Caught in a bind - '08 F-150 & Aluma 7818

[nikdfish]

I have a query in with AlumaKLM (the manufacturer) & haven't gotten a response yet. When I asked the dealer I purchased from about his recommendation on WD for my specific trailer, he just recommended a trunnion style hitch without expanding further. If I don't get an email response from AlumaKLM this week, I'll try getting a knowledgeable rep on the phone next week.

Probably 95% of all we ever would use the trailer for won't bump the 500/5000 trigger point for WD & the remaining 5% would probably never exceed 580/5800 at the heaviest (i.e. about 4700 lb. cargo).

Nick

 

[nikdfish]

I finally talked with a technician at AlumaKLM about weight distribution. He indicated that WD is indeed not recommended for my Aluma model 7818. He said that according to their engineer, the tongue is not designed to accommodate the forces associated with WD hitches and that "they aren't really needed". I pointed out that with regard to the '08 Ford factory hitch it was indeed necessary if I wanted to take full advantage of the trailer's cargo capacity. I also pointed out that Alumas' incompatibility with WD was not articulated anywhere on their site or literature, that their dealers are also apparently not aware of the shortcoming & that the matter should be clearly spelled out for any potential buyer before they buy.

Kinda PO'd at the moment.

Nick

 

[Diamondpilot]

I finally talked with a technician at AlumaKLM about weight distribution. He indicated that WD is indeed not recommended for my Aluma model 7818. He said that according to their engineer, the tongue is not designed to accommodate the forces associated with WD hitches and that "they aren't really needed". I pointed out that with regard to the '08 Ford factory hitch it was indeed necessary if I wanted to take full advantage of the trailer's cargo capacity. I also pointed out that Alumas' incompatibility with WD was not articulated anywhere on their site or literature, that their dealers are also apparently not aware of the shortcoming & that the matter should be clearly spelled out for any potential buyer before they buy.

Kinda PO'd at the moment.

Nick

I would be PO'd also. The only way you can use the max trailer capacity is to have a 3/4 ton truck and even then you will need a late model with a modern hitch.

Chris

 

[Reg]

I wrote to them and got a reply.

SUMMARY:
Not recommended on their standard production trailers.
Reinforced A-frame can be built in for special order.
(no cost estimate given)

My reaction, though I haven't replied (yet);
I had better not buy anything straight off a dealer's lot.
Not sure that I would want to special order one with a reinforced A-frame.

It has me wondering about the whole design approach, i.e. whether or not the rated load is ASSUMED to be evenly distributed.
For lumber and other material that may be OK, but for hauling things like tractors or other equipment the ability to carry point loads MATTERS,
e.g. the ONE cross beam under a tractor's rear tires had better be able to stand up.

Right now I'm thinking "Flimsy".

 

[94BULLITT]

I guess that is one of those things the dealer forgot to tell you.

Most people would probably use the trailer without a WDH.

 

[HHR]

I wrote to them and got a reply. SUMMARY: Not recommended on their standard production trailers. Reinforced A-frame can be built in for special order. (no cost estimate given) My reaction, though I haven't replied (yet); I had better not buy anything straight off a dealer's lot. Not sure that I would want to special order one with a reinforced A-frame. It has me wondering about the whole design approach, i.e. whether or not the rated load is ASSUMED to be evenly distributed. For lumber and other material that may be OK, but for hauling things like tractors or other equipment the ability to carry point loads MATTERS, e.g. the ONE cross beam under a tractor's rear tires had better be able to stand up. Right now I'm thinking "Flimsy".

I've never seen a WD hitch on a straight tongue trailer. Not sure how you could mount one without putting massive amounts of force on a single spot on the trailer tongue. Being that this is an aluminum trailer, I wouldn't want to be the first one to try either.
I assume that the trailer we're referencing has a tongue shaped like a "Y" and not a "V"

 

[Reg]

There are "pole tongue adapters" for what you call straight tongue trailers.
I built one for a utility trailer that I built decades ago - it SEEMED to make sense at the time, but I overbuilt just about everything else on that trailer anyway.
It was simpler for me to hinge the tongue to get a tilting bed and that was easiest for me to do with a single beam tongue.

Anyway, the Aluma trailers we were talking about have "V" (or "A" according to your point of view) tongues.
I think the issue isn't with the material used, more with a need to select an adequate section in view of potential bending stresses.

Aluma claim to know of only one tongue failure resulting from WDH use and claim that it was with a customer reinforced tongue.
One could speculate whether it might have failed earlier if the customer had not reinforced it - I won't speculate, since I haven't seen it.

BTW, aluminum can and does bend, watch 53 ft aluminum flat bed trailers some time.
Empty they have a huge mount of crown (or arch) that is designed in.
Loaded they flex back and forth as they cross road level changes, the bumps don't ALL get absorbed by the suspension system (-:

 

[The Fred]

2008 F-150 Lariat Limited abysmal towing capacity!! - F150online Forums


Interesting information here.

Fred

 

[jejeosborne]

I finally talked with a technician at AlumaKLM about weight distribution. He indicated that WD is indeed not recommended for my Aluma model 7818. He said that according to their engineer, the tongue is not designed to accommodate the forces associated with WD hitches and that "they aren't really needed". I pointed out that with regard to the '08 Ford factory hitch it was indeed necessary if I wanted to take full advantage of the trailer's cargo capacity. I also pointed out that Alumas' incompatibility with WD was not articulated anywhere on their site or literature, that their dealers are also apparently not aware of the shortcoming & that the matter should be clearly spelled out for any potential buyer before they buy.

Kinda PO'd at the moment.

Nick

I would try to educate the manufacturer on why they are indeed needed. If they are in the trailer business i would have hoped they were familiar with the towing industry but obviously they are not. Could you take a picture of your tongue (trailer tongue that is) so that we could maybe understand why it is built heavy enough to accept the additional load? I would request them to cover the cost to reinforce the tongue or threaten to cause them more in lost sales through forums like this. I would also request they publish this downfall on their Webpage and printed materials to prevent future issues.
I would guess a majority of these 7000 lb trailers are being towed by 1/2 ton trucks which all have this requirement. As diamondpilot said, even 3/4 tons until recently have this requirement and I would want to use one regardless if I had 800 lbs on the tongue.

 

[94BULLITT]

Did the dealer you purchased the trailer from know you were going to use this truck to haul your 3038?

Sent from my GT-P3113 using TractorByNet