Chuck FB

At this point in the brakes life assuming it has the brake life percent indicator, what are the current readings and do you know what the rotor surface condition looks like on both sides of the rotors. What I am getting at is if it would be worth the expense of swapping out the brake pads for either a current GM brake pad compound or a known good aftermarket pad and to make sure the pins are well lubed on the caliper sliders. But here's the other one and I know it may not seem like it should do anything but certainly some more attention to detail shops will use the special high temp brake silicone lube on the back sides of the pads where they contact the pistons and possibly a few other key spots. If your rotors are not in good shape, then only throwing pads at it isn't the ideal brake job. The idea of that silicone is to help stabilize the brake pad from starting to vibrate and squeal. All I can say is I still haven't heard any squealing out of my brakes so far but I have not accumulated very many miles on it either.

Here is a video that shows what some of the bracket designs for air bags will do when asking too much of the air bag system to hold up the load. As he points out, once one starts using the airbags as a leveling device and taking too much of the carried weight away from the leaf springs, its putting too much stress on the air bag system then it was ever designed for. I also came across something else lately of an older F250 7.3 diesel that hauls a camper and he put in air bags and had his pumped up near max pressure and realized that his frame was cracking at the area of the air bag bracket on the frame. I know a couple of people that are running timbrens for hauling truck mounted campers and they seem happy with them but there are different grades/stiffness levels of timbren or timbren like brands of these units. At some point though I believe more springs are required and not over depending on timbrens or air bags. Also tall slide in campers have more sway issues with air bags as its the nature of the beast with such a high center of gravity load. Timbrens fail too I have seen if over dependent on it for carrying too much of the load and no doubt could damage the frame as well and goes full circle back to having enough spring capacity to carry the bulk of the load ( and enough truck/frame under the load ! ) since these frames were never designed from the ground up to have an air ride suspension like a highway tractor.

Like a Rock ... wow, just wow

Like I say its a question I pose because unless I missed it and I very well could have, I didn't grasp a meaningful "before this test" explanation as to what the engine had been testing prior or how long before that it had been torn down. And as to the difference in wear metals, that too is partly a question on my part as to your thoughts on just how much or little is that difference in wear metals from greatest to least on this test. I can only say from watching prior videos and Lake Speed pointing out wear metal stats in a typical customer used UOA sample, that a couple of PPM variable isn't enough to in the big picture put too much credence on. That was why in my own mind ( and not claiming to be correct at all, I am just the layman here ) I saw the bar graphs in the way they were laid out as perhaps showing a larger spread of differences and almost like standing too close to a large picture and not being able to see the full view as a result. Pretty much I am asking questions to help fill in answers to questions I have to better understand how real world meaningful these particular tests are. Also would I be correct that although its very interesting to pit various oil types against each other, their applications are somewhat different, one at least is not at all made to run in a turbo direct injection gas engine due to LSPI risk, one is an all our race oil never designed for sustained street use, call it a very uneven playing field vs if lets say all the oils met a certain spec and lets pick the Dexos 1 spec for example ( again given this forums main theme of engines ! ) for a apples to apples comparison rather than an apples to oranges comparison that this test leaned towards. Hoping I made some sense there in my question and thought process.

I should elaborate in my thinking process when I was watching the results from the video, that correlation with wear metals declined step by step from the first oil tested and so I wondered if it was just coincidence with the oils chosen to run first or what had been run in that engine prior to this round of testing or when did they last have an engine tear down. In prior videos from some time back they were literally tearing down ( and believe it was that very same block ) the engine and swapping out pistons and rings multiple times and talking about honing as well. Like at the end of this video, they tore down the engine enough to pull the cam shaft, could not even touching such a engine in that way and reassembling the same parts cause a slight disturbance in a UOA that was run after the partial tear down ?. Having said that, are the wear metal differences that statically different between the oil samples given the variables in lab testing equipment results ?

Because this dealer or GM has a suspicion the noise is coming from the transmission, I was curious as to if the trans oil has been changed anywhere along the line and the oil itself evaluated for condition as well as the amount of metal on the magnets or contaminants trapped in the filter. Of course if they pick up on something once they do this test, that would mean either dropping the pan at the very least or pulling the transmission and working on it to discover what it is or if GM just says replace the trans. I wonder if there is a chance its a planetary set that under that speed and load could cause that whine.

