Tongue weight

[honda03842]

Thank you Borden.

First I could remove all credibility by saying I was a politician for 6 years. LOL

Second, after reading about all the accidents where people became "unintentionally unhitched", I will add a breakaway switch to the Casita and Scamp for a little more margin. I was surprised to see they don't have them even though our 1982 lighter Sunline had one.

Is it the norm for Scamps/Casitas not to have a breakaway switch?

Always time to learn,

Norm

[Bill K]

The reason Scamp says you don't need them is because they (breakaway switch ) are not required in Minnesota even though it is required in other states.
I took a breakaway switch with me when I picked up my Scamp.

Bill K

Originally Posted by honda03842

Thank you Borden.

First I could remove all credibility by saying I was a politician for 6 years. LOL

Second, after reading about all the accidents where people became "unintentionally unhitched", I will add a breakaway switch to the Casita and Scamp for a little more margin. I was surprised to see they don't have them even though our 1982 lighter Sunline had one.

Is it the norm for Scamps/Casitas not to have a breakaway switch?

Always time to learn,

Norm

[Roger C H]

In the report from Wisconsin Highway Patrol, the idiot towing the trailer used a carabiner to attach his safety chains to his truck.

I use a Campbell Chain Clevis Slip Hook

SLIP - CLEVIS HOOKS - CHAIN - CABLE FITTINGS

The trailer came with quick links

ACE QUICK LINK - REPAIR - CONNECTING LINKS

but I got tired of crawling under the car to unscrew them.

[Francesca Knowles]

Originally Posted by Roger C H

In the report from Wisconsin Highway Patrol, the idiot towing the trailer used a carabiner to attach his safety chains to his truck.

I use a Campbell Chain Clevis Slip Hook

SLIP - CLEVIS HOOKS - CHAIN - CABLE FITTINGS

The trailer came with quick links

ACE QUICK LINK - REPAIR - CONNECTING LINKS

but I got tired of crawling under the car to unscrew them.

I'm with you on the clevis hook- I use the one with the safety latch CAMPBELL CHAIN CLEVIS SLIP - SLIP - CLEVIS HOOKS
Did the Wisconsin police report say why the trailer came off the hitch?
So many people don't think to grease or maintain their trailer coupler and hitch ball- did that have anything to do with it?

[Borden]

We are required to latch trailer then add a Coupler Lock, clevis pin or bolt In Ontario Canada. MTO gives chain ratings needed per load in detail. Our chains clip on; same with both trailers. Wonder if trailer had to light of ball or hitch lock broke; maybe clip came off the Class III Pin & Clip, 5/8", groove style receiver pin?

COMBO LOCKS (HITCH & TRAILER) sounding better

The only addition we added was the breakaway switch. The original owner used WD system with sway-bar on the boler. Will consider adding brakes to the smaller trailer even though not a legal requirement. since car has the module and harness.

[cpaharley2008]

Update:
I purchased another tongue box made with plastic vs aluminum and reinstalled the 2 batteries and small propane tank. I reinstalled the spare on the rear and filled my water heater in the rear with water. My tongue weight is down to 310# which is about 30# over factory stock due to the extra battery. Pictures will be posted this pm. I'm a happy camper since the class II hitch on an Outback is rated 300#. Now if I can get the Subaru dealer to drop his price a little.....
Anyone want to purchase an unused aluminum tongue box real cheap?

[Carol H]

Yup it is amazing how moving things about can change the tongue weight but keep in mind that although the hitch on the Outback is rated at 300lbs you are still 120lbs or well over 50% of the allowed tongue weight of the Outback itself. It is very normal for the hitch to have a higher rating than the tow itself.

I understand why you really want an Outback :-) I love mine and Im very happy with its towing ablility but I personally would be concerned with possible warrenty and perhaps handling issues if I was towing that much over the tongue limit.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Carol H

John as I mentioned earlier I think the difference **may** be that your Dodge is a rear wheel drive (or 4 x 4?) and the Subaru is a All Wheel Drive so they are built with different components and weight distribution in an unloaded state. Obviously in a 2 wheel drive when you put your foot on the gas the weight transfer is to the rear wheels only and on an All Wheel Drive weight is transferred to all 4 wheels. As I understand it a rear wheel drive vehicle is built with a lot more weight at the front in an unloaded condition than an All Wheel Drive vehicle. Its also my understanding that a vehicle that is built as an All Wheel Drive will be a heavier vehicle than the same vehicle if it where built only as a 2 wheel drive due to all the extra parts needed to make it an All Wheel Drive.

To complicate things it appears there are big differences in how the All Wheel Drive vehicles are designed as well. Subaru's system is different from that of Honda and other manufactures or at least it appears to be. How and why is a bit beyond my understanding of cars. ;-) But a while back I found this interesting video which does not actually explain the differences in how the various All Wheel Drives are designed to work but it does show that there is a differences in how they responded to different situations which would suggest they are not all built/designed the same either.

I'm not an engineer but I have a hunch that how we load up an All Wheel Drive may have a bigger impact in regards to traction and its safe drive, than it does on a rear wheel drive. I tend to think that the manufactures know how they are designed, so I’m probable better to go with what they say in regards to weight loading than to go with a general rule of thumb.

In straight line forward accelleration weight transfer is always rearward,... and in braking, weight transfer is always forward.
In limited slip and AWD applications, power[not weight] is transferred to the wheel with with the most traction.

The videos inadvertantly explain why electronic traction control equipped vehicles commonly have a button which allows traction control to be deactivated when stopped or at slow speeds.

[Carol H]

Floyd - its all to complicated for me! =:-) So is what you are saying is that the impact of putting more weight on the back end of them wil not impact their tracking/handling ability when accellerating? My understanding was that there a number of different all wheel drive systems out there and that depending on what one is being used the answer to the above may differ. Is that not correct?

I recall that my first Outback had a button on the shift that had to be pushed for it to go into all wheel drive - actually it may have been 4 wheel drive at the time - it was more than a few years ago and a couple of Outback later :-) Last 2 Outbacks have had no button they are always in all wheel drive.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Carol H

Floyd - its all to complicated for me! =:-) So is what you are saying is that the impact of putting more weight on the back end of them wil not impact their tracking/handling ability when accellerating? My understanding was that there a number of different all wheel drive systems out there and that depending on what one is being used the answer to the above may differ. Is that not correct?

I recall that my first Outback had a button on the shift that had to be pushed for it to go into all wheel drive - actually it may have been 4 wheel drive at the time - it was more than a few years ago and a couple of Outback later :-) Last 2 Outbacks have had no button they are always in all wheel drive.

The button to which I was refering was for "electronic traction control", not to engage the drive system. It is an extension of the ABS capability.
Too much tongue weight will definitely have a deleterious effect on both handling and tracking, at all times, especially when accelerating.
Of course it's all a matter of degree.