Ford ranger towing

Bukhouse · Veteran Member

Ford ranger towing

iana · Guru

Yep, we towed a 3.5 ton caravan about 35,000 km without a WDH, rear springs up-graded though. It was the Rangers sister, a BT50, Had no issues.

-- Edited by iana on Friday 19th of August 2022 07:23:20 PM

Bukhouse · Veteran Member

Thanks for the reply

We have 24ft Coromal van and used tow tow with Landcruiser with WDH

we sold the Landcruiser 100 series and brought XLT Ford ranger but made the mistake in having ford fit tow bar

which isn't rated for WDH set up

that's why I was wondering if I should go to the expence and change the tow bar to a WDH rated Hayman Reese bar

yobarr · Guru

Bukhouse wrote:
Hi , Anyone out there towing large caravan with Ford Ranger without WDH ? Is a WDH needed ? Cheers Ken

Hi Ken. Whilst the Ranger has an alleged tow capacity of 3500kg, because of the lightweight 1850kg rear axle this can be achieved ONLY when a DOG trailer is being towed. Dog trailers have both a front axle, usually steered, and a rear axle, so there is almost no towball weight. Caravans are PIG trailers which have only one axle group near the middle of the van, with significant weight on the towball. When towing a 3500kg van with the generally accepted 10% towball weight (350kg), there will be over 500kg applied to that lightweight rear axle. Think "levers". If safety is of concern to you, 3000- 3100kg ATM is the biggest van you'd consider towing. Always the weight on the wheels of the car should be greater than the weight on the wheels of the van, so with your 6000kg GCM (Total weight of car and van) and 3200kg GVM (total weight of car) you've got only 2800kg left. Although your towball weight (300kg) becomes part of your car's GVM when hooked up, it still is part of your caravan's ATM so must be added to the 2800kg that is being carried by your van's axles, giving total van weight of 3100kg. You will no doubt get all sorts of tales from those who will proudly tell you that they have "Done a million miles towing 3500kg Mate. No worries Mate. Just gotta drive to the conditions Mate" and other such ramblings, but such an "achievement" is more a result of good luck than of good management, as always the weight on the wheels of the car should be greater than is the weight on the wheels of any caravan it is towing if safety is of any concern. Not negotiable. Think of the "Tail wagging the Dog" scenario. Simple physics. Always I am happy to help you with any queries you may have about weights, but none of the popular twin-cabs can safely tow more than about 3100kg ATM. Often members who ask questions prefer to listen to the 'advice' that they want to hear rather than listen to the facts. And a WDH is NOT the universal cure-it-all that many believe it to be because it transfers weight from the rear axle of the car to both the front axle of the car AND the van's axle group.This can result in you exceeding both your van's axle group rating and your van's ATM. Like all the more popular twin-cabs the Ranger is capable of towing around 3000-3100kg as a PIG trailer, but realistically that's it. Cheers

P.S Upgrading your car's rear springs may improve the ride but it does NOT increase axle rating or carrying capacity. Neither do Airbags.

P.P.S If you use the "search" function at the top of the page you can access much good advice about towing weights and dynamics.

yobarr · Guru

Bukhouse wrote:
Thanks for the reply
We have 24ft Coromal van and used tow tow with Landcruiser with WDH
we sold the Landcruiser 100 series and brought XLT Ford ranger but made the mistake in having ford fit tow bar
which isn't rated for WDH set up
that's why I was wondering if I should go to the expence and change the tow bar to a WDH rated Hayman Reese bar

Just saw this Ken. The LC100 and the Ranger are chalk and cheese, and miles apart in towing capacity, but Coromal weights seem to differ greatly? Some are pretty light so you may be OK. What is the ATM of your van? I'm guessing it's a Princeton?

-- Edited by yobarr on Friday 19th of August 2022 09:07:22 PM

Are We Lost · Guru

I have an XLT Ford Ranger and a largish van. I agree with Yobarr (on this anyway). 3000kg or a tad more, but less would be preferable. There is no way a Ranger should tow a 3500kg van, despite the fact that some people have avoided problems. Of course you have not said it is 3500kg, so that may be pointless.

