WDH for 2500 Truck necessary?

[splashback]

I am new here and have decided on a Ram as the upgrade from my GMC Envoy.
I currently tow a camper that weights about 5000lbs fully loaded. Hitch weight is about 450-500lbs.
I currently have a weight distributing hitch and assume due to rear end sag, the Ram 1500 would also require using one.
Do you think a Ram 2500 would need the WDH? I would use sway control, but getting rid of the WDH would be great.
Thanks in advance.

[Dr__Blake]

Ron Gratz wrote:

Dr. Blake wrote:
Truck weights
Front axle: 4,620
Rear axle: 3,300
Total truck: 7,920

Trailer weights
Tongue: 820
Axle: 5,100

Truck and trailer no WD
Front axle: 4,356
Rear axle: 4,180
Total truck: 8,580

Truck and trailer with WD
Front axle: 4,450
Rear axle: 4,070
Total truck: 8,470

Your axle loads are not consistent with the reported tongue weight.

The axle load data indicate a tongue weight of about 600# versus the 820# from direct measurement.
I'm guessing the 820# value is closer to correct.

A tongue weight of 820#, with no WD applied, should have caused a load of about 330# to be removed from the steer axle and a load of about 1150# to be added to the drive axle.

I think a re-weigh is in order.

Ron

I was working in Kilograms and my son was in and out of the truck; he's about 30 pounds, which is why some of the weights are a bit off. The scale rounds to the closest 10 kgs, which is almost 25 pounds. The reason the WD hitch is only redistributing about half is that's what I thought GM wanted. I am readjusting.

I was merely pointing out to the OP that with a truck his size and minimal tongue weight acting on it; not a lot changes from loaded to unloaded.

[Pauljdav]

Also your weight distribution could do a better job. It is not even putting half the load taken from the front axle back on.

I agree with Ron though the math is not adding up.

Paul

[Ron_Gratz]

Dr. Blake wrote:
Truck weights
Front axle: 4,620
Rear axle: 3,300
Total truck: 7,920

Trailer weights
Tongue: 820
Axle: 5,100

Truck and trailer no WD
Front axle: 4,356
Rear axle: 4,180
Total truck: 8,580

Truck and trailer with WD
Front axle: 4,450
Rear axle: 4,070
Total truck: 8,470

Your axle loads are not consistent with the reported tongue weight.

The axle load data indicate a tongue weight of about 600# versus the 820# from direct measurement.
I'm guessing the 820# value is closer to correct.

A tongue weight of 820#, with no WD applied, should have caused a load of about 330# to be removed from the steer axle and a load of about 1150# to be added to the drive axle.

I think a re-weigh is in order.

Ron

[splashback]

Thanks for the info. It sounds like I should just try towing my camper with and w/o the WDH once I get my truck.

[gcloss]

gijoecam wrote:

I would beg to differ on this point... The weight capacity of the truck's receiver is but one factor in determining the NEED for a WDH. I could replace the hitch on my Super Duty (rated for 600/6000 weight-carrying) with a Reese Titan rated for 2000lbs of tongue-weight weight-carrying, but that doesn't eliminate the need for a WDH to restore the front axle load, and it doesn't provide the additional rear axle capacity necessary to handle the tongue weight plus the weight transferred from the front to the rear axle. (On my particular truck, I **might** be able to go as high as 1800lbs tongue weight without overloading the rear axle, but I suspect the front wheels would be dangerously light)

In short, the *need* for a WDH is related to the hitch as well as the chassis design, suspension ratings, and axle weights as a *system*, not any one specific component.

Well said .....

[Dr__Blake]

OP - I have a similar setup to you. See my signature below. I had a tough time setting up my WD hitch because the tongue weight of my trailer didn’t really have any effect on my truck. Below is my post with weights. This weekend I am going to tweek it to get the front end back to stock weight. John was a big help with this, I thought I was supposed to only add back 50% of the weight removed; this amounts to basically nothing. I will make the adjustments and probably update my post to let people know how it goes.

Here is my post:

I setup my hitch for my new truck yesterday. It is a 2013 GMC 3500hd diesel.

Truck weights
Front axle: 4,620
Rear axle: 3,300
Total truck: 7,920

Trailer weights
Tongue: 820
Axle: 5,100

Truck and trailer no WD
Front axle: 4,356
Rear axle: 4,180
Total truck: 8,580

Truck and trailer with WD
Front axle: 4,450
Rear axle: 4,070
Total truck: 8,470

I am using 7 links when I am hooked up.

I had a hard time getting it dialed in. The truck barely knew it was there so any adjustment had to be so minor. Plus, GM says only add back 50 percent of the weight removed from the front axle, making each adjust even more delicate.

