Guest peter Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 johnnerontheroad - 2013-12-15 9:08 PM peter - 2013-12-15 8:58 PM Ah well that's another thread sabotaged by extreme nastiness from the usual suspects , sadly. I hope he gets it sorted, as it's a bloody disgrace to expect people to pay a lot of money for a product that seems to have been designed by a complete idiot with no basic knowledge of good engineering practice at all. Unbelievable and supremely arrogant to expect no-one to notice it eventually. Well spotted Brian. I wouldn't fix it myself as it's clearly unfit for purpose, if I did I'd send the supplying dealer a bill for my labours. Taken from Elddis web site it looks like the customers design the vans :-D "Once we have decided our product strategy, we create a Customer-led detailed design brief for each and every model." http://www.elddis.co.uk/why-choose-elddis/design-and-development DaveThat's the cause sorted then. They're designed by a committee of customers who want a van that's going to be a lemon. Great idea! why don't all manufacturers go down this route?. Then we'd all be driving around in crap motorhomes, instead of just those driving British ones. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 My newly acquired French Rapido is a pinnacle of design, I've just spent the best part of last week taking the kitchen apart to get to the faulty boiler, it was obviously designed to be the very first thing to be put in the van, and to hell with any one that may need to get at it later. My UK IH in contrast required just four screws to be removed to gain access to it, oh well. :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peter Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 You didn't even need a screwdriver. A tin opener is all that's needed. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 coombsmk2 - 2013-12-13 5:26 PM Sides and lower sections are just soft wood frames,polystyrene inners then sandwiched between 2 thin layers of plywood. Which all makes a great sponge if not sealed correctly.! . I thought polystyrene was a closed cell foam that doesn't absorb water? (so much so it is used in lifejackets to provide buoyancy in water.) (?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Peter James - 2013-12-16 5:47 AM coombsmk2 - 2013-12-13 5:26 PM Sides and lower sections are just soft wood frames,polystyrene inners then sandwiched between 2 thin layers of plywood. Which all makes a great sponge if not sealed correctly.! . I thought polystyrene was a closed cell foam that doesn't absorb water? (so much so it is used in lifejackets to provide buoyancy in water.) (?) As you say, extruded closed-cell polystyrene (often referred to as "Styrofoam" when motorhome construction is being discussed) will not absorb moisture. It's used by many prestigious converters (eg. Carthago) as an effective insulator. In coombsmk2's case, the polystyrene insulation won't have contributed to the problem, nor (I suspect) will the way Elddis has overlapped the body-side's external aluminium skin. As the owner says, this particular sandwich-panel had been poorly sealed. As a result, when the vehicle had been driven on wet roads, water will have been able to enter the panel from below and seep into its internal structure. With thin plywood and thin aluminium having been used by Elddis, the consequences are pretty much inevitable. Photos of 'overcab' Autoquest models up to 2012 show a horizontal joint fairly high up in bodyside panels. I presume Elddis used a standard width of aluminium sheet for the skin and the height of overcab models meant that a joint was required. 2012-onwards overcab Autoquest models have a different design of side-panel. Elddis has now developed the SoLiD construction method. http://www.elddis.co.uk/why-choose-elddis/solid-construction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve928 Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 As a former Elddis owner, and as someone who has removed and refitted one of these skirt panels, I would agree with Derek that the method of overlap at the skirt joint is not the problem. Although it may look somewhat comical, given the construction of the van's main structure and the skirt panel it is a fair method which attaches the skirt to the very outside of the wall at its lowest point below floor level without intrusion into the wall at all other than for the inevitable screw holes. Any water that did find its way past that joint (which was well-sealed on my van) would just run down the back of the skirt panel which anyway gets soaked on wet roads. Just a poorly sealed skirt panel which is easily replaced - which Elddis should have done without quibble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 1footinthegrave Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 I think we should cut some of these manufacturers some slack, m/home and caravan building is in it's infancy, :-) odd though that one of my first caravans bought in the late 1960's leaked.............and here we are getting on for 50 years later and they still do. >:-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Steve928 - 2013-12-16 10:27 AM As a former Elddis owner, and as someone who has removed and refitted one of these skirt panels, I would agree with Derek that the method of overlap at the skirt joint is not the problem. Although it may look