImaHeadaU wrote:
Hensley says
Quote:
Spring bars should be greased before an extended trip and at 500 mile intervals. (Cannot be over greased)
I ignored this advice to my and my Hensley's detriment.
Ok, that caught my interest. If you don't mind, please elaborate on the problem you experienced. I can't envision the spring bars failing because they weren't greased every 500 mi.
Garfie|d wrote:
ImaHeadaU wrote:
Hensley says
Quote:
Spring bars should be greased before an extended trip and at 500 mile intervals. (Cannot be over greased)
I ignored this advice to my and my Hensley's detriment.
Ok, that caught my interest. If you don't mind, please elaborate on the problem you experienced. I can't envision the spring bars failing because they weren't greased every 500 mi.
Well, I picked up my trailer new at the manufacturer and had a local shop install the Hensley Hitch. They had never seen one before. I don't believe they greased it. I drove about 275 miles home and shortly after took off for a trip to Napa Valey CA without greasing it. I made it about 700 of the 900 mile trip to the mountains of northern California before my first spring bar U-bracket broke. I managed to find someone to weld it back together and continued on my way. I enjoyed a few days in Napa and headed home along the coast to avoid the snow in mountains. I managed to go another 300 miles or so before I broke the other spring bar U-bracket. Finding someone who was willing to weld the second on back together took quite a bit more effort. Finally, I dug out the Hensley manual and found that I should have been using a grease gun on the grease zerks. The manual says "Use a grease gun on the grease zerks provided. (Recommended) Fill them until you see grease come out of the bottom of the housing. Note: Squeaking or groaning around turns usually means the bars could use more grease." Indeed I had heard moaning as I made hard turns and I turned uphill on both occasions.
I bought a grease gun applied the grease as directed. It took quite a bit of grease initially. I've been greasing them as directed ever since without incident. The U-brackets were kind of ugly from being welded back together. So I eventually ordered some replacements.
I'll admit that I can be a slow learner at times but if a little bit of grease can save a whole lot of messing around, I'll go for the grease.
It could very well be that those of you who spend your time on flat land may not need to be so fussy but it doesn't take much effort to grease the thing.
* This post was last edited 12/14/08 12:51am by ImaHeadaU *
Ron Gratz wrote:
SteveRankin wrote:
---When I'm towing with the Hensley, the combination was actually more stable in most conditions that cause sway than the truck was without the TT. You just can't say that with any friction-based sway control.
Actually, an almost identical statement has been made by at least one user of a Dual Cam.
Also, when I towed an Award TT with a Ford Explorer using a single friction sway bar, it was my opinion that the combination was more stable than the Explorer was without the TT.
Award trailers are very low and have steeply sloped roofs, so they are much less affected by side winds than conventional TTs & impose less yaw force on the TV because of their extreme light weight. So, it's pretty easy to envision a friction sway control stiffening up the connection to the point that it resisted turning strongly enough to make the TT behave somewhat like a tag axle.
Of course, that same friction sway control also has the effect of trying to prevent the TV from turning easily and there are cases of TV's failing to negotiate turns because of overly tight friction sway devices.
Ron Gratz wrote:
The additional vertical force imposed on the TV, when properly distributed between front and rear axles, can improve braking, steering, and lateral stability.
Hmm, very interesting. While the addition vertical force can increase tire traction, the increased kinetic energy of the the additional mass results in longer stopping distances.
The same holds true for steering. It's also hard to imagine any real world vehicle that can gain an improvement in steering by adding weight approx 5 feet behind the rear axle.
Again, I'd like to see an explanation of how approx 1,000# weight 5 feet behind the rear axle of any real world vehicle can improve it's lateral stability.
If what you said was true, then it seems that the combination of these 3 improvements in vehicle dynamics that you've described would render any form of sway control, or even auxiliary braking quite redundant and unnecessary.
Ron Gratz wrote:
Also, a friction-based sway control resists relative yaw between TV and TT and tends to turn the TT into a "tag axle" for the TV. A single friction bar can generate about 500 ft-lb of yaw-resisting torque. A Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer can generate several times that amount.
Let's assume that your figures are correct. So, if a single friction bar can generate 500 lb-ft of yaw-resisting torque, that also means that it resists the front wheels of the truck with the exact same amount of torque. Since the friction bar is mounted 5 feet behind the rear axle, then that means it's developing 2,500 lb-ft of turn-resisting torque because of the 5' lever it has on the truck. If the WB of the truck is 144", then the front wheels have a 12/5 advantage which gives 1040 lb/ft of turn-making torque required by the front wheels before the truck would even begin to turn.
When you consider that my Duramax makes a maximum of 605 lb-ft of torque & that's enough to propel 20,000# of truck down the highway & up grades, 1040 lb-ft of torque just to start a turn certainly explains why friction anti-sway devices are so dangerous--because they can make a TV difficult to turn.
Then, you said that the Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer can generate several times that amount. If so, that's even more scary. Since that much yaw-resisting torque is also turn-resisting torque a rig equipped with a Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer would turn about as well as a vehicle with locked differentials. Not at all.
It's worth noting that even if your numbers are wrong, the fact remains that 100% of the yaw-resisting torque of a friction hitch is also turn-resisting torque. And that is not a good thing when the driver needs to turn the vehicle. And what if road conditions are slippery? It means that just when the driver needs to finesse the steering, he can't because the friction hitch is trying to force the entire rig, including the TV to go straight.
Ron Gratz wrote:
I think it's interesting to note that a Hensley Arrow does not generate yaw-axis torque unless there is some amount of relative yaw between TV and TT. It does not tend to "lock" the TV and TT together as a friction-based control does. Instead, the HA works by moving the pivot point closer to the TV's rear axle.
Ah, but here is the beauty of the Hensley & its new kin, the ProPride. Since the Hensley does not tend to "lock" the TV & TT together, the drive of the TV is free to point the TV anywhere he needs to go without ANY resistance from the hitch. Steering feel is greatly improved, as is steering response since there is no turn-resisting torque to overcome.
What makes the Hensley, ProPride and PullRite so incredibly more stable than any friction hitch is the simple fact that the pivot point is moved much closer to the rear axle of the TV and as a direct result the yaw-inducing force of the TT has much less leverage on the TV.
A conventional friction hitch has its pivot point about 5' behind the rear axle of the typical TV. The 4-bar linkage of the Hensley projects that pivot point forward to about 20-24" behind the rear axle. This is the same as eliminating over 50% of the yaw-force the TV experiences. There is no hocus-pocus imagineering of how 500 lb-ft of yaw-resisting torque equates to 10,000# of TT wagging the rear of the TV. Instead, the Hensley simply reduces the leverage of the TT to a point where the TV feels as if it is towing a small popup.
As for the PullRite? Well, the pivot point of the PullRite hitch is only 11" behind the rear axle, so the leverage is reduced by half again compared to the Hensley.
There is a reason why all those folks with humongous 5vers drive around with pickups just like mine with no sway control at all. It's because their 5ver has no leverage on the TV so they don't need sway control. Figuring out how to make a hitch that takes advantage of that basic principle is so much more elegant AND effective than any friction hitch ever built.
A friction hitch, when adequately tightened can make a good TV/TT combination behave well enough to satisfy most people. However, the more friction force the friction hitch employs to force the TT to behave, the more steering torque is required to turn the TV when the road turns.
In the mean time, the folks with the Hensley, ProPride or PullRite are driving down the road totally relaxed because their TT has so little leverage on their TV that it might as well be a popup. And when the road turns, their TV will follow the road just as easily as when it's not towing.
And THAT is definitely worth the price of admission.
* This post was edited 12/13/08 10:17pm by SteveRankin *
ImaHeadaU wrote:
Well, I picked up my trailer new at the manufacturer and had a local shop install the Hensley Hitch. They had never seen one before. I don't believe they greased it. I drove about 275 miles home and shortly after took off for a trip to Napa Valey CA without greasing it. I made it about 700 of the 900 mile trip to the mountains of northern California before my first spring bar U-bracket broke. I managed to find someone to weld it back together and continued on my way. I enjoyed a few days in Napa and headed home along the coast to avoid the snow in mountains. I managed to go another 300 miles or so before I broke the other spring bar U-bracket. Finding someone who was willing to weld the second on back together took quite a bit more effort. Finally, I dug out the Hensley manual and found that I should have been using a grease gun on the grease zerks. The manual says "Use a grease gun on the grease zerks provided. (Recommended) Fill them until you see grease come out of the bottom of the housing. Note: Squeaking or groaning around turns usually means the bars could use more grease." Indeed I had hear moaning as I made hard turns and I turned uphill on both occasions.
I bought a grease gun applied the grease as directed. It took quite a bit of grease initially. I've been greasing them as directed ever since without incident. The U-brackets were kind of ugly from being welded back together. So I eventually ordered some replacements.
I'll admit that I can be a slow learner at times but if a little bit of grease can save a whole lot of messing around, I'll go for the grease.
It could very well be that those of you who spend your time on flat land may not need to be so fussy but it doesn't take much effort to grease the thing.
Interesting. I guess it's possible the lack of grease put excess pressure on the struts and snapped the u-brackets. Unfortunately the problem was really the result of a faulty installation, not because of poor maintenance. But you're right in that the Hensley needs to be lubed periodically.
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote: SteveRankin wrote: Actually, an almost identical statement has been made by at least one user of a Dual Cam. Also, when I towed an Award TT with a Ford Explorer using a single friction sway bar, it was my opinion that the combination was more stable than the Explorer was without the TT.
---When I'm towing with the Hensley, the combination was actually more stable in most conditions that cause sway than the truck was without the TT. You just can't say that with any friction-based sway control.
As regards Award trailers -- the phrases "very low", "steeply sloped roofs", "extreme light weight", and "much less affected by" might be a bit misleading. The overall height of a 2005 Award is listed as 9' 6". The lateral roof slope is about 9" over 4'. My 1994 Classic 27 had an empty weight of 4000# and a GVWR of 6000#. Because the Award has less ground clearance, it is more difficult for side winds to pass under the TT and the wind load might not be significantly different from the load on a taller TT.
SteveRankin wrote:
Of course, that same friction sway control also has the effect of trying to prevent the TV from turning easily and there are cases of TV's failing to negotiate turns because of overly tight friction sway devices.
Ron
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote:
The additional vertical force imposed on the TV, when properly distributed between front and rear axles, can improve braking, steering, and lateral stability.
Steve wrote: The same holds true for steering. It's also hard to imagine any real world vehicle that can gain an improvement in steering by adding weight approx 5 feet behind the rear axle.
A WD system does exert a vertical force at some distance behind the TV's rear axle. However, the WD system also exerts a pitch-axis torque on the hitch head. It is this torque which causes the vertical force to be distributed between the TV's axles. The resultant vertical force is moved from the hitch to a location which might be directly over the TV's rear axle or somewhere between the axles. Depending on the magnitudes of the vertical force and the torque, the load on both axles could be increased, and this would increase the steering effectiveness of all tires. Or, only the rear axle load might be increased. However, since the rear tires also provide steering forces, increasing the rear axle load can also improve steering effectiveness. The airfoils on a Formula 1 car create a "downforce" which improves cornering and lateral stability. A properly adjusted WD system also can produce a stabilizing downforce on the TV.
Steve wrote: If what you said was true, then it seems that the combination of these 3 improvements in vehicle dynamics that you've described would render any form of sway control, or even auxiliary braking quite redundant and unnecessary.
Not at all. I said, "The additional vertical force imposed on the TV, when properly distributed between front and rear axles, can improve braking, steering, and lateral stability." I did not say that the improvement is enough to eliminate the need for sway control. And, I did not say that the potential braking improvement is sufficient to stop the additional mass of the TT. Ron
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote:
Also, a friction-based sway control resists relative yaw between TV and TT and tends to turn the TT into a "tag axle" for the TV. A single friction bar can generate about 500 ft-lb of yaw-resisting torque. A Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer can generate several times that amount.
Let's assume that your figures are correct. So, if a single friction bar can generate 500 lb-ft of yaw-resisting torque, that also means that it resists the front wheels of the truck with the exact same amount of torque. Since the friction bar is mounted 5 feet behind the rear axle, then that means it's developing 2,500 lb-ft of turn-resisting torque because of the 5' lever it has on the truck. If the WB of the truck is 144", then the front wheels have a 12/5 advantage which gives 1040 lb/ft of turn-making torque required by the front wheels before the truck would even begin to turn.
