Help with hitch / tongue weight

Ron Gratz wrote:

LarryJM wrote:
Again you also need to take all this up with those clearly agreeing with me to clarify for your better understanding if you care to learn what I think is your misreading of such things as this cargo before or after the WDH is engaged, etc.

I have provided clearly that TONGUE WT as it pretains to WDH and I believe the receiver capacities/specs includes CARGO ADDED after the TV REAR AXLE ... PERIOD.

Larry, you are going to have to help me understand what you are saying.
Can you please provide some straight answers to my questions which follow your statements?

LarryJM wrote:
---Hook up your trailer run across the scales and then have someone stand on your rear bumper and do a second run across the scales and all your weights including those on the TT axles will change. That can only happen if the "TONGUE WEIGHT" has changed unless you have adjusted your WDH system.

When the load on the TT axles increases -- will the downward vertical load applied to the receiver a) increase, b) decrease, or c) stay the same? Why?

LarryJM wrote:

And all I'm saying is that this additional load should and can be considered "TONGUE WEIGHT" since that is what the WDH is designed to do and that is to DISTRIBUTE TONGUE WT. which in this case included that extra cargo wt. that constructively appears at the ball/coupler position.

I understand that "extra cargo wt." is weight which is added to the rear of the TV after the WDH is adjusted.
Can you please explain what you mean by "that extra cargo wt. that constructively appears at the ball/coupler position"?

LarryJM wrote:
---Having extra wt show up on the TT axles w/o physically adding any wt to the TT can only come from what we typically classify as tongue wt that is being redistributed by the WDH to the various axles.---

Do you believe that when the rear of the TV is forced down by adding cargo after WD is applied, the lowering of the rear of the TV and front of the TT will cause the load on the WD bars to increase?
Do you believe that increasing the load on the WD bars will result in a torque which causes the downward force on the TT's axles to increase without actually adding any weight (mass) to the TT?
Do you believe that increasing the downward force on the TT's axles without increasing the weight (mass) of the TT must be accompanied by a reduction in the vertical force acting on the TV's receiver?

LarryJM wrote:
---You may think that the the cargo is not what is added after the WDH is adjusted, but if you read carefully the context that the quotes I gave from etrailer and Cequent from that is IMO not the case.---

Actually, I believe that "cargo" is what is added both before and after the WDH is adjusted -- and all of it is part of the TV's payload.
When cargo is added after the WDH is adjusted -- will the downward vertical force applied to the receiver a) increase, b) decrease, or c) stay the same? Why?

Ron

Ron,

I'm not going to play word games with you. I understand what etrailer and CEQUENT say and agree with it and have tried to say the same in this thread, it is you that are having some issue with what they have said. If not then just agree with those quotes and we are thru, no questions needed to be asked or answered. I stated the fact that this Cargo added after the axle is to be included to the tongue wt of the trailer only tongue wt as seen say on a Sherline scale for sizing you WDH system and I believe it would apply to what is called the tongue wt. in a WDH configuration for a receiver. This "CARGO" wt that both etrailer and CEQUENT are talking about is something that is
ADDED meaning it wasn't there and is the only change in you setup. It wasn't there when the WDH was first adjusted or setup because it is typically temporary as illustrated in the CEQUENT mention of things like gas cans, tools, etc. which are items not normally in the TV, but are added after you have setup your WDH system just like specifically my 4 fuel cans that are empty until my first fuel stop and then are typically used in a day or two. This is EXACTLY what both etrailer and CEQUENT has also said and that's all I really need to know. The minutia of what goes where, and how this or that happens at the level you want to talk about is unimportant to me. Now the end resulting weights axle wise is of course important. I tried to give reasonable example like this standing on the bumper to illustrate what I was saying, but you seem to want to nitpik and get down in the really unimportant details of analyzing that to death and which this analysis you are giving only you and maybe one other really understands so we don't know if it's even correct or not ... I have no earthly idea and quite frankly could care less since nobody else tries to do what you are doing swimming down in this to me basically meaningless minutia.

You can go ahead and get down in all this what I call gibberish since I really don't care to try and put numbers into some formula which non of us except you are sure are even correct as you are trying to use them.

