Chelston Motorhomes

[Robinhood]

...I think we are missing a little additional information here (either that, or I have missed something in the previous text) before being able to take a definitive stance on the vehicle as a whole.

 

I'd like to know what the final stage weight plate states viz-a-viz MAM and maximum front and rear axle weights. (presumably the MAM should be 4800kg, given foregoing text, but I haven't seen anything on the plated axle weights).

 

Given the weighbridge figures, I already have concerns that may or may not come into more focus once the final plated weights are shared.

 

Is it possible the OP could post a picture if the final stage (VIN) plate?

 

Edited to add - the OP's comment on axle weights above was posted in parallel to my question, but whatever, there should be a final stage VIN plate with the data.

[Robinhood]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-05-03 6:54 PM

 

This reads 3400kg on the Carthago data-plate, but (for a 4.5bar pressure for that tyre specification) is stated as 2395kg on the Continental listing. 2395kg is 5kg short or 2400kg - draw your own conclusion...

 

...the 3400kg figure is patently "an anomaly"...

[monique.hubrechtsgm]

Paul has an interface fiat- Alko chassis. My Partner can bolt on alko/VB Air suspension which is the same in two days whit two persons. It is just a lego kit.. Including fiat/Iveco can - bus software. Do not worry we are standby to help.

[colin]

Robinhood - 2019-05-03 7:17 PM

 

...I think we are missing a little additional information here (either that, or I have missed something in the previous text) before being able to take a definitive stance on the vehicle as a whole.

 

I'd like to know what the final stage weight plate states viz-a-viz MAM and maximum front and rear axle weights. (presumably the MAM should be 4800kg, given foregoing text, but I haven't seen anything on the plated axle weights).

 

Given the weighbridge figures, I already have concerns that may or may not come into more focus once the final plated weights are shared.

 

Is it possible the OP could post a picture if the final stage (VIN) plate?

 

Edited to add - the OP's comment on axle weights above was posted in parallel to my question, but whatever, there should be a final stage VIN plate with the data.

 

No you've not missed anything, you are not the first to point this out.

 

TheEscapist - 2019-05-03 7:14 PM

 

Trying to find out the maximum axle loads now. I am sure Chelston know and have had this discussion as they have been talking to Carthago all week. Seems to me there is some economy with the truth or at least not volunteering the whole situation! Getting weary of all this!

 

If you have access to the vehicle the plate will be attached to it, it should give front and rear axle limit, overall MAM and train weight.

 

Interesting that it appears the same model is/has been sold as 4.5t as well as 4.8t.

[TheEscapist]

colin - 2019-05-03 8:37 PM

 

Robinhood - 2019-05-03 7:17 PM

 

...I think we are missing a little additional information here (either that, or I have missed something in the previous text) before being able to take a definitive stance on the vehicle as a whole.

 

I'd like to know what the final stage weight plate states viz-a-viz MAM and maximum front and rear axle weights. (presumably the MAM should be 4800kg, given foregoing text, but I haven't seen anything on the plated axle weights).

 

Given the weighbridge figures, I already have concerns that may or may not come into more focus once the final plated weights are shared.

 

Is it possible the OP could post a picture if the final stage (VIN) plate?

 

Edited to add - the OP's comment on axle weights above was posted in parallel to my question, but whatever, there should be a final stage VIN plate with the data.

 

No you've not missed anything, you are not the first to point this out.

 

TheEscapist - 2019-05-03 7:14 PM

 

Trying to find out the maximum axle loads now. I am sure Chelston know and have had this discussion as they have been talking to Carthago all week. Seems to me there is some economy with the truth or at least not volunteering the whole situation! Getting weary of all this!

 

If you have access to the vehicle the plate will be attached to it, it should give front and rear axle limit, overall MAM and train weight.

 

Interesting that it appears the same model is/has been sold as 4.5t as well as 4.8t.