First, some basic physics -- torque is the product of force times distance. Sometimes, it is expressed in units of lb-ft. The product of torque times distance, as you have introduced above, is meaningless. Torque is torque. Whether torque is applied at the hitch, or at the rear axle, or at the front axle, or anywhere else on the vehicle, makes no difference.
To determine how much front tire lateral force is required to balance the 500 lb-ft of torque, you can assume the torque will tend to make the TV pivot about a vertical axis through the center of the rear axle. The required front tire force would then be: force = 500 lf-ft / 12 ft = 41.7#. Each front tire would have to generate a lateral force of about 21#.
Assuming each front tire carries a load of 1800# and the tire is operated within its linear range of lateral resistance, an additional steering angle of about 0.12 degrees would be required in order to balance the 500 lb-ft of yaw-axis torque exerted at the hitch.
Steve wrote: When you consider that my Duramax makes a maximum of 605 lb-ft of torque & that's enough to propel 20,000# of truck down the highway & up grades, 1040 lb-ft of torque just to start a turn certainly explains why friction anti-sway devices are so dangerous--because they can make a TV difficult to turn.
No, that does not explain anything. The torque produced by your engine has absolutely nothing to do with the added steering angle required to overcome the sway control torque.
Steve wrote: Then, you said that the Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer can generate several times that amount. If so, that's even more scary. Since that much yaw-resisting torque is also turn-resisting torque a rig equipped with a Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer would turn about as well as a vehicle with locked differentials. Not at all.
That's an interesting deduction. I think we all know that a rig equipped with a Dual Cam or an Equal-i-zer can be turned. It might take an added 0.12, or even 1.0 degrees of tire angle to make a turn; but, the TV does turn
Steve wrote: It's worth noting that even if your numbers are wrong, the fact remains that 100% of the yaw-resisting torque of a friction hitch is also turn-resisting torque. And that is not a good thing when the driver needs to turn the vehicle. And what if road conditions are slippery? It means that just when the driver needs to finesse the steering, he can't because the friction hitch is trying to force the entire rig, including the TV to go straight.
Please see this post for my response. Ron
* This post was edited 12/14/08 05:54pm by Ron Gratz *
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote:
I think it's interesting to note that a Hensley Arrow does not generate yaw-axis torque unless there is some amount of relative yaw between TV and TT. It does not tend to "lock" the TV and TT together as a friction-based control does. Instead, the HA works by moving the pivot point closer to the TV's rear axle.
Ah, but here is the beauty of the Hensley & its new kin, the ProPride. Since the Hensley does not tend to "lock" the TV & TT together, the drive of the TV is free to point the TV anywhere he needs to go without ANY resistance from the hitch. Steering feel is greatly improved, as is steering response since there is no turn-resisting torque to overcome.
Not true. As you well know, if you are rounding a curve with an angle of, say, 4 degrees between TV and TT, the HA's virtual pivot point will be moved about 18" laterally from the TV's longitudinal centerline. Unless you are coasting, the TT will be exerting a rearward pull on the TV due to aerodynamic, rolling, and friction forces which might be in the range of 500-1000# depending on speed, terrain, etc.
Since the rearward pull from the TT is acting at the VPP, the 500-1000# of force acting over the distance of 18" will translate to a yaw-axis torque of 750-1500 lb-ft. This torque will tend to straighten the combination as you round the curve. You will have to introduce more steering angle to maintain the 4 degree relative yaw angle.
With a friction-based sway control, you will have to introduce more steering angle at the beginning of the curve; but once into the curve, the SC will tend to keep the yaw angle constant until you are ready to steer out of the curve. So there are advantages and disadvantages to both the HA and friction-based systems. The thing to remember is that for either type of system. The steering changes required to overcome the hitch-induced torques are quite small.
Steve wrote: What makes the Hensley, ProPride and PullRite so incredibly more stable than any friction hitch is the simple fact that the pivot point is moved much closer to the rear axle of the TV and as a direct result the yaw-inducing force of the TT has much less leverage on the TV.
I must agree with you on this point since I've often made nearly identical statements in these threads. Ron
SteveRankin wrote:
A conventional friction hitch has its pivot point about 5' behind the rear axle of the typical TV. The 4-bar linkage of the Hensley projects that pivot point forward to about 20-24" behind the rear axle.---
Partially true. When the TV and TT are aligned with zero relative yaw angle, the VPP might be about 20-24" behind the T's rear axle. When the relative angle reaches 4 degrees, the VPP will be about 50-54" behind the axle and about 18" away from the TV's longitudinal centerline. With an angle of about 15 degrees, the VPP is very close to the straight-ahead location of the ball coupler.
Steve wrote: This is the same as eliminating over 50% of the yaw-force the TV experiences.
No, you're confusing force and torque. The 4-bar linkage has relatively little effect on the lateral force induced on the TV by the TT. The significant effect is on the yaw-inducing torque and not on the lateral force. At a relative yaw angle of zero degrees, the torque might be reduced to about 40% of what it would be with a conventional hitch. At a relative yaw angle of 4 degrees, the torque might be around 85% of conventional. And, at 15 degrees, the torque would be greater than the conventional value because the VPP is actually further from the TV's rear axle than would be the ball of a conventional hitch.
Steve wrote: As for the PullRite? Well, the pivot point of the PullRite hitch is only 11" behind the rear axle, so the leverage is reduced by half again compared to the Hensley.
Unless you have the 90 degree model -- in which case, the pivot point probably would be closer to 20" behind the rear axle.
Steve wrote: There is a reason why all those folks with humongous 5vers drive around with pickups just like mine with no sway control at all. It's because their 5ver has no leverage on the TV so they don't need sway control. Figuring out how to make a hitch that takes advantage of that basic principle is so much more elegant AND effective than any friction hitch ever built.
If you want "elegance" and don't mind paying for it, go for it. You don't have to justify the purchase of a Hensley Arrow on a "need" or "superiority" basis.
Steve wrote: A friction hitch, when adequately tightened can make a good TV/TT combination behave well enough to satisfy most people. However, the more friction force the friction hitch employs to force the TT to behave, the more steering torque is required to turn the TV when the road turns.
