Hymer MLI 580: Removal of Drop-Down Bed And Replacement Lockers.

[PJay]

Frank McAuley - 2017-08-19 6:12 PMThank you Pauline. Not restricted by age for a couple of years but this Motorhome was purchased in anticipation of that magical limit! We didn't fit A/C so as to avoid excess weight and we regarded the other fittings as necessary! Like you we only use the Motorhome in mainland Europe and we have never been stopped by the Police but it appears that this is changing and Motorhomes are being increasingly targeted, especially due to excess weight!

Leave the wife at home , Or she could fly over!I guess because we have voted to leave the "love and Friendship" of the EU" we are likely to get picked on?? It bit like as kids, if you did not play by the rules of the ball owner, they took the ball away!! and went home to MUM!I suppose you could tow a trailer?, but defeats the reason to have a MH, IMO. Enjoy the years to 70, (upgrade) then see what happens !P

[Frank McAuley]

Yes Pauline we're moving targets but what's new? I think your advice is right apart from leaving the wife at home - she's the navigator !!

[Tracker]

Frank McAuley - 2017-08-19 7:10 PM

 

Yes Pauline we're moving targets but what's new? I think your advice is right apart from leaving the wife at home - she's the navigator !!

 

My wife used be chief navigating officer until we got one of they there sat navs and it's a lot better than the previous sit nag for directions too and I can switch the sound off!

[Brian Kirby]

Frank McAuley - 2017-08-19 5:53 PM

 

Thanks Brian. Here we go: please refer to my reply to Robbo which I was compiling when you added your advice and which hopefully answers your initial questions. Please bear in mind these figures are from memory as I'm away from home where the data is. The issue from your comments is that the empty weight did not include normal camping kit and tools but empty except for one 6 Kg  tank of gas,half tank of fuel plus the driver. I think the chassis is either ( to be confirmed) either the 3.8 or 4 ton version. The upgrading from 3.5 to a higher figure is not an age related issue at this time but will be in a couple of years; I recently moved from a 4.25 ton veh to accommodate this 'hoped-for' development! Overall the weight issue seems nearly intractable unless I upgrade but what happens when time takes its toll? How can I keep this Motorhome within its magical 3.5 ton figure without removing the sat dish, awning,solar panel and bike rack? I totally accept the dealer was negligent in failing to advise re weight restrictions when fitting accessories but has Hymer not a vicarious responsibility re this? It seems to me when buying a Hymer( MLI) and with a desire to remain within the bounds of the traffic laws and safety do not fit accessories or be prepared to upgrade the weight limit!

Hi Frank.

 

There is a factory option to specify 3,880kg at the time of ordering, so it should be possible to get the van plated to that MAM. This was a mere £200 on published 2017 prices, but would obviously have placed you above your desired 3,500kg limit. As you know this is a 7.0 metre long van which, with an A class, was always going to be a big ask at 3,500kg.

 

The claimed Mass in Running Order (MRO) is 3015kg, leaving a 485kg payload, which is, IMO, marginally workable - until you add the dealer fit extras. I'm assuming yours is on a 316CDI chassis? The spare wheel is 25kg, and I assume is mounted on the rear wall of the garage, so worst for rear axle load. On ours, this adds 35kg at the rear axle but removes 10kg from the front. Yours will, I think, be similar. Hymer "book" an awning at 45kg, a satellite dish at 14.5kg, a 90W solar panel plus controller at 10kg, and a 3bike rack at 8kg. Total, 102.5kg, so payload down to 382.5 payload. Still, I would think, just about workable, though very tight.

 

Are you running with the fresh water tank full? 120 litres will add 120kg, and I guess the tank is near the rear axle? If you can accept running with only the recommended 20 litres, you should remove 100kg, possibly a bit less, from the rear axle.

 

Are there any Hymer "packs" fitted to the van? For instance the Comfort line pack (driver's door etc.), which adds another 57kg to the MRO.

 

In truth, though, I'm a mite surprised that the rear axle is over weight. Ours is 6.75M long, and a similar layout, and the "light" Fiat chassis only allows a max 2,000kg on the rear axle. I'd be surprised if the Merc chassis is less. Fully laden ours (2,824kg empty as above) flirts with 3,500kg, but that is absolute max with two full 13kg steel gas cylinders, full water (100L), full fuel, and everything, and everyone, else on board. In that state the front axle (1,850kg max) is at 1,640kg, and the rear (2,000kg max) at 1,860kg. Either your van has a very long rear overhang, or something is adding considerable weight at the rear.

