Late 2015 Ford Everest Rear Suspension Upgrade

thalls01 · Veteran Member

RE: Late 2015 Ford Everest Rear Suspension Upgrade

KevinJ · Senior Member

thalls01 wrote:
Hi all
Weighbridge results are in!

KevinJ - inspected your Load Calculation spreadsheet at length. Couldn't find where to insert my results. The distance from axles - is this done physically with a tape measure?

Bobdown - thanks for your reassuring words. My key issue was caravan sway well below the 100km/h speed limit and how best to minimise it.

RESULTS

1. Caravan weight - standalone: 2740kg

2. With WDH attached BUT NOT TENSIONED:
- Front Vehicle Wheels: 1180kg
- All vehicle Wheels: 3000kg
- Rear Wheels: 1820kg (over axle limit)
- Caravan only on weighbridge - hitched to car: 2520kg

3. With WDH attached AND TENSIONED:
- Front Vehicle Wheels: 1300kg (addition of 120kg; max front axle limit of 1480kg)
- All vehicle Wheels: 2940kg
- Rear Wheels: 1640kg (reduction of 180kg; now within axle load limit of 1750kg)
- Caravan only on weighbridge - hitched to car: 2570kg (the WDH has put 50kg back on the dual axles of caravan)

I gather the caravan's payload TBW is the difference between Van Standalone (2740kg) - Van Hitched but Untensioned (2520kg) = 220kg
However, I note the Gross Combined Mass my car can pull of 5800kg is very closely approached with a figure of 2940 (car) + 2740kg (van) = 5680kg (clearance of 120kg only). That is amazing since I considered we travel light!! (No bull bar, fancy lights or accessories).

NOTE: Before leaving home I did another TBW with Scales with Caravan loaded. This time however, I released the manual brake to caravan. On my set of TBW Scales the TBW this occasion read 240kg. It noticeably increased with the release of the handbrake (van was chocked at the time). I now consider my past reading of 190kg was erroneous since I had the manual brake applied! Live and learn. The weighbridge has the Van TBW lighter but who knows what the error of margin their scales has. Ditto my TBW scales.

OTHER
Examination of the Van's A-frame relative to its chassis and my Everest tug suggests the nose is still a little high. I am almost half a spirit level bubble high out of the ideal region marked. There is room to angle the E2 hitch down a little more by adding 2 more washers - 7 being the acceptable maximum. I am presently using the standard 3" Equalizer 2 hitch by Fastway. I wanted a 4" but the importer is no longer importing the 4" and the 6" and 8" have been on back order for close to a year due to demand in the USA trumping our supply with Covid. However, before chasing a 4" I will trial increasing the tilt of the ball downward toward the A-frame to determine if that suffices. I believe a slight tilt of van over the ball is preferable to it nosing slightly - correct?
Let me know if you have other insights from the weighbridge figures posted.
The payload ball weight of 220kg for a Van weighing 2,570kg with the WDH tensioned is still light. That represents a BTW of 8.56% of the caravan when loaded. That is probably acceptable. It will increase if I move the spare wheel from the rear bumper to the A-frame or add a 2 x bike carrier to the A-frame.
Can someone advise whether other than removing articles from the van or car is there a way of increasing your rated GCM limit for the vehicle. As stated above, I am only 120kg within the Ford Everest's rated GCM.
Cheers, Tim

Hi Tim,

You enter the measurements in the "Tugs and Vans" TAB. (See TAB names at the bottom of the spreadsheet). These are static values which never change for the vehicle, hence why they go on this TAB. Yes, the values are based on you measuring the vehicle with a tape measure. See attached file for where the numbers go.

I used a bricky's level vertically at the positions I wanted to measure and then put some insulation tape on the ground at that point. It was then easy to measure from point to point.

-- Edited by KevinJ on Sunday 20th of March 2022 03:45:51 PM

oldbloke · Guru

It's important the van be level or nose down slightly. Looks like you need to fix that.

KevinJ · Senior Member

Tim, did you follow the instructions in the E2 manual to setup the WDH?

thalls01 · Veteran Member

KevinJ wrote:
Tim, did you follow the instructions in the E2 manual to setup the WDH?

