An adequate payload?

[pepe63xnotuse]

Brian Kirby - 2010-12-09 3:30 PM

pepe63 - 2010-12-09 2:14 PM ............ Even when in 3500kg trim, the axles were rated as: Front-1850kg,Rear-2060kg...Giving 3910kg So really,all the replate did was to use up some of this "spare capacity"... Chris

Just to be clear Chris, is it the case that the permissible loads for the axles were increased, and are now shown on the new plate, at 1870kg front and 2100kg rear?  I'm intrigued, because an extra 20kg seems hardly worth the effort.  Do you happen to know what were the actual limiting factors on the axles?  It would also be interesting to know what van/base combination you are referring to.

Yes Bri'..you're correct,those are the figures that are shown on the "uprated" 3850kg plate(1870kg F/2100kg R) and this plate does carry the Trigano name..I have no idea what or if there are any axle limitations,as the van was replated by the previous owner...It is odd when a vehicle has been "upped by 350kg"..and yet the axle limits only raisied by 20kg(F) and 40kg®..but I suppose they've just made use of "the spare"..?!(..and I suppose with both axles together approaching 4t(3970kg)it should be ample for my needs. ;-)..and strangely the GTW has dropped by 550kg!(5500kg to 4950kg),I have no idea why that should be? Oh!..and this is on a 2007 Renault Master LWB Platform cab(dci150)Chris(sorry if this is going off topic :$ )

[Poppy]

Well you know Judge some of the payloads quoted are very low, UNDER 300kgs.You may be right and the van weight less rather than more, but it doesn't have to and you would have no rights at all if that proved to be the case.Its a lot of money to risk.You could have a payload of less than 150kgsForeign vans are quoted a payload with out the ovens, carpets etc. fitted for the British market and very few include the awning which we all like..I know that you purchase in Germany and do extensive research first but you shouldn't have to do that unless you choose to.Best thing we ever read was the Go Motorhoming book.

Like you, we don'ttake baked beans to Spain.We have a small stock of tinned food for emergencies and shop locally.We do like to fill the fridge when we do shop though as we don't want to spend our entire holidays in the supermarket.When on a long holiday we take about 10 days worth of clothes and some extra bedding towels etc. as I don't want

to visit every laundrette on the continent.We don't travel with much water as we tend to use campsites, but it can creep up without you realizing and SOME people do like to fill their tanks because they like to use aires etc. which they are suposed to be able to do.So I for one, like a decent payload.

[Tony Jones]

As a van-conversion man, with little chance of finding ROOM to exceed my payload, I hesitate to tread here, but I will anyway.

 

The trouble is, the converters are caught between a rock and a hard place.

 

On the one hand, many of "us" (ie motorhoming fraternity taken as a whole) like far more home comforts in our vans nowadays than we used to (although admittedly we may have been "educated" into that by those same converters!). So there's a limited market for very basic vans - of the kind we all used to use at one time!

 

On the other hand, many of "us" are of an older generation, approaching (or past) the age where we're limited to a 3500 GVW. And younger drivers (who passed their test after 1997) need to take an extra test to exceed that anyway. So vans on higher-plated chassis have a limited market appeal too.

 

The easy way out is for converters to use those lighter chassis, pack in as much equipment as they can (without the van actually leaving the showroom already overweight!) and keep very quiet about payload, which then becomes the buyer's problem - and what a problem!

 

A better way might be to produce three versions of each coachbuilt model (in descending price order):

1. on the "heavier" chassis, trumpetting the extra payload as a positive selling point, and encouraging all those who are eligible to take the test and go for it.

2. on the lower-rated chassis, promoting the fact it can be driven on an ordinary licence, but warning clearly about the payload. This could still have a market with people who don't do very long trips.

3. on the lower-rated chassis, but with the built-in kit scaled down. Selling points now would be extra payload and a lower price, and its market would be those who, for financial or nostalgic reasons, DON'T want all the home comforts, but DO want to be able to take plenty of stuff with them.