 

To try to answer your question on front/rear weight transfer to Robbo, motorhomes behave a bit like a see saw, with the pivot being the rear axle. Any weight added behind the rear axle thus reduces weight at the front, but transfers an equal amount to the rear. Thus, the load on the rear axle will be greater than the actual load added. To answer your further question, the gross running weight (as I understand your term) will indeed be the sum of the actual loads on both axles. So, any load at the rear, especially if behind the rear axle, that can be transferred toward the front, will take from the present rear axle load more than its self weight, transferring the difference to the front axle.

 

It would be interesting to know the actual laden rear axle load, the limit on the rear axle, and if possible the rear overhang. The wheelbase is 3,665mm. For comparison ours is 3,650, with a 2,000mm rear overhang. This points to a rear overhang on yours in the order of 2,250mm, which may be the origin of the problem. If I'm right, that is 61% of wheelbase, which seems uncomfortably high.

 

Hope this helps a bit.

[Robbo]

Sorry to be the messenger of bad news, Frank, but generally you can't just add the two permissible axle loads together to give your overall maximum load.

 

Your Hymer VIN plate will show the following (in this order):

MAM, maximum authorised mass of vehicle

Total mass of vehicle + trailer

Maximum permissible front axle load

Maximum permissible rear axle load

 

The sum of the axle loads is generally higher than the MAM. This is done so you have some flexibility to manipulate the load between front and rear axles whilst not exceeding the MAM.

 

So, if your rear axle is close to the permissible maximum load, you can add extra load to the front axle, providing of course, you stay within the overall MAM limitations.

 

Removal of the dropdown bed and replacement with cupboards MAY enable you to utilise any surplus load capacity on the front axle. However, these cupboards are only likely to be used for fairly lightweight stuff, so the gains are likely to be minimal.

 

Manufacturers sometimes offer a paper upgrade in MAM, for a nominal cost, whereby the addition of the two permissible axle loads equals the MAM. If you are already struggling keeping within the limits of the rear axle then the only advantage of this upgrade is for the ability to put extra load on the front axle, which might be difficult considering the general layout configuration of the vehicle with respect to where the major loading points are positioned.

 

[Derek Uzzell]

The Hymer ML-I 580 was marketed as standard with an overall weight of 3500kg, with the option to specify 3880kg or 4200kg. There also seems to be the possibility (which I don’t understand) to have weights of 3800kg and 4050kg.

 

Frank seems to think that his motorhome’s maximum overall weight is either “the 3.8 or 4 ton version”, but (as Robbo says) this weight - and the vehicle’s maximum permissible axle loads - are easily confirmed by referring to the Hymer VIN-plate.

 

I’ve attached a photo of an ML-I 580. With a relatively short wheelbase, a ‘single wheel’ rear axle, a longish rear overhang, fresh-water and waste-water tanks at the back and a large rear garage, there’s obvious potential for significant rear axle over-loading.

[Brock]

Having looked at the 2016 model price list which contains the technical specifications, it seems Frank's van will have a wheelbase of 3.665m on a length of 6.99m.

 

Hymer calculate the MIRO at 3015kg including driver, full fuel, full aluminium gas tank [not plural], 20l of water, 75kg for the driver. The 485kg payload should be reduced by 165kg, according to Hymer's figures, to cover a 75kg passenger, personal effects for two [20kg], and 10kg per metre [70kg]. I believe these are industry standard figures. That reduces the payload to 320kg.

 

If the motorhome was bought from a UK dealer it probably had at least the 'Comfort Package' fitted which is 57kg; Frank has added semi air suspension on rear [Hymer quote 42kg for full air suspension on the rear although I allow 60kg for my semi air system]; a satellite dish which Hymer quote as 15kg; for 2 full metal gas cylinders, I'd add another 21kg; 24kg for a driver's door, 48kg for the autobox, 25kg for spare wheel. If Frank's van is silver painted, that's another 30kg!

 

Frank, I owe you an apology because the dealer should have gone through this with you and ensured you had the price booklet with the technical specifications. By my calculation, and assuming you have no other accessories fitted and my math is right, you probably have 70kg or so spare [without the silver paint]. This is slightly less than us and we uprated our weights to allow us to carry more than 20l of water or an extra passenger and remain within the individual axle weightings of 2000kg.

