Jayco RV Owners Forum
 


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 09-07-2011, 05:22 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Orange County, N.Y.
Posts: 631
I have settled twice before for a different TT because of my TV. Is t possible to upgrade the TV now and then get the TT you want later?
__________________

__________________
Joe, Joyce , 4 Kids and 3 Dogs.
2004 V-10 Excursion with Hellwig sway bar, Roadmaster Active Suspension, Bilstein shocks and steering stabilizer, Super Duty Tow Mirrors,
3.73 Gears, Reese dual cam, Prodigy brake controller.
2010 Jayco Jay Flight G-2 32 BHDS
usmc616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2011, 05:55 AM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Huntsville,AL
Posts: 18
I'd like to offer up my opinion. I have a 29BHS. I pull it with a 2004 Chevy Avalanche. On slight grades and flat roads it pulls perfectly fine. On steeper hills it struggles, but I'm working on getting a tuner and switching out the servo in the transmission for better towing. Our Ford Expedition pulls it perfectly fine.

My honest opinion would be to get the one you like the most. I don't really see WHY a Tundra wouldn't pull it with their large V8, when my little V8 can. But the distance you pull could be a large factor. I wouldn't pull mine more than a few hours away.
__________________

__________________
04 Chevy Avalanche. 373 gears, LSD rear, not much else for now.
05 Expedition (backup rig)
03 Jayco JayFlight 29'BH
Husky Centerline weight distribution system
Husky Quest brake controller
03Avifamily is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2011, 09:00 AM   #13
Moderator Emeritus
 
Rustic Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperAir View Post
snip.........I've gone through all the capacities and the limiting factor is payload capacity. The 29QBH has a published tongue weight of 880lbs. If I assume 20% of that is shifted to the trailer with a WDH, that's 704 on the truck. If I add back 100lbs to acct for a heavier-than-published tongue weight, that puts me at about 800lbs...which is going to be right at the published limit for the Tundra after I reduce the payload capacity of the truck by the weight of passengers and stuff in the cab.(?).....snip
Apparently you aware of what many folks overlook..., the payload capacities of 1/2 ton trucks are the limiting factor with heavy TT's, specifically the "loaded" tongue weights. Also considering that the published tow ratings of vehicles are based on the curb weight of the base model in question, and the fact that the curb weight only includes a 150lb driver and a full tank of fuel. Your correct that the published tow rating will be reduced by the combined weights of the TV's options, passengers, and cargo.

It's great that you are watching your weight limits and that "loaded" weights should be the focus. Yes, the 29QBH has a "dry" tongue weight (hitch weight) of 880lbs, but the actual recommended "loaded" tongue weight should be 13% to 15% of the "loaded" TT weight. So, it really depends on your loading habits.

Using the 29QBH as an example: UVW 6,745lbs, Ship Weight 6,995lbs (approx.), off the RV dealer's lot (battery, hitch, etc.)..... 7,120lbs. So your "loaded" TT weight will be somewhere between 7,120lbs and the TT's GVWR of 9,250lbs. Adding 1,200lbs (your number) to 7,120lbs brings one to a 8,320lb "loaded" TT weight. Thus the loaded tongue weight would be 1,082lbs to 1,248lbs (13% to 15%).

The above thought process can be applied to the other models you are looking at as well.

The Tundra 1/2 ton is a great tow vehicle, and it may pull the 29QBH, but IMO you won't be happy towing around an 8,400lb TT.

Just food for thought.

Bob
__________________

2016 GM 2500HD 6.0L/4.10
2018 Jay Flight 24RBS
2005 Jayco Eagle 278FBS (retired)
1999 Jayco Eagle 246FB (retired)
Reese HP Dual Cam (integrated sway control)
Rustic Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2011, 05:46 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 7
As ever, I really appreciate everyone's input and hope to keep it coming.

Toyota is an interesting case in that it doesn't play games with capacities at quite the level of the Big 3. For Toyota, payload capacity is determined by trim level and after accounting for fuel. So, per Toyota, the payload capacity is reduced by passengers and cargo only and not by fuel. The Big 3 have typically based capacities on a bare-bones truck, literally no fuel, and one individual. Consequently, Toyota 1/2 tons appear to have less payload capacity (by 2-300 lbs) than similar American trucks. Apples to apples, however, they're very similar with the Toyota typically coming out a bit ahead.

Nevertheless, payload capacity is absolutely the issue with 1/2 tons as most newer ones are strong enough to drag around 8-9k lbs but may not be strong enough to take the tongue weight.

The 15% tongue weight issue is an interesting one and I see folks use that to do a back-of-the-envelope tongue weight calculations often. 15% has been the rule of thumb for "ideal" tongue weight for travel trailers for as long as I can remember. But with many travel trailers, getting to 15% would require not using a WDH. So, even though it's the rule of thumb, I doubt most folks are putting 15% on the tongue if they're using a WDH (...especially since another common rule of thumb is a WDH will typically be set up to transfer 20% to the trailer in order to get a similar amount of weight on the front axle of the truck). I really have no way of knowing how much will remain on the, but I question 15% as a good estimate.

As an aside, the rule of thumb for boats is 5-7% tongue weight...and has been for as long as I can remember (I've been towing boats since I was 16...so 30 years). But, of course, you typically get what you get and don't mess with tongue weight on boats (where WDH is uncommon) unless the tongue weight is too much or you're getting sway. I'm thinking travel trailers might be the same---the tongue weight is a residual value and "is what it is" after adjusting the WDH to keep the TV level.

