240kg load margin anyone?

[Colin Leake]

Poppy - 2011-02-08 12:38 PM

 

For me the MINIMUM payload I would be prepared to accept would be 400 kgs. happier if it was over 500kgs. which our Hobby van has.

 

In old money that's half a ton. I just can't see the need to carry that much unless you are delivering coal as well. We are off for a long trip to Scotland in May so will be fully loaded and will try and put the Auto-Trail on a weighbridge fully loaded to see just how much it weighs when we go.

[Colin Leake]

Robinhood - 2011-02-08 9:46 AM

Colin Leake - 2011-02-08 9:37 AM  Our model has a rear garage which means there will be a temptation to put all the heavy stuff in the overhung rear garage and overload the rear axle and that is likely to be more of a problem that the actual load capacity. For that reason I intend to put heavy items such as wine, bear and the BBQ in plastic boxes and move them inside, suitably secured for safety, when traveling

Personally, I'd leave the bear in the garage - they get a bit fractious when cooped up in a plastic box. ;-)

I'm never going to live the Bear down am I?

[Robinhood]

I'm never going to live the Bear down am I?

...as you hadn't responded/edited, I was beginning to think you really did have a bear!

Who would have looked a fool then? :-D

BTW, good luck with the new 'van. You've obviously given some thought to it, and it looks like you may be able to make it work for you.

The suggestion about the garage was serious - don't write it off without loading it. If you've not had a garage before, you'll really appreciate it for storage.

[Guest JudgeMental]

a van with a garage and not the axle or capacity to be loaded properly? thus requiring the load placed within the camper? To me this simply means the camper is poorly designed and unfit for purpose....

[Guest pelmetman]

Colin Leake - 2011-02-08 4:51 PM

 

I'm never going to live the Bear down am I?

 

As the song goes where would we be without the "Bear necessities of life" :D

[ron.]

I would be very dubious about any coachbuilt motorhome with a quoted payload of just 260kg. My take on motorhoming is that it is a hobby based on pleasure and relaxation and the last thing I would want is to be forever worrying about loadingings and shifting weights and water. Also with such a low payload it must be very difficult to acheive a decent balence between axles and I can well imagine one or other of these will always be near the limit. Only my own opinion of course but such a vehicle would mean a constant aggravation for me.

[Sundowner]

With ref. to having air suspension fitted, does anybody know how this will change the actual MIRO, ie. heavier or lighter?

 

I asked earlier who these mythical 75 kgs. people where, - after converting kgs. to

2 "english money" , I realised that in the dim and distant past, one of them used to be me :-(

[Sundowner]

Thanks to Mel B and Flika I've finaly managed to successfully use the emoticons!;-D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(>) :-D :-S B-) :'( 8-) >:-( (!) :-D :-D

[lennyhb]

Robinhood - 2011-02-08 3:34 PM

lennyhb - 2011-02-08 1:35 PM After taking into account all the extras on our van we are down to 270kg even with that we can travel with a full tank of water & enough clobber for 3 - 4 weeks. Only concession to water is we dump it at Calais and replace it with 60-70 bottles of wine. We might have a slight advantage her indoors only weighs in at just over 40 kg.

...but with 270kg to actually play with, what was the nominal payload of the 'van without extras? (i.e. the brochure figure without the extras - that no doubt you feel are important to your enjoyment).

I would guess you've used up at least 150kg of that to get to where you are - imagine doing that if the brochure figure started at 240kg - and then living with the spare capacity. 

It's useful taking a benchmark sometimes - my car, admittedly a reasonable sized family saloon, has a payload of 598kg after allowing for driver, tools and 90% fuel. Makes you think doesnt it? :-S  

The brochure was 350kg but our van is a special edition with loads of extras, Oyster sat + 17" TV, Sub Woofer & amp IRIS seats, Remis blinds TEC Tower with 150 Lt Fridge Freezer/oven etc with this lot we still get 350kg (standard model is 450kg).We then added a 4m awning, 2nd battery, bike rack, alloy wheels (-15kg)and a few other bits bringing it down to 270kg.Colin said he would have 260kg after adding awning & other accessories not much different then apart for the 20-25kg I save by having a lightweight other half, when down to these figurers it's quite a big advantage. As Colin doesn't carry much water he must have a bigger usable payload than me.The obvious answer is get the wife on a diet (lol) As I've said before I keep thinking of uprating but keep coming back to the same conclusion I would only carry more stuff that we probably don't need.

[Robinhood]

lennyhb - 2011-02-09 11:03 AM

Robinhood - 2011-02-08 3:34 PM

lennyhb - 2011-02-08 1:35 PM After taking into account all the extras on our van we are down to 270kg even with that we can travel with a full tank of water & enough clobber for 3 - 4 weeks. Only concession to water is we dump it at Calais and replace it with 60-70 bottles of wine. We might have a slight advantage her indoors only weighs in at just over 40 kg.

...but with 270kg to actually play with, what was the nominal payload of the 'van without extras? (i.e. the brochure figure without the extras - that no doubt you feel are important to your enjoyment).

I would guess you've used up at least 150kg of that to get to where you are - imagine doing that if the brochure figure started at 240kg - and then living with the spare capacity. 

It's useful taking a benchmark sometimes - my car, admittedly a reasonable sized family saloon, has a payload of 598kg after allowing for driver, tools and 90% fuel. Makes you think doesnt it? :-S  

The brochure was 350kg but our van is a special edition with loads of extras, Oyster sat + 17" TV, Sub Woofer & amp IRIS seats, Remis blinds TEC Tower with 150 Lt Fridge Freezer/oven etc with this lot we still get 350kg (standard model is 450kg). We then added a 4m awning, 2nd battery, bike rack, alloy wheels (-15kg)and a few other bits bringing it down to 270kg. Colin said he would have 260kg after adding awning & other accessories not much different then apart for the 20-25kg I save by having a lightweight other half, when down to these figurers it's quite a big advantage. As Colin doesn't carry much water he must have a bigger usable payload than me. The obvious answer is get the wife on a diet (lol) As I've said before I keep thinking of uprating but keep coming back to the same conclusion I would only carry more stuff that we probably don't need.

I might be labouring things a bit, but I think you've probably proven my point (at least as far as the usability for you would be concerned).

It may not be the 'van that Colin is buying, but the closest fit I can find is the Apache 632. This is quoted by Autotrail in the 2011 brochure as having a "payload" of 240kg. I believe this includes a recessed awning, and patently the basic appliances as supplied can be considered "sufficient". It doesn't include the passenger, and it doesn't have the other extras fitted to your 'van.

So, copying your case, let's subtract 60kg for a bike rack and two bikes, 20kg for an additional battery, 25 kg for the Sat and TV, 40kg for the wife (mine wishes :-)) and say 20 kg for the other "bits" you have added.

Then suddenly, the 240kg figure becomes 75kg compared on a similar basis to your 270kg. The accesories added are far from out of the ordinary!

And then note that I've assumed you are 75kg. Taking the combined weight of myself and my wife (and I'm not going to split them in order not to embarass either of us :-D), you'd have to knock best part of 50kg off that!.

I don't think it would work for you, and I'm damn sure it wouldn't work for me.

Peter seems to have gone into it with his eyes open, and be prepared to travel light, so it may well work for him (and every litre of water less than full capacity adds 1kg).

My concern is that most people buying a 'van of such a type without the background, are most likely to want the 'bells and whistles' and we haven't covered half of what many people add to their 'vans.   

[catinou]

lennyhb - 2011-02-09 11:03 AM

 

As I've said before I keep thinking of uprating but keep coming back to the same conclusion I would only carry more stuff that we probably don't need.

 

 

We came to the same conclusion last year. Ordered and paid for our new van on a "heavy chassis" to give us a massive payload (850+ I think). Spotted (after collection! :$ ) it had in fact been built on the lighter chassis giving us a tiny (in our opinion) payload. After much to-ing & fro-ing with the dealer we had it upgraded to 3850 with the addition of air ride, whilst not necessary still a very nice addition, especially at roundabaouts! Still 150 kgs short of the original asked for but we reckoned it would stop us loading stuff on board for the sake of it.

 

Our last van, which we thought was fairly empty (and an Autotrail) had a heck of a lot more in it than expected when we changed over! *-)

[Poppy]

I think the simple answer really is human error.We had a quoted payload ofabout 650kgs BUT its a Hobby.Build quality very good incidently.That payload wouldn't have included the oven fitted as standard for the British market or the carpets ditto.Don't know if it included the awning or not or the sat nav fitted as standard.Salesmen do not point these things outto you, in fact, they rarely mention payload at all.We travel with only small amounts of water as we choose to use camp sites BUT we have the capacity to change our minds if we wish, and in any event I think the water builds up more than we think over a long trip.Human error see.Go Motorhoming, which is my motorhoming bible states about 150kgs for basic stuff bedding,awning,tools,maps,kitchen,bathroom,outside camping tables etc.mapsand guides. 50kgs for two people for shoes and clothes and up to 40kgs for food, drink various.These weights are of course, average and some will have less some more.They do a table of weights of stuff put in motorhomes by most people to back up their argument.This doesn't take into consideration hobby equipment such as laptops, televisions etc.No bikes.We have decided after buying the van that we wanted one and we could add it.It could be, and I hope it does, that all this will work for you but I think you will have to be constantly aware of what you have in the van.Good luck :-D

[lennyhb]

Robinhood - 2011-02-09 11:49 AM

lennyhb - 2011-02-09 11:03 AM

Robinhood - 2011-02-08 3:34 PM

lennyhb - 2011-02-08 1:35 PM After taking into account all the extras on our van we are down to 270kg even with that we can travel with a full tank of water & enough clobber for 3 - 4 weeks. Only concession to water is we dump it at Calais and replace it with 60-70 bottles of wine. We might have a slight advantage her indoors only weighs in at just over 40 kg.

...but with 270kg to actually play with, what was the nominal payload of the 'van without extras? (i.e. the brochure figure without the extras - that no doubt you feel are important to your enjoyment).

I would guess you've used up at least 150kg of that to get to where you are - imagine doing that if the brochure figure started at 240kg - and then living with the spare capacity. 

It's useful taking a benchmark sometimes - my car, admittedly a reasonable sized family saloon, has a payload of 598kg after allowing for driver, tools and 90% fuel. Makes you think doesnt it? :-S  

The brochure was 350kg but our van is a special edition with loads of extras, Oyster sat + 17" TV, Sub Woofer & amp IRIS seats, Remis blinds TEC Tower with 150 Lt Fridge Freezer/oven etc with this lot we still get 350kg (standard model is 450kg). We then added a 4m awning, 2nd battery, bike rack, alloy wheels (-15kg)and a few other bits bringing it down to 270kg. Colin said he would have 260kg after adding awning & other accessories not much different then apart for the 20-25kg I save by having a lightweight other half, when down to these figurers it's quite a big advantage. As Colin doesn't carry much water he must have a bigger usable payload than me. The obvious answer is get the wife on a diet (lol) As I've said before I keep thinking of uprating but keep coming back to the same conclusion I would only carry more stuff that we probably don't need.

I might be labouring things a bit, but I think you've probably proven my point (at least as far as the usability for you would be concerned).

It may not be the 'van that Colin is buying, but the closest fit I can find is the Apache 632. This is quoted by Autotrail in the 2011 brochure as having a "payload" of 240kg. I believe this includes a recessed awning, and patently the basic appliances as supplied can be considered "sufficient". It doesn't include the passenger, and it doesn't have the other extras fitted to your 'van.

So, copying your case, let's subtract 60kg for a bike rack and two bikes, 20kg for an additional battery, 25 kg for the Sat and TV, 40kg for the wife (mine wishes :-)) and say 20 kg for the other "bits" you have added.

Then suddenly, the 240kg figure becomes 75kg compared on a similar basis to your 270kg. The accesories added are far from out of the ordinary!

And then note that I've assumed you are 75kg. Taking the combined weight of myself and my wife (and I'm not going to split them in order not to embarass either of us :-D), you'd have to knock best part of 50kg off that!.

I don't think it would work for you, and I'm damn sure it wouldn't work for me.

Peter seems to have gone into it with his eyes open, and be prepared to travel light, so it may well work for him (and every litre of water less than full capacity adds 1kg).

