Crack in Sidewall by Bedroom Slide

[Tumbleweed79]

We purchased a brand new 2014 Keystone Avalanche on June 2, 2014. By the 23 of June after having pulled it only twice I noticed a crack in the sidewall by the bedroom. It was small and while concerned I wasn't sure if it had been there when I bought it or not. We were parked for over a month and I decided to keep an eye on it and if it got ANY bigger I would make the call to Keystone. Well...it did. Below are the pictures.

I contacted Keystone, they told me to get it to a dealer. The dealer in Tulsa where we were was booked up until October so we ended up pulling it to Texas. After I dropped it off the service manager called me and told me that what he had thought was a simple "stress crack", after seeing it first hand was certain it was a cracked weld or broken frame.

After several days of waiting I got an email from the dealer stating that Keystone had "respectfully declined" assistance in our problem. They cited a Warranty Exclusion that "Damage or loss caused in whole or in part to a .... cargo platform" was not covered. At this time, it doesn't appear I have ANY warranty on this unit. Although Keystone won't answer that question.

The cargo platform in question was one that we had on our Keystone Bullet (with absolutely no problems) and carried our two kids bikes and a door mat. That's it NOTHING else.

Has anybody else had this type of crack on your unit?
Have you had any trouble with your manufacturer covering the repairs or "respectfully declining" to assist?

The unit was only 19-20 days from purchase and had this problem.

I have pictures to post, but am not understanding how to go about posting them. Please help with that.

Thanks!

[Tumbleweed79]

Charlie D. wrote:
Check the new post by Mike Leclair about getting his Cougar stuck. I noticed that he has a platform on the back of his and may be original from the factory. A search would tell you how his model compares to yours. Would be interesting if it matches closely and yet the platform on his is from the factory.

Is there anyway to provide a link?

Never mind found it. Very interesting!

[Tumbleweed79]

Lyle,
I must say the popcorn line made my night!!!

[Tumbleweed79]

TXiceman wrote:
Tumbleweed, that was my CB handle back in the CB days.

I am including a couple of photos of the frame repair I had done on my 2012 Cameo. It was flexing on the left front and opening a seam, letting in water. It was moving about 1/8" between hitch and unhitched.

The repair was done by Kansas RV Center in Chanute, KS, the former NuWa factory fro HitchHiker trailers. They had to make splicer plates to stiffen the front side wall along with additional wood bracing. The problem was related to mot enough strength in the area where the cut out for the slide is located.

Photos

I do not feel that 100% of the problem being seen on trailers is the manufacturers. The rough roads we are seeing do contribute a lot to the problems. Out Hitch Hiker has Mor/Ryde IS suspension, a Demco Glide pin box and the truck has a Trailer Saver TS3 air ride hitch to soften the trailer ride and I think it does help.

Hey! What do you know...the CB days...that's been a long time ago.

Thanks for the pictures. I can see what they did there. Very interesting. My dealer told me that he may have to do something similar, I assume that he had something like that in mind.

As far as the roads go...I agree with you. There have been a few roads (and bumps) that it was too late to do anything but cringe and hope for the best. That being said, do they test these units loaded? Or do they just roll them off of the factory floor only tested at UVW? I can only make a choice of unit, truck, suspension, speed, and route, but I cannot control the roads. They need to take these bad boys over the worst roads that they can find and nail them bumps loaded and see what happens. That's realistic testing...that's real life...that what we bought these things for...to travel in.

Yet, you have given me a great idea! (At least I think it is great) 🙂 Why don't we start a new thread with all the "bad" spots and roads that we can think of and list them for fellow travelers , for interest, and possibly create a list for states and federal highway department...well, maybe I reached a little too far on that last one, but it would be fun.

[laknox]

TXiceman wrote:
Tumbleweed, that was my CB handle back in the CB days.

I am including a couple of photos of the frame repair I had done on my 2012 Cameo. It was flexing on the left front and opening a seam, letting in water. It was moving about 1/8" between hitch and unhitched.

The repair was done by Kansas RV Center in Chanute, KS, the former NuWa factory fro HitchHiker trailers. They had to make splicer plates to stiffen the front side wall along with additional wood bracing. The problem was related to mot enough strength in the area where the cut out for the slide is located.

Photos

I do not feel that 100% of the problem being seen on trailers is the manufacturers. The rough roads we are seeing do contribute a lot to the problems. Out Hitch Hiker has Mor/Ryde IS suspension, a Demco Glide pin box and the truck has a Trailer Saver TS3 air ride hitch to soften the trailer ride and I think it does help.

Sorry, that just won't cut it. You think these guys don't know the conditions of our roads? You think Boeing designs planes to only fly in perfectly smooth air? No, they =have= to take into account turbulence, and they have a max spec for flying in severe turbulence; it's called maneuvering speed. Should Lippert publish a "maneuvering speed" for their frames, as tire manufacturers do for ST tires? How would you feel if you could only tow your FW at 45 mph on a freeway that's "too rough"? The Aussies are at least recognizing that they have rough roads and country they tow through and build accordingly.

Lyle

[laknox]

Tumbleweed79 wrote:

laknox wrote:

Tumbleweed79 wrote:

laknox wrote:

FLY 4 FUN wrote:
For sure I feel for you, but there are only a few rv's designed and shipped with bumper mount bike/cargo racks. The rest are clearly placarded against modifying in any way.

I doubt your cargo rack had anything to do with the crack, but now the dealer and manufacturer have every right to deny your claim as you voided the structural warranty.

I am truly sorry you are getting the run-around, but they play the game to win!

Daryll

If there was no drilling or welding on the frame, they have a =very= weak case.

Lyle

I agree! My friend took pictures of a Honda Prius with a bike rack on the back and sent it to them... He said maybe Keystone needs to get together with Honda to figure out how to make a frame that won't crack from a bike rack. Also, there was NO PLACARD anywhere. It only stated it in the owner's manual, which I cannot even read until I have bought the thing! By that time I had already moved the cargo platform over from our other trailer.

Also, the very fact that other manufacturers INSTALL cargo platforms on the back show that it can be done without destroying the integrity of "Frame Camber". As a matter of fact it may be a safety net so that nothing else can be put on the back bumper without TRULY modifying it.

Since you have now posted a picture, they're going to say that you installed a "cargo rack" with a capacity of up to X hundred lbs. The fact that you never put anything but bikes on it will get lost in the shuffle. Had you taken the rack off before taking it in, we would still likely be having this conversation, as that's the way the mfrs all work, but you'd have a much stronger position. I agree that by them bending over and keeping you happy would sell a lot more RVs than them putting you through this. The mfrs just don't seem to get the power of the Internet and how bloody =fast= and =far= this kind of stuff can spread. And don't be afraid to spread it around, either. Good luck, is all I can say.

Lyle

Lyle, your point is well taken. I agree with you...they will keep shuffling their feet until they get what they want. The cargo rack has a capacity of approximately 400 lbs. If they take this stance, then they have specs of what their bumper can hold, then they could be asked to show how much extra weight it takes to create unequal "camber" or to break, crack, tweak, bend, or deform their bumper. Again, they are stating that their bumpers are capable of carrying enough weight to damage their own frame. That is like Remington stating our firearm receiver can handle the hottest load you can put in it, but our barrels will explode. The one without the other is meaningless. Who needs a bumper when you have a broken frame?

As well, they have now implicated Lippert if indeed there is a cracked weld, frame, or structure, by stating the "camber" is out of wack or whatever. Lippert will do everything in its power to show that Keystone is wrong so that Lippert is not liable, for Keystone's cracked or broken structure. To state that Lippert's frame was off camber will, in my opinion, cause Lippert to prove their frame was not faulty or broken due to 400 lbs. I am SURE that in testing and then listing capacities they take it to the extreme and then back off for a huge margin of safety. If testing documentation shows that the testing phase was a mere 200 lbs or so from the safety margin listed then that would create a huge legal liability. Like any manufacturer, they likely test until it breaks, write that number down, and then set a "safe" limit for their product based on that number. Why would you make a car that could only handle "skinny" people and then say the frame broke because you put "fat" people in it. The tires were fine, the struts were fine, the seats were fine, but the frame broke because it was right at the edge of the safety margin.

