Originally Posted by BigBaron
As an engineer, you should also know that the forces generated by the spring bars on a traditional WDH are torsion forces that act as a lever on the frame of the TV, transferring some of the weight from the rear of the TV to the front.
The direction of the forces that create this torsion is completely irrelevant to the transfer of weight on the TV. Only the direction and magnitude of the torsion that creates the transfer matters.
First of all, love the Jack Nicholson avatar.
Secondly, and respectfully, you are incorrect. (Those not interested in a lesson in statics need not continue.)
You say that the direction of the force is irrelevant to the transfer of weight, and that only the direction and magnitude of the torsion matters. The problem with your statement is that you can not define the magnitude of the torsion unless you know the direction of the force.
Torque is a measurement of the torsional force about a point, due to a force at some other point. Torque equals the magnitude of the force, times the distance between the point and the force, perpendicular to the force. You can't know the perpendicular distance unless you know the direction of the force.
In the case of the traditional WDH, the force is nearly vertical, so the perpendicular distance is nearly horizontal. In the case of the Anderson, the force exerted by the chains is nearly horizontal, making the perpendicular distance nearly vertical.
The effect is profound, due to the trigonometry involved. You must have a tremendous amount of force from the Anderson to get a similar torsion from the traditional WDH. But as the Anderson coupler approaches level (angle is zero, and inline with the force exerted), there can be no more weight transfer, which is what limits the Anderson in actual weight transferred. Not so with a traditional WDH. The more you lift, the more is transferred. If fact you have to be careful that you don't actually unload the rear axle.