3255RL Frame Flex!!! - Page 2 - Montana Owners Club

odfwcliff · 07-20-2005, 09:14 AM

I was speaking of the service people at Ingram's! As for the Sales staff, you are probably correct!

Montana_3931 · 08-12-2005, 03:13 PM

In May of 2005 I posted a message about Montana axles being under designed for the trailer weight. Alko-Kober replaced the axles under thier warranty after Keystone declined to do anything, (the unit was 18 months old,): also Keystone denies the axles are under capacity.
However, I checked on the 2005 models and Keystone has increased axle capacity substantialy on the Montana line.
Since Keystone denies resposibility the only answer to this problem may be letters to the NHTSB.
Please comment on this and give some thoughts about solving this problem.

rickfox · 08-12-2005, 05:05 PM

Newman,

I'm just getting in on this so please tell me a little to get me up to speed. You say that Keystone has increased the axle capacity substantially for 2005. What changes have they made for 2005?

patodonn · 08-12-2005, 08:09 PM

Re the axle capacity, Newman's posting (10 June) said:
"Montana model 3295, GVRW 14300# only has 2 6000# axles. This means the capacity of the axles is deficient. Keystone, [Montana] denies the problem and will not up-grade axles."

What was missing in that problem statement was the fact that, in addition to the axles/tires, the weight of the rig is always supported by either the hitch pin or the fwd struts. At 14,300 lbs total weight and a pin weight of 2700 lbs, that means that each 6000 lb rated axle supports 5800 lbs at max rated weight of the rig. Obviously, the 6000 lb axle rating is within limits and is "adequate".

So, how much "extra" is "enough"? Do you need a 7000 lb axle to support 5800 lbs? If 7000 lb capacity is good, wouldn't an 8000 lb axle be even better? You can see where that logic is going...

The larger capacity axles weigh more, thereby giving less payload for the rig.....engineering-wise, 6000 lbs axles look to be OK.

Now, how close to the design specifications are the actual axles provided by Al-Ko to the one(s) tested and rated? No way to tell, but they should be at least 6000 lb capable.

Would I rather have seen 2 X 7000 lb axles used to support the 11600 lbs they need to carry? Probably, yes. Is Keystone wrong or in error in using 2 X 6000 lb axles? Based on the facts, probably "no".

JMHO

patodonn · 08-13-2005, 08:37 AM

As an aside, I just saw this yesterday...it helps explain a design philosophy...

To some people, a glass may be viewed as half empty; to others, it is half full; to an engineer, it is twice as big as it needs to be.

sreigle · 08-13-2005, 12:02 PM

I have to agree with PJ. We have a 3295RK and it scales at 14,360 pounds. That's 60 lbs OVER the stated GVWR. The weight on the axles is 11,060. The axles are rated at 6000 lb. each. That's 12,000 for two axles. If any 3295RK were going to be over the axle rating I have to think ours would be. But we have almost a thousand pounds to spare. Therefore I have to feel the axles are NOT underrated for the rig. As a point of reference, our 14,360 actual weight is 20 lbs more than the GVWR on ANY Montana ever made. Sure I'd like to have the newer Dexter axles but the Al-ko's we have are sufficiently rated for the rig in my opinion.

Montana_2785 · 08-13-2005, 07:22 PM

So far from what I've seen on our rig, I'll have to agree with Steve R. I took our unit in with about 12,000 miles on it to have the alignment checked. The shop I used is very reputable and they said that everything was in alignment.

I have to think that the axles are likely OK.

Al Ko electric brakes on the other hand.....

Eric

Montana_3931 · 08-14-2005, 09:32 AM

I completely agree that the axles are rated above the trailers GVRW however the rating is too close to the GVRW for safety.
The reason I am aware of this is because, in my area I am aware of three units other than mine that have had the axles lose camber and need replacement.
As to the greater rated axles now being installed, the way to check is to look at the Id# on the axle. For quick, general varification check how many lugs per wheel; 6 for 6000# and 8 for 7000# and greater.

patodonn · 08-14-2005, 12:58 PM

Did they "lose" the proper camber, or did they never have it to begin with? That was the case in our situation. Typical bad tire wear, all four on the inside edge, noticed at around 10,000 miles. Had the axles "bent" to correct camber, no problems in 10,000 miles since then.