 

I can email you a copy of the 2016 model Price List brochure to help you calculate your van's weight. Let me know if you want one.

 

What we did is empty everything out of the van that can be and weighed both axles at a weighbridge - pay for a ticket! Then we started start adding the additional items, being miserly in what we added back [we weighed most things] and used the weight calculator on the SV Tech site [it's free]. I played around with this programme to see how adding weight in one area affected both axles. I wanted to ensure that adding another passenger or more water did not take me over the weight on the rear axle.

 

SV Tech say I can increase each axle plated weight on my van by about 10% if I get fatter tyres/wheels.

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2017-08-20 9:16 AM..........................The Hymer ML-I 580 was marketed as standard with an overall weight of 3500kg, with the option to specify 3880kg or 4200kg. There also seems to be the possibility (which I don’t understand) to have weights of 3800kg and 4050kg..................................

Derek, it seems this relates to whether or not the four wheel drive is selected. I assume due to the added weight of the drive system. If I'm reading the catalogue correctly, the 3880kg MAM option is for the 316CDI chassis without 4WD, and the 3,800kg with 4WD, while 4200kg is the 319 chassis without, and 4050kg with. Haven't explored why 4WD apparently weighs 80kg more on a 316, yet 150kg more on a 319. Possibly just beefier components for the extra power.

 

The part of Frank's tale I don't understand is his statement that the rear axle was overloaded even with the van "empty".

 

Frank McAuley - 2017-08-19 5:16 PM

 

Heavy stuff Robby but I certainly appreciate its originality but Would ask for some clarification! Firstly I have weighed the veh in fully loaded and empty mode and from memory the former was 3976 kg and the latter was 3440 kg with the front axle,in both modes, being within limits but the rear axle in excess in both modes!

Laden, I can understand, given that long overhang and the diminishing payload due to options and extras, but unladen!? Surely there must be a mistake? If that is truly the case the dealer sold the van in unroadworthy (illegal) condition.

 

Frank has queried what responsibility Hymer have for this. I think the answer is none. One could go on about the moral responsibility of marketing so compromised a design, but it leaves the Hymer factory, in its most basic form, with a (IMO just) workable payload. Hymer cannot know how a buyer will use their van, nor what they will add to it. All the items Frank added are Hymer options, yet I gather were dealer fitted, so Hymer won't have known they were being added.

 

That just leaves the dealer, who should, IMO, have done the sums and given fair warning at the time the van was ordered. I remember being at Brownhills years ago (2004?) when one of their sales staff was taking a customer order, doing the adds, and trying to persuade a reluctant customer that he should either abandon some of the extras, or specify a heavier chassis.

 

Plainly, Frank needs greater load carrying capacity at the rear of this van. It is a new vehicle, and presumably under warranty. That being the case he seems to me to have three options, one disagreeable, the others expensive. Approach Mercedes to see if the rear axle load for his chassis can be enhanced, and at what cost: change his van for one that works better: or find a way to work within its limits.

 

His further option would be to take his evidence to Citizen's advice or Trading Standards (or a suitably experienced solicitor), and see if he has a case against the dealer - especially if the rear axle is near or over its limit when the van is empty - on the ground that, as supplied, the van is either illegal or unfit for purpose. To do the latter, I think he would need to load the van to conform to its Mass in Running Order (Catch 22: see below!), and then weigh it to see whether it was within that limit, +/-5% of its published value.

 

Now, here's the Catch 22. The technical section of my 2013 Hymer brochure contains the following note:

 

"b) Mass in roadworthy condition according to EN1646-2 incl. basic equipment (75kgs for driver, filled fuel tank, water tank in driving condition filled with 20 litres, gas in aluminium cylinder 100% full, and electrical cable) in basic option. Masse in roadworthy condition (and payload or number of persons possible) varies according to motor or equipment options or depending on optional equipment attached. Deviations within the factory tolerance limits are possible and allowed."

 

I can find no such statement, or equivalent, in the downloadable English 2017 Hymer brochure or technical supplement, nor any definition of Mass in Running Order, nor can I find any reference to EN1646-2, or any claim that their products conform to that standard. Silence: so what does that mean? Omission, or that the "emptor" has to exercise even more "caveat" when buying?

