first motorhome - old or new-ish?

[hammer]

Hi - we are going to buy our first motorhome soon. We have spent a long time checking out different layouts and have found some that will work for us.

 

My question is - for our budget (just over £30k) we can choose 3 types of van: a 3 year old budget brand such as a Roller Team Auto roller, a 6-7 year old coachbuilt (such as a Benimar or Dethleffs) or a 10-11 year old A class van. Apart from the age they all have similar miles on the odometer. They all have a similar layout and size.

 

I guess the older German brands should have a higher build quality but the base vehicle could throw up problems as they are older.

 

We will be using the van for weekends & holidays with the children (including in winter) - can anyone offer any advise on how they would choose?

 

Thanks

[Robbo]

Hi, welcome to the AOL forum.

 

Bit more info required:

 

A) Which category driving license do you hold

B) How many children and rough idea of ages

[hammer]

Hi - I have a C1 licence (wife does not) so we want a van to be less than 3500Kg.

Kids aged 5 & 8

 

The vans we are looking at all have very similar layouts (rear garage)

 

 

I am really just looking for advise of whether a newer (but cheaper) brand might be a better buy than an older German built one

[crocs]

Almost impossible to answer this (but many will try! 8-) ).

 

It really depends on the condition of each. It also depends on what makes you feel comfortable. try and think of it as buying a nearly new Kia, a few years old Ford or a 10 year old Audi. Which of those makes you feel more comfortable? BTW, those brands are more or less random choices as people will have differing opinions on them.

[pepe63xnotuse]

crocs - 2017-05-02 3:55 PM

 

Almost impossible to answer this (but many will try! 8-) ).

 

It really depends on the condition of each. It also depends on what makes you feel comfortable. try and think of it as buying a nearly new Kia, a few years old Ford or a 10 year old Audi. Which of those makes you feel more comfortable? BTW, those brands are more or less random choices as people will have differing opinions on them.

 

Nicely put..

I would add;

Hammer, which ever route you take, do research the van's usable payload and axle capacities, especially as you've got a couple of kiddies (5, coming on 10? and 8 coming on 15? (lol) ) because when traipsing around showroom forecourts, there may be a temptation to get as large a van as you can for your buck....? :-S

 

[BruceM]

It’s a pertinent question and one that I had to grapple with before getting my van recently. I think a lot depends on what sort of motorhome owning experience appeals to you.

 

Like yourself, identifying a vehicle with the right habitation format, the right condition and within an acceptable age range whatever that would mean was initially a challenge. I spent 3 months studying the market and had not planned to buy anything for another 9 months when a van appeared that on paper ticked all the boxes so I brought my plans forward. I ended up with an 2003 ‘A’ class Dethleffs for a little over half your budget.

 

The key point here though is that although the base vehicle was in great shape and the habitation unit was in good condition the habitation unit had experienced a number of ‘temporary fixes’ or breakages that detracted from the perception that it was a good van. For instance, loose ceiling lights had been retained with white blue tack, broken control knobs had not been replaced, the blinds needed servicing, almost every screw and bolt needed tightening etc. I’m competent with mechanicals/electrics/gas so working through the van and getting everything up to snuff over the last four weeks has been great fun, has allowed me to get to know the vehicle inside out and will allow my wife and I to tour Europe with confidence.

 

If on the other hand if I’d wanted to have a vehicle that I was reasonably certain was ‘good to go’ from day one I’d have probably had to have a budget similar to yours and aim at something about six years old from a reputable dealer with some kind of guarantee.

 

 

[hammer]

Thanks for the replies.

 

(we want to get the smallest van that is practical for our 'needs' - we do a lot of hillwalking and biking so would like something that will be possible to leave roadside/in small car parks when out and about during the daytime.

 

Sleeping will be a mix of wild and campsites.

[Billggski]

Some considerations.

Damp, damp and er....damp.

Get a habitation check whatever you buy.

[hammer]

Hi - regards the habitation check. Would you trust a recent certificate that a dealer/independent vendor provides or is it wise to get my own independent inspection done?