When I bought my van I towed it home without a WDH and the rear end did sag quite a bit. The sag is just cosmetic but it is a symptom of a more important issue that should be addressed. For me a WDH was always in the plan, and once fitted it made a huge difference to the feel on the road. With a heavy load on the back, the steering becomes too light due to reduced grip. The beauty of the WDH is the way it increases the effect when needed. When braking, the nose of the van puts more weight on the towball thus taking more weight off the front wheels, just when they need it most. This automatically increases the WDH tension, helping to restore that additional lost weight. This same feature has the added benefit of vastly improving porpoising.

Talking about a WDH is a touchy subject, and Yobarr shares a different viewpoint from the majority on here. Have a search for other threads on the subject. It is rare to find someone who has used a WDH with a heavy van to not appreciate the benefits.

As for your towbar, I was not aware some towbars are not rated for a WDH. Is it rated for 3500kg? There should be a plate on it with basic specs.

Edit. I see you posted the ATM of 2590kg. That is very light for a 24 footer. What about the other specs? Have you actually taken it over a weighbridge?

-- Edited by Are We Lost on Friday 19th of August 2022 09:31:35 PM

Bukhouse · Veteran Member

Yess chalk and cheese lol regret selling but she was a bit slow around town being a non turbo

the Ranger is also a great vehicle

the van ATM is 2590kg

yes Prinston 701

-- Edited by Bukhouse on Friday 19th of August 2022 09:27:30 PM

yobarr · Guru

Bukhouse wrote:
Yess chalk and cheese lol regret selling but she was a bit slow around town being a non turbo
the Ranger is also a great vehicle
the van ATM is 2590kg
yes Prinston 701

-- Edited by Bukhouse on Friday 19th of August 2022 09:27:30 PM

Hi Ken. You'll be OK with that van. More tomorrow. Cheers

Bukhouse · Veteran Member

Hi when i had the Landcruiser it had a Hayman reese towbar rated 3500kg and I used the WDH on the van

The Ford Ranger has a Ford towbar rated to 3200kg and there's a sticker on the drivers side door pillar

that states not to be used with WDH device

So I think Ill get the Ford towbar changed out to the Reese bar and run with the WDH

Bukhouse · Veteran Member

the last time I had it weighed the van came in at 2.7 tonne loaded so I had to shed some off the wifes stuff lol

Are We Lost · Guru

The PX2 towbar as factory installed has a very short receiver which abuts the main towbar crossmember. You may also have this same "feature". From memory, the HR receiver is open at both ends, so a much better solution. Worth checking when you are are getting the new one. Also, take along the WDH shank to make sure the hole position suits and maybe you can get some cut off if needed to reduce the towball overhang ... beneficial in reducing rear axle load and resistance to sway.

Greg 1 · Guru

I have been towing a van weighing in at 2980 ATM with a Ford Ranger and WDH for a number of years now.
It has done about 80,000kms with this van on the back over most of this continent.

I am a fan of WDH bars but probably not for the same reasons that many use them.
A lot of people equate them with a load levelling device which they are really not.
They are designed as their name implies, to redistribute some weight from the back axle of the tow vehicle to primarily the front axle, so returning steering feel and control and to gain back braking distance.

If you think of it in those terms and do not crank it up too hard, you will be fine. I have mine on the 3rd link from the chains free end on my setup but that will vary from brand to brand.
it does not have massive tension on it and the car is still slightly down at the rear.

I am using the standard Ford towbar and I have the standard suspension setup that Ford supplied.
The towball weight of my van fully laden measured with a proper load cell was 308kgs.

The rig is very stable and where conditions and limits allow, I tow at 100kph.
I have tried towing without the hitch bars and the rig is definitly not as stable and the steering feel and braking distance is not as good.
I have some runs on the board with car dynamics, as I made my living at one stage as an automotive test driver and also have quite some experience setting up race cars, so am familar with being able to tell the differences in a vehicle with small changes to suspension etc.

Your Ranger should have little difficulty towing the van at that ATM and personally I would use the WDH. I have been using them since the early 1970's and as I said I am a fan, having tested them on several vehicles both with and without.
But the decision is entirely upto you.

Ivan 01 · Guru

That is a great post Greg 1

I have tried towing without the hitch bars and the rig is definitly not as stable and the steering feel and braking distance is not as good towing without the hitch bars and the rig is definitly not as stable and the steering feel and braking distance is not as good.

This says it all.
Those anti WDH members will never be able to assess how much better their combination may perform with one.

Yes, there are some situations where a WDH may need to be disconnected but those times fall into insignificance if compared to the restored steering and general stability with travelling and braking that a WDH can bring to the combination.

deverall11 · Guru

Bukhouse wrote:
Hi , Anyone out there towing large caravan with Ford Ranger without WDH ? Is a WDH needed ? Cheers Ken

Lots of advice, most good. Bottom line is you need to understand and appreciate how a WDH

works and why. Hayman & Reece usually have a video showing what happens.

3500kg is a lot for a Ranger. We use to tow that weight (24ft Golden Eagle) with a 200 series Landcruiser and I though it

was on the limit. That little Ranger will be working hard.

I get the big van and the extra comfort it brings with it but also the bigger job the tow vehicle has to do.

I truly do not believe the Ranger will be up to the task of towing for any long distances. Eg: driving

across the Nullabor.

You can make up your own mind based on what you read here and advice is given in good

faith. However when it all goes wrong, no one here will be there to pickup the pieces. Talk to the

real expert (Hayman & Reece) and use that also to make your decision.

Good luck,

Larry

-- Edited by deverall11 on Saturday 20th of August 2022 04:49:21 PM

yobarr · Guru

Ivan 01 wrote:
That is a great post Greg 1

I have tried towing without the hitch bars and the rig is definitly not as stable and the steering feel and braking distance is not as good towing without the hitch bars and the rig is definitly not as stable and the steering feel and braking distance is not as good.

This says it all.
Those anti WDH members will never be able to assess how much better their combination may perform with one.

Yes, there are some situations where a WDH may need to be disconnected but those times fall into insignificance if compared to the restored steering and general stability with travelling and braking that a WDH can bring to the combination.

Ivan, you seem to have conveniently overlooked the fact that Greg's van has ATM 2980kg, while Ken's van's ATM is only 2590kh. BIG difference! Ken's Ranger could easily handle a 2590kg van without using a WDH, no problem, but if he's got money to waste, let him go for the WDH. Increased TBO, increased yaw, and almost zero gain. Weight of WDH and extra TBO virtually negate any weight transfer. With only 250kg towball weight, if a miserable 100kg extra weight on the front axle of car is critical to balance, there is something inherently wrong elsewhere. With my car I run at 6800kg GCM with only 1350kg on front axle. No trouble with steering and braking, or anything else. In addition, assuming Ken's van has the usual Coromal Symons Knee suspension, he will have the only suspension system that doesn't suffer from axle steer, so stability is further increased. Ranger is good car to tow up to about 3100kg ATM. No WDH. Cheers.

Greg 1 · Guru

I have no Idea how someone can say that a Ranger towing the van in question wouldn't tow very far. Mine has now towed ours across the continent and back 5 times including a complete lap along with many shorter trips around WA. It has been faultless with the exception of a blown turbo boost hose on this latest trip which a new rubber hose fixed very quickly. Some people really come out with some crap at times. Open your eyes. There are an awful lot of Ranger's and BT50's out there towing sizeable vans all over this country. They are some of the most popular tow tugs out there. Yobarr, from my experience over all the years, all vehicles benefit from a WDH. Some more than others certainly, but after much testing, I wouldn't tow any sizeable van without one. Weight has little to do with it. Your assertions that it increases yaw is absolutely incorrect. In fact the opposite is true. When you have done the miles that I have done with and without one come talk to me.

yobarr · Guru

Greg, surely it is an indesputable fact that an HR WDH increases yaw, simply because it increases TBO. More TBO=more leverage= more yaw. Cheers

-- Edited by yobarr on Saturday 20th of August 2022 09:59:44 PM

Greg 1 · Guru

So if I measure mine the additional tow ball overhang is a gigantic 50mm. Not enough to make the slightest difference to yaw that would be either measurable or felt in the rig. But to answer your question there are two reasons it prevents yaw. The first is the very fact that it was designed for in the first instant. By putting weight back on the front axle and increasing steering response and control. Second is a rub off of the design which was originally probably unintentional, and that is as the van begins to step out of line, the tension in the chains tends to force the van back into line. I get what you are trying to say, but the true fact is that TBO has very little affect on the van until it becomes very substantial in distance and there are very few hitches that I have seen that push into that territory. I would also like to correct you on the claim that van ATM increases with a WDH. ATM will always, like tow ball weight remain exactly the same unless payload in the van is added or subtracted. Gravity doesn't alter if you want the physics involved. ATM and TBW are both measured with the van off the vehicle. It is the total weight of the van standing alone on its axle groups and it's jockey wheel. A WDH does not alter that. It does not alter the GCM either being the total weight of the rig. What it can alter is how that total weight is distributed between the bits holding it up, that is the various axle groups, so you can get a decrease in the weight on the tow vehicle rear axle with increases on the tow vehicle front axle and a slight increase on the vans axle group. IT ONLY CHANGES THE WAY IN WHICH THE TOTAL WEIGHT IS SUPPORTED. It does not increase nor decrease the total weights. To give an analogy, if we placed 1000 tonnes in the centre of the Sydney harbour Bridge the load would be primarily supported by the arch trusses and to a small degree the abutments of the bridge via the bridge deck. However, if we spilt that load into 2 off 500 tonne loads and moved them very close to the abutments, then the abutments take on a much greater role in supporting the load and the arch less so and yet the total load on the bridge hasn't changed. A WDH does a similar thing by moving some of the load off the back axle and moving it outwards. The load hasn't changed but it is supported slightly differently.

jegog · Senior Member

When it is all said and done, when the rozzers stop you and weigh you and find you are non-compliant then apart from a hefty fine, your rig sits there until it is compliant. Of course you could tell them of how many travellers you know of that have seemingly exceeded the limits for years without problems, but they would be more inclined to charge you with wasting police time than let you drive off.
I notice that no-one has mentioned adding the weight of the tow bar to the gross vehicle mass or the combined mass. And those WDHs aren't light either.
With similar specs, Mitsubishi use a more realistic 3100kg as the max. tow capacity.

Gundog · Guru

Bugger I have flat batteries in my BS meter.

The usual anti WDH crowd trying to justify their position, oh wait it's the physics !

Ivan 01 · Guru

yobarr wrote:
Ivan 01 wrote:
That is a great post Greg 1

I have tried towing without the hitch bars and the rig is definitly not as stable and the steering feel and braking distance is not as good towing without the hitch bars and the rig is definitly not as stable and the steering feel and braking distance is not as good.

This says it all.
Those anti WDH members will never be able to assess how much better their combination may perform with one.

Yes, there are some situations where a WDH may need to be disconnected but those times fall into insignificance if compared to the restored steering and general stability with travelling and braking that a WDH can bring to the combination.
Ivan, you seem to have conveniently overlooked the fact that Greg's van has ATM 2980kg, while Ken's van's ATM is only 2590kh. BIG difference! Ken's Ranger could easily handle a 2590kg van without using a WDH, no problem, but if he's got money to waste, let him go for the WDH. Increased TBO, increased yaw, and almost zero gain. Weight of WDH and extra TBO virtually negate any weight transfer. With only 250kg towball weight, if a miserable 100kg extra weight on the front axle of car is critical to balance, there is something inherently wrong elsewhere. With my car I run at 6800kg GCM with only 1350kg on front axle. No trouble with steering and braking, or anything else. In addition, assuming Ken's van has the usual Coromal Symons Knee suspension, he will have the only suspension system that doesn't suffer from axle steer, so stability is further increased. Ranger is good car to tow up to about 3100kg ATM. No WDH. Cheers.