[colin]

Brian Kirby - 2017-08-20 11:58 AM

 

The part of Frank's tale I don't understand is his statement that the rear axle was overloaded even with the van "empty".

 

That's the but puzzles me, even with the fitted extra's it would seem odd, was there some water in tanks?

If not then even without extras it would make the rear locker pretty much unusable, same for tanks.

 

 

Frank has queried what responsibility Hymer have for this. I think the answer is none. One could go on about the moral responsibility of marketing so compromised a design, but it leaves the Hymer factory, in its most basic form, with a (IMO just) workable payload. Hymer cannot know how a buyer will use their van, nor what they will add to it. All the items Frank added are Hymer options, yet I gather were dealer fitted, so Hymer won't have known they were being added.

 

AS above, if Franks post is correct, even with extras removed the tanks and/or locker is pretty much unusable, this is a Hymer issue.

[Frank McAuley]

OK folks I have endeavoured to absorb this info and to be able to comment further I shall have to do some more 'digging'! I have most of the details to hand but the figures for the unladen axle weights will not be available until tomorrow when I shall hopefully be able to tap your wise counsel. In the meantime I have the following info from the VIN plate:

MAM 3500 kg; 

             5500 kg (total mass + trailer);

            1:1940 kg ( front axle);

            2 :2430 kg ( rear axle).

 When the veh was weighed when fully laden but minus passenger and water the axle weights were:

           1: 1500 kg;

            2 : 2420 kg.

Both within the parameters for each individual axle but not MAM !

 

Unfortunately I will not have the empty figures until tomorrow as they're in the motorhome at the dealers, but from memory with no water, half tank of fuel, one 6kg (lightweight) gas tank and no passenger we were left with only 60 kg to be within MAM!

 

To be continued; your help is greatly appreciated and a steep learning curve !!

[PJay]

The salesman, never tell you about weight, do they! We knew we could only drive up to 3500, when we bought our van, but no-one told us about weight issues. We assumed that we could "FILL" the van with all we needed!! After 10 years , we discovered that we had too much "stuff", so had a good declutter!

 

Having been sailors prior to the MH, we had no problem filling the boat with bottles of wine, bought by the case load!! That was in the days when wine was cheap in France, and cigarettes/tobacco also , was always requested by smoking friends an relatives to bring them back.

Just as well we rarely drink wine these days More like G & T 's now

 

PJay

[colin]

Frank McAuley - 2017-08-20 2:50 PM

 

OK folks I have endeavoured to absorb this info and to be able to comment further I shall have to do some more 'digging'! I have most of the details to hand but the figures for the unladen axle weights will not be available until tomorrow when I shall hopefully be able to tap your wise counsel. In the meantime I have the following info from the VIN plate:

MAM 3500 kg; 

             5500 kg (total mass + trailer);

            1:1940 kg ( front axle);

            2 :2430 kg ( rear axle).

 When the veh was weighed when fully laden but minus passenger and water the axle weights were:

           1: 1500 kg;

            2 : 2420 kg.

Both within the parameters for each individual axle but not MAM !

 

Unfortunately I will not have the empty figures until tomorrow as they're in the motorhome at the dealers, but from memory with no water, half tank of fuel, one 6kg (lightweight) gas tank and no passenger we were left with only 60 kg to be within MAM!

 

To be continued; your help is greatly appreciated and a steep learning curve !!

 

We await the 'unladen' figures, but looking at that, whilst far from ideal, it looks like it may be workable if you don't carry water and are prepared to up the MAM. BTW did you have bikes on the rear rack?

[Frank McAuley]

Thanks Colin. Never carry water when travelling but always try to maintain half full fuel tank. When weighed 'full' there were two Dahon Curve folding bicycles on the rack but none when weighed 'empty' !

Increasing the MAM is probably the solution but I basically changed the motorhome to this 3.5 tons model in anticipation of a smooth transition in 2 years time! 

[Derek Uzzell]

Brian Kirby - 2017-08-20 11:58 AM

 

...Now, here's the Catch 22. The technical section of my 2013 Hymer brochure contains the following note:

 

"b) Mass in roadworthy condition according to EN1646-2 incl. basic equipment (75kgs for driver, filled fuel tank, water tank in driving condition filled with 20 litres, gas in aluminium cylinder 100% full, and electrical cable) in basic option. Masse in roadworthy condition (and payload or number of persons possible) varies according to motor or equipment options or depending on optional equipment attached. Deviations within the factory tolerance limits are possible and allowed."

