# 31rls Question



## HuckZito (Jan 1, 2008)

I am now looking at the 31RLS. My TV is a 07 Tundra Crewmax 5.7 with a towing capacity of 10,100 lbs.
We were looking at the 31BHDS and thought that the 31RLS would shave off some pounds.
The weight of the trailer is 7105 lbs with a hitch weight of 605 lbs. I am thinking that the weight will be OK and the hitch weight being much lower will be allright with my 1300 lb payload cap. Just me, my wife and a 4 year old. We do not pack too much stuff. I just bought the Tundra, so another vehicle is out of the question for a little while.
I plan on going with a good WD set-up like the Equilizer or Hensley, not sure yet. The service forman at Longo toyota, where I bought the truck says that the Tundra will be fine with that size trailer.
Hoping I could get some feedback on this selection.

Thanks, Dave


----------



## wolfwood (Sep 19, 2005)

HuckZito said:


> I am now looking at the 31RLS. My TV is a 07 Tundra Crewmax 5.7 with a towing capacity of 10,100 lbs.
> We were looking at the 31BHDS and thought that the 31RLS would shave off some pounds.
> The weight of the trailer is 7105 lbs with a hitch weight of 605 lbs. I am thinking that the weight will be OK and the hitch weight being much lower will be allright with my 1300 lb payload cap. Just me, my wife and a 4 year old. We do not pack too much stuff. I just bought the Tundra, so another vehicle is out of the question for a little while.
> I plan on going with a good WD set-up like the Equilizer or Hensley, not sure yet. The service forman at Longo toyota, where I bought the truck says that the Tundra will be fine with that size trailer.
> ...


YOU'VE got mail !!!!


----------



## PDX_Doug (Nov 16, 2004)

Hi Dave, and welcome to Outbackers!









I think you would probably get by okay with that combo, but there are a few issues to consider before you sign on the dotted line...

First of all, loaded the trailer is going to weigh a lot more. We tend to pack light as well, but trust me by the time you have full propane tanks, liquid in the other tanks (even if you tend to tow empty, there will still be times you are going to have a tank full of something), clothes, food, firewood, bikes, etc. it adds up quick.

Beyond the rated towing capacity of the Tundra, that 30 footer is a big BIG trailer. Consider the Toys brakes and suspension as well. Are they really up to the task. Personally, we tow a 28 footer with a Titan (similar truck), and it does a great job, but I would not want to go any bigger. Several have, with good results, but I know I wouldn't be comfortable with it.

What kind of terrain and conditions are you going to be towing in? What may be more than enough in the flatlands of the midwest, can also be woefully inadequate in The Rockies. Areas noted for high winds are a big consideration as well. These travel trailers are one big sail, and catch a lot of wind. You need to have a tow vehicle that can keep it under control.

If you do decide to go this route, be sure to invest in a quality anti-sway setup. The Equal-i-zer, Reese DualCam and Hensley Arrow are all very effective, high quality units. My strong recommendation is to install it yourself, make sure you really understand how it all works, and take the time to make sure the setup is correctly tuned to your combination. Keep he Tundra in top notch condition, paying especially close attention to the transmission and rear end. Use the best lubricants available, and plan on changing them a couple of times a year.

Hope this helps some. I'm certainly not trying to scare you off, just want to make sure yo don't end up in a situation you are not comfortable with. Good luck in your hunt, and keep us posted!

Happy Trails,
Doug


----------



## Camping Fan (Dec 18, 2005)

HuckZito said:


> I am now looking at the 31RLS. My TV is a 07 Tundra Crewmax 5.7 with a towing capacity of 10,100 lbs.
> We were looking at the 31BHDS and thought that the 31RLS would shave off some pounds.
> The weight of the trailer is 7105 lbs with a hitch weight of 605 lbs. I am thinking that the weight will be OK and the hitch weight being much lower will be allright with my 1300 lb payload cap. Just me, my wife and a 4 year old. We do not pack too much stuff. I just bought the Tundra, so another vehicle is out of the question for a little while.
> I plan on going with a good WD set-up like the Equilizer or Hensley, not sure yet. The service forman at Longo toyota, where I bought the truck says that the Tundra will be fine with that size trailer.
> ...


----------



## Camping Fan (Dec 18, 2005)

HuckZito said:


> I am now looking at the 31RLS. My TV is a 07 Tundra Crewmax 5.7 with a towing capacity of 10,100 lbs.
> We were looking at the 31BHDS and thought that the 31RLS would shave off some pounds.
> The weight of the trailer is 7105 lbs with a hitch weight of 605 lbs. I am thinking that the weight will be OK and the hitch weight being much lower will be allright with my 1300 lb payload cap. Just me, my wife and a 4 year old. We do not pack too much stuff. I just bought the Tundra, so another vehicle is out of the question for a little while.
> I plan on going with a good WD set-up like the Equilizer or Hensley, not sure yet. The service forman at Longo toyota, where I bought the truck says that the Tundra will be fine with that size trailer.
> ...