 

Yes, I've asked the question as the vehicle is with dealer not with me. I feel all this should be known to the dealer rather than me playing detective. Rather than being upfront with the info, I'm having to prise this out and only getting info when I ask questions. Doesn't ring right to me.

[TheEscapist]

monique.hubrechts@gm - 2019-05-03 8:25 PM

 

Paul has an interface fiat- Alko chassis. My Partner can bolt on alko/VB Air suspension which is the same in two days whit two persons. It is just a lego kit.. Including fiat/Iveco can - bus software. Do not worry we are standby to help.

 

I have the VB/Air suspension on the rear already.

[Billggski]

This is the bit I don't understand. A payload of 40kg?

 

"On the advice of members here, I asked Chelston to weigh the van axles separately.

 

The results are:

 

Front: 1,860 kgs

Rear: 2,900 kgs

 

Total: 4,760 kgs

 

Van total weight allowance is 4,800 kgs.

 

This is with full fresh water tank but no luggage, food and drink etc. so I can manage if I carry less water, even though its close to the limit. "

[colin]

TheEscapist - 2019-05-03 9:50 PM

 

monique.hubrechts@gm - 2019-05-03 8:25 PM

 

Paul has an interface fiat- Alko chassis. My Partner can bolt on alko/VB Air suspension which is the same in two days whit two persons. It is just a lego kit.. Including fiat/Iveco can - bus software. Do not worry we are standby to help.

 

I have the VB/Air suspension on the rear already.

 

Is that part of standard spec (raising 4.5t to 4.8t) or is it an upgrade? If the latter their might be some hope of upping the MAM.

[TheEscapist]

Billggski - 2019-05-03 11:05 PM

 

This is the bit I don't understand. A payload of 40kg?

 

"On the advice of members here, I asked Chelston to weigh the van axles separately.

 

The results are:

 

Front: 1,860 kgs

Rear: 2,900 kgs

 

Total: 4,760 kgs

 

Van total weight allowance is 4,800 kgs.

 

This is with full fresh water tank but no luggage, food and drink etc. so I can manage if I carry less water, even though its close to the limit. "

 

That weight is with bicycle in garage, fresh water tanks on 90% and bbbedding etc. As mentioned , missing are:

 

- people

- clothes

- food

- drink

 

And can gain from dropping fresh water down from 200l / kgs but yes, I'm bothered that there is no margin for error...

[TheEscapist]

colin - 2019-05-03 11:23 PM

 

TheEscapist - 2019-05-03 9:50 PM

 

monique.hubrechts@gm - 2019-05-03 8:25 PM

 

Paul has an interface fiat- Alko chassis. My Partner can bolt on alko/VB Air suspension which is the same in two days whit two persons. It is just a lego kit.. Including fiat/Iveco can - bus software. Do not worry we are standby to help.

 

I have the VB/Air suspension on the rear already.

 

Is that part of standard spec (raising 4.5t to 4.8t) or is it an upgrade? If the latter their might be some hope of upping the MAM.

 

Standard soec gains air when opting for the 4.8t load.

 

https://www.carthago.com/fileadmin/user_upload/download/2019/EN_PL_Integriert_2019_1.pdf

 

Page 71.

 

 

[TheEscapist]

colin - 2019-05-03 11:23 PM

 

TheEscapist - 2019-05-03 9:50 PM

 

monique.hubrechts@gm - 2019-05-03 8:25 PM

 

Paul has an interface fiat- Alko chassis. My Partner can bolt on alko/VB Air suspension which is the same in two days whit two persons. It is just a lego kit.. Including fiat/Iveco can - bus software. Do not worry we are standby to help.

 

I have the VB/Air suspension on the rear already.

 

Is that part of standard spec (raising 4.5t to 4.8t) or is it an upgrade? If the latter their might be some hope of upping the MAM.

