9 replies to this topic

[John D]

As an old sailor, it seems obvious to me that line is better for securing a camper to the truck bed than turnbuckles. I secured my previous camper to my truck using half inch Samson double braid. One end of each line was secured with a bowline to a stainless loop in the bed. The forward lines passed through stainless loops and fairleads in the sidewall floor pack and were secured to readily accessible cleats inside the camper.

My last camper, a hard sided model twice as heavy as our FWC, was secured to the truck with rope and went 5 years and many miles all across this continent with no problems whatsoever. A line is simpler to attach, adjust, and check for security than a turnbuckle. Fiber rope is available that has little give, but I chose to have a bit of stretch in mine because I wanted to reduce torque to the camper.

I have considered going back to using double braid line instead of turnbuckles, to secure my FWC. In my humble opinion, line even looks classier. I am fairly certain it is quite a bit stronger than the turnbuckles we are currently using. Any comments would be welcome.

John D.

[Mark W. Ingalls]

{A quick check of the calender shows we are pretty far from April Fool's day, so...}

I think to take a page from the logbook is a good idea. That said, why not use the nautical idea of cotter pins in turnbuckles to keep turnbuckles tight? These are used in standing rigging all the time.

Rope and knots are preferred methods for some purposes, I agree.

[John D]

Mark, I don’t intend the following remarks as a disagreement, I’m just commenting about rope v. turnbuckles as I read the replies. As you probably know, the turnbuckles used on standing rigging for sailboats are much more substantial then those use on our campers. Sailboat standing rigging is taken down infrequently. Whereas, our campers are suppose to be easily loaded and unloaded.

Assuming the aluminum and steel turnbuckles currently used with FWC/ATC are adequate, there must be several good methods for securing lightweight campers to truck bodies. Indeed, there is a small industry of camper mounting hardware including but not limited to Happy Jack. I am surprised that there is so little discussion of ways to do this in this forum. For one thing, to securely fasten a FWC/ATC at four points in the corners of the truck bed seems fraught with problems and almost certainly exerts excessive twisting moment to the campers, while restricting the flex of the truck, which they are designed to have. Two things may happen; the camper is damaged and the traction of the truck is reduced. John D.

[chnlisle]

Ok I'll weigh in here as well. I've done a bit of sailing myself including a good deal of racing and all of the standing rigging on my race boats and my cruising boats was either rod or cable attached by turn buckles. The running rigging was line but the stuff that held the mast up was attached by turnbuckles.

I've been demasted twice in pretty big blows and what failed in the rigging wasnt the turnbuckles. This equipment has incredibly high loads on it. Loads that will never be duplicated by a 700 lb camper. So I think I'll stay with the turnbuckles and a locking nut.

My first FWC 10 years ago was through bolted into the bed. All others have been attached using the current method. Almost all my camping is remote and on more than a few rough roads. I've been on tons of world class washboard in Baja and never had a failure. I know there are failures but I've never experienced one. I am speaking just for me and I'm not trying to step on toes here but as I have said in the past my mantra is KISS.

[John D]

Hi Jay, Thank you for wading in. I agree, the attachment point loads from our lightweight campers is pretty low compared to sailboats. I’m using the term sailboats to mean something in the 30 to 50 foot range. I think we would also agree the loads on the running rigging, normally lines made from fiber rope, can be quite high too. Rod rigging fails more frequently than wire rope (for technical reasons, usually work hardening) but is used on racing boats because it has less windage and is more efficient. Rod rigging on a sailboat makes the case for using rope (fiber or steel) instead of something solid as an attachment member where reliability is important. By the way, rope is simple as in KISS.

You mentioned a previous camper you owned used bolts through the floor to secure the camper to the truck. An Alaskan camper I once owned had this arrangement too and the builder recommended it. The footprint of a bolt system through the floor is smaller than our current turnbuckle and eyebolt system. This would allow more flex between the truck and camper. I think bolts through the floor make pretty good sense but I doubt FWC and ATC would agree because they are probably happy with their present eyebolt and turnbuckle system.

I placed this discussion outside the FWC and ATC forums because I hope the experts from the companies will wait until knowledgeable owners and users like you have made their comments, then make their pronouncements to settle the issue, which will effectively end the discussion.

I am urging a discussion on mounting systems because the aluminum frames of our campers tend to break down at the corners of the door. In addition, I read a post by an owner who complained about other corner welds breaking down. He was using his camper on Baja and going off road quite a bit. When I first read his post, my reaction was to wonder if securing his camper tightly to the bed had transferred too much of the twisting forces working on the truck to the camper. Who knows what he was doing with his equipment off road? Nevertheless, I wondered if the rest of us have undetected broken welds. It this is really a problem? If so, a way to ameliorate it would be to allow more movement between the truck and camper.

Mounting hardware is not a new discussion for truck campers in general. I think I read about an engineering graduate student doing his PhD thesis on the subject. John D.

[pvstoy]

You mentioned a previous camper you owned used bolts through the floor to secure the camper to the truck. An Alaskan camper I once owned had this arrangement too and the builder recommended it. The footprint of a bolt system through the floor is smaller than our current turnbuckle and eyebolt system. This would allow more flex between the truck and camper. I think bolts through the floor make pretty good sense but I doubt FWC and ATC would agree because they are probably happy with their present eyebolt and turnbuckle system.
John D.

I'll add a few cents here.

I'm on my second FWC and both have been bolted through the floor. FWC still will sell you the small round plate and hardware to bolt through the bed. I have my inside plates made bigger squares for a bigger surface area to help back up the floor on the inside

I think their present system works well for most people and on many different truck beds. The holes I made may not work if I sold the camper to fit on a different truck bed. So there you would have more holes in the camper floor.

Resale the turnbuckles and eye bolts are a win win for the next buyer.

Not to many people want to bolt through the bed and it takes a little longer to line up four holes on a bed with spray in liner.

Overall my spray in liner and the clamping force with bolt through the floor has worked well for me. The camper won't slide around and no turnbuckles to adjust.

As for using rope....I don't have a answer.

[chnlisle]

John, Good point on the tie down points fatigue of the camper. Boy is that ever a whole new discussion. As you know Some of the new hi tec lines have zero stretch, great UV resistance, very high breaking points and super human prices. But again its not the line that will break. I think the law of unintended consequences comes into play here and until somone tries it and sees the results we'll all just be mentally masterb ... well you know. But its a great discussion.

Pat, On my Dodge I have 3 inch square aluminum backing plates for the eyebolts. I'm not sure it makes a difference but it makes me feel better.

[Mark W. Ingalls]

Perhaps another way to approach the problem is to incorporate some 'give' into the eyebolt|turnbuckle system. While this would be undesirable in standing rigging, shock absorption is clearly desirable in a tie-down system.

[TCG]

Hello Jay

Not knowing the ropes of the forum (no pun intended) I'm not sure if this is the place to ask this question. In your post you mentioned you use a locking nut on your turnbuckles. Is this just a standard nut on the "J" hooks?

Tom

[chnlisle]

TCG
Yep just a standard nut after I get the turnbuckles tight I cinch up a nut and away we go. I still check everything after a rough road but it all stays tight.