Instead of asking me questions why haven't you addressed and explained with counter authorative references SPECIFICALLY COUNTERING THIS ADDED CARGO AFT OF THE TV AXLE that both etrailer and CEQUENT among others are saying you should include or add to tongue wt for sizing your WDH SYSTEM. You evidently don't think they are correct so why don't YOU explain clearly why they are in error which I haven't seen I don't think. You should also contact them and have them correct their errors if you believe what they are saying to do is not correct as you seem to believe. I believe what they say is true and correct and you are the one not apparantely believing them.

Larry

LarryJM wrote:
Again you also need to take all this up with those clearly agreeing with me to clarify for your better understanding if you care to learn what I think is your misreading of such things as this cargo before or after the WDH is engaged, etc.

I have provided clearly that TONGUE WT as it pretains to WDH and I believe the receiver capacities/specs includes CARGO ADDED after the TV REAR AXLE ... PERIOD.

Larry, you are going to have to help me understand what you are saying.
Can you please provide some straight answers to my questions which follow your statements?

LarryJM wrote:
---Hook up your trailer run across the scales and then have someone stand on your rear bumper and do a second run across the scales and all your weights including those on the TT axles will change. That can only happen if the "TONGUE WEIGHT" has changed unless you have adjusted your WDH system.

When the load on the TT axles increases -- will the downward vertical load applied to the receiver a) increase, b) decrease, or c) stay the same? Why?

LarryJM wrote:

And all I'm saying is that this additional load should and can be considered "TONGUE WEIGHT" since that is what the WDH is designed to do and that is to DISTRIBUTE TONGUE WT. which in this case included that extra cargo wt. that constructively appears at the ball/coupler position.

I understand that "extra cargo wt." is weight which is added to the rear of the TV after the WDH is adjusted.
Can you please explain what you mean by "that extra cargo wt. that constructively appears at the ball/coupler position"?

LarryJM wrote:
---Having extra wt show up on the TT axles w/o physically adding any wt to the TT can only come from what we typically classify as tongue wt that is being redistributed by the WDH to the various axles.---

Do you believe that when the rear of the TV is forced down by adding cargo after WD is applied, the lowering of the rear of the TV and front of the TT will cause the load on the WD bars to increase?
Do you believe that increasing the load on the WD bars will result in a torque which causes the downward force on the TT's axles to increase without actually adding any weight (mass) to the TT?
Do you believe that increasing the downward force on the TT's axles without increasing the weight (mass) of the TT must be accompanied by a reduction in the vertical force acting on the TV's receiver?

LarryJM wrote:
---You may think that the the cargo is not what is added after the WDH is adjusted, but if you read carefully the context that the quotes I gave from etrailer and Cequent from that is IMO not the case.---

Actually, I believe that "cargo" is what is added both before and after the WDH is adjusted -- and all of it is part of the TV's payload.
When cargo is added after the WDH is adjusted -- will the downward vertical force applied to the receiver a) increase, b) decrease, or c) stay the same? Why?

Ron

Larry, your experts simply want to sell you a larger more costly hitch. It is called marketing.

You run your van with weight behind the axle without the trailer hooked up. What you fail to see (or will not admit to see) is that hooking up the trailer ( without shifting that aft weight) is no different than running without the trailer hooked up. That is the whole point. A truck is designed to run with a load in the bed and dropping a trailer on doesn't change that.

Ron Gratz wrote:

LarryJM wrote:
The problem with what you are now saying is that you have already conceeded that applying extra cargo wt aft of the TV rear axle, a portion of that will show up as an additional wt. on the TT axles.---

Larry, it's not a "concession". It's a simple fact of physics.

LarryJM wrote:
---Having extra wt show up on the TT axles w/o physically adding any wt to the TT can only come from what we typically classify as tongue wt that is being redistributed by the WDH to the various axles.---

Having "extra wt show up on the TT axles w/o physically adding any wt to the TT" results from torque which is applied to the hitch head by the WDH bars. It does not come from a redistribution of "tongue weight".

A WDH doesn't redistribute "tongue weight" -- it redistributes reaction forces acting on the TV's front axle, the TV's rear axle, and the TT's axle(s).
In fact, you could set up a TT to have ZERO tongue weight and the WDH still could redistribute axle reaction forces.
The WDH removes load from the TV's rear axle and distributes that removed load to the TV's front axle and the TT's axle(s).

