Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
| [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #76959] |
Wed, 17 March 2010 15:10  |
Mark Torgerson
Messages: 19
Registered: March 2010
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "leighharrisongmc@aol.com" <leighharrisongmc@aol.com>
To: a1nss@yahoo.com
Sent: Wed, March 17, 2010 11:49:47 AM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] 2/4 bagger
Gary The center hinged support "Dual bag" is an unsafe design. If one bag goes down that side will drop so that you cannot drive Whoever wrote that the "4 bag" (Harrison system) bracket will not support that side with one bag is not telling the truth. About 10 years ago when our 4 bag system first came out one of the members of the Sunshine Statesman in FL took the two center wheels off and drove into the convention just to see the members jaws drop. Five members have called me back to say they had a flat tire or a wheel bearing went out. They put the opposite bag in the full raised position and drove some 20 miles and one 200 home. When our bags are at the proper ride height you can run a straight edge right thru the center of the bags to the center of the bolt holes in the swing arms. It is laser straight.
-Sent: Wed, Mar 17, 2010 2:31 am
Subject: Fw: [GMCnet] 2/4 bagger
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 10:29:45 PM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] 2/4 bagger
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Gary Casey <casey.gary@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I've been reading all the posts on the rear spring options and here is what I've concluded with some remaining questions:
>
> 1. Dual bag - functionally replaces the OEM by using a hinged center support. With this design you are not able to take the load off any one tire if the need arises, but the design looks simple and light-weight. About $800
> 2."4-bag" system - Center support is rigid so that each wheel is supported by its own spring. But I read that the center support is not strong enough to hold the total load of one side of the coach with a single wheel (one bag pressurized, the other not). Except for that problem it apparently works fine and is relatively light-weight. Price?
> 3. "Quad-bag" - functionally the same as the 4-bag, but with the center support beefed up so that it can reliably support the total weight with only one bag pressurized. About $1600 and substantially heavier than either the dual bag or 4-bag.
> 4. OEM bags - still available new for about $350-$400.
>
> Questions: I read various opinions about the relative handling benefits of each design. But...they all appear to have the bags attached at about the same radius - they are all spaced up a little from the standard location. And I read that they all use the same Firestone bag part number. True? Therefore, they should all have the same spring rate, unless some are compressed more (to a different length) than others at the nominal ride height. Are they? The nominal compressed length will be the only control over spring rate since the radius of action is about the same for all. Apparently all the aftermarket designs have a higher spring rate than the OEM bag. True?
>
> Conclusions: I read in some of the ads that one design eliminates "80%" of the braking imbalance. I think that's impossible, since the geometry hasn't changed. One says that it eliminates the "buffeting from passing truck." Oh, yeah? It is only a spring and maybe the new designs have a higher spring rate that the original, but that is the only difference that can effect handling. One says it will "track better." Same comment as above. And I don't think having the bags "independent" makes any difference for 99% of driving. The common bag approach (OEM, dual bag) might have a slight advantage climbing over a curb, but on the road there should be no measurable difference.
>
> So, my conclusion is that it mostly depends on whether one wants to be able to drive with one tire flat (and is willing to plumb the bags so one can be inflated without the other). The dual bag, of course, can't be used that way and the 4-bag is reportedly not structurally able. . Is my conclusion ill-founded? Disclaimer: I have no personal knowledge of any of the protagonists and don't have a dog in the fight.
>
> Gary Casey
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com/
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #76964 is a reply to message #76959] |
Wed, 17 March 2010 15:49  |
Nelson Wright
Messages: 147
Registered: May 2004
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mark,
I think that your statement that the "Dual Bag" is unsafe is
unfounded. If one bag fails you still have over 50% with the
remaining bag that can be overinflated and possibly will enable you to
continue causally. As for the Harrison system being able to support
the coach with one bag I can attest that there have been failures due
to the under designed support structure. If you have a Harrison system
and you experience a failure and try to go on one bag be very careful
as the slightest bump or overload and that support structure WILL
bend. If you have a 23' coach and keep things light you may be OK, but
others should give serious consideration to the "Quad Bag". The extra
cost will be money saved in the long run.
BTW. There is a crutch being developed to enable those that already
have the old "Harrison" system to strengthen the support .
Also, your last statement that you can run a straight edge through the
center of the bags and the holes in the bogeys is false as the
Harrison bags are offset to allow the mounting hardware to miss the
bogey. The modification will also address this issue.
Nelson Wright
Orlando, Fl.
78 Royale rear bath
On Mar 17, 2010, at 4:10 PM, Mark Torgerson wrote:
>
>
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
> From: "leighharrisongmc@aol.com" <leighharrisongmc@aol.com>
> To: a1nss@yahoo.com
> Sent: Wed, March 17, 2010 11:49:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] 2/4 bagger
>
> Gary The center hinged support "Dual bag" is an unsafe design. If
> one bag goes down that side will drop so that you cannot
> drive Whoever wrote that the "4 bag" (Harrison system)
> bracket will not support that side with one bag is not telling the
> truth. About 10 years ago when our 4 bag system first came out one
> of the members of the Sunshine Statesman in FL took the two center
> wheels off and drove into the convention just to see the members
> jaws drop. Five members have called me back to say they had a
> flat tire or a wheel bearing went out. They put the opposite bag
> in the full raised position and drove some 20 miles and one 200
> home. When our bags are at the proper ride height you can
> run a straight edge right thru the center of the bags to the center
> of the bolt holes in the swing arms. It is laser straight.
>
>
> -Sent: Wed, Mar 17, 2010 2:31 am
> Subject: Fw: [GMCnet] 2/4 bagger
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
> From: Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com>
> To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> Sent: Tue, March 16, 2010 10:29:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] 2/4 bagger
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:08 AM, Gary Casey <casey.gary@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> I've been reading all the posts on the rear spring options and here
>> is what I've concluded with some remaining questions:
>>
>> 1. Dual bag - functionally replaces the OEM by using a hinged
>> center support. With this design you are not able to take the load
>> off any one tire if the need arises, but the design looks simple
>> and light-weight. About $800
>> 2."4-bag" system - Center support is rigid so that each wheel is
>> supported by its own spring. But I read that the center support is
>> not strong enough to hold the total load of one side of the coach
>> with a single wheel (one bag pressurized, the other not). Except
>> for that problem it apparently works fine and is relatively light-
>> weight. Price?