I will admit I feel somewhat bad for dragging you through that video, I hope your ears don't hurt as bad as mine for all that inserted "dramatic effect" music stuck into the video. I hear you over the cam wear, I wasn't sure what the expected result would or should look like given the special soft cam but it certainly didn't look like pulling a healthy cam out from an engine and admiring how well the oil run on it protected it.

Would I do that I will say that I was surprised the Mobil did as well as it did although I doubt the word impressive could be used to describe its sheer stability relative to some of those oils used in this test and was expecting a result like that based on other UOA results I have seen online. Am I right that there are only two or maybe three oils in this test that are actually Dexos licensed ( rather than being said to meet a Dexos spec or those oils that certainly are not formulated to meet any such spec ) so that would play into how the Mobil would fair in such a test on a relative basis. I will say I was shocked at the near matching sheer of the SS vs the Mobil and how the PUP for what it is as an off the shelf oil had such an impressive result on that test, however its not a Dexos oil. But again, a test like this doesn't tell the whole story out in the real world of the every day vehicle user as that requires long term testing among different engine platforms to evaluate. Taxi cab fleets is one method but even that is not the same as the use the average person gives their vehicle since they are running all day for many hours and oil changed far more often calendar wise.

In a way its amusing, not to the person that runs the thin oil and possibly has their engine fail on them after the warranty is past but the very idea that they can lie and push their weight around telling the customer you MUST run 0W-20 in your engine while the vehicle sitting next to it with the same engine only cranked up in power has the manufacturer/dealer telling the customer you MUST run 0W-40 in this truck, make sense of that !. I have a feeling although hope I am wrong that be it GM or the other manufacturers will keep right on this path of engine design or concept of over complicated problematic engines and at some point throw the gas particulate filter at them, I don't get the impression that this roll back is as rolled back as one would have wished for. As to the oil they will go with, that is a good question. I actually haven't a clue how long HPL has been around as a company blending and selling oil, I believe it was this forum that clued me in that the company even existed.

That would have been a very interesting UOA comparison to have re run the RL once again at the end of the test after a RL flush, then an actual run. Then compare those two results 1st and last although I do have to wonder if that result comparison would throw too much doubt into all the results, but we will never know. What are your thoughts on the viscosity vs heat differential that the tests showed, certainly there is a difference in viscosity between the various oils but what the viscosity chart would not show is the vis at the actual temperature that the oils were being run at which was a lot hotter than that 100C standard and the thinner oils allowing for more power output but at what long term detriment as some of them would have continued to sheer down further I am guessing while others would have been able to maintain viscosity. Unfortunately they could run tests like this until they are blue in the face and I assume never fully duplicate the same outcome as a real world test of time with cold starts and varying distance drives including plenty of short runs would test an oil to in being able to prevent corrosion, sludge, wear etc with combustion contamination and worse fuel dilution etc, over quite a period of time on the calendar.

That doesn't sound like your run of the mill every day engine, certainly not on the same playing field as my naturally aspirated regular fuel using HD work truck L8T with factory tune !. However that theme of your engine pushing the power out, I look at the variety of factory tuned turbo gas engines and the amount of power they produce for their size, are they really running a factory recommended viscosity that is protecting the engine as well as it could be and the F150 eco boost, Toyota turbo engine currently blowing up in their pickups/suv's, the Ram turbo in the half tons as examples. After all at least with the F150 its the same Dexos 1 Gen 3 5W-30 oil with a Ford approval that they use as in a thinned version of what had been a true 30 grade. Speaking of the boutique oil brands, HPL I have yet to ever set my eyes on that brand here in Canada, attempting to find sources for purchase in Canada by internet searches so far and have not found one peep. Its tough enough to find anyone that handles Red Line. Amsoil surprisingly enough has a distribution Wearhouse in Edmonton Alberta which surprised me as I never had known that until recently, not that as person one can walk in there to purchase but just that it gets shipped from there up here to distributors.

