Upgrading weights / payload on Kontiki 645

[Barryd999]

Has anyone done this on this model? I am talking about the 2003-2006 model which I think according to the specs I can find is either 3850kg or 4000kg. I have seen one for sale which may replace our ageing 1996 Kontiki 640. As you may know we need to fit a rack and scooter but I dont reckon the newer Kontiki has enough payload despite the short overhang on the Alko Chassis. The Figures I have seen online for payload seem to be between 425-500kg with either 2120 or 2300 max on the rear axle depending on which one it is.

 

On our current Kontiki I think we had something like 690kg of payload and about 250kg to play with on the rear which was just enough with the rack and bike on. I dont reckon this 2003 model as it is will be enough but the question is. Can either the 3850 or 4000 van be upplated and if so how?

 

What is the maximum you can uprate a single rear axle? Is 2300 the max? I have not seen it yet but wondered if anyone had done this particular model

[Brian Kirby]

Don't know if this will help, Barry, but you can download a 2006 Kon-Tiki brochure from Swift's website. There don't seem to be any earlier than that.

It quotes the 645 as being built on the "heavy" chassis, with either 2.4L 130ps, or 3.0L 160ps, engines.

Both are shown as having an AlKo chassis with an MAM of 4,250kg.

The 2.3's MRO (see brochure for definition) is 3,715kg, the 3.0's MRO is 3,765kg. Both are X250 base - the early one, which juddered! :-) Claimed payloads are 535kg and 485kg respectively. Both look marginal for a van of this size, IMO.

Our van is X250 with AlKo, and I have the AlKo owner's handbook, which lists the axle loads for the "heavy" chassis on two axles as 2,100kg front and 2,400kg rear. MAMs are variously 3,500kg, 4,000kg, or 4,250kg. The max axle loads remain unchanged in all cases.

So, for the Kon-Tiki, Swift opted for the 4,250kg variant with 2,100kg max front and 2,400kg max rear axle loadings. AFAIK, AlKo axle load limits cannot be uprated.

The 645 has a rear lounge, so should not run overly tail heavy when fully laden - but it is a largish, heavy van, and there is no indication what the ex-works axle loads are. Trip to weighbridge before buying seems to be indicated!

You may get away with the scooter on the rear axle, but I'm unclear on the availability of scooter racks for the AlKo rear chassis. Add rack and scooter, and I think you'll really struggle for payload. Might work with a trailer of some sort, but still a bit light on payload, I think.

The 130ps is a good little engine, but I'd be a bit wary about that on a 4,250kg MAM that is likely to be running near its max load.

The problem with the 160ps would be the loss of payload due to the heavier power train. Good luck with your search.

[Derek Uzzell]

Swift’s technical handbooks indicate that the Maximum Authorised Mass (MAM) of a 2003 model-year Kon-Tiki 645 was 3850kg and the MAM of a 2006 model-year Kon-Tiki 645 was 4000kg.

 

These 645s were built on a Fiat Ducato 18 ‘Maxi’ Al-Ko chassis with 2.8litre motor. The maximum axle-loadings would have been 1850kg(front axle) and 2120kg(rear axle) for the 3850kg MAM chassis, or 1850kg(front axle) and 2300kg(rear axle) for the 4000kg MAM chassis. The original tyres would have had a 8-ply-rated 215/75 R16C specification with a load-index of 113 (1150kg).

 

As you wish to carry a scooter on a rear-mounted rack, this would inevitably place extra load on the rear axle and risk the maxima of the rear axle and tyres (2 x 1150kg) being exceeded. However, without you actually weighing a 645 to establish the load likely to be placed on the rear axle when the motorhome is in ‘normal use’ condition, it’s difficult to see how it can be decided what the effect of carrying the scooter would be. Clearly, though, you ought to be better off with a 4000kg MAM version.

