ddndoug wrote:
I really don't want to jump in the middle of an argument, but....
Onaquest, I think the point that Doug is trying to make is....
As you earlier admitted the further you extend the jacks, the less stable they become. If you are able to dump the airbag suspension on the DP, it lowers the chassis. By lowering the chassis the jacks are already at an advantage by starting from a lower point (not having to overcome the height of the airbag rise) which in turn typically will allow for a more stable RV.
IOW, by dropping the chassis (by means of dumping the airbags) the jacks do not have to extend as far to level. Which in turn adds more stability.
Doug
As you pointed out, I did concur with the fact that a heavier DP chassis (with air suspension) is inherently more stable, on or off the jacks, than a sprung gas chassis. And the abilities that you just reiterated are what makes that true. I know all that.
It was not any of that logic that I voiced disagreement with. It was only the statement that
"IF you have a Gasoline model, then movement and "bounce" will be normal even with the jacks leveling the RV. Doug", that I contested.
I based my response on my own 9+ years of owning my current gas Bounder and ~20 years of experience with RVs of friends and relatives.
Properly leveled (and with NO over extension) there simply is NO movement and "bounce". Could it be moved by hitting it with a DP? Sure, but the statement implies that movement and "bounce" can never be mitigated in a gas motorhome. THAT simply is NOT TRUE!!!
I am sorry that Doug took this as a personal affront to his abilities and capabilities. I was only trying to clarify for the OP that there was an answer to his inability to level and stabilize his RV on his first few attempts.
As for the couple of immature folks who attempted to come to Doug's defense, by playing their "we stick together card", and got their noses bent, I have absolutely no concern what so ever.
Thanks for giving me a chance to explain my position once again.