 

https://www.carthago.com/fileadmin/user_upload/download/2019/GB_Integriert_Web_2019.pdf

 

 

[TheEscapist]

Weighbridge weights

[Robinhood]

Paul,

 

it really is important that you get the (MAM and) maximum axle loadings from the vehicle VIN plate.

 

The remainder of this post may appear very pessimistic, and I hope I am wrong in my assessment, but I think you've got yourself a real problem.

 

First, forget any (type and pressure) issues with the tyres - as has already been posted, the use of non-camping tyres on motorhomes is far from uncommon, particularly if there has been a weight upgrade as "Camping" tyres max out at a load index of 118 which is inadequate for many upgraded rear axles. Your vehicle will have been fitted with the non-camping tyres for exactly that reason, and the use of "Four Seasons" versions is logical for a vehicle emanating from a German manufacturer, as they comply with current German winter tyre regulations (whereas any "Camping" tyre fitted on a current new vehicle does not!). The pressure thing might be a little confusing (exacerbated by the patently erroneous 3400 figure for CP tyres on your fuel flap), but is easily resolved once actual axle-weights are known by reference to the published Continental pressure data (which Continental will back up by recommendations if requested by email).

 

That isn't, however, quite the end of the tyre issues, as the questions around weight then arise.

 

Frankly, even without knowing the VIN data, the details you've published make me fear that the 'van as it is now (specced up with fairly heavy extras) is not viable.

 

On weighbridge figures you are 40kg from the MAM of 4800kg (and that MAM figure is believable, given the brochure details), BUT, the weight tickets you've recently posted indicate that there was no-one in the 'van at time of weighing. Even should you choose to run with no or low fresh water, driver and passenger weight is going to largely offset any resulting saving, leaving you still with little scope for loading over and above what was in it when it was weighed.

 

Now we come on to the matter of axle weights - you really do need the VIN figures, BUT, the pricelist is fairly revealing. With the 4800kg (rear air) upgrade option, the pricelist does actually quote axle weights (under footnote 28). These are respectively F/B 2250/2700kg. If this proves to be the case, then you are already wildly over the rear axle load (and frankly, with tyres rated at an absolute maximum of 2900kg on the rear axle, this doesn't surprise me). Again, it has already been pointed out that the geometry of the vehicle probably doesn't support redistributing the load to reduce that on the rear axle (and certainly not by 200kg). Typically the way of getting round such issues would be to upgrade the rear suspension, but having already upgraded, and the tyres being on the limit, I doubt this would be an (easy) option.

 

Whilst I personally have no issue running at or on the MAM (anybody running a 3500kg 'van is going to face that at some time), I certainly wouldn't be happy running with tyres absolutely on the limit (and even less so if the maximum axle weight had also been exceeded). Whilst I might be on the MAM, my current 'van has a good margin on the axle weights, an even further margin on the tyres, and it is effectively downplated from 3850 to 3500kg so I'm happy that it is technically capable should I inadvertantly load just beyond the 3500kg.

 

I don't think there's much good news in there, but there are some hard questions to ask of Chelston, and I suspect there might be a fight upcoming about any responsibility for the weighty extras. Check your audit trail.

[Derek Uzzell]

(I wrote the following before I read Robinhood’s latest analysis. My posting covers some of the same ground but it may still be useful.)

 

Paul

 

Your Carthago motorhome was created in three stages

 

1: Provision by Fiat of a Ducato ‘cowl’ unit.

 

2: Addition to the cowl-unit of an AL-KO rear chassis.

 

3: Conversion into a completed motorhome by Carthago of the cowl unit + AL-KO chassis.

