WHICH Motor Home of the Year

[Saphire]

I read in June's edition of MMM, that the WHICH motorhome of the year is the Adria Vision 707i, What!!!. Are those judging a Motorhome of the year, for real, are they motorhome'ers or just people wearing rose tinted glasses. I was trying to think, why I had dismissed the Adria Vision, when I first went to see it. I just remembered and it had nothing to do with personal choice, of layout, it had to do about, fit for the purpose intended. The Adria Vision is a motorhome designed to carry four people, the driver and three passengers, that is why it has four belted seats. The industry uses a figure of 75 Kg as the weight of one person = the driver, then gas, and fuel, is added to the weight of the finished motorhome, that is then deducted from the, from the Max of 3500kg, to give the USER PAYLOAD. In the case of the Adria Vision, that payload is 220 Kg. Add three passengers x 75 Kg = 225 Kg. Already the van would be 5 Kg over max weight. No clothes, no food, no anything. How can this be Motorhome of the year. It's ridiculous. As for the rear garage, don't even go there. With three passengers, in their birthday suits, you put anything more then a tin of beans in the garage and the police will charge you for having an illegal vehicle on the road. Have an accident while carrying four people and your insurance will not pay out either. The law states it is you, as the owner, that has to ensure your vehicle is road worthy and not the builder of your motorhome. So I ask again, How can this be the WHICH motorhome of any year. It is not fit for the purpose of carrying three passengers, notwithstanding any food or clothes or anything, they might require, to take with them. Maz

[enrico]

Thanks for that so it means I can cross this one off the list to look at. :-)

[Pat P]

Yeah me too. Pat

[Saphire]

This is just one of many such motorhomes out there at the moment. I feel that it is up to me and other right minded people to help our fellow motorhome friends to save them making a costly error. However All of my procrastinations seem to pale to nothing, when a magazine votes it so highly and that magazine being WHICH ? The WHICH magazine I always thought helped the end user with good in-depth studies of many items. There reports are used, in this case by would be motorhome purchasers as a bad job something special when it is voted as motorhome of the year 2006.

[smifee]

hi saphire i sent an email to the editor of MMM when they had awarded a similar title to a van with an inadequate payload. no reply and it didn't get printed. i wonder why? the magazine is a sad rag trading on it's previous good name. they won't rock the boat for fear of advertising being withdrawn. so we have reviews of vans where everything is 'conveniently placed' , interiors are 'well thought out' but in true basil fawlty style 'don't mention the payload' mike

[Saphire]

Thanks Mike. Like you say, I didn't understand this one either. In America a Watch Dog Magazine, tells it as it is about the state of cars, now because of their standing tall on such a matter, the whole car industry has changed. People are given the correct information on what they are buying. We thought that Which did the same for us over here, but clearly that isn't so, or they wouldn't have voted this as motorhome year. Add to this how few have come back on this thread. Are we British, so complacent. there should be a roar going out and not a whimper to motorhome manufacturers, after all this one cost nearly £50,000 and put three passengers in it and it will cost you more in the court for being over the weight limit. What is going on? MMM, pick up on this, even though WHICH, is your sister publication. Come on you motorhome owners, reading this thread, don't sit there doing nothing, get on board. blitzs this thread. all we seem to hear, is that it is up to us the buyers to check everything out. Like the couple that bought an American motorhome, to then find out it was too wide, they lost a fortune. That British sales outlet is still trading, we need to know these thing and we all will be the winners and not be left in the dark. Come on WHICH, ARE YOU MEN OR WIMPS. do you really care about the British public at all. Do you like seeing us to be taken to the cleaners by misrepresenting a motorhome as be the best for that year. some one, somewhere, must have some back bone, stand up and be counted. MAZ.

[Pilgrimphil]

Are you sure that WHICH Motorcaravan is actually associated with the WHICH magazine? Don't think so !!

[Saphire]

Dear Pilgrimphil. Good point, thank you. When we think of the magazine called WHICH, we take it that any such publication, using that name, works on the same philosophy. It could be that it has nothing to do with WHICH, the consumer watchdog mag. That would be even worse. However, it matters little to this thread, as WHICH motorhome, made this Adria, Motorhome of the year. It isn't fit to carry three passengers, plus clothes and food in the fridge and be legal on the road. it's not just about the buyer either, what about a woman pushing a pram with a baby in it, on the side of the road, when such a Motorhome comes around the corner and wipes them out, due to overloading, just carrying three passengers and a few other items we all carry. I remember the motorhome Guru Wickersham making a point some years ago (although not naming and shaming) on a German made unit, so it's not me bashing Adria Vision. Or are we looking for excuses, to allow manufacturers to rip us off and put us into the hands of the court, when and if something goes wrong. There are enough deaths on the road as it it, having an overloaded Motorhome, on the road effect us all. Maz.

[Guest Sally Pepper]

There are MANY reasons why the Adria Vision won our Motorhome of the Year - all of them valid, and none connected with advertising. You can read them all in the May issue. And we share readers worries about payload. The article about the Vision winning states clearly "you'll need to fork out an extra £100 for the chassis to be plated at 3,850kg. The standard 3.5-tonne version doesn't have enough payload, but with the upgrade you can carry up to 570kg." I can't think of an A-class with a garage that would have a decent payload AND a 3,500kg gross weight. BUT many are built in Europe and plated at 3,500kg to meet their stricter driving licence restrictions. When they are imported to the UK they are simply re-plated to a higher figure. And it's not just WHICH MOTORCARAVAN that thinks the Adria Vision is a winner. It has won plaudits all over Europe. It is currently sold out - even though production models have only just started to appear. And it won the BEST A-CLASS in the CARAVAN CLUB's recent Design & Drive competition. Peter Vaughan Editor Which Motorcaravan

[mikemoss]

That's a fair answer Peter - beats me why they try and sell the thing with such an inadequate loading margine (which is even worse if you order the 3 litre engine!). If Adria UK had any sense (or rather conscience) they would make the 3850kw model the ONLY one availalable here, and never mind trying to charge extra for it.

[mikemoss]

And by the way, many thanks to Saphire for raising this thread - it has certainly made me think. Naively, I'd always assumed that any motorhome on sale from a reputable manufacturer would have an adequate basic payload built into it. How wrong I was!

[Saphire]

Thanks for your reply Peter, especially as you were one of the judges and as you point out I have not read the article as I only get MMM mag. However, I am even more confused! Are you saying that the Adria Vision is only plated at 3500-tonne to get around licensing laws in Europe and that the actual motorhome is rated at 3.8-tonne and all one needs to do is pay £100 to have it upgraded. (Re-plated). What about those drivers in this county, who's licence only allows them to drive a maximum of 3.5-tonne, they might see the motorhome as being ideal and put three passengers in it and will brake the law, due to overload. When there can be such confusion, my point become more pressing. Did you follow the trend or think about this confusion due to our licensing changes in the mid nineteen ninety? If a vehicle can only be driven by people such as I rated up to 7.5-tonne on our licence, then why vote for it as motorhome of the year. We need to protect all our fellow motorhome drivers and all other road users. words can be lost to some who only see a motorhome at a good price with sound specification and WHICH'S endorsement. I thank you for your reply and that you stand by your own judgement on such a motorhome. I do hope, those that might be swayed by such an article, reads it with great care, I would hate to hear about anyone going to court. Even so, it would seem that in Europe, where 3.5-tonne is some kind of weight restriction on their licences, they would be braking the law, carrying three passengers and all other normal items, so shame on those European endorsements as well. Maz.

[Saphire]

Dear Mikemoss. Thank you for getting on board. This is what the forum is all about. Now we have it from the horses mouth, so to speak, one of the judges. You are so Right. Bless you for your imput. Maz.

