scratching my head

BarneyS wrote:

MM49 wrote:

Farm Camp wrote:

MM49 wrote:
It’s really bad when a moderator behaves with such sarcasm. You should be ashamed of yourself.
MM49

Maybe if I ask then.

I'm trying to sort out the specific bad advice and get some education.

Seriously-really.

If you have a difference of ideas let's have it so we can all be better. It's kind of selfish to cast doubt at least indirectly on what others have said as a blanket statement while offering no competing idea or information of your own.

I won't speak for the Mod but my impression is that he's inviting you to do just that for the betterment of all.

“There are NO standards used for sizing axles or for designing TT frames” The RVIA might have a little to say about this. They have issued two recals this year just for typo errors on vehicle labels.
“Sometimes it's the tires that are under-rated.” The RVIA controls this also. The specifications are managed by Keystone manufacturing.
“Don't expect a dealer, a factory rep. or even the plant to be able to tell you much on tech. info. on a frame and components. A brochure will tell you nothing about frames and axles” Every catolog I've seen gives axle ratings and tire size with rating.
“The axle rating only needs to equal the GVWR-the tongue weight” The axle rating has nothing to do with the tongue weight.
MM49

First of all, moderators are members just like anybody else and can post what they think. I did and, in my opinion, you should have posted the reasons for your sarcastic comment - hence my post. You can take it for what you want.

Secondly, you missread one of the statements that you say is wrong. The poster did NOT say that the axle rating had something to do with the tongue weight. What he DID say was that the axle rating only needs to equal the GVWR

MINUS

the tongue weight. That is a true and correct statement. In other words, the tongue weight does not count towards the weight carried on the axles.
Barney