I am curious as to why your running a 50 weight oil, is the oil running that hot in your application or is this more one of a reduced wear finding ?. In saying that and I am making no claims of having tested anything but the theme that Dexos in part has had to play playing with the viscosity within the recognized viscosity grades, its like a dexos 5W-30 themed oil is nearing a 25 grade rather than non dexos formulations or what was typical formulations with a 11.+ up to 12 vis @100c . And the Euro oil still staying with that higher viscosity HTHS 3.5+ and not having played the game. A typical heavy duty diesel rated 40 weight or a Euro is higher than this so called 40 weight dexos or I guess it would be called R rated oil that barely crosses the line into the 40 range. Its almost as if there is a 20, 25, 30, 35, 40 range of oil viscosities on the market as I try to make sense of any of it these days !. What one of my main thoughts and being the GM truck forum, the GM engine lineup and in this case the gas engines and issues surrounding GDI with intake valve deposit control, being mindful of LSPI although I wonder how touchy the naturally aspirated engines even are to that ? ( the 2.7 turbo being the outlier engine of the group ) and what is the best viscosity and additive formulation that fits with these engines, split into best with more than likely highest price by a fair margin boutique oil to the best choice within the brands that sit on most store shelves easily obtainable at todays typical price point and can even be found on sale. Are any of these GM engines noted for having sheer issues like what I gather is more prone with lets say the Ford double overhead cam designs and that long long chain ( again the GM 2.7 is that outlier vs the other three Gm engines ). Is a dexos 5W-30 plenty sufficient or looking at GM's own actions by switching to 0W-40 on the 6.2 recall engines, is there an advantage to going to either a Euro 5W-30 or a Dexos or Euro rated 0W-40 and in part to combat a vehicle use that may push the limits of fuel dilution.

There is one other item that one may have kicking around and that is old sleeping bags no longer being used and using them as an insulating tool and if they are huge double wide sleeping bags they would not even have to be opened up. Example would be laying out a sleeping bag on the bottom and laying the luggage on top of that and draping another sleeping bag over top. Or incorporate a heated blanket into the mix by laying it on top of the lower sleeping bag before setting the luggage in and covering it over with the remaining sleeping bag. If not too cold and that supplemental heat as well as if the luggage came straight out of a heated location so it had its own retained heat as well, that could prolong the cooling process.

I wish there was an easy solution to heating up that space but that's why it is such a challenge due to the nature of a truck box or lets say one had a basic shell or topper instead of a low tonneau cover. I have a friend who has done the camping/sleeping theme inside of her shell and she and her boyfriend freezing their butts off sometimes but they have never used any sort of supplemental heat and in that situation the engine isn't running to power up anything. I've seen various youtubers doing that very same theme and also in the back of their suv and using a buddy heater which I would think is rather suspect as far as safety in being in the space when its running but the heating concept is using a fuel and generating btu's that a small electrical power source isn't capable of producing. There would be that option of using a battery bank with an electric blanket lets say for camping in the back of a shell. However or at least my friends situation in what she has been doing, that it just dips down below the freezing point a little at night as its winter time but in southern NM or AZ, not in the middle of winter in Colorado from where she lives. Put another way, it takes a considerable amount of btu to heat a space that is poorly insulated and be that fuel powered with propane or lets say one of those little diesel heaters that van lifers like to install into their van, or running a coolant system from the engine into the rear of the truck. Insulate a space well and naturally it will take a lot less btu of heat to keep warm. When winter comes and I am buying groceries, I can't just put everything in the back of the truck in a tote or sitting there in boxes etc under my bak flip like I can easily do when its not freezing, its great for the frozen foods if I want to put them back there but other items that can't be frozen like all canned goods, eggs and so on are going into the cab and why a crew cab truck works so well over the days of a standard cab pickup, not as well as a spacious larger suv though. Also when it gets very much at all below the freezing point its not like I can buy groceries and then piss around town for hours after or go visit anyone, I am committed to go straight home to get the groceries into the house. For example in a few days time they are forecasting -30f temps, it does not take long to freeze items at that temperature which is way below the temp of a typical freezer in ones house.

