Ford - Unhitched vs Hitched Fender Height

Bob Landry wrote:
---I'm just curious why you wouldn't want all of the original weight transfered back to the front end for stability. Some manufacturers, like Toyota, tell you to do that..

Bob, I think the rationale for returning the front axle to its unhitched load (or even more than the unhitched) was more about removing load from the rear axle and less about adding load to the front axle.

Now it seems the concern for good yaw stability (positive understeer gradient) is receiving attention equal to the concern for rear axle load.

Ron

ScottG wrote:
Don't be surprised if you can't get enough weight transferred forward to lower the front of the truck very much - let alone dropping it as much as the back. And if you manage to do so, it may handle strangely - feeling like it's pivoting in the middle. If the front is stiff enough you may be transferring weight but not pushing the springs down much.
The engineers are often wrong on this one.

I think Ford and others are using front-end height only as an indicator of axle load. They probably assume many more people will attempt to measure height changes than will go to a scales and measure load changes.
Unfortunately, it's the load changes which are the important parameter.

And, nobody should attempt to drop the front as much as the rear -- inspite of what some WDH sales people might tell you.

I'm not sure what you mean by the engineers often being wrong on this one -- but I'm going to disagree with your statement anyway.

Ron

Ron Gratz wrote:

ScottG wrote:
Don't be surprised if you can't get enough weight transferred forward to lower the front of the truck very much - let alone dropping it as much as the back. And if you manage to do so, it may handle strangely - feeling like it's pivoting in the middle. If the front is stiff enough you may be transferring weight but not pushing the springs down much.
The engineers are often wrong on this one.

I think Ford and others are using front-end height only as an indicator of axle load. They probably assume many more people will attempt to measure height changes than will go to a scales and measure load changes.
Unfortunately, it's the load changes which are the important parameter.

And, nobody should attempt to drop the front as much as the rear -- inspite of what some WDH sales people might tell you.

I'm not sure what you mean by the engineers often being wrong on this one -- but I'm going to disagree with your statement anyway.

Ron

And I agree with Ron. I think many people go wrong trying to either get the same amount of drop front to rear, or to just use the WD to make the truck ride level, and neither is the purpose of WD. I think the general opinion now is the get the front right and let the rear take care of itself.

JBarca wrote:
........................................................In my case I found running the front about 75 to 100# lighter on the front created a more stable tow. This was not from the oversteer concern, but do to the F350 rear suspension. When I returned the front to unhitched height, the heavy TW camper rocked the back of the truck to a noticeable point.

When I backed off a little WD, the 1 ton helper springs (overloads) just kissed the frame brackets and created a global shift in left to right stability.

The F350 way up high in it's suspension when the truck is empty is fairly soft, when you load it, it then becomes more stiff.

..........................................

Same way with my Silverado 1500. My Silverado tows and drives much better with more compression on the rear springs than full restoration gave. I have Timbrens installed and they have little or no effect when all the weight is transferred back to the front axle, yet give a more solid feel when they are allowed to carry part of the rear axle load. This happens with about 50% restoration. I may be confusing some people, but I know what works for me.

Bob Landry wrote:

Ron Gratz wrote:

ScottG wrote:
Don't be surprised if you can't get enough weight transferred forward to lower the front of the truck very much - let alone dropping it as much as the back. And if you manage to do so, it may handle strangely - feeling like it's pivoting in the middle. If the front is stiff enough you may be transferring weight but not pushing the springs down much.
The engineers are often wrong on this one.

I think Ford and others are using front-end height only as an indicator of axle load. They probably assume many more people will attempt to measure height changes than will go to a scales and measure load changes.
Unfortunately, it's the load changes which are the important parameter.

And, nobody should attempt to drop the front as much as the rear -- inspite of what some WDH sales people might tell you.

I'm not sure what you mean by the engineers often being wrong on this one -- but I'm going to disagree with your statement anyway.

Ron

And I agree with Ron. I think many people go wrong trying to either get the same amount of drop front to rear, or to just use the WD to make the truck ride level, and neither is the purpose of WD. I think the general opinion now is the get the front right and let the rear take care of itself.

And I agree with both of you. What I meant by engineers being wrong is I've read directions for hitches and seen people report that their truck maker says both ends should drop to same amount.

BTW, anybody who thinks engineers know everything have never worked with them like I have. Sometimes they come up with the most ridiculous idea's and unless someone with some common sense is there to give them a verbal dumb-slap, the idea may get pushed through.

ScottG wrote:
---What I meant by engineers being wrong is I've read directions for hitches and seen people report that their truck maker says both ends should drop to same amount.

Thanks for the clarification.

I would not assume that WDH adjustment instructions requiring equal drop were written by engineers. If they were, it probably was done back in the 70's when that was necessary for towing with the family sedan. It appears that some WDH manufacturers never have updated their instructions.

And, I've never read or heard of any truck manufacturer who specifies equal drop.
Ford, Chevrolet/GM, and Toyota all say return front to unitched or higher height.
Ram says a WDH "When used in accordance with the manufacturer’s directions, it provides for a more level ride, ---". However, "a more level ride" should not be taken to mean the front and rear will drop the same amount.

If you know of any specific truck manufacturer instructions which say the WDH should be adjusted to cause equal front and rear drop, I would be very interested in seeing it.

Ron

TomG2 wrote:

JBarca wrote:
........................................................In my case I found running the front about 75 to 100# lighter on the front created a more stable tow. This was not from the oversteer concern, but do to the F350 rear suspension. When I returned the front to unhitched height, the heavy TW camper rocked the back of the truck to a noticeable point.

When I backed off a little WD, the 1 ton helper springs (overloads) just kissed the frame brackets and created a global shift in left to right stability.

The F350 way up high in it's suspension when the truck is empty is fairly soft, when you load it, it then becomes more stiff.

..........................................

Same way with my Silverado 1500. My Silverado tows and drives much better with more compression on the rear springs than full restoration gave. I have Timbrens installed and they have little or no effect when all the weight is transferred back to the front axle, yet give a more solid feel when they are allowed to carry part of the rear axle load. This happens with about 50% restoration. I may be confusing some people, but I know what works for me.

Hi Tom,

In my case and maybe even in yours, my rear helper springs act like a rear sway bar on the rear axle to the frame to help stiffen the left to right stability. Now that we see you have Timbrens, they could be acting to help stiffen the left to right stability. And the only way you or I can get this to happen is by either more bed weight and or less WD. I have more bed weight, more tongue weight and a little less WD.

This may help explain to others that on your truck less WD allows more left to right stability due to the Timbrens coming in contact with the truck frame and stiffening up the back of the truck. That may help lessen the confusion.

Glad to here your rig works well.

John

Lynnmor wrote:
I have a F250. If I bring the front back to level the rear wheels will spin easily. Just follow the manual.

Agreed. I tried to explain this on another thread, but they did not seem to get it. I like the added traction that 50% restoration gives. Think of the burnouts you could do with enough weight distribution!

TomG2 wrote:

Lynnmor wrote:
I have a F250. If I bring the front back to level the rear wheels will spin easily. Just follow the manual.

Agreed. I tried to explain this on another thread, but they did not seem to get it. I like the added traction that 50% restoration gives. Think of the burnouts you could do with enough weight distribution!

I recall seeing a video posted a while back of a front wheel drive car from the 70s I think... They wrenched the weight distribution so much it lifted the rear wheels of the car off the ground. The took off the tires, braced the hitch so it couldn't pivot, and drove off with the trailer!