 

I can find no such statement, or equivalent, in the downloadable English 2017 Hymer brochure or technical supplement, nor any definition of Mass in Running Order, nor can I find any reference to EN1646-2, or any claim that their products conform to that standard. Silence: so what does that mean? Omission, or that the "emptor" has to exercise even more "caveat" when buying?

 

Yes, it’s interesting that the 2016-published UK price-list differs in that particular respect from price-list versions in other languages.

 

Previous forum comments suggest that weight data provided in Hymer documentation are accurate. So, if Hymer states that a ‘basic’ ML-I 580 model with 3500kg chassis has a maximum payload of 485kg, it’s reasonable to assume that this will be correct. And, as that 485kg datum occurs in all non-English versions of the 2016/2017 Hymer price-lists, there’s no reason to think that the weight-related formulae in those lists should not be applied to ML-I 580s marketed in the UK.

 

Summing the 1940kg front-axle and 2430kg rear-axle values Frank has said are on his motorhome’s VIN-plate produces a figure of 4370kg. As the sum of maximum axle weights (on a 2-axle vehicle) can often not greatly exceed a vehicle’s MAM, there’s a reasonable possibility that a ML-I 580 is built on a 4200kg chassis and ‘downplated’ to the standard 3500kg or optional 3880kg MAM. The fact that it’s apparently quite cheap to opt for a MAM of 3880kg or 4200kg instead of 3500kg suggests that there’s little ’technical’ difference between a 3500kg ML-I 580 and a 3880kg or 4200kg variant.

 

If that assumption is valid, although increasing Frank’s motorhome’s MAM to (say) 4200kg would address the present issue of it weighing 3920kg, its rear-axle loading of 2420kg (with no passenger or water on board) would still be perilously close to the 2430kg VIN-plate figure. Essentially, if it’s only the MAM that increases when the Hymer 3880kg or 4200kg Hymer option is chosen, the potental for going overweight on the rear axle remains.

 

I find it perplexing that, if a 3500kg MAM Hymer ML-I 580 actually has 485kg of payload available to begin with (ie. the vehicle weighs 3015kg in ‘running order') how adding a sat-TV dish, awning and spare wheel can increase the vehicle’s weight by 905kg to 3920kg. Me, I’d want to reweigh the vehicle on a different weighbridge...

[Brian Kirby]

Agreed. I had Frank's payload down to 380kg allowing for the options he listed. We don't know about any "packs" that might have been included, though the Comfort line pack, which includes the driver's (in RHD passenger's) door is very popular and weighs an additional 57kg. If Frank is travelling with two typical 13kg steel gas cylinders these will be substantially heavier than the single aluminium 11kg cylinder Hymer included in their (now disappeared) calculation of MIRO. I seem to remember the weight of a full aly. 11 kg cylinder being in the region of 19kg (6kg cylinder + 11kg gas). A full steel 13kg cylinder will be around 25kg, so two about 50kg. Deduct 19 from that and, in round figures, that's another 30kg payload gone. With the comfort line pack, payload now down to 290kg. On a 7 metre van, that is, IMO unworkable.

 

I withdraw my previously suggested option for Frank to consider uprating the rear axle, leaving him the two options of changing this van for one that will work for him, or having it plated up, as Derek suggests, (I would still suggest by Hymer to retain manufacturer authenticity) to 4,200kg (no point messing with 3,880kg).

 

My only "but" is how the vehicle presently drives laden. There is a lot of weight at the rear, and the front is relatively light. It has a long rear overhang. I would expect that to leave it very prone to slipstream and crosswind buffeting, with a general tendency for the tail to wag the dog. I would also expect the steering to go disconcertingly light on sharp uphill bends of the Alpine pass variety, especially as one begins to accelerate from the apex. I would also wonder about retaining stability under wet road braking, ABS or not. Added to that, I'd expect it to be distinctly "interesting" on snow or ice!! :-)

 

The layout does not give much scope for redistributing weight forward, especially with that front drop down bed. So, the apparent option, as well as re-plating, is to reduce weight at the rear. If Frank can live with that, fine, but if not, then I think he needs to twist the dealer's (who I don't think have served Frank's interests at all well for their £80K!) tail for a change of van at a very preferable rate.