I noticed that the Mobil TS has a far lower calcium level vs any of the other oils and was that a factor that played into its ability to have a reasonable cam wear rate as the zddp components as a whole were not competing with it, but also is there a long term use negative to such a low amount of calcium for controlling acids. I guess its not a surprise that it wasn't very good at sheer stability and where would that sit with a bit more fuel dilution and actual real world use in an engine with many hot/cold cycles and time passing in protecting an engine ( the GM suggested 7500 mile OCI for example ). I noticed somewhere else on the forum lately that a UOA of the Mobil TS was put up and it did not have near the zinc level, is the oil varying that much in specs or is the analyzing that far off from one company to the next ?. The RL oil is sky high in calcium and I wonder what the reason behind that is as isn't that like a reading an older diesel formulation would have and could that have contributed to its higher wear rate ( although the bar graph makes it look far worse that it is for dramatical purposes ) due to competing with the zddp additives. Again long term in an engine I wonder if some of these higher viscosity oils would show a better result than what these lab test procedures are showing. After all there must be a reason why the Euro oils with requiring to meet a certain minimum spec HTHS level of I believe 3.5 is a thing with the premise of engine protection from wear. Funny you should say that OnTheReel as I was wondering the same thing as I saw the results and wondered if there would have been a different outcome with those first two oils had they been tested last instead. Also in the back of my mind, picking out who might have paid the most for the best result LOL ... or did any of the companies hand them the bottles of oil "wink wink, special bottles". Hopefully everything was played fair but an honest error in testing procedure or the testing of the oils in the lab UOA wise or with the new oil testing done for sheer etc is always possible I suppose, to error is to be human it seems.

I have a crazy idea to add to your crazy idea Since a truck box has exactly zero ( or close to it ) insulating value, how would making a container or could be called an insulated storage unit that was made entirely out of high density foam boarding seem. It could consist of a build using the special glue to fasten walls to a base and then a lid that sets over top or could be constructed in such a way that it could be disassembled completely for storage purposes when not in use. A thick enough foam that would insulate well enough would also help in creating a more sturdy structure. Then use the heated blanket type idea as the method to heat it but if you felt the need and you had one of those power bank station units and set it inside the insulated assembly so it stays warmer as well ( lithium battery after all ) and then run your power from your 120 volt in the truck box into the insulated structure to your storage battery unit which in turn would power your heated blanket. That way when the truck was turned off the power unit would take over completely and keep the blanket powered until the truck was run again or you had access to power to run a cord into the truck box to recharge the battery unit and/or run the blanket directly.

So following that theme you laid out of your particular truck under both its load and ambient temp operating conditions, have you continued that same use case out to 5000 miles and observed its total use. The reason I ask is that over the years I have noted often with vehicles and equipment, the first number of hours or miles within an oil change the engine is not using much oil but as the use continues the oil consumption rate ramps up very noticeably which to me at least would indicate a breaking down of the oil in sheer or additives ( and combustion contamination building ) or for that matter its possible that fuel dilution is playing a part in it. Figured I would ask and see what you've observed. My L8T, I haven't driven it far enough on an oil change to have given it a fair shot to see if it will show signs of oil use yet ( or unreasonable oil use as all engines use something, its a matter of how much ) as the last oil change I had 1750 miles or so on it and no perceptible usage so at least a good sign, also have not been towing with it so it was not not under a high load either. The other item I found interesting and I see Pryme has found the same thing with his truck as per what the oil sump holds going by the dip stick and assuming going by the markings on an oil jug to determine oil volume poured in. So far my oil changes are not showing that much oil being required and I wonder what is different as I go through the variables that could cause the difference in oil volume. What I have experience so far is that when I add exactly 8 quarts going by the markings on the jugs of the oil brand I am using, I am over the full mark so that its just climbed up at the full round section of the dipstick. How much in volume that would be, I would guess at least .1 or maybe .15 of a quart too much above the full mark. I am using the Delco filter as per oil volume it holds and I allow it to drain for at least a half an hour if not an hour and the engine was warmed up mostly but not actually driven for a distance so that the oil was boiling hot but plenty warm. So in my mind now as I sit here wondering about this and why mine seems to be different ( yes the book does say 8 quarts ), did I not leave it drain long enough although I find that hard to believe. Is my truck sitting at a different attitude as it is on an almost flat floor but there is a slight slope on that floor to the rear of the truck of about a 1/2 inch so the front would be slightly higher than if the floor was perfectly flat. I raised the front of the truck slightly beyond the stock factory setting by about a 1/2 inch and within that leveled the truck from side to side as it had a fair lean to the drivers side when first bought ( ironically a lean to the drivers side would probably allow more oil to go into the engine for the dip stick to show full ). Is my dipstick length different or my dipstick tube or how its inserted into the block. My other thought is that what if the oil volume in the jugs of oil that people are using are not exactly what they say they are and varying by brand or batch, I am currently using Mobil oil and even though in Canada, they package them as 4.73 liters / 5 US quarts and I dump in one full one and go down to the 2 quart mark on the second one. I start the engine once I have added all the oil and let it run for at least a minute, shut it down and leave it sit for a while and check the oil level initially and see its plenty full, then recheck it many hours or the next day to confirm when the oil is cold. Perhaps its because I am located closer to Santa's house and am on some strange tilt LOL, anyone have any other idea's ?.Like I said, just seemed so close to the factory listed volume and thought yes this all makes sense, until I saw your two comments today and wonder what is different as we are talking half a quart different.

