A frames update May 2018 gov. UK (1 Viewer)

[Deleted member 29692]

Does anyone know if popcorn is actually legal in Spain?

Only if sold from a vehicle being towed on an A frame

 

[Mr Chrysalis]

Only if sold from a vehicle being towed on an A frame

Thank you for clearing that up Nick.

 

[Larrynwin]

It is so lovely to see a thread were everyone is getting o n so nicely keep it up fellas, I admit was a bit hesitant to post such a thread about tow cars and towing loll, i can see I won't be needing any popcorn for this thread x thankyou
Regards Kate

A thousand curses , do you mean no handbags at dawn and no holiday

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[PeteH]

I personally think the following Sum`s up "A" frames.

" A perfectly satisfactory TOOL, which is a Victim of Bureaucratic Stupidity"

 

[tonyidle]

I personally think the following Sum`s up "A" frames.

" A perfectly satisfactory TOOL, which is a Victim of Bureaucratic Stupidity"

I think, like other aspects of legislation that affect our hobby (C1 licence laws for example), that it's a lack of legislative interest rather than a deliberate attempt to prevent the use of a perfectly sensible device. I have no doubt that there was a perfectly valid reason for Spains car towing laws and that hobby A framing is simply an accidental casualty. Even in this country there's no political will to rewrite trailer legislation to accommodate a small user group with no political clout.

 

[Ninjabob]

I think, like other aspects of legislation that affect our hobby (C1 licence laws for example), that it's a lack of legislative interest rather than a deliberate attempt to prevent the use of a perfectly sensible device. I have no doubt that there was a perfectly valid reason for Spains car towing laws and that hobby A framing is simply an accidental casualty. Even in this country there's no political will to rewrite trailer legislation to accommodate a small user group with no political clout.

Good points - I think the A Frame industry would be happy to have clarification of what the standard should be for these devices. I would not be happy with a cable operated brake on an A Frame that does not have servo assistance - ever turned your engine off and coasted until the vacuum on the servo has run out and then tried to apply the brakes - the pedal needs standing on for any braking effort to happen. There are two schools in A Frame technology - do it on the cheap (£1000 fitted) cable operated braking no servo assistance - do it right (£2500 fitted) electronic inertia sensor/vacuum pump servo braking. IMHO the latter should be the standard.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[chrisgreen]

Good points - I think the A Frame industry would be happy to have clarification of what the standard should be for these devices. I would not be happy with a cable operated brake on an A Frame that does not have servo assistance - ever turned your engine off and coasted until the vacuum on the servo has run out and then tried to apply the brakes - the pedal needs standing on for any braking effort to happen. There are two schools in A Frame technology - do it on the cheap (£1000 fitted) cable operated braking no servo assistance - do it right (£2500 fitted) electronic inertia sensor/vacuum pump servo braking. IMHO the latter should be the standard.

my 4 wheel boat trailer has an all up weight of 3.5 ton has cable brakes and no servo, and stop's ok, my toad has a cable and stop's superb never had an issue stopping while towing a toad.

 

[Ridgeway]

Sorry for my ignorance but what actually is an "A Frame" trailer ?

The reason I ask is because a good MH technician has just left our local dealer and has set up by himself about 10mins away from us and he's now selling the YORemorques range, but is that an A Frame ?



Just curious as it may be a solution to our weight management.....

PS: these have a way to lock the trailer when reversing as the wheels pivot although it looks like a bit of a faff to me.

 

[Geo]

Sorry for my ignorance but what actually is an "A Frame" trailer ?

The reason I ask is because a good MH technician has just left our local dealer and has set up by himself about 10mins away from us and he's now selling the YORemorques range, but is that an A Frame ?



Just curious as it may be a solution to our weight management.....

PS: these have a way to lock the trailer when reversing as the wheels pivot although it looks like a bit of a faff to me.

Correct term would be a Motor Cycle Trailer.
Most defiantly NOT an A Frame

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Ridgeway]

Correct term would be a Motor Cycle Trailer.
Most defiantly NOT an A Frame

Thanks, popcorn required in Europe for that type ?