 

10-ply-rated 215/75 R16C tyres are marketed and these have a load-index of 116 (1250kg) which would increase the load-bearing capacity of the TYRES at the rear axle position by 200kg to 2500kg (2 x 1250kg). However, changing the tyres would not change the rear axle’s own weight-limit and - because the 645 has an Al-Ko chassis with independent rear suspension - ‘uprating’ the axle above 2300kg (for the 4000kg MAM version) would not be a simple matter of fitting a couple of cheapish air-bellows as is often advised when a motorhome with a leaf-sprung rear axle is uprated.

 

Suggest you discuss this with SVTech

 

http://www.svtech.co.uk/vehicles/motorhomes/

 

but I suspect that (realistically) the rear-axle 2300kg limit of a 4000kg MAM Kon-Tiki 645 can’t be increased.

[Barryd999]

Many thanks, i hoped I would attract a couple of knowledgeable chaps on here. Useful info.

 

When i spoke to Armitage Trailers who fitted the last rack on our kontiki which is fitted into the Alko Chassis they suggested that the Kontiki with the Alko chassis was the best bet both in terms of handling the rack and scooter and for fitting their system. I posted on the Autotrail facebook page as their Scout and Apache on paper looked like they had more available payload but apparently its not as simple as that as they guys on there reckoned you would have to fit the rack onto the chassis extenders which have a 100kg limit. Thats why I was keen to stick with Alko.

 

Plus the shorter overhang in theory means less of a canter leaver effect and lessens the overall weight of the rack and scooter when you do the sums. This was the case on our current Kontiki and the handling I Think is better with that chassis with a load on the back.

 

So really I need to speak to SV Tech, go and look at the van check the weight plates and if possible get it weighed. unless it has a good bit spare on the back I dont reckon its going to have enough as standard either on the 3850 or 4000.

 

I did wonder though if there is less scope for upgrading the 4000kg chassis with the 2300kg rear axle and this might sound daft but would there be more scope in upgrading a 3850kg van with a 2120 max rear to 4000kg and a rear load of 2300 or even 2400kg thus adding 180 or even 280kg to the payload minus of course whatever is added to get it uprated.

 

Its been an endless quest trying to find a suitable van to be honest.

[thebishbus]

Would it not be better to have the van of your choice , and a Hydratrail type trailer for your scooter.?

 

Brian B.

[Derek Uzzell]

Barry

 

The Swift technical handbook (publication-date September 2003) for the 2004 model-year gives the Mass in Running Order (MIRO) of a 3850kg-MAM Kon-Tiki 645 as 3443kg and a user-payload of 407kg.

 

The handbook (publication-date September 2005) for the 2006 model-year gives the Mass in Running Order (MIRO) of a 4000kg-MAM Kon-Tiki 645 as 3577kg and a user-payload of 423kg.

 

As the handbooks quote identical external dimensions for the 2004 and 2006 models, it would seem from the above data that the MIRO weight of a standard-specification Kon-Tiki 645 increased by 134kg between 2004 and 2006. I’m not sufficiently familiar with Al-Ko chassis to know what difference there is between the 3850kg and 4000kg MAM chassis used on the 645 model, but as the maximum rear-axle loadings are respectively 2120kg and 2300kg it’s possible that the 4000kg MAM chassis has a beefed-up rear axle, revised torsion-bar settings and/or different dampers.

 

I don’t see the MAM as being the restricting factor in your case. If the maximum axle-loadings of the 3850kg MAM version were totalled the result would be 3970kg, but if the MAM were increased to that value the rear-axle limit would still be 2120kg. Similarly, a MAM of 4150kg might be attained by totalling the 1850kg and 2300kg axle-loadings of the 4000kg MAM version of a Kon-Tiki 645, but the rear-axle limit of 2300kg would be unaltered.

 

I notice that you’ve explored this before

 

http://forums.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/Do-you-have-a-Scooter-on-a-rack-/41221/

 

Did you get any useful feedback from SVTech?

 

 

 

 

 

[Barryd999]

Thanks Derek and Brian.