But I could be wrong.
SuperAir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2011, 07:27 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Orange County, N.Y.
Posts: 631
I disagree with your statement that the big 3 give payload capabilities without fuel. My Excursion states the rating is with a full tank of gas and a driver.
__________________
Joe, Joyce , 4 Kids and 3 Dogs.
2004 V-10 Excursion with Hellwig sway bar, Roadmaster Active Suspension, Bilstein shocks and steering stabilizer, Super Duty Tow Mirrors,
3.73 Gears, Reese dual cam, Prodigy brake controller.
2010 Jayco Jay Flight G-2 32 BHDS
usmc616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2011, 07:43 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 7
Learn something new every day. I guess the take-away is to read your manual to see how these things are calculated...the manufacturers don't all do it the same way.

The new SAE tow rating standard should make things a bit more coherent. All the manufacturers have played around with capacities in the past. Toyota adopted the new standard this year and, if I recall correctly, the US manufacturers do it for model year 2013.
SuperAir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2011, 08:35 PM   #17
Member
 
dorayme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Peidmont of North Carolina
Posts: 30
I think you should go with the TT that you believe will be the most comfortable for how you will use it both now and in 10 years. If you spend time indoors somewhat, the kids bring friends, or as stated you are staying local I would say go with the 29BHQ. The layout and roomier feel will be appreciated. If you are mostly using the TT for sleeping and meals, you go farther distances, or probably won't bring any friends, the 28BHS would possibly be a better fit.
We went with a larger TT/layout and haven't for one moment regretted it. It has meant more comfort, when we are trying to relax. Before our curent TT we had a 1980 Avion. It was close in size in the length, but had no slides so it had a submarine feeling as Rocky described it. The configuration quickly started to feel cramped as the kids got larger. Negotiating from one end to the other was unpleasant and neither Rocky or I are large people.
A method I believe works for seeing if the TT is right for you is to go through a pretend day in it. Try the beds, bathroom schedules, prepping meals, hooking up utilities, etc. Basically, moving around inside and outside of the TT. See if it feels homey and natural or not. If you have to do something special to get through the day, depending on whether or not you like it, it may be a poor fit for you!
Best of luck!
__________________

2008 (40th Anniversary) Jay Flight G2 32BHDS
2011 F250 XLT Extended Cab 6.2L

Doreen and Rocky
3 kidlets
1 princess puppy
1 feral kitty
1 boar guinea pig
dorayme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2011, 10:09 PM   #18
Moderator Emeritus
 
Rustic Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,370
SuperAir,

Just some open thoughts;

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperAir View Post
snip.......Nevertheless, payload capacity is absolutely the issue with 1/2 tons as most newer ones are strong enough to drag around 8-9k lbs but may not be strong enough to take the tongue weight.
I couldn't agree more, and unfortunately many folks with 1/2 tons are towing over their TV's GVWR for this very reason, and don't realize it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperAir View Post
snip...... So, even though it's the rule of thumb, I doubt most folks are putting 15% on the tongue if they're using a WDH (...especially since another common rule of thumb is a WDH will typically be set up to transfer 20% to the trailer in order to get a similar amount of weight on the front axle of the truck). I really have no way of knowing how much will remain on the, but I question 15% as a good estimate......snip
For clarification, it should be noted that the actual TT tongue weight load placed on the hitch ball never changes, with or without the WDH. The 20% (approx.) of the tongue weight value distributed to the TT axles originates from weight removed from the TV's rear axle, as is the weight returned (distributed) to the TV's front axle. I offer this clarification in the event someone may unknowingly use an under rated TV receiver or WDH assuming that their actual tongue weight will decrease.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperAir View Post
snip.....The new SAE tow rating standard should make things a bit more coherent.....snip
I hope so...., it will be nice to have pertinent data generated by the automotive manufactures originating from the same "rule book".

SuperAir, your informative post also brings to mind.....;

As we all know, RV manufactures and WDH manufacturer's established years ago the recommendation that tongue weights should be 10% to 15% of the gross TT weight. What many folks have found when towing the heavier and longer TT's, a 13% to 15% range provides for enhanced handling characteristics when towing in ideal, and more importantly under less than ideal road/weather conditions.

I would bet that most folks towing a TT, HTT, etc., have never visited a CAT scale, or used a Sherline scale to confirm their loaded tongue weights. Just one visit to a CAT scale will provide a wealth of important data confirming the towing integrity of any TV/TT combination.

Bob
__________________

2016 GM 2500HD 6.0L/4.10
2018 Jay Flight 24RBS
2005 Jayco Eagle 278FBS (retired)
1999 Jayco Eagle 246FB (retired)
Reese HP Dual Cam (integrated sway control)
Rustic Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2011, 11:40 PM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustic Eagle View Post

For clarification, it should be noted that the actual TT tongue weight load placed on the hitch ball never changes, with or without the WDH. The 20% (approx.) of the tongue weight value distributed to the TT axles originates from weight removed from the TV's rear axle, as is the weight returned (distributed) to the TV's front axle. I offer this clarification in the event someone may unknowingly use an under rated TV receiver or WDH assuming that their actual tongue weight will decrease.
Bob-I appreciate your input...and your clarification. After I clicked to post earlier, I thought about the very issue you clarified and that I was a bit fast and loose wrt how I used the term "tongue weight."
SuperAir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2011, 04:05 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 10
I own a 29QBH and had it weighed.

Total trailer weight is 7780lbs with all out junk inside but NO water. 86 gallon fresh tank will add A LOT of weight.

900lbs of tongue weight with 2 full propane bottles.
__________________

__________________
'11 Jayco Jayflight 29QBH

'11 Chevy 2500HD XC 4X4 Long Bed 3.73
Reece Dual Cam
NH 2500HD is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Virginia State Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2002-2016 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.