 

Last thought. These ML Hymers have a bit of a track record for leaving their underslung rear mounted waste tanks behind, or partially so. With the rear axle at its maximum load, and the front light, that seems a particular risk for Frank's van. I just wonder what the rear ground clearance is when the van is fully laden. (Note to Frank, "fully" means with Mrs McAuly also present and seated! :-D)

[Frank McAuley]

The figure re unladen weight and overhang are:

Front axle- 1540 kg;

Rear axle- 1900 kg;

Overhang - 2250 mm.

In the meantime a few facts to fill the gaps:-

 Removal of drop down bed ruled out as it will not solve the weight issue; 

We only changed to the 3.5 ton Hymer to accommodate the 70 limit in 2 years time and this was fully explained to the dealer who also informed us the Motorhome had a payload of 485 kg which we were happy with;

At the time of purchase we were not told and neither were we aware the dealer had Hymer factory add approx 206 kg of extras leaving us with 279kg payload;

 Unaware of the weight issues we asked the dealer fit approx 200 kg of what we considered necessary extras as itemised earlier.This left us with approx 70 kg ( which we were unaware of until we became suspicious due to the veh's 'different' handling characteristics which caused me to weigh it) and that's before :

Driver + passenger;food;clothes;bedding;camping equipment;bicycles and fuel.

BRIAN you have hit the nail on the head,viz the driving characteristics scared me despite the air suspension and anti sway devices! That's what caused me to weigh the motorhome and I was totally shocked at our overall weight which has brought us to this stage.

May I say that senior management and tech staff at the dealership,despite initial shortcomings at the acquisition stage, have been most understanding to date and I am hopeful of a successful outcome but as already stated 'Buyer beware'!

I have always sought to own a Hymer as I have friends with 10+ years old Hymers who love them but this has changed my mind. The first issue was ingress of water into the garage followed by poor fitting of furniture,rattles, magnetic flaps not securing, fly screens not fitted properly, shower not properly sealed and more to a total in excess of 21 issues requiring attention! To the dealer's credit they rectified all the issues but shame on Hymer quality control!!

 

[Brian Kirby]

Frank, that 3440kg unladen weight was presumably after your extras were fitted?

 

I'm now assuming this was a van the dealer already had in stock, which presumably explains why you had him fit the extras.

 

Can you say what the dealer fit extras are? 200kg of extras points to quite a pile!

 

If the van was sold as having 485kg payload, when in fact it had only 285kg, you were seriously misled at the point of sale. I'm assuming they acknowledge that you informed them why you wanted a 3,500kg van at the point of buying, so it is extraordinarily incompetent of them to add another 100kg of extras at your request without any warning of the impact on payload. I assume Mrs McAuley was there at the time, and can corroborate if necessary?

 

These people are supposed to be the "professionals" of the motorhome world, so if one can't even rely on them to know, as a Hymer dealer, the weight of vehicles they have themselves ordered from Hymer, what hope does anyone else have? Bloody idiots comes to mind!

 

It seems you may be getting encouraging signals from them, so I hope they are agreeing to something sensible. However, they may change their tune when they do the sums (assuming they can count money better than they can kilograms!), so I think I'd be inclined to sound out your legal position just so that you know the score, should push come to shove. I would think you have reasonable grounds for pressing for a full refund, leaving them to get the van re-plated and to sell it at 4.2 tonnes MAM.

 

Looking at the spec of the van, it seems to me to be, basically, an Exsis on a Mercedes platform. These are built "light" by Hymer, to appeal to those like you and me who prefer not to become involved with the three-yearly medicals necessary to drive a van over 3,500kg, once past 70. They have "cheated" somewhat in doing this (in which they are far from alone!) by declaring MIRO with only 20 litres of water on board. They produce these vehicles to look spacious and comfortable, but they are consequently larger than is sensible with only 3,500kg to play with. The bigger the van, the heavier it inevitably becomes, and the smaller the resulting payload. Starting with that 485kg you should, just, have got away with it. Deducting their extra 200kg of options, you didn't stand a cat-in-hell's chance!

 

Just a thought, but is there any chance you could make your way to Dusseldorf next week, where all the German, but also many more, vans will be on display? It's the biggest show in Europe, and would enable you to see in one place pretty much all that is on offer. Not to buy, but to help you arrive at a shortlist (no doubt plus a headache and sore feet! :-)) of satisfactory alternatives if you do have to go shopping.

