I was at the RV shop recently and the electrician asked me how my new shocks worked out and I could not answer him. The reason I couldn't answer him is that I didn't know.

Human nature dictates that we never make mistakes because whatever we do is obviously well thought out. Otherwise we would not have done it... right? We are too smart to be wrong. Did we buy the right tires for our trailer? Absolutely. Is it better to live in California where you live? Of course. Is it better to remain single for 40 years? Sure it is. If you have. Whatever our position on anything it is the right position without doubt. We are creatures of vested interests and tend to remain so all of our lives.

So when I read where people who put shocks on their Casita were very happy that they worked so well I assumed that was the only thing they could say... nothing less. I am also quite sure that any evidence they provide to substantiate their claim will be anecdotal at best or at worst it will be anecdotal spiced with flakes of science they don't understand. Therefore don't ask me if my shocks work. I really don't know.

But I did do a little mechanical study just for kicks that lead me to believe, however so misguided, that there may be something good about putting shocks on your trailers. Maybe

To test the shocks vs no-shocks I mounted a dial indicator on the frame and fixed the tip over the dog bone axel. See the image below

I took the return spring out of the indicator and packed the whole thing with thick axel grease to that it would move in both directions and would stay there until the stem was pulled back out again.

I drove a stretch of smooth highway at 50 mph with shocks and without shocks. The amount of indicator movement did not change. I repeated this test three times with no appreciable difference in axel bounce.

(The actual over all movement is unimportant since there is no measured distance from the spindle axis to the place on the dog bone where the indicator rests therefore no angle of flexure can be determined. Also note that only movement was measured, not velocity This means that the shock could effect the speed at which a bounce occurs even though the overall movement remains unchanged. However, inertia being as physically dogmatic as it is, I'll take a leap and say that velocity was pretty closely tied to bounce probably... probably.

The second test I did was to put a two by four on a section of road and drive over it at 20 mph with shock and without shock. This test produced more definable results. The shocks limited the length of bump rise to 90% of the same bump without shocks. Repeated it three times with about the same results

What does this mean? Don't ask me. I don't know for sure. But since I do drive a substantial amount of hard rock roads it "seems" as if the axel bounce my be retarded somewhat by the shocks which saves me (perhaps) some rivet pops. I don't know. I am just guessing.

A better test would be to mount an electronic accelerometer on the floor of the egg and record the telemetry. This would measure what you really want to measure, the height and velocity of the bump in relationship to the road. My test measures the movement of the wheel in relationship to the frame. Not the same.