>> 3. "Quad-bag" - functionally the same as the 4-bag, but with the
>> center support beefed up so that it can reliably support the total
>> weight with only one bag pressurized. About $1600 and
>> substantially heavier than either the dual bag or 4-bag.
>> 4. OEM bags - still available new for about $350-$400.
>>
>> Questions: I read various opinions about the relative handling
>> benefits of each design. But...they all appear to have the bags
>> attached at about the same radius - they are all spaced up a little
>> from the standard location. And I read that they all use the same
>> Firestone bag part number. True? Therefore, they should all have
>> the same spring rate, unless some are compressed more (to a
>> different length) than others at the nominal ride height. Are
>> they? The nominal compressed length will be the only control over
>> spring rate since the radius of action is about the same for all.
>> Apparently all the aftermarket designs have a higher spring rate
>> than the OEM bag. True?
>>
>> Conclusions: I read in some of the ads that one design eliminates
>> "80%" of the braking imbalance. I think that's impossible, since
>> the geometry hasn't changed. One says that it eliminates the
>> "buffeting from passing truck." Oh, yeah? It is only a spring and
>> maybe the new designs have a higher spring rate that the original,
>> but that is the only difference that can effect handling. One says
>> it will "track better." Same comment as above. And I don't think
>> having the bags "independent" makes any difference for 99% of
>> driving. The common bag approach (OEM, dual bag) might have a
>> slight advantage climbing over a curb, but on the road there should
>> be no measurable difference.
>>
>> So, my conclusion is that it mostly depends on whether one wants to
>> be able to drive with one tire flat (and is willing to plumb the
>> bags so one can be inflated without the other). The dual bag, of
>> course, can't be used that way and the 4-bag is reportedly not
>> structurally able. . Is my conclusion ill-founded? Disclaimer:
>> I have no personal knowledge of any of the protagonists and don't
>> have a dog in the fight.
>>
>> Gary Casey
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> List Information and Subscription Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Kanomata
> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> http://www.appliedgmc.com/
> 1-800-752-7502
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77020 is a reply to message #76978] |
Wed, 17 March 2010 23:25 |
|
|
All,
At the Eastern States rally this April in Calhoun, GA we'll learn more about
the bag wars. It looks like there will be a new kid in town and the old bags
will have competition.
The competition may anger some and please others. It will offer an option
for keeping our coaches rolling.
In early May I'll post the information in better detail after the rally.
Look on www.gmceast.com about then.
Personally, I like the original design. It was one of the things that drew
me to the GMC.
Byron Songer
1978 Royale by Coachmen
Louisville, KY
Personal - http://web.me.com/bnsonger
Eastern States - http://www.gmceast.com
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
--
Byron Songer
Full-timing to enjoy the USA
Former owner but still an admirer
GMC paint schemes at -
http://www.songerconsulting.net
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77021 is a reply to message #77020] |
Wed, 17 March 2010 23:33 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ask Dave Lindzi, Steve Ferguson and others who have bent the Harrison unit.
Steve now rides on our Q Bag unit.
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Byron Songer
<bsonger@songerconsulting.net> wrote:
> All,
>
> At the Eastern States rally this April in Calhoun, GA we'll learn more about
> the bag wars. It looks like there will be a new kid in town and the old bags
> will have competition.
>
> The competition may anger some and please others. It will offer an option
> for keeping our coaches rolling.
>
> In early May I'll post the information in better detail after the rally.
> Look on www.gmceast.com about then.
>
> Personally, I like the original design. It was one of the things that drew
> me to the GMC.
>
> Byron Songer
> 1978 Royale by Coachmen
> Louisville, KY
> Personal - http://web.me.com/bnsonger
> Eastern States - http://www.gmceast.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77027 is a reply to message #77021] |
Thu, 18 March 2010 05:30 |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Absolutely true. When I had the flat, I drove about two blocks and
that was all it took to bend the heck out of the center support
bracket. I can speak from experience as to the effectiveness of all
but the dual bag systems since I've owned them all. OEM, Harrison,
and Quadrabag.
Bag wars? I don't think so.
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ask Dave Lindzi, Steve Ferguson and others who have bent the Harrison unit.
> Steve now rides on our Q Bag unit.
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Byron Songer
> <bsonger@songerconsulting.net> wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> At the Eastern States rally this April in Calhoun, GA we'll learn more about
>> the bag wars. It looks like there will be a new kid in town and the old bags
>> will have competition.
>>
>> The competition may anger some and please others. It will offer an option
>> for keeping our coaches rolling.
>>
>> In early May I'll post the information in better detail after the rally.
>> Look on www.gmceast.com about then.
>>
>> Personally, I like the original design. It was one of the things that drew
>> me to the GMC.
>>
>> Byron Songer
>> 1978 Royale by Coachmen
>> Louisville, KY
>> Personal - http://web.me.com/bnsonger
>> Eastern States - http://www.gmceast.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> List Information and Subscription Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Kanomata
> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> http://www.appliedgmc.com
> 1-800-752-7502
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Steve Ferguson
'76 EII
Sierra Vista, AZ
Urethane bushing source
www.bdub.net/ferguson/
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77171 is a reply to message #77027] |
Thu, 18 March 2010 22:27 |
Jim Bounds
Messages: 842
Registered: January 2004
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
A friend called me today telling me about this thread, I have been very busy and have not had time to get up on the net. I would have commented earlier so here goes--------
There is no bag war--- there is no comparison-- it is totally documented that the Harrison 4 bag system is not strong enough-- but even before that I can tell you not only first person but from customers of mine who were left out to dry when they complained about issues with the system. You want to talk about this--- you got it buddy! I have left this along for some time but there must be the truth plainly told here!
Yes, a person went to a Sunshine Statesmen rally and drove around the park on 4 wheels-- I not only was there but was the dealer who installed a blue million of the systems and was installing them when that was done-- looked very convincing too. I sold even more. I will tell you I have installed more of the Harrison 4 bag systems than I bet any single person including Mr. Harrison and everything was going fine until I drove a coach from Orlando to Jacksonville to get on a ship bound for Europe. I had a tire blow out which damaged the air line on the bag with the blown tire. I pulled into the rest area just south of Jacksonville-- shut off the valve to that bag and drove the coach on in to a buddy of mine who had a mechanical shop in Jacksonville some 25 miles. I did not hit any bumps, drove under 50 MPH and parked the coach on a paved flat surface. I then drove on home and the next day my friend installed a new bag, the spare tire and
fixed the air line that was damaged, he then drove the coach to the port and put the coach on the ship for transport. 6 weeks later I got a call from the new owner in England who said the vertical member was bent 10 mm. The bag was rubbing on the structure and he was afraid to move the coach. I immediatly called Leigh Harrison and told him about the pro blem, he told me there was no warranty in that the coach had been sold. I told him hang the warranty, the system had failed! Something had to be done. He said there was no problem and there was nothing wrong with the system, something must have caused the failure. I DROVE THE THING, THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO THE SYSTEM!
Then another system was sent to me to install on Nelson's coach. Leigh said he had started powder coating the metal rather than the gold zinc. I really liked the gold zinc but he said that costed too much. Before we even got Nelson's system on the "power coating" was coming off and the metal was rusting. That system is on his coach right now! If that is powder coating I'll eat my hat! I complained but he would not validate my complaint saying we must have damaged it. NO, I DID NOT DAMAGE IT, THE THING RUSTED ON IT'S OWN!
I have a Harrison 4 bag on my coach "Larry" right now. The plates on the vertical member that the air bags are mounted to are bent, they are NOT perpandicular to eachother! I told Leigh about it and he had no responcse. This is my coach, I look at it every day! DO NOT TELL ME THAT SYSTEM IS STRONG ENOUGH-- IT IS NOT!
I implored him to investigate the problem with the system. I told him these were not isolated issues, there are many-- he said I was nuts, that there was no problem. He was wrong! Since I had installed so many of the systems and still do feel having a seperate air bag for each wheel is a good idea, I sat down and listed all of the things I would change if I could build my own 4 bag system, at the end of each issue I will tell you how the Quad bag fixed the problem Oh, and if you say I'm just saying this because I make the new Quad bag-- you are wrong, I helped Jim K. design the system, I got nothing from him to do it, get no override, commissions or have any partnership with him on the system. I do have the pride that goes along with helping design it but thats it-- I do not own or get anything from the sale of them to others so stick that in your pipe!-- here is my list:
1. prime problem is the structure is designed wrong and is made of too light a material. You actually bend the single structure over the bogy pins to install the system, you have to to get it over the protruding pins! With a single rod holding the 2 plates holding the bags apart, there is not enough support to keep the mounting plates parallel to each other. The Quad bag is made of 3/8" steel not 1/4". Both sides of the Harrison system weight 56 pounds in the single box, I know because I shipped them. The Quad bag system comes in 2 boxes, each box has a weight of 54 pounds each! By the pound it is a better deal! The mounting plates for the bags are 3/8" steel, double thick back to back bolted together-- ask any engineer and he will tell you this is a much more robust structure.
2. The air lines to the bags are in the 1 inch gap between the bags, they have a 90 deg. press lock fitting. Having the gap between the bags will not allow the coach to drop as much as if the bags were together and God help you when those press lock fittings leak-- and they usually did! The Quad bag, having the mounting plates back to back not only allows the bags to drop the coach farther, because the air lines are on the outside, you can forget those press lock fittings, you can easily get to the fitting and wrench it down really well. The number 1 place the Harrison system leaked were on those 2 fittings between the bags-- I know, I had to replace them over and over. The leaking had nothing to do with the installation, all you did was cut the air line at a 90 degree and push them into the fitting, even I could do that!
3. The bags were too small and their rating was too low. Checking the gauge on the manifold, it was not uncommon to see 135 PSI to get the coach to ride height--- we even started putting in new regulators to pump the available pressure to the system from the origional 120 PSI max to 145 to get the coach above ride height. The bags are rated at 100 PSI max by Firestone! YOU DO NOT DESIGN A DEVICE TO RUN ABOVE THE RATED VALUE OF THE COMPONENTS! The Quad bag in the upper holes will bring a 26' coach to ride height at 70 PSI! This is an absolute fact that if you want to pay for the lab this spec can be documented. Ah, but even at that the bags in the Quad bag are larger diameter and will hold more PSI-- this is a fact!
4. You had to pry the Harrison vertical member over the 2 bogy pins sticking out. You had to because the member was a 1 piece construction and had to be stressed to fit into place. The Quad bag is a 2 piece construction, fits over the pin easily then bolts together. To remove a bag the 2 sections easily unbolt for access. Being made of 3/8" steel, you could never pry apart the structure if it were a 1 piece construction-- it is that strong!
5. I really liked the look of the 4 bagger in gold zinc. Not only did it look great, it did not rust. The Quad bag is gold zinc, thank you Jim K.
6. It was always said "the 4 bag system made for a stiffer ride". The reason for this was the higher bag pressure. The tighter bags transferred more road vibration but I thought you had to have that to have the more precise, performance ride. You had to put up with one to have the other. The Quad bag having a taller structure allows for lower bag pressure so the ride is not "stiff". You still get the control and performance the 4 seperate bags give you without the harsh, stiff ride and this is a fact!
7. The Harrison 4 bag system puts a twist in the air bag. Hold a straight edge from center to center of the swing arms and you will find the upright is not centered. The Quad bags are centered on the vertical member. They push straight on the arms.
8. The Harrison system uses all push to lock fittings. The Quad bag has fitting you tighten with a wrench, give me a fitting I can wrench down tight every time!
There are more but this post is already way too long. I now install the Quad bag system, I have installed many-- did one this week, you can see it on my daily pose page. They fit perfect, go in without a hitch and the fittings do not leak! I know these work--- why--- because I install them all the time. I have a Harrison 4 bag system on my coach--- why--- so I can show anyone who asks why the Quad bag is better. Someday I will get rid of it but right now I feel it does the most good to show other people why they should not have the system on their coach. Come by the shop any time, I have too much money into it to throw it away so I figure I'll get my moneys worth this way! Do I feel bad talking this way about a product-- not in the least because I can prove it all. Yes, I am mad as ______ about how I and my customers were treated and don't even get me started about the Electromotive direct port fuel injection systems that were sold that
even Electromotive and the dealer that made the harness said should have never been installed into a motorhome application. The heat and water sensative CPU was placed inside of the engine compartment! I was told they were the "latest and greatest" then I found out they were not only discontinued by the manufacturer with no tech support but could not be run sequential and because of the non sealed connectors should never have ben used in this application but hey-- thats another kettle of fish!
Lets keep it on the 4 bag system, the system that failed on me, failed on other people and are still being sold with exactly the same desing flaws! Come by my shop any time, I will show you the problems--- and the solution. Am I passionate about this--- you betcha-- I was left out to dry! One of my customers has a comment on Mr. Harrisons site right now that was taken out of context, this person wrote to Mr. Harrison asking him to please take his name and the out of context comment off of his site-- to date it is still on the site. I talked directly to Firestone about the comment that the Harrison system was designed in consort with Firestone engineers. Firestone does not take any responsibility for the design, testing or comments about the system at all. This was told to me by my Firestone rep, see I am a Firestone dealer and have been for some time! It is said the Quad bag system is "overengineered"-- SO! I would much rather be on the
overengineered side than the underengineered side as it has been proven the other system is! All this I can prove so bring it on if you want to refute this! I have been in this business for 14 years, in my own business for 12. I have installed 4 air bag systems from the very beginning and I will tell you right here, right now-- the Quad bag system is the best I have seen, it answers all of my issues and now that there are no original air bags is the best suspension for your GMC and that is my personal opinion based on my personal experiences.
Sorry guys but I do not want ANYONE to misunderstand how I feel on this subject. Contrasting views are welcome but you had better be able to document what you say--- I can! So you lurkers take notice and you who may not like much the fact I speak my mind--- do not put your coach in harms way!
JIM BOUNDS!!!!!!!
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77175 is a reply to message #77171] |
Thu, 18 March 2010 23:10 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jim ,
thank you for clearing the air on the partial history of the 4 bag and
your use of them.
I remember about 5 years ago when I told Jim B to his face that he was
nuts promoting the 4 bag units as there was no way it could do
anything to improve the stability of the rear of the coach.
After 4 years producing the Q Bag units, I have seen our mechanics
fall in love with them and I am convinced it is a must to help gain
better control.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Jim Bounds <gmccoop@yahoo.com> wrote:
> A friend called me today telling me about this thread, I have been very busy and have not had time to get up on the net. I would have commented earlier so here goes--------
>
> There is no bag war--- there is no comparison-- it is totally documented that the Harrison 4 bag system is not strong enough-- but even before that I can tell you not only first person but from customers of mine who were left out to dry when they complained about issues with the system. You want to talk about this--- you got it buddy! I have left this along for some time but there must be the truth plainly told here!
>
> Yes, a person went to a Sunshine Statesmen rally and drove around the park on 4 wheels-- I not only was there but was the dealer who installed a blue million of the systems and was installing them when that was done-- looked very convincing too. I sold even more. I will tell you I have installed more of the Harrison 4 bag systems than I bet any single person including Mr. Harrison and everything was going fine until I drove a coach from Orlando to Jacksonville to get on a ship bound for Europe. I had a tire blow out which damaged the air line on the bag with the blown tire. I pulled into the rest area just south of Jacksonville-- shut off the valve to that bag and drove the coach on in to a buddy of mine who had a mechanical shop in Jacksonville some 25 miles. I did not hit any bumps, drove under 50 MPH and parked the coach on a paved flat surface.  I then drove on home and the next day my friend installed a new bag, the spare tire and
>  fixed the air line that was damaged, he then drove the coach to the port and put the coach on the ship for transport. 6 weeks later I got a call from the new owner in England who said the vertical member was bent 10 mm. The bag was rubbing on the structure and he was afraid to move the coach. I immediatly called Leigh Harrison and told him about the pro blem, he told me there was no warranty in that the coach had been sold. I told him hang the warranty, the system had failed! Something had to be done. He said there was no problem and there was nothing wrong with the system, something must have caused the failure. I DROVE THE THING, THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO THE SYSTEM!
>
> Then another system was sent to me to install on Nelson's coach. Leigh said he had started powder coating the metal rather than the gold zinc. I really liked the gold zinc but he said that costed too much. Before we even got Nelson's system on the "power coating" was coming off and the metal was rusting. That system is on his coach right now! If that is powder coating I'll eat my hat! I complained but he would not validate my complaint saying we must have damaged it. NO, I DID NOT DAMAGE IT, THE THING RUSTED ON IT'S OWN!
>
> I have a Harrison 4 bag on my coach "Larry" right now. The plates on the vertical member that the air bags are mounted to are bent, they are NOT perpandicular to eachother! I told Leigh about it and he had no responcse. This is my coach, I look at it every day! DO NOT TELL ME THAT SYSTEM IS STRONG ENOUGH-- IT IS NOT!
>
> I implored him to investigate the problem with the system. I told him these were not isolated issues, there are many-- he said I was nuts, that there was no problem. He was wrong! Since I had installed so many of the systems and still do feel having a seperate air bag for each wheel is a good idea, I sat down and listed all of the things I would change if I could build my own 4 bag system, at the end of each issue I will tell you how the Quad bag fixed the problem Oh, and if you say I'm just saying this because I make the new Quad bag-- you are wrong, I helped Jim K. design the system, I got nothing from him to do it, get no override, commissions or have any partnership with him on the system. I do have the pride that goes along with helping design it but thats it-- I do not own or get anything from the sale of them to others so stick that in your pipe!-- here is my list:
>
> 1. prime problem is the structure is designed wrong and is made of too light a material. You actually bend the single structure over the bogy pins to install the system, you have to to get it over the protruding pins! With a single rod holding the 2 plates holding the bags apart, there is not enough support to keep the mounting plates parallel to each other. The Quad bag is made of 3/8" steel not 1/4". Both sides of the Harrison system weight 56 pounds in the single box, I know because I shipped them. The Quad bag system comes in 2 boxes, each box has a weight of 54 pounds each! By the pound it is a better deal! The mounting plates for the bags are 3/8" steel, double thick back to back bolted together-- ask any engineer and he will tell you this is a much more robust structure.
>
> 2.  The air lines to the bags are in the 1 inch gap between the bags, they have a 90 deg. press lock fitting. Having the gap between the bags will not allow the coach to drop as much as if the bags were together and God help you when those press lock fittings leak-- and they usually did! The Quad bag, having the mounting plates back to back not only allows the bags to drop the coach farther, because the air lines are on the outside, you can forget those press lock fittings, you can easily get to the fitting and wrench it down really well. The number 1 place the Harrison system leaked were on those 2 fittings between the bags-- I know, I had to replace them over and over. The leaking had nothing to do with the installation, all you did was cut the air line at a 90 degree and push them into the fitting, even I could do that!
>
> 3. The bags were too small and their rating was too low. Checking the gauge on the manifold, it was not uncommon to see 135 PSI to get the coach to ride height--- we even started putting in new regulators to pump the available pressure to the system from the origional 120 PSI max to 145 to get the coach above ride height.  The bags are rated at 100 PSI max by Firestone! YOU DO NOT DESIGN A DEVICE TO RUN ABOVE THE RATED VALUE OF THE COMPONENTS!  The Quad bag in the upper holes will bring a 26' coach to ride height at 70 PSI! This is an absolute fact that if you want to pay for the lab this spec can be documented. Ah, but even at that the bags in the Quad bag are larger diameter and will hold more PSI-- this is a fact!
>
> 4. You had to pry the Harrison vertical member over the 2 bogy pins sticking out. You had to because the member was a 1 piece construction and had to be stressed to fit into place. The Quad bag is a 2 piece construction, fits over the pin easily then bolts together. To remove a bag the 2 sections easily unbolt for access.  Being made of 3/8" steel, you could never pry apart the structure if it were a 1 piece construction-- it is that strong!
>
> 5. I really liked the look of the 4 bagger in gold zinc. Not only did it look great, it did not rust. The Quad bag is gold zinc, thank you Jim K.
>
> 6. It was always said "the 4 bag system made for a stiffer ride". The reason for this was the higher bag pressure. The tighter bags transferred more road vibration but I thought you had to have that to have the more precise, performance ride. You had to put up with one to have the other.   The Quad bag having a taller structure allows for lower bag pressure so the ride is not "stiff". You still get the control and performance the 4 seperate bags give you without the harsh, stiff ride and this is a fact!
>
> 7. The Harrison 4 bag system puts a twist in the air bag. Hold a straight edge from center to center of the swing arms and you will find the upright is not centered.   The Quad bags are centered on the vertical member. They push straight on the arms.
>
> 8. The Harrison system uses all push to lock fittings. The Quad bag has fitting you tighten with a wrench, give me a fitting I can wrench down tight every time!
>
> There are more but this post is already way too long. I now install the Quad bag system, I have installed many-- did one this week, you can see it on my daily pose page. They fit perfect, go in without a hitch and the fittings do not leak! I know these work--- why--- because I install them all the time. I have a Harrison 4 bag system on my coach--- why--- so I can show anyone who asks why the Quad bag is better. Someday I will get rid of it but right now I feel it does the most good to show other people why they should not have the system on their coach. Come by the shop any time, I have too much money into it to throw it away so I figure I'll get my moneys worth this way! Do I feel bad talking this way about a product-- not in the least because I can prove it all. Yes, I am mad as ______ about how I and my customers were treated and don't even get me started about the Electromotive direct port fuel injection systems that were sold that
>  even Electromotive and the dealer that made the harness said should have never been installed into a motorhome application. The heat and water sensative CPU was placed inside of the engine compartment! I was told they were the "latest and greatest" then I found out they were not only discontinued by the manufacturer with no tech support but could not be run sequential and because of the non sealed connectors should never have ben used in this application but hey-- thats another kettle of fish!
>
> Lets keep it on the 4 bag system, the system that failed on me, failed on other people and are still being sold with exactly the same desing flaws! Come by my shop any time, I will show you the problems--- and the solution. Am I passionate about this--- you betcha-- I was left out to dry! One of my customers has a comment on Mr. Harrisons site right now that was taken out of context, this person wrote to Mr. Harrison asking him to please take his name and the out of context comment off of his site-- to date it is still on the site. I talked directly to Firestone about the comment that the Harrison system was designed in consort with Firestone engineers. Firestone does not take any responsibility for the design, testing or comments about the system at all. This was told to me by my Firestone rep, see I am a Firestone dealer and have been for some time! It is said the Quad bag system is "overengineered"-- SO! I would much rather be on the
>  overengineered side than the underengineered side as it has been proven the other system is! All this I can prove so bring it on if you want to refute this! I have been in this business for 14 years, in my own business for 12. I have installed 4 air bag systems from the very beginning and I will tell you right here, right now-- the Quad bag system is the best I have seen, it answers all of my issues and now that there are no original air bags is the best suspension for your GMC and that is my personal opinion based on my personal experiences.
>
> Sorry guys but I do not want ANYONE to misunderstand how I feel on this subject. Contrasting views are welcome but you had better be able to document what you say--- I can! So you lurkers take notice and you who may not like much the fact I speak my mind--- do not put your coach in harms way!
>
> JIM BOUNDS!!!!!!!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77185 is a reply to message #77027] |
Fri, 19 March 2010 00:32 |
Mark Torgerson
Messages: 19
Registered: March 2010
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Steve - just a note: you were using an earlier version of Harrison's system on your coach.
According to Idencorp the center bracket has since been changed for added strength - (however, still it could/should be beefed up even more).
'73 Canyon Lands
Portland, Oregon
________________________________
From: Steven Ferguson <botiemad11@gmail.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 3:30:06 AM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
Absolutely true. When I had the flat, I drove about two blocks and
that was all it took to bend the heck out of the center support
bracket. I can speak from experience as to the effectiveness of all
but the dual bag systems since I've owned them all. OEM, Harrison,
and Quadrabag.
Bag wars? I don't think so.
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ask Dave Lindzi, Steve Ferguson and others who have bent the Harrison unit.
> Steve now rides on our Q Bag unit.
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Byron Songer
> <bsonger@songerconsulting.net> wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> At the Eastern States rally this April in Calhoun, GA we'll learn more about
>> the bag wars. It looks like there will be a new kid in town and the old bags
>> will have competition.
>>
>> The competition may anger some and please others. It will offer an option
>> for keeping our coaches rolling.
>>
>> In early May I'll post the information in better detail after the rally.
>> Look on www.gmceast.com about then.
>>
>> Personally, I like the original design. It was one of the things that drew
>> me to the GMC.
>>
>> Byron Songer
>> 1978 Royale by Coachmen
>> Louisville, KY
>> Personal - http://web.me.com/bnsonger
>> Eastern States - http://www.gmceast.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> List Information and Subscription Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Kanomata
> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
> http://www.appliedgmc.com
> 1-800-752-7502
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Steve Ferguson
'76 EII
Sierra Vista, AZ
Urethane bushing source
www.bdub.net/ferguson/
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77196 is a reply to message #77185] |
Fri, 19 March 2010 06:59 |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mark,
No rocket science is necessary to figure out how to prevent the
bending of the center plates. But the point is, in doing so, you ruin
the (in my case) the zinc or annodize finish, and you have to remove
the system in order to do so. The mfr was completely unresponsive to
feedback so what happened next has benefitted all of us. Someone
built a better, safer, stronger mousetrap.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Mark Torgerson <a1nss@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Steve - just a note: you were using an earlier version of Harrison's system on your coach.
> According to Idencorp the center bracket has since been changed for added strength - (however, still it could/should be beefed up even more).
>
>
> '73 Canyon Lands
> Portland, Oregon
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Steven Ferguson <botiemad11@gmail.com>
> To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 3:30:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
>
> Absolutely true. When I had the flat, I drove about two blocks and
> that was all it took to bend the heck out of the center support
> bracket. I can speak from experience as to the effectiveness of all
> but the dual bag systems since I've owned them all. OEM, Harrison,
> and Quadrabag.
> Bag wars? I don't think so.
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ask Dave Lindzi, Steve Ferguson and others who have bent the Harrison unit.
>> Steve now rides on our Q Bag unit.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Byron Songer
>> <bsonger@songerconsulting.net> wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> At the Eastern States rally this April in Calhoun, GA we'll learn more about
>>> the bag wars. It looks like there will be a new kid in town and the old bags
>>> will have competition.
>>>
>>> The competition may anger some and please others. It will offer an option
>>> for keeping our coaches rolling.
>>>
>>> In early May I'll post the information in better detail after the rally.
>>> Look on www.gmceast.com about then.
>>>
>>> Personally, I like the original design. It was one of the things that drew
>>> me to the GMC.
>>>
>>> Byron Songer
>>> 1978 Royale by Coachmen
>>> Louisville, KY
>>> Personal - http://web.me.com/bnsonger
>>> Eastern States - http://www.gmceast.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> List Information and Subscription Options:
>>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Kanomata
>> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
>> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
>> http://www.appliedgmc.com
>> 1-800-752-7502
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> List Information and Subscription Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Ferguson
> '76 EII
> Sierra Vista, AZ
> Urethane bushing source
> www.bdub.net/ferguson/
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Steve Ferguson
'76 EII
Sierra Vista, AZ
Urethane bushing source
www.bdub.net/ferguson/
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77198 is a reply to message #77187] |
Fri, 19 March 2010 07:11 |
Jim Bounds
Messages: 842
Registered: January 2004
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Aall good points & I will answer them one at a time. Sorry but I do have good reason to get upset-- when I install or suggest to someone to buy this or that, I put my name on that product-- I am in the loop and when I see and at a point know there is a problem I have a commitment to my customet but also to my company to stand up. I did that long ago and was squelched by Mr. Harrison. At that point I told him to not look to me for any solice on his products because of the way he treated me. I do not forget, I follow through with what I say I will do and I am doing this. So I will not take your questions one at a time not to rag on the old 4 bag system but to make everyone see how badly I was treated and how obvious deficiencies were overlooked. I do not play games with this, it cost me money and customers goodwill-- I do not take that lightly!
----- Original Message ----
From: Mark Torgerson <a1nss@yahoo.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 3:12:30 AM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
Thanks for the stories Jim.
No need to get angry - we are all just talking here.... understanding areas in need of improvement on a system is always a good thing - now it just needs to be put all into one package.
Bull crap, this is America and I can tell it like it is!
There were a few questions I had: If you personally have had blown tires take out the air lines on several occasions why not design the Q bag system to help prevent this from happening to others? The air lines in the Q bag appear in photos to be routed just as close - if not closer - than the stock single bag set up. And there are more of them!
The lines that were damaged were on Harrisons system with the fittings in the middle of the bags-- still were damaged. The original single bag system has the air line coming in on the outside of the bag, the Quad bag does the same thing-- are you saying the entire original system was a design flaw--- I think not. In a catestrophic event in that wheel well, steel cords on the tire will screw up everything, no matter where they are. I think ease of maintenance is a key, if you do nothing more than carry a 1/4" pipe thread schreder valve, maybe 2 you can make an undamaged bag go up very easily-- try that in that 1" gap between the Harrison system!
Safety on a "12,000 lb hot rod" is very important to me and I have to tell you - I am not comfortable hearing you say a blown tire can take out the systems' air lines.
As I said before, there is nothing safe when you blow a tire, this is why you DO NOT run tires over 5 years old. The coach I was driving had just been sold, no doubt the new owner put new tires on the coach, do folks selling coaches change the tires just before they sell? Reality is no.
An owner says he looked up the specs on the air bags of his Harrison equipped coach and they are rated for "a max of 150 PSI". But if the bags were rated at 100 psi - why would air pressures up to "145" psi be a problem on the Harrison system which distributes that pressure to 8 (4 on one side and 4 on the other) different air bags at the same time? Is any one air bag ever getting the total pressure required to raise the coach?
As few travel with the air bags fully aired up I imagine the pressure at travel height would be less than that of a fully inflated system - staying within the pressure limits of the air bags.
Do not know where you read but when I was installing the Harrison system, I questioned Leigh Harrison direct on this issue, his answer to me was the bags have a triple redundant spec and he cleared that through Firestone, he had never had a problem and that was good enough for him. I listened and for a long time I went with that. But really, Firestone would never give a legal opinion on a product they had no dealing with designing and they would never design such a product as this and put themselves in the liability loop. When I started opening my eyes, I asked Firestone the exact same question, their answer to me was they did not want to see more than 100 PSI in those bags-- unless leight has changed the bags he was using, the spec was 100PSI, I told you to be sure you personally document something you say-- do not quote others on such an important point. If he changed his bags, why didn;t he do it when he knew they were not rated properly for
the application. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!
Also - how come after installing the Q bag system one can no longer mount their side skirt back onto their coach?
Exactly like Harrisons system, all you do is take out some of the meat of the lower bracket and the T skirt fits right back on. IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME ON EITHER SYSTEM-- THAT COMMENT HAS ABSOLUTLY NO AIT AT ALL!
Why is further modification or an after market bracket needed? Couldn't this all be built into the system?
I am talking about trying to find a way to make Harrisons system stronger-- why indeed is there modifications needed-- because the thing is too weak to do it's job-- I have personal friends out there who bought the Harrison pile on my personal recommendation and I want to help them. Nelson, retired engineer, is helping me do this-- why, hey, he got one and hated it from the day he got it, I fell bad, I feel I have a commitment to him to do something even though Leight does not! Wish I could do something about the huge surface rust on Nelsons system but that will have to just stay there and be a testiment to the bad finish he put on it.
Jim - I am only asking because as a "newbie" these were some of the questions that came up as I reviewed and compared the different systems on-line.
I am only telling you this because being a "newbee" you need to know, the lurkers out there who hang on every thread put out here need to know, everyone needs to know that there were problems, they were addressed and a better mouse trap was made, it is not only better but stronger, better designed actually on a computer and a stress analysis was done proving it is better. Not only is it better in those ways but the manufacture and finish is better. The Quad bag is batter all the way around. To the statement the Quad bag is "overengineered" I am proud that someone says that-- heck isn;t that a good thing? As far as the statement that "because of a high volume in sales, the price of the Harrison system price was dropped"-- hey, I have beem a player in this niche market for over a decade, in being involved as a livlyhood in something for that long, you get a feel of how things sell and the volume of sales of an item. The sales of the Quad bag I am
now involved with has ramped up, especially since tyhe demise of the original Fir3estone system. Before that though, the sales of the Quad bag was ever increasing, those sales had to impact the sales of the Harrison system-- it is just logical that the sales of the Quad bag ate into the sales of the Harrison system. Leigh was raising the cost constantly on the system and lowering the quality (going from a zinc plate to the lousey "powder coating" when I was selling them. I am not bragging put I suggested to many to buy, told folks to call leigh direct since he didn;t give me squat to handle the transaction and rarely saw any "thank you" for doing that and I personally installed a pile of them. Me stopping dealing with them at thaty point had to impact the sales as well so I reject the excuse for him lowering the cost because of increased sales-- he lowered the cost because his sales had to be dropping. Now this statement I do not have
documented data but "red flowers are red"! Yes, the Quad bag system costs more-- I would not buy something as important as a suspension system based on the "lowest bid". If that was the best way to buy something maybe other catestrophic mistakes in NASA maybe would not have happened! There are many "maybes" in this last statememtn but because of being in this first person I do feel I can make them.
So ending this chapter 2 of the "great Americal Novel" let me say, you need to know these thing. If you do not and are simply repeating what you have been told by others, you need to question the statements more. I DO know mainly becaise I WAS THERE!!! My company was involved, I lost a pile of $ trying to support my customers and I owe them to press this to the mat. If Leight wants to do the right thing by them, I will entertain helping him-- short of that, stay out of my way, I am carrying the flag! Old timers here on this net know I will not give up if I am right. Try and push me below the noise floow with your thumb and I will rip it off and feed it to you!
There is no easing this or trying to get everyone to hold hands and sing "Cumeby ya", there is a rat in the hen house and if you want to push it -- I'm your Huckleberry!
Jim-- the red neck from Florida--- Bounds
I think I am called "Bubba" by someone on their web site-- heck I'm damn proud of that!
'73 Canyon Lands
Portland, Oregon
________________________________
From: Jim Bounds <gmccoop@yahoo.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 8:27:08 PM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
A friend called me today telling me about this thread, I have been very busy and have not had time to get up on the net. I would have commented earlier so here goes--------
There is no bag war--- there is no comparison-- it is totally documented that the Harrison 4 bag system is not strong enough-- but even before that I can tell you not only first person but from customers of mine who were left out to dry when they complained about issues with the system.
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77209 is a reply to message #77187] |
Fri, 19 March 2010 09:12 |
Mr ERFisher
Messages: 7117
Registered: August 2005
Karma: 2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Mark
Looks like you are taking a little heat, just let it slide by.
when you get close to someone's pocket book or what someone owns, they tend
to get over protective. This list is not like that for most of the
members.
There are about 800 folks that read this list and a lot of them are put off
by the over enthusiastic responses caused by " I own it , it must be good".
You are asking good questions, keep up the good work, and make your own
decisions depending upon what you want to do.
There are lots of folks here that are afraid to post for fear of getting a
harsh response (they write to me "off net") but the discussions here are
good for all of us, just consider them JWID (Just What I Did) messages, and
do your own thing, and don't take the input personally ;>)
JWID--Orgn guy
gene
>
> No need to get angry - we are all just talking here....
>
--
Gene Fisher -- 74-23,77PB/ore/ca
“Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today --- give him a URL and
-------
http://gmcmotorhome.info/
Alternator Protection Cable
http://gmcmotorhome.info/APC.html
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77217 is a reply to message #77209] |
Fri, 19 March 2010 09:58 |
Jim Bounds
Messages: 842
Registered: January 2004
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gene,
While I recognize & appreciate the "olive branch" to Mark which actually is a really good thing, I do not apologize for my enthusiasm in supporting people and products as I do. My comments are not directed at Mark, sorry brother, rather they are directed at the product many here and many more folks you guys would never know have purchased and have failed. I did, as a concerned associate, investigate the issue carefully and the end result was finding the product deficient and claims being made to be not as represented. New GMC owners have questions, they are excited to have such a machine. I want to be sure they get good information.Â
A larger part of my customer base are the new, young, excited GMC owner. In fact today the Sunshine Statesmen are having their 4th annual Drag Race Rally here in Orlando this weekend. A dry camp rally such as this is targeted directly at the young GMC owner. An exciting "extreme" venue. These are the things this person is looking for in a club. We as the GMC community have an obligation to these new people. They are looking for interesting things, if we do not show that to them we will not benefit from their interest.Â
I do not say this about the Quad bag system other than I know it is a better product. I installed all of the air suspension systems and a bunch of them and the Quad bagger is the one. So Mark, I hope you don;t hate me, just please really investigate things before you recommend them-- there are a pile of people listening!
Besides, people have thought of me as a hot head for a long time, I wouldn't want to disappoint them! The title is OK with me, be careful if you ask me a question, I just may answer you,
Jim Bounds
--------------------------
----- Original Message ----
From: Mr.erf ERFisher <mr.erfisher@gmail.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 10:12:46 AM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
Hey Mark
Looks like you are taking a little heat, just let it slide by.
when you get close to someone's pocket book or what someone owns, they tend
to get over protective. This list is not like that for most of the
members.
There are about 800 folks that read this list and a lot of them are put off
by the over enthusiastic responses caused by " I own it , it must be good".
You are asking good questions, keep up the good work, and make your own
decisions depending upon what you want to do.
There are lots of folks here that are afraid to post for fear of getting a
harsh response (they write to me "off net")Â but the discussions here are
good for all of us, just consider them JWID (Just What I Did) messages, and
do your own thing, and don't take the input personally ;>)
JWID--Orgn guy
gene
>
> No need to get angry - we are all just talking here....
>
--
Gene Fisher -- 74-23,77PB/ore/ca
“Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today --- give him a URL and
-------
http://gmcmotorhome.info/
Alternator Protection Cable
http://gmcmotorhome.info/APC.html
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77305 is a reply to message #77185] |
Fri, 19 March 2010 22:36 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mark,
both systems allows for the fender T skirt to be installed.
Who could not install the T skirt ?
Keep in mind that the Q Bag System have been in production for over 4 years.
Your making it sound like our system is really sub standard and Jim B
is little ignorant when it comes to knowing product that are better
engineered.
I suggest you take time to look at both and get your hands on them.
Reading and listening to comments is not sufficient for anyone to make
comment o a product.
Come to Western States and see coaches there with different systems.I
will even feed you some rice.
Words are words, I have a grin on my flat face as I get ready to press
the send button.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Mark Torgerson <a1nss@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Steve - just a note:  you were using an earlier version of Harrison's system on your coach.
> According to Idencorp the center bracket has since been changed for added strength - (however, still it could/should be beefed up even more).
>
>
> '73 Canyon Lands
> Portland, Oregon
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Steven Ferguson <botiemad11@gmail.com>
> To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 3:30:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
>
> Absolutely true. When I had the flat, I drove about two blocks and
> that was all it took to bend the heck out of the center support
> bracket. I can speak from experience as to the effectiveness of all
> but the dual bag systems since I've owned them all. OEM, Harrison,
> and Quadrabag.
> Bag wars? I don't think so.
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ask Dave Lindzi, Steve Ferguson and others who have bent the Harrison unit.
>> Steve now rides on our Q Bag unit.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Byron Songer
>> <bsonger@songerconsulting.net> wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> At the Eastern States rally this April in Calhoun, GA we'll learn more about
>>> the bag wars. It looks like there will be a new kid in town and the old bags
>>> will have competition.
>>>
>>> The competition may anger some and please others. It will offer an option
>>> for keeping our coaches rolling.
>>>
>>> In early May I'll post the information in better detail after the rally.
>>> Look on www.gmceast.com about then.
>>>
>>> Personally, I like the original design. It was one of the things that drew
>>> me to the GMC.
>>>
>>> Byron Songer
>>> 1978 Royale by Coachmen
>>> Louisville, KY
>>> Personal - http://web.me.com/bnsonger
>>> Eastern States - http://www.gmceast.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GMCnet mailing list
>>> List Information and Subscription Options:
>>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jim Kanomata
>> Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
>> jimk@appliedairfilters.com
>> http://www.appliedgmc.com
>> 1-800-752-7502
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> List Information and Subscription Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Steve Ferguson
> '76 EII
> Sierra Vista, AZ
> Urethane bushing source
> www.bdub.net/ferguson/
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> List Information and Subscription Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #77417 is a reply to message #77305] |
Sun, 21 March 2010 00:33 |
Mark Torgerson
Messages: 19
Registered: March 2010
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
"Who could not install the T skirt?"
Jim - it was posted on the GMC COOP site that the Qbag system requires modification and/or an aftermarket mounting bracket to re-attach the T shirt. Looks like Jim B has since gone in and changed his wording about it.
"Your making it sound like our system is really sub standard"
Really? Because I asked questions about the design of the Qbag system?
It doesn't matter anymore.
After asking questions of both companies concerning their product and careful review I have ordered the Harrison system for my coach. The Harrison design incorporates protection for both the air bags and the air lines should a tire fail.
This is an important feature to me.
73' Canyon Lands
________________________________
From: Jim Kanomata <jimkanomata@gmail.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 8:36:26 PM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
Mark,
both systems allows for the fender T skirt to be installed.
Who could not install the T skirt ?
Keep in mind that the Q Bag System have been in production for over 4 years.
Your making it sound like our system is really sub standard and Jim B
is little ignorant when it comes to knowing product that are better
engineered.
I suggest you take time to look at both and get your hands on them.
Reading and listening to comments is not sufficient for anyone to make
comment o a product.
Come to Western States and see coaches there with different systems.I
will even feed you some rice.
Words are words, I have a grin on my flat face as I get ready to press
the send button.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Mark Torgerson <a1nss@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Steve - just a note: you were using an earlier version of Harrison's system on your coach.
> According to Idencorp the center bracket has since been changed for added strength - (however, still it could/should be beefed up even more).
>
>
> '73 Canyon Lands
> Portland, Oregon
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
List Information and Subscription Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 04 16:28:53 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04578 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
