tag axle campers

[snail]

Hi all, going to retire early, next year, thinking about changing van for a tag axle, maybe a cheiftan? just to gain more payload and more living space, my concerns are over the weight at 5 ton, not allowed in french centre villes?, 3 axles on french,spanish toll road charges? and in Austria, Switzerland with go boxes, general exclusion from carparks because of weight etc, we currently use aires and passions quite alot how do you get on with the xtra length,weight, issuse and is it worth it? not interested in towing a car as may as well be a tugger, been there done that and not going back, would appreciate any experiences from tag axle owners that cross the channel, presently have a 2007 hymer a class at 7 mtr and difficult to park that sometimes!

[Guest JudgeMental]

You list some of the negatives of owning a larger vehicle. Its really an individual decision if the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Personally, I just dont get the big is better menatality.....also I don't see why 2 people can not manage within 3500kg - but that is me ;-)

[Ris]

Our tag axle weighs 4,500 kilos, only been refused access to French sites on 2 occassions in 4 years, one would not allow double axles the other due to weight as the weather had been very wet. Do note that in the CC Europe sites guide it does often state "no double axles" so just avoid them.

 

Can only talk about French toll roads, have found that if the manned booths are used Class 2 applies but if you go through the automatic barriers then height and weight are automatically calculated, then prepare for Class 4!!!.

[terry1956]

Hi, I to looked at a tag axle, but giv up on this idea as I think that under new EU laws its going to become harder to use these as the years past so not to good an investment when trying to sell later on.

I just keep to the 3.5 ton hymer and if needs take a trailer, the needs being if I am planing a fishing trip, 8 fly rods and all the gear is a real pain to place in a B544 so the box trailer takes the load, or if we are towing the smart car, the the rods fit in a alloy box I made that fits between the tailer cross sections.

think long and hard about buying a motorhome over 3.5 ton.

terry

[ron.]

When we had a tag axle I was told by a site owner that they were less trouble in poor weather simply because each rear wheel carried less weight than the normal van. I though this a fair point.

[Rayjsj]

ron. - 2010-03-11 8:25 PM

 

When we had a tag axle I was told by a site owner that they were less trouble in poor weather simply because each rear wheel carried less weight than the normal van. I though this a fair point.

 

I think he is absolutely correct, however at the moment everyone is trying to be 'Greener' that everyone else, and i think that soon everything over 3500 kg will be thought of as a 'Big truck' and Excluded/overcharged and generally thought of as socially unacceptable(the way some idiots think of 4x4's) personally I think they are mad/bad/ill informed. *-) Ray

 

And I thought the 'No Twin Axle' rule was directed at Travellers caravans ?

They would have done better saying' no cut glass windows and No Ford transit Pick-Ups' (oops is that racist ??).

[Derek Uzzell]

snail

 

I believe you might have difficulty if you wanted to continue using France Passion sites (though you should be OK generally with 'aires') due to the sheer length of the motorhome and the huge turning-circle that the configuration normally produces.

 

(I've always wondered who started using 'tag-axle' to describe FWD motorhomes with tandem rear axles. Perhaps the same person who coined the motorhome-related terms 'low profile' and 'cab-over'.)

[emmbeedee]

Derek Uzzell - 2010-03-12 9:06 AM

 

snail

 

(I've always wondered who started using 'tag-axle' to describe FWD motorhomes with tandem rear axles. Perhaps the same person who coined the motorhome-related terms 'low profile' and 'cab-over'.)

 

Probably the same person who started calling mobility buggys "scooters".

[Brian Kirby]

If you really want that large a van, have you considered getting one with rear wheel drive and, preferably, twin rear wheels?  Iveco or Mercedes both supply chassis to converters for their larger vans: Hymer, Neismann, and Carthago for example.

The problems (not from personal experience) with these long, so called tag axle, vans is that a) they are front wheel drive and b) they have to have the second axle because neither a single axle, nor the tyres, could otherwise absorb the resulting rear end loads.  They are, in my opinion, a compromise too far. 

They have little traction relative to rolling resistance because the drive is through the front wheels, which carry little relative load, yet have to propel (drag!) the twin axles along over whatever is presented beneath the tyres.  Expect traction problems on anything remotely soft or slippery. 

Next up, the whole front drivetrain/suspension is being asked to work far harder, on a permanent basis, than it seem to have been designed to withstand.  I do not know whether owners suffer problems with top and bottom pivot wear, worn track rod ends, worn CV joints, and failed wheel bearings, but if they don't, I would suspect only the relatively low annual mileages of most such vehicles has allowed them to get away with it.  A simple (and very unreliable! :-)) engineering principle is "if it looks wrong, it probably is".  Add to this the extreme manoeuvring restrictions Derek refers to, and I'd just take the alternative route, or go for a far smaller van if it is to be FWD (which I have!).

If you want a "biggun", base it on something that left the factory designed for the loads you will subject it to, rather than something that has been adapted (bodged :-))to do a job it was never designed for. 

I shall be torn limb from limb, of course, for this opinion, but I think, as vehicles, these tag axle FWD vans are absolutely barking!  Apologies to the apoplectic. :-D

[The Decorator]

I always wondered what a "tag axle" was, probably an americanised name.

 

1. Does that mean the rear 4 wheels all drive or is it 2 front 2 back and if so which 2?

 

2. If the rear 4 all drive it must tear at any grass surface or are they all independant ? (there is a word I know).

 

3. Can the 4 wheel drive be changed to 2

 

4. Is TAG an abreviation?

 

PS. I see Brian has answered some of my thoughts while I was composing the note elsewhere.

 

(............"They have little traction relative to rolling resistance because the drive is through the front wheels, which carry little relative load".............)

 

Is Brian now saying they are front wheel drive only? I'm now more confused.

 

 

[donna miller]

Derek Uzzell - 2010-03-12 9:06 AM

 

 

(I've always wondered who started using 'tag-axle' to describe FWD motorhomes with tandem rear axles. Perhaps the same person who coined the motorhome-related terms 'low profile' and 'cab-over'.)

 

Technically, a 'tag axle' is a non driven 3rd axle, directly behind the drive axle, i.e. it 'tags' along with the vehicle.

 

I cannot see that in a m/home, they serve any real purpose, everyone knows that they are supposed to spread the weight of the vehicle, but in reality, doing so present more problems than they cure. There is significantly more tyre scrub with a 3rd axle and the turning circle is greatly increased.

The same weight distribution benefits are better achieved with a twin wheel set-up, giving you the added benefit of the reduced weight of an extra axle, albeit with a slightly longer wheelbase.

This tag axle configuration is adopted in commercial use more as a means of reducing road tax on HGV's and you will find that 99% of those tag axles can be lifted whilst the vehicle is running empty, thus saving on tyre wear and fuel consumption. The difference in taxation for an 18 tonne vehicle with 2 axles and the same vehicle with 3, is £450 per year, even larger savings are made when you go above 25 tonne and up to 44 tonne, however, you will not see any reduction in tax for your vehicle with your extra axle.

As already stated, European tolls tend to be higher for 3 axle vehicles and a lot of sites simply turn you away.

 

So, yes they look nice, but are they really worth the associated problems.

[The Decorator]

The TAG axle configuration I'm Ok on now.

 

Regarding the twin rear wheel set up; I assume the vehicle is RWD (perhaps not?)

 

Do all 4 rear wheels drive or do 2 wheels free wheel as in the tag axle? Inner or outer?

 

If all 4 are driving I assume there is a dif arrangement as standard and all 4 wheels are then independent?

 

What is the object of an additional pair of wheels apart from the obvious regarding load carrying?

 

Is there an additional weight allowance related to an extra ‘pair of wheels’ as opposed to an additional axle?

 

 

 

[Blizzard]

Does "Tag Axle" not refer to an extra axle being tagged on behind another - Or is that being too simplistic ?

 

Our MH is front wheel drive with 2 rear axles, neither of which provide drive.

 

I've never seen a Tag axle set up, with either or both of the rear axles providing drive, but I've not been in this game for very long.

[Brian Kirby]

Twin rear wheels are mounted either side of a single rear axle, the one axle thus has four wheels and tyres, two per side.

The tag axle, as Donna says, is a trailed second rear axle, mounted behind the driving axle, often carried raised when the vehicle is unladen.  It shares load, but provides no drive.  Usually on rigid chassis HGVs.  Also used on coaches where the rear, non-driving, pair of wheels will often caster, but will not be carried raised when the coach is unladen.

The term, as Derek says, is technically misapplied to describe twin rear axle FWD motorhomes, where neither axle is, in fact, driven.  I am unaware of any (though there must, surely be one?) true tag axle motorhome with rear wheel drive and a trailed second axle.

[The Decorator]

Blizzard,

 

That must be some weight to shift on soggy ground then with 4 wheels sticking to the ground and all that weight relying on a lighter front end trying to pull it away.

 

Jon

[Mel B]

We have a twin rear-wheel drive Ford based motorhome which has 4 wheels on one rear axle. It means in our case that, although it is classed as having a MTPLM 3,500kg, it can be uprated to 3,950kg if we so desired without any mechanical changes - just a paper exercise. The existing maximum axle loads cannot be increased but as the vehicle was originally built to take the higher load and only plated at the lower weight by the converter, the front and rear axles are well able to take the higher load if we so wished.

 

All 4 rear wheels drive the vehicle so you have very good traction and it also has traction control bulit in too.

 

We have the benefit of being able to carry a heavier load if we needed but without the extra weight or problems that a second rear axle means and being rear wheel drive we get the benefit of the extra wheels. A tag (or double rear) axle vehicle has the extra support for the additional load weight but with not being rear wheel drive has to rely on just the one pair of front wheels for traction - on a large vehicle, as has been said above, this really doesn't make sense to me either.

:-S

[Blizzard]

The Decorator - 2010-03-12 6:22 PM

 

Blizzard,

 

That must be some weight to shift on soggy ground then with 4 wheels sticking to the ground and all that weight relying on a lighter front end trying to pull it away.

 

Jon

 

 

Fully agree Jon,

 

That's why our our sites are planned carefully, usually on hardstandings where we can. Not always ideal, but it suits us at the moment while the kids are with us. :-D

 

In my earlier post, I was referring to never having seen tag axle set ups on motorhomes, rather than on commercial vehicles. I hope that didn't cause too much confusion.

[Derek Uzzell]

Brian Kirby - 2010-03-12 6:21 PM

 

...I am unaware of any (though there must, surely be one?) true tag axle motorhome with rear wheel drive and a trailed second axle.

 

I don't know of any European-built motorhome (past or present) that has a 'genuine' tag-axle configuration, but the arrangement is evidently quite common on large American RVs.

 

See the following for more information:

 

http://blog.rv.net/2008/11/how-to-justify-a-tag-axle-on-your-next-coach/

 

http://www.motorhomemagazine.com/forums/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/16636791.cfm

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axle

 

 

 

 

 

[Brock]

I thought the benefit of a tandem axles was that the wheels intrude less into the body of the van at a single point and thus make interior design/layout easier. For example, ambulances for disabled people with restricted mobility often have tandem axles to make it easier for wheelchair access.

 

Having easy access to the second rear axle wheel is also a benefit.

 

Tandem axles are rare on commercial vehicles because they are more expensive and because most commercial vans would hit the weight limit before they 'cube out' ie run out of space. The body also rides above the rear axle so intrusion is a lesser issue (commercial vans are designed around standard pallet sizes).