KevinJ - 'yes' I did but as mentioned last post the 4" & 6" hitch were not available and I resolved to trialing the standard 3" that was available knowing it may not have enough drop. I was constrained purchasing locally since I had to physically sight and fit the hitch to ensure it could accommodate my vehicle's stone stomper mount on the hitch.

When fitting the 3" on level ground and hitched the van was very slightly nosing up. I realised after this that with a lower figure with the WDH fitted for the front fender from road than unhitched altogether, the WDH was over-adjusted. I dropped it to the lowest on the Fastway E2 hitch and the bars closely followed the chassis of the car and van, i.e. parallel horizontal plane and there was not the effort to tension them as before when over-adjusted.

It was at the weighbridge today that I noted the van was still nosing up and the rear door spirit level gave the reading of a half bubble out of the ideal marked zone.

Further to that I have added 2 washers to the E2 (7 in all; the max.) to angle the head down to see if that helps with the nose of the A-frame. It did with the nose however increasing the angle also increases the angle of the tensioning bars and I aborted going further since it was obvious I would again be over-adjusting the E2.

See attached pics here showing the pitch of the van relative to the car at the weighbridge. Let me know what you think regarding the nose height, if you will.

Whilst the importer is awaiting supply, as said, I have found a dealer in NSW who has spares of the 4" and 6" hitch. They are not cheap commencing at $150 and up.

Unfortunately, they are not available here in SA.

The nose pitch of van is not great but possibly enough to be contributing to sway, what do others think?

Cheers, Tim

KevinJ · Senior Member

I can't offer any advice on the WDH as I am no expert. I have the same hitch and followed the setup in the manual and mine seems to work nicely. The attached is the manual I used and I followed the steps very slowly and carefully. It took me the best part of a day to get the setup right. I think I tried 3 setups before I found the one that worked.

I know some people don't like WDH but I even use the shepherd crooks on my 6x4 box trailer. One crook either side. Not to lift the car, but to stop the trailer bouncing.

Are We Lost · Guru

It's good to see you posted detailed results, and comprehensive as well. Was this fully laden, ready for a trip? What about water and gas? With a Tare of 2420kg compared to 2740kg as weighed, that gives 320kg above factory plated weight. You said the water tanks (170kg when full) were in front of the axles. So whether full or empty would make a major difference to gross weight, but more importantly ball weight. Critical to know if you want to carry water. Can they be easily relocated?

I know changes lilke that should not be needed with a new van, but it's useful to know how feasible that would be.

As for the washing machine weight, I can't believe specs (for mine) would list it with water and clothes. I know when removing mine it was quite a struggle to get it out, so I fully believe 54kg would be correct? Maybe newer models are lighter. You should be able to find the specs for your model.

The spare wheel on the rear bumper is probably at least 30kg. Is there room to mount it underneath? Again, it's not just the 30kg, but being right on the back it becomes a contributor to that pendulum effect if sway starts.

As for GCM haven't you double counted the ball weight. With WDH tensioned, you have 2940 + 2570 = 5510kg.

So far, it seems that the concerns about ball weight being too low are diminishing although as you discovered it is really easy to overload the Everest rear axle limit. A very common situation.

Are We Lost · Guru

I see you posted an update with photos while I was composing my post above.

The first photo seems to highlight that nose up attitude more than the others. Do you have load sharing suspension? If not then I think it is a bit excessive as the rear wheels will be taking more weight. That imbalance could easily be a sway contributor. You would probably be able to feel a higher temperature in the tyres after some highway travel. If you DO have load sharing suspension then it is less important. The NSW recommendation is level or slightly nose down. Can you measure from the chassis rail front and back? It would be nice if that hitch allowed a further notch down, but then you may get ground clearance issues with the bars.

However, looking at the hitch I see another issue. It extends a long way past the rear of the car. The shorter the distance between your car rear axle and the towball the better, for 2 reasons. First, that longer lever applies more weight to the rear axle, contibuting to you overloading the limit. That 220kg ball load probably adds over 350kg to your rear axle.

