Andersen Trailer Hitch

Quoting Internet sources does not legitimize them. I am not saying they are all wrong, but the methodology begs for documentation and verification. Scale tickes? Independent observers? You know the routine. There is a right way to test things. I can quote ten people on the Internet that think that we did not go to the moon.

Some people sure spend a lot of time and energy with negative comments about the Andersen hitch. I can only report from personal use that the product gives me a better towing experience than the half dozen other WD hitches that I have tried over the past forty years. That may be purely subjective, but I am not saying that is what ten people say. Therein is the difference. If anyone actually wants to discuss, or even test tow with an Andersen, they can contact me. I am currently in Texas but who knows where next month?

atreis wrote:
Having read the other threads, it seems quite likely to me the sources are actual users of the hitch. However, what's not clear is how many of these users tried to get 100% FALR. There are several people in the other threads that admit that they don't try to achieve that because they don't need/want to. That doesn't mean they couldn't. It also doesn't mean that they could. It's inconclusive. Unfortunately, there's no independent test agency for hitches, which is really a shame.

Thanks for providing some constructive comments.
You're correct -- there is no way to know how many tried to get 100%. Some of them did. I don't know about the others.

I do know that Andersen rates their WDH for a tongue weight capacity of 1400#. With that tongue weight, a WDH needs to restore about 600# to the front axle to achieve 100% FALR. With the OP's estimated 800# TW, the WDH needs to restore nearly 400# for 100% FALR.

From the following Appendix of Andersen user posts, we can read the following:

"renojack" reported the maximum load restoration value of 200# with 43% FALR. He stated, "--- I tightened the chains/ compression springs from the inadequate 7 threads to 9 threads (about all I could get with the socket provided by Anderson). It seemed that even if I had a deeper socket I could not have gotten more compression."

"AirHeadsRus" was able to achieve 160# and 57% with 10 threads. He stated, "That was very close to the limit that I could adjust."

"eartha" got 63% and 150# restored. He stated, "I found I could not hold the hitch on the frame with the clamps. I had to drill into the frame to hold it. I really liked the idea of the ball not rotating on the hitch. The hitch is well built and looks good. I wanted it to work for me, but the weight distribution is the killer."

"CHD Dad" achieved 160# and 50% at 1/2" compression. He stated, "I dont believe I can get any more compression without compromising the bushing."

I think it's fair to say that all of the above wanted to have more load restoration, but were only able to achieve values ranging from 150-200# versus the approximately 400# the OP would need for 100% FALR.
As for the others -- all I can say is the user reports all show less than 200# of load restoration.

Ron


APPENDIX OF ANDERSEN USER WD REPORTS

zues
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/25717515/gotomsg/25860978.cfm#25860978
2009 Ram Mega Cab diesel. 43% with est 600# TW. WD objective not indicated.

Bruce H.
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/25717515/gotomsg/25878691.cfm#25878691
2006 Honda Pilot. 90% at 1/4" compression with 400# TW.

gallifrey
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/25717515/gotomsg/25916590.cfm#25916590
2005 Nissan Armada. 75% at 9 threads with 900# est TW. "---hooking up with 9 threads seems to really compress the springs, probably more than they should---"

renojack
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/25717515/gotomsg/26103569.cfm#26103569
2005 Suburban 2500. 43% at 9 threads with 960# TW. "--- I tightened the chains/ compression springs from the inadequate 7 threads to 9 threads (about all I could get with the socket provided by Anderson). It seemed that even if I had a deeper socket I could not have gotten more compression."

hbillsmith
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26309849.cfm
2010 Mercedes GL450. 54% with 600# TW. WD objective not indicated.

housedad
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26354611/gotomsg/26382668.cfm#26382668
2005 Excursion. "---getting close to 50% at 1/2" compression with 1250# TW. No further data.

airheadsrus
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f464/the-andersen-wd-hitch-user-thread-92131-14.html#post1161759
Silverado 1500. 50% at 7 threads with 800# TW.
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f464/the-andersen-wd-hitch-user-thread-92131-77.html#post1231872
Silverado 1500. 36% at 9 threads and 57% at ten threads with 800# TW. ""At 10 threads showing, got it within 100 pounds at 3400. That was very close to the limit that I could adjust." (photo of compressed bushing)

SteveH
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f464/the-andersen-wd-hitch-user-thread-92131-48.html#post1204193
FJ Cruiser. Est 100% at 400# TW.

