Ducato X250 failed rear leaf springs

[Guest JudgeMental]

will rear air-suspension help with spring longevity and ride comfort? as I may do this anyway to get the 3500Kg capacity and extra 100Kg on rear axle (SV Tech)

[Sundowner]

JudgeMental - 2011-04-23 9:06 AM

 

My new adria purchased last week, has the fresh water in back, the waste at back underneath. the Truma gas heater is also at the back...only weight at front under sofa is original leisure battery and a second one fitted as an extra...I guess the fuel tank must be under the floor in this area as well

 

 

They must have changed the design since 2008. The water tank (120 litres?) was under the "sofa", well forward of the rear axle.

[roger20]

Isn't it possibly to get springs re-tempered nowadays? Going back many years there used to be a very large spring manufacturer in Leeds who used to do this. Not much help if you needed the van urgently though. Perhaps others may know more about the process.

 

We are going over old ground here about inherent defects and "not fit for purpose". Had Shaun bought new he could have simply asked his dealer (nothing to do with Adria although thats where the problem may lay) to replace them. If they had refused, the work could be done elsewhere and the bill sent to the dealer with Small Claims Court as the next step. Nothing to do with warranties - its simply Statute of Limitations for 6 years.

 

There would of course need to be some expert evidence that they were underspecified but Nick's comments validate the possible/probable need for heavy duty springs in a similar PVC

 

 

[Guest Tracker]

roger20 - 2011-04-23 7:54 PM

Isn't it possibly to get springs re-tempered nowadays? Going back many years there used to be a very large spring manufacturer in Leeds who used to do this. Not much help if you needed the van urgently though. Perhaps others may know more about the process.

 

I had springs reset by a 'specialist' on a tail heavy Bedford CF many years ago.

It was fine for a year and then one of them went all floppy and the van became decidedly lop sided.

So I got two springs off a 35 cwt CF pick up from a breakers yard - complete with U bolts and hangers etc - and fitted them myself in a couple of hours.

As I recall with a bit of jiggling about with hangers, bushes and U bolt attachment it was quite straighforward to do. All the nuts and bolts seemed to be of high grade steel in them days and all were easy to undo / redo - that may or may not be true to this day?

[dwaviation]

Go for the airides Judge and put a 'smile' back into those springs :-D

[dwaviation]

Go for the airides Judge and put a 'smile' back into those springs :-D

[Shaun]

Bearing in mind the replacement uprated springs are still single leaf, I used the van on a 400 mile round trip yesterday, so was able to compare the old with the new. None of us noticed any difference, though when we drove over heavily pot-holed roads, the back end made quite a racket. This makes me wonder whether yet greater uprating to twin-leaf springs on a panel van, is the way to go. I think you reach a point where enough's enough and I feel I have what seems to be a good overall compromise - though frankly I had no complaints with the springs which were taken off.

 

In terms of replacing the springs, this again makes me question why such a high Fiat labour charge. They wanted two hours for one leaf spring, though to give them their due, when I complained as to the cost, they appear not to have charged any more for fitting both sides. Nevertheless, I daresay many of us have fitted leaf springs, coil springs and dampers over the years, and know that once the vehicle is suitable jacked up and supported, it's not that big a deal. I took a look at these new springs, and fitting is as it always has been - a bolt at either end for the spring hangers. How Fiat can quote two hours apiece, I don't know. Perhaps that includes a lunch break.

 

All this does is drive people like me away from main dealers when they just cannot resist charging far too much both for parts and labour. They got me this time, but it won't happen again. This reminded me they'd carried out the fix for the reverse judder a while back. That must have cost Fiat a pretty penny, not least because it entailed a whole new clutch. I think they wanted to get even and take their money back!

 

Shaun

 

 

[Derek Uzzell]

pepe63 - 2011-04-23 2:02 PM

 

Bit of a daft question...but when ordering a new M/h,are ALL of the base vehicle options available to you?.. :-S

 

Off topic,I know...

 

 

If you purchased a motorhome from a small motorhome converter (eg. Murvi, IH Motorhomes or RS Motorhomes), where you could tell the converter exactly what you wanted, then there's really no reason why you shouldn't be able to specify everything on the base-vehicle manufacturer's options list provided that those options didn't conflict with the design of the conversion.

