Jump to content
Inventor

Coupling options

Recommended Posts

Available off-road couplings I am aware of are: (listed alphabetically) Alko, AT35, Hitch-Ezy, Hitchmaster DO35, Hyland, McHitch, Orac, OzHitch, Pintle hook, Treg, Trigg and possibly others I have not identified. Inventor welcomes comments on relative merits of these possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used most of these not all, they all do a job and have their good and bad points.

There is only one coupling I will use from this day forward "The McHitch".

The McHitch being very user friendly, so easy to hook up and unhook from any angle.

It is a total hook up once attached, absolutely no movement or possibility to come loose.

Our 23' Kedron ATV weighs in at 4.2 tonne, with the capacity of the 6 tonne McHitch makes it legal, safe and a pleasure to tow.

IMO the only coupling meeting every criteria of the true meaning OFF ROAD COUPLING is The McHitch.

Regards

Greg and Judy :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following links on the Campertrailer site suggest there is a new kid on the block to compete with McHitch's rating for heavier vans:

http://www.campertrailers.org/hitch-ezy.htm

http://www.campertrailers.org/couplings.htm

Hitch-Ezy seems to be worth serious consideration. I have heard that McHitch does not engage smoothly if initial alignment is a bit off target. Apparently the down forces on the coupling's engaging sleeve, as you lower the jockey wheel, are not directly applied to the sleeve as there is an intervening articulation. As a consequence the engaging sleeve wants to tilt about the universal's horizontal axis if there is any initial resistance from slight misalignment. The tilting in turn impedes continued engagement and the angle of tilt increases with further lowering of the jockey wheel. Also lots of steps involved and parts to be lost or pilfered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding with the McHitch is that it's not really suitable with weight distribution hitches due to the pivot point location.

We had a Hyland and had no problems with it in 5 years although the van was below 3 tonne.

Cheers

Darryl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard that McHitch does not engage smoothly if initial alignment is a bit off target. Apparently the down forces on the coupling's engaging sleeve, as you lower the jockey wheel, are not directly applied to the sleeve as there is an intervening articulation. As a consequence the engaging sleeve wants to tilt about the universal's horizontal axis if there is any initial resistance from slight misalignment. The tilting in turn impedes continued engagement and the angle of tilt increases with further lowering of the jockey wheel. Also lots of steps involved and parts to be lost or pilfered.

I must totally disagree, when lowering onto the pin you put slight weight onto the head tilting it forward and it hooks up every time no matter what angle you are at. Our 6 year old grandson gets it first time every time.

I dont understand "lots of steps involved and parts to be pilfered" ??.

Remember this "Locks only keep honest people out" If someone decides to take your hitch or part thereoff no matter which one you are using it will vanish.

Al I can say is try it before you make a decision based on someone else's say so.

My understanding with the McHitch is that it's not really suitable with weight distribution hitches due to the pivot point location.

We had a Hyland and had no problems with it in 5 years although the van was below 3 tonne.

Cheers

Darryl

Correct Darryl, in its standard form without modification it is not suitable due to the pivot location in relation with the hookup point as I first pointed out when they became available.

But! If the tow vehicle and van are correctly weighted/loaded you do not require weight distribution bars.

I never used them with my Hyland hitch and never had an issue and most are finding with the McHitch they don't need to use them anymore.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

Inventor could not have it more wrong! I totally agree with Haveago.

I have had the McHitch (replaced a Hyland) since late last year and I have now travelled over 10,000 k with it. It is fantastic. Mine is the 6 tonne version. It is easy to hitch. I do it on my own using the rear view camera. There is nothing to steal. In fact, it makes my van hard to steal as few thieves have the McHitch "ball" whereas all thieves have the 50 mm ball.

The Mc Hitch is quiet, very secure and has NOT caused me any concerns in tight turns. If I am really doing it hard in X-Country or backing etc, I remove the WDH bars. Not a problem.

If Inventoir wants a deesign for a great hitch then he/she should copy the McHitch.

And, right at this moment I am in my van in the Thredbo Valley in the Snowy Mountains where this little Cairns boy is finding it VERY cold. The deisel heater is fantastic!!

Regards to all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

I like Greg have a 6 ton McHitch and have never had a problem with connecting the truck to the van.

With the Hyland coupling, I always had minor trouble. It was always just enough to cause some grief. Now, no problems and no bars. It tracks true and no sway.