 

Thanks for resurrecting that thread. I think I was trying to see if anyone had done similar with that layout of van (I had forgotten I posted that). I never got an answer from my email to SV Tech so will call them. Ill wait a few days. Those payload figures you quoted for the 645 are a bit less than the ones I found (not from Swift I might add) the other day. It does look to me like its not going to be possible with a 645 but ill call SV Tech anyway and go and look at the van.

 

Swift recently brought out a model called the Esprit 496 which comes in a coach built Luton and rear lounge model as one option and its payload appears to be huge. 900+ Kilos but they have only been out a couple of years and are like hens teeth and of course still fairly expensive. They are also very wide and may not fit on our drive. It would be the obvious replacement. One option would be to wait a couple more years and see if I can get a 496 a bit cheaper, let it lose a bit of its initial steep depreciation.

 

The only other van that keeps cropping up is the Arapaho 2007+ model on a 5000kg chassis but its too long really.

 

Brian I dont really want to change from a rack like we have now if at all possible.

 

If anyone can think of a rear lounge model with a decent payload then I am all ears.

 

Thanks again for the excellent input.

[Brian Kirby]

If you want to stick to the rear lounge layouts, I think you may have to investigate the so called tag axle variants. In the meantime, you could try to get more clarity by contacting AlKo technical in UK. (Tel: 01926 818500)

 

My English AlKo handbook (dated 01/12) lists the AMC Chassis variants. The German version (dated 12/12) lists more variants, but rear axles are rated at either 2,000kg ("light" chassis only), or 2,400kg. Whether, or when, these axle maxima may have been changed since 2003 is not stated, and neither is it clear whether the greater number of variants available in Germany is due to developments between January and December 2012, or whether they merely reflect differences in the markets.

 

However, I found the AlKo technical representative very helpful when I spoke to him, and willing to check one or two details with the factory where he did not have the information to hand. Hence my suggestion to contact him.

 

I'm intrigued that Derek's info seems to be saying the axle limit was 2,300kg, as this suggests a revision may have taken place. The question then would be when, and how, you can easily find out which axle is actually fitted to vans from around the time of the change. The simple answer, of course, is to look at the AlKo plates on the vans, but that would entail getting the dealer (or seller) to find, and quote from, the right plate in each case - or visiting yourself. But, maybe AlKo tech can clarify?

 

These AlKo chassis/Fiat cab combinations will have been Type Approved in Germany, although the earlier ones won't have been subject to TA requirements in UK when converted to motorhomes. I would expect a similar principle to have been adopted, however, with the converter adding their final, and legally defining, plate somewhere. That plate might impose lower rear axle limits than those Type Approved in Germany for AlKo. I would be surprised if any such lower limit on a van with an MAM exceeding 3.5 tonnes would have been applied by Swift (or whoever) without close consultation with AlKo, since there would be no advantage in selling a van plated at, for example, 3,650kg where the chassis cab combination was already TAd for a MAM of 4,000kg.

 

I therefore suspect that the actual chassis construction may vary, even though the axle maxima don't. Otherwise, there would seem little point in AlKo designating AMC 35H (3,500kg MAM), AMC 38H (3,850kg MAM), AMC 35HA (3,500kg MAM), AMC 40H (4,000kg MAM), AMC 42H (4,250kg MAM), AND AMC 45H (4,500kg MAM), chassis, all of which have 2,100kg front, and 2,400kg rear, axles. I think there will be more at play when seeking to uprate, than just the max rear axle load.

[Barryd999]

Thanks Brian. Contacting Alko would be a good idea and I will do that i think. In the meantime this morning I have been researching the database on here and have come up with the following alternatives that might fit the bill.

