Equalizer vs Dual Cam

[aarond76]

I am currently pulling a roughly 9,000 lb 34' camper with a Reese Round bar WDH and friction sway control. My bars are rated at 1,000 lbs, I am sure tongue weight is substantially more but they seem to ride fine.

I want to get rid of the friction sway and go to either a Dual Cam or Equalizer set-up. If I stay with the 1,000 lb bars I can add the Dual Cam for around $200 so that is the cheapest option. However if I go to heavier rated bars I'm basically buying everything new and the cost is comparable between equalizer and a complete new dual cam set-up.

I had a 600/6000 lb Equalizer on a hybrid before and liked the set-up. The Equalizers were very popular with the hybrid people. It seems like the heavier campers tend to go with Dual Cam more often. Is one system better then the other when towing heavy? I want the nicest set-up I can get without going the $$$$ route of Propride or Hensley.

On the Reese hitches is there any performance difference between round bar and trunion bar? I see a fair amount of the trunnion bar 1,200 lb hitches complete with Dual Cam on Cragslist. The ball mount on our camper is attached to the top of the frame, I assume that limits me to round bar and the trunnion hitches are made for campers that have the ball mount on the bottom of the frame?

Alot of people say to add a 2nd friction sway bar with this long of camper. The only way to do that on a Reese hitch is to have someone weld another plate on the left side of the hitch head. By the time you do all that you might as well pay a little more for the Dual Cam so that is not really a consideration.

Thanks.

[Ron_Gratz]

For both the Equal-i-zer and Dual Cam, the amount of friction which is generated depends directly on the amount of upward force applied to the end of a WD bar rather than on the bar rating.

If you apply 800# of force to an 800# rated bar or a 1000# rated bar, you will get the same amount of friction as if you applied 800# of force to a 1200# rated bar.

Ron

[Huntindog]

myredracer wrote:
Has there been any comments on bar ratings? I assume that the EQ bars care available in different ratings? I am assuming that different bar ratings on the EQ setup has little influence on sway control or does it? On the other hand, the higher the bar rating is on the DC, the more friction there is between the bar and cam and better sway control?

I can say that we initially had 800 lb bars on our DC setup and then learned that our actual tongue weight is 960 lbs. I just installed 1200 lb bars and there is a HUGE difference. The truck tracks nice and straight and smoothly now in comparison to the smaller rated bars. The rear of the trailer appears to bounce a lot less. It seems in my case that the increased friction of the heavier bars makes a big difference in the friction and sway control.

Both systems have different sizes available, and both will have more friction the heavier one goes.

In fact, these systems are not recommended for light tongue weights.
At least by EQUALIZER.

[myredracer]

Has there been any comments on bar ratings? I assume that the EQ bars care available in different ratings? I am assuming that different bar ratings on the EQ setup has little influence on sway control or does it? On the other hand, the higher the bar rating is on the DC, the more friction there is between the bar and cam and better sway control?

I can say that we initially had 800 lb bars on our DC setup and then learned that our actual tongue weight is 960 lbs. I just installed 1200 lb bars and there is a HUGE difference. The truck tracks nice and straight and smoothly now in comparison to the smaller rated bars. The rear of the trailer appears to bounce a lot less. It seems in my case that the increased friction of the heavier bars makes a big difference in the friction and sway control.

[Ron_Gratz]

MarkyVasquez wrote:
I use the Camco Elite Weight Distributing Hitch with the friction control. Cam and friction controls both have their pros and cons. I've had both and like the friction better.---

Welcome to Open Roads Forum. Here you will find much diversity of opinion which usually generates much thought-provoking discussion. I fully respect your opinion as to personal preferences, but I will respectfully disagree with some of your views as to how the Dual Cam does or does not work.

---The problem with the cam and spring type of sway control is that at the center point they have the least amount of push or resistance. When the trailer starts to move away from the center the cam lobes increas their resistance. The more the trailer moves from the center the greater the resistance created by the cam.---

I agree that the friction force between cam and bar increases a the cam moves away from center. But, it's important to know the magnitude of the friction increase when forming an opinion about its potential benefit or detriment.

We agree the cam causes more upward deflection of the bar as the cam moves away from the center of the detent. If the TT swings by 1 degree, the cam will move about 0.1" longitudinally and, due to the slope of the bar, will lift the bar about 0.05". The added upward force on the bar will be equal to 0.05" times the spring constant.
For an 800# bar with a base load of 800#, the bar load will increase by 0.05"x200#/inch = 10#. The upward force will increase from 800# to about 810# -- an increase of about 1%.
At a "sway" of +/- 5 degrees, corresponding to the rear of a 30' TT moving side to side about +/- 2.5', the sway-resisting friction force would vary only about 5% from centered to max swing.

---The resistance is pushing the trailer to the center but as it starts to get to the center the resistance is less.---

It might be a matter of semantics, but IMO, the friction force does not push the trailer to the center. The friction force resists movement of the TT away from center, and it also resists, to a significantly smaller degree, movement of the TT back toward center.

The max resistance is when the trailer is almost jackknifed. The max resistance has to be kept within reason or the trailer won't be able to turn.---

At a very large angle of 50 degrees, the friction force would be about 25% greater than at an angle of zero degrees. However, the resistance to turning will be less than at zero degrees. This is because, at a very large angle, the component of force acting parallel to the TV's longitudinal centerline (the force which generates the yaw-resisting torque) is significantly diminished.

On the other hand with the friction control method the friction can be dialed up to the max all the time (within reason so you can turn). It doesn't start at low resistance then goes higher as the trailer moves from the center.---

Again, the "resistance" provided by the Dual Cam varies from 100% when centered to about 105% at a swing of +/- 5 degrees.

If the trailer starts to sway it first has to overcome the locking action the friction control creates when its not moving then the friction that has been set to the max as the friction control slides. So I guess you could say it almost locks the trailer behind the tow vehicle.---

The purpose of any friction-based sway control is to prevent relative yaw between TV and TT. If effect, the combination is "locked", up to the point at which the static friction is overcome and the friction surfaces begin to "slide".

The primary functional differences among the "friction sway controls" are the methods by which yaw-resisting torque is generated and the magnitude of the torque. The Dual Cam is unique in its ability to generate significantly less torque when the TT is returning to center than when the TT is moving away from center. Whether this is good is a matter of personal opinion.

Ron

[jerem0621]

MarkyVasquez wrote:
I use the Camco Elite Weight Distributing Hitch with the friction control. Cam and friction controls both have their pros and cons. I've had both and like the friction better. The problem with the cam and spring type of sway control is that at the center point they have the least amount of push or resistance. When the trailer starts to move away from the center the cam lobes increas their resistance. The more the trailer moves from the center the greater the resistance created by the cam. The resistance is pushing the trailer to the center but as it starts to get to the center the resistance is less. The max resistance is when the trailer is almost jackknifed. The max resistance has to be kept within reason or the trailer won't be able to turn. On the other hand with the friction control method the friction can be dialed up to the max all the time (within reason so you can turn). It doesn't start at low resistance then goes higher as the trailer moves from the center. If the trailer starts to sway it first has to overcome the locking action the friction control creates when its not moving then the friction that has been set to the max as the friction control slides. So I guess you could say it almost locks the trailer behind the tow vehicle. The only thing is the friction doesn't push the trailer to the center. Both systems are good. Most of the problems with friction controllers is shoddy construction. I like the price on the Camco on Amazon and it's built like a brick outhouse. I'm RVing on a teachers salary guys. Camco has a nice article on their website on how a black smith invented their eazLift weight distribution hitch in the 1950s. Happy RVing!

Pretty much my experience as well. I actually prefer the dual friction bars over the DC for various reasons.

Thanks!

