Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I am wondering if anyone has the axle weights from a CAT scale for a stock Silverado. I am trying to figure something out. I am working on getting my trailer dialed in but I have leveled my 2016 (2" Rough Country) and think that may be causing a slight problem. I did it to be able to use 275/60R20 tires. I did nothing to the rear. My front according to wheel well shows I'm at about 38-5/8" on front and 39" at rear. I am using a weight distribution hitch but they only really concentrate on front wheel well height. When hitched and no weight distribution, I went up to 39" on front. With the weight distribution all hooked up, I'm perfect and right back at 38-5/8". Now the rear is a different story. I forgot to measure rear without weight distribution but with weight distribution, it is still 2" low right at 37". So that means I am nose high. During the day, not as big an issue as at night. The headlights are not aimed for this and I've never gotten bright lights flashed back at me as much as I am now. I'm pretty sure that I need to add air bags to rear to assist with the sag. But I am curious to see the weights of a stock 14-18+ CCSB 4X4 5.3L. 

 

I did take truck and trailer over to CAT scale today to do 3 weights. 1 with truck and trailer using weight distribution, 1 with truck and trailer using no weight distribution, and last, truck by itself. The 3 weights do show that weight is being distributed but I think I can do better. With just the truck weights, I'm at 3420lbs on front axle and 2880lbs on rear axle. This is including full tank of gas along with a topper on the bed. The trailer is almost 5400lbs loaded. With weight distribution, I now have 3380lbs on front axle which seems reasonable. But the rear axle went up to 3540lbs which puts me at 40lbs over the 3500lb axle rating. Those figures really don't seem too bad. 

 

What I wonder is what I could do to eliminate that sag maybe without air bags. I do have a set of Air Lift 5000 ready to be installed but if I can do it without them it would be preferred. I wonder if by leveling, it changed the weights of front axle and rear axle which results in more weight on back axle. I'm almost convinced if I raise rear end maybe 1" it may make the difference. I have seen that airbags can be used along with WD hitches. It is recommended to set rear height to a maybe a slight rake prior to connecting hitch and record the psi, then deflate. After connecting the hitch, increase the air in bags to the previous measured psi. It may end up with about 1" lower but is acceptable.

 

But if I do end up raising rear end, this would cause another issue. The top of the ball height is supposed to be set at same height as the inside of the coupler when trailer is level. I am at the top hole already. I haven't checked to see if I can flip the receiver upside down to give more height adjustment but will have to look into it. I did see a post on another forum while doing a Google seach.  That one suggested raising the ball to 1" above the coupler height to compensate. 

 

TL;DR Leveled truck and trailer and WDH. Perfect on front axle but truck sags 2" in rear. Would Air Bags make up the difference?

 

 

Posted

You need to put more weight on the front axle.
With it coupled, raise the trailer jack lifting the truck until the truck is level then tighten it up . If trailer is too high in front lower the hitch.
You need the whole setup level.
Air bags are a band aid.


Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Posted

I took my truck last year to the scale. I think I had like half a tank of fuel, a few of my things in the truck and a tonneau cover on the truck. The weight was 5,526 or 5,586 I think. The sheet is in my glove box somewhere.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, dieselfan1 said:

You need to put more weight on the front axle.
With it coupled, raise the trailer jack lifting the truck until the truck is level then tighten it up . If trailer is too high in front lower the hitch.
You need the whole setup level.
Air bags are a band aid.


Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 

What would I tighten up? I'm not quite following. In order to attach the spring arms on the Equal-I-Zer hitch, I have to raise the jack stand while it is attached to the ball on the truck. This raises not only the trailer but the rear of the truck as well. It has to go almost to the limit to pop the arms into the L brackets on either side of the trailer frame. But after arms are connected, and upon retracting the jack, I end up with the 2" sag. The trailer is level when I measured the coupler height. I matched the inside of coupler height to the top of the ball prior to anything being hooked up. Everything matches up. The front wheel well height is dead on for the instructions on adjusting the hitch.

 

Here's the rub. If I didn't have the front of my truck leveled by 2" with the Rough Country kit, the front measurement would be at 36-5/8" and rear would be at 37". The whole setup would then be level. But because of the tires on the truck, I need the front leveled.

Edited by mikeyk101
Posted
48 minutes ago, CamGTP said:

I took my truck last year to the scale. I think I had like half a tank of fuel, a few of my things in the truck and a tonneau cover on the truck. The weight was 5,526 or 5,586 I think. The sheet is in my glove box somewhere.

If you happen to find it, please post the front and rear axle weights please.

Posted

2018 crew cab standard bed 6’6” 6.2L max tow 4x4 SLT sunroof etc. 

 

I’m 170lbs, full tank, 80lb Tonneau cover

 

6000lb - 170 - 80 = 5750 lbs curb weight

3520 Front Axle

2480 Rear Axle

Posted

I found the picture on my phone.

 

Truck was 5,560lbs.

3240 front axle

2320 rear axle

 

It's a 2016 Crew Cab short bed LT model.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, CamGTP said:

I found the picture on my phone.

 

Truck was 5,560lbs.

3240 front axle

2320 rear axle

 

It's a 2016 Crew Cab short bed LT model.

Ok, thanks. Mine is the same 2016 Crew Cab Short Bed LT. I do have a topper on mine and had made sure to fill the gas tank just before but nothing else that I can think of that would change the weight much. I did still have the weight distribution hitch along with spring arms still there but that should have added only about 100lbs more, maybe.

My info was a little different but still similar with more weight on front axle.

Truck total weight 6300lbs

Front Axle 3420 lbs

Rear Axle 2880lbs

 

But it does appear that mine already has more weight on the rear axle to start with. Several hundred pounds different. I'm taking a guess but this does seem to point to leveling front transfers more weight to rear axle. Yours is roughly 58% on front axle and 42% on rear. Mine is roughly 54% on front axle and 46% on rear.

Edited by mikeyk101
Posted

What kind of WDH are you using ?
Does it have chains on the bars and a hook on each side of the tongue?
By tightening up I mean using the links on the chain.
This is the kind of hitch I'm talking about8c5121814151fc758ffde3370e961459.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Posted

This is the one I have. It has spring bars that attach to "L" brackets on side of trailer frame. I could move the "L" brackets up one or 2 more holes but as of right now, I need to raise the trailer jack almost up to swing the bars into the brackets. Like I mentioned, the directions say as long as the front wheel well returned to pre hitch height, they call it good. And my front wheel well is perfect. But if I wasn't leveled in front and still had the rake, with the 2" sag in rear,  once front wheel well was adjusted, it would be level. I know I could probably just put a block on rear axle to raise it up, but then I would have a rake again. With air bags I would have some options. I prefer the leveled stance but may have to make that decision soon.

Screenshot_20210329-085722_Brave.jpg

Posted

I have a 2018 Silverado, crew cab, short box, 4x4 with the 5.3.  Here are my numbers from the last time I weighed it: Front axle - 3480, Rear axle - 3040 = 6520.  I had a full tank of fuel and an additional 165 pounds of camping gear in the bed.

 

I tow a camper that weighs 7920 fully loaded, and I use the same hitch as you.  I disagree that air bags are a band aid, as I do use them.  I set up my weight distributing hitch with 5 psi in the bags to get the front axle weight close to the unloaded weight, I then add 15 psi to the bags.  I do not lift the rear of the truck with the air bags, I just supplement the rear leaf springs to help the truck not bunce as much as it did without the air bags when towing. 

  • Like 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, UnlimitedMatt said:

I have a 2018 Silverado, crew cab, short box, 4x4 with the 5.3.  Here are my numbers from the last time I weighed it: Front axle - 3480, Rear axle - 3040 = 6520.  I had a full tank of fuel and an additional 165 pounds of camping gear in the bed.

 

I tow a camper that weighs 7920 fully loaded, and I use the same hitch as you.  I disagree that air bags are a band aid, as I do use them.  I set up my weight distributing hitch with 5 psi in the bags to get the front axle weight close to the unloaded weight, I then add 15 psi to the bags.  I do not lift the rear of the truck with the air bags, I just supplement the rear leaf springs to help the truck not bunce as much as it did without the air bags when towing. 

