How big, function vs ease of use??

[Ed Calkins]

FWIW, I used a Reese Dual-Cam when towing my 25RB with a 7,000 lb Excursion with a 10,000 lb tow rating. I would recommend nothing less than a Dual-Cam or Equal-i-zer WDH/sway control hitch for your tow with a 21' Bigfoot. If you already have a WDH, then you can get by with it, but I'd definately recommend a friction sway control device to compliment it.

Roger

Thanks for the weight info and advice Roger. I will follow it. I will do a little research to have more understanding on the anti-sway options and the differences between the products you mentioned. I do have a WDH (torsion bars, receiver, chains, etc.) that I used about 30 years ago when towing a speedboat with a passenger car but I think it may be too small and it has none of the anti sway function that I am aware of. What about having to remove the anti sway device when backing and maneuvering --- is that true? Ed

[Roger H]

What about having to remove the anti sway device when backing and maneuvering --- is that true? Ed

If you're using a friction sway control device (bar), and you have to back at an acute angle, it's wise to remove the device first. If you use a Reese Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer hitch, there's no reason to remove anything while backing.

Roger

[V'sGlassSleeper]

If you're using a friction sway control device (bar), and you have to back at an acute angle, it's wise to remove the device first. If you use a Reese Dual Cam or Equal-i-zer hitch, there's no reason to remove anything while backing.

Roger

Roger...please clarify... according to the Equalizer brochure that I just picked up, it does use friction for sway control... so should it be removed when backing up?

[Roger H]

No, Val... only if you're using a friction sway control device in conjuction with a standard weight distributing hitch. A friction sway control device looks like this:





If you're using an Equal-i-zer sway control weight distributing hitch, or a Reese Dual-Cam hitch, there is nothing that needs to be removed for backing. You might want to review this post in Reese Dual Cam Sway Control.

Roger

[V'sGlassSleeper]

No, Val... only if you're using a friction sway control device in conjuction with a standard weight distributing hitch. A friction sway control device looks like this:


Attachment 8854


If you're using an Equal-i-zer sway control weight distributing hitch, or a Reese Dual-Cam hitch, there is nothing that needs to be removed for backing. You might want to review this post in Reese Dual Cam Sway Control.

Roger

Well, that's a strong point in favor of an Equal-i-zer or Reese Dual-Cam. The less rules to remember, the better.

[Loren G. Hedahl]

Back to your original question --

We are fortunate to have both a Scamp 16 and an Avion 26. Both tow great with our 83 Jimmy diesel. Fuel usage with the Scamp runs about 19 MPG vs 15-16 with the Avion. The only basic anemity the Avion has over the Scamp is a shower.

What we have found, so far, is the Scamp goes and the Avion stays.

Our major use is getting away from the Pacific Northwest rain for a couple of weeks or so a couple of times through each winter. This involves a fast trip down I-5 to So. California, a week or two in the sun (hopefully) and a dash back up I-5.

For us the evenings get a bit long in the Scamp. Seating is not that comfortable and heating is spotty due to leaks around the door, windows and lack of insulation.

On the-other-hand we have enjoyed exploring and camping in remote areas with the Scamp that would not be possible with the Avion.

So our plan is to use the Scamp for exploratory-touring outings. Then as we find places that we might like to revisit for a longer time, the Avion will be available. Most of these places are in areas easily accessed with the larger trailer.

Another trailer you might consider, if you can find one, is one of the Award models. They are very light weight, having an engineered frame, and are quite aerodynamic but are more conventional in construction.

My parents had a Big Foot fifth wheel (my memory says it was a 21 ft, but that may not be exact) for several years. It was roomy and very functional, but a little heavy and hard to pull until they upgraded to a full size V-8 pickup. Later they upgraded to a large full-time 5th wheel setup for a while, then back down to a Scamp 16.

[Pete Dumbleton]

Of even more importance than removal when backing (when I had a friction bar anti-sway control on my old Jayco, I made a hanger on the tongue so I could pull the pin on the truck end of the control, fold it back against the tongue and hang it when unhitching or backing to the wrong side), is the warning to loosen or remove it when towing in slippery road conditions.

As mentioned elsewhere, a tight friction bar control that has gone into a turn and has slipped, will now resist the trailer tracking straight behind the truck when coming out of a turn or maneuver.


QUOTE FROM THE REESE PDF FOR FRICTION BAR SWAY CONTROL:

1.SWAY CONTROL CANNOT BE USED ON TRAILERS WITH SURGE BRAKES.

2.Trailer loading: Proper trailer loading is your first-line defense against dangerous instability and sway. Heavy items should be placed on the floor in front of the axle. The load should be balanced side-to-side and secured to prevent shifting. Tongue weight should be about 10-15 percent of gross trailer weight for most trailers. Too low apercentage of tongue weight can cause sway. Load the trailer heavier in front.

3. The handle (5) is an on/off device. The bolt (7) below is for adjustment only.

4. When towing during slippery conditions such as wet, icy, or snow-covered roads or on loose gravel, turn on/off handle (5) counterclockwise until all tension is removed from unit. Failure to do so could prevent tow vehicle and trailer from turning properly.