 

If all three versions were available for each model, dealers could discuss payload issues much more openly with prospective buyers.

Also, magazine road-testers could specify which version they're testing, and remind readers what others are available.

 

Does that make any kind of sense?

[Hawcara]

Regarding Mel's comment about 23stone on the fixed bed. This does not seem a lot at all. The average bloke is about 15 stone and wifey 10, puts it over the limit. Move around too much and there would be problems. *-)

[Guest JudgeMental]

Poppy - 2010-12-10 1:23 PM

 

Well you know Judge some of the payloads quoted are very low, UNDER 300kgs.You may be right and the van weight less rather than more, but it doesn't have to and you would have no rights at all if that proved to be the case.

 

 

I know and I would not touch one....

 

My point is that in Germany (ere he goes again:-S) Information is far more transparent. My van was under its MIRO and I think you will find that Brians was as well. Everyone knows what an awning weighs? and the other goodies? it is simple math providing you know the MIRO is reliable *-)

 

I nearly bought a Dethleff? it was wood frame construction, but better kit and slightly longer but a lot heavier! I had almost given up finding a decent winterised hightop until I found the Eura......

 

I only knew these facts from brochures and magazine test reports?

 

 

 

;-)

[Poppy]

Judge where do you get your info from? I don't speak any German!

[Brian Kirby]

Vernon B - 2010-12-08 9:40 PM All of which makes the new Hymer B544 in standard trim unfit for purpose, despite rave reviews in PM. V

I'm afraid I don't think this is correct.  The rule of thumb calculation would give a minimum required payload of (6.5x10) + (3x75) + (4x10) = 330kg.  The basic 3,500kg MAM version, according to Hymer, has a payload of 350Kg.  So, it meets the EN 1646 formula requirement and cannot be said unfit for purpose. 

However, beyond that possibly narrow definition of compliance, it is optionally available on a 3,850kg chassis (which I assume gives around 700kg payload), or on a 4,250kg Maxi 40 chassis, which gives it a claimed 1100kg payload.  So, available comfortably above even my overly pessimistic payload proposal!

All this detail (though I am not sure they have all of the arithmetic correct in the current verson of the 2011 catalogue), is obtainable by downloading the price list from the Hymer website.  In this will also be found the weight penalty, as well as the price, of every option on offer. 

This is what both Eddie (Judgemental) and I have been banging on about in terms of the transparency of some maker's information.  Hymer have always been exemplary in this respect.  Whether the dealer bothers do do the calculations at the time of ordering might be another matter, but you would think a customer, given the information, and that it is contained in the price list, might be interested enough to sit down for a while and do the loading sums as well as the cost calculation.  If he doesn't, he has no-one to blame but himself if he doesn't get what he wanted!

[Poppy]

Which Motorhome states that the B544 has a payload of 450 kgs on the 3500 chassis and if you upgrade to a 4250 chassis you get 750 kg payload?????? I do get what you are saying Brian but when you are new to all of this you rely on 2 things, the product being suitable for its stated purpose and some proper professional advice (gives hollow laugh!).By accident I heard of, purchased and read the Go Motorhoming book before we bought our first motorhome.Thank goodness I did orgoodness only knows what sort of mess we would have been in.

[Mel B]

Hawcara - 2010-12-10 2:12 PM

 

Regarding Mel's comment about 23stone on the fixed bed. This does not seem a lot at all. The average bloke is about 15 stone and wifey 10, puts it over the limit. Move around too much and there would be problems. *-)

 

Not sure where you get your info from but 15 stone being the weight of the average bloke (hubby's not THAT big! 8-) ), not to mention 10 stone for the wifey (I wish I was! :$ ). We're fine with our bed (just :D except when the heffalump Romy who's 20kg jumps up) but I assume the bed has a safety margin as we haven't gone bump yet! :-D It's just another thing that people don't think to check on. :-S

[Brian Kirby]

Then I don't understand where they got their figures, unless Hymer have revised the technical data in the printed brochure, and left the downloadable data un-modified.  What I wrote above is for the 2011 version of the Hymer B544 direct from Hymer's website today.  Honest!  :-)

In terms of what you can rely on, it is the manufacturer's technical appendix to his brochure.  Nothing else (other then a letter from the dealer quoting chapter and verse) would give you the right to a legal challenge (misleading statements in advertising material that you had relied upon when buying), and even that would be a bit tenuous.  Sadly, relying on a magazine article would be of no help.  Anyone listening!  :-D

[Poppy]

Brian I am absolutely sure that you are correct but this is suposed to be a specialist motorhome mag for goodness sake.

[derek pringle]

Brian,

I really appreciate your comments on this forum, you are constructively critical

and yet supportive of anyone who finds themselves in an unfortunate circumstance. Judging by the discussion here between very experienced motorhomers it is obvious that newcomers or beginners are going to fall foul of the pitfalls. The need to rationalize the information and calculation system is

patently overdue. Following from my initial setting off of this discussion (rear carriers) I have ordered a Bessacarr e660 which states 560kg after options.

Considering 2 people will be using this vehicle (wife and I ) I must be correct in assuming we will be ok for the type of luggage you listed earlier in this thread.

Or how far do you have to go to ensure conformity and legality ?

cheers

derek

[Guest JudgeMental]

weigh it before buying......or else walk away from the deal

[rupert123]

derek pringle - 2010-12-10 6:50 PM

 

Brian,

I really appreciate your comments on this forum, you are constructively critical

and yet supportive of anyone who finds themselves in an unfortunate circumstance. Judging by the discussion here between very experienced motorhomers it is obvious that newcomers or beginners are going to fall foul of the pitfalls. The need to rationalize the information and calculation system is

patently overdue. Following from my initial setting off of this discussion (rear carriers) I have ordered a Bessacarr e660 which states 560kg after options.

Considering 2 people will be using this vehicle (wife and I ) I must be correct in assuming we will be ok for the type of luggage you listed earlier in this thread.

Or how far do you have to go to ensure conformity and legality ?

cheers

derek

 

Derek at some point you must trust the maker on their weights, why would you not. I have had two vans from the Swift group and both were fine so you should have no reason to doubt the given weights are about right. As to Eddies go and weigh it bit before you buy, who the hell has ever done that in practice. My van has a stated 530kg and I carry a scooter on the back. With just two of us I still have plenty of spare payload although my back axle is close to limit but OK. Beats me what some carry around but that is up to them. I would agree some vans have a payload that is to small but the brochure clearly indicates this so why the problem. I would also assume that when anyone parts with a load of money they take the trouble to do a bit of checking. I see nothing wrong with the way makers publish the weights now, it is easy to compare. All recent brochures I have seen clearly state the way the weights are arrived at and all are the same.

[Guest JudgeMental]

not rocket science *-) if unsure of dealer/manufacturers shenanigans, just make a payload slip part of the contract...what is wrong with that *-)

 

if they cant be bothered to supply a slip, at a cost of £5-10? on a £40,000 + camper ....Well, words fail me, and like I said earlier either walk away, or do the deal but dont cry about it afterwards........

[pepe63xnotuse]

JudgeMental - 2010-12-10 11:15 PM

 

not rocket science *-) if unsure of dealer/manufacturers shenanigans, just make a payload slip part of the contract...what is wrong with that *-)

 

if they cant be bothered to supply a slip, at a cost of £5-10? on a £40,000 + camper ....Well, words fail me, and like I said earlier either walk away, or do the deal but dont cry about it afterwards........

 

Yep..I agree,that's a very good idea..

...however for those who are new to the game,they wouldn't be expecting any "shenanigans" in the first place...especially about something like the weight of the thing... :-S (..they'd be more concerned about the colour of the cushions!)

 

We can throw figures about and quote payload equations until we are blue in the face..but this is off little use to those who are new to MHing and who,when walking into a dealership,expect to be treated honestly,fairly and supplied with the full facts...