The 30RLS will save you some weight compared to the 32BHDS, but you may still be pushing the limits of your Tundra weight wise. Keep in mind that "real life" weights are *ALWAYS* much higher than listed weights for any RV. The listed shipping weight is totally "dry", nothing packed away in the trailer, usually no propane or battery and also often doesn't include the weight of "options" such as AC/awning/outside kitchen. Even if you pack very lightly you can count on your actual loaded weight being at least 1,000-1,500 pounds higher than the listed weight. My 27RSDS has a listed shipping weight of 5860 pounds, my actual loaded weight is 6,800 pounds (CAT scale reading). The same holds true for the listed tongue weight. Once you add in the weight of battery/propane/gear in the trailer, the actual tongue weight will be higher than the listed weight. My 27RSDS is listed with a tongue weight of 570 pounds, my actual tongue weight is 800 pounds (calculated from CAT scale readings of TV alone and TV/TT combined). The real life tongue weight of a loaded 30RLS will probably be at least 850 pounds, if it's much higher than that you'll be pushing the limits of your 1,300 pound payload capacity once you add in the weight of passengers, fuel and cargo.

As Doug mentioned, that is also still a pretty long trailer, actually 33 1/2 feet long. If after calculating all the weights carefully you decide on this trailer, be sure you get a good WD/sway control set-up (Equalizer, Reese Dual Cam or Henslety). Do not under any circumstances let the dealer send you off the lot with a friction sway bar - it will be useless for a trailer that long.

One last thing to keep in mind - *NEVER* believe what someone affiliated with a dealership tells you about what your TV can tow. Automobile dealerships are notorious for overestimating what their products can tow, and RV dealerships are just trying to make a sale. Several members of the forum can tell you real life stories of what they were told they could pull, and how quickly they got a more capable TV when they found out they really couldn't safely tow that much.

Good luck with your search.


----------



## HuckZito (Jan 1, 2008)

Well...

In my never ending quest for TT/TV knowledge I have some new info,

I found the original sticker that was on my Tundra when I bought it. It lists my VIN and all the standard/options on the truck.

According to that, I have a payload capacity of 1515 lbs. I contacted Toyota Corp. and Longo Toyota service dept. and they both told me that this number would be the "actual" payload capacity of my truck with options installed.
They told me that the "offroad package" increased the payload from 1290 lbs by adding different tires and with modifications to the suspension.

I also spoke to Josh at Equal-i-zer and he told me that I could expect that 1/3 of my total hitch weight of the trailer will be transfered back through the trailer and off of the hitch.
He seems to think that this set-up (30RLS, 655 lb hitch weight) will work with my Tundra, and that with the sway control the length would be fine.

This 225 lb increase in payload capacity is good news for me, and the low initial hitch weight (655 lbs) will give me a lower starting point as I load the trailer.

I did find a interesting piece of info from Toyota that I did not know yet, the weight capacity of the receiver on the 07 Tundra is 1010 lbs. I had not heard that spec before. I plan on being well below that.

So, in conclusion......

We are going to get the 30RLS some time next week!

You guys are all Awesome, Thanks for all the help. This is one of the nicest forums I have ever posted on! 
Hopefully I did'nt drive you all as crazy with all my research as I did my wife. I would love to stick around now that I can relax a little bit!

Thanks again, Dave


----------



## 1jeep (Jul 24, 2007)

HuckZito said:


> Well...
> 
> In my never ending quest for TT/TV knowledge I have some new info,
> 
> ...


I would really reccomend asking the dealer to do a test tow before signing, its still a lot of trailer and you will know it is back there. Not trying to be negative, i am in a similiar situation with my tundra...i dont regret buying the 32bhds, but it is a looooooong trailer. I went from a trailer that measured 30' to this one and it made a big difference when backing into tight camp spots. My future does hold a 3/4 ton truck in it....although the tundra has plenty of power, but falls short on payload and mine has a rating of 1550lbs.(non crew max)

Good luck with the trailer....


----------



## HuckZito (Jan 1, 2008)

Yea, I will do the test drive.
I am hoping that by switching from or first choice (32BHDS) to the 30RLS, it will make a little difference. The 30RLS is almost 2 feet shorter and about 400 lbs lighter. The big thing for me was the 150 lb difference in hitch weight (655 lbs vs 805 lbs)

Actually, if I go with the 08, it starts out with a hitch weight of 605 lbs, 200lbs less than the 30BHDS. That will give me the wiggle room I need when loading.