 

[Geo]

Good points - I think the A Frame industry would be happy to have clarification of what the standard should be for these devices. I would not be happy with a cable operated brake on an A Frame that does not have servo assistance - ever turned your engine off and coasted until the vacuum on the servo has run out and then tried to apply the brakes - the pedal needs standing on for any braking effort to happen. There are two schools in A Frame technology - do it on the cheap (£1000 fitted) cable operated braking no servo assistance - do it right (£2500 fitted) electronic inertia sensor/vacuum pump servo braking. IMHO the latter should be the standard.

No never turned an Engine off and cruised BUT
Have conducted many sample vehicle on our MOT rolling brake tester
I did a report a few years ago and reported the only difference in brake performance was the pressure required was greater but the brake readings were up to mot pass standards.
the force directed through the cable to the toad due to inertia is imo far greater than a human would apply
I personaly have experienced brake lock up on a toads brakes in an emergency stop situation with cable brakes and no servo

 

[emjaiuk]

Thanks, popcorn required in Europe for that type ?

Most certainly, the argument being whether it's a trailer, supported bike rack or vehicle extension. I've no doubt whatsoever that you will find somebody on this forum who will state with utter certainty that the world will end if you carry on using it.


Malcolm

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[tonyidle]

Good points - I think the A Frame industry would be happy to have clarification of what the standard should be for these devices. I would not be happy with a cable operated brake on an A Frame that does not have servo assistance - ever turned your engine off and coasted until the vacuum on the servo has run out and then tried to apply the brakes - the pedal needs standing on for any braking effort to happen. There are two schools in A Frame technology - do it on the cheap (£1000 fitted) cable operated braking no servo assistance - do it right (£2500 fitted) electronic inertia sensor/vacuum pump servo braking. IMHO the latter should be the standard.

There should be a system in between those two cost-wise. A simple vac pump and two non-return valves would keep the servo going & shouldn't cost a fortune. @chrisgreen your comment is fair enough but the trailer linkage & lever ratios are set up for overrun braking. A small car will be fine with a pedal-pull cable but as things are someone could be A framing a couple of tonnes. An active servo is probably essential with a heavy weight car behind.

 

[PeteH]

On the subject of "Servo" brakes. My 1971 Triumph Herald, has no Servo, Very few cars Prior to the 80`s had Servo Brakes, the braking effort IS THE SAME. The only difference is that the effort of the driver is less. You CANNOT improve braking with a servo, the Physics are against it!. An "A" frame does not need servo assist, all 4 wheels are braked and the effort is supplied on the overrun and is a function of the potential difference in Mass/motion between the 2 vehicles. I have had a 4 wheel "lock-up" on the toad, in a "Crash" stop. The brake efficiency is not the question, ability to reverse is, but in my view that is a total "red herring", as older Caravans had to be "locked" before reversing, requiring the driver to get out and "set" the lock!. In fact I would suggest that it is quicker to get out uncouple and move the car, as opposed the reversing a Trailer, especially if the distance involved is more than a few yards!.

 

[Larrynwin]

I use an RVi Brake 2 with my a frame , it’s an American unit that sits in footwell and operates brake pedal via an inbuilt compressor. It’s sensitivity and brake effort can be tested and is adjustable from a wireless unit in mhome which also displays braking performance.
As this is not an overrun system limited reversing is possible without locking toad brakes.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[olley]

Overrun brakes on a trailer, exert a force on to the towing vehicle to make them operate, with a servo this force is a significant amount less, so your overall braking distance will be less.

 

[Pausim]

The good thing about overun brakes is that the braking effort is automatically adjusted so that the trailer brakes in tandem with the towing vehicle. Simple but very effective. I can’t see how the accelerometers used in the expensive electronic kits can achieve this level of control. The fact that some of them have sensitivity adjustments merely reinforces my opinion that they are a fairly imprecise way of setting up the level of braking effort. If the electronic braking system was controlled by something that was reacting to the load in the coupling device I might be more impressed.

 

[tonyidle]

On the subject of "Servo" brakes. My 1971 Triumph Herald, has no Servo, Very few cars Prior to the 80`s had Servo Brakes, the braking effort IS THE SAME. The only difference is that the effort of the driver is less. You CANNOT improve braking with a servo, the Physics are against it!. An "A" frame does not need servo assist, all 4 wheels are braked and the effort is supplied on the overrun and is a function of the potential difference in Mass/motion between the 2 vehicles. I have had a 4 wheel "lock-up" on the toad, in a "Crash" stop. The brake efficiency is not the question, ability to reverse is, but in my view that is a total "red herring", as older Caravans had to be "locked" before reversing, requiring the driver to get out and "set" the lock!. In fact I would suggest that it is quicker to get out uncouple and move the car, as opposed the reversing a Trailer, especially if the distance involved is more than a few yards!.