True, but I believe your attempt at applying physics has led you to grossly overestimate the effect of sway-control torque on the steering process. Ron
Ron Gratz wrote:
As regards Award trailers -- the phrases "very low", "steeply sloped roofs", "extreme light weight", and "much less affected by" might be a bit misleading. The overall height of a 2005 Award is listed as 9' 6". The lateral roof slope is about 9" over 4'. My 1994 Classic 27 had an empty weight of 4000# and a GVWR of 6000#. Because the Award has less ground clearance, it is more difficult for side winds to pass under the TT and the wind load might not be significantly different from the load on a taller TT.
I don't think they're misleading at all, Ron.
Height: Your Award's overall height is 9'6", but sidewalls were only 8'9" high. By comparison, my Holiday Rambler was 10'3" high at the sidewalls, plus 15" for ACs etc. That makes the HR nearly 20% taller than the Award--a very significant difference.
Weight: The dry weight of a 27 HR Aluma-Lite was 7,176# (heavier than the GVWR of the Award) and the GVWR of the Aluma-Lite was 10,000#. A full 30% heavier than the Award.
Steeply sloped roof: 9" slope in 4' is the same steepness as a 19% grade. Another way of looking at that is that reduction of height at the sides is about 10% of the height of the trailer body. Sounds pretty significant to me. And as noted in the Award brochure, the slope of the roof lowers the interior cabinets which lowers the center of gravity and the slope of the roof also adds some downforce to the chassis instead of sideforce from hitting the walls.
As for the wind load being increased by the lower ground clearance of the Award? First, due to the friction of the wind passing over the ground the wind speed at a point just 1 foot off the ground is only a fraction of what it is 10 feet off the ground. Plus, the wind force on the additional 15" height of the HR has far more leverage on the coach and therefore a much greater effect on it's behavior. RVers rarely think about weight aloft and windage, but those two forces are extremely significant in the performance of any vehicle.
Ron Gratz wrote:
[ blue]The TT has its own brakes which are designed to stop its mass. Since the TV has more load on its tires without a corresponding increase in mass of the TV, its braking effectiveness is increased.
Yes, it's true the TT has it's own brakes. The same marginally effective brakes that came on a 1950's 4,000# Oldsmobile are supposed to stop a 10,000# trailer? They do meet the requirement that the trailer has brakes, but their effectiveness is pathetic compared to the effectiveness of the TV's brakes. The test results I've seen show that a 3/4-ton pickup with 4-wheel disc brakes takes 150% as long to stop when towing a 10,000# trailer so I think it's safe to say the braking effectiveness is definitely NOT increased when the TT is connected.
Ron Gratz wrote:
A WD system does exert a vertical force at some distance behind the TV's rear axle. However, the WD system
exerts a pitch-axis torque on the hitch head. It is this torque which causes the vertical force to be distributed between the TV's axles. The resultant vertical force is moved from the hitch to a location which might be directly over the TV's rear axle or somewhere between the axles.
The static vertical force of the TT tongue is shifted forwards by the W/D hitch, but as you said where? While shifting the vertical force forward is definitely better than not doing so, the improvement in vehicle performance does not approach that of the TV without the TT.
Plus, When the trailer is braking, the TT pitches on it's axles making for considerable weight transfer onto the tongue. Weight transfer on a passenger car can exceed 80% of the total weight of the vehicle onto the front wheels, so it's reasonable that the weight transfer of the TT onto the tongue could be in the range of 50%. That's 3-4 times the static tongue weight and bound to have dramatic effect on the handling of the TV as several thousand pounds of force is suddenly applied on the hitch ball—far more than the W/D hardware can compensate for. Worse, if this happens in a turn, then that downward force on the ball tends to lift the front wheels of the TV AND the forward momentum of the TT that can't stop as quickly as the TV pushes on a 5' long lever. The result is sway with a simultaneous reduction in steering traction. Not pretty.
Ron Gratz wrote:
Depending on the magnitudes of the vertical force and the torque, the load on both axles could be increased, and this would increase the steering effectiveness of all tires. Or, only the rear axle load might be increased. However, since the rear tires also provide steering forces, increasing the rear axle load can also improve steering effectiveness.
What you just said is that if the vertical load is between the axles the steering effectiveness is improved and you also said that if the vertical load is on only on the rear axle the steering effectiveness is improved. In other words, you're saying that the steering effectiveness is improved no matter where the vertical load is applied. If that was true, why do Porsches drive so differently than Camry's? And if the steering effectiveness is improved with additional weight on the rear axle, it seems there is little reason to spend money on a W/D setup because the steering of the TV already improved with the weight of the TT on hitch ball.
Ron Gratz wrote:
The airfoils on a Formula 1 car create a "downforce" which improves cornering and lateral stability. A properly adjusted WD system also can produce a stabilizing downforce on the TV.
Yes, the ground effects & airfoils on a Formula 1 car create tremendous downforce, which increases tire traction--not stability. There is a difference. However, that downforce is created without a significant amount of weight, hence a net gain in performance. However, when you add weight to a vehicle, the gain in traction is more than offset by the gain in weight and performance is degraded. Often significantly. If adding weight improved the performance of the vehicle, then race cars wouldn't use outrageously expensive exotic materials to reduce weight. In fact, race sanctioning bodies impose additional weight as a penalty, AND the race cars faced with such a penalty always try to mount the weight as close to the center of the vehicle as possible because they know that it DOES matter where that weight is located.
Ron Gratz wrote:
Not at all. I said, "The additional vertical force imposed on the TV, when properly distributed between front and rear axles, can improve braking, steering, and lateral stability." I did not say that the improvement is enough to eliminate the need for sway control. And, I did not say that the potential braking improvement is sufficient to stop the additional mass of the TT.
Well, if you're saying that the additional weight improves braking, steering and lateral stability then why would you need sway control with all of those improvements? Especially, if you're towing such a lightweight, low slung and aerodynamically advantaged TT?
Ron Gratz wrote:
The common friction-bar sway control is adujsted at the factory to produce a maximum torque of about 500 ft-lbs.
and
Ron Gratz wrote:
No, you're confusing force and torque.
No, I'm not. I think you are. You said the friction-bar sway control produces a maximum torque of about 500 ft-lbs. The friction-bar sway control doesn't produce any torque at all. It produces friction which resists the yaw force of the TT. The motion of the TT produces a force, which when applied to a lever (the 5' that's the typical distance between the ball and the rear axle) produces torque.