Now I am trying to decide whether to go with the 07 or the 08 (both new).

I do appreciate the advice on test driving first, all weights aside it is a long trailer!

Dave


----------



## Sean Woodruff (Dec 20, 2007)

HuckZito said:


> Yea, I will do the test drive.
> I am hoping that by switching from or first choice (32BHDS) to the 30RLS, it will make a little difference. The 30RLS is almost 2 feet shorter and about 400 lbs lighter. The big thing for me was the 150 lb difference in hitch weight (655 lbs vs 805 lbs)
> 
> Actually, if I go with the 08, it starts out with a hitch weight of 605 lbs, 200lbs less than the 30BHDS. That will give me the wiggle room I need when loading.
> ...


Very good advice given here, Dave. The test tow will be a great indication of if you have enough power. With at least an Equal-i-zer, or a Pivot Point Projection hitch like the ProPride 3P hitch, the length of the trailer shouldn't be an issue.


----------



## 1jeep (Jul 24, 2007)

HuckZito said:


> Yea, I will do the test drive.
> I am hoping that by switching from or first choice (32BHDS) to the 30RLS, it will make a little difference. The 30RLS is almost 2 feet shorter and about 400 lbs lighter. The big thing for me was the 150 lb difference in hitch weight (655 lbs vs 805 lbs)
> 
> Actually, if I go with the 08, it starts out with a hitch weight of 605 lbs, 200lbs less than the 30BHDS. That will give me the wiggle room I need when loading.
> ...


Honestly i dont think you would notice much difference between the 2 trailers, they are both at the limit of the tundra.
I thought the 2008 sydneys were a LE model with a few extras one them?

Mine does fine for a 1/2 ton, but that is my opinion and everyone has a different feel for how a truck should tow. I also have a 8' bed with the double cab giving my truck a 165"wheelbase...slight advantage over the crew max when it comes to trailer length.


----------



## BoaterDan (Jul 1, 2005)

HuckZito said:


> I also spoke to Josh at Equal-i-zer and he told me that I could expect that 1/3 of my total hitch weight of the trailer will be transfered back through the trailer and off of the hitch.


Does anyone understand this? The tongue weight is by definition applied directly to the tow vehicle. Now, the weight distributing hitch transfers the weight to the front of the truck, but "back through the trailer"??!!


----------



## Sean Woodruff (Dec 20, 2007)

BoaterDan said:


> I also spoke to Josh at Equal-i-zer and he told me that I could expect that 1/3 of my total hitch weight of the trailer will be transfered back through the trailer and off of the hitch.


Does anyone understand this? The tongue weight is by definition applied directly to the tow vehicle. Now, the weight distributing hitch transfers the weight to the front of the truck, but "back through the trailer"??!!
[/quote]

Yes, some of the tongue weight is transferred back to the trailer axles with a weight distribution hitch. The actual amount is different for every hitch, every trailer and every tongue weight so I think Josh was probably using a "rule of thumb."


----------



## BoaterDan (Jul 1, 2005)

Sean Woodruff said:


> Yes, some of the tongue weight is transferred back to the trailer axles with a weight distribution hitch. The actual amount is different for every hitch, every trailer and every tongue weight so I think Josh was probably using a "rule of thumb."


From what I can see, that's an urban legend.

Woodalls WD discussion
rv.net discussion

I looked at another dozen sites explain what WD is and does, and they all say WD distributes the load on the TV axles and never mention any changes to tongue weight.

It's easy enough to envision how the WD hitch transfers load to the front axles of the TV, but can anybody explain how it can move weight off the tongue of the TT or find a site that makes this claim? Doesn't seem possible to me that pulling DOWN on the tongue of the trailer moves weight off of it.


----------



## Sean Woodruff (Dec 20, 2007)

BoaterDan said:


> From what I can see, that's an urban legend.
> 
> Woodalls WD discussion
> rv.net discussion
> ...


Dan, since both Woodall's and RV.net are part of the Closed Roads Forums you will find a lot of information there that goes unchecked and unsubstantiated.

It is a simple statics problem. To check it you can take a couple of 2x4s and connect them together at the center and put a load on them at that point. Place a scale under the end of both of them and read the weights. Now, pry the 2x4s up in the center under that weight. The load has to distribute in both directions.


