scratching my head

I spoke to a Nash factory rep. at a show yesterday. Nash designs and makes their own frame and gets them independently certified to their HD off-road specs. He agreed that their are no industry standards and anything that is enforceable. Looking at Jayco TTs at the show, it looks like they have switched to the BAL/Norco Ultraframe. Looks pretty nice and looks better than the version Lance was or is still using. If you go to the Ultraframe website, there is almost no tech. data.

If there are any standards like perhaps by SAE, I'd really like to know what they are. Frame builders, like say L*****t, can build whatever they want with no accountability and no repercussions. If you find that your frame has serious flaws, there is no gov't agency of any kind (that oversees a standard) that you can complain to. The only thing you can do is complain to NHTSA or Transport Canada. I've been through major frame issues first hand in the past and have experienced the frame manufacturer's indifference. It's pretty sad IMHO.

If you do have a major frame problem, and you are still under warranty, the TT manufacturer sometimes will simply tell you to go deal directly with the frame manufacturer. That also is wrong IMO.

The RVIA does not create, control or enforce design standards or require recalls. The general public can't even access their information. They're a self-serving organization simply there for dealers and manufacturers, not the public.

I've yet to see a manufacturer's brochure with any real spec's on axles and tires and of course, frames. I've asked factory reps at shows and they can't tell me anything about frames, suspensions, axles or tires. I asked a dealer a simple question once - why would anyone want to pay for an upgrade option of load range D tires and he had no idea. A TT manufacturer can call their frame heavy duty when in fact, it can one of the weakest out there. It seems like you are on your own to ferret out the info. and truth.

The saddest thing of all is that when the majority of people go shopping for a new TT, they buy all the bling and features and have no idea what it is sitting on. There's an expectation that there could never be anything wrong with the frame and that someone has taken care of that for you.

MM49 wrote:


“There are NO standards used for sizing axles or for designing TT frames” The RVIA might have a little to say about this. They have issued two recals this year just for typo errors on vehicle labels.
“Sometimes it's the tires that are under-rated.” The RVIA controls this also. The specifications are managed by Keystone manufacturing.
“Don't expect a dealer, a factory rep. or even the plant to be able to tell you much on tech. info. on a frame and components. A brochure will tell you nothing about frames and axles” Every catolog I've seen gives axle ratings and tire size with rating.“The axle rating only needs to equal the GVWR-the tongue weight” The axle rating has nothing to do with the tongue weight.

MM49

MM49 wrote:

westend wrote:

MM49 wrote:
Here's a link for those that feel RV industry is exempt from standards and actions
MM49

Another Recall

How does this have anything to do with RVIA controlling the frame, tires, or axle standards?

"Due to the risk of failure, these tires fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119, “New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars.”
It is at the direction of the NHTSB.

There is no hope for you! If you don't understand this. I wish there was link for install common sense.
MM49

I understand everything in this thread, perfectly.

I think you may be using the British Standards and, believe me, you can't use BS with a guy that knows all about BS. :R

MM49 wrote:

westend wrote:

MM49 wrote:
Here's a link for those that feel RV industry is exempt from standards and actions
MM49

Another Recall

How does this have anything to do with RVIA controlling the frame, tires, or axle standards?

"Due to the risk of failure, these tires fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119, “New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars.”
It is at the direction of the NHTSB.

There is no hope for you! If you don't understand this. I wish there was link for install common sense.
MM49

MM49


you make less sense every time you post…

the recall from your link is - NHTSA Campaign Number: 14T001000,

RVIA has absolutely nothing to do with it…

Who ever said the RV industry is exempt from any standards or actions…



Here I’ll give you a lot of RV recalls to pick from…

recalls

.

Hi nephi007.

When I look at trailer specs and think about longer term quality with safe towing, I use simple rules for validating weights and axles specs.

