Why don't trailers have tongue casters?

[RayCo]

that little tractor cant weigh more than 1500lbs. i would not hesitate to put that in the pickup bed of a 1-ton truck. my 1-ton 1997 chevy can take 1850lbs of tongue weight, as per the hitch. i could hang that tractor off my receiver, and be within spec. no matter where you put it on the trailer, the trailer axles are going to take some of the weight. you cannot seriously tell me that you believe that putting a bx tractor on the front of that trailer is going to "technically" --(or otherwise)--overload a 3/4 or 1 ton truck. the tractor does not need all the way to the extreme front of the trailer anyhow.

Actually, a BX weighs a little under 3,000 pounds with the loader and backhoe on, but the load in question doesn't much matter. This trailer design will quickly exceed the tongue capacity of a truck before the hauling capacity is exceeded.

--on a side note, that trailer is very poorly designed with the axles all the way to the back.

Yeah, it is an interesting design. I'm guessing it is that way because of wanting the axles under the dump area.

 

[RayCo]

If you are exceeding the tongue weight, you are exceeding one do the tow capacities of the truck. They are band-aids. If you cannot load the trailer to not do that, it is time for a gooseneck or a weight distribution hitch.

True, which is why this is an odd trailer design. It leads to exceeding the tongue limit before even approaching the hauling limit.

 

[aczlan]

Yeah, it is an interesting design. I'm guessing it is that way because of wanting the axles under the dump area.

Probably wanted to avoid having negative tongue weight when the dump box is loaded. What did the designer pull it behind?

Aaron Z

 

[RayCo]

Probably wanted to avoid having negative tongue weight when the dump box is loaded. What did the designer pull it behind?

I'm not sure. This is just something I came across on Craig's List. I'm still half tempted to get it, since it would serve three of my needs - being able to tow my tractor, having a dump trailer, and having an excuse to get a bigger truck.

 

[RayCo]

it would need to be sring loaded with tension, if you went over a big bump your suspension would cycle the back of the vehicle down lowering the trailer tounge or putting force on that area. It would then either break your caster off bend it or rip the trailer off the ball on the hitch. Just my thoughts.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Reg]

Actually, a BX weighs a little under 3,000 pounds with the loader and backhoe on, but the load in question doesn't much matter. This trailer design will quickly exceed the tongue capacity of a truck before the hauling capacity is exceeded.



Yeah, it is an interesting design. I'm guessing it is that way because of wanting the axles under the dump area.

No, the trailer's DESIGN is FINE !!!
What is WRONG here is a lack of understanding (by some posters to this thread) of how to properly distribute a load on a trailer to obtain proper tongue load.
Hint/Clue; NOT heaviest items (e.g. micro-tractorlette) farthest forward.
(-:

It is more likely "that way" to reduce tail dragging at dips, e.g. driveways that rise from the roadway.
The trade-off is increased chance of bellying out on driveways that drop down from the road bed, but you can usually drag off of those, the tail dig in ones STOP you when trying to back out and they leave a bigger mark (-;

 

[RayCo]

No, the trailer's DESIGN is FINE !!!
What is WRONG here is a lack of understanding (by some posters to this thread) of how to properly distribute a load on a trailer to obtain proper tongue load.
Hint/Clue; NOT heaviest items (e.g. micro-tractorlette) farthest forward.
(-:

I think it's reasonable to assume that most people know the goal is to distribute weight evenly. But, if this must turn into an argument, let me look at it from a mathematical approach. (Credit to my brother for helping with the physics involved)

For argument's sake, let's say that this trailer is 18' long, 2000 pounds, and that it can hold 7,000 pounds. And now let's say you put 7,000 pounds of water on it (in some massless container), so that you you are using every square inch of trailer surface, with equal weight distribution on the platform - using the trailer's full capacity as far as AREA. If the distance from the back of the trailer to the front axle is 5', and the distance from the back of the trailer to the couple is 21', that'd be about tongue load of about 2,142 pounds.

So, what I'm saying is that for an evenly loaded trailer of this design, the ratio between the maximum hauling capacity and the tongue load is a bit out of the ordinary. You'd need a bigger truck to handle the tongue load, but you'd still have a pretty light duty trailer as far as its weight capacity. It's not that the trailer is designed wrong; it's just different.

No, I don't intend to haul water (nor do I intend to buy this trailer), but this is meant to illustrate what can happen when you try to make full use of the length of the trailer. Obviously if you had a 7,000 pound object that is only a cubic foot, you'd put it over the axles.

