Cortes Campers, new company?

[slowpat]

Originally Posted by TucsonBill

Oh no. Cortes Campers are running afoul of the Cancel Culture. Mao killed millions more in my lifetime than Cortes has ever been accused of (even in the most, wild, fevered dreams of the most ardent social justice warriors), yet there is no outrage about buying from Chinese companies whose very existence is the work of Mao's worshippers.

Nor do you see anything Chinese promoting that name. There's a difference between writing a corporate mission statement that approves of the conquering of a people based on their religion, and just building a product with no hidden message in the name.

Cancel Culture? Nope, I'd call it recognizing bad taste and possible bigotry.

[Raz]

Originally Posted by Mikmay

Took a lot of heat here when we introduced the HC1 but not once did we have anyone object to Happier Camper name ,not much you can say to that name.
While I wish the new company well and much of what they plan to do HC is already doing so not much to improve on there I do question their plans to go the dealership route as it is virtually impossible to mass produce a fg trailer without mass producing molds ,a very expensive process unless they have found an alternative process no other fg manufacturer knows of.

Yes, I remember that thread. I thought you were far more restrained than I would have been. As for dealers, factory direct allows the buyer to develop a relationship with the manufacturer. Travelling to pick up saves money and I suspect if the buyer wants a trailer delivered, the cost is the same as a dealer markup. Warranty work is done by a local dealer with the factory authorization either way. I bought my first trailer from a local dealer. After 4 trips to the dealership for an appliance repair, I ended up fixing it myself.

[charlsara]

Originally Posted by Raspy

Mike,



Here are a couple of pictures of the 3500 lb model "Axleless" suspension. It appears to bolt to a longitudinal frame member and have a 2" square tube running across the trailer to the other axle piece to stabilize them both and control the upward torquing motion from the force on the spindles. You can see the square socket on each axle assembly. It seems the lighter duty ones may not need that cross-stabilizer if the frame is stiff enough, but I'm assuming the ones being used are the 3,500 lb model.



That stabilizer is up and out of the way compared to a conventional axle.



I like how the spindle can be easily replaced, and apparently, so can the rubber springs. On the Cortes site, they mention that there is an extra spindle included.

What you may have missed. This cross beam is not required if the trailer frame has a crossmember between the suspension units.

[TucsonBill]

Big apology to everyone. I wish the best of luck to the new trailer company and I respect everyone's feelings on the company's name and mission statement.

[Raspy]

Originally Posted by charlsara

What you may have missed. This cross beam is not required if the trailer frame has a crossmember between the suspension units.

The lighter duty axle less doesn't need a crossmember if the frame is stiff enough. The 3500 needs a cross member and that is why it has the 2" square brackets as part of the axle pieces. The twisting load from the spindle goes straight to the crossmember through those square pieces on the axle part. It would not make sense to install that design and not use the brace as designed. In fact, it would likely brake because the other mounting holes are weak in that direction.

I actually like the design because it is easy to fix and the crossmember is more out of the way than a conventional axle. It will certainly be quieter and probably less trouble than leaf springs.

[Steve Outlaw]

Originally Posted by ACZ06

...There is also a funny video of them making fun of Oliver campers on the gallery section...

Actually, he states in his videos that he is making his comparisons to a CASITA. He never mentions an Oliver.

[thrifty bill]

Originally Posted by Steve Outlaw

Actually, he states in his videos that he is making his comparisons to a CASITA. He never mentions an Oliver.

Cant understand any comparisons until real life production models are released. Comparing real trailers to ones that don’t exist seems premature.

Good to have a plan and targets of course.

Oliver to me right now occupies the “similar to a Casita but better” space (at a much higher price of course).So if the real production is significantly better than a Casita, comparisons to Oliver seem appropriate.

Competition can make everyone better so bring it on! Always room for another choice.

[Kenny Strong]

I asked Axleless for spread sheet of products sold. They emailed one to me. They have light duty on up to 7000lbs. they have a 2000lbs model. I need a new axle.

Later Kenny

[Carol and Mike]

Paul, welcome to this diverse group of fiberglass travel trailer owners. We’ve been camping without internet for the last couple of weeks and I am just now reading through this thread. I hope that you are able to produce a quality product at a competitive price. If you do, it doesn’t matter what you name it. I do not subscribe to the politically correct, statue toppling, renaming, cancel culture crowd. Just build a good trailer and you’ll be fine. Mike

[Rzrbrn]

What Mike said.

[AC0GV]

Originally Posted by ACZ06

There is also a funny video of them making fun of Oliver campers on the gallery section...

Can't find it. Got a link?

[SherryNPaul]

It was on their website til yesterday, but they wisely took it down.
Making fun of two respected names, Oliver and Casita, wasn't a wise marketing idea

[AC0GV]

Originally Posted by ACZ06

Hi does anyone know about this new company in Ohio? It looks like a direct competitor to Oliver but they are setting up dealers and have some sort of patents pending.
Seems interesting that someone is finally going to have a dealer network.

The Name has been used before to sell RVs. NASA bought one for the astronauts.

[SherryNPaul]

I don't care what they name it. That's their issue.
As far as building a dealer network, they probably should build a few trailers, first.

[AC0GV]

Originally Posted by SherryNPaul

I don't care what they name it. That's their issue.
As far as building a dealer network, they probably should build a few trailers, first.

It looks recently like they started sending press releases to every where that would print them and it worked. The stock may be recovering.

Also a NEST note, I always felt that Airstream bought them to kill them.

[charlsara]

Originally Posted by Raspy

The lighter duty axle less doesn't need a crossmember if the frame is stiff enough. The 3500 needs a cross member and that is why it has the 2" square brackets as part of the axle pieces. The twisting load from the spindle goes straight to the crossmember through those square pieces on the axle part. It would not make sense to install that design and not use the brace as designed. In fact, it would likely brake because the other mounting holes are weak in that direction.



I actually like the design because it is easy to fix and the crossmember is more out of the way than a conventional axle. It will certainly be quieter and probably less trouble than leaf springs.

I have been considering these for awhile to retrofit on my Lil Snoozy. Here is a note from the install guidance on the E Trailer site. This is for the 3500 lb units.

Note: The Timbren Axle-Less suspension system may require additional support on your trailer. If your trailer does not have a crossmember above the spot where you want to install the Timbren system, you may need to reinforce the frame. You can accomplish this three ways. First, you can retrofit the trailer with a crossmember. Second, you can build out the trailer frame. Third, you can use standard, 2-inch steel tubing to connect the 2 Timbren suspensions together using the built-in square hole on each unit.

[Civilguy]

Originally Posted by Civilguy

Raspy,

What source indicates a steel member running between the two assemblies?

I think that developing an effective interface between the steel suspension assemblies and a composite frame will be critical to a successful design. I had thought the two assemblies would be mounted independently with no steel member to join them and help maintain proper wheel alignment, but I may be mistaken on that point.

I exchanged some PMs with Paul on Friday. I sent him a rather lengthy one Friday night with feedback on various subjects including the axle assemblies.

I ran across this article discussing how the rear torsion axle of a dual-axle design tore away from the aluminum frame on a Livin' Lite toy hauler.

https://rv.org/blogs/news/watch-thos...s-a-true-story

While it's not to say that you can't join successfully a steel axle to an aluminum or composite frame, this case does illustrate how a design joining dissimilar materials can go astray.

[Raspy]

Yikes!

That failure looks like the axle simply tore the aluminum flange off the frame, possibly after some fatigue set in but it doesn't look like electrolysis from what I can see. An aluminum frame member too thin to handle the load seems more likely.

Oliver has a wonderful solution to mount steel axles to their aluminum frame. They make a whole truck assembly that mounts the suspension system, and bolt that assembly to the aluminum frame. It sort of cradles the frame and has cross bolts to hold it in place. There are no high stress points. And the whole assembly is hot dip galvanized.

[jdgomez2]

Kudos to Cortes Campers for pushing the envelope.

I'll be honest and say that I don't love the name. If you want to make a statement about slaying the competition or the industry standard, I think there are alternatives. Your choice, though, and best of luck. I don't think the name is going to make a big difference but will definitely be hard for some to swallow.

Here's a counter-narrative about Hatuey that I would like to share because I'm Cuban-American. Hatuey is an icon in Cuba and considered by some to be Cuba's first national hero.

Long story short, he was so disgusted by the raping and pillaging of his people by Spaniards (Christians) that when he was captured, he told them he would rather be burned alive/burn in hell than convert to Christianity.

If you want to see what the historians wrote, see below. I wish this history was shared more than the story of how Columbus "discovered" America because he couldn't figure out how to get to India.

According to Spanish historians Hatuey is known for warning some of the native people of the arrival of Spaniards in Cuba and showing them a basket of gold and jewels, saying:

Here is the God the Spaniards worship. For these they fight and kill; for these they persecute us and that is why we have to throw them into the sea. They tell us, these tyrants, that they adore a God of peace and equality, and yet they usurp our land and make us their slaves. They speak to us of an immortal soul and of their eternal rewards and punishments, and yet they rob our belongings, seduce our women, violate our daughters. Incapable of matching us in valor, these cowards cover themselves with iron that our weapons cannot break.

Before he was burned alive, a priest asked Hatuey if he would prefer a less painful death by accepting Jesus. The priest explained to Hatuey that this would also allow him to go to heaven.

Hatuey, thinking a little, asked the priest if Spaniards went to heaven. The priest answered yes. Hatuey then said without further thought that he did not want to go there but to hell so as not to be where they were and where he would not see such cruel people. Basically, he would rather burn in hell.

Maybe make your motto that you would rather burn in hell than make campers of poor quality? I'm not really serious but I'm sure there are other stories that can provide the same sentiment. This story just happens to be one that came to mind when I thought of Cortes.

[Glenn Baglo]

Thanks for that bit of education Jonathan.