Regards,

Kingy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following links on the Campertrailer site suggest there is a new kid on the block to compete with McHitch's rating for heavier vans:

Inventor are you connected to the Hitch Ezy hitch being the inventor or maybe a reseller.

I have looked at the Hitch Ezy coupling closely, it appears to be a copy whilst modified/upgraded version of the Hyland hitch exactly same principle.

A much better version for sure as it is rated at 5 tonne, still using the old principle of the hitch pivoting on the pin even though it states the o ring will keep out dirt and water.

It will definitely do the job for the lighter van owners who are presently happy with the Hyland hitch, but in my opinion it has a long way to go to match "THE McHITCH"

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inventor are you connected to the Hitch Ezy hitch being the inventor or maybe a reseller.

HAVAGO, perhaps you may respond to the same question regarding any connection to the McHitch?

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

Can't really offer an opinion about hitches other than the McHitch which is the first off-road hitch that we have used. For my part I find the hitch extremely easy to use and echo all the positive comment that has already been made by others.

I must admit though that I was curious as to the motivation for the thread when I first saw it last night. I am even more convinced now that there is an agenda afoot which is not being shared, call me a cynic if you like, but I think we are being manipulated.

Chris and HAVAGO make a good point. Remember that all the popular search engines have their bots crawl sites such as ours to obtain data that they provide to you when you enter your search question about a particular subject. Do a search on some of the names in this thread and see what comes back. If I were one of the brands mentioned here I would be very happy with the way this thread is trucking along.

My question, a big call, should admin delete the thread?

Cynical John :confused1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question, a big call, should admin delete the thread?

No way John. I was criticised when I was Webmaster for stifling healthy debate when I was trying to protect the forum members from possible defamation.

Let the thread remain !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

We also use the 6 ton Mc Hitch and like the fact the hitch pin is not readily available for bad guys ..win for the good guys !!!

we also use our WDH bars and dont have any problems.

I now wouldn't tow a van of this weight with any other hitch

And no I dont have any connection with Mr Mc Hitch !!! :thumbsup:

Cheers Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only connection I have with McHitch is on the back of my 100 Series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inventor declares that he is the joint inventor of Hitch-Ezy. The wording of my opening post indicated a desire to have consumer feedback on various couplings and stimulate debate about the merits of all options.

The name "Inventor" was chosen to indicate my background and I felt it was self evident that I had invented one of the listed options.

Opening such a debate was intended to create greater awareness of our new coupling but it also carried the potential downside of promoting one of the other listed options. Thus far the posts have demonstrated great satisfaction with the relatively recently developed McHitch coupling. Never the less I would encourage members to look at the merits of all options.

Awareness and a discussion and of the advantages and disadvantages of all available options is in my opinion a healthy exercise. Knowledge never hurt anyone.

As an inventor you want to be aware of practical problems a variety of users may have experienced with any of the various couplings.

Havago in a post on April 3 2010 said "If you look at the reciever hitch you will see now with this coupling it hooks on at the pin as all coupling but the pivot is back at the universal so when the WDS bars are fitted the bars are actually fighting the uni because they are pivoting approximately 6 inches forward of the trailer pivot. I am going to move the tow pin forward on the reciever hitch so as to align the uni pivot and the WDS bar pivot." I'm interested in the outcome of that thought. Is it on a thread I have not read?

Chris and Lynn wrote on 29/10/10 "On the subject of hitches and WDH, we have experienced the WDH thingies on the drawbar sliding back and forward on tight turns." This problem accentuates the further you move the pivoting point of the "A" frame draw bar from the pivoting points of the torsion bars. Plot the arcs of the ends of the torsion bars against the arcs of the attachments to the chains to the "A" frame and you will see why there are undue stresses in the chains on tight turning that cause the chain anchor points to move with such a configuration.

Havago's statement " I have looked at the Hitch Ezy coupling closely, it appears to be a copy whilst modified/upgraded version of the Hyland hitch exactly same principle" is not accurate. Hitch-Ezy utilises a patented locking on method that is totally different from anything previously disclosed. The mechanism is easier to operate and the sleeve neither jams going on or coming off. The only commonality with Hyland is the utilisation of a similarly sized yoke. McHitch also incorporates two yokes but that hardly makes it a copy of a Hyland.

HItch-Ezy tows on a tow-pillar not a tow-ball and therefore does not have slop and associated noise or the need for adjusting screws to remove said slop. Does Havago believe that the durability of our o-ring sealed, case hardened, large diameter tow-pillar will be inferior to the durability of the vertical axis of rotation present in a McHitch coupling? If the answer is yes then please include an explanation of how you arrived at that conclusion.