 

However, if you are buying a 'mass production' motorhome, then you'll normally only be able to speciify (at best) those base-vehicle options included in the options list in the converter's brochure. Even that may prove impossible if an importer chooses to specify a particular specification targeting the UK market. For example, my Germany-bought Ford-based 2005 Hobby has cab air-con and electric windows, both of which are Ford options and on the Hobby brochure's options list. The same Hobby model marketed in the UK in 2005 by Brownhills (the then sole UK Hobby agency) could not be purchased with cab air-con or electric windows (though it did come as standard with faux-wood dashboard trim).

 

So, if Converter A and Converter B are using similar base vehicles as a basis for similar motorhomes, and Converter A has chosen to fit uprated rear springs as standard while Converter B has not, unless Converter B offers uprated rear springs as a brochure-option, it's very unlikely that a buyer will be able to specify them.

[pepe63xnotuse]

That's pretty much what I figured...

 

...So in the majority of cases,the twin leaf/ HD spring set-up may not be an available option anyway...

 

Compared to the cost of possibly having to replace springs after just few years(just 4 in Shaun's case),500 odd quid for "Air Rides" makes good sense...

[Keithl]

JudgeMental - 2011-04-23 4:16 PM

 

will rear air-suspension help with spring longevity and ride comfort? as I may do this anyway to get the 3500Kg capacity and extra 100Kg on rear axle (SV Tech)

 

Judge,

 

If you're thinking of adding auxiliary air to the rear then I would thoroughly recommend the Dunlop system from Marcle Leisure, here is a Link to the system for an X2/50.

The system for our Merc was very well engineered and I've been really pleased with the improvement in ride and handling in the 12 months since I fitted it. For info I usually run at 40 psi.

 

If you're handy with your spanners the systems can usually be fitted in a few hours on your drive without even having to remove the wheels. I drove up onto my levelling blocks to give more access room and then only had to raise the body another couple of inches off the axle to fit the bellows.

Alternatively why not ask someone like Dave Newell for a quote, I'm sure he'd oblige :D

 

Keith.

[Mike88]

Judge - If you are going for an uprate via SVTech then I believe they specify the type of assisters to be used and I don't think they are Airrides but possibly the Dunlop system. I would check with SVrech first.

 

I have Airrides on my 6 metre panel van - bought to avoid a grounding issue on my drive - but for what its worth the ride quality has improved and if that helps extend the life of the rear springs I shall be doubly pleased.

[Shaun]

I've just been under the van and with the new springs fitted, it looks just like the second picture George uploaded, whereby the leaf spring is touching, or is very close to, the bump stop. The spring itself has a slight curvature as new, which I daresay in time will become level or even concave. What I would ask is how my van failed its MOT. Clearly, it's not because there's no discernible gap between spring and bump stop, because this is actually a Ducato design feature. I know because the following is from a MHF forum, whereby Fiat were contacted regarding the purpose of the bump stop:

 

'The Expert confirmed what has been said previously that the bump stops are NOT bump stops but "an integral part of the suspension system and are designed to be acted upon in conjunction with the springs, and not as a bump stop." He added that, as the rear axle approaches its maximum permitted weight, the supplementary suspension aid would just about touch the top of the leaf spring.'

 

So on that basis, what must the MOT tester have seen under my van this week for it to fail? I can't pay too much attention to what the dealer's customer service chap said at the time, as he wasn't clear and he was also the one who told me that both springs were broken, when if fact they were simply flat.

 

Assuming for arguments sake that the springs were flat, and also assuming that this in itself doesn't lead to MOT failure, then what is the issue? With the bump stops (or whatever Fiat choose to call them) still in place and not damaged or worn, there would have been a large gap between the axle and the van's undercarriage. So what caused the flat springs to lead to MOT failure and their simple replacement to a pass?

 

Any ideas?

 

Shaun

 

 

[Shaun]

In partial answer to my own question above, I've just looked at the failure certificate, whereby the MOT tester commented thus: "Rear Axle has inadequate clearance with the bump stop."

 

Given that the bump stops are claimed by Fiat to be an integral part of the suspension system, and that "as the rear axle approaches its maximum permitted weight, the supplementary suspension aid would just about touch the top of the leaf spring", my question would be how that system can pass an MOT at any time, if the inherent lack of clearance (which is a design feature) leads to MOT failure.

 

Shaun

[Mike88]

Are you going to raise this with the dealer?

[Guest JudgeMental]

Mike88 - 2011-04-24 11:45 AM

 

Judge - If you are going for an uprate via SVTech then I believe they specify the type of assisters to be used and I don't think they are Airrides but possibly the Dunlop system. I would check with SVrech first.

 

I have Airrides on my 6 metre panel van - bought to avoid a grounding issue on my drive - but for what its worth the ride quality has improved and if that helps extend the life of the rear springs I shall be doubly pleased.

 

Thanks keith and Mike...like you say you have to get type approved by SV Tech to get the upgrade (forget which ones) I have fitted 2 airride kits before on 4x4 pickups when I had demountable campers. Looking under the Fiat not a lot of room, and they have a proper damper thingy instead of the bump stop you do away with on the 4x4 *-)

 

what I mean to say is, it looks like there is not a lot of room to get the airrides in, unless they are very small?

 

anyone want to post a picture with aiir fitted to a PVC? pretty please :-D

[Shaun]

I've contacted the dealership who did the MOT for them to confirm more specifically why the van failed, as even with the new springs in situ, there's no clearance between leaf spring and bump stop. This means only very minimal space between axle and bump stop, that being the MOT failure point.

 

Shaun

[Keithl]

Hi Judge,

 

There are full fitting instructions on the Marcle website if you want to see what is involved. Here is a direct Link if it works.

They look easier to fit than those on my Merc if that helps.

 

Keith.

[Guest JudgeMental]

Keithl - 2011-04-24 1:41 PM

 

Hi Judge,

 

There are full fitting instructions on the Marcle website if you want to see what is involved. Here is a direct Link if it works.

They look easier to fit than those on my Merc if that helps.

 

Keith.

 

many thanks!...Looks like a DIY jobby :-D

[dwaviation]

Shaun - My replacement single leaf springs actually raised the rear of my van by about two inches (I always need front wheel chocks :-S ) I reckon the Airides on minimum pressure (0.5 bar) don't actually contribute to that so the rear end lift is all spring. Our first test drive was amazing... with the back end gently bobbing up and down on the most basic of roads (we took it almost cross country on our recent battlefield tour)

 

I am really surprised you have not seen much more of a difference. Can I ask whether your ride height at the back changed at all (it should have increased)

 

 

[Shaun]

I can't see any difference in ride height, but then I didn't think it sagged at the back before the springs were replaced. I never used anything to level the van out and the side door never tried to open or close on level ground, so I think the van sat just fine pre-replacement springs.

 

Shaun

[Mike88]

This is a minor point but one thing I've noticed since fitting Airrides is that the oil lights lose some accuracy and now measure only 4 bars instead of 5 due to the increased ride height at the rear. Also when you park on level ground the rear is raised so I find I need to use levelling blocks more frequently.

[Derek Uzzell]

Shaun - 2011-04-24 1:39 PM

 

I've contacted the dealership who did the MOT for them to confirm more specifically why the van failed, as even with the new springs in situ, there's no clearance between leaf spring and bump stop. This means only very minimal space between axle and bump stop, that being the MOT failure point.

 

Shaun

 

There is an earlier forum posting that, although relating originally to Ford Transits, does touch on the MOT 'bump-stop' issue regarding Citroen/Fiat/Peugeot chassis.

 

A multiple-leaf rear spring may not always be 'stronger' than a single-leaf equivalent - it all depends on the design. Equally, there may be single-leaf springs that look very similar but differ significantly in 'strength'.

 

Air-bellows 'air assistance' systems can disguise weakened original-equipment rear springs as, to a lesser extent, can long 'bump-stops' or metal 'helper' springs. MOT-testing isn't an exact science and relies in some instances on the experience (and intelligence) of the tester. In my Hobby's case, although there's no space between bump-stop and rear axle-beam, it's plain that a) the vehicle's stance is not tail-down (in fact, it's tail-high), b) that the bump-stop is intended to provide spring assistance under load and c) that the rear springs are not flattened or inverted. These factors are visually obvious and I'd suggest that you'd need to be a technical thicko to believe that the nil bump-stop clearance was a fault. Obviously, if the Hobby's stance were tail-down, the bump-stops were clearly designed not to be in contact with the rear axle and/or the springs themselves were showing evidence of damage or weakness, it would be another matter.