Exact same model. In the office so I can't access my weight ticket.

I agree with the use of air bags. Had mine in place before I purchased the trailer. Use them on the job. I agree, they give a better towing "ride" when inflated slightly. My trailer loaded is lighter than yours but I found that 15 psi gives a much smoother ride than 5 psi. My WDH setup routine is similar to yours. I'm using a Blue Ox Sway Pro with 1000k bars.

 

I fully agree that if one tries to use air bags in place of a properly set up WDH, they will not get the correct results.

  • Like 1
Posted
51 minutes ago, UnlimitedMatt said:

I have a 2018 Silverado, crew cab, short box, 4x4 with the 5.3.  Here are my numbers from the last time I weighed it: Front axle - 3480, Rear axle - 3040 = 6520.  I had a full tank of fuel and an additional 165 pounds of camping gear in the bed.

 

I tow a camper that weighs 7920 fully loaded, and I use the same hitch as you.  I disagree that air bags are a band aid, as I do use them.  I set up my weight distributing hitch with 5 psi in the bags to get the front axle weight close to the unloaded weight, I then add 15 psi to the bags.  I do not lift the rear of the truck with the air bags, I just supplement the rear leaf springs to help the truck not bunce as much as it did without the air bags when towing. 

Your truck numbers are not far off from what I have. I am not really looking at "lifting" the rear so much as limiting the sag. I saw on a you tube video that its not a good idea to raise rear to original height after hooking up the WDH. It would require a lot of air and then a rough ride. IIRC, The idea is to increase air before hitching and just when rear starts to rise. I think he settled on about 25psi. Then deflate the bags, hook up hitch and then increase just under the 25psi. He ends up about an inch lower than original height. Thatbwould be just about right for me but I would have too experiment.. So your 15psi falls right in line with that as well. So it is starting to look like I now have my next project. Thanks.

 

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Capt Bob said:

Exact same model. In the office so I can't access my weight ticket.

I agree with the use of air bags. Had mine in place before I purchased the trailer. Use them on the job. I agree, they give a better towing "ride" when inflated slightly. My trailer loaded is lighter than yours but I found that 15 psi gives a much smoother ride than 5 psi. My WDH setup routine is similar to yours. I'm using a Blue Ox Sway Pro with 1000k bars.

 

I fully agree that if one tries to use air bags in place of a properly set up WDH, they will not get the correct results.

From everything I find and read, the hitch is set up properly. The front wheel well height is dead on after WD. The trailer is essentially level. The difference in weight on front axle with WD should be more than 50% between unhitched and hitched with no WD. Since unhitched is 3420lbs and hitched with no WD is 3140lb, the target weight is 3280lbs and I'm at 3380lbs which is actually about 85% more than no WD. Although I still have about 120lbs of wiggle room before front GAVW, I don't think I should try to adjust any more weight to front. I'm still thinking that the front leveling kit is throwing off my setup and air bags are going to be the solution.  Like I also mentioned above, I don't really want to raise the rear level, just control the sag. And from last 2 posts, about 15psi could be a great help. Thanks 

Edited by mikeyk101
Posted

Leveling kit won't change the weight per axle in any noticeable way. I have a CCSB 5.3 4x4 LT as well.

Front: 3,400

Rear: 2,520

Combined: 5,960

(I weigh 200lbs, I don't know how much gas was in it, soft tonneau)

 

Is the problem that you are trying to fix the "nose-high" pitch when trailer is hooked up? Or are you worried about the weight on each axle when loaded? Your trailer isn't that heavy, do you know the tongue weight? I would attempt to redistribute weight on the trailer first.

 

I think having a leveling kit and then trying to run level with a trailer is a fool's errand. Why do you think pick-up trucks all come off the line with a rake? You should only be concerned that your weight is distributed properly and stop worrying about how high your front fenders are. If you want it to be "levelled" when unloaded, you're going to live with the cali-lean when you pull the trailer. But then get your headlights aimed properly.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,691 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...