----------



## PDX_Doug (Nov 16, 2004)

BoaterDan said:


> I also spoke to Josh at Equal-i-zer and he told me that I could expect that 1/3 of my total hitch weight of the trailer will be transfered back through the trailer and off of the hitch.


Does anyone understand this? The tongue weight is by definition applied directly to the tow vehicle. Now, the weight distributing hitch transfers the weight to the front of the truck, but "back through the trailer"??!!
[/quote]

Actually, this is the case, and I personally stumbled across it quite by accident at one point. I have access to a truck scale at my work, and used it when I was dialing in my Equal-i-zer. When comparing TV weights with and without the trailer attached, I kept coming up with numbers that just did not add up. Eventually, I did notice that the axle weights on the trailer did increase when the Equal-i-zer was set, and very neatly accounted for the differences I was seeing at the truck.

Now why is this, I asked myself... The best way that I can describe it, is that the W/D hitch creates a more-or-less rigid connection vertically between the TV and TT. There is some up and down movement allowed (less, the tighter you set the hitch), but by creating this (semi)rigid connection, the weight of both vehicles distributes across all axles. This is really the principal that makes the whole W/D concept work in the first place. Of course, there are other elements at play, such as balance and center of gravity that keep all the axles from scaling out the same, but that is what's going on. You are basically converting an articulated combo into a single 'straight' vehicle. At least in that axis.

It's a little difficult to get your head around (at least it took me awhile), but I can confirm from personal experience that the statement is correct.

Happy Trails,
Doug


----------



## BoaterDan (Jul 1, 2005)

Sean Woodruff said:


> From what I can see, that's an urban legend.
> 
> Woodalls WD discussion
> rv.net discussion
> ...


Dan, since both Woodall's and RV.net are part of the Closed Roads Forums you will find a lot of information there that goes unchecked and unsubstantiated.

It is a simple statics problem. To check it you can take a couple of 2x4s and connect them together at the center and put a load on them at that point. Place a scale under the end of both of them and read the weights. Now, pry the 2x4s up in the center under that weight. The load has to distribute in both directions.
[/quote]

But there is no force "prying up" on the tongue. There is no "rigid connection" on the tongue side. The tension bars are attached to the tongue by a chain! The rigidness and prying up is only on the TV side - which is why the WD does what it does.

Yes those sources I showed were discussion forums as open to illogic and ignorance as this one.
















My challenge for you is to find a site of a hitch manufacturer claiming their WD hitch distributes weight OFF the tongue of the trailer. As I said, I read a dozen sites of hitch manufacturers, U-Haul, resellers, etc. and nobody makes that claim. WD is described 100% of the time as doing one thing and one thing only - distributing the weight on the TV axles.

Draw-Tite (Mfr) Site
Site 1
Site2
WS hitch patent info
U-haul

[Edit:]Hey, I sometimes come off like a jerk. I don't mean to here, but a misunderstanding here could be dangerous or even fatal if somebody grossly overloads their TV, so I'm going to keep pushing for that reason.

Again, I simply assert that I see this is an urban legend until I see an authoritative source making this claim. I'm just hoping for useful friendly discussion/debate here.


----------



## BoaterDan (Jul 1, 2005)

Sean Woodruff said:


> It is a simple statics problem. To check it you can take a couple of 2x4s and connect them together at the center and put a load on them at that point. Place a scale under the end of both of them and read the weights. Now, pry the 2x4s up in the center under that weight. The load has to distribute in both directions.


I don't think this is a very good analogy. You describe an outside force pushing up on both boards, which is most definitely not what a WD is doing. There is no outside force... all a WD hitch can _possibly_ do is redistribute the forces, otherwise what it really would be is an anti-gravity machine.









The spring bars are pulling down on the tongue, not pushing up. That connection is with a chain. The ball by definition isn't rigid. At what contact point do you see the WD system is exerting an upward force on the trailer's tongue?

[Maybe this needs its own thread so it can distract everybody from the plane on a conveyor belt.]


----------



## Sean Woodruff (Dec 20, 2007)

BoaterDan said:


> It is a simple statics problem. To check it you can take a couple of 2x4s and connect them together at the center and put a load on them at that point. Place a scale under the end of both of them and read the weights. Now, pry the 2x4s up in the center under that weight. The load has to distribute in both directions.


I don't think this is a very good analogy. You describe an outside force pushing up on both boards, which is most definitely not what a WD is doing. There is no outside force... all a WD hitch can _possibly_ do is redistribute the forces, otherwise what it really would be is an anti-gravity machine.









The spring bars are pulling down on the tongue, not pushing up. That connection is with a chain. The ball by definition isn't rigid. At what contact point do you see the WD system is exerting an upward force on the trailer's tongue?

