Thomas,
Finally, we agree 100% on something. This is exactly why I proposed the definitions in Tongue Weight and Hitch Load - What are they and how are they different? and referred you to them in my very first response to you.Part of quote from above:
"Yes, the WD system distributes tongue weight over both the front and rear axle (that is the purpose of it). "
I say this is misleading if that is not what happens. ---
I think this is an excellent example of how lack of definition leads to misinterpretation.
First of all, my dictionary's definition of "mislead" implies an intention to deceive. Given that definition, I do not think the statment is misleading, but I do think it is subject to misinterpretation.I certainly was not implying anyone was trying to deceive - bad choice of words. I should have used misinterpretation as that is what I meant.
A reader easily could interpret this as meaning that a WD hitch decreases tongue weight. The same reader could believe that decreasing tongue weight can contribute to sway and, therefore, choose not to use a WD hitch.
Secondly, if I knew nothing about how a WD hitch operates, the statement would lead me to believe that weight is removed from the tongue and added BOTH to the front axle AND to the rear axle. We know this is not the case.
Thirdly, there is no mention of the fact that the WD hitch causes the load on the TT's axles to increase. This is fundamental to understanding how the WD hitch works.
So, please consider the following two statements:
1) The WD system distributes tongue weight over both the front and rear axle (that is the purpose of it), and
2) The WD system removes load from the TV's rear axle and distributes it to the TV's front axle and to the TT's axles.
Which of these do you think is the better definition (meaning less subject to misinterpretation) of the purpose of a WD hitch?Ron, I choose #2 !!
Ron