HowieE
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f464/the-andersen-wd-hitch-user-thread-92131-67.html#post1229114
2004 Excursion. 40% with 670# TW.

eartha
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26561155/gotomsg/26562284.cfm#26562284
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26561155/gotomsg/26567836.cfm#26567836
2005 Ford F-150. 63% with 560# TW. "I found I could not hold the hitch on the frame with the clamps.
I had to drill into the frame to hold it. I really liked the idea of the ball not rotating on the hitch.
The hitch is well built and looks good. I wanted it to work for me, but the weight distribution is the killer."

CHD Dad
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26817828.cfm
2010 Tundra. 19% at 3/16" compression and 50% at 1/2" with 800# TW.
" I dont believe I can get any more compression without compromising the bushing."

babies_dadeo
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/27095484.cfm
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/27095484/gotomsg/27224954.cfm#27224954
2013 Sierra Duramax 2500HD. 50% at 1/4" compression with 990# TW.
5/12/2013 "If you are in a situation where you require a hitch that will remove a substantial amount of weight from the drive axel, this is just not the right hitch for ya."

idroba
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f464/the-andersen-wd-hitch-user-thread-92131-160.html#post1333561
2012 Grand Cherokee. 33% at 6 threads and 53% at 8 threads with 680# TW.
"The hitch is capable of doing more distribution, I simply did not test it at higher levels.
The bushings now show a very slight bulge when 8 threads show on the adjustment."

PHS79
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/25717515/gotomsg/26988625.cfm#26988625
2004 F-150. 50% at 1/4" compression with 700# TW.


OTHER POSTS ON INABILITY TO DISTRIBUTE LOAD

jujububbajr
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26694630/gotomsg/26828948.cfm#26828948

CHD Dad
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26694630/gotomsg/26864568.cfm#26864568

dkottum
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f464/the-andersen-wd-hitch-user-thread-92131-124.html#post1293742

I admit that I used pretty graphs and spreadsheets to sell clients or owners on proposals back when I was employed, so I am familiar with the technique. "The computer said it, so it must be true". I am also familiar with the Scientific Method which relies on verifiable facts and figures to reach a conclusion. It is great that people challenge the Andersen hitch. I do, every time I hitch mine up. So far, it has met all expectations.

Having read the other threads, it seems quite likely to me the sources are actual users of the hitch. However, what's not clear is how many of these users tried to get 100% FALR. There are several people in the other threads that admit that they don't try to achieve that because they don't need/want to. That doesn't mean they couldn't. It also doesn't mean that they could. It's inconclusive. Unfortunately, there's no independent test agency for hitches, which is really a shame.

Posting undocumented "Internet" sources and presenting it with charts and graphs is the oldest trick in the book when it comes to knocking some product. How many of those "sources" sell other brands? How many actually know how to determine their FALR? Why not quote the dozens of satisfied users? I know what the Andersen can and can't do, because I have actually use one. I notice one name is notably missing from the "compilation", the authors.

lakeman48 wrote:
Thanks for all the input. I never thought to do a search. Will do now and decide. Thank you all again !!

Lakeman, it's entirely up to you to decide how much Front Axle Load Restoration (FALR) you want your new WDH to provide.
Some people follow the TV manufacturer's specification (100% for your TV), and others accept a lesser amount.

The following chart is a compilation of FALR values calculated from front-axle load or height measurements provided by actual Andersen users.
Based on the user-reported measurements, you might expect an Andersen WDH to provide an FALR of about 50% for your tongue weight.

Candid comments regarding the limited load transfer ability of the Andersen WDH can be found by searching Airforums.com for recent posts by users SteveH and dkottum.