 

The normal procedure is for each of those three stages to result in a ‘data-plate’ (often referred to as a VIN-plate) being attached to vehicle. So, for your motorhome, in principle there should be a Fiat data-plate, an AL-KO data-plate and a Carthago data-plate. It’s the 3rd-stage (“Stufe 3”) Carthago data-plate that ‘counts’ as far as specifying the motorhome’s maximum weight limits are concerned. I can’t find an image of a Carthago data-plate, but the attached photo of a Hymer motorhome’s Stage 3 plate shows the vehicle's maximum authorised mass to be 3900kg, its maximum ’train weight’ (weight of motorhome + anything being towed) to be 5500kg, its maximum FRONT-axle loading ("1 -“) to be 1850kg and its maximum REAR-axle loading (“2 -“) to be 2200kg. Stage 3 data-plates are sometimes self-adhesive ’stickers’ rather than metal plates, and this recent MHFun discussion suggests that Carthago uses a sticker to provide Stage 3 data.

 

https://www.motorhomefun.co.uk/forum/threads/carthago-weight-plate-confused.192874/

 

Regarding motorhome tyres and maximum authorised axle-loadings, the norm is for the tyres fitted to have a load-carrying capability that exceeds the maximum authorised axle-loadings of any of the motohome’s axles, and for the total of the maximum authorised axle-loadings to exceed the motorhome’s maximum authorised mass. In your Carthago’s case its tyres have a load index of 121 (2900kg load-carrying capability for a single-fitment axle). So neither of your motorhome’s axles should have a maximum authorised loading that exceeds 2900kg as this would have the potential to overload the tyres. The total of your Carthago’s two axles’ maximum authorised loadings should not exceed its maximum authorised mass (presumably 4800kg) as this would have the potential to overload the motorhome as a whole.

 

Once the maximum-weight values on the Carthago data-plate/sticker are known, it can be established whether or not the Continental VancoFourSeason 2 are adequate. (ie. if neither of the maximum authorised axle-loadingsthe exceeds 2900kg, then the tyres are adequate.)

 

The norm is to fit tyres with a load-carrying capability that exceeds the maximum authorised loading of any of a motorhome’s axles,. This suggests that the maximum authorised axle-loading of the Carthago’s rear axle may well be less than 2900kg, which - if true - would indicate that when the motorhome was weighed its rear axle was overloaded.

[TheEscapist]

Robinhood - 2019-05-04 8:48 AM

 

Paul,

 

it really is important that you get the (MAM and) maximum axle loadings from the vehicle VIN plate.

 

The remainder of this post may appear very pessimistic, and I hope I am wrong in my assessment, but I think you've got yourself a real problem.

 

First, forget any (type and pressure) issues with the tyres - as has already been posted, the use of non-camping tyres on motorhomes is far from uncommon, particularly if there has been a weight upgrade as "Camping" tyres max out at a load index of 118 which is inadequate for many upgraded rear axles. Your vehicle will have been fitted with the non-camping tyres for exactly that reason, and the use of "Four Seasons" versions is logical for a vehicle emanating from a German manufacturer, as they comply with current German winter tyre regulations (whereas any "Camping" tyre fitted on a current new vehicle does not!). The pressure thing might be a little confusing (exacerbated by the patently erroneous 3400 figure for CP tyres on your fuel flap), but is easily resolved once actual axle-weights are known by reference to the published Continental pressure data (which Continental will back up by recommendations if requested by email).

 

That isn't, however, quite the end of the tyre issues, as the questions around weight then arise.

 

Frankly, even without knowing the VIN data, the details you've published make me fear that the 'van as it is now (specced up with fairly heavy extras) is not viable.

 

On weighbridge figures you are 40kg from the MAM of 4800kg (and that MAM figure is believable, given the brochure details), BUT, the weight tickets you've recently posted indicate that there was no-one in the 'van at time of weighing. Even should you choose to run with no or low fresh water, driver and passenger weight is going to largely offset any resulting saving, leaving you still with little scope for loading over and above what was in it when it was weighed.

