I have a 2.5” WDH set up for my travel trailer, but not an extra set of trailer mount parts (yet) for my tilt bed, and a 2” conventional ball mount with a sleeve.

I plan to tow the ~6000# tilt bed (including load) 750 miles next weekend.

Would you use the WDH ball mount or the conventional one? The WDH one has the ball several inches further back than the conventional.

TV info in sig.

 

Weight distributing hitches keep the back end from squatting down and pointing your headlights in the sky. More for 150s or if you have more tongue weight than usual on a 250 like yours.

For 6000 pounds, if you don't have much tongue weight, on a f250, I wouldn't bother with a weight distributing hitch - plus they make weird sounds if you turn tight on them.

For reference, I use my wdh on my 5000 pound camper with half tons and skip it on the 3/4 and ton (or bigger trucks).

If you want to know for sure, try it with the WDH and then try it without in your driveway, measure how much the bumper comes down with each and how level your trailer axles are (assuming its a dual axle trailer at 6000 pounds)

good luck

 

Just to be clear, my options are the 2-1/2” WDH ball mount without the spring bars, or a 2” conventional ball mount using a 2 to 2-1/2 sleeve. So extra slop or extra protrusion.

 

For 6,000 pounds on a 2024 F-250, I wouldn't bother with a WDH unless you have an unusual amount of tongue weight and/or are planning on driving through ridiculous conditions.

 

I run the sleeve on both my wdh +6k travel trailer and my 2" ball with my 14' flat bed and notice zero noise or felt slop. I vote for keeping the hitch closer to the truck for less leverage.
P.S. your sig does not appear on my android device.

 

I avoid using the sleeve at all costs. As long as the WDH ball mount is at the right height for the tilt bed trailer, I would use that. In a pinch I've used my WDH ball mount for my single axle ATV trailer which has an upgraded 2 5/16" coupler. I do have an adjustable height 3" Weigh-Safe with a 2 5/16" ball, but sometimes I forget to bring it to the storage lot.

 

2024 F250 Platinum, Crew Cab, Short Bed, 7.3, 3.73 locker, Rapid Red, Carmello Max Recline seats

 

I probably should just get a 2-1/2” ball mount…

 

there are several options you can do.

Personally, I almost always go for the "more than you need" so you only have to buy it one approach. As such, I would go for a nice sturdy 2.5 inch shank adjustable hitch.

I own this one https://www.curtmfg.com/part/45927

10k capacity on a 2 inch ball, 20k capacity on the 2-5/16th ball, plenty of adjustment room on it so that I can always get the trailer to tow flat. I also don't have to worry about a reducer. This is important to me as some (not all. but at least the one that came with mine from Ford and a few of the other's I've seen online) also reduce the capacity of your hitch. I think Curt's reducer (https://www.curtmfg.com/part/45405) does not reduce the hitch rating, so you might be okay with that

The adjustable hitch has been rock solid for me. the BIG thing you need to remember is that it's there. If you have it installed in certain configurations, you can put a nice big dent in your tailgate. It's also a big heavy SOB. I'm in my 50s and while I can install it and move it around okay, with a 50 lb weight, t's not nearly as easy as it was moving around that same weight 15 years ago, and really not as easy as it was in my 20s.

If all you have is this one other trailer, there are other cheaper options you can get like this one https://www.curtmfg.com/part/45342 but you will need that reducer as it's only a 2 inch shank.

I am sure other manufacturers out there make stuff that's just as good and I would encourage you to look at your options. I use Curt as I've always been impressed with their stuff since the first draw bar of theirs I purchased. I can't say the same for some of the others.

 

This.

But(TestPilot), if going with WDH(without bars), double check trailer plug/wiring has ample length to reach your pickup.

Let us know what you end up going with.

 

My 2" shank ball mount is an adjustable height WeighSafe with both 2" and 2-5/16" *****. I bought it when I had my 1500.

My conclusion is that I've ordered another set of rests for the WDH spring arms to put on the tilt bed so I can use the WDH "properly" in the future, and will keep the 2" shank mount with sleeve for light loads or short hauls. I am also going to use it for this trip, but cut the trip in half by leaving the trailer at the destination until the next time I go back, with the rests and use the WDH coming back.

Thanks for all the thoughts and suggestions.

 

If you use yours, I would just use the Curt or similar reducer. Again, just be careful about going with the cheapest reducer. I've seen quite a few that reduce the capacity of the hitch, while others "keep the rating of the hitch"

If I was in your shoes, I would get a good reducer reducer since it looks like you already have a good tow bar.

 

Are the end products and different or is it just different levels of ***-covering?

 

I always thought that use of a reducer was a universal reduction in capacity, not limited to one brand. Maybe the ones that don't mention it are the ones that should.

 

Reducer sleeves are not all made the same.

One of my first reducer sleeves was made by Reese, when manufacturing was still in the USA and Canada, from what appeared to be blued steel, seam ground, with two perpendicular walls of the tube shaved, to ensure that the outside diameter of the reducer fit within the inside diameter of a 2.5" receiver hitch, which Reese was first to bring to market in the form of their "Titan" line, later marketed as "TowBeast" due to a trademark dispute, which Reese won and resumed using the Titan sub brand.