[gijoecam]

skipnchar wrote:
The NEED for a WD system depends on the weight capacity of the trucks receiver. SOUNDS like your tongue weight would be within the trucks receiver rating even without a WD hitch but you need to WEIGH it not guess. For what it's worth, the trucks ride will be a lot better with the WD system in place.

I would beg to differ on this point... The weight capacity of the truck's receiver is but one factor in determining the NEED for a WDH. I could replace the hitch on my Super Duty (rated for 600/6000 weight-carrying) with a Reese Titan rated for 2000lbs of tongue-weight weight-carrying, but that doesn't eliminate the need for a WDH to restore the front axle load, and it doesn't provide the additional rear axle capacity necessary to handle the tongue weight plus the weight transferred from the front to the rear axle. (On my particular truck, I **might** be able to go as high as 1800lbs tongue weight without overloading the rear axle, but I suspect the front wheels would be dangerously light)

In short, the *need* for a WDH is related to the hitch as well as the chassis design, suspension ratings, and axle weights as a *system*, not any one specific component.

[mtofell1]

I have a bit heavier TT with about 800# tongue weight on my 2500 Duramax. I don't "need" the WDH but still use it. I notice it helps with "porpising" when going over uneven spots.... it also prevents campers towing 12K trailers with 1/2 ton trucks from trying to "educate" me at the campground or gas station 🙂

I generally run mine on the 2nd chain link which is very little tension... just enough to give some support when things start bouncing on big humps and bumps.

[TomG2]

Who cares? Certainly not the OP or me. I have an Andersen hitch and know how to use it. He doesn't. If the OP or anyone else is interested in the Andersen hitch, which I doubt, there are a couple hundred pages devoted to it and all the calculations and theories involved therein. Chevrolet does not mandate the use of a weight distributing hitch for the OP's trailer with the Silverado 2500HD. I suspect the Dodge is similar in capacity.

[Ron_Gratz]

TomG2 wrote:
---I don't know where or how anyone came up with 680# of tension, but I doubt that it is nearly that high since the chains are snug not as tight as a bow string.---

Click on this link from my previous post and scroll to the bottom;

Andersen WDH Chain Tension Versus Bushing Compression

Ron

[TomG2]

Back to the OP's question, I think he needs little or no weight distribution towing with a 2500 series truck and the trailer mentioned.

[TomG2]

Having towed with one friction bar, two friction bars, and the Andersen, the Andersen gives a much better feel of sway resistance, is easier to install, does not have to be unhooked when backing up, and less maintenance than either one or two bars. In addition, the ride is improved and it is silent. I don't know where or how anyone came up with 680# of tension, but I doubt that it is nearly that high since the chains are snug not as tight as a bow string. They do get tight at 1/4" but I don't need anything like that much.

[Ron_Gratz]

TomG2 wrote:
For those who have actually used an Andersen hitch, it is quite easy to determine the amount of tension required to make the hitch perform its anti sway function. For those that haven't, about 1/8 inch compression on the bushings will be plenty.---

Thanks for the information.
I was trying to get a feel for how much tension was "very little tension".

According to member Bruce H. who has measured the relationship between compression and tension,
Andersen WDH Chain Tension Versus Bushing Compression,
a compression of 1/8" produced 680# of chain tension.

For comparison, a "normal" amount of bushing compression for the Andersen WDH seems to be in the range of 3/16"-1/4" -- corresponding to chain tension of 970-1220#.

If the tongue weight of the OP's 19H is around 500#, the Andersen WDH would be a good match.
However, if he doesn't need any weight distribution, a single friction bar sway control would be considerably cheaper.

Ron

[gcloss]

The following is from www.ramtrucks.com for 2500/3500 trucks

3. The recommended tongue weight is between 10 percent and 15 percent of the gross trailer weight. However, the maximum tongue weight on Class III (the bumper ball) is limited to 500 pounds, and Class IV (the receiver hitch) to 1,200 pounds. Additionally, the GAWRs and GVWRs should never be exceeded.

4. The maximum trailer weight is 5,000 pounds for a weight-carrying hitch. A weight distributing system is recommended for trailers over 5,000 pounds. A fifth-wheel or gooseneck hitch is required for trailers over 12,000 pounds.

I have a 2012 Ram 2500 and will always use my WDH. I purchased my truck with an 8' bed for the increased stability of the longer wheelbase. I want the tongue weight distributed throughout the truck and not all of the weight sitting on the rear of the truck.

I don't find it a big deal setting up the WDH each time I tow.