oxygen wrote:
I just took scale weights, left the DW and dog out of the picture
Okay, let's take the scale numbers and make an adjustment for the WDH which was not included in the "T only" values.
We'll assume the WDH would remove 40# from the front axle and add 140# to the rear axle.
The "adjusted" weights for TV only are
Front = 3240-40 = 3200#, Rear = 3000+140 = 3140#, TV GVW = 6340#.
For TV+TT w/ no WD, Front = 2940#, Rear = 4200#, TT axles = 5360#
The indicated tongue weight is (2940+4200)-(3200+3140) = 800#.
The indicated total TT weight is 12500-6340= 6160#.
The indicated tongue weight percentage = 800/6160 = 13%.
The indicated load removed from the front axle is 3200-2940 = 260#.
With an 800# TW, I would expect closer to 340# removed.
For TV+TT w/ WD, Front = 3060#, Rear = 3900#, TT axles = 5540#.
The indicated load added to the TT axles by WD is 5540-5360 = 180#.
The indicated load added to the TV's front axle by WD is 3060-2940 = 120#.
It is physically impossible for your rig to have 180# transferred to the TT axles, while having only 120# transferred to the TV's front axle.
The amount transferred to the front axle should be close to 340#.
The indicated load removed from the rear is 4200-3900 = 300#.
The amount removed from the rear should be close to 520#.
After accounting for the WDH not being included in the "TV only" weights, the indicated tongue weight now is 800#.
However, based on what you've reported there, there still is a discrepancy between the expected load removal from the front axle.
And, there still is a significant discrepancy between the
hitched with WD and
hitched without WD values.
BTW -- your first post says the GCW is 12,500#. The latest post says the GCW is 12,300#. Which is correct? My analysis above assumes the GCW is 12,500#.
Ron