Since the friction-bar sway control is mounted at the ball, the overall resistance of the friction sway control is very much affected by the length of the lever the TT has to exert its force on the TV. So, if the friction sway control can develop up to 500# of resistive force at the ball, that
Steve wrote: A friction hitch, when adequately tightened can make a good TV/TT combination behave well enough to satisfy most people. However, the more friction force the friction hitch employs to force the TT to behave, the more steering torque is required to turn the TV when the road turns.
Ron Gratz wrote:
True, but I believe your attempt at applying physics has led you to grossly overestimate the effect of sway-control torque on the steering process.
Grossly overestimated? Look at it this way Ron, a friction device that has the ability to tame the yaw of a 10,000# TT logically has the ability to also affect the yaw of the 5,000# TV it's connected to. Your analysis of the tire forces necessary to turn the vehicle depended on the 12' WB of the TV, but didn't correct for the 5' lever the TT & friction device has. Additionally, the friction device has two states: stationary and sliding. Very often, the stationary friction is several factors higher than the sliding friction. So, if the factory 500# is stationary, then the amount of resistance to yaw produced by the friction device drops significantly as soon as it slides. OTOH, if the 500# represents sliding friction, then the initial resistance to yaw is much higher, which when combined with the leverage can dramatically increase the amount of steering force required to turn the TV.
Steve wrote: As for the PullRite? Well, the pivot point of the PullRite hitch is only 11" behind the rear axle, so the leverage is reduced by half again compared to the Hensley.
Ron Gratz wrote:
Unless you have the 90 degree model -- in which case, the pivot point probably would be closer to 20" behind the rear axle.
The 70 degree model is the only model available since roughly 2 years ago. As I noted, my pivot point is 11" behind the C/L of my rear axle, which makes for an 80% reduction in the lever the TT has available to impart sway in the TV.
Steve wrote: There is a reason why all those folks with humongous 5vers drive around with pickups just like mine with no sway control at all. It's because their 5ver has no leverage on the TV so they don't need sway control. Figuring out how to make a hitch that takes advantage of that basic principle is so much more elegant AND effective than any friction hitch ever built.
Ron Gratz wrote:
If you want "elegance" and don't mind paying for it, go for it. You don't have to justify the purchase of a Hensley Arrow on a "need" or "superiority" basis.
Ah, we've gotten to the crux of the discussion. See, I never said "elegance". That implies something entirely different. But, I do like elegant solutions. Elegant solutions are by definition simple and effective. The PullRite hitch is a truly elegant solution. It's easily mistaken for a conventional hitch most of the time, yet it completely eliminates sway under all conditions and situations AND imposes NO loss of performance compromises on the TV. And it is bonehead simple & 95% out of sight—elegant.
As for the need for superiority? Yeah, I'll agree with you that many folks buy a 5th wheel because it's bigger, flashier—superior—to us trailer trash in our TTs. Let's face it, the average RVer knows absolutely nothing about RV stability. But, they know that those big 5vers are the big guns. Sort of like your Monaco Dynasty is one of the big guns of DPs.
But, when I'm going down the highway in our plain Jane Chevy 'LS' pulling a 29' TT with a PullRite that only a certified RV nut would notice, it's hard to figure out what the 'elegance' and 'superiority' stuff is about. Jeeeesh Ron, I sold my Mercedes 5 years ago.
Hi Colaman,
I'm relatively new here and I would like to tell my Hensley story.
My story's pretty short. I haven't had a chance to try this "new" hitch yet, but hope to install it on our "lowrider" Coachmen this spring.
Currently, we are using an equalizer type hitch with 1000# round bars, no sway control. After reading about geometric link hitches here, we bought a "pre-owned" Hensley to go with our "pre-owned" 1995 Coachmen Catalina 280 RK.
I think a substancial "pre-owned" price is well worth the investment even though I think we have far less money in our rig than the typical RV.NET member.
So I'm saying I recommend "pre-owned" as another avenue. Hensley's are built pretty durable except for the older style paint. These days, a dollar saved is a dollar earned.
Before I use it, I'll need a 4" offset stinger, perhaps "pre-owned" also, instead of the 6" offset that came with it. Last time I checked, new Hensley factory stingers were $175 plus shipping(?) and handling(?).
We've gone less than a dozen miles to the nearest site (on flat roadway) last year, and for this, our '94 Mazda was fine, but in the spring we have an unexpected 100 mile trip planned using an Interstate highway. On a hill, I don't optimistically believe the miserly 4.0 Liter V6 will be reasonably up to this, even under very patient mindset.
Perhaps a Suburban, or Expedition, is in our near future. The underpowered Mazda is lighter than a Suburban or Tahoe and the wheelbase falls in between (116", 125", 130"). The lightness of the Mazda first made me seriously look for a Hensley but, even with a suburban, my marriage, too, could be more secure since I talked my wife into this near 30' trailer.
"Don't worry", I told her.
Wes
...
Days spent camping are not subtracted from one's total.
- 2000 Excursion V-10 - 2000 F-250 CC 7.3L V-8
- 2004 Cougar Keystone M-294 RLS, 6140# tare
- Hensley Arrow - Champion 4000w/3500w gen
- Linda, Wes and Quincy the Standard Brown Poodle
...
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote:
As regards Award trailers -- the phrases "very low", "steeply sloped roofs", "extreme light weight", and "much less affected by" might be a bit misleading. The overall height of a 2005 Award is listed as 9' 6". The lateral roof slope is about 9" over 4'. My 1994 Classic 27 had an empty weight of 4000# and a GVWR of 6000#. Because the Award has less ground clearance, it is more difficult for side winds to pass under the TT and the wind load might not be significantly different from the load on a taller TT.
Weight: The dry weight of a 27 HR Aluma-Lite was 7,176# (heavier than the GVWR of the Award) and the GVWR of the Aluma-Lite was 10,000#. A full 30% heavier than the Award.