[Brock]

Full marks Frank for dealing with this. I hope you get it sorted. It's a lovely van.

 

[bolero boy]

the three ML-i Packs (comfort line, Power, ALDE Arctic) add nearly 200kg to the Miro.

this is the big danger with these light vans, its so easy to add stuff thats not included in the factory MIRO.

[Frank McAuley]

Yes Brian the 3440 kg was the unladen weight after our extras were fitted and the van was in stock with the factory fitted options which were:

Comfort-Line package;electric roller shutter in front; auto gear box;textile leather/fabric combo; cooker oven combo;fog lights;alloy Whèels;electric entrance step at driver's door; add cushion between beds; roof vent @ front + screens;comfort has door with window;comfort L-shaped lounge with moveable table and seat belts!

My wife would be a competent witness if required but let's hope sense prevails.We are at this time looking at the real possibility of a visit to Düsseldorf.

At this stage of the game may I Thankyou all for your essential help and guidance- once again!

[colin]

With those figures whoever wants to use the van be it you or another owner it will need the MAM upping.

Next would need to be a review on how the van is loaded, basically you need to shift weight forward, this doesn't necessarily mean you need to take stuff from the back and put in front, although that would do the job, even say removing bike rack and putting them in garage would be a start, or where is the wheel changing kit? If it's in garage could it be put back under front seat?

[Frank McAuley]

Yes Colin I get that.This scenario has been a steep learning curve and will be an exercise of some discipline to take the necessary actions! I just wonder how many motorhomes and possibly caravans are out there grossly overladen .I note the French Police are equipped with weight mats so possibly this will cause more people to take note; possibly the 3.5 ton limit is a mite low when equated the upping of retirement age and the longer to wait for retirement pensions?

[Derek Uzzell]

Frank McAuley - 2017-08-21 5:22 PM

 

The figure re unladen weight and overhang are:

Front axle- 1540 kg;

Rear axle- 1900 kg;

Overhang - 2250 mm.

 

In an earlier posting you provided the following data

 

MAM 3500 kg;

5500 kg (total mass + trailer);

1:1940 kg ( front axle);

2 :2430 kg ( rear axle).

When the veh was weighed when fully laden but minus passenger and water the axle weights were:

1: 1500 kg;

2 : 2420 kg

 

If the rear-axle loading is 1900kg with the motorhome unladen, but 2420kg when fully laden (with no water in the rear-mounted tank) can you explain, please, how the load on the rear axle has apparently increased by 520kg?

 

I’ve no difficulty whatsoever appreciating how a 3500kg Hymer ML-I 580’s 485kg payload will be eroded when factory-fitted extras have been added to the model’s basic specification, nor how any remaining payload can completely disappear if an owner adds further accessories (Caveats about this regularly appear in motorhome magazines and it’s forever being warned about on this forum) but I don’t understand how your vehicle’s rear axle loading is so close to its VIN-plate permissible maximum with nothing particularly heavy being carried in the rear garage.

[Frank McAuley]

Derek the starting point to remember is that due to the fitting of extras the payload was all but gone .

We are not 'experts' in the principles governing motorhome weights and like, in my opinion, many others we rely on the principles of the market,viz: 'item as described ' and thereafter advice as to the use or otherwise of the item being supplied. If the salesperson had done his job and possibly if the tech staff had gone to him and outlined the diffs we wouldn't be where we are today.A sale at any price!!

[Brian Kirby]

Derek asks a fair question, though, Frank. The arithmetic shows that you have added 580kg of load to your van between its "empty" weight and its (nearly! :-)) fully laden weight. Of that 580kg, 520kg falls upon the rear axle. I suspect this is being dictated by the layout.

 

Our previous van was similar, in that it had a long rear overhang relative to wheelbase. Unladen, the axle loads were front 1260kg, rear 1420kg, whereas fully laden (for 8 - 11 week trips, including a full fresh water tank at 100kg) the axle loads were front 1270kg, rear 1850kg. Added load 440kg, of which 430kg went to the rear. All the storage, both "garage" and internal, was centered around the rear axle, with only high-level cupboards at the front.

 

This is somewhat inevitable with these layouts, so if you are looking at a different van, one with a shorter rear overhang would be a good place to start. Nevertheless, allowing for the water, you've beaten us by 200kg (170%) and I'm accused of travelling heavy! :-) That's quite a load! Could there still be an error in the figures?