 

There may be a number of reasons for fitting uprated rear springs or air-assistance to a motorhome, but it's normally because a genuine need becomes apparent. Usually, this need is to combat a down-at-the-back stance. If the motorhome isn't showing tail-dragging symptoms, then altering the original suspension system starts to become 'tuning' in my view.

 

Your motorhome - before new springs were fitted - apparently didn't show any wayward tendencies while being driven and its stance wasn't tail-down. As its stance hasn't altered after new springs were fitted, it seems doubtful that there was anything mechanically wrong with it initially.

[Shaun]

My sentiments exactly, Derek. Furthermore, one of the companies which sells air assistance shows pictures of a worn and unworn bump stop. The former is used to show the wear which occurs to the rubber when the springs are shot and the bump stops, rather than the springs, are taking the load. In my case, the bump stops are fine. Had they not been, I'm sure the dealer would have wanted to replace them along with the springs.

 

Frankly, I'm not at all convinced that a dealership which sees very few motorhomes (this is by their own admission, when they did the reverse judder remedial work on my van) is best placed to opine as to the suitability of the springs originally fitted by the converter. At this initial juncture, Fiat UK has relied on that opinion more than Adria's motorhome-building experience.

 

It's now down to the MOT tester to explain how if the bump stops aren't worn, why a failure certificate was issued. I don't believe the back-end of the van was noticeably sagging, not least because the rear wheel arches didn't hide any part of the rear wheels.

 

Shaun

[Derek Uzzell]

Mike88 - 2011-04-25 8:31 AM

 

This is a minor point but one thing I've noticed since fitting Airrides is that the oil lights lose some accuracy and now measure only 4 bars instead of 5 due to the increased ride height at the rear. Also when you park on level ground the rear is raised so I find I need to use levelling blocks more frequently.

 

I'm asking myself why you are running your Airride units at a pressure that causes your Mondial to sit significantly tail-high. If the back end is now so high in the air that the vehicle's oil-level warning lights are affected, then, logically, the vehicle's stance is not what Fiat intended.

 

That isn't a criticism - you may well have found by experimentation that using a particular air-bellows pressure provides optimum on-road driving characteristics for you and that a tail-high stance is the unavoidable result. But, if that's not so, then I do wonder why you'd want to operate a Mondial with a seriously elevated derriere. It's the sort of thing I'd envisage an owner of a motorhome with a lot of rear overhang (that's the motorhome not the owner!) doing, but not where a compact panel-van conversion is involved.

[Derek Uzzell]

Shaun - 2011-04-25 9:25 AM

 

My sentiments exactly, Derek. Furthermore, one of the companies which sells air assistance shows pictures of a worn and unworn bump stop. The former is used to show the wear which occurs to the rubber when the springs are shot and the bump stops, rather than the springs, are taking the load. In my case, the bump stops are fine. Had they not been, I'm sure the dealer would have wanted to replace them along with the springs.

 

Frankly, I'm not at all convinced that a dealership which sees very few motorhomes (this is by their own admission, when they did the reverse judder remedial work on my van) is best placed to opine as to the suitability of the springs originally fitted by the converter. At this initial juncture, Fiat UK has relied on that opinion more than Adria's motorhome-building experience.

 

It's now down to the MOT tester to explain how if the bump stops aren't worn, why a failure certificate was issued. I don't believe the back-end of the van was noticeably sagging, not least because the rear wheel arches didn't hide any part of the rear wheels.

 

Shaun

 

I notice that I omitted to copy into my previous posting the critical link to the earlier forum thread I mentioned. (See below:)

 

http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=19542&start=1

 

It would appear from Brian Kirby's comments in that thread that MOT-testers have been instructed about the need to be aware of the lack of bump-stop clearance in the design of rear-suspension systems of certain vehicles.