 

[Reg]

I think it's reasonable to assume that most people know the goal is to distribute weight evenly. But, if this must turn into an argument, let me look at it from a mathematical approach. (Credit to my brother for helping with the physics involved)

For argument's sake, let's say that this trailer is 18' long, 2000 pounds, and that it can hold 7,000 pounds. And now let's say you put 7,000 pounds of water on it (in some massless container), so that you you are using every square inch of trailer surface, with equal weight distribution on the platform - using the trailer's full capacity as far as AREA. If the distance from the back of the trailer to the front axle is 5', and the distance from the back of the trailer to the couple is 21', that'd be about tongue load of about 2,142 pounds.

So, what I'm saying is that for an evenly loaded trailer of this design, the ratio between the maximum hauling capacity and the tongue load is a bit out of the ordinary. You'd need a bigger truck to handle the tongue load, but you'd still have a pretty light duty trailer as far as its weight capacity. It's not that the trailer is designed wrong; it's just different.

No, I don't intend to haul water (nor do I intend to buy this trailer), but this is meant to illustrate what can happen when you try to make full use of the length of the trailer. Obviously if you had a 7,000 pound object that is only a cubic foot, you'd put it over the axles.

I know of no "goal to distribute weight evenly".
My goal is to distribute a a load "properly".
No need for an argument, no need for sample arithmetic.
No need to ASSUME that any trailer is DESIGNED for an even floor load.
SOME need to distribute a load intelligently.

I agree that this particular design may be sub optimal for loads that require an even load to be carried along it's entire cargo length and for those loads which also approach it's total capacity, e.g. pipe.
For your sample size and weight rating a load of steel pipe would exceed an acceptable tongue load before exceeding the trailer's total capacity - OK, so don't use it for 20ft pipe, or just haul less of it per trip.
It is still not a BAD design and for some applications it is a VERY GOOD design.

 

[Duffster]

I think it's reasonable to assume that most people know the goal is to distribute weight evenly. But, if this must turn into an argument, let me look at it from a mathematical approach. (Credit to my brother for helping with the physics involved)

For argument's sake, let's say that this trailer is 18' long, 2000 pounds, and that it can hold 7,000 pounds. And now let's say you put 7,000 pounds of water on it (in some massless container), so that you you are using every square inch of trailer surface, with equal weight distribution on the platform - using the trailer's full capacity as far as AREA. If the distance from the back of the trailer to the front axle is 5', and the distance from the back of the trailer to the couple is 21', that'd be about tongue load of about 2,142 pounds.

So, what I'm saying is that for an evenly loaded trailer of this design, the ratio between the maximum hauling capacity and the tongue load is a bit out of the ordinary. You'd need a bigger truck to handle the tongue load, but you'd still have a pretty light duty trailer as far as its weight capacity. It's not that the trailer is designed wrong; it's just different.

No, I don't intend to haul water (nor do I intend to buy this trailer), but this is meant to illustrate what can happen when you try to make full use of the length of the trailer. Obviously if you had a 7,000 pound object that is only a cubic foot, you'd put it over the axles.

I would be interested to see your formula that you used.

It would not matter what the measurement from the back of the trailer to the front axle is, center of tandems is the spot to measure to.

 

[The Haymaker]

I think it's reasonable to assume that most people know the goal is to distribute weight evenly. But, if this must turn into an argument, let me look at it from a mathematical approach. (Credit to my brother for helping with the physics involved)

For argument's sake, let's say that this trailer is 18' long, 2000 pounds, and that it can hold 7,000 pounds. And now let's say you put 7,000 pounds of water on it (in some massless container), so that you you are using every square inch of trailer surface, with equal weight distribution on the platform - using the trailer's full capacity as far as AREA. If the distance from the back of the trailer to the front axle is 5', and the distance from the back of the trailer to the couple is 21', that'd be about tongue load of about 2,142 pounds.

So, what I'm saying is that for an evenly loaded trailer of this design, the ratio between the maximum hauling capacity and the tongue load is a bit out of the ordinary. You'd need a bigger truck to handle the tongue load, but you'd still have a pretty light duty trailer as far as its weight capacity. It's not that the trailer is designed wrong; it's just different.

No, I don't intend to haul water (nor do I intend to buy this trailer), but this is meant to illustrate what can happen when you try to make full use of the length of the trailer. Obviously if you had a 7,000 pound object that is only a cubic foot, you'd put it over the axles.

I kept losing my calculator, so I just drive on until the truck settles a few inches and then stop.