Cars such as your Herald have a different hydraulic ratio to a modern car. Back in the day, when adding a remote servo was a popular pastime, what you say was true. It isn't these days. Whilst you are correct about driver effort the reality is that the hydraulic ratio design of a modern car assumes there will be an operating servo. It is still possible to brake adequately without the servo in use but the amount of pressure required to do so is such that all sensitivity is lost and the effort involved means that it isn't safe to do it except in an emergency situation. It is equally possible that the tension required in an overrun cable is beyond what the hitch and its damper were designed for. You are correct about reversing too, or you were, because legislation changed in 1989 to require all trailers to be capable of reversing without the driver having to leave the towing vehicle.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[PeteH]

Cars such as your Herald have a different hydraulic ratio to a modern car. Back in the day, when adding a remote servo was a popular pastime, what you say was true. It isn't these days. Whilst you are correct about driver effort the reality is that the hydraulic ratio design of a modern car assumes there will be an operating servo. It is still possible to brake adequately without the servo in use but the amount of pressure required to do so is such that all sensitivity is lost and the effort involved means that it isn't safe to do it except in an emergency situation. It is equally possible that the tension required in an overrun cable is beyond what the hitch and its damper were designed for. You are correct about reversing too, or you were, because legislation changed in 1989 to require all trailers to be capable of reversing without the driver having to leave the towing vehicle.

The point I was trying to make is that "Universally" legislating for Doubtful and expensive "improvements", is IMV, unnecessary. When something simple WORKS, Why alter it?. (KISS). The cynical (and I am one of them) would say it does improve "profits" for the manufacturer, the extra complication adds more to go wrong, and of course like we see with "modern" vehicles there is less scope for the skilled, DIY`er to tend to His/Her own maintenance, as owning the very expensive testing equipment is not cost effective. As a glaring example, I was quoted £80 plus VAT, JUST to extinguish an MIL light, which was the result of having to remove a Seat for access!. (In the event, I spent the £80 on a device which can do that, and a whole lot more!).

The early pattern "A" frames are largely over engineered, and I have only ever heard of one incident of failure, and that was where one of the "new" breed of lightweight "all singing and dancing" frames was bent. Even then the toad did not detach from the towing vehicle, but did tend to crab sideways and scrubbed the tyres!.

As for a difference in Hydraulic ratio, I have to say I am just as cynical, I have seen no evidence that the Ratio between the Size of the Master and slave cylinders has changed for any given class of vehicle?, but no doubt someone in the "industry" will know?.

 

[John & Joan]

As for legality.
Unless it’s against the law it is legal by default. One simply cannot be prosecuted unless a law is in place and written down. In certain country’s there are laws written down but any law is challengeable and bloody challenge I would in the VERY SLIM chance I got pulled. QUOTE]

This is where some of the problems exist. In UK law it is legal unless it is specifically banned. Abroad it is banned (illegal) unless specifically allowed by law.

 

[tonyidle]

The point I was trying to make is that "Universally" legislating for Doubtful and expensive "improvements", is IMV, unnecessary. When something simple WORKS, Why alter it?. (KISS). The cynical (and I am one of them) would say it does improve "profits" for the manufacturer, the extra complication adds more to go wrong, and of course like we see with "modern" vehicles there is less scope for the skilled, DIY`er to tend to His/Her own maintenance, as owning the very expensive testing equipment is not cost effective. As a glaring example, I was quoted £80 plus VAT, JUST to extinguish an MIL light, which was the result of having to remove a Seat for access!. (In the event, I spent the £80 on a device which can do that, and a whole lot more!).

The early pattern "A" frames are largely over engineered, and I have only ever heard of one incident of failure, and that was where one of the "new" breed of lightweight "all singing and dancing" frames was bent. Even then the toad did not detach from the towing vehicle, but did tend to crab sideways and scrubbed the tyres!.

As for a difference in Hydraulic ratio, I have to say I am just as cynical, I have seen no evidence that the Ratio between the Size of the Master and slave cylinders has changed for any given class of vehicle?, but no doubt someone in the "industry" will know?.

