pro pride or hensley hitch tongue weight

The discussion was what weight gets applied against the receiver rating. Not what is defined as tongue weight. I think you understood my post that there is some arbitrary hitch weight in the reg that is assumed to built in to a receiver rating. We have had this argument before and say what you will, but the fact is you can't go wrong with Larry's advice. I add my full 95lb hitch weight to my tongue weight when comparing to my receiver rating as Larry advises. You can't go wrong by using this method and I don't like assumptions.

Receivers are rated for trailer weight and tongue weight, the hitch is not part of either of those.

AH64ID wrote:
Receivers are rated for trailer weight and tongue weight, the hitch is not part of either of those.

As I originally said ... I'm not going to try and convince anyone and what I posted were "MY THOUGHTS" and nothing has changed that. The argument that the hitch is not part of the tongue wt. is something that even Ron disagrees with and he even adds some of the HA/PP hitch wt. to the tongue wt. I also feel that if an extra 100lbs of tongue wt. is going to break the bank then you are probably too far "on the edge" so to speak already. Since you could basically have a convential WDH locked onto the tongue and hook up much as you do with the HA/PP by backing the TV into the DRAWBAR/stinger then as far as I'm concerned the WDH is just something else that is added to the tongue of the trailer that effect the tongue wt as seen by the TV receiver. This is not different in my view as adding say more the heavier batteries to the tongue, a generator or even a bike rack to the tongue of a trailer ... they all contribute to the tongue wt. as seen by the TV receiver.

I can appreciate what that document Ron referred to, but it's not IMO univerally use and is woefully out of date with the last revision being almost 40 years ago. There are obviously different opinions on what is to be included in TW so it is sort of up to one to decide which "camp" so to speak the wish to pitch their tent in.

Larry

Larry

If it's not part of the truck and is stuck in the receiver then it's tongue weight. How much of it that gets transferred is another topic. IMO there's no difference between hitching up any trailer to any kind of stinger that's stuck in the trucks receiver. It's all tongue weight. HA/PP's are semi permanently attached to the trailers tongue. Therefor IMO it's considered TW. Same as propane bottles or batteries that are siting on the tongue.

I agree ducks, the portion attacked to the frame of the trailer is part of the TW. The portion that attaches to the receiver with a pin is not.

Yes Larry if the extra 100lbs is too much then something else needs to be looked at.

Then again it's not something I personally ever even need to think about with a hitch that will take 2500lbs with a WDH.

LarryJM wrote:
---The argument that the hitch is not part of the tongue wt. is something that even Ron disagrees with and he even adds some of the HA/PP hitch wt. to the tongue wt.---

Larry, your statement is incorrect. You need to re-read what Ron posted.

I can appreciate what that document Ron referred to, but it's not IMO univerally use and is woefully out of date with the last revision being almost 40 years ago.---

Well, you're welcome to your opinion -- but I think all the manufacturers who continue to rate their towing equipment based on VESC-5 and its SAE look-alike, SAE J684, would argue that the VESC-5/SAE-J684 testing protocol IS universally accepted for its intended purpose.

The only criticism I could find of VESC-5/SAE-J684 is that it only covers trailers up to 10,000# GVWR.
The need to have a rating system for heavier trailers is discussed in How Hitch Manufacturers Are Designing Class-V Hitches To Extreme Capacity Levels

However, the bottom line is that VESC-5/SAE-684 specifies that WDH test moments are based on trailer tongue weight and NOT on tongue weight plus the weight of the WDH.

Ron