Van going back to manufacturer

[Steve928]

I'm pleased to able to report that my van is now back home and has survived its journeys completely unscathed as far as I can tell. In the end, because return shipping was going to be delayed, I opted to travel to Bristol and collect it myself. While it was in their hands Bailey had worked through a long snag list and done lots of repairs (new hab. door, skylight, tank heater, water pump, surge damper etc. etc.) including a lot of things that my dealer has refused to refer to them, so in that respect alone it was worthwhile.

 

As to the original problem of drifting to the left, the 10 month long process of appealling to dealer, Al-Ko UK and Bailey for rectification of what appearred to me to be a clear and documented fault has got me precisely nowhere. I can only conclude that my standards and expectations as to how a £45,000 vehicle should perform are higher than those held by all 3 of the above-mentioned companies.

 

I could battle on, I could shoot holes in Al-Ko's lengthy report for example, but have decided to keep my gun in its holster, draw a line under it all, accept that the motorhome industry has defeated me and, most importantly, implement Plan B.

 

Plan B has always been in my arsenal and was to fix it myself through minute machining of the swingarm - stub axle interface to correct the rougue values. This has now been done and I have neutral rear axle geometry and a transformed van which tracks as straight as a die, no longer runs down camber and is a pleasure to drive. Big smiles at last :-D That it had to come to this is a sad indictment of the motorhome industry but there we are, that appears to be how it is.

 

Another van with the same problem leaves Scotland for Bailey next week. I wish the owner (who I think posts on here sometimes) more luck than I had with the process.

[Brian Kirby]

Steve928 - 2015-11-04 11:20 AM...............................Plan B has always been in my arsenal and was to fix it myself through minute machining of the swingarm - stub axle interface to correct the rougue values. This has now been done and I have neutral rear axle geometry and a transformed van which tracks as straight as a die, no longer runs down camber and is a pleasure to drive. Big smiles at last :-D That it had to come to this is a sad indictment of the motorhome industry but there we are, that appears to be how it is.................................

Interesting! This intervention is going to be way outside the capability of the average owner, so I wonder if you could a) say how it was achieved and b) whether you have advised AlKo UK, for transmission back to Germany, of the "rogue" values you found, the corrections applied, and the affect on driving they secured?

 

You might also include the cost to you of getting this done, as it seems to me that the same option was open to them and, in refusing to carry out the work themselves, they landed you with (I assume) a considerable bill.

 

Unless they say the values you found were within their acceptable tolerance range you have a documented fault in their quality control procedures. I assume they are ISO 9001 registered, so not complying with their own standards, and then refusing to rectify the defect, would seem to place them in an "interesting" place vis-a-vis their Q A inspectors.

[Steve928]

Brian,

The van's tracking had been measured 3 times prior to the recent factory visit. Firstly upon completion of the bare chassis, secondly when I first suspected the problem and thirdly upon return to Al-Ko in March. These 3 sessions all produced broadly similar results (given the tolerance of the measuring equipment) although only the last 2 recorded axle toe-out outside of Al-Ko's published tolerance due to the RH value. In essence, while the LH rear wheel is toed-in marginally and has negative camber the RH rear wheel is toed-out excessively and has positive camber. Both of those camber values are pretty much on the limit too.

 

It's worth noting that Al-Ko do not specify individual toe (i.e. LH or RH) tolerances for their axle, they only consider the 'total toe' value which is calculated by subtracting one side's value from the other. You could it seems end up with an axle with extreme RH toe-in and extreme LH toe-out and this would pass as the resulting total toe would be zero. Clearly such an axle would have an extreme sideways thrust though and could end up on a motorhome.

 

The 4th tracking carried out by Laser Tracking mobile service at the recent factory visit seems to have produced such different results that I don't know how to comment upon them! The rear axle is now measured as having total toe-in (no individual values are presented) and both sides now have mid-range negative camber. This 4th. inspection is taken by Al-Ko as disproving their own results from March, and I quote:

" The indicated red figure (from March) is not a failure or incorrect figure for the rear axle as is proved by the independent inspection of the rear axle".

In the end they have chosen to rely on a mobile service to deny the results of their own production line equipment.

 

I did at one point suggest that I might take up the matter with Al-Ko head office in Germany (I have fluent German) and was told 'fine, go ahead' so you can see that I was really banging my head against a brick wall. The really annoying thing is that in a telephone call from Al-Ko's service manager in June I was offerred a new rear axle and told that they would need my van for 3-4 days to fit this. It all then went very quiet and I learned some time later that he had now retired and taken his offer with him! You couldn't make it up.

