Andersen Vs Goosebox

[Cumminsfan]

Originally Posted by dayle1

I agree you will probably never get stopped. But the law is unclear on this issue, could refer to type of trailer or type of hitch. I doubt the Texas legislature knows about the Andersen or will ever take the time to clarify the law. However from a pure technical perspective, if one ball hitch needs chains then all should need chains to be legal. Happy travels.

100% agree. Thats why I use the chains. 20 secs to hookup. Big deal. I see no difference between the ball on top of the Andersen to the ball that a GN uses in the truck bed or the ball on the end of your WDH. It's ball, not a set of jaws.
20 secs to be a lot safer is pretty cheap insurance.

[1960C182]

Originally Posted by Tdave

Pardon me jumping in here, but I'm trying to make sense of all the offerings when it comes to GN conversions.

From what I am reading in this thread, the Andersen unit requires modification to allow safety chains to be used. I have a hide-a-ball unit in my long bed crew cab DRW (forget the manufacturer) and the safety chain hooks are spring loaded and flush with the bed. I would absolutely prefer safety chains with a GN. How to tell if my set-up would require same modification?

Also, am I correct in assuming that the Andersen unit will not cause grief when it comes to any FW warranty? I'm not sure why their design would be acceptable vs any other GN conversions. Isn't the concern here about the articulation stresses that a GN puts on a FW design? Why would the Andersen be different in that regard?

I'm pretty tall, and can always nail ball to receiver alignment on my first try with my enclosed GN race trailer, I just skootch up against the back of my seat and crane my neck, no big deal, so the alignment advantage of the Andersen is no real concern for me.

Todd

One more time, the Andersen is not a gooseneck hitch. It just attaches to the floor ball then uses a ball at the kingpin at normal 5er hitch hight.
The chain problem is with those factory puck systems. I have a Curt turnover with the spring loaded chain attach point & no problem .

[dayle1]

Originally Posted by Tdave

Also, am I correct in assuming that the Andersen unit will not cause grief when it comes to any FW warranty? I'm not sure why their design would be acceptable vs any other GN conversions. Isn't the concern here about the articulation stresses that a GN puts on a FW design? Why would the Andersen be different in that regard?

I'm pretty tall, and can always nail ball to receiver alignment on my first try with my enclosed GN race trailer, I just skootch up against the back of my seat and crane my neck, no big deal, so the alignment advantage of the Andersen is no real concern for me.

Todd

All other GN adaptors for fifth wheel trailers are extensions, rigidly attached to the king pin, roughly 14+ inches in length in order to reach the floor mounted ball. Which is the pivot point and point where all forces are transmitted between truck and trailer. It adds up to increased leverage on the fifth wheel frame. The Andersen uses a small adapter block that depending on how it is mounted, shifts the pivot point just a few inches forward or rearward of the king pin. Much less impact on the frame.

Excellent that you are tall enough to see a floor mounted ball. Crew cab and /or short bed truck owners, shorter owners and older owners may not have the same ability so ease of alignment is a significant deal to many. Some owners even have tool boxes, fuel tanks or bed covers that make seeing a floor mount ball totally impossible.

So, it can be a no brainer to reduce risk of frame damage and improve hookup visibility at the same time.

[Tdave]

Originally Posted by dayle1

All other GN adaptors for fifth wheel trailers are extensions, rigidly attached to the king pin, roughly 14+ inches in length in order to reach the floor mounted ball. Which is the pivot point and point where all forces are transmitted between truck and trailer. It adds up to increased leverage on the fifth wheel frame. The Andersen uses a small adapter block that depending on how it is mounted, shifts the pivot point just a few inches forward or rearward of the king pin. Much less impact on the frame.

Excellent that you are tall enough to see a floor mounted ball. Crew cab and /or short bed truck owners, shorter owners and older owners may not have the same ability so ease of alignment is a significant deal to many. Some owners even have tool boxes, fuel tanks or bed covers that make seeing a floor mount ball totally impossible.

So, it can be a no brainer to reduce risk of frame damage and improve hookup visibility at the same time.

Ok, I think I'm starting to get it.

This is the kind of GN adapter that can cause frame damage and can get your warranty voided:

https://www.etrailer.com/Gooseneck-a...FQZMDQodW_kJMQ

It's not the actual ball shaped interface of a GN that is the problem, it's tacking on this vertical extension that extends the leverage point and can cause frame stress.

Given that a GN has much more articulation than a FW king pin design, are there any other reasons FW manufacturers universally chose king pin over GN as the standard? I get that they are easier to couple, but the receiver renders a pick up bed useless, which is such an inconvenience to a non-commercial user.

The Reese Goosebox extends all the way to bed level ball, from what I understand, but I suppose the geometry is done in a way that does not introduce more leverage on the frame even though it is technically longer than a FW neck?

Safe to say that no FW manufacturer will have warranty issues with the Andersen?

Thanks for the patience in explaining.

Todd

[artman1913]

Depends on who you listen to and who makes your frame.
I would email your trailer maker so you have a copy of the reply in case you have issues.

from
https://www.etrailer.com/Gooseneck-a...y4UaAs2V8P8HAQ

"Will the Use of Extensions and Gooseneck Adapters Void the Warranty on Lippert 5th Wheel Pin Box
I spoke with my contact at Lippert and I have a solution as to how to maintain your warranty and still be able to pull your fifth wheel trailer with the gooseneck hitch. She said that the use of any extension or gooseneck adapter will void the limited frame warranty. This would include the use of the Andersen Gooseneck Hitch to Fifth Wheel King Pin Adapter..........."

[dayle1]

Originally Posted by Tdave

Given that a GN has much more articulation than a FW king pin design, are there any other reasons FW manufacturers universally chose king pin over GN as the standard?

Actually, fifth wheel hitch articulation is intentionally limited. With most setups, clearance between the truck bed rails and the fiver is like 6 +/- inches. Too much articulation results in contact. GN trailers frequently have more clearance and/or a flatbed truck is used, so the extra articulation can actually be used.

Originally Posted by Tdave

I get that they are easier to couple, but the receiver renders a pick up bed useless, which is such an inconvenience to a non-commercial user.

This all depends on the hitch, some are easier to remove than others. It takes me about the same amount of time to remove my hitch as it does to hook up my utility trailer. So, I don't consider removing it an inconvenience and which option I choose depends on the cargo. Anything really heavy or dirty and the utility trailer is the better choice.

Originally Posted by Tdave

The Reese Goosebox extends all the way to bed level ball, from what I understand, but I suppose the geometry is done in a way that does not introduce more leverage on the frame even though it is technically longer than a FW neck?

Not really geometry but isolation techniques used to minimize stress. But just because Lippert says it doesn't void the frame warranty doesn't mean it doesn't increase stress. I think the jury is still out on it.

Originally Posted by Tdave

Safe to say that no FW manufacturer will have warranty issues with the Andersen?

Really there are no guarantees with FW manufacturers and how they handle warranty issues.

[DJNCJ]

As you know I switched from Andersen to Reese Goosebox this month. The GB will not fit all trailers. It does happen to work on my Cedar Creek. I had a std pin box riding on the Andersen. It was an "Okay" ride but now with the cushioned Goosebox the ride is much better.

As mentioned earlier the TrailAir/Andersen combo vs Goosebox will likely net zero ride improvement. For me the empty bed ready to accept our Hobie inflatable kayaks at the campground is quite nice.

While not an engineer, it seems to me that the Goosebox coming down on a 45 degree angle from the frame to the GN ball would put less torsional stress on the frame than a pinbox extending straight out to a traditional fifth wheel hitch connecting point. No?

I use the safety chains anchored to the rear factory puck connections.

Lippert not only approves the GB for use on their frames they will sell you one too:

Goose Box by Reese

I bought my 20k version from "Auto anything" for under a grand, shipped.

[Tdave]

Originally Posted by artman1913

Depends on who you listen to and who makes your frame.
I would email your trailer maker so you have a copy of the reply in case you have issues.

from
https://www.etrailer.com/Gooseneck-a...y4UaAs2V8P8HAQ

"Will the Use of Extensions and Gooseneck Adapters Void the Warranty on Lippert 5th Wheel Pin Box
I spoke with my contact at Lippert and I have a solution as to how to maintain your warranty and still be able to pull your fifth wheel trailer with the gooseneck hitch. She said that the use of any extension or gooseneck adapter will void the limited frame warranty. This would include the use of the Andersen Gooseneck Hitch to Fifth Wheel King Pin Adapter..........."

Wow, I take it back: I'm not starting to get it.

Can anyone speak with authority on why a GN puts more stress on a FW frame?

Apparently it's not the leverage arm length alone, as the Andersen keeps the same geometry as a king pin arrangement.

[DKRITTER]

Originally Posted by dayle1

I agree you will probably never get stopped. But the law is unclear on this issue, could refer to type of trailer or type of hitch. I doubt the Texas legislature knows about the Andersen or will ever take the time to clarify the law. However from a pure technical perspective, if one ball hitch needs chains then all should need chains to be legal. Happy travels.

Dayle1 I'd like to comment on your post if I may;

First, the law is not unclear and is in fact very specific. A quick google search and I will quote it below. Please note the exceptions and definitions.

Secondly, are you saying a "regular" fifth wheel hitch that attaches to the same location as a goose neck ball also requires chains?

The Companion, with its single-point-attachment, utilizes the B&W Turnoverball under-bed mounting system.

Texas Administrative Code
Next Rule>>

TITLE 37 PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS
PART 1 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
CHAPTER 21 EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
RULE §21.5 Standards for Safety Chains



(a) A person may not operate a passenger car or light truck while towing a trailer, semitrailer, house trailer, or another motor vehicle on a public highway unless safety chains of a type approved by the department are attached in a manner approved by the department from the trailer, semitrailer, house trailer, or drawn motor vehicle to the towing vehicle.
(b) Exceptions.
(1) Does not apply to trailers, or semitrailers, used for agricultural purposes.
(2) Does not apply to trailers, semitrailers, house trailers, or drawn motor vehicles operated in compliance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.
(3) Does not apply to trailers, semitrailers, or house trailers which are equipped with safety chains installed by the original manufacturer before the effective date of this section, August 18, 1994.
(4) Does not apply to fifth wheel or gooseneck semitrailers.
(c) Definition of Terms.
(1) House trailer--A trailer or semitrailer:
(A) which is designed, constructed, and equipped as a dwelling place, living abode, or sleeping place (either permanently or temporarily) and equipped for use as a conveyance on streets and highways; or
(B) whose chassis and exterior shell is designed and constructed for use as a house trailer, as defined in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, but which is used instead permanently or temporarily for the services, or for any other commercial purpose except the transportation of property for hire or the transportation of property for distribution by a private carrier.
(2) Light truck--Any truck with a manufacturer's rated carrying capacity not to exceed 2,000 pounds and is intended to include those trucks commonly known as pickup trucks, panel delivery trucks and carryall trucks.
(3) Motor vehicle--A self-propelled or towed vehicle used to transport passengers or property upon a public highway.
(4) Passenger car--A motor vehicle, other than a motorcycle, golf cart, light truck, or bus, designed or used primarily for the transportation of persons.
(5) Safety chains--A series of metal links or rings connected to or fitted into one another, and are inclusive of the hooks, coupling devices, and other connections, necessary in the coupling together of a towing or towed vehicle.
(6) Semitrailer--Every vehicle with or without motive power, other than a pole trailer, designed for carrying persons or property and for being drawn by a motor vehicle and so constructed that some part of its weight and that of its load rests upon or is carried by another vehicle.
(7) Trailer--Every vehicle with or without motive power, other than a pole trailer, designed for carrying persons or property and for being drawn by a motor vehicle and so connected that no part of its weight rests upon the towing vehicle.
(8) Truck--Every motor vehicle designed, used, or maintained primarily for transportation of property.
(d) Specifications for safety chains.
(1) Two separate and individual safety chains shall be used simultaneously in all situations where safety chains are required.
(2) The two safety chains will be of equal length, long enough to permit free turning of the vehicles without placing stress on the chains, and attached to the towing vehicle equidistant right and left of the point at which the vehicles are connected. The safety chains must be connected to the towed and towing vehicles and to the tow-bar in a manner which prevents the tow-bar from dropping to the ground in the event it fails or becomes disconnected. In no event will the safety chains be allowed to contact the road surface during movement of the vehicles.
(3) Safety chains shall be of sufficient strength to prevent the vehicles from separating in the event the towed vehicle disengages from the towing vehicle under ordinary towing conditions.
(4) Safety chains must be attached to either side of the tongue or connecting apparatus of the towed vehicle, equidistant forward and aft of the hitch or connector. They shall not be directly welded to the towed vehicle, but rather shall be connected by means of bolts, pins, or other secure connecting methods, that meet necessary strength requirements.
(e) Enforcement Policy. When the use of safety chains are required in accordance with subsection (a) of this section, enforcement actions should be initiated against all persons apprehended who are operating a towing and towed vehicle in combination:
(1) without both safety chains securely attached;
(2) when safety chains are improperly attached to the degree that one or both are in contact with surface of the road;
(3) when the failure of either or both safety chains or the manner in which they are attached allow the vehicles to become disconnected or allow the tongue or connecting apparatus of the towed vehicle to come into contact with the road surface during ordinary towing operations; or
(4) when the failure of either or both safety chains or the manner in which they are attached results in an accident.



Source Note: The provisions of this §21.5 adopted to be effective April 12, 2012, 37 TexReg 2430; amended to be effective September 8, 2013, 38 TexReg 5740

[dayle1]

DKRITTER, thanks for the reference and I'm suprised that GN trailers are exempt from safety chains. But then there can be problems with laws being out of date or inadequate. Exempting ag trailers, for example , may make sense for a rancher moving livestock or supplies from one field to another but what about hauling a dozen or more round bales of hay several hundred miles at 70 mph?

As I concluded, from a technical perspective all ball connections should require chains. For fifth wheel connections, there is just a single size king pin, 2", so any hitch is compatible with any king pin. But there are many sizes of ball mounts, use an undersized ball with a larger coupler and the lock mechanism is worthless. And once connected the issue is invisible. Even GN couplers now come in 3" sizes as well. If the purpose of safety chains is to prevent the trailer from contacting the road surface in the event of accidental disconnection, then again all ball connections have the same risk.

[NW Explorers]

If you have a RAM truck with factory goose neck/5th wheel hitch prep the Andersen Ultimate will not cover your rear pucks. I have the factory safety chain attachment rings installed in my rear pucks right next to my Andersen.

[DJNCJ]

Originally Posted by NW Explorers

If you have a RAM truck with factory goose neck/5th wheel hitch prep the Andersen Ultimate will not cover your rear pucks. I have the factory safety chain attachment rings installed in my rear pucks right next to my Andersen.

When I was using the Andersen, the Curt safety chain attachment rings would not work in my rear puck locations. They were close but too large.

[Whitewolf]

We also have a GooseBox. Same reason as others. A clean bed. The reason I chose a GooseBox over the Anderson is because Lippert (the manufacturer of our frame) approves it. There must be a reason for that.

I use safety chains. I reconfigured the setup and hook the chains to the GB instead of bolting to the GB and hooking up in the bed of the truck. It takes seconds to hook up and I don't worry about the laws. Do I think the hitch will EVER come undone? No. Not with over 2000lbs pushing down on it.

There's been lots of discussion here and elsewhere about using gooseneck conversions, adapters or whatever.

If you look at any gooseneck trailer you'll notice the frame where it drops down to the bed is reinforced. Not so with 5rs. There's a lot of stress at that point, which is why it's reinforced.

If Lippert or any other frame manufacturer would endorse anything other than the GooseBox I'd consider it. Until then, no.