Wheelbase to length ratio. What does it mean?

JimM68 wrote:

Gjac wrote:
I have not heard of this posted before but would think if the MH had equal weight on all 6 tires this would be a well balanced MH and should ride well. I would be interested to hear from folks that were knowledgeable about chassis design to see if this were to affect the ride quality more than the wheel base ratio.

Unfortunately, that is a gross oversimplyfication of the engineering problems involved.

If the wieght rating of the tires and wheels were all that mattered, maybe. But there are 2 tires in front, and 4 or maybe 6 in back.

And while those 2 in front might carry 14,000 pounds (7000 each), or maybe more, 4 in back on a single axle are federally mandated to carry only 20k total, or 5000 each, even though they are the same size tire with the same load rating as the two in front.

And really, none of this matters a hill of beans to the handling of the coach.
Besides the weight balance end to end, you also need to look at the front overhang, rear overhang, and wheelbase.
And there is a whole lot more having to do with the overall design of the suspension, and it's resistance to roll and pitch (including under braking)

I agree there are many factors with perhaps the driver's skill set being very important. Working with our two 16 year old permitted drivers I see how they over steer. This is worse in vehicles with very worn front end parts as can be the case with some MH's.

All I know is our 32' 1992 P30 Chevy chassis that it is 33' bumper to bumper with no real weight paste the front tire and a tail of 10' with a 208" Wheel Base handles like a dream. It left GM as a 190" chassis per the parts build sheet. I expect the 18" addition makes a work of difference. We are just under 15K pounds which means we are not over weight over all or per axle.