Following the chart is a listing of user names and forum names if you want to search for the actual reports.

Front Axle Load Restoration (FALR) is chosen as the indicator of load transfer effectiveness.
For measured front-axle loads, FALR is defined as the amount of load added by application of WD
divided by the amount of load removed by tongue weight (with NO WD applied).
For measured front-axle heights, FALR is defined as the front-end lowering due to application of WD
divided by the front-end rise due to tongue weight (with NO WD applied) .
When the front end is observed to be returned to the unhitched height, the FALR is taken to be 100%.

The data indicate FALR=100% can easily be achieved for low tongue weights.
However, for tongue weights in excess of 1000#, it is not clear that FALR=100% can be achieved.

The curves labeled "FALR Theory" are calculated from: FALR = 100*CT*2*LA*(1+BOH/TTL)/TW/BOH
where
CT = chain tension in #/chain
LA = lever arm from ball center to chain in ft (assumed to be 6.5"/12 per Bruce H.)
BOH = ball overhang in ft (assumed to be 5')
TW = tongue weight in lbs
TTL = distance from ball to mid-point between axles (assumed to vary from 12' for TW=400# to 20' for TW=1200#)

Contributors of data can be identifed by their TW and achieved FALR in the following table:

TW - FALR - Load/Height - Contributor - DataSource

400---100%----hgt.----SteveH------Airforums.com
400----91%----load----Bruce H.-----Lanceowners.com, RV.net, Airforums.com
900----75%----hgt.----gallifrey------RV.net
800----57%----load----airheadsrus---Airforums.com (updated for 10 threads)
600----54%----load----hbillsmith-----RV.net
800----50%----load----airheadsrus---Airforums.com
800----36%----load----airheadsrus---Airforums.com (new data for 9 threads)
1250---45%----load----housedad-----RV.net
960----43%----load----renojack------RV.net
600----43%----hgt.----zues----------Airforums.com
670----40%----load----HowieE-------Airforums.com
560----63%----load----eartha--------RV.net
800----19%----load----CHD Dad 3/16"--RV.net
800----50%----load----CHD Dad 7/16"--RV.net
946----50%----load----babies_dadeo---RV.net
680----33%----load----idroba--------Airforums.com
680----50%----load----idroba--------Airforums.com
700----50%----hgt.----PHS79-----------RV.net
(chart updated 11/16/2013)

Ron

Thanks for all the input. I never thought to do a search. Will do now and decide. Thank you all again !!

Not an Anderson owner, but from what I've read you're right in the sweet spot for an Anderson. The only negative I've read is folks with very heavy tongue weight, say 1,000 lbs or more and they were dissatisfied with the amount of weight transfer to the front axle. For your use, I would go for it. As Tom said, there's lots of info out there and the Anderson now has a "body of work" so you can make up your own mind. Most of what I've read has been very positive.

For those that don't know how to do searches, there are hundreds of pages on the Airstream forums also. In general, the folks that actually own the Andersen hitch are happy with the product and those that don't, aren't. About like most other products or comparisons. Examples; Gas versus diesel, Ford versus Chevy, fifth wheel versus travel trailer, mine versus yours.

lakeman48 wrote:
I need to replace my 13 year old Draw-Tite weight distribution hitch. I have a 26ft.Freedom Express travel trailer. 6000lbs.w/load. Pull w/2007 Chevy 1500 extended cab 4x4 w/5.3 v-8. I've been looking at the Andersen No-Sway weight distribution hitch and wanted to know if any one has any experience w/this hitch.

The Owners Manual for your truck states:

When using a weight-distributing hitch, the hitch must be adjusted so the {front wheel well height} remains the same both before and after coupling the trailer to the tow vehicle.

This implies the WDH must be able to restore 100% of the load which was removed from the front axle due to application of tongue weight.

Your 6000# TT should have a TW of around 800#.

Based on Andersen user reports, it is not likely that you will be able to achieve 100% load restoration for your TV/TT combination if using the Andersen WDH.

Ron