[smifee]

hi all if a lot of the continentals are running around overloaded there appears to be little chance of being stopped & weighed over there then. i haven't seen any weight stop checks in thousands of miles over the channel but have seen MHs being weighed at a couple of DOT checkpoints in the uk. mike

[Saphire]

Hi Mike. Thanks for that, once more it is one of the points I was making in a round about way. Some young man, with a licence up to 3.5-tonne, without the wisdom of age, might see "Payload" as an amount of baggage and shackles that can be carried and 220 Kg, is not a small amount. However, we know that the "payload" includes, people at an industry figure of 75 Kg each. We have read in the pages of MMM about other motorhomes finding out when they are pulled by the police onto a weighbridge, that there is no excuse, no matter what the showroom sales person said or for that matter didn't say to them at the point of sale. The Motorhome, is plated at 3.5-tonne, if it was plated at 3.850-tonne, to give a more pleasing "payload" of 570 Kg then I would hope the sales person would point that out to the buyer, if they didn't have the correct licence. As for the European industry singing the praises of this motorhome, then with age I can recall a very important and recent event. All over Europe, the press and media were telling everyone, what a wonderful small car the Merc A class was. Here in Britain, Jerromy Clarkson, took it for a test drive, on the program Top Gear. He slated it, nothing to do with the finish and fit, but to do with it's handling, it felt to him as if it was going to roll over. He was slated in the papers and then in Sweden, an A class overturned, thankfully no one died. only then did people say what a good chap Clarkson was, making people stop and think for a moment. All the A class were recalled to have stiffer roll bars put on them. He stood up and was counted. He didn't just go with the flow and add his endorsement to the car. Back to the point, why should I have to pay out an additional £100, just to have it re-plated at 3.850-tonne. Why is this Motorhome, badged, even in the UK at 3.5-tonne. It's to catch the young customer out and make a sale. Why did our own WHICH mag, make it their motorhome of the year. For them to tell me, that it's such a wonderful motorhome, as all of Europe says so and that I could have it re-badged to allow me to carry three passengers and some items of clothes and food in the fridge as well, is laughable. For Peter Vaughan, as a judge and Editor of WHICH Motorhome, to come back and have to defend the un-defend-able, was really upsetting. At least he did step in and state what we already knew, it was just a follow on from European media hype. Just because they say so, means diddle squat to me. This is Britain, not France or Germany, remember the A Class hype. It took a Brit to make a point. all we want is that kind of watch dog and making this motorhome to be best for the year 2006, is not the way to go, if you want public support and look after British customers. Over to you Peter. Maz.

[enodreven]

Hi, It is not just the young people who may have a problem, i met someone on holiday in France who had a medical condition that precluded him from driving a vehicle over 3500kg and he had purchase his vehicle presisly because it was shown as under 3500kg even though the pay load was so little ?? it was a Rapido ?? so it may not be silly or missleading on the manufactures part it could be that some people actually want the room inside and are prepaired to accept the low payload on the understanding that they won't or shouldn't carry a full compliment of passengers etc. this also goes for those over 70 as well. I also think there was a thread on hear or perhaps on another site where people were asking about having their MH replated to a lower weight as they were getting near 70 ??

[colin]

Bumped up for ronb

[johnsandywhite]

:-D One would like to ask, how much in backhanders, perks, holidays etc the judges receive for putting such an acolade on a motorhome. But I wouldn't do that would I? *-)

[Lizzy]

Another reason why Hubby and I have put our plans on hold! We carry a lot of archery equipment, not only is this expensive to replace but also adds to the day-to-day needs of 2 people. Although it's a good reason to lose weight [points to Himself ;-) ] it's been noted that the Police will, from April, be pulling more and more 'vans onto British weighbridges! Can't be doing with yet another hassle!

[net-traveller]

I know I'm a bit late getting into this but ........ it's all very well offering an upgrade to 3850 but anyone over 70 is restricted to 3500 unless they can convince the licencing authority to allow them to keep their previous entitlement. This may involve an expensive, and frequent, medical. This means that many campers, who intended to travel widely on retirement, are having to revise their plans or pay shedloads out of a modest income. It seems that the latest trend is the bigger the better from the manufacturers. It's about time there was a balance between small, medium and large. Cheers

[johnsandywhite]

:-S I must apologise to ALL with regards my Tongue in Cheek post within this thread. I mean to cast no aspersions on any of the Judges who took part in the judging of the Motorhome Of the Year. Happy Motorhoming to all. May your travels be many and your troubles be few. ;-)

[o midKnight]

Can any of you more knowledgeable than me people please advise on best payload 96 model exis or 501D Knaus sport. I do not want to make another mistake. Thanks for the information to date.