camping trailer build...

Quote from clendaniel

I'd agree...for the minimal cost of a receiver 'blank' I'm not seeing the benefit. Am I missing something or are you not just using it for a receiver on the rear of the trailer?

Another thing to keep in mind is the corners. Most box tubing has more of a radius and I seem to remember running into an issue in the past where one of the solid style inserts wouldn't fit into a homemade receiver and had to have the corners ground.

--Ian

Also, some of the aluminum racks use a square cornered tube that has the same issue.

Why do you have three PIECES of box for the tongue??

Are you make the tongue extendable. It you are seamless ID as you know is very pricey.

IF YOU ARENT..... Why not just have two 2x3 (which is way overkill as it is) go from the coupler to the first cross member and lose the whole middle piece. This would also allow for a sharper jackknife angle.

Quote from whatevah

Sorry, I can't figure out the first question.

Why do you have three PIECES of box for the tongue??

Quote from whatevah

I think all of the corners will be mitered so I don't have to weld on plugs to cap the tube ends.

If you have a miter saw that would be a good way to go. If not, box the ends, leaving material on the outer wall that would overlay the open end on the adjacent piece. That way you don't have to cut out plugs.

Quote from whatevah

Hmm nice idea! A lot easier, I think. Trying to decide now if I use this as an excuse to buy a welder or owe some more favors... Was thinking stick for simplicity. Gotta be 110v, though, don't have 220v in my garage.

If you know how to stick weld, it might be simpler. ;D

Is there a breaker panel in the garage?

Quote from Slimer

If you have a miter saw that would be a good way to go. If not, box the ends, leaving material on the outer wall that would overlay the open end on the adjacent piece. That way you don't have to cut out plugs.

Or use C channel like a lot of trailers and not have places for water to get trapped like a TJ frame.

If you ever think you'll be in a situation where you'll use that rear receiver for recovery I'd err on the overbuilt side and add some triagulation:

Remember , once you bolt on the deck, it will add tons of strength. My home made 4x8 trailer is done with 3" C-channel and uses smaller I beam cross members and its way over built.. If you want to see it. let me know. Its a small tank.

I don't remember seeing which body you ended up going with but was looking at the Dinoot site and looking at their 'heavy-duty' frames:

Short trailer:

Extended w/ receiver:

The pic also helps put the scale in perspective. It's worth noting that it looks like the tongue diagonals are angle on both, not tube.

--Ian

Quote from whatevah

I think all of the corners will be mitered so I don't have to weld on plugs to cap the tube ends.

I would just spend the extra 20 minutes to cover the 4 exposed end with a piece of flat stock.

Getting the 45° cuts just right is tough without a really good saw, and welding the outer corners requires some grinding and beveling to get a decent looking and strong weld.

Dont forget to design in weight distribution.. Per the internet.. "Most experts agree that an acceptable tongue weight for any trailer is somewhere between 9 and 15 percent of the gross trailer weight (GTW) "

I had a hitch receiver on the back of my trailer for a bike rack, but fully loaded, it was enough to significantly to lighten the tongue weight so I almost lost the whole thing on RT1. Tail wagging got so extreme we almost wrecked..

Food for thought. The longer the tongue, the further back the rear axle will need to be to add tongue weight as it can become more difficult to move the load forward.

Quote from clendaniel

If you ever think you'll be in a situation where you'll use that rear receiver for recovery I'd err on the overbuilt side and add some triagulation:

Wouldn't you flip those yellow bars around. In my head it seems like if you didnt you are still only "pulling" from the middle of the two x-members and adding some additional tension at the blue (or maybe its white, lol) trailer corner. Or maybe i'm over thinking it. I'm thinking of it as another trailer tongue mirrored of the axle centerline.

Quote from deadfeat

Food for thought. The longer the tongue, the further back the rear axle will need to be to add tongue weight as it can become more difficult to move the load forward.

Maybe the axle position should be adjustable like on OTR trailers... ;D

Quote from keith_c

Maybe the axle position should be adjustable like on OTR trailers... ;D

That is the ideal way... So how would you build that into a small trailer, I would assume a sliding sub frame in a channel with a series of holes to secure the subframe where you want it.

Quote from ruquik

Wouldn't you flip those yellow bars around. In my head it seems like if you didnt you are still only "pulling" from the middle of the two x-members and adding some additional tension at the blue (or maybe its white, lol) trailer corner. Or maybe i'm over thinking it. I'm thinking of it as another trailer tongue mirrored of the axle centerline.

Either way would improve things but personally I'd put them as drawn. I was thinking of it more from the fact that a hard yank rearward could conceivably bow that rear crossmember (esp if .125 wall)...the triangulation as drawn would be in compression and help distribute that force to the corner. Aren't you the CAD guy? Come on, I want to see a stress analysis from solidworks to see which would be better.

--Ian

Quote from clendaniel

Either way would improve things but personally I'd put them as drawn. I was thinking of it more from the fact that a hard yank rearward could conceivably bow that rear crossmember (esp if .125 wall)...the triangulation as drawn would be in compression and help distribute that force to the corner. Aren't you the CAD guy? Come on, I want to see a stress analysis from solidworks to see which would be better.

Challenge accepted, but don't expect it anytime soon.

--Ian

Display More