Quote:
Originally Posted by PopBeavers
...The ability of the tail (TM) to wag the dog (TV) is a function of, among other things:
1. wheel base of the TV, longer is better
2. distance from tow ball to rear axle of the TV, shorter is better
TMs are designed to not require anti-sway equipment.
A WD hitch is mandatory with small TVs. I assume (big mistake) that a WD hitch will compensate for a very short wheel base and/or a very long axle to tow ball distance.
Maybe I confused myself regarding tow ball to axle distance. I think shorter is better. Zero being the best, as with a 5h wheel. But it is late and I may have confused myself.
|
You're less confused than you're giving yourself credit for.
The math works out that the wheelbase is leverage the TV has to steer with, and the distance between the rear axle and the hitch ball (let's call this Overhang) is leverage the trailer has to defeat that. You can isolate the Wheelbase to Overhang ratio as a Tow Vehicle factor which multiplies "goodness" for both left-right skid control and for reducing the unweighting of the front axle/overweighting of the rear axle by the trailer tongue.
The WDH has a greater effect for shorter wheelbase vehicles. In other words, the same WDH settings/WDH induced trailer axle weight boost would add twice as much weight on the front axle of a 100" wheelbase TV than it would for a 200" wheelbase TV. There's a steering and braking benefit from extra weight on the front that compensates proportionately (holding the Overhang distance the same, a 10% increase in WDH effect on the trailer axle calculates out the same as a 10% increase in wheelbase). But I'd still describe the WDH as a "compensating" alternative to a longer wheelbase, but not necessarily a perfectly equal one.
And, I still like real weight distributions in things like CountryGirl's move of the spare tire to a mount in front of the TV, because it's a double win: one for the forward weight added and one for the rear weight removed.