Yobarr,

I have overlooked nothing.

Continual assumptions of what others do and dont do is a big problem.

Incorrectly *quoting* what I and others say is frustrating.

The constant mentioning of how good your example of the 79 vehicle and van are with weights when in fact all these figures you repeatedly rattle at us all, are unsubstantiated as the *correct* figures ( how do we know that these are the correct figures ) and all of the lesser folk without 79 series utes according to you are unsafe is nothing more than an incessant promotion of the 79.

You quote *no trouble with steering and braking* is really no recommendation coming from someone who blatantly denies the proven instability of a 79 caused by the narrow rear track. In your very words *spare me* and for that matter, spare us all.

Greg 1s post immediately above explains the real facts and it is obviously not liked because the information does not fit with anyone making a choice of vehicle unless of course, it is the 79 series.

Advising others at all that a vehicle should be used without a WDH when that very advice may be against manufacturers recommendations is nothing more than foolish.

The situation where a person on this forum may read incorrect recommendations on WDH fitment and use, and blindly accept all the small but emotional reasons that are being presented to denigrate anyone using that equipment contrary to a manufacturers advice, is not only foolish but extremely dangerous.

yobarr · Guru

Gundog wrote:
Bugger I have flat batteries in my BS meter.
The usual anti WDH crowd trying to justify their position, oh wait it's physics !

At least you got that part right Graham. It seems that simple physics confuses you? Later today I also will reply to Greg's post, which as usual is good information. There is no doubt that Greg has "runs on the board" from vast experience and knowledge of weights and dynamics but he is either unintentionally contradicting himself or he is being simply being pedantic. Ivan again has taken offence that I quote my car as an example of what can be achieved, without the constraints of a WDH, by correctly loading a car. For a time Ivan and I were getting on quite well, but his recent constant denigration of the 79 seems to be in response to my perhaps undiplomatic correction of a point he recently made? Perhaps he really wants a 79 having realised that "nothing compares or competes"? Unfortunately that car already has a 4 year waiting list and Toyota gave stopped taking orders, while 2nd hand models are selling for $40,000 more than new. Why would that be, I wonder? Cheers

-- Edited by yobarr on Sunday 21st of August 2022 10:38:48 AM

Greg 1 · Guru

Jegog, If you have weighed your rig fully laden ready to go,complete with WDH and it is compliant, if you get pulled up on the side of the road the fact you are using a WDH isn't somehow going to magically put you over the weight limit, unless along your journey you have added to your payload to put the rig over. You should always weigh the rig complete with everything including the WDH. When weighing ATM and TBW I lay my bars across the van drawbar to get as accurate a measurement as possible. I agree with you that most vehicles are not realistic in a practical sense with their towing capacity claims. Take my Ranger for example. Yes it can tow 3500kgs but with virtually no payload in the Ute. Given its 6000kg GCM by the time you extract the 3500kgs off that you have just enough for two average passengers and half a tank of fuel so not realistic. The maximum tow capacity of the Ranger in any practical sense is about 3100kgs if you do the sums.. The new V6 model will be slightly better with a GCM of 6400kgs but the vehicle has a kerb weight about 100kgs heavier so not all of that increase is available for towing.

Ivan 01 · Guru

yobarr wrote:
Gundog wrote:
Bugger I have flat batteries in my BS meter.
The usual anti WDH crowd trying to justify their position, oh wait it's physics !
At least you got that part right Graham. It seems that simple physics confuses you? Later today I also will reply to Greg's post, which as usual is good information. There is no doubt that Greg has "runs on the board" from vast experience and knowledge of weights and dynamics but he is either unintentionally contradicting himself or he is being simply being pedantic. Ivan again has taken offence that I quote my car as an example of what can be achieved, without the constraints of a WDH, by correctly loading a car. For a time Ivan and I were getting on quite well, but his recent constant denigration of the 79 seems to be in response to my perhaps undiplomatic correction of a point he recently made? Perhaps he really wants a 79 having realised that "nothing compares or competes"? Unfortunately that car already has a 4 year waiting list and Toyota gave stopped taking orders, while 2nd hand models are selling for $40,000 more than new. Why would that be, I wonder? Cheers

-- Edited by yobarr on Sunday 21st of August 2022 10:38:48 AM

Yobarr,

I have not taken offence of your selection of any brand or model of tow vehicle.

It is in fact, your choice.

What many find offensive is repetitive posts that continually repeat the specifications of other vehicles, if only to *put them down*.

Many find that your constant referral to the 79 is completely unnecessary particularly considering that some of that vehicles downfalls are glossed over.

Many find the continual dangerous advice that all vehicles towing should not need a WDH even when contrary to manufacturers recommendations is pushed at us all at every opportunity but worse still is that suggesting that you can do it with different model vehicles and vans at random.

I dont think we have any qualified person on this forum to advise anyone with safety and accuracy as to the weight cut off point of any vehicle and trailer combination so may I respectfully suggest that you leave this advice up to vehicle manufacturers and refrain from confusing what could quite simply be information on the safety of a combination without personal thoughts or experience being forced on others.

A choice of using any vehicle is the consumers choice. It is quite common knowledge with the caravanning fraternity that 79 series utes are not what a large percentage of that demographic of users want or even own.

It is not because they are currently hard to buy but more because they dont represent any comfort or even value for money.

Here is an example of the views of a good crosscut of caravanners from 3 or 4 years ago.

Interesting reading for all.

https://www.caravanersforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=80327

-- Edited by Ivan 01 on Sunday 21st of August 2022 12:21:15 PM

Gundog · Guru

Greg 1 wrote:
So if I measure mine the additional tow ball overhang is a gigantic 50mm.
Not enough to make the slightest difference to yaw that would be either measurable or felt in the rig.
But to answer your question there are two reasons it prevents yaw.
The first is the very fact that it was designed for in the first instant.
By putting weight back on the front axle and increasing steering response and control.
Second is a rub off of the design which was originally probably unintentional, and that is as the van begins to step out of line, the tension in the chains tends to force the van back into line.
I get what you are trying to say, but the true fact is that TBO has very little affect on the van until it becomes very substantial in distance and there are very few hitches that I have seen that push into that territory.
I would also like to correct you on the claim that van ATM increases with a WDH. ATM will always, like tow ball weight remain exactly the same unless payload in the van is added or subtracted.
Gravity doesn't alter if you want the physics involved. ATM and TBW are both measured with the van off the vehicle.
It is the total weight of the van standing alone on its axle groups and it's jockey wheel.
A WDH does not alter that. It does not alter the GCM either being the total weight of the rig.
What it can alter is how that total weight is distributed between the bits holding it up, that is the various axle groups, so you can get a decrease in the weight on the tow vehicle rear axle with increases on the tow vehicle front axle and a slight increase on the vans axle group.
IT ONLY CHANGES THE WAY IN WHICH THE TOTAL WEIGHT IS SUPPORTED.
It does not increase nor decrease the total weights.
To give an analogy, if we placed 1000 tonnes in the centre of the Sydney harbour Bridge the load would be primarily supported by the arch trusses and to a small degree the abutments of the bridge via the bridge deck.
However, if we spilt that load into 2 off 500 tonne loads and moved them very close to the abutments, then the abutments take on a much greater role in supporting the load and the arch less so and yet the total load on the bridge hasn't changed.
A WDH does a similar thing by moving some of the load off the back axle and moving it outwards. The load hasn't changed but it is supported slightly differently.