Hopefully the moderator will be happy for this thread to continue. I would obviously like the opportunity to explain the merits of my invention and to dispell any misconceptions about how our coupling works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G`Day All

We also have a Mc Hitch used with WDH bars ,whilst I agree with Greg (Havago) on most points of the hitch,we still find it to be a bit of a mongrel to hitch up on occasions. If it is not exactly lined up on the pin it refuses to go on,but with a lot of swearing (mostly from Lea of course) and kicking it will go on. I believe McHitch has acknowledged the problem and has made a slight modification to fix it,which we will investigate whilst house sitting in NSW.

Cheers

Rick & Lea :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich and Lea are correct in saying that McHitch can be a mongrel to put on if the initial alignment is less than near perfect.

My earlier post attempted to explain the genesis of the difficulty. With McHitch downward directed engaging forces that arise as the jockey wheel is lowered are not acting directly on the sleeve that is trying to engage the SS pillar. There is an intervening articulation at the universal joint and rotation occurs around the universal's horizontal axis in a manner that aggravates alignment and locks you out from engagement.

The foregoing phenomena do not arise if the line of horizontal articulation passes through the centre line of the sleeve that engages the towing pillar. Hitch-Ezy has the correct geometry of the horizontal axis of rotation passing through the vertical axis of the sleeve. With Hitch-Ezy you can back the head of the tow-pillar into the open forward-facing mouth of the coupling's sleeve and it will roll on ready for descent and full engagement. Subsequent downward forces from a lowered jockey wheel then act to self align the sleeve to the pillar rather than fighting against achieving this required alignment.

Rick and Lea toggling actions are the cause of your difficulties with attaching your McHitch coupling to its pillar if "initial alignment is less than near perfect". I will be fascinated to hear about the nature of the "slight modification" that McHitch intends to implement to fix a serious problem that you say they admit is real.

There are car jacks that rely on the principle of toggling to support the weight of a vehicle so do not be surprised at your difficulties once toggling has started to occur. Current best fix is to raise the McHitch, improve your alignment and try again. No doubt a well set up backing camera and/or assistant directing your backing will help. As you know heavy vans, especially dual axle, are very hard to manhandle. Manually moving a van can be near impossible in sand or uneven terrain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G`Day All

We also have a Mc Hitch used with WDH bars ,whilst I agree with Greg (Havago) on most points of the hitch,we still find it to be a bit of a mongrel to hitch up on occasions. If it is not exactly lined up on the pin it refuses to go on,but with a lot of swearing (mostly from Lea of course) and kicking it will go on. I believe McHitch has acknowledged the problem and has made a slight modification to fix it,which we will investigate whilst house sitting in NSW.

Cheers

Rick & Lea :smile:

Rick I can see where you are going wrong.

Mate just get it close, push down on the front of the screw head and lower the jockey wheel it goes on first time every time.

Willing to help anyone, just don't try to hard. :thumbsup:

Ps: Mate as to McHitch acknowledging a problem and modifying, the only modification I am aware of is they put a 45 degree chamfer on the locking tabs making it easier to locate. There were times when people were fighting the hitch and making it hard to lock home.

Cheers

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

I replaced the Hyland with a Hitchmaster DO35 and wouldn’t change it for quid’s as even the crow can hook up.

Happy Wife Happy Life. :biggrin:

Bryan :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inventor declares that he is the joint inventor of Hitch-Ezy. The wording of my opening post indicated a desire to have consumer feedback on various couplings and stimulate debate about the merits of all options.

The name "Inventor" was chosen to indicate my background and I felt it was self evident that I had invented one of the listed options.

Opening such a debate was intended to create greater awareness of our new coupling but it also carried the potential downside of promoting one of the other listed options. Thus far the posts have demonstrated great satisfaction with the relatively recently developed McHitch coupling. Never the less I would encourage members to look at the merits of all options.

Awareness and a discussion and of the advantages and disadvantages of all available options is in my opinion a healthy exercise. Knowledge never hurt anyone.

As an inventor you want to be aware of practical problems a variety of users may have experienced with any of the various couplings.

I totally agree with all above, also nice to know who we are debating with.

Havago in a post on April 3 2010 said "If you look at the reciever hitch you will see now with this coupling it hooks on at the pin as all coupling but the pivot is back at the universal so when the WDS bars are fitted the bars are actually fighting the uni because they are pivoting approximately 6 inches forward of the trailer pivot. I am going to move the tow pin forward on the reciever hitch so as to align the uni pivot and the WDS bar pivot." I'm interested in the outcome of that thought. Is it on a thread I have not read?

