Uncle Bulgaria Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 One for the technical experts. I've been looking at a few new Fiat van conversions at the recent NEC. The base vehicle seems to be specified as either a 33L or 35H. A 33L Ducato I've seen has a payload that I think is too small, but the dealer, after speaking to SV Tech, says it can be replated from 3300Kg to 3500Kg. The vehicle plate states GVM of 3300Kg, Axle 1:1750Kg, Axle 2 :1900Kg, Train max : 5800Kg. Is the 35H chassis an inherently stronger design giving appreciably higher maximum axle loads? And if so, can replating a 33L chassis to 3500Kg give a viable vehicle? Richard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 This is a real minefield, you have to consider not just the overall weight but also each axle, older Twins on a 33L overloaded the front axle and no amount of paperwork replating would help. The 35H off the top of my head is front 2100kg rear 2400kg much more tolerant of loading. p.s. A true 35L (as used by some UK manufacturers) off top of my head is front 1900kg rear 2000kg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 I'm not as familiar with the current Ducato as I was with the previous, but if there is a choice, and you expect to be close to the maximum weight, I would always go for the higher rated base. AFAIK, the 35H gives you an extra 100kg on both the front and rear axle, and 200kg on the GTW. Uprating via SVtech (as a paper exercise at least) is likely to increase only the MAM, and not either of the axle weights or the GTW. This may be important in the case of a panel van conversion, as problems have been reported with the front axle weight on a number of the same (judicious use of the search facility may pull up some relatively recent postings on this - though at the moment I can't find them), and the lack of overhang at the back makes it difficult to reduce front axle load . Edit: Colin may well be correct about the model designation I'm quoting as being 35L, there is also (I think) a version with 2100/2400 axle weights (but that is a very big leap from the lower rated chassis). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JudgeMental Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 Well my 2011 Adria at 3300kg is fine. Fully loaded (and I mean fully loaded!) for summer trip with E bikes, full tanks etc ....etc....all axles well within capacity and a bit spare on max as well. travel with less water and more capacity available German dealer said I was mad to consider upgrading and he was proved right... If you carry 4 people this could cause you to go over front axle capacity, so you would have to be more careful...But as Colin says upgrading to 3500kg is unlikely to help in this regard as front axle governs what you can do anyway! (unless you go for full air supsension which is very expensive) we were surprised and relieved that 3300kg was sufficent, and quite honestly there was no room to carry more stuff comfortably anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 A minor correction to my post. 35L is 1850/2000, still not a bad 'guess' earlier considering the state of my memory :D I know nick rates the 35H (maxi) , but we have a 35H L4 and IMO this is not as good a ride as 35L. In our case there was no option as L4 is maxi only, but if we had an L3 (6 metre) would still want 35L or H as we regulary have four up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JudgeMental Posted October 18, 2011 Share Posted October 18, 2011 colin - 2011-10-18 8:38 PM A minor correction to my post. 35L is 1850/2000, still not a bad 'guess' earlier considering the state of my memory :D I know nick rates the 35H (maxi) , but we have a 35H L4 and IMO this is not as good a ride as 35L. In our case there was no option as L4 is maxi only, but if we had an L3 (6 metre) would still want 35L or H as we regulary have four up. Reminds me of another thing german dealer said, and that was that the 3500kg was a horrible ride... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Bulgaria Posted October 20, 2011 Author Share Posted October 20, 2011 Thanks to everyone for their contribution. It is a bit of a minefield, but contributions have given me a clear steer to follow. I hadn't previously considered that it was the front axle that was struggling to keep under the limit. Having only experience of coachbuilts with a rear overhang and garage I have always seen the rear axle as the the limiting factor. As we would be three-up I would look for a minimum of the 35L. Thanks everyone. Richard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Dwight Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 I agree with Eddie,our vehicle is 3300kg Fully loaded 2 adults, dog, two bikes and enought gear for three months and we still had pay load spare. Did Croatia last year and Morocco this year. It amazes us how much clobber people take with them. We have friends who Caravan the van is loaded plus the Car and theres only two of them. Ittakesthem about 3 hours to pack up, whilst we take about 15 minutes. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euroserv Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Hello, If we disregard the lower weight vans and look only at the 35L and 35H (or Maxi), one thing is immediately apparent: The 35L has 40kg more payload to play with. That might be important. The 35H has the same suspension as the 40H which carries a payload of about 1850kg and is necessarily 'harder'. The springs are up-rated and the wheels and tyres are bigger along with the brakes and this makes the whole set up considerably firmer. This is so that there is a margin of excess capacity on both the front and rear axle loads (mentioned above) and so that under heavy loads the vehicle exhibits more control and thereby ensuring higher levels of stability when making sudden movements and under braking. Many people do not need this extra margin and may find the softer nature of the lighter van to be more comfortable; especially when only partly loaded. What i do know is that if I were running one of these vehicles at close to it's maximum weight most of the time on unfamiliar roads I would not only want that extra control but would opt for the twin leaf suspension at the rear to steady things even further and ensure a level posture even if badly loaded. But that's just me... Maybe it's because I know how little these extras cost when you have the vehicle from the factory compared with modifying it later and would rather be "Looking at it than looking for it"! The odd broken plate would be sufferable compared to being at the helm of a boat. Joking aside; the Fiat vehicle is more stable than anything else on the market even in it's lighter forms, so all things are relative. For the rest of you..... "Steady as she goes"! Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith T Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 When we pruchased our Burnster in 2007, the choice was 33L, or 35H at extra cost.We opted for the latter, but it didnt simply add 200 kg to the loading margin, as some of the components in the 35 are heavier. However to get a decent payload it was necessary to upgrade, and this was not just a replating procedure. Whilst I cant remembr the details after allhtis time, we were advised exactly what parts were bigger/heavier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.