somewhat comical, given the construction of the van's main structure and the skirt panel it is a fair method which attaches the skirt to the very outside of the wall at its lowest point below floor level without intrusion into the wall at all other than for the inevitable screw holes. Any water that did find its way past that joint (which was well-sealed on my van) would just run down the back of the skirt panel which anyway gets soaked on wet roads. Just a poorly sealed skirt panel which is easily replaced - which Elddis should have done without quibble. Steve, have you looked at the CC forum pictures, as linked on page 1 by Derek? They are much sharper. The panel in question does not seem to be a quite so simple as you imply. It is a thin aluminium sheet backed onto a timber frame with polystyrene infill. It is unclear, and was not stated what, if anything, clads the rear of the panel. I have to say I fail to understand how this could be considered a "fair" method of construction. It places apparently untreated timber in the most hostile environment on the van. The consequence is evident: it has rotted in less than three years. Not what buyers expect, even on an "entry" level van. May one ask why you also found it necessary to remove and re-fit one of these panels on your van? I agree with you strongly that Elddis should not have hidden behind their warranty terms, and should have carried out the repairs without question. I can only assume that either they were fearful of creating a precedent, or that they knew this was a major problem and grabbed the opportunity to reduce their costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
globebuster Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Trust me, the Polystyrene will have made a significant contribution to the damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve928 Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Brian Kirby - 2013-12-16 4:16 PM Steve, have you looked at the CC forum pictures, as linked on page 1 by Derek? They are much sharper. The panel in question does not seem to be a quite so simple as you imply. It is a thin aluminium sheet backed onto a timber frame with polystyrene infill. It is unclear, and was not stated what, if anything, clads the rear of the panel. I have to say I fail to understand how this could be considered a "fair" method of construction. It places apparently untreated timber in the most hostile environment on the van. The consequence is evident: it has rotted in less than three years. Not what buyers expect, even on an "entry" level van. May one ask why you also found it necessary to remove and re-fit one of these panels on your van? I agree with you strongly that Elddis should not have hidden behind their warranty terms, and should have carried out the repairs without question. I can only assume that either they were fearful of creating a precedent, or that they knew this was a major problem and grabbed the opportunity to reduce their costs. Yes, Brian, I've looked at the OP's 2 pictures. The skirt panels are constructed from a softwood timber frame with a polystyrene sheet infill and both inner and outer skins of plywood. The resulting unit is then bonded onto the inner side of the aluminium skin leaving an upstand of this skin at the top which is then used to fasten the skirt to the van at the overlap joint that you have identified. The skirt is then braced to the underside of the floor with a combination of brackets and steel straps. I meant to apply the word 'fair' only to the attachment method of the skirt - perhaps I was unclear, although I did say 'given the construction of the van's main structure and the skirt panel'. Regarding my own panel - I damaged it on an unseen spike. I removed it, had the skin replaced and then refitted it. The timber was in good condition at 5 years old and was re-used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 Thanks for this, Steve. Bad luck with the spike, one of the hazards, I'm afraid! :-( It seems there must be some radical difference between the OP's skirt and yours, as his seems virtually to have disintegrated within about half the life of yours at the time you re-used it. Very strange. Even so, it still strikes me as a highly dubious form of construction to use in such a location. Ah well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted December 16, 2013 Share Posted December 16, 2013 ..and not just the OP's either, ours was starting to "go" at 3 years... ... and izzywhit's had "gone" at 5 years(Here's their thread again, linked too earlier in this thread): https://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/Corrosion-of-body-work-on-Elddis-Autoquest-100/32495/ Not good at all.... :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 globebuster - 2013-12-16 4:33 PM Trust me, the Polystyrene will have made a significant contribution to the damage. I worked at GCHQ for 26 years. I don't trust anybody - some days I don't even trust me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Derek Uzzell - 2013-12-16 9:50 AM As you say, extruded closed-cell polystyrene (often referred to as "Styrofoam" when motorhome construction is being discussed) will not absorb moisture. It's used by many prestigious converters (eg. Carthago) as an effective insulator. Ah, Thats what I thought but Thanks for the confirmation. It must be only when its in British vans that they call polystyrene a sponge *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 globebuster - 2013-12-16 4:33 PM Trust me, the Polystyrene will have made a significant contribution to the damage. are you going to tell us how *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Peter James - 2013-12-17 12:08 PM globebuster - 2013-12-16 4:33 PM Trust me, the Polystyrene will have made a significant contribution to the damage. are you going to tell us how *-) I'd hazard a guess that it's "inclusion" as another layer in a poorly(cheaply)constructed ply/insulation/ply/aluminium panel assembly and therefore adding additional faces/surfaces in which to trap moisture/road spray, that is a problem... I never got to the point of stripping down our Compass and I'll admit that until I read Steve928's account of what he found when he repaired his, I was of the opinion that it would've just consisted of 5/8"-3/4" exterior ply,which was then clad with an aluminium panel(..I had no idea it was a "sandwich" comprising of such thin ply panels and softwood battens!)). Just why on earth they feel the need to construct an "insulated" panel, when it's only going to hang outside, below the floor line anyway, beats me...*-) (....there's a good chance it's a way of using up ply off-cuts from elsewhere in their operation...? :-S ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
globebuster Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Derek Uzzell - 2013-12-17 9:27 AM globebuster - 2013-12-16 4:33 PM Trust me, the Polystyrene will have made a significant contribution to the damage. I worked at GCHQ for 26 years. I don't trust anybody - some days I don't even trust me. I'll re-phrase that then - 'In my humble opinion, the Polystyrene will have made a significant contribution to the damage'.................. Trust me :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 pepe63 - 2013-12-17 12:43 PM Just why on earth they feel the need to construct an "insulated" panel, when it's only going to hang outside, below the floor line anyway, beats me...*-) I guess its a continuation of the side panels. Two thin sheets with polystyrene between also makes a light, strong, rigid and cheap panel whether you need insulation or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 globebuster - 2013-12-17 4:33 PM I'll re-phrase that then - 'In my humble opinion, the Polystyrene will have made a significant contribution to the damage'.................. Trust me :-D So what should they have used instead of polystyrene (like the other manufacturers do)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peter Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 A thicker and separate aluminium panel for a start. But that would incur extra cost. Not what they want at all. :-> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rupert123 Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 peter - 2013-12-17 5:47 PM A thicker and separate aluminium panel for a start. But that would incur extra cost. Not what they want at all. :-> As has been pointed out on this thread several times they do not use this construction method any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Derek Uzzell - 2013-12-17 9:27 AM globebuster - 2013-12-16 4:33 PM Trust me, the Polystyrene will have made a significant contribution to the damage. I worked at GCHQ for 26 years. I don't trust anybody - some days I don't even trust me. By eck your a dark horse Derek.......................that explains it ;-)............... 26 years in a place like that 8-)...................no wonder your a human database :D............ Fortunately you have Fiona :->............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 rupert123 - 2013-12-17 6:08 PM peter - 2013-12-17 5:47 PM A thicker and separate aluminium panel for a start. But that would incur extra cost. Not what they want at all. :-> As has been pointed out on this thread several times they do not use this construction method any more. Pity the unfortunate mug who ends up with a rotting camper that won't reverse up hill *-).............Prog.r..es.......Ooops :$...................but you see my point ;-)....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 rupert123 - 2013-12-17 6:08 PM peter - 2013-12-17 5:47 PM A thicker and separate aluminium panel for a start. But that would incur extra cost. Not what they want at all. :-> As has been pointed out on this thread several times they do not use this construction method any more. Yeah, let's keep this in perspective eh, after all, they haven't used such a rough ar*ed, outdated method of construction since ...well?....it must at least 3 or 4 years now... (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
globebuster Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Even a budget van deserves to be built half-decent! They may not use this method anymore, so what about those existing owners Rupert? - because I fear it's only a matter of time before others come to the surface. Let's face it, they were about 20 years behind just about everyone else in dropping the overlap method amongst other things 8-) And those exposed 2" x 1" that run along the bottom of the skirt - what were they thinking? They now use the Solid construction system - but I can tell you that underneath not so much has changed !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.