Caddywhompus
Explorer
Joined 24 years ago
User Profile
User Widgets
All Activity
Re: Need a Mac expert
Having just bought a new Macbook Pro running Maverick, and 2 Macbook Airs for my kids over the holiday, I can tell you that iPhoto and the rest of the iLife suite are not installed by default. As soon as you setup the Mac and get it running, Maverick will download all the iLife and iWork programs via the app store. On all 3 of these new macs, the icons were already present on the dock, but the programs weren't installed until they were downloaded. My guess is you haven't yet downloaded the iPhoto program, so when you try to launch it the App store opens.296Views0likes0CommentsRe: Practical Caravan (British Mag) 2013 Tow Car Awards
Francesca Knowles wrote: Did I hear right- did that fellow say that they were testing all the cars towing loads that were 85% of total tug weight? That's pretty impressive... Such a different world! Not just the tugs, either. Trailer design is so different over there. A few years back, the Subaru Forester was "Towcar of the year". You know, the car you said was completely incapable of towing because the OEM hitch sucks.369Views0likes0CommentsRe: Towing 3,000 Pounds
Francesca Knowles wrote: Caddywhompus wrote: Francesca Knowles wrote: Redsky wrote: A Subaru wagon will pull a 3,000 lb. trailer and without the trailer it will get 30 MPG on the freeway. Dunno which "wagon" you're referring to, but I doubt that any Subaru except possibly the Tribeca is capable of towing 3,000 pounds of travel trailer. Limiting factor is tongue weight- limited to 200 pounds on just about every model. You can't tow a 3,000 pound TT safely with such a low tongue-to trailer ratio. The "high" number really only applies to boat towing- due to differences in design those can be towed with a 5-7% ratio. Again excepting the Tribeca, Subaru max tow limits are between 2,000 and 2700 pounds...And let's keep in mind that the weight of everything in the car except a 175 pound driver has to be taken off that number in order to stay under max GCWR. This tongue weight limitation is for the Subaru factory hitch, which is only class II. The aftermarket makes class III hitches for most Subarus that can handle higher tongue weights, as well as WD hitches. That is not correct, though VERY commonly believed. Putting a "higher capacity" hitch on does not raise tow limits on any vehicle. A hitch itself is only one of many design considerations, and the numbers stamped on a receiver reflect only that component's capacity. As for aftermarket W/D, Subaru warns against their use on any/all of its vehicles. Also, aftermarket hitches are very often inferior to those supplied by the manufacturer- never more true than with that supplied for the Forester. Below is a picture illustrating just ONE major difference. The pic is from a very detailed discussion, complete with illustrations, of an install of a factory hitch on a Forester at this link. It shows the bumper removed to expose the engineered channels into which part of the factory hitch slides. NO aftermarket hitch supposedly "designed for a Forester" does that. Furthermore, here quoting from that discussion Post number 28 wrote: The OEM hitch connects to the body/frame in 12 places in a design that is engineered specifically to interface with the design of the Forester versus only four connection points (two of which require drilling) for any of the aftermarket hitches that are a standard design. Despite taking a little bit longer to install and roughly $100 more expensive, the superior design of the oem hitch is more than worth it to me. Hitches have the potential to apply extreme forces to the body/frame of your car, and on my car, I would rather have one that has 3X the number of connection points. None of that, of course, will stop folks from doing just as they please, but as someone who's in the market and having looked at a lot of used cars I can tell you that the effects of using inferior equipment and/or ignoring mfr. limits does show "down the road". Drink more Kool-Aid and buy what the commercials tell you. Tongue weight limits are SPECIFICALLY a function of the hitch. As long as the tongue weight you are carrying doesn't overload the GVWR or GAWRs, nothing else matters besides the hitch and it's attachment to the frame/chassis. Interesting to note that the factory hitch is SO tough that is must slide into the frame and be bolted in 12 places, yet is still so weak to carry a 200 pound TW limit and no WD use permitted. Yet the aftermarket hitch on my Forester was made of much better steel, attached in 4 places with huge bolts and backer plates to protect the chassis, and had it's mounting points spread out far enough to support a WD hitch. The factory hitch I took off was a joke trinket in comparison. I am not alone in my knowledge of what can be SAFELY towed with a Forester. Thousands of others around the world already know by experience, not internet hearsay or supposition by people who bought too much truck. In Australia, you can get a Class III hitch on a Subie from the factory. P.S. Note my signature, I have plenty of options to tow with. For light-duty towing under 3000 pounds, the Subaru was clearly the best.684Views0likes0CommentsRe: Towing 3,000 Pounds
