length to wheel base ratio

SoCalDesertRider wrote:
I suppose a motorhome manufacturer can list it in whatever unconventional way they want. For commercial trucks, the standard is center of tandems, on a 3 axle tractor.

:S A tag axle DP only has two tires on the tag unlike your truck example. The four tires on the drive axle with 20K lbs on them will win over the two with only 7K on them when a DP is turning... even without decreasing the tag's air bags pressure. The MH manufactures know the correct numbers.

J-Rooster wrote:
I respect all of you, but your getting to technical for my pea brain! I just get in my Class A with a smile and just drive. Before I retired (truckdriver) I had to deal with bridge weights for any State that I drove in. Now life is simple for me just get in and drive!

X2 - I hope some carpet walker did the math on ours before I bought it :)

PS - go fast over bridges you are too heavy for - doesn't work for low clearances.

I respect all of you, but your getting to technical for my pea brain! I just get in my Class A with a smile and just drive. Before I retired (truckdriver) I had to deal with bridge weights for any State that I drove in. Now life is simple for me just get in and drive!

RLS7201 wrote:

barmcd wrote:

RLS7201 wrote:
Wheel base to over all length ratio is more forum/internet nonsense.
MY 95 Bounder has a ratio of .479 and it drives great! 190" wheel base, 33' long. Best thing is the turning. Then there is the diesel owners talking about rear over hang on the gassers. My gasser has a 13' over hang. Diesel pushers have a 12'+ over hang, depending on chassis. More forum/internet chatter. Bah Humbug!
You'll see folks telling how horrible or how great their rig drives, no matter the ratio or total length. No one can document the ratio thing.
If set up correctly, they all drive well.

Richard

It's called physics.

OK, any one can say a work. Can you detail what you said?

Richard

Sure, the formula for figuring out the dynamic forces on a wheeled vehicle includes the following components: center of gravity, weight of the vehicle, wheelbase of vehicle, height of components above ground level, acceleration or deceleration of the vehicle and a gravity constant.



While it seems like the size of the rear overhang won't make a difference in the handling of a vehicle, it does affect the forces the wheels experience because one component is the distance between the center of gravity and the axle ("d"). A large rear overhang moves the center of gravity toward the rear of a coach.

barmcd wrote:

RLS7201 wrote:
Wheel base to over all length ratio is more forum/internet nonsense.
MY 95 Bounder has a ratio of .479 and it drives great! 190" wheel base, 33' long. Best thing is the turning. Then there is the diesel owners talking about rear over hang on the gassers. My gasser has a 13' over hang. Diesel pushers have a 12'+ over hang, depending on chassis. More forum/internet chatter. Bah Humbug!
You'll see folks telling how horrible or how great their rig drives, no matter the ratio or total length. No one can document the ratio thing.
If set up correctly, they all drive well.

Richard

It's called physics.

OK, any one can say a work. Can you detail what you said?

Richard

I suppose a motorhome manufacturer can list it in whatever unconventional way they want. For commercial trucks, the standard is center of tandems, on a 3 axle tractor.

wolfe10 wrote:

Mile High wrote:

SoCalDesertRider wrote:

Mile High wrote:
So my wheelbase is listed as 279+tag. At 279 with 522 overall, I'm .534. Do I count the length to the tag?

Wheelbase of tandem axle chassis are measured from front axle to center of tandems (center of tandems is the midpoint between the first and second rear axles).

That doesn't seem to be how Winnebago lists it. I'm trying to find a diagram.

But, it DOES give a reasonable approximation of the handling impact of the tag axle configuration.

They may just use the distance from the front axle to the driven axle. This is somewhat valid if the tag axle can be unloaded for manuevering and you are trying to convince customers that your coach is not too cumbersome in tight spots. Changing the air pressure in the tag axles's air bags does effectively change the wheelbase.

Mile High wrote:

SoCalDesertRider wrote:

Mile High wrote:
So my wheelbase is listed as 279+tag. At 279 with 522 overall, I'm .534. Do I count the length to the tag?

Wheelbase of tandem axle chassis are measured from front axle to center of tandems (center of tandems is the midpoint between the first and second rear axles).

That doesn't seem to be how Winnebago lists it. I'm trying to find a diagram.

But, it DOES give a reasonable approximation of the handling impact of the tag axle configuration.

SoCalDesertRider wrote:

Mile High wrote:
So my wheelbase is listed as 279+tag. At 279 with 522 overall, I'm .534. Do I count the length to the tag?

Wheelbase of tandem axle chassis are measured from front axle to center of tandems (center of tandems is the midpoint between the first and second rear axles).

That doesn't seem to be how Winnebago lists it. I'm trying to find a diagram.

If you tow something behind your motorhome, especially a trailer with heavy tongue weight, you want the rear axle to be as far back as possible.

I would not want a chassis where the wheelbase length was less than 2/3 (66 percent) of the overall chassis length. I would prefer it be around 3/4 (75 percent) of overall length.