[MarkyVasquez]

I use the Camco Elite Weight Distributing Hitch with the friction control. Cam and friction controls both have their pros and cons. I've had both and like the friction better. The problem with the cam and spring type of sway control is that at the center point they have the least amount of push or resistance. When the trailer starts to move away from the center the cam lobes increas their resistance. The more the trailer moves from the center the greater the resistance created by the cam. The resistance is pushing the trailer to the center but as it starts to get to the center the resistance is less. The max resistance is when the trailer is almost jackknifed. The max resistance has to be kept within reason or the trailer won't be able to turn. On the other hand with the friction control method the friction can be dialed up to the max all the time (within reason so you can turn). It doesn't start at low resistance then goes higher as the trailer moves from the center. If the trailer starts to sway it first has to overcome the locking action the friction control creates when its not moving then the friction that has been set to the max as the friction control slides. So I guess you could say it almost locks the trailer behind the tow vehicle. The only thing is the friction doesn't push the trailer to the center. Both systems are good. Most of the problems with friction controllers is shoddy construction. I like the price on the Camco on Amazon and it's built like a brick outhouse. I'm RVing on a teachers salary guys. Camco has a nice article on their website on how a black smith invented their eazLift weight distribution hitch in the 1950s. Happy RVing!

[MontanaCamper]

I just ordered the EQ, Havs been a tough couple of days, reading....bouncing back and forth between the Blue Ox, Reese, Anderson, and the EQ. Ordered the 1200k hitch...thanks to all of you for the information. Hope I will be happier towing my rig with this hitch over my WD hitch I had......

[Denlor]

X-2 Steeleshark
equalizer 1200 bars works great with our 33fk

[Huntindog]

The first thing to do is to agree on what the definition of "is" is.

Or in this case, what is the definition of "sway"

Having fortunantly survived to tell about experiencing it, Here is my definition.

An uncontrollable swinging from side to side of the TT in relation to the TV. Often increasing in severity with each "swing"

This experience will make an atheist turn religious.

Sway is NOT a TT being blown off center by a wind gust and then returning to center.

Now if your definition of sway is substantially different....Read no further as you will not agree with anything else I say.

Ron Gratz has calculated the anti sway force (friction) that both the DC and the EQUALIZER are capable of.

IIRC, the EQUALIZER can produce about 2200#s and the DC about 2000#s.

What this means is that two identical TV/TT combos with properly setup hitches, one a DC and the other a EQ,

When towing down the road in normal conditions there is no difference, until something such as a side wind gust occurs.

Since the EQ has slightly more friction (anti sway force), it will take a slightly stronger wind gust to overcome and force the TT off center. But if the wind is strong enough, both hitches will allow the TT to leave center.
(So both of the hitches are reactive, not proactive.)

What happens next is where the hitches differ.
The DC requires about 2000#s of force to overcome its friction holding the TT centered, and less to return to center. I can't remember any calculations on how much "less" for this discussion I will assume that its a lot, say 75%. This will mean that there is only about 500#s resisting the TTs return to center.
But the TT is like a pendalum, and will try to swing past center, where it will encounter the increased force leaving center in the opposite direction. This no longer 2000#s, as once the parts start sliding the friction goes down.
Since it has 75% less force when returning to center, it will do so faster/easier than the EQ will allow.

As for the EQ. Ron and I are in disagreement over the next part. Ron thinks that the EQ has the same amount of friction when moving away from center and towards center. I think it is somewhat less, though not as big a percentage as the DC likely allows.
But since Ron is the engineer, I will leave that debate for another day, and go with his theory (it won't make a lot of difference anyways)
So the EQ having slightly more friction than the DC when moving away from center also has much MORE friction when trying to return to center. This means that the sway is resisted in BOTH directions and it will be slowed down faster to the point where it may not be able to pass center.

So the net result is pretty much the same.
No perceptible sway.

I think that the reason users of both types are satisfied is that both of these hitches force the user to properly set them up. As they are both pretty ineffective when set up wrong.

The standard friction control OTH will make a noticeable difference to a poorly setup hitch.