LarryJM wrote:
---Let's say that extra 50lbs you have used is because of an extra 200lbs applied on the rear bumper of the TV then just where does the other 150lbs show up axle wise. If some shows up on the rear axle and some on the front axle of the TV as I believe it will then that can be only attributed to 200lbs added tongue wt. that has now been redistributed in those amount among the three axles (taken say all axles on the trailer as one wt.)

In other words please explain how that extra 50lbs you have mentioned gets transferred to the TT axles by adding wt at the rear of the TV back axle.

As stated before -- there is no actual weight (mass) added to the TT.
When the rear of the TV is pushed down, the WD bars produce a torque which causes increased upward force (50# for this example) on the TT's axle(s).
A simple free body diagram will show that the upward force of 50# acting on the TT's axle(s) will cause the downward force on the hitch/receiver to be reduced by 50# (in accordance with conservation of mass).

LarryJM wrote:
Again, while you can disagree with what are considered other experts one such from a source that should have some credibility is etrailer and in THIS LINK this cargo is explained and attributed to tongue wt. Thus I'm not the only one to view this the way I am so while I might not be adept at explaining this others appear to agree with me and unless you can provide a similiar outside source supporting your view I will say I see your opinion and raise you one opinion that agrees with me by one.

It might be of interest to speculate about the source of all the "expert opinions" which you have cited or to which you have alluded.

As far as I can tell, the earliest reference to dealing with TV load is found in installation instructions for the Eaz-lift WDH.
Eaz-lift Corporation was founded in 1952 when virtually all TTs were towed by the family sedan.
Current Eaz-lift WDH adjustment instructions (probably very similar to original instructions) state:

2 PROPER METHOD OF HOOKING UP WEIGHT DISTRIBUTING HITCH WITH HEAVY LOAD IN TOWING VEHICLE
A. Have proper size hitch to carry tongue weight of trailer and load in vehicle.
B. Measure towing vehicle before adding load to towing vehicle.
C. First measure distance between back bumper and ground and write it down.
D. Measure distance between front bumper and ground, write it down.
E. Add load to towing vehicle.
F. Hook up trailer to towing vehicle.
G. Raise front of trailer and back of towing vehicle above level with trailer tongue jack (approx. 3").
H. Secure spring bars to Hook-up Bracket.
I. Release trailer tongue jack.
J. Remeasure front and back of towing vehicle and have both settle the same amount or up to an inch lower in back by adjusting chain on spring bars.
K. You have now distributed the trailer tongue weight on both axles of the towing vehicle.
L. See step 7 on previous page.

Note that these instructions refer to "HEAVY LOAD IN TOWING VEHICLE" as opposed to separate instructions which refer to "LOAD IN TOWING VEHICLE".
Also note that the instructions refer to having both front and rear settle by the same amount ("equal squat") approach.
So, I'm guessing that current "expert opinions" all harken back to the early instructions from Eaz-lift.

Now -- let's recall the subject of "temporary cargo wt" which we were discussing.
You defined "temporary cargo wt" as weight which is added to the tow vehicle AFTER the WDH has been adjusted.
I don't think any of the "expert opinions" pertain to cargo loaded after the WDH is adjusted.
IMO, our discussion deals with "apples" and your "experts" are dealing with outdated "oranges".

Ron

Try and word smith it any way you want, but what I said that cargo added after the TV axles and the key IMO is added has to be accounted for as an addition to the TW used to size the WDH system IS CORRECT and confirmed IMO by the links I have provided. I note you really have not provided any second source to clearly counter that position. I gave a reference from a 2016 Cequent document that clearly agrees with what I have been saying and has nothing to do with how you hook up or even set a WDH system which your Eaze lift info refers to and your guesses as to what they might be meaning is just that GUESSES. Finally, I think the expertise of CEQUENT trumps the folks who make and market Eaz-lift which is CAMCO who is IMO not even a major player in WDH systems and IMO sure IS NO EXPERT in this matters like CEQUENT IS. You may think that the the cargo is not what is added after the WDH is adjusted, but if you read carefully the context that the quotes I gave from etrailer and Cequent from that is IMO not the case. If it wasn't then the WDH system would not have any effect on it nor the sizing of the WDH system which clearly at least CEQUENT says it should be taken into account as an increase in the tongue wt and like some of it showing up on the TT axles which we have already discussed and you agreed with in a prior post.