 

Sorry but I don't want to go into further details of the correction itself.

 

[Brian Kirby]

Steve928 - 2015-11-04 12:51 PM...................................Sorry but I don't want to go into further details of the correction itself.

No, quite right, and I hope I didn't seem to be suggesting you should. I was thinking in terms of what you might say to Al-Ko. However, it seems you already have! Glad you're now happy (ish!) with the results.

[rolandrat]

Knowing very little about the in depth technicalities of the Alko chassis apart from it being an add on to replace a normal Fiat chassis perhaps some well qualified technical expert can enlighten me as how to tow in or out or alter the camber one way or the other of a rubber bushed rigid rear axle. I'm very familiar with car independent suspensions and how to adjust them so I don't think I'm entirely thick in that area. There seems to be thousands of trailers on the road with Alko type suspensions so are they all fitted with means to adjust the toe in/out and neg/pos camber? Going back to the motorhome tracking problem I would have thought that it would be only possible to alter the front suspension settings.

[rolandrat]

Just to add to the previous post, many years ago Lynton Trailers made us an "A"frame Drawbar Trailer which was towed behind a "SpecialTypes" Landrover Discovery fitted with air brakes. As it was over 3.5 tonnes it had to be fitted with a Tachograph as it was classed as a commercial outfit and I remember having to go to Alko in Warwickshire after a short period of use as the nearside rear axle unit had collapsed. It had to be fitted with a complete new rear axle which was done while I waited. The outfit did many thousands of miles after that trouble free. I don't ever recollect there being any tracking problems throughout it's life.

[Steve928]

The Al-Ko axle doesn't fit your description of a rigid rubber-bushed axle but, yes, like the majority of rear axles it has fixed geometry; most cars these days feature torsion U beam rear axles which are similarly non-adjustable.

 

Given this lack of adjustability manufacturers build these axles to specified tolerances as clearly absolute accuracy is not achievable. As vehicle owners the best that we can hope for is that these tolerances are tight enough to produce a product that doesn't ill affect the vehicle's performance and that axles that are outside of tolerance are rejected and do not find their way onto our vehicles, or that if by mistake they do then a solution is provided.

[rolandrat]

Thanks for that Steve. The failure on the Lynton Trailer was the bushing on the rear near side. I must admit, I was very impressed with the way they were manufactured and I suppose that because of the high volume of manufactured units there is bound to be the odd failure from time to time. Good to hear you are now sorted and can enjoy your travels.

[Earthmover]

Hi Steve,

May i beg the question?, Has this problem had any effect on the wear of the rear tyres?. Will they need replacing any time soon?.

Top marks for getting it sorted.

Cheers EM.

[Steve928]

The inner shoulder of the rear right tyre has become feathered with a c. 1mm step down from the trailing edge of one tread block to the leading edge of the next tread block but apart from that the tyres seem to be wearing evenly and have plenty of life left in them. This uneven tyre wear was mentioned to Al-Ko prior to their recent inspection as one of the things that they should consider but sadly didn't feature in their report.

[Derek Uzzell]

Steve

 

Did you get any useful feedback from Al-Ko and/or Bailey regarding your criticisms of your motorhome’s harsh ride?

 

At the NEC Show I had a long chat (my wife would probably say “an endless chat”) with an Al-Ko representative and mentioned your observations about poor ride quality. I suggested that, if a largish motorhome were built on an ultra-low Al-Ko chassis with limited ground clearance, the rear wheels’ vertical travel would need to be seriously restricted and a harsh ride would then be pretty much inevitable. The representative seemed comfortable with that view.

 

I inquired how much liaison there usually was between Al-Ko and the motorhome manufacturer regarding choice and specification of the chassis and was told that manufacturers specified what they wanted and Al-Ko provided it. I then asked if it was normal for a manufacturer (I mentioned Bailey) to prototype a motorhome design on a particular Al-Ko chassis before specifying what they wanted chassis-wise for production models and the representative said he hoped Bailey would have done that.

[Steve928]

No, Derek, that issue wasn't discussed, primarily because I'm sure that it is a feature rather than a fault and that my van is to specification in this respect. Al-Ko did carry out a thorough check of all chassis and axle components though and confirmed that both are undamaged and fault free. The discussion that you recount does seem to have pin-pointed where the blame for the harsh ride lies.

 

Interestingly before the van could be returned to the factory I had to empty it, unloading around 600kg. in the process, yet I could detect no change in static ride height between the 2 states.