Secondly, it is more leverage for sway to begin. This is one of the negative compromises with WDH, that they are typically longer than a standard shank. You may be able to shorten it. An engineering shop did mine while I waited for $20.

A few posts ago PeterinSA mentioned checking the wheel alignment. It's not uncommon for new vans to need a little tweak. Hopefully not. But let's focus on the weights for now. I think you can see there are a few things that could easily be contributing to sway, and solutions may not be very difficult.

Bobdown, sorry I don't agree with your comment about ignoring the little nuances and just drive to what feels safe. On the road, you may have to swerve for some reason, and you don't want that unexpected little event resulting in your van and possessions being scattered all over the highway. It should be fixed to make it safe.

-- Edited by Are We Lost on Sunday 20th of March 2022 06:36:51 PM

thalls01 · Veteran Member

Are We Lost - 'Yes', the van and vehicle were laden with both the van's potable water tanks (2 of) full.
The 320kg above factory plated weight - probably the 2 potable tanks (170 kgs), kitchen food stuffs & consumables (35kgs), the new 17kg electric jack mounted on the A-frame, the 20L jerry can of drinking water in the A-frame holder (20kg); the 30kg generator on the slide in the box mounted to the front A-frame and a no. of sundries in the front side-to-side hatch, such as the Baby Q Weber. I put a dummy bag of old curtains weighing 11.1kgs on the bed to account for our usual carrying of clothes to rear of van.

Let's see, those items (excluding the Baby Q Weber and other hatch sundries) amount to: 283.1kg I guess it seems right, however I do wonder whether Tare excluded the washing machine and a no. of such items as we travel so light usually.

The spare wheel - 'yes', good point. I will try and relocate it however it is competing with a bike rack over the A-frame currently. I understand that underneath near the axles where it has a low centre of gravity would be best.

Your comment, "As for GCM haven't you double counted the ball weight. With WDH tensioned, you have 2940 + 2570 = 5510kg." - Well sighted, 'yes' I have and that is a bit of a relief. Every bit ore allowance helps. I do not like working up against maximum tolerances since it puts everything under strain with resultant wear and tear leading to breakdowns. I now have a clearance of 290kgs; a lot better than my previous figure!!

I have written to the importer of the Fastway E2 to determine whether I can swap my 3" trunnion for a 6". That should give me some head-room to move the hitch downward and in turn stop the Van's A-frame nosing more than I would like. I will see what they have to say and post.

Thanks for all your guidance. These matters are certainly time consuming but once done I expect it is a case of working with an awareness when loading the car and caravan, or loading very little in my case - lol.

Cheers, Tim

oldbloke · Guru

Lol. I just measure the nose down with a tape measure on level ground. Level or about 25mm nose down is what you aim for.

thalls01 · Veteran Member

Are We Lost - Unfortunately 'no' I believe I do not have load sharing suspension. Just 2 leaf springs attached to both axles with a common union. I believe that is referred to as dependent leaf spring suspension.

I attach a photo here for your confirmation.

I believe the van may need tweaking. Many bolts I have come across on the van have been left loose by the manufacturer. Having said that, I did get under the van the other day and the union bolts that affix the axle to the leaf springs appeared tight with lock fixing blue glue to keep them that way. I was less certain however where the two leaf springs met the common union. There are no dampers.

Cheers, Tim

thalls01 · Veteran Member

Are We Lost - I will shorten the E2 hitch if possible. Your points raised are very valid. I just need to be careful in any shortening that I keep something like the 3" overhang of the E2 tensioners in the sway control fittings as specified by Fastway.

Unfortunately I have a lack of options in terms where I can mount the brackets on the A-frame short of welding them in place. All grist for the mill ...

Aus-Kiwi · Guru

Pretty much correct Bob . See so many out there almost racing !! The ute has become the HDT OR RX7of the 90s ! Its a journey not a race !

watsea · Guru

Tim,
If you move weight forward in the van (you probably can work that out for yourself), there will be more tow ball weight. So, theoretically because of the extra weight, your car will be lower at the rear with the van hitched. This may give the amount of lowering of the front van that you are looking for. Of course, this is adding more weight to the car which has to be managed. I think you will be successful.