Again you also need to take all this up with those clearly agreeing with me to clarify for your better understanding if you care to learn what I think is your misreading of such things as this cargo before or after the WDH is engaged, etc.

I have provided clearly that TONGUE WT as it pretains to WDH and I believe the receiver capacities/specs includes CARGO ADDED after the TV REAR AXLE ... PERIOD.

You might disagree and that is fine, but don't try and say what I have given or provided is incorrect since IT IS NOT ... IMO.

I'm also somewhat disappointed in your what IMO is clearly trying to muddy the waters with what I would almost classify as the same type gibberish that I believed TerryAllen was employing. I think in that vain I'm about finished with trying to discuss this any further with you also since I believe you are now just probably being subborn and not willing to admit you might not have been correct in some of your previous beliefs.

Larry

LarryJM wrote:
The problem with what you are now saying is that you have already conceeded that applying extra cargo wt aft of the TV rear axle, a portion of that will show up as an additional wt. on the TT axles.---

Larry, it's not a "concession". It's a simple fact of physics.

LarryJM wrote:
---Having extra wt show up on the TT axles w/o physically adding any wt to the TT can only come from what we typically classify as tongue wt that is being redistributed by the WDH to the various axles.---

Having "extra wt show up on the TT axles w/o physically adding any wt to the TT" results from torque which is applied to the hitch head by the WDH bars. It does not come from a redistribution of "tongue weight".

A WDH doesn't redistribute "tongue weight" -- it redistributes reaction forces acting on the TV's front axle, the TV's rear axle, and the TT's axle(s).
In fact, you could set up a TT to have ZERO tongue weight and the WDH still could redistribute axle reaction forces.
The WDH removes load from the TV's rear axle and distributes that removed load to the TV's front axle and the TT's axle(s).

LarryJM wrote:
---Let's say that extra 50lbs you have used is because of an extra 200lbs applied on the rear bumper of the TV then just where does the other 150lbs show up axle wise. If some shows up on the rear axle and some on the front axle of the TV as I believe it will then that can be only attributed to 200lbs added tongue wt. that has now been redistributed in those amount among the three axles (taken say all axles on the trailer as one wt.)

In other words please explain how that extra 50lbs you have mentioned gets transferred to the TT axles by adding wt at the rear of the TV back axle.

As stated before -- there is no actual weight (mass) added to the TT.
When the rear of the TV is pushed down, the WD bars produce a torque which causes increased upward force (50# for this example) on the TT's axle(s).
A simple free body diagram will show that the upward force of 50# acting on the TT's axle(s) will cause the downward force on the hitch/receiver to be reduced by 50# (in accordance with conservation of mass).

LarryJM wrote:
Again, while you can disagree with what are considered other experts one such from a source that should have some credibility is etrailer and in THIS LINK this cargo is explained and attributed to tongue wt. Thus I'm not the only one to view this the way I am so while I might not be adept at explaining this others appear to agree with me and unless you can provide a similiar outside source supporting your view I will say I see your opinion and raise you one opinion that agrees with me by one.

It might be of interest to speculate about the source of all the "expert opinions" which you have cited or to which you have alluded.

As far as I can tell, the earliest reference to dealing with TV load is found in installation instructions for the Eaz-lift WDH.
Eaz-lift Corporation was founded in 1952 when virtually all TTs were towed by the family sedan.
Current Eaz-lift WDH adjustment instructions (probably very similar to original instructions) state:

2 PROPER METHOD OF HOOKING UP WEIGHT DISTRIBUTING HITCH WITH HEAVY LOAD IN TOWING VEHICLE
A. Have proper size hitch to carry tongue weight of trailer and load in vehicle.
B. Measure towing vehicle before adding load to towing vehicle.
C. First measure distance between back bumper and ground and write it down.
D. Measure distance between front bumper and ground, write it down.
E. Add load to towing vehicle.
F. Hook up trailer to towing vehicle.
G. Raise front of trailer and back of towing vehicle above level with trailer tongue jack (approx. 3").
H. Secure spring bars to Hook-up Bracket.
I. Release trailer tongue jack.
J. Remeasure front and back of towing vehicle and have both settle the same amount or up to an inch lower in back by adjusting chain on spring bars.
K. You have now distributed the trailer tongue weight on both axles of the towing vehicle.
L. See step 7 on previous page.

