Up-Rated Towing Suspension

I can't find any info on this unit at all. Is it a current model? What's it's gross weight? Why do you need a "stiffer" rear suspension? Does "stiffer" mean extra weight carrying capacity? If it does, are you sure you aren't going over the towing capacities of the Expedition?

Your cleanest and most effective solution would be an air bag suspension, like these:

You can have a stock ride when you need it then "pump" up the stiffness when required.

Do you have a weight-distributing hitch? I wouldn't even consider bags until I had one. What is the tongue weight of yourf toy hauler, loaded and ready for the road?

Bill ================

351CJ wrote:

The unit we have bought is exactly the same as this one, dry weight: 5090 lbs

We have added a 4KVA Generac propane fueled generator, which is located on the port side at the front, so there is an extra 300lbs at the nose.

We have added a weight distribution hitch

The front wheels still seem a little light, we will be hauling an 800lb Honda Valkyrie, so with that weight towards the rear the nose weight will decrease, though I have yet to tow it, other than bringing the RV home.

Take it to a place that has public scales, and weight he trailer loaded, then hook it up and weigh the rear and front wheels of the truck seperately (with it loaded), then weigh just the tongue of the trailer. Without these figures, you're only guessing. There is no way you can accurately tell what you need to do without knowing what the truck and trailer and combination actually weigh. And we still don't know what you mean by "stiffer". Adding extra springs to the rear will *not* add to the GCWR.

Bingo. If the front wheels feel light, air bags or shocks will NOT help. Only a weight-distributing hitch will put the weight back where it belongs. And rear-weighting the trailer, in an effort to reduce the tongue weight, is an invitation to disaster in the form of uncontrollable trailer sway. You MUST have at least 10% (and 12-14% is better) of the trailer weight on the tongue. Then you MUST have a WD hitch, properly adjusted so that it re-levels the tow vehicle.

"Properly adjusted" means this.

1. Without the trailer, measure the height of the front and rear bumpers above ground.
2. With the trailer loaded and ready for the road, drop the trailer tongue onto the hitch ball. Remeasure the front and rear bumper height. You will find that the rear end has squatted and the front end has risen (unweighted). This front-end unweighting is DANGEROUS.
3. Snap up the spring bars, and measure the front and rear heights again. If you chose the correct link on the springbar chains, the front and rear of the tow vehicle will both squat, and will squat by the same amount from their original height in step 1. If they don't squat equally, then choose a different link in the springbar chains. Keep trying different links until you find the one that produces equal squat.

HTH

Bill

He still hasn't weighed the trailer yet. It's very possible with the added stuff, the trailer is overweight for the truck. A weight distributing hitch will not correct for this.

You are absolutely correct, Big Bill. If the trailer weighs 5000 pounds empty and unoptioned, and he adds all his stuff, and 100 gallons (850 pounds) of water, and food and clothes and pots and pans and a TV and a microwave and ..., and then adds tools for the bike, and then adds an

800-pound bike - he is probably headed for 7500-8000 pounds loaded and ready to roll. So a first question whether his vehicle is ready for that kind of load. If not, then he is done before he starts. However, IF he can convince himself that his particular Expedition, equipped as his is equipped (factory tow package, for example?) can handle the load, then he MUST have a WD hitch, he MUST adjust it properly, and he MUST avoid all the spurious advice to cram some air bags into the rear suspension to level it.

Bill

Yup! I have to wonder why you continue this. Do you think that only the springs determine the weight ratings? It seems so. A little more education on what constitutes a weight rating will make you rethink this.

Education?

I specifically said you could not "Officially change the original manufactures GVWR or GCWR"!!! Did you miss that?

ON THE OTHER HAND, The "weight ratings" have a VERY generous "safety factor" built in, its very similar to a pressure vessel "pressure rating", no where near the true physical limits of that pressure vessel. Yes these ratings are a real number that have official, and legal ramifications if they are exceeded, but they aren't an actual physical limit.

Springs are not the only component that contribute to arriving at a given "weight rating", but they have a greater contribution than any other single component.