Are We Lost · Guru

Looking at those photos again I am not so sure the level is so bad as to be concerned. Perspective may be making it look worse than it is. You said the spirit level is half a bubble from level. A tape measure chassis to ground at each end will tell you.

However what you said about water and other items is concerning. On the drawbar you have 2 x 9kg gas bottles (40kg when full), a toolbox (20kg including contents?), electric jack 17kg, water 20kg, bike rack (plus bike), 20kg? And in the tunnel boot there is the generator (30kg), Weber and a few sundries.

That is about 120kg of items on the drawbar, and maybe 50kg in the tunnel boot. AND 170kg of water in front of the axles. And it is STILL too light on the ball?

What would happen at the end of a trip with empty water and gas tanks? There is absolutely no way you should need to travel with full water tanks to get a reasonable balance.

While weight up front is nowhere near as bad as weight at the back, its a LOT of weight to carry away from the centre of the van. With the washing machine and spare wheel at the back and all this at the front, the wheels act as the pivot point. Your goal should be to reduce weight at EACH end. But that is looking more difficult.

I thought things were looking to be fairly easily solvable, but your next dilemma is that even with that lighter than desirable towball load, the Everest rear axle is already 70kg over limit before the WDH is fitted. So you certainly should not be adding more weight to the front of the van. And then the laden van weighs almost the same as the laden tow vehicle. Manageable if everything else is OK, but it's not.

With all these things adding up, its no wonder you found the sway a problem.

Several posts ago you listed the specs for the Everest kerb weight as 2407kg (with full fuel tank). Then in the same post you said:
1) Ford Everest Kerb Wt. with Tow Bar, Roof racks etc. = 2,650kg

243kg more? Do you mean laden ready for travel? With passengers? Your weighbridge said 3000kg without WDH. But if ball weight measured 220kg, there is 130kg unaccounted for.

Anyway, its late now. Perhaps someone else has some enlightening ideas and will chime in.

-- Edited by Are We Lost on Monday 21st of March 2022 01:33:54 AM

Radar · Guru

There is the problem in your last photo.

To much hard wear from the rear end of the car.

Added lenght of tow hitch. That is the culpit.

Stone protector.

WDH. System

Place a normal tow hitch in the tow bar and take the lot for a drive.

KJB · Guru

Radar wrote:
There is the problem in your last photo.
To much hard wear from the rear end of the car.
Added lenght of tow hitch. That is the culpit.
Stone protector.
WDH. System
Place a normal tow hitch in the tow bar and take the lot for a drive.

I agree . That ball needs to be as close to the car as possible. All the other fittings are just adding weight ( and right where you do not need it..) KB

-- Edited by KJB on Monday 21st of March 2022 08:37:04 AM

yobarr · Guru

thalls01 wrote:
Are We Lost - Unfortunately 'no' I believe I do not have load sharing suspension. Just 2 leaf springs attached to both axles with a common union. I believe that is referred to as dependent leaf spring suspension.

I attach a photo here for your confirmation.

I believe the van may need tweaking. Many bolts I have come across on the van have been left loose by the manufacturer. Having said that, I did get under the van the other day and the union bolts that affix the axle to the leaf springs appeared tight with lock fixing blue glue to keep them that way. I was less certain however where the two leaf springs met the common union. There are no dampers.

Cheers, Tim

Hi Tim. Some good advice has been offered here, and still I have little time to spare, but without being 100% sure, that certainly looks like load sharing suspension as there are no shackles at either end of the springs. As one wheel rises, perhaps driving over a kerb, the hinged pivot between the two spring sets pivots, forcing the other spring down and weight onto the other wheel. The weight of the van is thus shared between those two wheels rather than the wheel on the kerb carrying all the weight. Keeping the van level in such situations is of little importance, but better to have the front lower than the rear. However, you seem to have major weight problems with the way your van is set up, and without yet being able to fully analyse your figures, it all looks like an accident looking for a place to happen, with yaw being your enemy. In the next few days I may be able to help, as the 18 speed gearbox in my Road Train has cried "enough", and now has only one gear, so we're changing gearboxes once we find a suitable new box. Putting 600- 700hp through an 18 speed box, while towing huge weights has resulted in its demise, but once we get the box out I may be able to devote a few hours to analysing your figures. Great to see you being so responsible, and taking your weights seriously, but perhaps the Everest is a lttle out of its depth here? Cheers.