Note that these instructions refer to "HEAVY LOAD IN TOWING VEHICLE" as opposed to separate instructions which refer to "LOAD IN TOWING VEHICLE".
Also note that the instructions refer to having both front and rear settle by the same amount ("equal squat") approach.
So, I'm guessing that current "expert opinions" all harken back to the early instructions from Eaz-lift.

Now -- let's recall the subject of "temporary cargo wt" which we were discussing.
You defined "temporary cargo wt" as weight which is added to the tow vehicle AFTER the WDH has been adjusted.
I don't think any of the "expert opinions" pertain to cargo loaded after the WDH is adjusted.
IMO, our discussion deals with "apples" and your "experts" are dealing with outdated "oranges".

Ron

lbrjet wrote:
The correct info is anything in the truck should not be considered tongue weight and none of that weight needs to be shifted by the WDH. It can be by cranking up the WDH to tight, but shouldn't be if set up correctly. That is why you start taking measurements after the truck is loaded for travel. That is your baseline. It really is that simple.

I, etrailer, and Cequent (parent company of REESE, HIDDEN HITCH, DRAW-TITE, and several others) disagree so you need to take your misplaced and IMO incorrect belief up with them and have them change their EXPERT OPINIONS.

Larry

The correct info is anything in the truck should not be considered tongue weight and none of that weight needs to be shifted by the WDH. It can be by cranking up the WDH to tight, but shouldn't be if set up correctly. That is why you start taking measurements after the truck is loaded for travel. That is your baseline. It really is that simple.

Ron Gratz wrote:

LarryJM wrote:
I think the whole point here is to understand what wts. we should be considering if we want to say within the specifications of the various components of the WDH system (i.e. receiver, WDH bars, etc.)

I think the whole point here is to understand that adding "temporary cargo wt" after the WD is adjusted does not increase the vertical downward load on the hitch/receiver -- it decreases it.

There is no "

extra cargo wt. that constructively appears at the ball/coupler position.

"
The effect of "extra cargo wt." is to reduce the vertical downward load at the hitch/receiver position.

When force is applied to the WD bars as part of the set up process, the result is a reduction in vertical downward force on the hitch/ receiver.
When MORE force is applied to the WD bars by adding "extra cargo wt." and causing the ball to drop, the result is MORE reduction in vertical downward force on the hitch/receiver.

The vertical downward force on the ball mount is the greatest (and is equal to the TT's loaded "tongue weight") when no WD is applied.
When WD is applied, the vertical downward force is reduced by an amount equal to the amount of load which was transferred to the TT's axles.
When "extra cargo wt." is subsequently added, more load is transferred to the TT's axles and the vertical downward force on the ball mount is further reduced.

If the tongue weight ratings of the hitch and receiver are not exceeded by the TT's loaded TW, they will not be exceeded when WD is applied and they will not be exceeded when "extra cargo wt." is added.

Ron

The problem with what you are now saying is that you have already conceeded that applying extra cargo wt aft of the TV rear axle, a portion of that will show up as an additional wt. on the TT axles. Having extra wt show up on the TT axles w/o physically adding any wt to the TT can only come from what we typically classify as tongue wt that is being redistributed by the WDH to the various axles. Let's say that extra 50lbs you have used is because of an extra 200lbs applied on the rear bumper of the TV then just where does the other 150lbs show up axle wise. If some shows up on the rear axle and some on the front axle of the TV as I believe it will then that can be only attributed to 200lbs added tongue wt. that has now been redistributed in those amount among the three axles (taken say all axles on the trailer as one wt.)

In other words please explain how that extra 50lbs you have mentioned gets transferred to the TT axles by adding wt at the rear of the TV back axle.

Again, while you can disagree with what are considered other experts one such from a source that should have some credibility is etrailer and in THIS LINK this cargo is explained and attributed to tongue wt. Thus I'm not the only one to view this the way I am so while I might not be adept at explaining this others appear to agree with me and unless you can provide a similiar outside source supporting your view I will say I see your opinion and raise you one opinion that agrees with me by one.

I can't lay my hands on the exact reference, but will look further for it, but I seem to remember reading on another website that deals in these bike racks that attach to the drawbar and one said that the wt of the rack and any bikes had to be considered as additional tongue wt. too.