5. Do not speed up if sway occurs. Sway increases with speed. Do not continue to operate a swaying vehicle. Check trailer loading, sway control adjustment, and all other equipment, until the cause of sway has been determined and corrected.

6. Never paint or lubricate slide bar (6).
END QUOTE

The friction bar anti-sway control is a tool, and like any other tool, there are right ways and wrong ways to use it.

As Roger said, the 'integral' anti-sway on the Dual Cam and EqualIZer WDHs do not need to be disconnected.

[Ed Calkins]

Again, thanks to all of you for your comments and contributions -- this is a great forum and very educational. Some comments on swaying as discussed in this thread in the context of anti-sway hitches. The trailer we are zeroing in on is the BF model 25B21FB (front bedroom). This trailer had a spec'd dry weight of 3815 lbs and recently I noticed the weight changed to 4090 lbs in the online specs. When chking with BF I was told that that particular model had some issues in some configurations under certain loading (water, propane, stuff ????) and they added weight to keep the tongue weight in a satisfactory range under different loading conditions. I guess there was some sort of recall or something (not sure of correct trailer language here) about the tongue weight issue. I guess that is ok, but, I was not too happy about just having weight added as opposed to moving something (batteries ?) or adding something useful (again batteries or ???) to manage the weight issue. I don't know where or what the added weight is or if it is removable but that trailer has an outside accessible storage area forward and it seems carrying some heavy tools or whatever is better than adding lead/steel weight. I will of course find out more about this soon but it seemed strange --- not sure if they plan to notify existing owners or do anything with dealer inventory trailers?? FYI, the rear bedroom model of the same 21' trailer has a dry weight of 36XX lbs with all the same stuff. Ed

[Pete Dumbleton]

I personally wouldn't get to fussed about the dry weight in general except to presume that it is low and to know that what really matters is the wet weight as you have it (and tow vehicle) loaded for the road.

A more useful number to use for planning, until you have actual scale weights, is the GVWR of the trailer, which tells you what the maximum load on the axle(s) can be, usually determined by the axle(s), wheels and tires, and it doesn't include the tongue weight (estimate 15% for planning).

Of course, that assumes the manf has equipped the TT with the right axle set, which is not always a valid assumption in the stick-built world.

I believe at least one state (Indiana?) has a law that requires the manf to weigh EACH rig as it goes out the door, with all the ordered options, and that weight goes on the title and the sticker.

[Brian B-P]

I would be surprised if any manufacturer added 275 lb of ballast - if only because 275 lb of anything cost money... and then there's the cost of installing it. It seems far more likely that Bigfoot either moved something, or changed the base configuration of components so something near the front is now included and something near the back is not. I could be wrong, of course, but unless you find two identically equipped 25B21FBs - from before and after the change - and compare them you'll never know.

Like Ed, I would far rather carry 275 lb of stuff I want, than just ballast.

[Ed Calkins]

I would be surprised if any manufacturer added 275 lb of ballast - if only because 275 lb of anything cost money... and then there's the cost of installing it. It seems far more likely that Bigfoot either moved something, or changed the base configuration of components so something near the front is now included and something near the back is not. I could be wrong, of course, but unless you find two identically equipped 25B21FBs - from before and after the change - and compare them you'll never know.

Like Ed, I would far rather carry 275 lb of stuff I want, than just ballast.

I was also surprised but they added ballast (as opposed to adjusting the load). Here is part of a response I got from the BF design people:

<span style="font-size:10pt;line-height:100%">"the B21FB is presently being produced, with the weights that have recently been discussed.
On older units, Bigfoot Industries has determined that when B21FB trailers are towed behind small tow vehicles, the hitch weight may not be as high as is desireable. As a result the trailer could become unstable when completely empty and towed at high speed.
Bigfoot Industries initiated a campaign, with the approval of NHTSA, and has provided to any customer at no charge a Ballast kit that will bring the hitch weight of an older B21FB trailer up to that of our current production. Which explains the weight differential on the two models of B21's as only the Current B21FB require the kit.
Letters of notification have been sent to all affected B21FB owners, as well as to the entire Bigfoot dealer network which outline this scenario as well as the corrective action required.
As part of our ongoing customer satisfaction program, we've also included the second time buyers to this campaign, and if you purchase the used Bigfoot, you would be able to make contact with a local Bigfoot dealer and arrange for the appropriate kit to be sent to the dealership for installation on your unit. Assuming that the original owner did not install the kit as offered. This kit will be installed on the used Bigfoot at no charge to you the second owner."</span>

I am now trying to determine where the ballast goes and how easy it is to remove if an owner can proplerly manage the weight distribution on his/her own. This is about safety under specific conditions and also about corporate liability exposure so I am not sure if BF will want us to have the ability to remove this ballast once it is installed --- it amounts to 5 or 6% extra weight to pull (and stop) so I think it is a significant "weight tax" on the owner that is willing to proplerly manage the tongue weight. Ed

[Brian B-P]

<span style="font-size:10pt;line-height:100%">"... a Ballast kit that will bring the hitch weight of an older B21FB trailer up to that of our current production...."</span>

The retrofit is clearly ballast. Does the "current production" design include ballast? I'm still not sure from this statement, although the 400 lb higher dry weight of the FB (versus the R - for no other obvious reason - does suggest ballast.

