Are foamies lighter?

[S. Heisley]

Perhaps these generalized weights, below, will help you extrapolate your plans:

4X8' -1/8" PLYWOOD sheet 9 pounds
" -1/4" PLYWOOD sheet 18 pounds
" -3/4" STYROFOAM sheet 1.5 pounds
" -1" STYROFOAM sheet 2 pounds
" -2" STYROFOAM sheet 4 pounds

Note: Regardless of what method of building you use, you will need some wood framing. How much depends on your style of building. The method of finishing both your interior and exterior can also depend on the materials you choose and how much you use. So, again, the majority of the weight of your finished trailer will depend largely upon you and the methods/style of building that you choose. A trailer builder can be his/her own worst enemy.

[atahoekid]

Plywood = 57#/ cu. ft.
Foam 2#/cu.ft. ....

Those were the numbers that convinced me that Foam made good sense. I wasn't really worried about weight since I had a pick up truck to tow with, ( I still do but HRH said she thought we should get a bigger truck ,so who was I to argue?) but light weight means easier on the fuel, brakes and the TV in general. It just makes sense once I researched SIPs or composite panels and saw they were strong!!! If you're towing with a smaller vehicle, it makes even more sense.

[GPW]

Just sayin' , I can (by myself) move my FS around on my gravel driveway , just using my HF dolly ... that’s Light !!!

[loaderman]

I always see people comparing Foam weight to plywood.
Really need to compare the overall system.
Plywood, spars, paint, etc.
Foam, interior finish (bedsheets can be used), canvass, and paint.

I do remember one thread where someone mentioned the weight of the paint on a boeing i believe and it was a lot!!!!

Having said that, yes I do believe a faom system would be lighter. But as others have said trailer weight is a huge deal, as well as air flow etc.

[wagondude]

I always see people comparing Foam weight to plywood.
Really need to compare the overall system.
Plywood, spars, paint, etc.
Foam, interior finish (bedsheets can be used), canvass, and paint.

I do remember one thread where someone mentioned the weight of the paint on a boeing i believe and it was a lot!!!!

Having said that, yes I do believe a faom system would be lighter. But as others have said trailer weight is a huge deal, as well as air flow etc.

Very true. Also remember the color of the paint effects the weight. For instance, FedEx used to have planes that were white on the bottom and purple on the top half for the full length. They changed to the current theme where only the tail is purple and saved a considerable amount of weight (I don't remember the exact figure). It seems that the purple had a large amount of lead in it. The repaint was supposed to pay for itself in fuel savings within just a few years.

[S. Heisley]

I always see people comparing Foam weight to plywood.
Really need to compare the overall system.
Plywood, spars, paint, etc.
Foam, interior finish (bedsheets can be used), canvass, and paint.

I do remember one thread where someone mentioned the weight of the paint on a boeing i believe and it was a lot!!!!

Having said that, yes I do believe a faom system would be lighter. But as others have said trailer weight is a huge deal, as well as air flow etc.

Very true. Also remember the color of the paint effects the weight. For instance, FedEx used to have planes that were white on the bottom and purple on the top half for the full length. They changed to the current theme where only the tail is purple and saved a considerable amount of weight (I don't remember the exact figure). It seems that the purple had a large amount of lead in it. The repaint was supposed to pay for itself in fuel savings within just a few years.

Oh, My Gosh! ...Who knew!!!!!

[atahoekid]

Yup, that's the exact same reason that American Airlines used to polish the bodies of their planes instead of painting. With the new composite materials used for the bodies they've now had to change their paint scheme which is a white base and the lightest of the paints

[Mary C]

if you have foam, TBII,canvas, and gripper a few spars it is going to be lighter than all wood. and Too light , Really??????
and all that stuff about aerodynamics and GET This: When I went to Texas my gas mileage was 30 to 33 miles to the gallon when I kept it under 65 . under 3000rpm When I went 70, 33rpm it was hard to keep it on the road (swayed) just felt unsafe and I got 26 miles per gallon. Without the Teardrop I got 37mpg (keeping it under 3000 rpm). I haven't weighed it yet but I will soon.

I am Happy going 65 and being on Teardrop time!!

Mary C.

[atahoekid]

I got back from a camping trip earlier this week and since most of the 1200 miles was driven in California, I decided to keep it at or below 65 mph. The Cali speed limit for any vehicle with a trailer is 55mph, I figured any faster than 65 would make me an easy target for the CHP. I passed a few CHP officers parked in waiting at that speed and never got a second look. At 65 mph I got better mileage than I do when driving my truck on a daily basis. I lost about 3 mpg from highway driving without a trailer though. No problems with crosswinds. The rig is rock solid. We drove through a snow and rainstorm on the way out and we drove home via the notoriously windy Owens Valley and though we could see the wind blowing flags, trees and shrubbery, we never felt any sway.

I know the added weight due to size plus the weight of my truck is a big factor in the stability but I also think the low and wide design gives me good stability too. It reduces the side square footage and lowers my center of gravity. I'd design it that way again if I had to rebuild.

My advice is keep it light but keep it low and wide, too!!

[GPW]

Mary , try balancing the trailer a little more weight forward (tongue heavy) till it pulls correctly ... balance means a lot on a trailer , and how it tows...

[atahoekid]

yup, if there's not enough tongue weight the trailer will "wag it's tail". If the trailer sways while towing, it is recommended to keep more weight toward the front of the trailer and try to center the weight. 10 to 15% of your total weight should be on the tongue

[S. Heisley]

Okay, so, at 19 mpg, my car isn't the most fuel efficient; but, evidently, my wood trailer is. Towing 1100 lbs drops my mpg to 15 mpg, just 4mpg less. So, weight on that point may not matter. Maybe it's mostly aerodynamics.

But, remember, if you can keep your weight down on that trailer, it could be easier when you have to brake.

[Mary C]

I am not complaining I think my trailer pulls great at times I forgot it was there. I had quite a load, camping gear and lots of building stuff, tools and extra stuff. I tried my best to pack expertly and I have pulled trailers all my life it is just that the front of the trailer is 3 feet taller and it is almost a flat surface behind my tow vehicle. I am saying I think it did great!!!

Mary C.

[Lonewolf42301]

:thinking: Okay, so, at 19 mpg, my car isn't the most fuel efficient; but, evidently, my wood trailer is. Towing 1100 lbs drops my mpg to 15 mpg, just 4mpg less. So, weight on that point may not matter. Maybe it's mostly aerodynamics.

But, remember, if you can keep your weight down on that trailer, it could be easier when you have to brake.

Very true... aero is the major concern at hiway speed... the smaller the parachute you pull, the better off you will be.... Now, stopping that brick is another matter.... getting up to speed and back down is where weight plays an issue.

[atahoekid]

:thinking: Okay, so, at 19 mpg, my car isn't the most fuel efficient; but, evidently, my wood trailer is. Towing 1100 lbs drops my mpg to 15 mpg, just 4mpg less. So, weight on that point may not matter. Maybe it's mostly aerodynamics.

But, remember, if you can keep your weight down on that trailer, it could be easier when you have to brake.

Very true... aero is the major concern at hiway speed... the smaller the parachute you pull, the better off you will be.... Now, stopping that brick is another matter.... getting up to speed and back down is where weight plays an issue.

TRUE DAT!!