Steeply sloped roof: 9" slope in 4' is the same steepness as a 19% grade.---
As for the wind load being increased by the lower ground clearance of the Award? First, due to the friction of the wind passing over the ground the wind speed at a point just 1 foot off the ground is only a fraction of what it is 10 feet off the ground. Plus, the wind force on the additional 15" height of the HR has far more leverage on the coach and therefore a much greater effect on it's behavior.---
I think we're making some progress. We now understand:
1) a "very low" TT is one with a 9' 6" overall height compared to your HR with 10' 3" sidewalls plus 15" for AC etc,
2) a TT of "extreme light weight" has a GVWR of 6,000# compared to your HR's 10,000#, and
3) a roof with a slope of 9" in 4' is considered to be "steeply sloped" when compared to a highway grade. However, it might make more sense to compare a TT's roof slope to the slope of a house roof, in which case I think most of us would agree that a slope of 2.25 ft in 12 ft would not be considered "steeply sloped".
As for the wind load -- the vertical profile of mean speed for turbulent wind flow can be approximated with reasonable accuracy by the power law expression V = Vref*(H/Href)^K where Vref is the reference speed at the reference height, Href, and K = 1/7 for open flat terrain (CBD-28. Wind on Buildings).
So, if we can accept the equation and the coefficient of 1/7 as being sufficiently accurate, wind speed at a point just 1 foot off the ground would be 72% of what it is 10 feet off the ground. Or, if we wanted to use the coefficient of 1/10 which is recommended for wind gusts, the "fraction" would be 79%.
Yes, the wind force on the additional 15" height of the HR would exert "more leverage". However, the (I assume) wider track of the HR and its nearly 2X greater weight would provide much more resistance to the "leverage".
Ron
2006 Ford F-150 Super Cab 5.4 Triton/3:73, Hensley TruControl Brake Controller, Ride Rite Air Bags, 2006 Sprinter 2991RLS, Hensley Arrow Hitch, Kipor 2000i, Xantrex RV2012, 1 Lovely Teenage daughter, who is now an U.S. Army Soldier, and 2 Crazy Dogs.
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote:
The TT has its own brakes which are designed to stop its mass. Since the TV has more load on its tires without a corresponding increase in mass of the TV, its braking effectiveness is increased.
Steve wrote: The test results I've seen show that a 3/4-ton pickup with 4-wheel disc brakes takes 150% as long to stop when towing a 10,000# trailer so I think it's safe to say the braking effectiveness is definitely NOT increased when the TT is connected.
Do you have a reference for the test results? Do the results also apply to a 1994 Explorer towing a 5000# TT? It would be interesting to see the details. Ron
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote: exerts a pitch-axis torque on the hitch head. It is this torque which causes the vertical force to be distributed between the TV's axles. The resultant vertical force is moved from the hitch to a location which might be directly over the TV's rear axle or somewhere between the axles.
A WD system does exert a vertical force at some distance behind the TV's rear axle. However, the WD system
Steve wrote: Plus, When the trailer is braking, the TT pitches on it's axles making for considerable weight transfer onto the tongue. Weight transfer on a passenger car can exceed 80% of the total weight of the vehicle onto the front wheels, so it's reasonable that the weight transfer of the TT onto the tongue could be in the range of 50%. That's 3-4 times the static tongue weight and bound to have dramatic effect on the handling of the TV as several thousand pounds of force is suddenly applied on the hitch ball—far more than the W/D hardware can compensate for.
Hmmm -- if what you say is true, I'm wondering why receivers and WD hardware aren't being destroyed everytime a TT's brakes are applied. Let's assume my 5000# Award has its CG 3' above the ground and the brakes are causing it to decelerate at 0.25G. The added downward force on the ball would be about 5000*0.25*3/18 = 208#. This might add about 300# to the Explorer's rear axle and remove about 100# from the front. At the same time, the TV is also braking, so that causes some of the weight of the TV to be moved from its rear axle to the front. Seems to me that the added downward force on the ball would help compensate for some of the TV load shift.
Steve wrote: Worse, if this happens in a turn, then that downward force on the ball tends to lift the front wheels of the TV AND the forward momentum of the TT that can't stop as quickly as the TV pushes on a 5' long lever. The result is sway with a simultaneous reduction in steering traction. Not pretty.
If this is true, I surprised we're not reading about many more TT accidents. If the TT is braking, the TV probably is braking also. If the TV is braking, load from the weight of the TV is being shifted onto the TV's front axle. I'm guessing that the net result of braking is to increase the load on the TV's front axle. Ron
SteveRankin wrote:
Ron Gratz wrote:
Depending on the magnitudes of the vertical force and the torque, the load on both axles could be increased, and this would increase the steering effectiveness of all tires. Or, only the rear axle load might be increased. However, since the rear tires also provide steering forces, increasing the rear axle load can also improve steering effectiveness.
What you just said is that if the vertical load is between the axles the steering effectiveness is improved and you also said that if the vertical load is on only on the rear axle the steering effectiveness is improved. In other words, you're saying that the steering effectiveness is improved no matter where the vertical load is applied. If that was true, why do Porsches drive so differently than Camry's? And if the steering effectiveness is improved with additional weight on the rear axle, it seems there is little reason to spend money on a W/D setup because the steering of the TV already improved with the weight of the TT on hitch ball.
No, I did not say, "the steering effectiveness is improved no matter where the vertical load is applied." I did say, "---the load on both axles could be increased---". In order for the load on both axles to be increased, the resultant of the added force would have to be between the axles. And, part of the reason people spend money on a WD system is to prevent load from being removed from the TV's front axle.
Ron
Ron Gratz wrote:
SteveRankin wrote:
---The folks at ProPride are no dumbies when about marketing their hitch. Offering the customer a full refund on a Dual-Cam if they come back and upgrade to the ProPride is an excellent idea.---
That might be an excellent idea; but, I don't think that's what they're offering.
Anyone who's counting on a full refund ought to check with them first.
Ron
Ron:
You are incorrect.
I checked with the president of ProPride and he informed me they would offer a full refund.
Check out this link:
http://www.propridehitch.com/trailer_hit........raight_line_dual_cam_hitch.php?item_id=3
Here's the quote from the ProPride website:
"Purchase with confidence backed by the ProPride Towing Comfort Guarantee!
If this product does not provide you with the towing stability you desire you can apply 100% of the purchase price toward purchasing a ProPride 3P. We have you covered for total towing comfort and stability.
"Russell
'12 GMC Sierra 3500HD SRW
'13 Excel Winslow 34IKE
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote:
The airfoils on a Formula 1 car create a "downforce" which improves cornering and lateral stability. A properly adjusted WD system also can produce a stabilizing downforce on the TV.