 

Now we come on to the matter of axle weights - you really do need the VIN figures, BUT, the pricelist is fairly revealing. With the 4800kg (rear air) upgrade option, the pricelist does actually quote axle weights (under footnote 28). These are respectively F/B 2250/2700kg. If this proves to be the case, then you are already wildly over the rear axle load (and frankly, with tyres rated at an absolute maximum of 2900kg on the rear axle, this doesn't surprise me). Again, it has already been pointed out that the geometry of the vehicle probably doesn't support redistributing the load to reduce that on the rear axle (and certainly not by 200kg). Typically the way of getting round such issues would be to upgrade the rear suspension, but having already upgraded, and the tyres being on the limit, I doubt this would be an (easy) option.

 

Whilst I personally have no issue running at or on the MAM (anybody running a 3500kg 'van is going to face that at some time), I certainly wouldn't be happy running with tyres absolutely on the limit (and even less so if the maximum axle weight had also been exceeded). Whilst I might be on the MAM, my current 'van has a good margin on the axle weights, an even further margin on the tyres, and it is effectively downplated from 3850 to 3500kg so I'm happy that it is technically capable should I inadvertantly load just beyond the 3500kg.

 

I don't think there's much good news in there, but there are some hard questions to ask of Chelston, and I suspect there might be a fight upcoming about any responsibility for the weighty extras. Check your audit trail.

 

Thanks for this and I suspect everything you say is correct.

 

Their reticence to tell me all of this is my main issue as effectively by telling me the van is all done and good to go, they were trying to send me out on the road with a dangerous situation. I have gone from frustration with Paul W at a Chelston to a friendly relationship with Wayne K, the MD, but I’m now very disappointed as I can’t believe he isn’t aware of all you have said, especially after discussions with Carthago, Continental and Fiat this week.

 

As I’ve already said earlier, my frustration is I’m having to chase and uncover all the issues here rather than being told them and even worse, I’m actually being told there is no issue. When I had the van for a couple of days Efren and experienced all the problems with TyrePal, I also had errors coming from the air suspension and self levelling and it now seems no wonder as the rear weight is too high. I’ve made it clear to Wayne I need the vin plates ASAP and that I’m unhappy being told all is ok when it clearly isn’t. I did want all the extras but I also said to be careful on the weight but the answer was always that they would weigh things at the end.

 

The actual extras added that have any weight are 420w of solar panels on the roof, Hyundai generator and fuel tank underslung, spare wheel underslung, E&P levelling, Truma air conditioning unit on roof. These don’t to me seem enough to tip things over by so much so clearly the base vehicle is too close to the limit in any case.

 

I’ll keep you posted on the response but we have got to the stage where I’m being treated like the annoying customer who asks too many questions instead of not just going off to be a motorhomer in his new van! I’ve pointed out that situation would be dangerous and there would be liability on Chelston as they have knowingly fitted and approved a dangerous vehicle. The only comment on safety has been to empty the tanks and put clothes at the front.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[TheEscapist]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-05-04 9:30 AM

 

(I wrote the following before I read Robinhood’s latest analysis. My posting covers some of the same ground but it may still be useful.)

 

Paul

 

Your Carthago motorhome was created in three stages

 

1: Provision by Fiat of a Ducato ‘cowl’ unit.

 

2: Addition to the cowl-unit of an AL-KO rear chassis.

 

3: Conversion into a completed motorhome by Carthago of the cowl unit + AL-KO chassis.

 

The normal procedure is for each of those three stages to result in a ‘data-plate’ (often referred to as a VIN-plate) being attached to vehicle. So, for your motorhome, in principle there should be a Fiat data-plate, an AL-KO data-plate and a Carthago data-plate. It’s the 3rd-stage (“Stufe 3”) Carthago data-plate that ‘counts’ as far as specifying the motorhome’s maximum weight limits are concerned. I can’t find an image of a Carthago data-plate, but the attached photo of a Hymer motorhome’s Stage 3 plate shows the vehicle's maximum authorised mass to be 3900kg, its maximum ’train weight’ (weight of motorhome + anything being towed) to be 5500kg, its maximum FRONT-axle loading ("1 -“) to be 1850kg and its maximum REAR-axle loading (“2 -“) to be 2200kg. Stage 3 data-plates are sometimes self-adhesive ’stickers’ rather than metal plates, and this recent MHFun discussion suggests that Carthago uses a sticker to provide Stage 3 data.