Your wife will be proud of your explanation or I think so as per her weight, she saves fuel mileage where ever she goes even if she's never realized it !. I wish I would have had a weigh scale completely empty weight of my truck but items were added onto it by circumstance before I was past a weigh scale and I have not weighed it lately as I keep adding more items under the rear seat and in a couple of large totes in the box for tools and tow ropes, a couple of jerry cans of fuel, and the initial steel/rubber comb mud flaps that weigh more than one would think, the bac flip cover, the rubber bed mat and quite a pile of fluid film clinging onto the underside of the truck, that even weighs up !. But anyway factory weight and I am guessing that means with a full tank of gas but I don't know that, it lists it as 7700 lb and there you are at not much more with two people and for sure a full tank of fuel. A High Country with so called leather seats adds weight, and that fifth wheel prep assembly, spray in box liner, and the extra battery and alternator I have up front, and the overload system of a 3500 as that difference to a 2500. Yup I'll have to reweigh it when I have a chance but not with snow/ice clung to it as it looks like that is now upon us. Around here its 2100 in elevation but various rolling hills to river crossing grades so its not flat as a pancake like some parts further south of the open prairies and I know with my other truck getting onto some highways that are low in elevation and relatively flat sure bump up the fuel mileage. I've driven through Alabama although was the Huntsville area and then south of there down to Panama City and at least in my mind I thought it was relatively flat for the most part but it was over 20 years ago so am sure I forgot some of it. I do know that one day and that would have been early Jan I think and in Huntsville, I saw frost ... I mean brrrr LOL. Yup, if that is anything typical of what winter is like down there, that I could easily deal with, not the hot humid summers though that I imagine you get. All I use is regular fuel and I suppose I could ask my bulk retailer if he knows what percent of ethanol they put in but I imagine its enough as some years back we didn't have any ethanol in fuel. That was someone else on this forum that talked about premium as well I believe and so it would depend if it was ethanol free for example and the regular had ethanol. They certainly never tuned the engine to respond to premium by the way it seems and GM has never made that claim, Ford though with their super duty 7.3 does make that claim of better mileage if premium is used. But yes that helps, your not running low tire pressures like I am to enhance the ride at the cost of some fuel and your lighter than I would be with the extra stuff put on the truck and packed in the truck, weight never helps fuel mileage.

By any chance do you have cruise engaged when your going down hill ?

In my case it would be 3800 pounds under my max payload LOL, with standard torsion bars they don't rate it at all which is ridiculous but that is what GM does, had I opted for either heavier torsion bar then it would have had the camper rating. Or done like you did in the end as you couldn't know until you had your truck and camper set up and then realize it would benefit from a softer bar since your camper is not throwing the weight forward like some campers may although I get the impression that even some of the fairly large campers are putting pretty much all the weight on the rear axle by the time the storage is used that tends to be further back in the camper. I had it on my brain today so I walked out to the shed to measure my brothers camper as per the width of the camper as Jake was mentioning the issues with being able to see properly with the GM mirrors. My brothers camper brand is no longer made but its brand is a Corsair and its width across from wall side to wall side is 8 feet 4 inches. Yes its that wide as I see a lot of campers are either 8 feet on the nose or some middle to smaller ones are under 8 feet by a certain margin. His camper doesn't have anything much sticking out beyond that, yes some covers as per water heater and so forth but nothing jutting out very much and the jacks are tucked in as the front ones swing forward and the rear ones stick out about 1/4 of an inch if that beyond the flat side of the camper. His camper has no side awnings so no other brackets or arms that stick out as that or jacks sticking out which I see on some campers becomes the obstacle even though the camper body is not as wide. So a camper that wide on a 2006 Ford dually, the camper was too wide to really see properly out the factory mirrors as it would have been the outer end of the mirror that I believe worked to just see past it, how it would compare with todays equivalent Fords I don't know. So he took off his factory mirrors which probably had some lighting etc on them and put on some brand of mirror that was made for the Ford but was more basic with LONG arms so they stick out and it is good to look back through them ( I've backed his unit into the shed more than once and they work good ). But that shows that some campers out there create issues with mirrors on trucks that even have "tow mirrors"

I was reading some comments below a sales guys blathering youtube video where he spewed out the usual crap information claiming that customers just had to spend money on their truck to upgrade the suspension to carry the camper and referring to a camper with a dry base "listed" weight of some 1800 lb or more as he stood by it and the claim was it would work on a half ton truck ( like in whos fantasy world ? ), then walks over to I think it was an Arctic Fox 8-11 size or so and showed what the listed weight was on it which was plenty heavy. Then I start reading the comments and that is where those that either owned such rigs or had been digging deeper into the specs and like the AF made to fit a short box srw truck, the arctic fox landing its called on the back is listed as an option so is not included in the sticker weight on the camper but AF makes those campers with the fox landing so its really not an option, its a game they played to lower the weight of the camper. Northern Lite, and others out there seem to play that slight of hand game as they are all trying to compete. Jon, your camper brand I looked up a while back or at least if its the brand that I have in my mind with how they brought it across on the website, they listed off the base weight and then the weight of every option so it could be tallied up and come up with a no nonsense final figure, that's the way all camper manufactures should do it ... with honesty. Its a big deal when one buys an expensive truck that the camper manufacture claims is suitable and then find out after the fact when you already own the truck and now the camper, its heavier than what they claim, plus once loaded with water and supplies just too much weight. The problem is trying to figure this out before putting down the cash and that's where forums or youtube videos or a comments section can help unless one happens to have friends that have rigged up a unit and can give some hard numbers and know what one is in for with a particular brand and model of camper. Your weight of camper Jon as well as your low center of gravity, that slid into the truck you have is the ideal setup for going up into the Yukon and Alaska with the crap highways which is always a moving target depending on year or time of the summer, construction season with rain, and all those wonderful perma frost frost heaves that some area's up there and then if one wants to venture up the Dempster in the Yukon or the Dalton in Alaska, lots of truck under a lighter camper allows that type of travel on gravel potholed roads ( with bullet proof tires ) .

I had someone mention this camper company to me today and its not one I am familiar with but they specialize in making custom campers as well as models they build out to a finished product, they are built up in Alaska, near Anchorage. Thought it was interesting and worth posting a link to the companies website. Fishhook - Cache Camper Manufacturing, Inc.

Good question you brought up about how air bags can be plumbed in a couple of different ways, separate or tied together. Without a doubt my brothers are separate and done for that very reason of stability so the air does not cross from one bag to the other, however the airbag concept with the sizing of the bags just doesn't seem to pan out with a top heavy load. It just seems to come down to spring capacity/stiffness to carry a load and help counter the sway issue along with big assed anti sway bars. I may had said what that rear aftermarket bar on my brothers truck size is, its 1 1/2 inches in diameter and I think the factory one was maybe slightly over an inch, that extra amount made it many times more stiff. And the somewhat larger front one just added to the over all package of better handling. For a dedicated heavier camper truck setup, having big sway bars is a a worth while upgrade if sway is found to be an issue, or like with the current GM platform I don't think a rear sway bar is even an option through GM and has to be sourced aftermarket.