ON EDIT added 12:53am Feb 15, 2016 I'm still looking for additional info, but HERE is another etrailer example of what they call TW as used in sizing of a WDH system and gives numbers in their example showing the two components of this tongue wt as being the trailer tongue wt and the cargo aft of the TV rear axle. BTW the trailer tongue wt is what I have been calling the "dead tongue wt" for lack of a better term.

Here is another link CLICKY in the post by rabird on November 04, 2009, 05:29:23 PM that cites the etrailer ref along with one by REESE that he says is similiar. However, the link for the Reese info is broke an I haven't found a good replacement one to give yet, but am still looking.

ON EDIT added 1:12am Feb 15, 2016 While this might not be considered by some as a real expert it is another source bringing up to 3 that agree with what I am saying CLICKY. One can question how expert these three folks are, but the same question would apply to those posting in this thread like Ron which while I might respect his opinion, I'm not sure I would classify him as the same level of expert in these matters as someone like the folks at etrailer who have posted their info on a public website.

ON EDIT added 1:40am Feb 15 2016 Finally probably the most authoratative reference I can find is from the Cequent 2016 Catalog on page 343 (catalog pg D-16) CLICKY talking about sizing a WDH system which has been copied in red below


SELECTING THE RIGHT WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
The hitch weight formula for determining the load
which the hitch must carry:
HITCH WEIGHT* = TONGUE WEIGHT +
VEHICLE CARGO LOAD BEHIND REAR AXLE
Tongue weight includes the trailer tongue weight
with full gas, water and waste systems and
everything packed inside the trailer. Vehicle cargo
includes all materials carried in your tow vehicle,
such as boat motors, gas cans, tools, etc.

I will note that what Cequent calls hitch weight in the above is what I have been calling "TONGUE WT" and as it applies to sizing things like the WDH system which to me includes not only the receiver but the WDH bars. My terms that I have consistently used and previously tried to explain are Tongue Weight = Dead tongue Wt (i.e. that measured by something like a Sherline scale) + vehicle cargo load behind the rear axle.

and with that I'm not sure I can give you any more what I call true expert opinions on what should and should not be included in TW when talking about WDH system and I think I can now rest my case and suggest those disagreeing with me or these "EXPERTS" take this matter up with them for further resolution since I have about exhausted my ability to provide correct info for those willing to listen and maybe learn something.

Larry

Larry it is REALLY, REALLY simple. Unhook the trailer, and every ounce of tongue weight is OFF the truck. EVERY OUNCE. No matter what is in the truck. With out a trailer hooked up. There is not one ounce of tongue weight on the truck.

The ONLY time there is tongue weight on the truck is when the trailer is hooked to it, and the ONLY weight the tongue adds to the truck, is the weight of the tongue itself. Has NOTHING to do with the cargo the truck is carrying.

Just because you want to count everything in the truck as tongue weight, does not make it so. I guess the spare tire under the truck is tongue weight as well??????

LarryJM wrote:
I think the whole point here is to understand what wts. we should be considering if we want to say within the specifications of the various components of the WDH system (i.e. receiver, WDH bars, etc.)

I think the whole point here is to understand that adding "temporary cargo wt" after the WD is adjusted does not increase the vertical downward load on the hitch/receiver -- it decreases it.

There is no "

extra cargo wt. that constructively appears at the ball/coupler position.

"
The effect of "extra cargo wt." is to reduce the vertical downward load at the hitch/receiver position.

When force is applied to the WD bars as part of the set up process, the result is a reduction in vertical downward force on the hitch/ receiver.
When MORE force is applied to the WD bars by adding "extra cargo wt." and causing the ball to drop, the result is MORE reduction in vertical downward force on the hitch/receiver.

The vertical downward force on the ball mount is the greatest (and is equal to the TT's loaded "tongue weight") when no WD is applied.
When WD is applied, the vertical downward force is reduced by an amount equal to the amount of load which was transferred to the TT's axles.
When "extra cargo wt." is subsequently added, more load is transferred to the TT's axles and the vertical downward force on the ball mount is further reduced.

If the tongue weight ratings of the hitch and receiver are not exceeded by the TT's loaded TW, they will not be exceeded when WD is applied and they will not be exceeded when "extra cargo wt." is added.

Ron