Can't blame it on improper or "inadequate" axles...just not set up correctly to begin with. That is a QC issue at Keystone.

I suppose that my real problem with this whole situation is that there are lots of hills to do battle over with Keystone, but inadequate axles isn't one of them. Engineering-wise, if there is a "safety margin" of one pound, then that is about 1/2 pound in excess. Sad but true, and it applies to aircraft, cars, RV's and scooters. The safety factor is built in when the axle (or whatever) is "rated" for X pounds. That means that the appropriate safety factors are included in that "rating" or "certified" number. These factors are a lot greater for, say, aircraft, than for scooters. RV's and autos fall somewhere in betweeen. For example, a part may have a design limit of 8000 pounds, with impact loadings up to 1.5 g, but only be "certified" for 6000 lbs. I don't mean to imply that is the case here, but it is standard engineering practice. That is why I don't get too "wrapped around the axle" (sorry, couldn't resist) re this particular issue. I'd probably be "happier" with 7000 lb axles, but it isn't a big deal, IMHO. I don't think it would have made any difference re the problem experienced by those folks who had improper camber (including us).

I obviously have far too much time on my hands today if I'm going this far into this discussion. Think I best head out to the driving range....

Best regards,

sreigle · 08-15-2005, 05:56 PM

Same story with ours as with patodonn's. We had inside tire wear from the git-go. Keystone had Alko replace the axles but they didn't align them. We had them aligned and have had a really good tire wear pattern in the roughly 8,000 to 9,000 miles since then.

It's one thing to talk about axle ratings and weight on them but to really find out what's happening we need to know how much weight on EACH wheel individually. If a six thousand pound axle has 2,500 pounds on one wheel and 3,500 on the other it is at its theoretical limit for the overall axle but can the axle handle the 3,500 on one wheel?

Or, if our 11,060 pounds on the combined axles actually is 4,560 on one axle and 6,500 on the other axle then we're overloading one of the axles and will likely have problems with that axle. Can't blame the axle for that. Gotta know those real life weights before we can place blame. That's on my list for next time we weigh this thing.

odfwcliff · 08-16-2005, 10:36 AM

Needless to say, our history of being "MONTANA OWNERS" has ENDED!!! After getting jerked around twice by Keystone/Lippert, we have shopped and purchased a replacement!

*********************** Edited by MOC Administrator *************

Hopefully we will remain welcome here on the Montana Owner's Page!

****************** Edited by MOC Administrator ****************

Edited material was removed because it was in direct violation of the Mission Statement. Members are welcome to the MOC Forum as long as they adhere to the Mission Statement.

Montana_2194 · 08-17-2005, 01:53 PM

It seems we're a bit off the original "frame flex" issue. Getting back to that, we had the 00-8 retrofit done on our 3255 (2000). Montana paid for the parts and shipping, and allowed a 600-700 Canadian for labour.

We had the work done at "Camping in Style" in Whitby Ontario, and they charged us another $700 C or so for labour, ON TOP OF Keystone's allowance.

I'm happy with Keystone's assistance, which I wouldn't have sought had it not been for this web site, but wouldn't recommend the dealer. When I complained, they became very cold and dismissive. (I bought the trailer privately, but still, I think they were paid adequately by Keystone, and there's such a thing as good-will.)

RADHAZJOE · 09-29-2005, 10:44 AM

we have the 7000 lb axles on our rig. We are just over the GVWR. But we have traveled on some very rough (washboard roads) and have not broken an axle or spring yet.

From an engineering point of view, just enough in this situation is not enough. In additiona to the calculated weights, the rigs are certainly not all balanced perfectly eo weight is distributed as noted.

Also, traavel causes vertical acceleration, raiseing the effective gross weight. From my point of view, at least a 10% overdesign is needed.

You may also like: