So you can use a carabiner anywhere you want and the application matters not. Got it

Inappropriate? Like it upset you? As if I farted at the dinner table?! Lol.

ETA: You can have the last word if you want, it’s become unproductive at this point. I’ve said my piece and those who want to understand why or why not to use something, will either do some digging or remain ignorant.

 

Perhaps the first question to ask is what is the chain's breaking strength? Almost all, but not all, bumper-pull trailer safety chain sets are rated lower than 11K#. The safety chain ratings I saw called out the GTW (Gross Trailer Weight) and not the strength of an individual chain/hook. The 5er & gooseneck safety chains are typically rated much higher, but that's a different subject altogether since this thread discusses issues with the Ford rear hitch.

I dislike hammer-locks because I don't want anything left dangling and clanging all the time, especially since I do very little towing. The carabiners go on and off in seconds. The most I owned was a 24' box car trailer which had 3.500# axles, 7K# total capacity (trailer and its contents). So 11K# carabiners were more than sufficient and stronger than the chains on all the trailers I've owned.

 

I replaced the smaller hooks on my trailer safety chains with a 3/8 hook. If you come in from behind it works on the hitch.

 

Hooked a trailer to my truck for the first time this week. Had to use these shackles I got off Amazon. They have a high rating (would have to look, don’t remember what it was), but don’t really think I want to deal with them. Think I’ll replace the hooks with ones like above.

 

When asking what the rating of the device is, the units of measure are as important as the number of measured units.

These Big Dan Carabiners are beautiful... probably the best "dan" carabiners I've ever seen.

But "an 11,000 lb" rating description is ambiguously written, and I sought to find more clarity.

RescueTech and ISC provided the clarity: These big dang carabiners are rated at 11,241 lbf.

Is there a meaningful difference between 11,000 and 11,241?

Probably not.

But there is a meaningful difference between an lbf unit of measurement, and an lbs unit of measurement, because the former describes units of force for the MBS (Minimum Breaking Strength) rating, while the later describes the maxium weight the rigging equipment is rated to hold, or WLL (Working Load Limit).

WLL = MBS / SF, where SF is a Safety Factor that the manufacture of the rigging equipment applies to derive their WLL ratings... which in this case, is the maximum weight of mass that carabiner is rated to hold.

It looks like Big Dan is playing it safe with a 10:1 SF, but the fact that the WLL rating for these carabiners can be readily found online from a number of different retailers should give anyone some pause.




The FMCSA, and the DOT, and the relevant sections of the CFR reference "WLL" in the regulations for tie down ratings.

It might not take much argument or expert testimony to convince a jury that neglecting to consider the Working Load Limit rating might reasonably be construed as negligence.

Working Load Limit is the rating of the actual pounds (expressed as units of lbs) of the heaviest object of mass that the rigging equipment is rated to suspend or hold, and this rating is always significantly less than the pounds force (expressed as units of lbf) that the rigging equipment material is predicted to potentially break at.

This truck dangling above the very deep and deadly Malad Gorge was reported to be dangling by the trailer's safety chains, which enabled the retiree couple to survive while left hanging until the rescuers could figure out what to do.

That looks like 9,500 lbs of mass to me, unless some of the stuff fell out of the truck into the canyon 100 feet below. 1,124 lbs + 1,124 lbs WLL is still only 2,248 lbs... a lot more than a man like Big Dan and all his gear, but a lot less than what many might consider appropriate for trailer safety chains.

 

That hook looks like it might feed through the hole and be able to just hook back to its own chain without the need for a shackle.

 

Has anyone tried soft shackles for this? In watching offroad recovery videos they seem to be able to handle quite the shock load and are easy to install and remove.

 

I see 2 related topics here.

Topic 1 is the hitch doesn't work with all the safety chain hooks out there. Yup I agree with that. The hooks on my 14K GVWR dump trailer are big hooks. Major PITA to get on and off. Usually involves lots of cussing and occasional a beating instrument. The hooks on my 7500 GVWR enclosed trailer are these little hooks and fit no problem.

Topic 2 is more a liability topic in my mind. This involves alot of "IF"s. If I lose a trailer and if that trailer causes damages and if I end up in court and IF, IF, IF...

I've towed trailers for work for almost 4 decades. Never lost one. Was a passenger when we had a chipper come off the hitch but the chains worked.

I haven't changed out the hooks on either trailer. The ones that fit fine seem small to me but that's what the manufacturer put on there. Their liability. I haven't changed out the big hooks for the same reason. As mentioned above, I think it may be easy for an expert witness to put liability on someone altering the manufacturers equipment. I haven't looked in to the hammerlocks much. It appears to me that they are for static loads, of course I could be wrong on that. I doubt the losing a trailer would be considered a static load.

There's lots of good ways to attach chains mentioned in this thread. Most, if not all may keep your trailer attached to the poorly designed hitch. Its just the 1 in a million chance of the "What If's" that might be a problem. Well...unless you plan on hanging off a bridge by your safety chains.

I'll probably order some Hammerlocks tho.

 

Those are the same kind of hooks I had on my chains that came with my camper. They would not fit in Fords hitch. Yes, I could have fed then through and then hooked them to the chain itself, but that would have pulled a good bit of slack from the chain itself. I ended up cutting those hooks off and then getting some of the large clevis hooks and installing them. I still use the D Ring shackles like in the picture though, however mine are flipped the other way with the pin at the top. I understand though that that will derate the shackles though.

 

This on the 2.5 hitch (won’t slide around and make noise). And on the 3 inch chain hooks fit.

 

so those hammer locks are on the truck all the time? Rattling around ? Wouldn’t a quality D Ring or Clevis work better? Only because you can remove them.

**I didn’t read the whole thread, looks like it’s been throughly discussed

 

If you install them like ATC did in my post 2 up they don’t move around. This is for the 2.5”. I can take photos of what I have, bought off Amazon.

You shouldn’t have to do anything to the 3 inch if you have large enough hooks. Although they are kinda a pain to unhook, gotta contort your hand some.

 

I've had the same 3/4 inch clevises on the last several trucks. Someone's hearing is much better than mine ( a distinct possibility) or they do not listen to any audio devices ever if they are upset by the supposed rattling.
I've never given it a second thought and the clevises are there 24/7/365.

 

I have the D Ring Shackles on mine and was worried about hearing them rattle around but after almost a year now I have not heard them the first time. Even with the windows down and the music turned down, I have not distinctly heard them. I was very surprised that they don't actually make a bunch of noise like some say.

 

Actually no need to hook back to the chain, these hooks work as they are. I have the same hooks and they go in from behind without problems if you slide them kind of sideways. It was a little complicated the first few times, then I learned how to do it and now it’s a breeze, no need to add shackles or other complications…