Wet bolt vs Neverfail bushings

[sylbill]

Since I will be visiting the Lippert facility this Friday for annual bearing maintenance and to get the V Clips installed, I was wondering about the bushings. I do grease the wet bolts as required and now have 2 that won’t take grease and will have to be replaced. Looking at maybe replacing all the wet bolts with the Neverfail bushings that don’t require grease or maintenance.

Any opinion or experience with one vs the other?

Vivian

A couple of months ago I spent a lot of time researching the durability of the Lippert Never Fail bushings, including asking on this forum. I have a hard time associating Lippert with the term "never fail". I was not successful finding anyone with any long term experience with the Never Fail bushings. Last month I replaced my electric drum brakes with hydraulic over electric disc brakes and at the same time replaced all the spring bushings on my trailer. A couple of my lubricated bronze bushings had some wear but in general looked pretty good. I decided to replace all the right side bushings with the Never Fail bushings and the left side were replaced with new bronze bushings. I did not replace any of the bushings in the Morryde CRE/3000 equalizer as they all looked good and I could not measure any wear. I can't give you any information about the durability of the Never Fail bushings, but at least in a year I will have about 16,000 miles on the bushings and will be able to compare the bronze and Never Fail bushings at that time.

Bill

[TucsonJim]

A couple of months ago I spent a lot of time researching the durability of the Lippert Never Fail bushings, including asking on this forum. I have a hard time associating Lippert with the term "never fail". I was not successful finding anyone with any long term experience with the Never Fail bushings. Last month I replaced my electric drum brakes with hydraulic over electric disc brakes and at the same time replaced all the spring bushings on my trailer. A couple of my lubricated bronze bushings had some wear but in general looked pretty good. I decided to replace all the right side bushings with the Never Fail bushings and the left side were replaced with new bronze bushings. I did not replace any of the bushings in the Morryde CRE/3000 equalizer as they all looked good and I could not measure any wear. I can't give you any information about the durability of the Never Fail bushings, but at least in a year I will have about 16,000 miles on the bushings and will be able to compare the bronze and Never Fail bushings at that time.

Bill

Welcome to the techy forum Bill!

I'll be very interested in seeing the results of your study.

Jim

[Beachcamper]

Nice! I wonder what the cost isto have my 5er done. Any idea's? Or if you have name/number for contact.

Steve, the bullfrogs say

The cost of today’s work was $1300 total but I had equalizers, bearing work and all new bushings and bolts. When I get the itemized bill will add cost for the axle retro which is removal of all hangers, new hangers, VClips and metal spans at all 3 hangers.

[Cate&Rob]

Beachcamper Superduty

It is interesting that the LCI techs chose to cross vehicle reinforce the 2" square tube above the hangers. The flex that breaks the hangers is below this square tube. Most cross vehicle reinforcing is done further down on the hanger legs. In any case, the V braces look good and will legitimately give you peace of mind.

Rob

[Superduty]

Steve, the bullfrogs say

The cost of today’s work was $1300 total but I had equalizers, bearing work and all new bushings and bolts. When I get the itemized bill will add cost for the axle retro which is removal of all hangers, new hangers, VClips and metal spans at all 3 hangers.

Vivian,
Thanks. I appreciate this. I was surprise how fast they got your unit done today. And a nice job on top of that.
Monday, while checking in your 5er. Look around, you should see mine in there somewhere, missing a slide - I hope.

So, the Frogs are talking again. He he They get louder as the commotion decreases after quitting time.

Talk to ya soon, Steve

[Canyonlight]

Beachcamper Superduty

It is interesting that the LCI techs chose to cross vehicle reinforce the 2" square tube above the hangers. The flex that breaks the hangers is below this square tube. Most cross vehicle reinforcing is done further down on the hanger legs.
Rob

X2......I would be very curious to understand this placement.

Dan

[Guest]

Beachcamper Superduty

It is interesting that the LCI techs chose to cross vehicle reinforce the 2" square tube above the hangers. The flex that breaks the hangers is below this square tube. Most cross vehicle reinforcing is done further down on the hanger legs. In any case, the V braces look good and will legitimately give you peace of mind.

Rob

Rob,

Odd that LCI re-enforced the frame this way. This puts more lateral stress on the hanger attachments but they now have the V clips so it looks strong to handle the more critical longitudinal stress while braking as well as the lateral stress. The V Clips with the X factor bracket would have been a stronger solution. Perhaps LCI does not like to bolt on MorRyde products?

Jim

[Beachcamper]

Rob,

Odd that LCI re-enforced the frame this way. This puts more lateral stress on the hanger attachments but they now have the V clips so it looks strong to handle the more critical longitudinal stress while braking as well as the lateral stress. The V Clips with the X factor bracket would have been a stronger solution. Perhaps LCI does not like to bolt on MorRyde products?

Jim

I spoke with the rep from MorRyde as I originally wanted the V Clips and the X Factor system. He told me that due to the way the X Factor bolts on, it would not work with the V Clips. Lippert used to do what is called Axle Retro and here is the document describing it and I found a picture of someone’s retro on their trailer. I suspect that with the newer V Clip reinforcement, they are now blocking the crush tube from forces transferred there and avoiding any stress on I Beam? See new configuration in post 14 above.

[Guest]

I spoke with the rep from MorRyde as I originally wanted the V Clips and the X Factor system. He told me that due to the way the X Factor bolts on, it would not work with the V Clips. Lippert used to do what is called Axle Retro and here is the document describing it and I found a picture of someone’s retro on their trailer. I suspect that with the newer V Clip reinforcement, they are now blocking the crush tube from forces transferred there and avoiding any stress on I Beam?

Beachcamper

You do bring up a good point since the upper strap that is used for the X factor bracket would not work with the wide hanger. . I do not see a V Clip in the picture above where this bracket would provide stiffness in both directions. The V Clip is the best solution for longitudinal stress while braking

Let me restate that the V Clip would have been the cost effective solution to the issue. The new solitudes are being built with V Clips as an example. But this looks good so no concerns.

Jim

[Cate&Rob]

Beachcamper

LCI "Axle Retro Procedure" is an interesting document! Thanks for posting.

The problem with a cross trailer hanger reinforcement for those of us with the LCI "Correct Track" system (the yellow octagon adjusters at the outer hangers . . . picture attached) is that the inside octagon covers the surface where a cross trailer brace would be attached. Since LCI replaced your hangers (presumably to get rid if the Correct Track feature) . . . I wonder why they did not then follow their own Axle Retro Procedure? I don't see how the V clips (internal to the hanger) would have any influence on a welded cross beam. I can see how the V Clip would prevent bolt & nut access for a bolted on cross beam.

Rob

[Beachcamper]

Beachcamper

LCI "Axle Retro Procedure" is an interesting document! Thanks for posting.

The problem with a cross trailer hanger reinforcement for those of us with the LCI "Correct Track" system (the yellow octagon adjusters at the outer hangers . . . picture attached) is that the inside octagon covers the surface where a cross trailer brace would be attached. Since LCI replaced your hangers (presumably to get rid if the Correct Track feature) . . . I wonder why they did not then follow their own Axle Retro Procedure? I don't see how the V clips (internal to the hanger) would have any influence on a welded cross beam. I can see how the V Clip would prevent bolt & nut access for a bolted on cross beam.

Rob

Rob, I will send an email to my Lippert tech with your question. I will post it when I get a response possibly on Monday. He did say to me that there needs to be some level of flex in hangers or your wheels will suffer damage by putting too much pressure on sidewall in an extreme backing up situation. I am not an engineer like a lot of folks here so don’t know if this is in fact what would happen with v clips and the additional metal span to hanger.

My feeling after last hanger failure and looking at X factor for upgrades was that the weak link would be the 2 x 2 GD added under I Beam to get bigger tire space. I believe this is referred to as a crush tube? The way Lippert attached the new span tube to that crush tube would help prevent the twisting of the crush tube and damaging frame if the hangers had too much reinforcement. But then again, unlike some of you I am not an engineer just my thought process when looking at the configuration.