[PA12DRVR]

No experience with Equalizer, but drove quite a few thousand miles with;
- Reese Dual Cam HP
- Either a 1997 Tahoe or a 2004 2500 Suburban
- Either a 2001 (?) Thor 22' trailer or a (2003?) 29' Keystone Cougar that measured approx 34' from hitch to rear bumper.

Altered the Reese Dual Cam HP a bit when switching to the longer trailer.

In both setups, the effect was incredible: when driving through cross-winds or being passed by 18 wheelers, the push felt like it was trying to push one big vehicle rather than pushing the trailer, then the tow vehicle, then the trailer, etc. The Dual Cam HP eliminated sway in every instance where it could occur.

The only time it didn't eliminate sway was on a highway where I came around a corner and found a truck had just spilled construction debris. By the time I made it through I had two flats on the right side of the trailer (in the end, I was happy that was all the damage). Got a bit of tail wagging the dog effect, but I'm sure it would have been worse without the Reese Dual Cam HP.

[myredracer]

Okay, now I am understanding it better. I like Jeremiah's comments about the DC being proactive.

I have not had a friction only based sway control before like the Equalizer. I have to think there is quite a difference in the "feel" of them. You could be in say a 45 degree turn with an Equalizer and there isn't a self-centering action and you need to return it to a straight line manually (for lack of a better word). I have to wonder what the feel of an Equalizer is like as you travel down a very gusty road and you still need to make corrective measures. For anyone who has hands on experience with the two, what is the difference in the feel between the two?

Also, is there any real difference in the Equalizer and the add-on friction sway control? Is the only benefit to the Equalizer fewer parts and quicker setup?

Have been looking around our cg here this weekend and have not seen anyone with a DC but have seen a few Equalizers. Also a few long trailers with no sway control.

[dadmomh]

We had an Equalizer on our HTT since Day 1 and it did a fine job....with the exception of the noise factor and getting greasy. We just made the leap to a TT - Rockwood Ultra Lite 2604 - and the dealer recommended the Blue Ox 1000. DH was hesitant since the Eq had done so well, but he watched the videos on the Blue Ox website and liked what he saw. The dealer would have ordered the Eq if we decided that was a better choice for us. In the end, we went with the Blue Ox 1000 and DH is sooo glad. Easier to hook up, does it's intended job very well, quiet, no greasy hands. The price difference was maybe $50 with the Eq being the higher of the two. Might be worth 10 min watching the videos before you make a final decision.

[Ron_Gratz]

myredracer wrote:
Reese says it is okay to add petroleum jelly to the cams to reduce noise. Clearly that would reduce friction so how is it that the DC is friction based?

Yes, Reese does say you can use Vaseline. The complete statement is:

QUOTE

9. Do not use grease on cam and cam arms. A light coating vaseline may be used to reduce noise. The Dual Cam was designed to use metal-to-metal friction. Heavy greasing of the cam and cam arm surfaces will affect performance. If noise is offensive, a very light coating of lubricant, such as Vaseline, may be used. Tongue weights over 1,200 lbs., may require a light coating of lubricant to reduce friction and prevent excessive wear.

UNQUOTE
(underline added for emphasis)

Using petroleum jelly but not using grease might seem contradictory, but it is not.

Grease is a relatively good lubricant which would reduce the fricton too much.
Petroleum jelly is a relatively poor lubricant which can be used for noise reduction with relatively little reduction in friction force.

Ron

[Ron_Gratz]

myredracer wrote:
Of course there is some friction involved because of the force imparted on the cams by the spring bar, but the way I see it, the crooks on the bars "roll" up and down on the cams in relation to swaying.---

The sloped surfaces on a bar don't "roll", they slide. It's two metal surfaces being forced together and that generates a friction force.

If the non-rolling cam could be replaced with a roller bearing and still generate the same amount of "sway control", I'm guessing the Dual Cam would be made with roller bearings.

That would eliminate the noise and wear which some people find objectionable.

Is there factual engineering info. from the manufacturer that supports the claims here? Just being curious.

None that I'm aware of. If I knew of any, you can bet I would cite it in support of the claims I've made.

Ron