Regardless of Bigfoot's method, I would look for a better solution.

Tongue weight by itself seems unlikely to fix anything. Image a block of iron fastened to the coupler - it would increase tongue weight, without changing anything about the dynamics of the trailer any more than if you mounted that same iron block on the bumper. Is ballast on the bumper a good thing?

If the "tongue weight is too low", then the polar moment of inertia is too high for the mass of the trailer. If there's anything in the back which can be located to somewhere in the middle, I would expect that to help more. Unfortunately, a candidate is not obvious to me in the floor plan. The kitchen (other than refrigerator) of the FB is further back, but I can't see moving the oven. Where's the water heater? How about the fresh and grey water tanks (which are somewhat bigger in the F?

[Pete Dumbleton]

Umm, it all depends on where the ballast is located, and likely that's not on the bumper or coupler, but further back on the tongue. That will affect the moment. Imagine the ballast as a second battery added to the tongue to reduce the effect of the behind-axle weight on the before-axle weight.

It's far from an ideal solution, but it is one the manf can implement. In later models the ballast could simply be some extra steel in the tongue...

[Ed Calkins]

Umm, it all depends on where the ballast is located, and likely that's not on the bumper or coupler, but further back on the tongue. That will affect the moment. Imagine the ballast as a second battery added to the tongue to reduce the effect of the behind-axle weight on the before-axle weight.

It's far from an ideal solution, but it is one the manf can implement. In later models the ballast could simply be some extra steel in the tongue...

Good assessment Pete,
Here is a response from the BF design manager in response to my question asking how and where they were adding the ballast and if it was removable:

"Typically if we install it...we weld it....but if the customer would like, the kit is actually set up for mechanical fasteners....meaning that if he chooses to at a later date, he could remove the hitch or A-Frame inserts (there are two) at a savings of 30 lbs per insert set. or remove the additional x-member located near the front cross member it's fastened to the main rails and the A-Frame....which would reduce the weight by about 187 lbs."

It seems they are adding about 250 lbs of ballast. Some of the weight difference between the two models (front and rear bedroom) of the 21' trailer are due to different cabinets, tank mountings/size etc. Probably not a big deal, but it is a lot of weight to carry around that in most cases is providing no benefit. Being this model (fr bdrm) has a big outside accessible storage area under the front bed, more productive weight could be provided by an owner but that would still leave the mfg exposed to liability if an owner did not provide weight when needed.

[Brian B-P]

Umm, it all depends on where the ballast is located, and likely that's not on the bumper or coupler, but further back on the tongue. That will affect the moment...

That's what I meant. When people talk about "tongue weight" being good for stability it oversimplifies the situation, because simply tongue weight is not very useful.

[Brian B-P]

Given the nature and installation method of the ballast, I think if I purchased this model I would take the ballast, have them bolt it in, and later eliminate as much as possible of it as I found and corrected the root problem, starting from the bits nearest the coupler.

By the way, based on showroom tours, the 25B21FB is the Bigfoot model which I find most appealing, and much more desirable (for us) than the rear-bed version; it would be worth sorting out the balance issue. In response to the original concern of the topic, this is unfortunately too big for our current tow vehicle, and not functional enough to justify a replacement tug.

[Lainey]

By the way, based on showroom tours, the 25B21FB is the Bigfoot model which I find most appealing, and much more desirable (for us) than the rear-bed version; it would be worth sorting out the balance issue.

Hey Brian, just wondering which showroom you toured to see the new Bigfeet? I was in Edm. looking to see both floor plans of the 17', but the one dealer I went to didn't even have a single 17'er to look at. Thanks.

[Brian B-P]

Hey Brian, just wondering which showroom you toured to see the new Bigfeet?

Otto Mobiles on Argyll Road usually has a selection of Bigfoot product, including the motorhomes, truck campers, and both trailer ranges (2500-series moulded and 3000-series panel-built). In the 2500 series, they usually have more than one model, but in several visits I found the 25B21RB usually but the 25B21FB only twice.

A 25B17.5CB was featured in the showroom for quite a while, but when they sell a unit they don't necessarily replace it immediately; like any dealer of any RV, it is not practical to have one of everything.

[Lainey]

Thanks Brian, that's where I was. Do you know of any other dealer in the area?

[Brian B-P]

Do you know of any other dealer in the area?

The Bigfoot site has a Dealer Locator, which shows only Otto Mobiles in the immediate Edmonton area. I haven't seen new Bigfoot units anywhere else, although like any brand they show up used anywhere.

The only other dealership source of eggs around here would be the Team Trillium Outback dealers; Arrkann may be the only one of those. Woody's used to carry Escape, but I think Escape is factory-order only now.