I actually discussed the wall thickness reduction of this reducer with Reese application engineers, who used to be readily available by telephone in the '90's. There is an industry standard specification for receiver tubing that is slightly different than standard 1/4" wall 2.5" tubing. The difference is about 30 thousandths net, so .253" versus .250". Wall thickness influences the bend radius of square tubing at the corners, as well.

The challenge of making a reducer is that both the inside diameter and the outside diameter of the tube selected, must closely hug the draw bar on the inside diameter, while still allowing insertion and removal, as well as be hugged by the 2.5" receiver, while still being insertable and removeable. And, there cannot be a longitudinal weld seam inside the tube, as that would interfere with inserting the tow bar.

All of these "must fit within and be fitted within" requirements for seamless tubing are challenges to work around as cost effectively as possible, but one way that I have seen is with the reduction in material thickness of the tubing wall that the reducer sleeve is manufactured with.

I have a collection of reducer sleeves, even though I don't usually use them. Each one is different. None of them are Ford OEM, which are different still.

Another interesting aspect of reducer sleeves is end opening through which the draw bar is inserted. This end is the first line of defense against the load. Whether the load, or pressure applied, is from turning the vehicle, or from pre-loading the coupling with spring pressure from a WDH system, from brake dive, from being beaten on up and down and side to side while jiggling down the road from the slop fit between ball mount and reducer, from the sheer mass of tongue weight just sitting there, etc... the inner walls of the reducer tubing at it's aftmost end at the entry edges are running point in the battle against all loading modalities.

Some reducers have distended ends, to prevent the reducer from slipping too far inside the larger receiver. Some reducers are swedged in this area. Distending or swedging the entry ends of a reducer sleeve can weaken the reducer material in the area where it is loaded the highest. This could explain a reduction in rating of some reducers.

On balance, the dimpling, swedging, or flaring of the reducer is convenient, as no one wants to have to retrieve a reducer that slipped too far into the receiver, especially if the reducer slipped past the hole alignment, and there is no back opening to the receiver.

So thus far, there are three physical factors in the making of a reducer sleeve that could potentially influence tow ratings:

1. Material properties (strength, treatment)
2. Material dimensions (wall thickness, insertion depth, sleeve length)
3. Material manipulation (shaving walls, grinding weld seams, distorting / stretching / flaring / dimpling the critical entry end)



However, there are also methods of reinforcing a reducer sleeve at the entry end, where it matters the most.

Some reducers mimic 2" receiver hitches, and have reinforcement collars surrounding the aftmost edge, that serve two purposes... to help the highly loaded edge survive, and to prevent the reducer from slipping in.

Amidst the variety of reinforcement collar designs, some are simply a slice of larger tube tack welded to the end of the receiver. Example:





And although quite rare in reducers, and more common in quality receiver hitches, some reinforcement collars are full on castings or forgings, and yet even among these, there are also subtle design differences, the most clever of which extend for a little ways inside the reducer tube, such that the forging itself is the first line of defense against reducer wall wallowing and distension under all directions of loading.

And this latter type of reinforcement collar is more likely to be found on actual receiver tubes, raw and ready to weld for hitch builders, rather than on store bought reducer sleeves. Examples:






And this is the type of "reducer" I actually use, when necessary. An actual receiver tube, manufactured with a forged reinforcing collar that is incorporated into the inside walls of the tube at the entry end, even as it surrounds the cross sectional face of the tube opening.

I bought a longer version of the same tubing, some 15" long, because my 2.5" receiver has an open end on the forward side of the receiver, so the "reducer" has a more contact area within the entire front to back length of the 2.5" receiver, and that captured length at the forward edges provides counteracting resistance to the load applied at the aft entry edges. Example:






Like the OP, I don't care to use a full on WDH head, ball only without the bars, when I'm towing a lighter trailer that does not need WDH, and/or does not have the cleats on the trailer tongue frame to even engage the spring bars of a WDH system (light equipment rental trailers, as an example). WDH ball mounts tend to be heavier (added tongue weight) and stick further out there (adding leverage against the rear axle) in order to clear the trunnions cast in the WDH head the hold the spring bars.

So I have separate 2.5" solo stingers (ball mounts) for a 2" ball as well as for a 2-5/15" ball.

However, there are still situations when having a reducer sleeve is needed... such as for hitch mounted cargo carriers, hitch mounted lifts, hitch mounted bicycle carriers, etc. All of these hitch mounted accessories are typically built for the 2" receiver, not the 2.5" receiver. Hence, despite "doing it right" when it comes to trailer towing, the need for a reducer sleeve still exists. Example:





I find that raw receiver tubing that incorporates a cast or forged entry collar into the design, is not only rated for the weight that a receiver built with that tubing would normally be rated for, it is also more durable at the point where loaded the highest, as it is reinforced.

Moreover, it can be purchased in a variety of lengths, and thus can be made into ANY length, to take advantage of the full depth of the 2.5" receiver into which the "reducer" is inserted, all the way to the forward end, and through the forward end if the receiver is of an an open pass through design.










In reply to: