The need for heavy duty springs if you are adding weight.

G

Guest

Guest
Matt & Jon

Well, 25" seems to suit me, and it still leaves a visible upwards slope of the running boards towards the rear (when looked at from the side), ie it doesn't look down at the back vs the front.

In fact, if anything, it leaves the horse trailer a little nose up with a tendency to lock the brakes on its front axle when empty. I've been tempted to move the towball down to the lowest set of holes on the hitch, but that will take it below the reinforcing plate behind, and increase bending moment on the hitch assembly. And I've never had stability problems towing the horses, so I think it's a case of "let sleeping dogs lie".

Christopher Bell
Devon, UK
1996 1HD-FT (possibly suffering from brewer's droop)


On Behalf Of Jon Wildsmith

That sounds a bit low, our 93 with standard suspension (which I thought was low from old age) but 285 tyres is 27" to the step on the rear. Even allowing for the 285's 25" seems low?

Never measured it before but the 94 is 33" to the step.

Regards,
Jon.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Christopher,
You could try putting taller tyres on the horse trailer then you could get
away with elevated springs on the 80.
Anthony graham
1994HDJ801HD-T
West Wales
UK
_____
From: [Email address removed] [mailto:[Email address removed]] On
Behalf Of Christopher Bell
Sent: 02 February 2005 12:54
To: [Email address removed]
Subject: RE: [ELCO] The need for heavy duty springs if you are adding
weight.
Matt & Jon
Well, 25" seems to suit me, and it still leaves a visible upwards slope of
the running boards towards the rear (when looked at from the side), ie it
doesn't look down at the back vs the front.
In fact, if anything, it leaves the horse trailer a little nose up with a
tendency to lock the brakes on its front axle when empty. I've been tempted
to move the towball down to the lowest set of holes on the hitch, but that
will take it below the reinforcing plate behind, and increase bending moment
on the hitch assembly. And I've never had stability problems towing the
horses, so I think it's a case of "let sleeping dogs lie".
Christopher Bell
Devon, UK
1996 1HD-FT (possibly suffering from brewer's droop)
On Behalf Of Jon Wildsmith
That sounds a bit low, our 93 with standard suspension (which I thought was
low from old age) but 285 tyres is 27" to the step on the rear. Even
allowing for the 285's 25" seems low?
Never measured it before but the 94 is 33" to the step.
Regards,
Jon.
 
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks