Just purchased a carson 14' toy hauler for hauling the bikes plus extra space for the kids. Trailer weighs 3200lb with 450lb tongue weight dry. I have the Reese titan on both trucks and run the reese 48" extension. One shop tells me not possible to tow with my current setup because I would need to add the tongue weight of trailer plus the added weight of the camper past the rear wheels and that would be what size distribution bars needed and since the Reese extension is rated for 600lb tongue and 6000lb pull I cannot go over 600lb distribution bars and therefore would be useless and have no effect. Any help would be appreciated.

How could it possible have no effect? Any bar giving any sort of upward force will have some effect.Have you looked to see if the Reese is rated for use with a WDH? I used to have one of those 48" bars but I can't remember if it was.If it is then a 500 pound bar should help.I would probably call Reese about it.

It's rated at 400-4000 or 600-6000 WD.

There isn't any reason to use a WDH unless you can't raise the rear any other way.

crossent wrote:It's rated at 400-4000 or 600-6000 WD.A WD hitch is going to move some of the weight off the rear axle and move it to the front axle . It will also transfer some of the rear axle weight to the trailer axles . It may not level the truck depending on the load but it should level the trailer if set up properly . I would find a new dealer . Clearly the hitch is rated higher with a WD hitch than without .

On online hitch site also said the same thing as dealer(almost as if I talked to the same person twice). Just posting here as I'm sure some tow with extensions and could give insight on bar size they run. Was thinking I might benefit from some sway control also.

Weight distribution hitch questions | Good Sam Community

ticki2
Explorer
Jan 15, 2016
jimh425 wrote:
mkirsch wrote:
The dead weight of the tongue pries down on the shank/extension. The WD bars pry up.

I think we just have a terminology problem. My point is the weight doesn't disappear or is attached differently just because you hookup a WDH. The WDW is designed to push up not down on the hitch, but to do that the force still goes through the hitch. There are no other attachment points to the truck. If you are worried about hitch strength, a WDH isn't going to fix it. The lever arm is still 4 feet.

Then why are the hitch and the extension both rated for more weight WITH a WDH ?

No , the weight doesn't disappear , It is distributed differently through the attachment point . The upward force is subtracted from the downward force to lessen the downward reaction at that point . Then it is transferred through the frames to the front axle of the tow vehicle and the trailer axles .
jimh406
Explorer III
Jan 15, 2016
ticki2 wrote:
Then why are the hitch and the extension both rated for more weight WITH a WDH ?

You'll have to ask the people doing the rating.
mkirsch
Nomad II
Jan 15, 2016
Kayteg1 wrote:
Observe how tow trucks are build. Their rear tires almost are touching the bumper and they tow without WD having tons on the hook.

Correct. However you are not going to see a fundamental change in how vehicles are designed any time soon.

Plus what's good for towing is not good for hauling. With the axle at the extreme rear of the vehicle, any weight you put in the bed is going to end up 1/3 to 1/2 on the front axle of the truck. It won't take much to overload the front axle. Not to mention the abysmal turning radius, undesirable for what is normally a daily driver.
Kayteg1
Explorer II
Jan 15, 2016
mkirsch wrote:

Correct. However you are not going to see a fundamental change in how vehicles are designed any time soon.

It already happen.
If you take a look at new Superduty, the rear axle is at about 70% of the bed, when on older SD it was at 50%.
Not sure what year the difference happen, but till early 2000' it took F550 to have rear axle at the rear.
That makes for longer wheelbase, but with coil springs, front wheels turn more, so the trucks are manageable at liquor story ;)
My 172" base 2007 SD makes about the same turning radius, what my 2000 14x' F250 (short bed supercab) did.
jimh406
Explorer III
Jan 15, 2016
Kayteg1 wrote:
If you take a look at new Superduty, the rear axle is at about 70% of the bed, when on older SD it was at 50%.

What years are you comparing? I don't remember the axle being dead middle of an 8 ft bed.
Kayteg1
Explorer II
Jan 15, 2016
Again, I am not sure when and what models, but compare rear overhang on those two F350.
The white one is 2013 but SRW.
Reality_Check
Nomad II
Jan 15, 2016
Kayteg1 wrote:
Again, I am not sure when and what models, but compare rear overhang on those two F350.
The white one is 2013 but SRW.

Short bed and long bed... Apples to spaceships.

I believe the dimension has been 52.4" for years... Regardless of whether it's a short box or not.
Kayteg1
Explorer II
Jan 15, 2016
They are both long beds.
jimh406
Explorer III
Jan 15, 2016
Kayteg1 wrote:
They are both long beds.

The ad may say it, but they aren't.
Kayteg1
Explorer II
Jan 16, 2016
jimh425 wrote:
Kayteg1 wrote:
They are both long beds.

The ad may say it, but they aren't.

I think you need better glasses. Take a tape measure and compare.
Both pictures are about the same scale.