 

[Derek Uzzell]

The challenge is to make people aware that they should consider a motorhome’s payload before they buy it, despite them having no inkling at that point that there might be a need to do this.

 

The cartoon I posted earlier in this thread came from an article published in October 2003’s Caravan, Motorhome and Camping Mart (CMCM). The piece was in the Beginners’ Guide part of the magazine and was titled “The weighidiotcher’s guide to payloads”. It was based on a posting (in an earlier incarnation of this forum) that was widely copied to other motorhome forums.

 

The CMCM article covered the same ground as Brian’s posting, explaining the way motorhome manufacturers provided weight-related data and how the EN 1646-2 formulae could be employed by a potential buyer to assess a motorhome’s suitability. An example was given using a then-current Hymer model available with alternative motors/chassis. The author stated “…of all manufacturers’ brochures, Hymer’s is arguably the most informative for payload details. If you buy a Hymer and subsequently find the payload’s insufficient, it really will be your own fault.”

 

The final paragraph said:

 

“Anxious enquiries or unhappy tales about motorcaravan-payload appear regularly in leisure magazines. As everybody’s motorhome requirements differ, it’s down to you, the prospective owner, to decide how much ‘spare’ payload you need to make you feel comfortable, or how little you are prepared to tolerate. The important thing, surely, is that some elementary maths will help you make an informed decision.”

 

As you will have probably guessed, I wrote that article. But it was nothing revolutionary – the “Guide to Buying a Motorhome” supplement provided with MMM magazine in the Summer of 2002, advised people on the first page of its “Choosing the Right Vehicle” section that weight and payload were key factors in buying a motorhome. In 2004, MMM published, across two issues, a pair of lengthy pieces by the late Mel Eastburn, dealing with all areas of motorhome-related weight issues. As Poppy points out, the “Go Motorhoming” book deals with the subject. All you have to do is SEARCH this forum on “payload” for a one year period and you’ll see how frequently it comes up.

 

I don’t know how the challenge I mentioned above can be met. I’ve done my best, as have Brian and Mel. Motorhome books, magazines and internet forums do what they can.

 

Motorhome manufacturers build vehicles to match demand and, in most instances, there is sufficient information in their advertising literature to identify those models that are likely to go overweight.

 

Realistically, motorhome dealers are unlikely to criticise a motorhome that a buyer has clearly set his/her heart on. (I recall asking a salesman whether he would sell a motorhome to someone knowing that it was probably unsuitable. He said “Once they’ve made up their minds, you can’t dissuade them!”)

 

As long as motorcaravan buyers fail to appreciate that there must be a finite limit on the payload that a motorhome is able to legally carry, then just standardising on the manner in which weight data are presented won’t cure the disease. I’m not being critical of novice motorcaravanners - we've all been one - I’m just stating the situation as I see it.

[derek pringle]

Derek,

Whilst I agree with your premis, would it not be an improvement or helpful if for instance in the MMM under the section "the ultimate guide to buying a motorhome" the Payload section was lengthened and went a bit more in depth.

They could do worse than paste the initial comments on this thread from Brian.

Must also accept some people start reading MMM after they have bought a van so it may not help everybody.

derek

[mike 202]

An extra section in MMM or any magazine could either put in the weight of a test motorhome or use manufacturers figures. Whilst the former would be of use it is the weight of your individual motorhome that counts. I believe that manufacturers have a tolerance of 5% so a nominal 3000kg motorhome could weigh anywhere 2850 and 3150kg. Given the possible differences in weight of the base vehicle added to the conversion differences then it is ONLY your actual vehicle that counts. Remember a vehicle that has large amounts (panels/mouldings) of GRP (Fibreglass) can depending on the skill of the manufacturer differ widely. An extra bucket or two of resin and gelcoat can add significantly to the panels weight.

