bpconversion goose neck conversion

Grit dog wrote:
My first blush is that you were tongue light when loaded and you confirmed it. And the pic sure looks like the axles could should move back a little. Especially when describing the payload.
Looks like they didn’t design the axle placement right if you gave them the right loading info.
Not sure the gn conversion will help if you don’t have enough tongue weight in the first place.
Upside is looks like moving axles would be real easy on that rig.
Just spitballing but you may be able to just weld new spring mounts on and extend the brake wires. Bing bang easy. Don’t even bother cutting the old ones off unless they interfere.
But if backing the rail in and pulling a little more weight up front works that seems even easier.

They were informed of the length, width, height as well as the weight of the sand rail. also that 60% of that 2k lbs is on the back half. I specifically requested 20% tw. According to there #'s, I received 16% tw ...... 20% tw def would've been better, but it is what it is now. i know they cannot hit that target dead on and prob didn't try too hard, as they prob knew they couldn't. I really wonder if a 32' oal would've offered a little better balance.

I am not opposed to moving axles and its wide open underneath. I didn't want the skirting below the wall. I know it looks better but one blow out and it could be junk. I also plan on some small tool boxs mounted in those areas.....down the road.

I don't want to winch it in backwards if possible..... but I keep coming back to that fact. I guess I will have to try it and see but I will be weighing everything on the cat scale first. I will also have to figure out how to drop the rear fresh water tank to add 2 more tie downs. The current tie down configuration was layed out in the floor specifically for the rail being pulled In.

I was just curious if anyone had tried one and what changes it made. I know dead weight will add to but not as much as one would hope. Curious how much etc etc.