[BikerBarry]

Our van (2.3 Fiat panel van conversion) has pulled slightly to the left since new in 2007. It has been back to Fiat several times without a resolution, after they have found nothing amiss. It has now covered 70,000 miles and is still tugging that way a little. The tyres have worn evenly, it pulls up straight when braking hard, so I've taken the easy way out and presume it may be just something simple like a 'sticky' strut top mounting?

All this talk of rejection is probably from folk who have not studied the reality of the situation and the problems faced by an owner who goes down that potentially long-distance route.

 

[PeteH]

Hi

 

A slight tendency to pull left (toward the UK kerb) would be a function of the road camber Surely?.

Also. whilst not 100% sure. I have Seen it reported on Fiat Forums, that on (some) Fiat Cars, with electric PAS, A tendency to pull one side or the other is a precursor to the demise of the PAS motor?

 

Any GROSS tendency. will be the result of improper setting of the Chassis set-up in some area?. and assuming NOT attributable to any Damage caused by "improper driving". (here I have in mind the sort of "abuse", say of Mounting the kerb on a regular basis) would be rectifiable under any Warranty?.

 

Having recently had to Scrabble under my 07reg Rapido in the Rear Suspension area to run Cable. I was surprised to find the Axle and its Fitting/Construction to be relatively unsophisticated. Brief observation would indicate that the Axle is Bolted to the side rails, which are in turn Bolted to the Fiat Sub Frame just abaft of the Cab. My take on that is that this creates two potential points at which the Alignment of the axle itself could become defective depending upon what I imagine are "Clearance" Not "Fit" holes in the chassis rails, would (could) lead to the Angular alignment becoming distorted?. effectively giving the issues described by the OP?.

 

Pete

 

 

 

Pete

[Steve928]

BikerBarry - 2015-11-07 1:35 PM

All this talk of rejection is probably from folk who have not studied the reality of the situation and the problems faced by an owner who goes down that potentially long-distance route.

 

Yes I agree but I also accept that ultimately my position was weakened by my desire to keep hold of my van and continue using it, but that was my choice. The owner of the van that goes back this week (we are in touch) is taking a firmer line and intends to refuse to accept it back unless the fault is corrected. This may well bring better results.

 

PeteH - 2015-11-08 3:17 PM

A slight tendency to pull left (toward the UK kerb) would be a function of the road camber Surely?.

 

Again I agree and I think it is particularly true of chassis with extended rear track. In my case however the pull was somewhere between your 'slight' and 'gross' definitions (I'd call it 'firm') and wasn't echoed by a similar tendecy to pull right on right-hand road cambers i.e. there was a demonstrable imbalance in the handling.

 

Regarding your description of how the chassis is bolted together, my understanding (from talking to the Al-Ko techs.) is that all the bolted joints pull up tight into one position i.e. there is no possibility to bolts things together incorrectly nor to loosen off the fixings, shoogle things around a bit and then tighten things up in slightly different position even if that were desired.

[PeteH]

 

""Regarding your description of how the chassis is bolted together, my understanding (from talking to the Al-Ko techs.) is that all the bolted joints pull up tight into one position i.e. there is no possibility to bolts things together incorrectly nor to loosen off the fixings, shoogle things around a bit and then tighten things up in slightly different position even if that were desired.""

 

Hmm?. Most Manufacturing Tolerances especially of "pressed" items (which the Alko frames appear to be) have some "wiggle room". otherwise "production line" staff would struggle to make assembly in any sort of "targeted" time frame?. (not talking Reamed High tolerance Fitting here, just "general" assembly). the unfortunate Cumulated effect of several small discrepancies might make a substantial difference.

 

Many Years ago, in only slightly different circumstances, we used to regularly "mix and Match" parts from differing presses and operations to compensate for the wearing process on the press/production tools. all the individual parts were "in tolerance" but when assembled the total discrepancy could be too great for final inspection!!. sounds daft but it happened!.

 

Pete

[Derek Uzzell]

Chassis alignment and “wiggle room” was something I discussed with the Al-Ko rep at the NEC. I was also told that no repositioning of the axle-unit on the chassis rails was practicable, nor was it possible to tweak the ‘strength’ of an Al-Ko axle’s torsion system.

 

When I mentioned the type of tracking problem Steve was having the rep seemed nonplussed, saying that alignment was carefully checked after the axle+chassis combination had been attached to the cab-unit prior to delivery to the motorhome converter. What I had not anticipated (and thus failed to query) was how Al-Kp carried out the alignment check and how wide ‘misalignment’ tolerances could be and still be considered acceptable by Al-Ko. If a left rear wheel has toe-in and negative camber and the right rear wheel has significant toe-out and positive camber, it’s to be expected that this will affect how the vehicle drives.