New Andersen WD hitch

Ron Gratz wrote:

BarneyS wrote:
Ron, I learned long ago not to try to argue a point with you (:W) BUT notice that Ben said "So it DOES NOT transfer as much weight to the front axle as a traditional receiver would with the same WD spring forces." (Bold added for emphasis) I still think his point was valid.:)

If the "WD spring forces" are the same, the load transfer to the front axle will be the same
-- unless you change WD bar length, TV wheelbase, ball overhang, ball to TT axles distance, or tongue weight.
Receiver torsional stiffness does not enter into the relationship between WD spring force and load transfer.

BarneyS wrote:
Let me rephrase what you just posted to make sure I understand exactly what you are saying.
With 5 links under tension and everything remaining the same (rear overhang etc.) you will get the SAME weight transfer to the front axles of the tow vehicle regardless of whether the receiver bends upwards or not when the WD force is applied.

Is this an accurate statement of what you are saying in your post above? If so, then it is contrary to what I have thought all along and I have learned something new today.

Barney, your rephrasing is not an accurate statement of what I said.
The post which you quoted, and my response, referred to "the same WD spring forces."

Your rephrasing implies to me that you believe there is a one-to-one correspondence between number of links under tension and "WD spring forces".

That is not correct. And that is why I stated, in this post,

However, if there is enough receiver rotation, you might find you need to increase the rearward tilt of the ball mount or decrease the number of links under tension
-- but you will be able to load the bars and transfer load.

Ron