[Maybe this needs its own thread so it can distract everybody from the plane on a conveyor belt.]
[/quote]

I'm with you on the analogy. I was just really trying to say, you can weigh it and determine it for yourself. The axle load on the trailer DOES increase.

Once you connect the trailer to the ball, and pull up the rear end of the weight distribution bars, you are using a lever to 'lift' at the hitch ball. That weight being moved by the lever (the spring bar) does not know to go in only one direction (toward the tow vehicle).

You may not read about it on hitch manufacturer's web sites but you may have given at least one of them the idea to put it on his web site.









The main reason you might not see it is that weight distribution is primarily a tow vehicle benefit to take some of the load off of the rear axle and get some of it on the drive axle.


----------



## Nathan (Jan 2, 2007)

Dan, Sean, and all.

Hopefully I'm remembering enough from college statics to do this correctly, but I have run the calculations. This is all for a standard WDH setup, so I won't pretend to calculated the Hensley design at this time. Basically, you need to do 3 free body diagrams. One for the connection, one for the trailer and one for the truck. The spring bars pull down on the trailer tounge behind the ball which creates a moment. This moment acts to take a load off of the ball and put it on the rear axles. It is a small change, but is there none the less. The WDH bars also create a moment on the truck which serves to add weight to the front axle and remove it from the rear. Let me know if you have furter questions or want to see a pdf of the calculations (clearer than the .jpg file).

***Edited***
See rescanned pictures below...

Also please note that I did a 1D approximation. The calculations are not exact, but they should be close enough


----------



## Oregon_Camper (Sep 13, 2004)

Nathan,

Great drawing...any chance you can scan it in a bit darker? I'm having problems seeing all of it with these OLD eyes of mine.


----------



## Nathan (Jan 2, 2007)

Oregon_Camper said:


> Nathan,
> 
> Great drawing...any chance you can scan it in a bit darker? I'm having problems seeing all of it with these OLD eyes of mine.


Ok, I'll try again, give me 5 minutes...


----------



## Oregon_Camper (Sep 13, 2004)

Nathan said:


> Nathan,
> 
> Great drawing...any chance you can scan it in a bit darker? I'm having problems seeing all of it with these OLD eyes of mine.


Ok, I'll try again, give me 5 minutes...
[/quote]

Thanks...


----------



## Nathan (Jan 2, 2007)

Ok, that was an ordeal (different scanner copier, 3 tries, etc








) but here goes again:

















Wow my productivity is shot today


----------



## Oregon_Camper (Sep 13, 2004)

That is so much better for my eyes. Thanks...sorry for bring down you productivity, but its Friday.


----------



## Sean Woodruff (Dec 20, 2007)

Nathan said:


> Wow my productivity is shot today


Excellent, Nathan. How about putting it on the MyRVTalk Blog at ProPrideHitch.com? I can set you up with a username and password to log in.


----------



## Nathan (Jan 2, 2007)

Oregon_Camper said:


> That is so much better for my eyes. Thanks...sorry for bring down you productivity, but its Friday.


Yeah, well a couple coworkers came up this morning as I was churning through the work and asked what I was doing. As we are an engineering group I casually responded "engineering." Everyone was shocked since we spend most of our day doing program management type tasks...








So maybe my productivity was really up for the day.


----------



## BoaterDan (Jul 1, 2005)

Sean Woodruff said:


> I'm with you on the analogy. I was just really trying to say, you can weigh it and determine it for yourself. The axle load on the trailer DOES increase.
> 
> Once you connect the trailer to the ball, and pull up the rear end of the weight distribution bars, you are using a lever to 'lift' at the hitch ball. That weight being moved by the lever (the spring bar) does not know to go in only one direction (toward the tow vehicle).


Ok, I think I'm seeing something here.

Consider the case where you've lifted the tongue up so high that the frame of the trailer is nearly vertical. Of course, the weight is being shifted from the tongue to the axle. So, I guess I can see that to the extent you're lifting a dramatically drooping tongue you've shifted some weight back to the TT axle.

But that's really just a simple geometry or vector math issue, not really as complicted as Nathan's description, which seems to be describing that there is something mechanical going on directly at the hitch itself to specifically accomplish the shift directly. I'll have to look at his drawing closer when I have a bit more time.


----------



## Nathan (Jan 2, 2007)

I did leave out all base weights and assumed that everything was hitched up level. I'm just calculating the distribution of the tounge weight across the axles. The WDH doesn't really shift weight... it basically is using lever arms to apply torques to keep everything straight. Perhaps I should start a new thread on this and we can discuss....

edited: I started the new thread....

Now back to the original subject.....


----------