After putting the McHitch through a vigorous tryout over 6000 klms on varied terrain, I found no good reason to do any modifying what so ever.

Havago's statement " I have looked at the Hitch Ezy coupling closely, it appears to be a copy whilst modified/upgraded version of the Hyland hitch exactly same principle" is not accurate. Hitch-Ezy utilises a patented locking on method that is totally different from anything previously disclosed. The mechanism is easier to operate and the sleeve neither jams going on or coming off. The only commonality with Hyland is the utilisation of a similarly sized yoke. McHitch also incorporates two yokes but that hardly makes it a copy of a Hyland.

Inventor when I look at the Hyland hitch and your hitch the only difference is the locking mechanism and the 5 tonne capacity.

The barrel and head pivot is exactly the same principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HItch-Ezy tows on a tow-pillar not a tow-ball and therefore does not have slop and associated noise or the need for adjusting screws to remove said slop. Does Havago believe that the durability of our o-ring sealed, case hardened, large diameter tow-pillar will be inferior to the durability of the vertical axis of rotation present in a McHitch coupling? If the answer is yes then please include an explanation of how you arrived at that conclusion.

I personally like the fact that the McHitch does not spin on the pin like most other hitches, not having to worry about a greasy pin getting contaminated with dust and water forming a grinding paste causing premature wear.

Inventor you ask me to comment about your Tow-pillar.

My main concern after looking seriously at your tow pillar I believe you are using a 7/8" shank for convenience sake replacing any 50mm ball attachment, yet it is rated to 5 tonne.

All other hitches rated above 3.5 tonne use a 1 ¼" shank.

I also believe your locking device relies on ball bearings in a groove, do you feel confident it will survive some of our outback tracks let alone our so called bitumen roads.

Please advise if I am wrong.

I would obviously like the opportunity to explain the merits of my invention and to dispell any misconceptions about how our coupling works.

I ask! "Have you taken the time to try the McHitch"?

I would hope your comments about The McHitch are not based on here-say alone.

It does not paint a good picture when you try to make your product look better by being negative about your competition.

They say "the proof of the pudding is in the eating"

Maybe you would like to send me your hitch and I will give a fair unbiased report on its pros and cons.

Cheers :Australia:

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HAVAGO, perhaps you may respond to the same question regarding any connection to the McHitch?

Chris

Chris, fair comment.

I can honestly say apart from being a satisfied customer I have no affiliation what so ever with McHitch, I have never met Joe McGinnes but I put that very high on my bucket list. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G`Day Greg

Yes the chamfer is the mod.We have tried everything to get it to go on easily inc. camera,handheld uhf ,moving it back and forth,up and down,in and out (made that last one up :laugh: )We must have got a

Monday Mchitch .It does not happen every time we hitch up,only about 10%.So hopefully the mod will make a difference,because that is were it gets caught up.We will be in Sherwood near Kempsey doing a house sit for 10 weeks so will have a bit of time to get it fixed.

Cheers from Cold Armidale

Rick & Lea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Rick and Lea,

Sorry to hear it is giving you a hard time, mate I have a certain fix... Don't unhook! sorry feeble attempt at humour.

Our hitch being the first "Big Yella Fella" is still straight cut and as I said our grandson gets it every time first go.

If we were closer we could get together and discuss it over some rough red to keep out the cold. :thumbsup:

Hope we catch up soon.

Cheers

Greg and Judy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pleased to see that some good discussion is occurring. I will try to address the comments raised since my last post.

Havago thanks for answering my question about you’re considering relocating the position of the tow-pillar on the weight distribution receiver. We have an adaptor that preserves our coupling's full range of articulation when it is combined with a level ride system (obviously torsion bars removed if undertaking man oeuvres involving extreme articulation). Our adapter alters the tow-pillars location relative to the torsion bar pivot points. The offset is like that which occurs with McHitch but is not as big. I am very pleased to hear that the bigger offset is not causing you any problems. DO35 also offers an adaptor for use with a level ride system and employs has an offset akin to ours.

I agree that one wants to concentrate on the positives of their product however it is not possible to say that one's own hitch design is easier to connect without implying that alternative hitches can be difficult to connect and/or disconnect.