-- Edited by yobarr on Monday 21st of March 2022 10:04:16 PM

yobarr · Guru

KJB wrote:
Radar wrote:
There is the problem in your last photo.
To much hard wear from the rear end of the car.
Added lenght of tow hitch. That is the culpit.
Stone protector.
WDH. System
Place a normal tow hitch in the tow bar and take the lot for a drive.
I agree . That ball needs to be as close to the car as possible. All the other fittings are just adding weight ( and right where you do not need it..) KB

Just looked at photos Kerry, and you are 100% right. That set up is stupidity in the extreme, and there is NO WAY Tim will ever be able to tow safely as it is. Tim seems to have been misled by experts here, starting with the clown who advised that a WDH removes (changes) towball weight. Spare me! Cheers

yobarr · Guru

Radar wrote:
There is the problem in your last photo.
To much hard wear from the rear end of the car.
Added lenght of tow hitch. That is the culpit.
Stone protector.
WDH. System
Place a normal tow hitch in the tow bar and take the lot for a drive.

Good advice Ralph. See my post above. Cheers

KevinJ · Senior Member

Tim, How did you go with the measurements on the "Tugs and Vans" TAB?

You may also be interested in this post I made back when I was going through the same exercise you are doing now.

https://thegreynomads.activeboard.com/t67501652/weights-and-measures-by-a-layman/

Have a read of the notes I made after the tables in the PDF file.

thalls01 · Veteran Member

Hi guys
It is getting harder to find a solution. The caravan should not have to be carrying full water tanks and weight on the A-frame to provide a satisfactory ball weight, which in turn is impacting on my vehicle's rear axle, suspension etc.

Are We Lost, Radar and yobarr have put this eloquently above.

I am at a stage where shortening the trunnion is like fiddling around the edges. We all appreciate that weight distribution in any trailer/van is ideally distributed around the axles with as low a centre of gravity as possible. The caravan purchased does not allow for this so I will be taking the matter up with the dealership here and manufacturer, River Caravans in Victoria today.

It is all very disappointing if I am to be frank, and it takes a lot for me not to be optimistic.

Good advice from all but I now need to bite the bullet!

Cheers, Tim

thalls01 · Veteran Member

KevinJ - I can move my tandem axles to the rear of the caravan by 50mm. Do you have the calculus to establish the new ball weight from doing so? If so, let me know what you require by way of figures.

I have found a reliable engineer who works with suspensions, but like all quality people he is snowed under for 8 weeks before he could do the calculations.

Cheers, Tim

KevinJ · Senior Member

thalls01 wrote:
KevinJ - I can move my tandem axles to the rear of the caravan by 50mm. Do you have the calculus to establish the new ball weight from doing so? If so, let me know what you require by way of figures.

I have found a reliable engineer who works with suspensions, but like all quality people he is snowed under for 8 weeks before he could do the calculations.

Cheers, Tim

I just sent you a PM for you to check.

Are We Lost · Guru

Tim, before you progress too far with the dealer/manufacturer I suggest you check the ball weight with the van empty as it was when you bought it. Is that easy enough to do? Empty the water and remove one of the gas bottles to simulate empty gas. Then check the ball weight. The method I advised earlier using kitchen scales is usually more accurate than a towball scale. But use both and see if there is a difference. Then compare to the plated ball weight.

That may give you more ammunition when talking to the dealer/manufacturer.

I suggest separating the two issues you have. First work out how to get the van as light as possible and with a towball weight closer to 10% without requiring water to do so.

Then, work on your tow vehicle and solve the issue that a towball download of 220kg is already overloading your rear axle.

As for the comments on the WDH resulting in the towball being too far back, I agree. It is contributing to your rear axle being overloaded and more conducive to sway developing. Contributing, not causing. The problem is that shortening that distance by using a standard hitch will probably not be enough to bring it back within your rear axle limits. And you could do with MORE ball weight, not less. So it seems you need a WDH.