The bottom line: We won't know exactly what is wrong until the dealer repairs. YET, Keystone is stating they WON'T fix it BECAUSE OF DAMAGE OR LOSS CAUSED BY...cargo platform. Yet, when I asked them point blank. "Are you stating that the cargo platform on the rear bumper caused the damage/loss/crack to the front of the unit?" They refuse to answer that question. It has been two weeks of emails averaging one a day. In my opinion, if it goes all the way to court then Keystone has to prove that my cargo platform broke their frame/structure. In order to do that they would need to produce these testing specifications that I mentioned. I don't think they want to do that...but again, I am just a consumer...what does my opinion count for? 🙂

You're really on the ball. Please do keep us all informed! I think I may need to buy more popcorn! 🙂

Lyle

[TXiceman]

Tumbleweed, that was my CB handle back in the CB days.

I am including a couple of photos of the frame repair I had done on my 2012 Cameo. It was flexing on the left front and opening a seam, letting in water. It was moving about 1/8" between hitch and unhitched.

The repair was done by Kansas RV Center in Chanute, KS, the former NuWa factory fro HitchHiker trailers. They had to make splicer plates to stiffen the front side wall along with additional wood bracing. The problem was related to mot enough strength in the area where the cut out for the slide is located.

Photos

I do not feel that 100% of the problem being seen on trailers is the manufacturers. The rough roads we are seeing do contribute a lot to the problems. Out Hitch Hiker has Mor/Ryde IS suspension, a Demco Glide pin box and the truck has a Trailer Saver TS3 air ride hitch to soften the trailer ride and I think it does help.

[Charlie_D_]

Check the new post by Mike Leclair about getting his Cougar stuck. I noticed that he has a platform on the back of his and may be original from the factory. A search would tell you how his model compares to yours. Would be interesting if it matches closely and yet the platform on his is from the factory.

[spud1957]

laknox wrote:

spud1957 wrote:
Funny, Keystone feels it's OK to clamp the spare tire to the rear bumper. Probably weighs the same as 2 bikes.

S

Probably less, since it's likely a crappy ST. 🙂

Lyle

My Blowmax ST235/80R16 tire weighs 37lbs (Tire Rack specs) plus the rim plus the bracket. That would probably take it over 50lbs.

[Tumbleweed79]

Another question would be: When you testing the units with spare tires on the bumper, did you do so with them on or off? What was the change in camber?

I would love to take it to a scale while connected to my truck, weigh each axle set with/without bikes and then weigh each axle with 400 lbs. and find out where the weight goes. My analytical mind would love to know anyway!

Where is this 400 lbs. being distributed? Trailer Axles, front, rear? Pin, truck axle?

Hey, hey! I think I am going to go have fun next week driving back and forth on a truck scale.

[Tumbleweed79]

laknox wrote:

Tumbleweed79 wrote:

laknox wrote:

FLY 4 FUN wrote:
For sure I feel for you, but there are only a few rv's designed and shipped with bumper mount bike/cargo racks. The rest are clearly placarded against modifying in any way.

I doubt your cargo rack had anything to do with the crack, but now the dealer and manufacturer have every right to deny your claim as you voided the structural warranty.

I am truly sorry you are getting the run-around, but they play the game to win!

Daryll

If there was no drilling or welding on the frame, they have a =very= weak case.

Lyle

I agree! My friend took pictures of a Honda Prius with a bike rack on the back and sent it to them... He said maybe Keystone needs to get together with Honda to figure out how to make a frame that won't crack from a bike rack. Also, there was NO PLACARD anywhere. It only stated it in the owner's manual, which I cannot even read until I have bought the thing! By that time I had already moved the cargo platform over from our other trailer.

Also, the very fact that other manufacturers INSTALL cargo platforms on the back show that it can be done without destroying the integrity of "Frame Camber". As a matter of fact it may be a safety net so that nothing else can be put on the back bumper without TRULY modifying it.

Since you have now posted a picture, they're going to say that you installed a "cargo rack" with a capacity of up to X hundred lbs. The fact that you never put anything but bikes on it will get lost in the shuffle. Had you taken the rack off before taking it in, we would still likely be having this conversation, as that's the way the mfrs all work, but you'd have a much stronger position. I agree that by them bending over and keeping you happy would sell a lot more RVs than them putting you through this. The mfrs just don't seem to get the power of the Internet and how bloody =fast= and =far= this kind of stuff can spread. And don't be afraid to spread it around, either. Good luck, is all I can say.

