JBarca wrote:
Using 0.0625 is to 260# as 7,800# is to X, I get 1.875 inch compression.
Using Bruce's data.
Using 0.250 is to 1,220# as 7,800# is to X, I get 1.598 inch compression.
I have my reservations if one can approach that amount of compression.
I agree.
The Andersen video says, "We like to compress it about a quarter of an inch".
In an extreme application, you might achieve a compression of 25% of unloaded length (3*0.25 = 0.75" in this case).
So far, we've not seen anything from Andersen about going more than 1/4".
---Knowing the 2500 Suburban, the truck is compensating for the issue with not being able to transfer the weight.---
I don't know what you mean by this -- but I would like to avoid more of the "receiver consumes WD torque" discussion. :)
The spring compression and front-end load transfer reported by Renojack were consistent with the compression and transfer reported by Bruce H.
Ron