My concern is that most people buying a 'van of such a type without the background, are most likely to want the 'bells and whistles' and we haven't covered half of what many people add to their 'vans.   

At the end of the day a lot must be down to us consumers, we want well equipped vans with all mod cons, & safer vehicles which are heaver and still expect it to be achievable in a 3500kg van. The engineers say your asking for too much, the salesmen say don't concern yourself it's what the market wants no one will notice.The industry really ought to have realistic guide lines & that would mean 90% of models would be over 3500kg & their sales would drop, particularly in several continental countries where you have have a medical annually to drive over 3500kg & have to take a stiff test.Lets face it, it ain't go to happen.On here we are the informed but we are a very small percentage of buyers, recently I was chatting to friends of my wife's we hadn't seen for some time & it turned out they had not so long ago brought a Motorhome & she was going on about all the stuff her hubby had to take with him, I asked what was their payload & was greeted with two blank faces & the question " what's Payload".Sorry robin I'm a fatty I top the scales at 76kg (lol), being a bit picky some of your weights seem a bit on the high side, our bike rack & 2 bikes is about 35kg Sat + TV about 14kg.I've just lost anther 7kg I forgot a few weeks ago I fitted an 80W solar panel.

[Brian Kirby]

Sundowner - 2011-02-09 9:02 AM With ref. to having air suspension fitted, does anybody know how this will change the actual MIRO, ie. heavier or lighter? 

Assuming you mean the full air variety, alost invariably heavier.  If just the air over spring assisted variety, just a few kilos marginally heavier.

[Colin Leake]

Robinhood - 2011-02-09 11:49 AM

lennyhb - 2011-02-09 11:03 AM

Robinhood - 2011-02-08 3:34 PM

lennyhb - 2011-02-08 1:35 PM After taking into account all the extras on our van we are down to 270kg even with that we can travel with a full tank of water & enough clobber for 3 - 4 weeks. Only concession to water is we dump it at Calais and replace it with 60-70 bottles of wine. We might have a slight advantage her indoors only weighs in at just over 40 kg.

...but with 270kg to actually play with, what was the nominal payload of the 'van without extras? (i.e. the brochure figure without the extras - that no doubt you feel are important to your enjoyment).

I would guess you've used up at least 150kg of that to get to where you are - imagine doing that if the brochure figure started at 240kg - and then living with the spare capacity. 

It's useful taking a benchmark sometimes - my car, admittedly a reasonable sized family saloon, has a payload of 598kg after allowing for driver, tools and 90% fuel. Makes you think doesnt it? :-S  

The brochure was 350kg but our van is a special edition with loads of extras, Oyster sat + 17" TV, Sub Woofer & amp IRIS seats, Remis blinds TEC Tower with 150 Lt Fridge Freezer/oven etc with this lot we still get 350kg (standard model is 450kg). We then added a 4m awning, 2nd battery, bike rack, alloy wheels (-15kg)and a few other bits bringing it down to 270kg. Colin said he would have 260kg after adding awning & other accessories not much different then apart for the 20-25kg I save by having a lightweight other half, when down to these figurers it's quite a big advantage. As Colin doesn't carry much water he must have a bigger usable payload than me. The obvious answer is get the wife on a diet (lol) As I've said before I keep thinking of uprating but keep coming back to the same conclusion I would only carry more stuff that we probably don't need.

I might be labouring things a bit, but I think you've probably proven my point (at least as far as the usability for you would be concerned).

It may not be the 'van that Colin is buying, but the closest fit I can find is the Apache 632. This is quoted by Autotrail in the 2011 brochure as having a "payload" of 240kg. I believe this includes a recessed awning, and patently the basic appliances as supplied can be considered "sufficient". It doesn't include the passenger, and it doesn't have the other extras fitted to your 'van.

So, copying your case, let's subtract 60kg for a bike rack and two bikes, 20kg for an additional battery, 25 kg for the Sat and TV, 40kg for the wife (mine wishes :-)) and say 20 kg for the other "bits" you have added.

Then suddenly, the 240kg figure becomes 75kg compared on a similar basis to your 270kg. The accesories added are far from out of the ordinary!