Lyle

Lyle, your point is well taken. I agree with you...they will keep shuffling their feet until they get what they want. The cargo rack has a capacity of approximately 400 lbs. If they take this stance, then they have specs of what their bumper can hold, then they could be asked to show how much extra weight it takes to create unequal "camber" or to break, crack, tweak, bend, or deform their bumper. Again, they are stating that their bumpers are capable of carrying enough weight to damage their own frame. That is like Remington stating our firearm receiver can handle the hottest load you can put in it, but our barrels will explode. The one without the other is meaningless. Who needs a bumper when you have a broken frame?

As well, they have now implicated Lippert if indeed there is a cracked weld, frame, or structure, by stating the "camber" is out of wack or whatever. Lippert will do everything in its power to show that Keystone is wrong so that Lippert is not liable, for Keystone's cracked or broken structure. To state that Lippert's frame was off camber will, in my opinion, cause Lippert to prove their frame was not faulty or broken due to 400 lbs. I am SURE that in testing and then listing capacities they take it to the extreme and then back off for a huge margin of safety. If testing documentation shows that the testing phase was a mere 200 lbs or so from the safety margin listed then that would create a huge legal liability. Like any manufacturer, they likely test until it breaks, write that number down, and then set a "safe" limit for their product based on that number. Why would you make a car that could only handle "skinny" people and then say the frame broke because you put "fat" people in it. The tires were fine, the struts were fine, the seats were fine, but the frame broke because it was right at the edge of the safety margin.

The bottom line: We won't know exactly what is wrong until the dealer repairs. YET, Keystone is stating they WON'T fix it BECAUSE OF DAMAGE OR LOSS CAUSED BY...cargo platform. Yet, when I asked them point blank. "Are you stating that the cargo platform on the rear bumper caused the damage/loss/crack to the front of the unit?" They refuse to answer that question. It has been two weeks of emails averaging one a day. In my opinion, if it goes all the way to court then Keystone has to prove that my cargo platform broke their frame/structure. In order to do that they would need to produce these testing specifications that I mentioned. I don't think they want to do that...but again, I am just a consumer...what does my opinion count for? 🙂

[Tumbleweed79]

JIMNLIN wrote:
Under the bedroom slide cracks in the skin were common in the late '90s up into the '00s era. Skin cracks doesn't mean a structure problem in all cases.

My '97 28 RK with a bed room slide. The skin started cracking the 2nd year. By the 4th year it ran down about 8" angled down and forward like the pictures, all the way to the edge molding.
Drilling holes didn't stop it which is typical of non metallic skins.

I kept enough caulking in the crack so it didn't leak.

Asked my RV service mgr whats the best fix. He gave me a 10" piece of sidewall molding for that application. I added sealant under the molding and added two small SS screws. Now it looks OEM for trailers with bedroom slides of that era as many came from the factory with that short piece of molding under the corner of the bed room slide.

I have heard this from several people, on and off this forum.
First, this unit was less than 20 DAYS old when it happened.
Secondly, it already has the little "relief cut"
Third, this crack is already beyond 8".

I likely will keep it sealed until it is repaired. Thanks for all the input everyone!

[Tumbleweed79]

spud1957 wrote:
Funny, Keystone feels it's OK to clamp the spare tire to the rear bumper. Probably weighs the same as 2 bikes.

S

That did cross my mind. It was clamped on our old one. I didn't bring it up yet with them, but it is in the mix.

[JIMNLIN]

Under the bedroom slide cracks in the skin were common in the late '90s up into the '00s era. Skin cracks doesn't mean a structure problem in all cases.

My '97 28 RK with a bed room slide. The skin started cracking the 2nd year. By the 4th year it ran down about 8" angled down and forward like the pictures, all the way to the edge molding.
Drilling holes didn't stop it which is typical of non metallic skins.

I kept enough caulking in the crack so it didn't leak.

Asked my RV service mgr whats the best fix. He gave me a 10" piece of sidewall molding for that application. I added sealant under the molding and added two small SS screws. Now it looks OEM for trailers with bedroom slides of that era as many came from the factory with that short piece of molding under the corner of the bed room slide.

[laknox]

spud1957 wrote:
Funny, Keystone feels it's OK to clamp the spare tire to the rear bumper. Probably weighs the same as 2 bikes.

S

Probably less, since it's likely a crappy ST. 🙂

Lyle