[Cate&Rob]

Beachcamper

The square tube spacer between frame and hanger (I have never heard this referred to as a crush tube which would infer that it is designed to absorb impact) is a common design element on many 5th wheel trailers. Grand Design was just a "little late" in adding these to the 303RLS design.

The square tube would add a little more leverage by the suspension through the hanger and square tube to the frame rail flange, and I have read of frame twisting (on other brands) with this configuration. So . . . your cross trailer reinforcement beams are added insurance against this type of failure.

The whole point of V clips or the illustrated LCI reinforcement procedure is to stop the side-to-side hanger flex that results in the fatigue breaks that several of us have experienced. I would not subscribe to the theory that hanger flex is required to prevent damage to wheels or tires.

In any case . . . my experience with V clips is that you are now in good shape with new hangers and properly installed V clips. (BTW, it is interesting that Grand Design is going to factory installed V clips on some models . . . I wonder where they got that idea ??)

Rob

[Guest]

Beachcamper

The square tube spacer between frame and hanger (I have never heard this referred to as a crush tube which would infer that it is designed to absorb impact) is a common design element on many 5th wheel trailers. Grand Design was just a "little late" in adding these to the 303RLS design.

The square tube would add a little more leverage by the suspension through the hanger and square tube to the frame rail flange, and I have read of frame twisting (on other brands) with this configuration. So . . . your cross trailer reinforcement beams are added insurance against this type of failure.

The whole point of V clips or the illustrated LCI reinforcement procedure is to stop the side-to-side hanger flex that results in the fatigue breaks that several of us have experienced. I would not subscribe to the theory that hanger flex is required to prevent damage to wheels or tires.

In any case . . . my experience with V clips is that you are now in good shape with new hangers and properly installed V clips. (BTW, it is interesting that Grand Design is going to factory installed V clips on some models . . . I wonder where they got that idea ??)

Rob

Rob,

It looks like we respectfully disagree on the side force versus the longitudinal. I'm still leaning on spring wrap and braking forces being the major factor on these failures that occur almost exclusively on the rear hangers. Otherwise we would see similar failures on the center hanger which exhibits the highest lateral force from both axles.

Another beer consumption/campfire topic at some time.

Jim

[Cate&Rob]

Another beer consumption/campfire topic at some time.

Hi Jim,

Absolutely ! Respectful difference of opiniont is a key part of any engineering analysis!

I agree with your theory of excessive loads on the rear hanger with heavy braking . . . and this is made worse with disc brakes on the trailer (as I have).

But . . . the evidence in the hanger failure breaks, coupled with the video evidence of these hangers flexing side to side continuously, leads me to a theory of fatigue failure over an extended period of time. In my case, 90% of the fracture line was rusted, leaving only the last 10% for the final separation.

If the failure were overloading in the fore-aft direction due to excessive braking loads, I would expect to see some hanger/frame deformation and tearing on the sides of the break. I have not seen any failures like this.

So . . . perhaps the most likely scenario is a combination of the two modes. Side-to-side fatigue cracks and weakens the hanger and braking forces finally separate the hanger sides from the frame. This would fit with most failures being the rear spring hanger which takes most of the braking loads. The fix is still stopping the side-to-side flex so that the hanger is not weakened in the first place.

Now . . . on to the beer and campfire plan . . . .

Rob

[Guest]

Cate&Rob Rob,

No doubt the combination of both is having some input where every failure is not precisely the same. I believe a combination of the two is plausible where the fore aft could begin with crack propagation then the constant bending could work away at this weakness. With front axle rise on heavy braking, this leaves most of the forces on the rear hangers which are the only solid anchor point for the overloaded rear axle when this occurs. This is one reason I focus on this failure mode, since the other hangers are not failing.

Any reason to have beers by the campfire works for me.

Jim