For me:
- Confirm Trailer's GVWR (Gross Vehicle Weight Rating). If wondering, its the max lbs number of base trailer + factory options + loaded user items. If trailer has GVWR of 7,349 lbs, then that's the "up to" loaded / MAX weight its factory frame/suspension can support.
- Unlike some TT Makers and their lawyers (to save money in building costs), I do NOT subtract 15% (average tongue weight) from its GVWR number. For properly sized suspension, I purposely ignore its tongue weight influence (subtraction) number.
- With above GVWR (including Tongue weight), I then divide by the number of trailer axles. In most cases, I divide by 2 (for a 2 x axle trailer). For example, 7,349 GVWR trailer / 2 = 3,675 lbs. Each axle (and leaf spring set) must support minimum 3,675 lbs.
- With this divided number, I then "round up" to the nearest available axle size. For example, 3,800 lbs axles and matching 3,800 lbs leaf spring packs. Or, I would go with 2 x 4,000 lbs axles with 3,800 leaf spring packs.

If I wanted to make TT's rider smoother, I would then install - click here - with WET Bolt system as well. This would be my "after base warranty" DIY mod.

Using above sizing (with improvement mods), I've never had a leaf spring snap, never had an axle hub snap off, and never had tires wear funny (from being under sized) either. I upgraded all my Trailer's suspension - to eliminate risk of damage from double railway tracks, deep CG holes and for other "over the top" incidents. A buffer that should exist in all Trailers (TTs, Boats, utility trailers, etc.).

One can buy a RV/TT with "minimum specs" Leaf Springs ratings and "minimum specs" Axle ratings if they want. If one does, simply apply suspension upgrades (like new leaf spring packs and axles and suspension parts) each year - for the next 4-5 years. And at end of 5 years, your TT's suspension is upgraded to level you want it (need it). Great upgrade plan - if you plan to keep your trailer for 10+ years (like I do). IMO, buying brand new and upgrading its undersized suspension isn't a show stopper. Especially if one does their own DIY suspension upgrades.

Note: Upgrading to larger size axles and/or leaf spring packs does NOT increase the trailer's GVWR (max weight number). These DIY upgrades create extra safety buffer - for when it's suspension is sometimes pushed over the top - like the sudden jolt of a curb at end of one's driveway.

Hope this helps.

MM49 wrote:
Here's a link for those that feel RV industry is exempt from standards and actions
MM49

Another Recall

How does this have anything to do with RVIA controlling the frame, tires, or axle standards?

"Due to the risk of failure, these tires fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 119, “New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars.”
It is at the direction of the NHTSB.

MM49 wrote:
The RVIA might have a little to say about this. They have issued two recals this year just for typo errors on vehicle labels.

Can you please provide a link to the source of this information? In particular -- what did it have to do with sizing axles or designing frames?

The RVIA controls this also. The specifications are managed by Keystone manufacturing.

Can you please provide more information -- what aspect of tire rating is controlled by RVIA?

Every catolog I've seen gives axle ratings and tire size with rating.

Obviously you haven't read all the catalogs. For example, the OP mentioned the Dutchmen 275BH and the Jayco 26BH. I could not find any listing of axle rating or tire size/rating for these models on either the manufacturers' websites or brochures for these models.

The axle rating has nothing to do with the tongue weight.

Well refuted by previous posters.

Ron

Here's a link for those that feel RV industry is exempt from standards and actions
MM49

Another Recall

It's all true, it's on the INTERNET!!

MM49, are ya hav'in a bit of cabin fever up there? Come on now, let's play nice. Even I saw the minus sign.
The OP has a good question and apparently some of the responders have some knowledge on the matter. It's kind of sad that we have to experience folks arguing over an actual question.
Today we saw a sign that read "BE NICE OR GO HOME." Hint----

fla-gypsy wrote:
The axle rating only needs to equal the GVWR-the tongue weight to be legal.

Notice the " - " right after GVWR, that would be a MINUS sign in this context. As in subtract tongue weight from GVWR to get the weight the axles need to carry. Seemed clear enough to those of us who actually read what was written.