This post is an account of my personal experience, and a heads-up to others, concerning a fitment issue affecting a type of Class III hitch receiver sold under the Curt, Draw-Tite, Reese, (and other) brand names, intended to fit 2nd Gen S-10 Chevy Blazers. These receivers have vertically oriented mounting flanges intended to straddle the outside surfaces of the rear frame, as opposed to 1st Gen receivers which are bolted to the bottom surfaces of the frame (Fig.1).

The 2nd Gen frame is 40 3/4 inches wide at the mounting location, so you would expect the receiver to have a dimension just slightly larger than that, just enough to allow for easy installation. But no, these receivers, like the Curt model 13300 that I bought, have a dimension between the mounting flanges of 41 1/16", resulting in a 5/16 inch total gap between the frame rails and the mounting flanges (Fig.2). And, as if that wasn't bad enough, the 1/2" grade-5 carriage bolts they supply won't go through the 12mm frame/bumper bracket holes (Fig.3).

I had a running email conversation with Bill at eTrailer.com about this, but the problem was above his pay grade. He could only say it's the one his "rep" says is for my '99 Blazer. So, I explained the issue to another dealer, who was running a sale on the DrawTite brand, and asked them to check the distance between the mounting flanges on that brand. The response was, "putting it alongside the Curt, they're identical".

So, I got hold of the upper part of the assembly drawing (Fig.4), where you can see 3 different dimensions for the mounting flange width. The dimension in red, 40.875, would be a big improvement leaving only a 1/8" gap, but the smaller of the min/max numbers in the black box near the top (40.785) would result in a virtually perfect fit. But mine and, apparently, all the other brands are being assembled WIDER than the specified MAX dimension!

I mentioned all this to Bill at eTrailer, but the best he could offer was a refund if I packed up everything I bought and sent it all back. And I almost did that, because I was definitely not going to allow that receiver to strain, stretch, or distort my frame rails, which is exactly what would happen when the bolts were tightened if something wasn't done to reduce that gap.

So I bit the bullet and had some shims made up (Fig.5) which, of course, added way too much $$ to the project cost - especially since I had to buy 6 of them just to get the fabricator interested. But after putting a shim on each side and opening the 12mm frame holes to 1/2", the fit is virtually perfect, but this was way more trouble and expense than necessary if the receiver had just been made accurately to begin with.

I'd send a copy of this post to the fabricator who's making these things if I knew who they were.

Figure 1


Figure 2


Figure 3



Figure 4


Figure 5

 

Wow. That is horrible that you had to deal with such a fitment issue. Someone less familiar with working on vehicles would have simply tried to brute force the part to fit with who knows what nasty outcome. This is not very impressive of Curt!!!

 

I think you're right about some (if not all) being force-fit. The fact that no one else (that I could find) on the forum ever posted about the problem really made me wonder. I would especially expect it to be the case where some service garage did the install. For them, time is money. Sorta like 'getter done'. They're just going to ream out the 12mm holes, tighten the bolts, and be done with it, probably without even realizing they've pulled one, or both, frame rails outward in the process. One thing that concerned me is that the rear spring shackles are right there in front of that attachment. Any frame distortion there affects those hangars. As for other DIY'ers, until someone else chimes in, we'll never know.

I'm not really blaming Curt. All the other brands are selling the exact same product, just with different labeling. They're all trusting, whoever it is that's making these things, to make them right. There's also a different design with different specs that uses a straight square tube instead of the curved round tube. That one hangs very noticeably below the bumper on each side. I have no information on it's fitment, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear it has the same problem.

 

I found that a company called Lippert Components, Inc makes the Curt hitch receivers, and probably all the other brands too, since they're all identical. So I sent them the email pasted below, and copied it to Curt Industries. Of course, I fully expect it to be ignored, but at least I tried. I'm also considering notifying NHTSA because I firmly believe this is a safety issue.
=========================================

"Hello,
You are listed as the manufacturer of vehicle hitch receivers sold under the Curt, and other, brand names. I purchased one of those products, sold under Curt p/n 13300 which is listed to fit 2nd Gen Chevy Blazers ('98-'05).

During installation, I found that the receiver mounting surfaces were way too wide for the frame width, leaving a huge and unsafe 5/16" gap. Correcting this glaring safety problem resulted in a great deal of wasted time, money, and effort.

For your information, I have written a detailed report, including pictures, of this issue, and posted it on the Chevy Blazer Forum HERE*. As this flaw presents potential safety hazards, I highly recommend your management team read it, and that all unsold receivers of this type be recalled.

In lieu of recall, at least include the shims necessary to correct this issue with each receiver sold, and notify previous customers of their availability.

* https://blazerforum.com/forum/2nd-ge...blazer-106744/ "

 

Update to the hitch receiver shimming issue:

1. For the record, and to no one's surprise I'm sure, I received no reply from the hitch manufacturer, Lippert Components Inc.
2. If anyone's interested, I still have the two pairs of extra shims I had made up. If you want a pair, PM me.

 

I got the same treatment --- with a threat to sue me if I mentioned the vendor's name on any website or forum.

This was concerning a pair of lifting blocks for the rear springs and the small wedge they provide with instructions to install it to raise the pinion a few degrees to "compensate" so-said their printed instructions.

Long story short -- that info was wrong and after reversing the wedge, it corrected their printed mistake and my mirrors all got clear again.

Then --- I called them and told them what I did and they INSISTED they were right and if I said to put the wedge in as I stated, they'd seek damages and monetary compensation for libel.

Companies either ignore or put you on terminal HOLD or threaten to sue.

What's wrong with these people any more?

 

>> ... threat to sue me if I mentioned the vendor's name ...<<

That's why I included the pictures, especially their own assembly drawing.
It's pretty hard to argue libel with factual evidence staring you in the face.