 

First up is the Lunar Roadstar 726 which seems to tick all the boxes and has a payload of 625kg. http://motorhomes.autotrader.co.uk/used-motorhomes/lunar/roadstar/2007-lunar-roadstar-726-diesel-coleford-mfpa-2c929a7b592b486a01592b503c350000/makemodel/make/lunar/model/roadstar

 

Look at the short overhang though. Must be on an extended Alko chassis I reckon. Could well be suitable. However little information out there, that appears to be the only one for sale in the country and I dont think Lunar are in business anymore.

 

Then I found this older van. Ave Novella Firenze with 727kg payload but looks like the standard fiat chassis with a longer overhang. None of them for sale anywhere https://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/motorhomes/reviews/motorhomes/details/motorhome-review-ace-novella-firenze-on-28jtd-fiat-ducato-maxi/899348

 

And finally this one and Auto Roller 600 with over 700kg payload https://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/motorhomes/reviews/motorhomes/details/roller-team-auto-roller-600/898544

It looks like a standard chassis but with twin wheels and rear wheel drive so presumably a lot of that payload capacity will be on the rear. Cant find any for sale.

 

I do like the look of the first one (Lunar Roadstar) but its also a bit wider as well. Three odd balls that are clearly not that popular but may well fit our requirements. Any thoughts on them?

[Derek Uzzell]

Brian K

 

Swift Group motorhome Technical Handbooks for model-years 2000 to 2017 can be viewed by using the following link

 

https://www.swiftgroup.co.uk/owners/handbooks

 

These give MAM, MIRO, maximum axle-loads, etc. data.

 

 

[Derek Uzzell]

Barry

 

I obviously don’t know what your earlier email to SVTech comprised, but you really need to ask them what weight uprating would be practicable for

 

a) a motorhome built on a Fiat Ducato 18 ‘maxi’ Al-Ko chassis with a MAM of 3850kg and maximum front/rear axle-loadings of 1850kg/2120kg and 215/75 R16C tyres with a load-index of 113.

 

b) a motorhome built on a Fiat Ducato 18 ‘maxi’ Al-Ko chassis with a MAM of 4000kg and maximum front/rear axle-loadings of 1850kg/2300kg and 215/75 R16C tyres with a load-index of 113.

 

As it’s more likely that potential overloading would involve the standard rear-axle limit being exceeded rather than the motorhome’s MAM being exceeded, you should ensure that you inquire whether or not the 2300kg (or 2120kg) rear-axle limit could be increased.

 

 

[Barryd999]

Derek Uzzell - 2017-01-02 2:00 PM

 

Barry

 

I obviously don’t know what your earlier email to SVTech comprised, but you really need to ask them what weight uprating would be practicable for

 

a) a motorhome built on a Fiat Ducato 18 ‘maxi’ Al-Ko chassis with a MAM of 3850kg and maximum front/rear axle-loadings of 1850kg/2120kg and 215/75 R16C tyres with a load-index of 113.

 

b) a motorhome built on a Fiat Ducato 18 ‘maxi’ Al-Ko chassis with a MAM of 4000kg and maximum front/rear axle-loadings of 1850kg/2300kg and 215/75 R16C tyres with a load-index of 113.

 

As it’s more likely that potential overloading would involve the standard rear-axle limit being exceeded rather than the motorhome’s MAM being exceeded, you should ensure that you inquire whether or not the 2300kg (or 2120kg) rear-axle limit could be increased.

 

 

Thanks again Derek. My original email to them was less specific but that detailed info above is perfect. Thats what I will discuss with them. Ill try calling them first but leave it a day or two.

 

I am really starting to lean towards looking further at the Lunar Roadstar I linked to above as it ticks all the boxes and seems to have a bigger payload but they seem pretty rare so info is scarce.

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

The max you can get out of a fiat light chassis or alko is 3850 kg with 15 inch 109 load tyres. As i do. You can have 16 ones. Its the final builder of your motorhome who decide about weight upgrades possible not retrofit but just what is including in the type approval. These SV tech plates are illegal if not covered by them Adria just said to remove 3850 upgrade and stick to 3650 followed by Chausson. You are in danger whit your brakes and safety systems. I just received my upgrade plates to 3850 kg from burstner and a approval to adept full air suspension from alko or goldsmit under their guarantee. No one of us on this site can advise a weight upgrade only the fabricator of your motor home. His plate is final all the others are just decoration.

