The verdict is in! DRW vs SRW....real world

BradW wrote:

otrfun wrote:
.............You obviously missed my point (by quoting/reading my sentence out of context)..................

Your point is pointless. You set up a false comparison between an over loaded srw truck and an over loaded drw truck. That is not a real world decision faced by truck camper owners.

The real decision faced by truck camper owners is how much better will a drw truck haul a particular TC than an srw truck....and are the issues associated with a drw vs an srw worth it for the improved handling and safety factor.

I have been on TC forums for twenty years and I have never once seen someone ask which handles better, an over loaded srw truck or an over loaded drw truck. That decision does not happen in the real world.

bradw

Again, your reply doesn't take into account the entire theme of my original post. Not sure why you feel the need to continue to hyper-focus on a sentence, taken out-of-context, to create your own personally tailored debate. I posted two paragraphs, not one sentence.

Once you go dual......you never go back!

emcvay congrats on the new truck!
Are the brakes any better on the DRW vs your old SRW?

Hmmm.....gone quite far down the rabbit hole ;)

Given that many start out with SRW's and spend money trying to haul big campers and that the intent of the post was to give my take on the difference once the swap is made the reality is nothing else really matters.

it's simple, my well setup SRW just didn't do what the box stock DRW does with the same camper. nuff said.

otrfun wrote:
.............You obviously missed my point (by quoting/reading my sentence out of context)..................

Your point is pointless. You set up a false comparison between an over loaded srw truck and an over loaded drw truck. That is not a real world decision faced by truck camper owners.

The real decision faced by truck camper owners is how much better will a drw truck haul a particular TC than an srw truck....and are the issues associated with a drw vs an srw worth it for the improved handling and safety factor.

I have been on TC forums for twenty years and I have never once seen someone ask which handles better, an over loaded srw truck or an over loaded drw truck. That decision does not happen in the real world.

bradw

ajriding wrote:
Wow, forum users figured out that a wide wheel stance is more stable.
Wonder if this would work for race cars too to make the car more stable in turns…

I wonder if anyone has taken a SRW truck and just put wheel spacers, or wheels that sit wider and had the same or similar stable results/

Lets just compare 4-wheel and 6-wheel one-ton trucks since they will both have the same spring set-up since that is an obvious and easy to fix thing on a 3/4 ton.
I think a 0ne-ton 4 wheel will handle camper sway better than a 3/4 ton any day given stiffer springs.

sorry for the pointless post

Fair points you make there. Unless people are in the habit of cornering to the point of lifting inside rear tires, the width simply means less force is seen at the outside tire(s) (think longer lever = less force needed). One of the reasons a DRW is more stable is primarily due to 4 sidewalls trying to flex versus 2. That translates into less “lean”. The other reason is the stiffer spring pack.

Wow, forum users figured out that a wide wheel stance is more stable.
Wonder if this would work for race cars too to make the car more stable in turns…

I wonder if anyone has taken a SRW truck and just put wheel spacers, or wheels that sit wider and had the same or similar stable results/

Lets just compare 4-wheel and 6-wheel one-ton trucks since they will both have the same spring set-up since that is an obvious and easy to fix thing on a 3/4 ton.
I think a 0ne-ton 4 wheel will handle camper sway better than a 3/4 ton any day given stiffer springs.

sorry for the pointless post

I've already stated the obvious (and unequivocally so, I might add), that a DRW is more capable than a SRW. My only exception was to simply acknowledge that DRW vs. SRW is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Nothing more, nothing less. I believe your reply substantiates this even further.

Pretty much,just an extra set of tires/wheels for stability..Mine is a 17" cut in the dirt versus maybe an 8" cut and mine are skinny tires compared to some for traction in the snow..

I almost bought an F-250 converted to a dually when I was in the truck market just for the stability they provide..It sold pretty quick..

jaycocreek wrote:

otrfun wrote:
I believe it's a forgone conclusion that a DRW will be more stable than the same (year/make/model) truck in a SRW configuration when carrying the same load. I mean, how could it not be--lol! However, certainly get the impression that a lot of the comparisons being made here are based on overloaded SRW's---some significantly. Comparisons made under these conditions would tend the exaggerate the actual effectiveness of a DRW. I believe if you compared a SRW carrying its maximum rated load vs. a DRW carrying its maximum rated load, the difference in handling would be much less dramatic.

Bottom line, you can make any truck (including a DRW) feel and drive like a wet noodle if you overload it enough.

The difference is the dual wheels that make it more stable with that heavy/tall load in the back..There are a ton of DRW's out there overloaded by manufacturer specs,heck,even an AF 811 overloads a newer DRW but the fact is,overloaded as it may be,the DRW will always drive and handle better for if nothing else,the footprint aka four tires in the rear versus two..

In the old days when trucks were not built Ford tough,some used to put wider tires(12" wide was the standard) on the rear for more stability and a bigger footprint...

I bought my setup for one reason,I needed stability on the side slopes I travel...I certainly don't need a DRW for my Lance 9.6 without a basement but the dual rear wheels makes the slopie roads I travel way more stable.

Both the DRW and the SRW loaded to max and the added tires in the rear of the DRW will always make it a more stable ride.

I've already stated the obvious (and unequivocally so, I might add), that a DRW is more capable than a SRW. My only exception was to simply acknowledge that DRW vs. SRW is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Nothing more, nothing less. I believe your reply substantiates this even further.

otrfun wrote:
I believe it's a forgone conclusion that a DRW will be more stable than the same (year/make/model) truck in a SRW configuration when carrying the same load. I mean, how could it not be--lol! However, certainly get the impression that a lot of the comparisons being made here are based on overloaded SRW's---some significantly. Comparisons made under these conditions would tend the exaggerate the actual effectiveness of a DRW. I believe if you compared a SRW carrying its maximum rated load vs. a DRW carrying its maximum rated load, the difference in handling would be much less dramatic.

Bottom line, you can make any truck (including a DRW) feel and drive like a wet noodle if you overload it enough.

The difference is the dual wheels that make it more stable with that heavy/tall load in the back..There are a ton of DRW's out there overloaded by manufacturer specs,heck,even an AF 811 overloads a newer DRW but the fact is,overloaded as it may be,the DRW will always drive and handle better for if nothing else,the footprint aka four tires in the rear versus two..

In the old days when trucks were not built Ford tough,some used to put wider tires(12" wide was the standard) on the rear for more stability and a bigger footprint...

I bought my setup for one reason,I needed stability on the side slopes I travel...I certainly don't need a DRW for my Lance 9.6 without a basement but the dual rear wheels makes the slopie roads I travel way more stable.

Both the DRW and the SRW loaded to max and the added tires in the rear of the DRW will always make it a more stable ride.