One important aspect of stability that has not been mentioned is wheelbase. I believe the Everest is 2850mm which is relatively short for a rig that is reaching its towing limits. The longer the wheelbase, the more it will resist sway, and the less the leverage effect will increase rear axle load.

I would measure the Everest rear axle to towball distance with the WDH fitted and again with the standard hitch. Weigh them as well. You can then work out how much the WDH affects your rear axle load before it is tensioned, compared to the standard hitch.

The formula is:

W * x = F * y

W = weight lifted from front wheels (= what gets added to rear wheels above towball load)

x = wheelbase

F = towball load

y = towball to axle distance

You know F, x and y. So W = F * y / x

Do the calculation with standard hitch and again with the WDH shank fitted.

I calculated it for my Ranger, using your towball load of 220kg. I have an Andersen hitch and it extends 90mm further back than the standard hitch. Its weight including chains, drawbar brackets is about 20kg, versus 6kg for the standard hitch. So I added that additional 14kg to the towball load for the second calculation.

With standard hitch:

220 x 1255 / 3220 = 86

With WDH apparatus

234 x 1345 / 3220 = 97

So 11kg extra comes off the front wheels. I need to add the 14kg additional apparatus weight, so the axle load goes up 11 + 14kg = 25kg due to the WDH apparatus. When it is tensioned it can remove multiple times that from the rear axle load. Your shorter wheelbase and (I assume) greater towball to axle distance will no doubt show more of a difference.

I would hold off on getting any more parts for the WDH until you work out your full solution.

-- Edited by Are We Lost on Monday 21st of March 2022 02:12:37 PM

thalls01 · Veteran Member

Are We Lost - thanks for your recommendations.

It will be difficult if not nigh impossible to get a ball weight that approaches 10% since even with a payload of 2 x tanks of potable water (170kg) in front of the axle and a further 100kgs over the A-frame I still have a ball weight of 220kg which is approx 8% of the payload of the van (2740kg), as measured at the weighbridge yesterday. Bearing in mind also, I do not want to travel with 2 full potable tanks of water everywhere I go and this is difficult to achieve in reality when out camping in any case.

I can always add weight to the A-frame to approach the 10%, such as the current spare trailer wheel affixed to the rear bumper, but again it needs to be borne in mind that the pendulum effect with a heavy rear and weight to A-frame is preserved even when taking these measures.

This is why I decided today to take the issue to the manufacturer of the van and the dealership from which I purchased it for a response.

Tare weight of the van may have been out or meaningless, so there is value in checking that as you have said.

I am also to take 3 measurements to determine the effect of the potable water tanks on the ball weight, namely:

1) Rear tank empty only;
2) Both tanks empty;
3) Front tank empty only.

There is the option of bringing both water tanks forward with their metal shields in the direction of the A-frame if any real difference in ball weight is found.

There is not a lot of wriggle room otherwise in relation to the caravan's weight distribution as when the caravan's payload ball weight was measured, there was very little we added to the rear or underside of bed - all in all 15kgs to rear at most.

Cheers, Tim

yobarr · Guru

Are We Lost wrote:
As suggested by Peter, you may well improve things with tyre pressures on the van. Probably more important in my view are the Everest tyre pressures. You said all tyre pressures were set to specifications. I like to feel the tyres for similar temperatures when stopping after some highway travel. I use it as a rudimentary check for a slow leak, but it will also highlight if one axle or tyre is getting more load than the others. My Ranger rear tyres get warmer than I would like but they are already inflated to the maximum psi as stamped on the tyres.

Also, adding to my earlier post, your comment about the WDH reducing the ball weight does not seem valid. Once connected, you can not measure ball weight. Are you referring to reduced rear axle load on the Everest? That is what a WDH is designed to do. A ball weight of 190kg translates to a rear axle increase of around 150% of that due to leverage (varies depending on the distance the ball is behind the rear axle). So that 190kg means increasing the rear axle load by around 300kg. This change is one of the before/after measurements that needs to be taken at the weighbridge. A WDH should initially be adjusted to transfer about 150kg of that weight back to the front wheels. A small proportion (20kg) would be added to the van wheels.