Greg well written.

Another thing that is often not considered is the length of the caravan A frame, I have never seen or heard any discussion on the A frame lemgth.

Greg 1 · Guru

Hi gundog I can only comment on my own experience with regards to drawbar length. From that experience I have found that a longer drawbar usually gives more stability to the trailer by the fact of pushing the axles further away from the tow ball. I like vans with longer drawbars and the axles firmly in the rear half of the van. Whilst it tends to increase TBW, it usually results in a good towing van. Used to tow a lot of horse floats about the country too and always found the extended versions were a ton better to tow with a couple of large nags in the back than the short variety.

Are We Lost · Guru

yobarr wrote:
Greg, surely it is an indesputable fact that an HR WDH increases yaw, simply because it increases TBO. More TBO=more leverage= more yaw. Cheers

It certainly is disputable. Greg is not the only one saying it. As usual with these discussions there is a chorus of members who disagree with you.

So I am going to focus just on that comment of yours about yaw.

From Wikipedia .... "A yaw rotation is a movement around the yaw axis of a rigid body that changes the direction it is pointing, to the left or right of its direction of motion"

You are quite correct that fitting a WDH typically results in more towball overhang. And you are also correct that this increased towball overhang increases the risk of yaw. However, as Greg pointed out, the additional distance of 50mm in his setup is insignificant. Mine is similar. But even for those with greater overhang, what you failed to take into account is the compensating benefit of the WDH in reducing the risk of yaw.

Look again at that definition. In the case of towing a pig trailer, the yaw axis is the rear wheels of the tow vehicle. When the van applies a sideways force at the towball, the tendency is for the tow vehicle to rotate around the rear axle. The tyre grip at the front wheels is the only resistance to the tow vehicle being rotated left or right. So, reduced grip from a lighter front end has less ability to prevent that yaw.

At the same time, the increased weight on the rear axle fixes the axis point more firmly. The greater the imbalance between front and rear tyre grip, the more likelihood of yaw occurring.

Restoring lost weight on the front wheels means more grip on the road, and thus more resistance to yaw. The relationship between weight and tyre grip is pretty close to linear ... add 10% weight and the grip on the road increases 10%.

That leads nicely into your comment

"if a miserable 100kg extra weight on the front axle of car is critical to balance, there is something inherently wrong elsewhere"

That 100kg extra weight on the front axle also means reduction on the back wheels (probably around 120kg, with 20kg added to the van wheels). Using your hypothetical 100kg, and a Ranger fairly heavily loaded, have a look at what that implies:

Front/rear weights:

Without WDH: 1200/1800 (600kg differential)

With WDH: 1300/1680 (380kg differential)

Without the WDH, the imbalance is siginficant, and therefore easier to induce yaw. With the WDH fitted, the imbalance is far less, thus better able to resist yaw.

Also, as I covered earlier in the thread, it's not just 100kg. It's the dynamic benefits that make towing with a WDH so much better. Comments from most people who tow heavy vans and have used a WDH confirm this.

-- Edited by Are We Lost on Sunday 21st of August 2022 01:29:16 PM

Greg 1 · Guru

Great post Are We Lost.

Ivan 01 · Guru

Greg 1 wrote:
Great post Are We Lost.

+1 from me.

yobarr · Guru

This is becoming interesting! It would take a lot of "creative" measuring to convince yourselves that a WDH increase TBO by only 50mm, but I have started compiling a response. Stephen's theory is flawed too, as weight on the rear axle tends to limit yaw, but today is beer-drinking day so I cannot apply the concentration needed to respond. Maybe by tomorrow we'll have further interesting comments, along with perhaps more sheep-like "+1s" from those who seem to have nothing of substance to add. Cheers

P.S For a start I'll post this photo of a shank. Anybody who believes that a WDH shank and the associated tow head adds only 50mm to the distance from the end of the receiver to the ball is delusional. Cheers

-- Edited by yobarr on Sunday 21st of August 2022 03:32:33 PM