1) Yes, the ground effects & airfoils on a Formula 1 car create tremendous downforce, which increases tire traction--not stability. There is a difference. 2) However, that downforce is created without a significant amount of weight, hence a net gain in performance. However, when you add weight to a vehicle, the gain in traction is more than offset by the gain in weight and performance is degraded. Often significantly. 3) If adding weight improved the performance of the vehicle, then race cars wouldn't use outrageously expensive exotic materials to reduce weight. In fact, race sanctioning bodies impose additional weight as a penalty, AND the race cars faced with such a penalty always try to mount the weight as close to the center of the vehicle as possible because they know that it DOES matter where that weight is located.
1) Please explain why adding downforce on the axles cannot improve stability.
2) What you say might be true. However, as I attempted to explain several posts back, when you attach a TT to a TV, the mass of the TT remains with the TT. There is a difference between transferring load and transferring mass. When you attach a TT to a TV, you add vertical force to the TV but you do NOT add mass to the TV.
3) Airfoils do not add significant masss to the Formula 1 car and hooking up to a TT does not add any mass to the TV.
Ron Gratz wrote:
Not at all. I said, "The additional vertical force imposed on the TV, when properly distributed between front and rear axles, can improve braking, steering, and lateral stability." I did not say that the improvement is enough to eliminate the need for sway control. And, I did not say that the potential braking improvement is sufficient to stop the additional mass of the TT.
Steve wrote: Well, if you're saying that the additional weight improves braking, steering and lateral stability then why would you need sway control with all of those improvements? Especially, if you're towing such a lightweight, low slung and aerodynamically advantaged TT?
Because, as I indicated before, the improvement in TV stability might not be sufficient to eliminate the need for sway control. Ron
Quote:
Ron:
You are incorrect.
I checked with the president of ProPride and he informed me they would offer a full refund.
Check out this link:
http://www.propridehitch.com/trailer_hit........raight_line_dual_cam_hitch.php?item_id=3
Here's the quote from the ProPride website:
"Purchase with confidence backed by the ProPride Towing Comfort Guarantee!
If this product does not provide you with the towing stability you desire you can apply 100% of the purchase price toward purchasing a ProPride 3P. We have you covered for total towing comfort and stability.
"1) Well, it appears they've upped the ante. Last week, a post on their forum stated that they would give a 50% credit toward the purchase of a 3P. Now they are saying they will give a 100% credit.
2) You said, "they would offer a full refund." Does this mean one could purchase a Dual Cam and then return it and get back 100% of the purchase price without subsequently purchasing a 3P?
Ron
SteveRankin wrote: Ron Gratz wrote: Ron Gratz wrote:
The common friction-bar sway control is adujsted at the factory to produce a maximum torque of about 500 ft-lbs.
No, you're confusing force and torque.
No, I'm not. I think you are. You said the friction-bar sway control produces a maximum torque of about 500 ft-lbs. The friction-bar sway control doesn't produce any torque at all. It produces friction which resists the yaw force of the TT. The motion of the TT produces a force, which when applied to a lever (the 5' that's the typical distance between the ball and the rear axle) produces torque.
Steve, I suggest you take a look at Figure 2 of these Sway Control Installation Instructions.
The friction bar is factory adjusted to produce a friction FORCE of 1100#. Figure 2 shows that the friction bar FORCE vector passes through the front ball attachment which is 5.5" from the ball coupler. This means that the FORCE of 1100# multiplied by the DISTANCE of 5.5" produces a TORQUE of 6,050 lb-in which is equal to 504 lb-ft (I rounded the value down to 500).
The force in the friction bar is opposed by an equal and opposite force in the ball coupler, so there is no net force acting on the hitch head -- only the torque. As far as sway control TORQUE goes, it makes no difference whether the distance from the ball coupler to the TV's rear axle is 5' or 1'. If the friction bar produces a FORCE of 1100#, the TORQUE applied to the TV will be about 500 lb-ft.
Steve wrote: Since the friction-bar sway control is mounted at the ball, the overall resistance of the friction sway control is very much affected by the length of the lever the TT has to exert its force on the TV. So, if the friction sway control can develop up to 500# of resistive force at the ball, that
Looks as though something got lost here. However, the friction bar produces about 1100# of FORCE, and via its connection to the hitch head, a TORQUE of about 500 lb-ft is exerted on the hitch.
Ron Gratz wrote:
True, but I believe your attempt at applying physics has led you to grossly overestimate the effect of sway-control torque on the steering process.
Steve wrote: Grossly overestimated? Look at it this way Ron, a friction device that has the ability to tame the yaw of a 10,000# TT logically has the ability to also affect the yaw of the 5,000# TV it's connected to. Your analysis of the tire forces necessary to turn the vehicle depended on the 12' WB of the TV, but didn't correct for the 5' lever the TT & friction device has.
That's because the "5' lever" has nothing to do with how much sway control TORQUE is applied to the TV.
Steve wrote: Additionally, the friction device has two states: stationary and sliding. Very often, the stationary friction is several factors higher than the sliding friction. So, if the factory 500# is stationary, then the amount of resistance to yaw produced by the friction device drops significantly as soon as it slides. OTOH, if the 500# represents sliding friction, then the initial resistance to yaw is much higher, which when combined with the leverage can dramatically increase the amount of steering force required to turn the TV.
The friction FORCE of 1100# is for static friction. For steel on steel, a typical value of static friction coefficient is 0.7, and a typical value of kinetic (sliding) friction coefficient is 0.6. I don't know what materials other than steel are used in the typical friction bar. At any rate, if the bar slides, the FORCE and TORQUE probably will be somewhat smaller instead of larger than when the bar is not sliding. Ron
* This post was edited 12/16/08 07:43pm by Ron Gratz *
SteveRankin wrote:
There is a reason why all those folks with humongous 5vers drive around with pickups just like mine with no sway control at all. It's because their 5ver has no leverage on the TV so they don't need sway control. Figuring out how to make a hitch that takes advantage of that basic principle is so much more elegant AND effective than any friction hitch ever built.
Ron Gratz wrote:
If you want "elegance" and don't mind paying for it, go for it. You don't have to justify the purchase of a Hensley Arrow on a "need" or "superiority" basis.