The neighbor that has the full size Northern Lite camper on the one ton dually, his son had a "mini me" Duramax and he has been pulling a ball hitch holiday trailer with it and I believe he has a weight distribution hitch or think he does but whatever he was doing was not sufficient and he installed the 1/2 ton version of the timbrens and claims its working ok for his towing as well as driving empty. Your right about the video comment I had, that was a long box crew cab srw truck and he talked about being over 3000 lb on is pin and the truck looked a little saggy even with timbrens on it !. You mentioned air bags and that brings up the topic of how air bags and a tall style of top heavy slide in camper do not go well together. What happens is that the air bag if inflated a fair amount starts lifting the truck up from its sagging situation which sounds good but the problem is that is reducing the amount of work that the springs themselves were doing so its transferring weight over to the air bags and they cause instability as in sway. I will see RV salesman ( doing the youtube thing to flog their campers/trailers any way they can ) and will most often say just put airbags on it, its because they either are clueless or really don't give a crap and just want to sell that camper anyway they can con the customer into signing on the dotted line. I'll use my brothers one ton dually as an example, he gets his camper in BC and its empty and he hauls it back to Alberta but when they loaded it onto his truck his truck is sinking and sinking and sinking as they lower the jacks ... like WTF ?, I am sure its heavier than that bs weight sticker on it claims. So he literally drags his behind home with his new camper and promptly goes to a spring shop where they added two more leaves per side in the main pack plus a set of air bags. Yes it held it up "ok" after that was thrown at it but what he didn't realize from then on is that it was the air bags that were causing horrible handling in cross winds or around more aggressive curves and it did have the factory camper special sway bars front and rear. He struggled with that for years and had some good scares in the wrong weather and it was not a pleasure to drive unless the road was perfect and there was no wind as it would suddenly change direction without warning and had to be on the ball driving it. He still has the air bags on it since they were on there already but only puts a max of 20 pounds in them and he had added both upper and lower stabile loads and that made a certain amount of a difference to both carrying it up a bit better and better sway so it was more acceptable but I encouraged him to drop more coin and buy the largest sway bars that are available for both ends of his truck and we put them on and that sealed the deal it seemed, its been like a different truck ever since with all those different items added and lowering the pressure in the air bags. His truck is used exclusively for that camper so it doesn't matter that the leaf springs are stacked up and the stable loads on it as he said it rides like crap on the back when he has reason to unload the camper. That truck rode smooth when new with the factory suspension and no load in the bed, which to me doesn't quite add up that it can ride great and be capable of carrying heavy loads and in its case it couldn't carry the load that Ford claimed it could ( the empty camper ). But at least with the dually the tire capacity is there and yes he is over weight by gvw some and near at max on his rear axle weight.

Grandpa The Gambler The IRS decides to audit Grandpa, and summons him to the IRS office. The auditor was not surprised when Grandpa showed up with his attorney. The auditor said, "Well, sir, you have an extravagant lifestyle and no full-time employment, which you explain by saying that you win money gambling. I'm not sure the IRS finds that believable." "I'm a great gambler, and I can prove it," says Grandpa. "How about a demonstration?" The auditor thinks for a moment and said, "Okay. Go ahead." Grandpa says, "I'll bet you a thousand dollars that I can bite my own eye." The auditor thinks a moment and says, "It's a bet." Grandpa removes his glass eye and bites it. The auditor's jaw drops. Grandpa says, "Now, I'll bet you two thousand dollars that I can bite my other eye." Now the auditor can tell Grandpa isn't blind, so he takes the bet. Grandpa removes his dentures and bites his good eye. The stunned auditor now realizes he has wagered and lost three grand, with Grandpa's attorney as a witness. He starts to get nervous. "Want to go double or nothing?" Grandpa asks. "I'll bet you six thousand dollars that I can stand on one side of your desk, and pee into that wastebasket on the other side, and never get a drop anywhere in between." The auditor, twice burned, is cautious now, but he looks carefully and decides there's no way this old guy could possibly manage that stunt, so he agrees again. Grandpa stands beside the desk and unzips his pants, but although he strains mightily, he can't make the stream reach the wastebasket on the other side, so he ends up urinating all over the auditor's desk. The auditor leaps with joy, realizing that he has just turned a major loss into a huge win. But Grandpa's own attorney moans and puts his head in his hands. "Are you okay?" the auditor asks. "Not really," says the attorney. "This morning, when Grandpa told me he'd been summoned for an audit, he bet me twenty-five thousand dollars that he could come in here and pee all over your desk and that you'd be happy about it!"