Still keeping an eye on proceedings here, and noticed that you suggest that only 20kg would be transferred to the van's axle group. When I first started posting here,many moons ago, I stated that a WDH would increase the weight of the van, and I was shouted down by several current posters. Seems that they now have accepted that I was correct? Anyway,the reason for this post is to point out that, because of the car's short wheelbase and ridiculous TBO, the amount of weight a WDH would transfer onto the van's axle group would be well in excess of 20kg. Please excuse me if I've missed it,but has Tim anywhere stated his axle group rating? This figure is often subtracted from the van's ATM to supply towball weight at tare, which is rarely measured, and means zilch. As I have said, as soon as I can find time I will analyse everything and give Tim my thoughts! Cheers

yobarr · Guru

thalls01 wrote:
Are We Lost - thanks for your recommendations.

It will be difficult if not nigh impossible to get a ball weight that approaches 10% since even with a payload of 2 x tanks of potable water (170kg) in front of the axle and a further 100kgs over the A-frame I still have a ball weight of 220kg which is approx 8% of the payload of the van (2740kg), as measured at the weighbridge yesterday. Bearing in mind also, I do not want to travel with 2 full potable tanks of water everywhere I go and this is difficult to achieve in reality when out camping in any case.

I can always add weight to the A-frame to approach the 10%, such as the current spare trailer wheel affixed to the rear bumper, but again it needs to be borne in mind that the pendulum effect with a heavy rear and weight to A-frame is preserved even when taking these measures.

This is why I decided today to take the issue to the manufacturer of the van and the dealership from which I purchased it for a response.

Tare weight of the van may have been out or meaningless, so there is value in checking that as you have said.

I am also to take 3 measurements to determine the effect of the potable water tanks on the ball weight, namely:

1) Rear tank empty only;
2) Both tanks empty;
3) Front tank empty only.
Ideally you would put all water tanks over the axles, or as close as possible to those axles, ahead and behind, so as to minimise the difference in your towball weight when tanks are either full or empty. Important that every tank can be isolated to help manage that weight. My van has 6 tanks and every one can be filled or emptied with no effect on any of the others.

There is the option of bringing both water tanks forward with their metal shields in the direction of the A-frame if any real difference in ball weight is found.

There is not a lot of wriggle room otherwise in relation to the caravan's weight distribution as when the caravan's payload ball weight was measured, there was very little we added to the rear or underside of bed - all in all 15kgs to rear at most.

Cheers, Tim

yobarr · Guru

oldbloke wrote:
Lol. I just measure the nose down with a tape measure on level ground. Level or about 25mm nose down is what you aim for.

If a van has non-load sharing suspension, it should always be as close as possible to level, and always there should be lower pressures in the lead axle than are in the back axle. Fairly obvious why? Cheers

thalls01 · Veteran Member

Yobarr - what you say makes a lot of sense - a tank either side of the axles. That would mean moving the waste tank behind the rear dual axle.

However, that would presumably lower my van ball weight which is already light, would it not? I could move the spare tyre - possibly 30kg - fixed to the rear bumper to the A-frame as an offset but the offset may be small compared to the potable tanks (170kgs) 3 metres from the A-frame coupling.

From my weighbridge measurements the WDH when tensioned is putting 50kgs back on the caravan axles.

For those critical of the WDH I am using (the Equalizer 2), I have looked at the shanks by Hayman Reese and Mister Hitches and found that they will protrude at best from the Everest only 10mm shorter. The area I am referring to is the centre of the pin in receiver to the welded gusset or vein. The Ford Everest receiver just protrudes from the rear than most cars I have owned.

Some here have mentioned going back to a standard hitch with out weight distribution. Please note I had that fitted at the time of the sway I mentioned in the outset of this post - so no great improvement.

I am somewhat loathed to drill a further hole in the length of the hitch that resides in the receiver - that is to shorten the shank. I would have thought that may impact on the engineering properties for which the hitch was designed. The gusset for one would be further in however that may be an advantage since less force can be exerted through the hitch if it is closer to the receiver. Of course I would have an engineering workshop do this since it is high grade solid steel. Opinions please?

Cheers, Tim