My position is that The SPRINGS have an overwhelming true physical effect on the ride and handling characteristics of any pickup truck, and that relationship DOES NOT simply magically evaporate when you are are loaded in excess of a grossly conservative original manufactures GVWR or GCWR weight rating!

Either you do not understand what I am saying, or you have no clue what you are talking about!

Yet you also say that those trucks were now carrying more than their GVWR allowed. That's stupid.

And you presume to know what that safety factor amounts to, while admitting that you're overloading. That's just showing how little you understand safety.

Wow! You say you know that more than springs are involved in a weight rating, then go on th say that only changing springs let's you carry more weight safely. Do yuou read this before you hit "Send"?

I understand very well. You're saying that you think altering the springe lets you carry more load safely. I also understand that this is wrong, and you're doing the rest of us a real disfavor by trying to imply that your methods are safe. They aren't. Maybe people who really want to know will see your writings, and realize that it's unsafe.

You didn't?

"That '94 Dodge I mentioned, the guy that has it now, regularly hauls a lot of firewood, both for all his own heating and for sale. He has totally worn out 2 roller fairleads on his 12,000 pound warn winch skidding the logs out to cut up and load into that truck. His loads regularly exceed GVWR, and without the airbags, he absolutely would not have the extra load carrying capacity that they do indeed provide."

Who wrote that? Oh, yeah, you did. You just make this up as you go, don't you? I sincerely hope the rest of the readers here understand that you just don't know what you're talking about, and ignore your unsafe advice.

And therein lies the problem with your advice. You're recommending that people exceed the structural safety of their vehicles.

BULLSHIT!

You need to try to follow along.

At no point did I endorse overloading a vehicle beyond its GVWR, or suggest that anyone else do that!!!

I AM DISCUSSING THE ACTUAL PHYSICAL EFFECTS OF AIR BAGS ON THE SUSPENSION GEOMETRY! NOT GVWR!

If I brought up a space shuttle explosion to illustrate fuel system limits and failures or ceramic tile attachment methods, would you then miss the point entirely and try to argue how unsafe and inappropriate it is for me to endorse blowing up space shuttles???

Are you really incapable of reasoning in a clear and consistent manner?

I stated that air bags increase both the spring stiffness, and the ride characteristics of an existing pickup trucks suspension! Then you and Bill Jeffery come along and say no they don't, they are dangerous, began slinging insults, etc.

Bill Jeffrey wrote: "and he MUST avoid all the spurious advice to cram some air bags into the rear suspension to level it" "Do whatever your ignorant mind tells you to do, but please don't mislead the newbies who are looking for a legitimate answer to a legitimate question." "The roads are dangerous enough with idiots like you out there, overloading your vehicles and begging for sway-induced oscillations."

Big Bill wrote: "when towing is the concern, it's for extra load carrying capacitry, which airbags won't provide." "Do you think that only the springs determine the weight ratings? It seems so. A little more education on what constitutes a weight rating will make you rethink this."

My bringing up the instance of an actual overloaded truck and the benefit of its air bag use, was in direct rebuttal to your and Bill Jeffery's naive insistence that airbags won't provide load carrying capacity, not an endorsement of exceeding any weight ratings...

The "overloaded truck" literally illustrates how unrealistic your position on air bags and their ability to provide load carrying capacity is. Because you have no technical rebuttal (the teeter-totter analogy actually supports my viewpoint on air bags), you try to switch the focus of the conversation away, and claim that I have endorsed exceeding weight ratings, how pathetic.

I'm talking about the handling and weight carrying benefits of using air bags (within the rated GVWR) not overloading a vehicle!!!

Before you fire off your response try thinking about what you say, so it at least gives the appearance you have extracted your head from your hindquarters.

Hey guys, this is REALLY starting to get old! How about continuing it off of the news group or better yet, maybe it time for me to just hit "ignore sender".

Ya, LOL you need to do that Bill...

Um, that wasn't me.

Um, LOL, Ya I Know that, it was Bill Jeffrey... You do realize both of you are going by the name Bill, right?

I don't see any indication of that in his post.