 

So in summary I agree with those on the forum who say " get it weighed and either walk away or don't bleat afterwards". After all if you are check weighed in the UK or France it is no good showing the manufacturers brochure and hoping your Fine for being overweight will go away.

 

I was caught out but NEVER again, A Weighbridge every time for me as I lost 150kg of load capacity to those mysterious manufacturing Gremlins

[rupert123]

I guess most of us at some time get our van weighed but hands up everyone who has ever asked a dealer to do this before you buy. In theory good but in practice non existant. Surely people can read it is all in the brochure, talk about the 'nanny state', what is wrong with the current way of publishing figures. All you will ever get is some sort of compareson and the one in place is as good as any.

[tonyg3nwl]

Hi, I have been following this argument/discussion with interest. During the time I was in discussion over wobbly gearbox problems, Peugeot insisted I weigh the van empty. This led them to agree to gearbox replacement as they said the existing gearbox was incorrect for the vehicle. This implied the convertor used the wrong base vehicle for his conversion. However, Peugeot remarkably did the warranty work .

 

was I lucky, or perhaps Pug should hav thrown it back to the convertor.???

 

tonyg3nwl

[derek pringle]

Tony,

be careful you are not told it is your own fault by some contributors.

I am really glad you seem to be getting help from the manufacturer,best of luck.

derek

 

 

[Guest JudgeMental]

derek pringle - 2010-12-11 6:21 PM

 

Tony,

be careful you are not told it is your own fault by some contributors.

I am really glad you seem to be getting help from the manufacturer,best of luck.

derek

 

 

Sorry that is unnecessary , we are a friendly bunch, but I do not like your snide comment. Obviously Tony's situation was different along with Mickeydrippin who's van was built on the wrong chassis as well.

 

But as for other situations? totally different and forseeable, Cavaet emptor (buyer beware) should always be at the forefront of your mind, especially when buying such expensive items...you would not buy a house without a survey would you *-)

[colin]

Here's an example of where it all goes wrong, as emailed to me in attachment from eddie couple of months back.

Hymer 322 with 3l engine and auto, as tested by RM.

On the face of it appears to have enough payload, esp if you use it as a couple, but then one day you decide to take a couple of friends out, sensibly you restrict the load so you are confident of staying well within gross weight, you all jump in and drive to the garage to fill the tank for the journey. You are now breaking the law by overloading the front axle! On this four seater motorhome to stay within limits you can only have around 1/4 full fuel tank.

 

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2010-12-11 10:43 AM The challenge is to make people aware that they should consider a motorhome’s payload before they buy it, despite them having no inkling at that point that there might be a need to do this. The cartoon I posted earlier in this thread came from an article published in October 2003’s Caravan, Motorhome and Camping Mart (CMCM). The piece was in the Beginners’ Guide part of the magazine and was titled “The weighidiotcher’s guide to payloads”. It was based on a posting (in an earlier incarnation of this forum) that was widely copied to other motorhome forums. The CMCM article covered the same ground as Brian’s posting, explaining the way motorhome manufacturers provided weight-related data and how the EN 1646-2 formulae could be employed by a potential buyer to assess a motorhome’s suitability. An example was given using a then-current Hymer model available with alternative motors/chassis. The author stated “…of all manufacturers’ brochures, Hymer’s is arguably the most informative for payload details. If you buy a Hymer and subsequently find the payload’s insufficient, it really will be your own fault.” The final paragraph said: “Anxious enquiries or unhappy tales about motorcaravan-payload appear regularly in leisure magazines. As everybody’s motorhome requirements differ, it’s down to you, the prospective owner, to decide how much ‘spare’ payload you need to make you feel comfortable, or how little you are prepared to tolerate. The important thing, surely, is that some elementary maths will help you make an informed decision.” As you will have probably guessed, I wrote that article. ....................

Well, there you go!  I read the quotes with some puzzlement, thinking Derek was mischievously quoting something I had written, but couldn't quite remember, only to discover he had beaten me to it by three years!

Good chap, that Derek Uzzell!  :-)