GMCforum
For enthusiast of the Classic GMC Motorhome built from 1973 to 1978. A web-based mirror of the GMCnet mailing list.
Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger
[GMCnet] Fw: 2/4 bagger [message #76959] Wed, 17 March 2010 15:10 Go to previous message
Mark Torgerson is currently offline  Mark Torgerson   United States
Messages: 19
Registered: March 2010
Karma:
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

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: GMC MH Belt Buckle
Next Topic: Re: [GMCnet] GMC MH Belt Buckle
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat May 18 04:37:16 CDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07202 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.1.1.
Copyright ©2001-2021 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software