Last Train
Texas
Full Member
Joined: 04/21/2016
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
 Offline
|
Ralph Cramden wrote:babock wrote:You are using an equilizing hitch right?
Last Train? Trailer sure looks nose down 4 or 5 inches and Ridgeline squatting at least the same.......may be the picture angle. Trailer nose down is usually better than nose high.
Ralph, huge apologies for not responding to your post earlier. "Life" just sort of gets in the way of reading/posting on these forums, eh?
So re your squatting observations. I have regularly measured the drop of our Ridgeline at the rear bumper, and it has never exceeded two inches - and I measure that once we are fully loaded the night before we depart for a trip early the next morning. I also measure our tongue weight with a Sherline scale, as well. Maybe the graphics on the 192RBS distort the view a bit in that picture.
A bit of experience from our night-time return from our camping trip in Garner State Park last week . . . I think I mentioned earlier in this thread that we drove/towed home in the rain, but I may not have said that the last hour of the trip was in the dark. So all traffic was running with headlights on - that included us, of course, and I also had our fog lights on as I recall. I mention this because no one - not one vehicle - in oncoming traffic "flashed" us thinking that our high beams were on or that our lights were just in their eyes. This was about a 50 mile segment of our trip and all on two lane, secondary roads.
2016 Coachmen Freedom Express 192RBS
2018 RAM 1500 Ecodiesel
|
SoundGuy
S Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02/11/2015
View Profile
|
babock wrote:You are using an equilizing hitch right?
Ralph Cramden wrote:Last Train? Trailer sure looks nose down 4 or 5 inches and Ridgeline squatting at least the same.......may be the picture angle. Trailer nose down is usually better than nose high.
Last Train wrote:So re your squatting observations. I have regularly measured the drop of our Ridgeline at the rear bumper, and it has never exceeded two inches - and I measure that once we are fully loaded the night before we depart for a trip early the next morning. I also measure our tongue weight with a Sherline scale, as well.
I think what Ralph and others are asking though is whether when hitched up and ready to go camping your trailer is sitting level front to back. If so, the trailer frame should be at the same distance off the ground at the rear as it is at the front ... not the A frame, but the frame near the front of the box. I agree, in your pics your combination sure doesn't look level but of course pics can distort so it's hard to tell without an actual measurement. As an example, my own truck & trailer runs dead level, and measurements confirm it. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/biggrin.gif "biggrin")
![[image]](https://i.imgur.com/SnlYta2l.jpg)
This is only possible, even with my 1/2 ton Silverado as a tow vehicle, because I use a properly sized & adjusted weight distribution system. Have to admit, I've always wondered how this is possible with a Ridgeline towing a 192RBS without also using weight distribution. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/scratchead.gif "scratchead")
|
Last Train
Texas
Full Member
Joined: 04/21/2016
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
SoundGuy wrote:I think what Ralph and others are asking though is whether when hitched up and ready to go camping your trailer is sitting level front to back. If so, the trailer frame should be at the same distance off the ground at the rear as it is at the front ... not the A frame, but the frame near the front of the box. I agree, in your pics your combination sure doesn't look level but of course pics can distort so it's hard to tell without an actual measurement. As an example, my own truck & trailer runs dead level, and measurements confirm it.
This is only possible, even with my 1/2 ton Silverado as a tow vehicle, because I use a properly sized & adjusted weight distribution system. Have to admit, I've always wondered how this is possible with a Ridgeline towing a 192RBS without also using weight distribution.
Nice looking rig, SoundGuy . . . and looks to be dead level, indeed. So to what end?
![[image]](https://i.imgur.com/n1cJjIKl.jpg)
|
SoundGuy
S Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02/11/2015
View Profile
|
Last Train wrote:Nice looking rig, SoundGuy . . . and looks to be dead level, indeed. So to what end?
Hmmmm, well since the object with any towing combination is to run the trailer as close to level as reasonably possible whether using weight distribution or not, the question being posed by Ralph, myself, and others is - does yours? We ask because it would appear in that earlier pic you posted, one you've posted many times before, that your trailer is in fact running noticeably nose down, which in turn would raise the question as to whether you wouldn't be better off using weight distribution, regardless of Honda's position on the subject.
|
SoundGuy
S Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02/11/2015
View Profile
|
Last Train wrote:Nice looking rig, SoundGuy . . . and looks to be dead level, indeed. So to what end?
SoundGuy wrote:Hmmmm, well since the object with any towing combination is to run the trailer as close to level as reasonably possible whether using weight distribution or not, the question being posed by Ralph, myself, and others is - does yours? We ask because it would appear in that earlier pic you posted, one you've posted many times before, that your trailer is in fact running noticeably nose down, which in turn would raise the question as to whether you wouldn't be better off using weight distribution, regardless of Honda's position on the subject.
Well I guess from the deafening silence we'll never know the answer to this. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/awink.gif "awink")
|
|
|
avoidcrowds
Centennial, CO
Senior Member
Joined: 02/24/2013
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
"Ha , those are our 2 finalists too although if I go with Lance i'll be buying a gently used one
You and me both, there pretty proud of them, and I didn't see 20K worth of difference.
It's what you CAN'T see that makes Lance better! "
---------------------------------------------------------
We looked at the 192 and Lance 1995, and went with the Lance:
Bigger Fresh tank (we boondock)
True 4-season package
Deeper slide, so we can get more at the table (guests)
Front window, and windows on side of slide, for more visibility (can't be outside in all weather)
DW preferred the aesthetics
For us, the $10k difference was worth it, for our use.
2017.5 Lance 1995
2017 F150 EcoBoost, Max Tow
Most camping off-road
|
SoundGuy
S Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02/11/2015
View Profile
|
avoidcrowds wrote:We looked at the 192 and Lance 1995, and went with the Lance:
Bigger Fresh tank (we boondock)
True 4-season package
Deeper slide, so we can get more at the table (guests)
Front window, and windows on side of slide, for more visibility (can't be outside in all weather)
DW preferred the aesthetics
For us, the $10k difference was worth it, for our use.
For sure, we're all different. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/smile.gif "smile") In our case we specifically did not want a dinette and even more so any slide with an elevated platform as is the case with the Lance - makes us feel like mannequins on display when seated in that slide. Personally I don't care for the interior decor in the current Freedom Express and much prefer our 2014's, and the current Lance as well. Beauty is all in the eye of the beholder though. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/wink.gif "wink") Two biggest drawbacks to Lance here in Ontario is their significantly higher price and very few dealers. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/frown.gif "frown")
2012 Silverado 1500 Crew Cab
2014 Coachmen Freedom Express 192RBS
2003 Fleetwood Yuma * 2008 K-Z Spree 240BH-LX
2007 TrailCruiser C21RBH * 2000 Fleetwood Santa Fe
1998 Jayco 10UD * 1969 Coleman CT380
|
drsteve
Michigan
Senior Member
Joined: 06/09/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
FWIW, my experience is that a TT pulls better when slightly nose down.
I don't care for an elevated slide floor, or for a front window, either. The front window is a leak waiting to happen, and the elevated floor is simply annoying. Current interior decors are mostly too dark for my taste.
2006 Silverado 1500HD Crew Cab 2WD 6.0L 3.73 8600 GVWR
2018 Coachmen Catalina Legacy Edition 223RBS
1991 Palomino Filly PUP
|
SoundGuy
S Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02/11/2015
View Profile
|
drsteve wrote:FWIW, my experience is that a TT pulls better when slightly nose down.
Key words being "slightly nose down" ... an inch is OK but 4" to 5" would be way too much. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/eek.gif "eek")
|
drsteve
Michigan
Senior Member
Joined: 06/09/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
SoundGuy wrote:drsteve wrote:FWIW, my experience is that a TT pulls better when slightly nose down.
Key words being "slightly nose down" ... an inch is OK but 4" to 5" would be way too much.
It's also different depending on the distance between the axles and the ball coupler. An inch on a 19' TT is further from level than an inch on a 30+ footer. My current TT is an inch or two down in front. I've never measured it, that's where it ended up after hitch setup, and it pulls great, so I'm not concerned. My experience is down a bit is better than nose high.
Five inches low on any of 'em would be way too much for me...
|
|
|
|