I'm not for one moment suggesting legislation is required. My interest is simply the engineering. I'm as cynical as you are about an industry that has over the years made understanding and maintaining its products more and more difficult. I have done as you did: it makes sense to me to buy what can be a very expensive tool that may only be used once if it enables me to do a job that would otherwise equal or exceed the price of the tool. My example (which as it turned out didn't need a tool) was an intermittently failing SRS module on my Mothers Seat Ibiza. The symptom was that the airbag light would illuminate, then extinguish, a few seconds after the ignition was turned on (as it should). However after a hot start it would stay lit. My diagnostic stuff couldn't do much with the SRS module other that to state that it was faulty. In a spirit of discovery, and expecting little, I removed the module then undid the single screw holding it together. I noticed as I did so that the screw was already loose. Once inside it was apparent that the screw not only held the (plastic) lid on but trapped the circuit board earth strip against the modules metal base. Once reassembled with the screw correctly tightened the module worked as it should and was still doing so 18 months later when she sold the car. Had that been taken to the 'professionals' it would have cost me a new SRS module - because no-one looks for the obvious anymore.

Hydraulic ratios: at one time any differences in spec would be available to anyone who wished to see them. Now not so much. But try stopping your Herald (or any car of that era) with no servo. Then try the same in any modern car with the servo disabled. The difference is NOT marginal .

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Geo]

Stopping distance in this case is both irrelevant and arbitrary. the stopping distance will depend on many factors, tyres weather, road surfaces etc and can not be compared between two different vehicles.
My tests were conducted with calibrated equipment designed solely to measure applied braking force
and clearly showed that the mandatory braking efforts required for the weight of individual vehicles could be met with or without servo assistance
G

 

[Charlie]

Yes I know... Spain and I believe Germany have prohibitive laws but France and most of the rest of Europe do not. Well that’s my belief everyone should check to be sure.

 

[tonyidle]

Stopping distance in this case is both irrelevant and arbitrary. the stopping distance will depend on many factors, tyres weather, road surfaces etc and can not be compared between two different vehicles.
My tests were conducted with calibrated equipment designed solely to measure applied braking force
and clearly showed that the mandatory braking efforts required for the weight of individual vehicles could be met with or without servo assistance
G

Never said otherwise. However the effort required by the driver is considerably different and a cause for concern in itself. That may or may not impact on the cable pull arrangements of an overrun-type A frame. A light car barely needs to brake when towed - it won't be much over the weight of an unbraked trailer. A heavier car (if anyone uses such a thing as a toad) will certainly need to brake.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Mikey RV]

I am still going to get one. Booked in next Wednesday.

 

[Charlie]

Il tell yer about them brakes.... I puts me big hoof ont tha big pedal int middle and the whole rig stops nicely under perfick control.

Nah that’s more than can be said for trailers and dem ruddy hawfil caravan fingies..

Dats all I need want and wot hi got...

 

[Kevin R]

The answer to those not wishing to recognise the law of European countries is to stay on the island.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Dare_Devil_Dennis]

How big a car can you tow on an A frame?

How about my Mercedes E class?

 

[Mr Chrysalis]

You can tow up to your combined gross train weight. It might be shown as PTRA on the plate. The plate should be visible in the Moho engine compartment. There will be 4 numbers. It us the biggest one. The combined weight of Moho and trailer must not exceed this. You may also have a towing weight on a plate on your towbar.
Your e Class is probably about 2500kg, so if your Moho is 4500kg you would need an allowance of 7000kg

 

[PeteH]

As for legality.
Unless it’s against the law it is legal by default. One simply cannot be prosecuted unless a law is in place and written down. In certain country’s there are laws written down but any law is challengeable and bloody challenge I would in the VERY SLIM chance I got pulled. QUOTE]

This is where some of the problems exist. In UK law it is legal unless it is specifically banned. Abroad it is banned (illegal) unless specifically allowed by law.

Which brings to mind the fact that before the UK changed it`s caravan "rules" the vast majority of German and Dutch Caravans where "illegally" too wide for UK roads. Yet the UK authorities STILL allowed them access. That is the "Spirit" of the access agreement, largely aimed at not limiting tourism, enshrined in the Vienna document. And which the Spanish and Portuguese in particular along with other European countries fail to honour.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}