No I have not owned a McHitch. I have observed a nearby caravan manufacturer having great difficulty connecting a McHitch. I subsequently assisted him to make a connection because I understood the significance of the horizontal axis of the coupling not passing through the axis of the tow-pillar. Rick and Lea own and use the McHitch and indicate that the connection problem is real though intermittent. I have explained the mechanism and undoubtedly if your initial alignment is very good you should not experience any problems connecting a McHitch coupling

I remain of the opinion that having the horizontal axis of rotation of the coupling pass through the axis of the tow-pillar is an important design feature that improves the ease of coupling. With our coupling you can back into it and watch it roll on. This favourable design feature is not possible with the McHitch concept where priority is given to the totally sealed articulation within the universal joint. Vehicle components DO35 incorporates our preference for this relationship between the pillar and the horizontal axis of rotation. One post indicates the ease of connecting a DO35 versus a Hyland.

The McHitch design has achieved the important goal of keeping the articulation free of dust and water that can form a grinding paste. We believe our o-ring sealing of the articulation around the tow-pillar will avoid the contamination problem. O-rings are not new technology. Time will tell if our belief is upheld by many years of trouble free performance. Our coupling comes with a pillar cover and "plug” that respectively o-ring seal-off the tow-pillar and coupling main sleeve when the coupling is disconnected.

The static and dynamic testing of our coupling through Melbourne Testing Services was conducted on a tow-pillar with a 7/8" shank. The stresses on our shank are less than those on the shank of a 50mm tow-ball because a) the bottom flange on our tow-pillar has a 75mm diameter versus the 51mm diameter for an ADR compliant tow-ball and B) our towing forces are applied at 32mm above the tow bar rather than at the equator of a tow-ball which is at 50mm above the tow bar. In summary broader base with less leverage. We have available a tow-pillar with a 1 1/4" shank if you remain anxious that the compliance testing is inadequate or if you have a tow-bar with an existing 1 1/4" tow-ball hole.

Havago says "Inventor when I look at the Hyland hitch and your hitch the only difference is the locking mechanism and the 5 tonne capacity.

The barrel and head pivot is exactly the same principle".

This summation is incorrect. The head of our tow-pillar only performs two functions: a) to guide the main sleeve onto the pillar and B) to be the obstruction to disengagement when the three ball bearings are in the locked position below the equator of the head. Out tow-pillar head does not transmit draw-bar weight as occurs with the tow-ball in a Hyland. Fore and aft plus sideways towing forces are born entirely on the pillar's shaft. The internal diameter of the main sleeve lying opposite our head's equator is machined to a diameter greater than the diameter of the head. This step in the internal profile of the main sleeve was incorporated to prove to regulators that we were not manufacturing a non ADR compliant tow-ball. Our tow-pillar is not a high rise tow-ball that puts undue stresses on the shank. The diameter of our tow-pillar and its head is 55mm. This was done deliberately to block inappropriate connection of a 50mm ball coupling to our tow-pillar.

The groove on the underside of the head is machined to the profile of the 50mm ball bearings that engage it when an attempt is made to disengage the coupling while the balls are in the locked configuration. The tow pillar is case hardened and chromed ball bearings are used. We have applied a pull out force of 18 tonnes with no damage to the ball bearings or their contacts with the pillar, their retaining galleries or the controlling lid. Consider the difference between the hammering of ball bearings inside wheel bearings versus the vertical upward forces transmitted between a draw-bar and a tow-bar while travelling over rough terrain. We are confident that these high quality components will stand up to the rigors of rough treatment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pleased to see that some good discussion is occurring. I will try to address the comments raised since my last post.

Havago thanks for answering my question about you’re considering relocating the position of the tow-pillar on the weight distribution receiver.

Inventor, you appear to have misinterpreted my reply to your post:

I did (did - being past tense) consider when I first received the McHitch, but after putting the McHitch through a rigorous tryout over 6000 klms on varied terrain, I found no good reason to do any modifying what so ever.

Too add to my reply a McHitch after 60,000 klms was stripped down and inspected to show absolutely no wear or damage.

The rest of your post is in your opinion and you are entitled to that without malice, your rationalization as to how you achieve the higher capacity of your tow-pillar merely strengthens the justification one should definitely consider the McHitch for utmost strength and dependability more than ever as to the off road capabilities for heavier vehicles and safety.

There can always be a "But!" as long as its not my but being kicked :laugh:

But! As I said Inventor, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating"

Mr McHitch was so confident he sent me the hitch to use/abuse and report on its pros and cons which I did honestly.

If you are confident send me your hitch and I will give everyone a fair impartial report on its pros and cons.

Cheers :Australia:

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...