Tongue Weight Rating
Hello, We are buying a trailer for our daughter and son-in-law. They now have a Ford Expedition with 8,900# tow rating. 80% of that is 7,120#, but they should stay below 7,000# loaded (5,500 to 6...
Forum Discussion
waynec1957 wrote:I agree, and that's why I said I've never been able to make much sense out of why receivers are rated the way they are.
That’s what I’m trying to understand…how does a WDH allow a receiver to handle a greater TW? It’s the same receiver, made of the same material, attached to the TV in the same manner with or without a WDH. But once the WDH is attached (like in the example of my old ½ ton) the amount of TW the receiver can handle seems to increase significantly and apparently it doesn’t have anything (or very little) to do with the construction of the receiver or how it’s attached to the TV.
If a given receiver were subjected to the same tongue load, first in weight carrying mode and then in weight distributing mode, the torsional stresses in the receiver would be significantly greater in the WD mode.
In the WD mode, the rear end of the receiver is pushing upward against the frame. In the WC mode, the rear end of the receiver is pulling downward against the frame.
The only thing I can figure is without a WDH all (or most) of the TW is on the back axle—which can create the problems folks have already talked about (steering, breaking, overloading the axle, etc.). With a WDH distributing the weight across the TV and TT (if I’m understanding this correctly) allows for more TW because it’s not all resting on the rear axle.I agree with this also.
It seems as though the rating on a factory-installed receiver usually reflects the capacity of the tow vehicle.
Ron