[flicka]

Hi Hammer & welcome to the forum

Another point you may wish to consider :-

Diesel engine emissions are now flavour of the month & things will only get worse. London already has the LEZ & media indicates more UK cities will follow, Similar is spreading across the continent, with the lead of Germany & France.

 

Oldest van pre2006 will have highest emissions, Euro 2. Changed to Euro 3 during 2006, but generally seen on 2007 motorhomes, & will already have the greater restrictions. (Euro 3 easily identified by new model nose on Fiat/Peugeot/Citroen, not so easily on A Class.

Vans around 2010 will be Euro 4 & those around 2013/4 will be Euro 5

Current are Euro 6.

 

You may not think it a problem now, especially if you don't intend visiting cities, but it will effect sales value when you want to change in a few years time.

[mgnbuk]

I would buy the newer Roller Team out of those choices because :

 

1). It will be Euro 5 compliant. As the witch hunt against diesels appears to be getting underway, it is the earlier vehicles that are going to be affected soonest. A Euro 5 vehicle will allow you to go to more places for longer before restrictions start to be applied. This will probably also affect any future resale value.

 

2). A 3 year old RT will (assuming the hab checks have been kept up to) have 2 years of factory no-contribution water ingress warranty remaining, plus another 5 years with an increasing contribution on your part - better than you will get from a dealer on an older van.

 

3). The RT is built with a modern, wood free construction method, with GRP walls, roof & underside & has Styrofoam insulation. This gives a lighter build without compromising strength or insulation, so it will have a better payload than an older van. You don't say which RT, but (for example) a 7 metre 707 overcab has 500kg at 3500 maximum according to the brochure & I would suggest you want at least 500kg available.

 

4). If the mileage is the same as the older vans, it is less likely to suffer from "standing around for long periods" problems - they were built to be used !

 

From experience, RT get some of the "budget" savings by specifing (for example) the Combi water/ space heater without the electric option - I can't say I missed that, as the unit was very economical on gas & most reported problems on the fora seem to concern the (expensive) electric elements failing. The only area that did seem "budget" was the seating area upholstry foam - though on my T-Line 670 the matress was good - which is a relatively cheap & easy problem to address.

 

I suspect that your main worry will be payload & axle loadings - you may well find that you can't actually put much in a garage, or hang 4 bikes on the back before one, the other or both are exceeded. Toys like roll out awnings, satelite domes, habitation aircon, solar panel, tow bar etc. will quickly eat into payload & may make the vehicle un-viable - an accurate weighing of total weight in running order and axle weights is a must to be sure that you can make it work legally, so do that before you commit to buy ! If a seller doesn't want to give you accurate weights - ask yourself why & be prepared to walk away.

 

Good luck - it is a bit of a mine field out there, but rewarding if you can get it right & make it work.

 

Nigel B

 

 

 

[AliB]

Important considerations are payload and seat belt provision. Older vans tend to have a lower payload if restricted to 3500Kg.

10 year old vehicles may not have 3 point seat belts on all rear seats.

[Keithl]

AliB - 2017-05-03 10:25 AM

 

Important considerations are payload and seat belt provision. Older vans tend to have a lower payload if restricted to 3500Kg.

10 year old vehicles may not have 3 point seat belts on all rear seats.

 

And a lot of MH seats and seat belts are not suitable for child seats and/or booster seats which may legally be required according to the age and weight of the child. MH seats tend to be softer material than car seats and consequently do not offer sufficient support for car seats, check very carefully that you can all be seated safely before parting with your money.

 

If you are struggling one option may be for one child to sit in the front passenger seat (check air bag suitability) and your OH and the second child to sit in the rear.

 

Keith.

 

PS And once again check and doublecheck that you have sufficient payload for your planned travels!

[PJay]

Have to agree with previous postings. Weight/Payload will be your biggest problem. Second will be child seat belts. As you can drive over 3500, I would go for a bigger payload van. Will the wife need to drive? probably not! Payload is a big problem , we struggle and there are only 2 of us! Ok we go for months rather than weeks holidays. 4 Bikes will be weighty on the back , and Kids grow and get heavier quickly!

 

Best of luck with your search

PJay

[hammer]

More to think about!

 

Payload could be an issue, although we are pretty good at travelling light (we recently had a ski holiday and between the 4 of us we had 1 ski bag and 2 hold bags which held everything, including ski boots and helmets - most people on the flight seemed to have a ski bag, a huge hold bag and a ski boot bag EACH - incredible!)

Our bikes are 50Kg for the 4 and would keep them inside the garage. If a bike rack was fitted I could remove it altogether to save a little weight (and ditch any tv set/satellite dish etc!). We could get a van over 3500Kg but my wife would take the kids away herself sometimes - looks pretty expensive to add the C1 category to her licence.

 

As a rough guide does the MIRO include a driver and a tank of fuel, but no water, leisure battery or anything else that is useful?

 

 

[david lloyd]

hammer - 2017-05-03 2:02 PM

 

More to think about!

 

Our bikes are 50Kg for the 4 and would keep them inside the garage. If a bike rack was fitted I could remove it altogether to save a little weight (and ditch any tv set/satellite dish etc!). We could get a van over 3500Kg but my wife would take the kids away herself sometimes - looks pretty expensive to add the C1 category to her licence.

 

 

50kg is very light for 4 bikes Hammer, but do be aware also that, in addition to rear axle weight limits, garages usually have a weight limit too - and this can be as little as 150kg so one other thing to check.

 

David

[hammer]

We are definitely 50Kg for the bikes - good bikes which is why they will be going inside the garage: away from prying eyes!

 

However, having done a quick calculation we might well struggle with a van under 3500Kg as just the weight of passengers & bikes is over 200kg and that is only going to get higher..

[Robbo]

Buy a van at £1000 lower than your budget and use the saving for your wife to obtain a C1 license.

 

With two growing children and all the associated clobber a +3500Kg van might be your best bet in the long term.

[euroserv]

I think the Kia/Ford/Audi analogy above is a little unfair.

 

Until very recently, Kia cars were based on a generation or two older architecture and technology than mainstream rivals. They have almost caught up now. A kia of 10 years ago would have been appropriately poorly built inside (for the price it was new) and would ride and handle like a horse drawn cart compared to European cars of that age. The engines would be adequate but not be at the cutting edge either.

 

Where am i going with this?

 

Most motorhomes are based on either Fiat/Peugeot, Ford or Mercedes platforms. At any age, each of these vehicles was at the leading edge of design and build for the type of vehicle that we are talking about. While a Mercedes might have been screwed together better than a Fiat; the cab would rust more readily and repairs when required may be more expensive. The base vehicle market (let's be frank; Vans) has always been a fairly level playing field in terms of emissions, ability and durability. Some people prefer the firm ride of most Fiat's to the softer ride of a Mercedes and find the former more positive on the road. You should drive some.

 

My advice would be to go for the newest vehicle that you can afford. If the interior is of a lesser quality than you would like; the kids should help accelerate the replacement cycle and you can always re-cover things that you don't like or tighten the odd loose screw but underneath you need a Euro5 engine. I understand from reading these forums that you will most likely want to change the vehicle in less time than you imagined (due to layout issues) or that you may go off the idea altogether; a Euro5 will be much more sought after and easier to sell in the near future and next time you need to be looking for a Euro6 if you remain a motorhome fan.

Whatever you decide to do, and no matter how much of a slating Diesel is getting right now; don't be tempted by a 15 year old Petrol engine or by any diesel with less than about 120hp. You don't want to be spending the rest of your leisure time in the slow lane. 'Taking it easy' sounds OK but it wears thin.

[crocs]

euroserv - 2017-05-04 11:42 AM

 

I think the Kia/Ford/Audi analogy above is a little unfair.

 

Until very recently, Kia cars were based on a generation or two older architecture and technology than mainstream rivals. They have almost caught up now. A kia of 10 years ago would have been appropriately poorly built inside (for the price it was new) and would ride and handle like a horse drawn cart compared to European cars of that age. The engines would be adequate but not be at the cutting edge either.

 

Where am i going with this?

 

Most motorhomes are based on either Fiat/Peugeot, Ford or Mercedes platforms. At any age, each of these vehicles was at the leading edge of design and build for the type of vehicle that we are talking about. While a Mercedes might have been screwed together better than a Fiat; the cab would rust more readily and repairs when required may be more expensive. The base vehicle market (let's be frank; Vans) has always been a fairly level playing field in terms of emissions, ability and durability. Some people prefer the firm ride of most Fiat's to the softer ride of a Mercedes and find the former more positive on the road. You should drive some.

 

My advice would be to go for the newest vehicle that you can afford. If the interior is of a lesser quality than you would like; the kids should help accelerate the replacement cycle and you can always re-cover things that you don't like or tighten the odd loose screw but underneath you need a Euro5 engine. I understand from reading these forums that you will most likely want to change the vehicle in less time than you imagined (due to layout issues) or that you may go off the idea altogether; a Euro5 will be much more sought after and easier to sell in the near future and next time you need to be looking for a Euro6 if you remain a motorhome fan.

Whatever you decide to do, and no matter how much of a slating Diesel is getting right now; don't be tempted by a 15 year old Petrol engine or by any diesel with less than about 120hp. You don't want to be spending the rest of your leisure time in the slow lane. 'Taking it easy' sounds OK but it wears thin.

 

I'd agree with this except for the first sentence as I think it's unfair to say that the Kia/Ford/Audi analogy is unfair.

 

That's because nowhere in my post did I comment on the suitability or quality of any of those brands. My point is more around what makes people feel comfortable. For example, some people are quite happy owning a Kia whereas others would not be seen dead in anything other than an Audi. And yet, they both do the same thing - transport us from A to B.

 

It's the same with Motorhomes. Some people are quite happy owning a budget model whereas others would not be seen dead in anything other than an Hymer. Each to their own as far as I'm concerned.

 

NOTE: No Kias were harmed in the making of this post. :->

[Derek Uzzell]

hammer - 2017-05-03 2:02 PM

 

...As a rough guide does the MIRO include a driver and a tank of fuel, but no water, leisure battery or anything else that is useful?

 

 

There’s no certainty regarding the ‘formula’ a motorhome manufacturer might use when quoting a MIRO datum (that’s assuming the manufacturer actually bothers to do this, of course!)

 

You can download some earlier Roller-Team brochures from here

 

https://www.rollerteammotorhomes.co.uk/downloads

 

As a MIRO-related example, for 2013 “T-Line” models the following advice is provided

 

"Certified vehicle weight. Comprises: driver, fuel tank fully filled (60 lt.), fresh

water tank filled to 50 lt. (use of special drain valve) and aluminium gas bottles

(max. 15 kg.) filled at 90% of their capacity, and certified tolerance (+/- 5%)

(2001/116/CE). Warning: optional items installed are not included in the

determination of the load less weight in running order of the vehicle.”

 

If there’s any doubt whatsoever about a motorhome’s overall weight (and/or the vehicle’s maximum axle loading) being exceeded, you’d be wise not to rely on brochure figures and insist that the vehicle be weighed before committing to the purchase.

 

It’s nonsense to maintain that four average-size people cannot travel legally in a 3500kg-chassis motorhome. As you’ve mentioned regarding your skiing holiday, it may be necessary to deliberately keep weight down (eg. use Kindles rather than carry bags of books and to travel with a limited supply of fresh water on-board), but that’s hardly rocket science. There seems to be a widespread belief that it’s legitimate to expect to carry an unlimited amount of clobber in a motorhome irrespective of the vehicle’s weight limits and to ‘accessorise’ the vehicle with no thought that awnings, towbars, sat-TVs, extra batteries, etc. will all diminish the available payload.

 

As Howard Hughes is said to have advised “Simplificate and add lightness”.

[hammer]

Thanks for all the replies. If I go over 3500Kg, does anyone have any predictions (dust off the crystal ball) about the future resellability of the van. Less people will have a C1 licence through grandfathers rights so the potential market is shrinking.

 

I have had a look at road toll costs in France for a vehicle over 3500Kg and it seems to be more than double the cost. Do they have number plate recognition linked to a database, or how do they know your vehicles maximum weight? It will be obvious with big vans but one I have looked at is relatively compact and apart from reading the weight plate on the van, it looks the same as one parked next to it which is less thank 3500Kg. I guess the automatic payage booths might measure the height or length of the vehicle but it's weight?

 

Going over 3500Kg is looking more likely - does anyone know offhand of any motorhomes with large payloads (on paper anyway...) below 3500Kg: 4 berth, big garage with double or twin beds above. Drop down or make up bed at front is good, a van with a big overcab bed not ideal.

The highest payload van I have found so far is a Burstner with apparently 475Kg

 

 

Many thanks

 

 

[AliB]

I cannot predict the future requirements for over 3500Kg vehicles but I believe some people will always want the larger payload. There are "younger" people with HGV licenses. There are lots of people who use big motorhomes who do not use these forums. Go to any motor racing circuit and observe the large motorhomes with trailers for the race car.

 

New vehicles are using lighter construction methods. The Hymer Exsis-i range typically have a payload of 690-700Kg. But don't look at the price!

[pepe63xnotuse]

Didn't Eddie (Judgemental) praise the payload of the 3500kg, Euramobil, over-cab that he used to have?

 

(and at the time, I believe his two (teens at the time?kids, travelled with them..)

 

No idea what model it was though, not without scouring the forum.... :-S

 

[Brian Kirby]

euroserv - 2017-05-04 11:42 AM...........................My advice would be to go for the newest vehicle that you can afford. If the interior is of a lesser quality than you would like; the kids should help accelerate the replacement cycle and you can always re-cover things that you don't like or tighten the odd loose screw but underneath you need a Euro5 engine. .................

Agreed. All the arguments point this way. I also think it would be worth comparing the MIROs between the vans you have shortlisted, and checking how each is calculated.

 

With a Ducato, the fuel tank (generally, but check the spec, as there are options the manufacturer may have specified) holds 90 litres, which weighs 76kg. Water weighs 1kg per litre. A 13kg gas cylinder (steel, the standard Calor type), weighs approximately 15Kg. It is the gas which weighs 13kg. Total weight therefore 28kg. Similar logic for the 7kg variety, cylinder about 8kg + 7kg gas = 15kg per cylinder.

 

Some include a calculation for the habitation load. I would be inclined to strip this out if you can identify it, then strip out the weights for their stated gas/water and fuel allowances within the MIRO calculation, to bring them to the most comparable basis you can arrive at. Then take account of the +/- 5% (usually, but some may use a different presentation) tolerance on built weight for each by assuming it will be +5% (or whatever) and then see which weighs the least amount, and deduct that from 3,500kg to get your gross payload.

 

Given your growing children, I'd target the lightest van first to see if it fits your expectations on quality, and then see if you can persuade the seller to get it weighed to prove the manufacturer's claimed weight. If not, try the next lightest.

 

My other caveat would be to compare the rear overhangs (how far the bodywork projects behind the rear axle). The shorter the better, as the longer this is, the more of the load you carry will be transferred to the rear axle - and the 3,500kg Fiat/Peugeot/Citroen chassis has a 2,000kg rear axle load limit. So, if one of the vans is lighter overall, but has a relatively long rear overhang, and another is a bit heavier but has a short rear overhang (assuming they have similar layouts), you may find the heavier van actually gives you the highest usable payload because it will transfer less of that payload to its rear axle.

 

Basically, motorhomes are like see-saws, with the rear axle as the fulcrum. Every 1kg you place behind the rear axle deducts weight from the front axle, but since the weight itself is unchanged, the weight deducted from the front must transfer to the rear. So, for example, 50kg added behind the rear axle might reduce the front axle load by 10kg, but will impose 60kg on the rear axle (60 - 10 = 50kg). It is not at all uncommon for vans with long rear overhangs to run out of rear axle capacity before they reach their maximum permissible overall weight.

 

Sorry to add another potential complication, but better aware than not. If you have some idea of what you may take, what it all weighs, and where it might be carried, you can do some rough calculations on the impact on rear axle load. Won't be perfect, but should be good enough to enable you to estimate whether any of your shortlisted vans might prove problematic with rear axle load.