And then note that I've assumed you are 75kg. Taking the combined weight of myself and my wife (and I'm not going to split them in order not to embarass either of us :-D), you'd have to knock best part of 50kg off that!.

I don't think it would work for you, and I'm damn sure it wouldn't work for me.

Peter seems to have gone into it with his eyes open, and be prepared to travel light, so it may well work for him (and every litre of water less than full capacity adds 1kg).

My concern is that most people buying a 'van of such a type without the background, are most likely to want the 'bells and whistles' and we haven't covered half of what many people add to their 'vans.   

You are right about the van we have on order but the 240 Kg is for the over-cab version. We are buying the super low line which I'm told has a 260Kg payload which is obvious when you think of it. I still come in under (just) 75Kg and the wife is around 60 Kg which equates to the amount of water we will be leaving out. The gas cylinders in their calculation are 1X7Kg and 1X13Kg of the old style cylinders but we carry 2X6Kg of the new light weight cylinders so we should easily have a payload of 260Kg which is more than enough for us even with a light weight folding bike on board. All that remains a question for me is the load distribution. I'm planning to fill up with fuel on the way home from picking it up and dropping in to a public weighbridge, to answer that question. I'm planning to build a wine rack for 16 bottles under one of the sofas and the wife usually puts all the heavy food in a plastic bin which can easily be moved for travelling if required.

[Brian Kirby]

Our Van. MAM 3,500kg.  6.0 metres long.  Figures from weighbridge for MIRO and fully laden, adjusted by spreadsheet for MIRO as used, and worst case laden.

Hobby catalogue MIRO: 2,817kg.  Actual, at weighbridge, (as close as I can get): 2,800kg.  (Adjusted for Hobby's 1 No aluminium gas cylinder + 11kg gas.)

MIRO as used/equipped: 2,840kg.  (Based on 2 No steel gas cylinders + 26kg gas, so 39kg actual increase due to gas)

Actual Laden Weight (ALW) as used, equipped for, and carrying, two people for 8-10 weeks, spring/autumn (so clothing for differing seasons/latitudes), all reserves full, and carrying spare wheel (normal case): 3,213kg.

ALW as above but allowing for addition of full toilet cassette, bikes (2 x 11kg), wine etc (worst case): 3,265kg.

Added load, therefore, at worst, about 465kg.  No satellite dish, no telly, no additional battery, no solar panels, 50M hook-up cable, ramps, and water hose.

We do not carry large reserves of food, water, wine, etc, and shop every 4/5 days.  So, all I can say is, Colin's van  wouldn't work for us, by 200kg!  He can save weight by driving with empty fresh water tank, as he proposes, but even that would leave us 100kg short, and will require him to be rigorous in emptying his tank every time he moves on.  However that may be, I really do hope it will work for him.

[Sundowner]

Thanks Brian,

 

That's what I suspected, if you want to stay within 3500kgs MAM, you gain on the axle loading at the expense of the total payload.

 

The Adria Compact that we have recently bought is available at 3300 kgs. or 3500 kgs. The difference in payload quoted is exactly 200kg., (585/785) This leads me to believe that the axles, tyres etc. are identical.

 

We are in the process of having ours replated by the supplying dealer. From previous experience with our Adria Twin, I am confident that I can take advantage of the increased MAM without overloading either axle.

 

rgds. Sundowner

[Brian Kirby]

Sundowner - 2011-02-09 3:57 PM Thanks Brian, That's what I suspected, if you want to stay within 3500kgs MAM, you gain on the axle loading at the expense of the total payload. The Adria Compact that we have recently bought is available at 3300 kgs. or 3500 kgs. The difference in payload quoted is exactly 200kg., (585/785) This leads me to believe that the axles, tyres etc. are identical. We are in the process of having ours replated by the supplying dealer. From previous experience with our Adria Twin, I am confident that I can take advantage of the increased MAM without overloading either axle. rgds. Sundowner

I'm not sure I agree, Ernie.  Adding air assistance doesn't increase the allowable axle loads, unless it is part of a re-plating exercise.  Even where it is a part of such an exercise, the individual axle loads are rarely increased.  The full air versions can be fitted in conjunction with increased axle loads, but the suspension is pretty much re-built at both ends in the process: an expensive process.

The Adria Compact is a coachbuilt van on a medium wheelbase chassis, with a longish rear overhang, and a rear "garage".  It will balance quite differently from your Adria Twin, which is a panel van conversion on a long wheelbase chassis.  The Compact will load its rear axle more heavily that the Twin ever could.

Our Hobby Van is similar in configuration, had a 2,000kg rear axle limit, and fully laden, runs at about 1,900kg on that axle.

I can't comment on whether the axle load limits vary as between the 3,300kg and 3,500kg Fiat Ducatos.  If they don't, and your assumption that both are identical is correct, your re-plating will work as you assume.  If they don't, however, you may come to rue that assumption.  Me, I'd be inclined to check the assumption very carefully before things get too far.  They two vans are not, in truth, at all similar.  Sorry.

[Robinhood]

lennyhb - 2011-02-09 1:11 PM  At the end of the day a lot must be down to us consumers, we want well equipped vans with all mod cons, & safer vehicles which are heaver and still expect it to be achievable in a 3500kg van. The engineers say your asking for too much, the salesmen say don't concern yourself it's what the market wants no one will notice. The industry really ought to have realistic guide lines & that would mean 90% of models would be over 3500kg & their sales would drop, particularly in several continental countries where you have have a medical annually to drive over 3500kg & have to take a stiff test. Lets face it, it ain't go to happen. 

I may share a healthy portion of your cynicism, and it may well be that it ain't going to happen, but as sure as eggs are eggs, unless we continue to shout about it, and/or vote with our feet, then it definitely won't happen.

It most certainly isn't impossible. Brian has posted his figures above. My 'van (3500kg MAM and 6.75m) is longer than his, but still has an ex-works payload of 630kg after all the conventional allowances. (Yes, there are a few UK additions that eat into that slightly, but not very much).

It also has a rear axle limit of 2250kg (I was mildly surprised at Brian's 2000kg figure), which is more than my Ducato Maxis have had, and which, with a rear garage, allows a good loading profile.

So, it's quite possible to build to a reasonable spec, and below 3500kg, and if everyone built to reasonable guidelines then the competition would be on a level playing field and sales would still continue.

Some rather less-prepared converters might well have to make some investment, however.

I worry even more about the suitability of many conversions as family (4 to 6 berth) vehicles, and adopting the practices set out above might make these more viable (albeit above 3500kg, with the accompanying issue of less and less people with such families having retained rights to drive them). I think there's a market segment here that is heading for potential obliteration. (But that's another story).  

[Poppy]

I do notice, for what its worth, that most vans that have reasonable payloads are classed as Entry Level Vans.

[Poppy]

I do notice, for what its worth, that most vans that have reasonable payloads are classed as Entry Level Vans.

[Poppy]

I do notice, for what its worth, that most vans that have reasonable payloads are classed as Entry Level Vans.

[Poppy]

I do notice, for what its worth, that most vans that have reasonable payloads are classed as Entry Level Vans.

[Sundowner]

HI Brian,

 

The only reason I would fit air suspension would be part of a replating exercise. My question was to ascertain whether or not I could increase the axle capacities without increasing MIRO (unladen weight).

 

The problem with the Twin was overloading the front axle while leaving 300kgs. spare capacity on the rear.

 

Because of the short rear overhang I could not rectify this by moving more weight behind the rear axle.

 

THe Compact allows me to do this because of the long overhang and the shorter wheelbase.

 

My post dated 6th. Feb. goes into more detail but the axle weights and MAM are the same on both vehicles,ie.= front 1750 kgs.

rear 1900 kgs.

MAM 3300 kgs

 

Thanks for your interest

 

rgds. Ernie

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

Robinhood - 2011-02-09 5:04 PM ..............It also has a rear axle limit of 2250kg (I was mildly surprised at Brian's 2000kg figure), which is more than my Ducato Maxis have had, and which, with a rear garage, allows a good loading profile..................

You are right: typo!  Should be 2250kg.

There are a few 6 berth vans around that cannot even carry the occupants of the six berths within their MAM, let alone any food or clothing.  Barking!