Steve wrote: Ah, we've gotten to the crux of the discussion. See, I never said "elegance". That implies something entirely different. But, I do like elegant solutions. Elegant solutions are by definition simple and effective. The PullRite hitch is a truly elegant solution. It's easily mistaken for a conventional hitch most of the time, yet it completely eliminates sway under all conditions and situations AND imposes NO loss of performance compromises on the TV. And it is bonehead simple & 95% out of sight—elegant.
OMG, now we're debating "elegant" versus "elegance". Perhaps it's time to bring this to a close. BTW, I've never owned a Monaco Dynasty. Ron
Quote:
I checked with the president of ProPride and he informed me they would offer a full refund.
Check out this link:
http://www.propridehitch.com/trailer_hit........raight_line_dual_cam_hitch.php?item_id=3
Here's the quote from the ProPride website:
"Purchase with confidence backed by the ProPride Towing Comfort Guarantee!
If this product does not provide you with the towing stability you desire you can apply 100% of the purchase price toward purchasing a ProPride 3P. We have you covered for total towing comfort and stability.
"Indeed, Sean has upped the ante. Excellent idea he has there, IMHO. Folks can buy a dual cam setup, if it works fine for them, great. If not, they lose NOTHING in stepping up to a ProPride.
* This post was edited 12/16/08 02:03pm by an administrator/moderator *
Ron Gratz wrote:
Quote:
Ron:
You are incorrect.
I checked with the president of ProPride and he informed me they would offer a full refund.
Check out this link:
http://www.propridehitch.com/trailer_hit........raight_line_dual_cam_hitch.php?item_id=3
Here's the quote from the ProPride website:
"Purchase with confidence backed by the ProPride Towing Comfort Guarantee!
If this product does not provide you with the towing stability you desire you can apply 100% of the purchase price toward purchasing a ProPride 3P. We have you covered for total towing comfort and stability.
"1) Well, it appears they've upped the ante. Last week, a post on their forum stated that they would give a 50% credit toward the purchase of a 3P. Now they are saying they will give a 100% credit.
2) You said, "they would offer a full refund." Does this mean one could purchase a Dual Cam and then return it and get back 100% of the purchase price without subsequently purchasing a 3P?
Ron
1) In my case ANY amount for the dual cam laying in my garage would have been nice. Even a few percent.
2) I'm not sure why that statement "you can apply 100% of the purchase price toward the purchase of a 3P" isn't clear, Ron. But, from what I know about them their return policy on all the products is more liberal than many others. It is 60 days on the 3P.
dirtengineer wrote:
You guys are giving me a headache.
You guys are even putting the other engineers to sleep, so there's no hope for a marketing guy like me.....
Moderator - TT Forum
By the way, Ron, thanks for the links to AL-KO products you linked elsewhere.Another take on the Hensley is this. First, for those who claim their conventional hitch method has not caused them to experience any sway, I'll bet I can follow you for only a few miles on a day with a bit of wind -- nothing high -- and with a video camera show you that the suspension on your TT is loading up on one side, regularly. Or on just a bad road, no wind. Or as you cut around a slow-mover. Etc.
In short, it (sway) is happening ALL THE TIME. Better trailer design is the only real cure. The best band-aid is hitch rigging. And the best anti-sway rigging gives the driver -- the weak link -- a better chance in that short moment between an incipient problem and one that is threatening catastrophe.
I'll finish with this. I have verfied I can violently, repeatedly snap my rig from one lane to another at over 50 mph. Constant lane changes, no "straightening-out" between changes the day I had my Hensley installed.
At what speed can your rig do this? How close is this speed to your travel speed, and what does it take to reach that "safe" speed?
From my travel speed of 63 mph, I need only drop from OD to fifth, touch the brakes, and I can follow any line I choose. No grabbing the trailer brake, no dancing on the pedals to get the speed down, no white-knuckle work.
1990 35' SILVER STREAK Sterling, 9k GVWR
2004 DODGE RAM 2WD 305/555 ISB, QC SRW LB NV-5600, 9k GVWR
Hensley Arrow; 11-cpm solo, 17-cpm towing fuel cost
'68Monaco440HP wrote:
(Ya'll shouldn't mess with "Ron Gratz", as "he" is actually a product of a Lawrence Livermore AI project from the 1980's).
Ahhh, those were the good old days. But, I decided to escape from the AI program when it became obvious that artificial intelligence was no match for natural stupidity.
Another take on the Hensley is this. First, for those who claim their conventional hitch method has not caused them to experience any sway, I'll bet I can follow you for only a few miles on a day with a bit of wind -- nothing high -- and with a video camera show you that the suspension on your TT is loading up on one side, regularly. Or on just a bad road, no wind. Or as you cut around a slow-mover. Etc.
There are many different definitions of "sway", but I certainly agree that the uneven side-to-side loading you have described can lead to yaw instability.
In short, it (sway) is happening ALL THE TIME. Better trailer design is the only real cure.
Certainly, the cure starts with better trailer design. Other essentials are proper fabrication, proper loading, proper operation, etc.
The best band-aid is hitch rigging. And the best anti-sway rigging gives the driver -- the weak link -- a better chance in that short moment between an incipient problem and one that is threatening catastrophe.
I agree 100% that the driver is the weak link. IMO, when the TT exerts a lateral force which causes yawing of the TV, most drivers will instinctively react with steering inputs which will increase the yawing and might lead to loss of control. Some drivers are able to overcome instinct and avoid making adverse steering inputs. The HA significantly reduces the TT-induced yawing of the TV and reduces the effect of de-stabilizing feedback due to incorrect steering adjustments.
I'll finish with this. I have verfied I can violently, repeatedly snap my rig from one lane to another at over 50 mph. Constant lane changes, no "straightening-out" between changes the day I had my Hensley installed.
I'm guessing that you have a "well-behaved" trailer and are not just using your HA as a "band-aid" as you mentioned above. Some people do use an HA as a "band-aid" for a trailer which is not well-behaved and/or is too large for the TV; and they might not experience the same response to a violent maneuver -- especially if they are steering instinctively. Ron
Is A Hensley Hitch Worth The Money
Source: https://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/22179580/print/true.cfm
Posted by: curryneway1990.blogspot.com
0 Response to "Is A Hensley Hitch Worth The Money"
Post a Comment