Francesca Knowles wrote: Redsky wrote: A Subaru wagon will pull a 3,000 lb. trailer and without the trailer it will get 30 MPG on the freeway. Dunno which "wagon" you're referring to, but I doubt that any Subaru except possibly the Tribeca is capable of towing 3,000 pounds of travel trailer. Limiting factor is tongue weight- limited to 200 pounds on just about every model. You can't tow a 3,000 pound TT safely with such a low tongue-to trailer ratio. The "high" number really only applies to boat towing- due to differences in design those can be towed with a 5-7% ratio. Again excepting the Tribeca, Subaru max tow limits are between 2,000 and 2700 pounds...And let's keep in mind that the weight of everything in the car except a 175 pound driver has to be taken off that number in order to stay under max GCWR. This tongue weight limitation is for the Subaru factory hitch, which is only class II. The aftermarket makes class III hitches for most Subarus that can handle higher tongue weights, as well as WD hitches. I towed upwards of 4000 pounds with a 2003 Subaru Forester, properly outfitted. I was surprised how stable and composed it was, and with the 2.5 liter 170HP flat-4 engine and manual 5-speed transmission, I had plenty of power and gears for any challenge the road could throw at me. One detail most don't know about, is Subaru rates their cars for towing assuming the vehicle is already loaded with people and gear. No need to deduct for every butt-in-a-seat like other trucks. On other shores, Foresters are rated as high as 3800 pounds towing. The only real limitation in North America is the class II hitch, which is easily remedied. I would highly recommend a Subaru. In fact, I miss mine. I put 110k miles on her before trading it in, trouble-free the entire time despite the towing. Overall mileage was 28-ish open road, 25-ish around town, 20-ish towing a 4000 pound popup.683Views0likes0CommentsRe: Android-Apple-Microsoft
n7bsn wrote: Bill.Satellite wrote: The Kindle Fire HD might be a good choice if you are doing a lot of book reading. My wife loves hers and she does her Facebook stuff and surfing as well. If you see posts from someone using any kind of a take-off of the Windows names (Windoz, etc.) they are just likely Apple fanatics. Or spent 30+ years working in the industry Or grossly uninformed and ignorant. As a user stuck working with Windows daily, I prefer Apple at home. 4 months ago I tried a Windows 8 smartphone. It has been more stable, efficient and secure than ANY Android device. It's faster than IOS on Apple devices, and completely surprised me when it proved to be more stable than Windows PC operating systems. Windows Mobile is way better than people assume.364Views0likes0CommentsRe: Buying van to pull my trailer
popupcamping wrote: You should not tow a 2700lb dry trailer. The tongue weight would be close to 500 lbs loaded to camp and you do not have the capability. 350 tw is your max....sorry Wrong answer. 350 is the maximum tongue weight with a class II hitch. You can buy class III hitches for the Freestar that not only get you the higher tongue weight capability, but the ability to use a WD hitch. From memory, the class III Hidden Hitch (custom fit, not universal) on our Freestar was rated for 400 pounds of hitch weight without WD, and 550 with WD. The max trailer weight was 5500 pounds. Freestars are some of the most under-rated tow vehicles in the world. A 4.2 liter Freestar will easily pull a travel trailer up to around 5000 pounds, despite carrying the rubber-stamp 3500 pound minivan tow rating. With some modifications, trailers over 5000 pounds are even possible.491Views0likes0CommentsRe: Windows 8
I have been running Windows 8 on at least 4 computers since January when it was on sale. Every single application I ran in 7 runs exactly the same in 8. I don't use the Metro screen much, but I even find value in the live tiles when I do. The OS has been stable, secure and fast. I have had no crashes, intrusions or infections despite connecting to public network all the time when I travel. As best as I can tell, the people complaining about 8 are generally not computer-savy, and therefore cannot adapt to change when it happens. Even though the change here is nominal at best, it is still change. BTW, I upgraded all 4 of my Windows 8 machines from various versions of Vista and 7. None of them were brand-new computers, and none came with 8 originally. All of them run faster, more stable and more secure after the upgrade. There is plenty of reason to upgrade a Windows 7 machine to 8.215Views0likes0CommentsRe: Timed vs inertia brake controllers