 

I presume a motorhome can ride lower, and be more fuel efficient, on a tandem axle. For motorhomes, where weight matters, an AlKo tandem axle is lighter than the standard commercial variant.

[ron.]

Reverting back to the original posting is the fact that tag axle vans have a big advantage over conventional single axle types in terms of road stability. This might also be true of single axle twin wheel types of course but I have never driven one to be able to comment.

[Mel B]

ron

 

I've never driven a tag axle but I can definitely tell you that our Ford based twin rear wheel drive motorhome sticks to the road like glue, better than the front wheel drive single rear axle Fiat we had previously. We're hoping our new van will still be good too, although it's a front wheel drive single rear axle Ford but it is a bit lower height wise. We'll soon find out! If not, then it'll be a case of installing air ride suspension assistance again.

[Big Momma]

I collect my new Autotrail Comanche (Tag Axle) on 1st May (8.7 Metres long). One of the concerns before ordering was the potential limitation of both UK and European sites. So I spent a great deal of time researching, I looked at all of the usual camp site guides, CC, C&CC, ACSI etc. etc. I made phone calls to the two major UK Clubs who told me that they can accommodate my vehicle and that where there are restrictions that this is generally due to access to the site rather than size of pitches. Upon collection of my van I am spending the weekend at the Salisbury C&CC Site, checked with Warden, no problems. At the end of May I am spending a week at the Brecon CC Site, hardstanding and fully serviced pitch. In summer I am doing a 30 day tour of Scotland using 5 CC and 2 C&CC sites. I have also Emailed other non CC or C&CC sites and they have confirmed no problems with accommodating large Units (some have reserved pitches for larger units, fully serviced).

 

As for Europe, did the same exercise. Emailed several sites in France, Switzerland, Germany, Holland and Belgium and got the same positive feedback. The ACSI DVD lists sites that accept Motorhomes over 7.5 Tonnes and so I emailed a few of these just to confirm that they could accommodate my van with same positive results.

 

Now I know that there will be a lot of sites that will not accommodate my size of van and I will just have to live with that. However, I do not think that the larger van is going to restrict my enjoyment of my hobby. I may have to double check with a site before I book but hey isn't that part of the fun of planning trips away, it is for me anyway.

 

As for the tolls, well I will just have to try it out and see what happens, if I end up paying more then "Se la Vie".

 

 

[Derek Uzzell]

Big Momma - 2010-03-13 9:13 PM

 

I collect my new Autotrail Comanche (Tag Axle) on 1st May (8.7 Metres long)...

 

What would worry me most would not be the length as such and the parking but what's up the front under the bonnet. As there have been complaints on this forum of relatively compact/light motorhomes with X/250 single rear-axle chassis and 3.0itre motor experiencing transmission-related problems when reversing (and no Fiat 'fix' available), I'd be more than a little concerned for a vehicle so large/heavy as a Comanche.

 

Perhaps you are getting an auto version (which might reduce the risk), but otherwise - as you rightly say - "That's life".

[747]

My needs for space and layout have been accommodated by the Burstner tag axle van I have. The `tag axle` came with the van I required and not the other way round. If I had not come across this layout, then I would have had to do a self build as I am not interested in an RV. The only other possibility might have been a 5th wheel but it would have meant a long travel to check them out, plus the inconvenience of selling a car also.

 

I live on a typical fairly new housing estate but can reverse the van on to my drive in 2 manouvres. It also reverses up my sloping drive without judder. Another reason why I did not go for a 2007 onwards model.

 

I had a sub 6 metre van with rear lounge (which meant good rear visibility) and found that it is no problem with the extra length (8.2 metres) and lack of rear view.

 

Everyone has their own idea of the right van for them and that is as it should be. I believe that any negative comments from me on other vans serve no purpose.

[Ris]

Couldn't agree more with 747. One buys a motorhome to suit your own pocket and needs. That is why there is so many variations on length and layouts to choose from. There are anumber of Tag axle models out there from a variety of manufacturers.