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

If SV tech is a COP approved, meaning conformity of product they can act like a conversion builder and can make changes under strict approval of the basic maker and tractor and chassis maker. They can make a brand new COC with reference to the original chassis number. In fact they make a new type approval. Price 500 euro. Including new plates.

[Barryd999]

Thanks for that but I am not sure if your two posts contradict each other. However on closer inspection of one of the adverts I posted earlier for an Ace Firenze the description claims it already has a scooter rack fitted. So I have asked for more info as its not presenet in the photos http://motorhomes.autotrader.co.uk/used-motorhomes/ace/firenze/2007-ace-firenze-diesel-cumnock-mfpa-2c929a7a573db1e101575575469463fe/makemodel/make/ace/model/firenze

 

From what I can gather they are or were made by Swift. On a 4000kg Chassis with a 2400kg limit on the back axle and a payload of 650kg. Looks like the standard chassis though not Alko. Will be interesting to see what they come back with. Of course just because the owner has fitted a scooter rack does not mean its legal.

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2017-01-02 1:48 PM

 

Brian K

 

Swift Group motorhome Technical Handbooks for model-years 2000 to 2017 can be viewed by using the following link

 

https://www.swiftgroup.co.uk/owners/handbooks

 

These give MAM, MIRO, maximum axle-loads, etc. data.

 

Thanks Derek, that's very good. I've been trying to unearth archived AlKo AMC chassis data, but can only find the latest versions, so not much use. However, I notice that the latest is different again from my 2012 versions, though not insofar as the axle loads are concerned. Happy New Year!

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

At the coming up CMT motor home show in germany this month Goldsmitt claims a upgraded weight chassis to 4000kg. On the fiat light with the square rear axle. By improving front and rear suspension and a Wheel-Tyre check. This means also approvals from fiat and body maker. But technically as a said before 4000 kg is possible. You get 500 kg extra if you want on your present ducato.

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

The more i read about weight matters about the fiat ducato light or heavy and whit an alko chassis or not is about the same thing. Apart from suspension,brakes, and tyres.

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

So in principal reading this adhesive sticker of the final builder should be sufficient. But be cause of theft he will check also the stamped chassis number in the chassis. Be sure it is readable . He will also ask you to open the hood. In their you will find a Scala of plates. The most important is the fiat plate not adhesive but by two metal nails. In case of alko you will find a adhesive sticker but not on the axle itself there it will be metal fixed. In case of a body swoop and all retrofits . All other parts are traceable marked read out visual or by smartphone.

[Barryd999]

The Kontiki this one http://motorhomes.autotrader.co.uk/used-motorhomes/swift/kon-tiki/2003-swift-kontiki-diesel-middlesbrough-mfpa-2c929a7a592b486e01593fdef77d5cc3/makemodel/make/swift/model/kon-tiki is now sold.

 

Not heard anything back regarding the Ace or Lunar either.

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

Weight up grading. Should be only done if it has been tested. But of course you are free to do what ever you want out of factory guarantee with your motor home. A motor-home builder has just approval papers.

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

Never make a phone call to Al-KO. Their product range is so big that they even have a clue what your are talking about. Pull on the internet and find a picture of a high frame alko chassis on their site you will not find them. You will also not find pictures of air suspension fitted to the high frame. Adria sonic supreme for good reasons uses this high frame and with ALC and with x2 and x4 unable to show pictures. Because of ALKo. For such a company of this size who are unable to show in detail if their axles are maintenance free or not is a great issue to the RV world.That is the reason that more motorhome builders say good buy.And do not pay the extra for whatever and the risk of broken torsion bars. Goldschmitt can provide a perfect full air on your ducato rear and front without alko.