I waved waved the BS flag before on some posts, but the Suburban out accelerating and out stopping a BMW 5 series has to take the cake. This is delusional to say the least. If this were remotely possible, I would think you'd see a lot more Subs out there competing in road racing, since all that has to happen to out-perform a BMW is some simple bolt-ons. What happened was simple, the guy rear-ended you because he didn't see you were stopping in time, or possibly because his reflexes were poor. Reading anything else into that post above is pointless. Personally, I find Suburbans to be about the WORST accelerating, braking and handling rigs ever mass-produced for the road. Simple laws of physics predict that an object which is top-heavy, weighs more than the biggest pickup truck, and comes with the same brakes and suspension cannot POSSIBLY out-perform a BMW. I don't care what was bolted onto it, short of a completely new suspension, brakes and drivetrain.89Views0likes0CommentsRe: Timed vs inertia brake controllers
06Fargo wrote: Has anyone changed from a timed controller to non-OEM inertia style and if yes what differences were found? Yes, I have. And I agree with above posters that the timed controllers should be removed from the market. The problem with the time-based controllers is that in a panic stop, you will NOT have full trailer brakes the instant you need them unless you crank the ramp up to the max. But then if you do that, you can't stop smoothly the 99% of the time you aren't panic-braking. You have to back down the ramp to stop smoothly, which is effectively neutralizing the trailer brakes. So you can either stop smoothly, or you can have your safety in an emergency. But in no way can you actually have both. My ramp-time controller is in the bottom drawer of my toolbox as a backup spare. I hope to never use it again.102Views0likes0CommentsRe: Antenna explanation
SCVJeff wrote: You seriously need to get you facts straight as almost everything you state here is incorrect. Where do you get this from anyway? Actually I think it is you who isn't paying attention. You are technically correct when you state there isn't such a thing as an "HD antenna", but that is splitting hairs. Pre-HD (analog TV days), UHF channels were the minority of channels in most markets, and they were also often independent channels people didn't care about. So the antennas made back then were tuned for optimal VHF reception, since those tended to be the more difficult channels to tune in over a long distance. In order to recieve UHF channels, you either had to get an antenna with a UHF grid, or add one to your antenna stack. Many people didn't care enough about UHF to bother with this step. (I know 2 personally) Newer antennas marketed as "HD" as simply tuned to receive much better UHF, since that is now the vast majority of broadcast network transmissions. They still recieve VHF (mine does) so you don't lose any of those channels either, but the UHF reception is dramatically improved, so your HD reception is dramatically improved. I will agree with you, that if someone HAS an old antenna on their roof or RV that picks up UHF acceptably, it will work fine with HD. (Hence no such thing as an "HD antenna") But if your old antenna had weak UHF reception to begin with, then it will suck picking up HD. Installing one of the newer designs will make a dramatic improvement. My own house is right in between 2 major markets, unfortunately 50+ miles from each. In the old days, I couldn't pick up ANY of the UHF analog broadcasts, they were far too weak. But I paid decent money for a massive beam antenna that picked up VHF reasonably well, even though it had to run through a rotor to get both markets. After the HD broadcasts began, I replaced this massive beam antenna with a small grid-style "HD antenna", and removed the rotor completely. I now receive all channels, from both markets, with no need to turn the antenna at all. I went from a beam antenna that weighed 30 pounds and had about a 5 foot span and needed a tripd mount on my roof to support, to a grid about 2 feet square that is light enough to mount on a pole attached to my gutter. So don't tell me there isn't a benefit in the new antennas.102Views0likes0Comments
Groups
Travel Trailer Group
Prefer to camp in a travel trailer? You're not alone.May 11, 202544,030 Posts