 

https://www.motorhomefun.co.uk/forum/threads/carthago-weight-plate-confused.192874/

 

Regarding motorhome tyres and maximum authorised axle-loadings, the norm is for the tyres fitted to have a load-carrying capability that exceeds the maximum authorised axle-loadings of any of the motohome’s axles, and for the total of the maximum authorised axle-loadings to exceed the motorhome’s maximum authorised mass. In your Carthago’s case its tyres have a load index of 121 (2900kg load-carrying capability for a single-fitment axle). So neither of your motorhome’s axles should have a maximum authorised loading that exceeds 2900kg as this would have the potential to overload the tyres. The total of your Carthago’s two axles’ maximum authorised loadings should not exceed its maximum authorised mass (presumably 4800kg) as this would have the potential to overload the motorhome as a whole.

 

Once the maximum-weight values on the Carthago data-plate/sticker are known, it can be established whether or not the Continental VancoFourSeason 2 are adequate. (ie. if neither of the maximum authorised axle-loadingsthe exceeds 2900kg, then the tyres are adequate.)

 

The norm is to fit tyres with a load-carrying capability that exceeds the maximum authorised loading of any of a motorhome’s axles,. This suggests that the maximum authorised axle-loading of the Carthago’s rear axle may well be less than 2900kg, which - if true - would indicate that when the motorhome was weighed its rear axle was overloaded.

 

Hi Derek

 

Thanks and see my reply to a Robin Hood.

 

Sadly, this all seems to be the case.

 

My wife and I are still waiting to have our motorhome adventure. It seems it’s not to be a d that is in a way more annoying than all the tine wasted ‘managing’ and ‘checking on’ Chelston whilst they have created this situation.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

 

 

[TheEscapist]

Does anyone know how easy or if it’s even possible to make the rear axle twin tyres or would this still not solve the rear axle problem?

[Derek Uzzell]

It’s not possible to do this with a Ducato-based motorhome.

[TheEscapist]

Further to the above, I’ve done some quick calculations on weight added:

 

- generator - 50kgs

- fuel tank for generator - 25kgs

- truma air con - 25kgs

- solar panels - approx 100kgs (5sqm)

- spare wheel - 25kgs

- total - 225kgs

 

Assuming this weight was all over the rear axle, which it isn’t, means there was precious little room for added anything and the rear axle was on the limit as a base vehicle. Though I know they assume little water etc.

 

Things that bother me:

 

- when first delivered TyrePal was disconnected so I wouldn’t hear the warnings.

- when I asked for weight to be checked of extras added item by item, I was told not to worry and wait til the end when they would use the weigh bridge.

- now I’m asking questions of the tyres, pressures, axle weights and faults with air, TyrePal and E&P I’m still being told all is ok.

 

Paul

 

 

 

 

[Derek Uzzell]

What’s wrong with your TyrePal system?

[TheEscapist]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-05-04 10:17 AM

 

What’s wrong with your TyrePal system?

 

The system was constantly beeping the tyre pressures were too high - particularly on the rear due the weight. Clearly the solution is to set the limits higher but what bothers me is this was all hidden from me by turning it off on delivery.

[TheEscapist]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-05-04 10:02 AM

 

It’s not possible to do this with a Ducato-based motorhome.

 

Oh dear.... so leaving aside the blame conversation, which I think is clearly on Chelston for having fitted all of this and kept me in the dark, I need to find a solution.

 

I see only two:

 

1. Take off all the extras and sue the van as a vehicle (but assuming the 2,700 kgs rear limit) this still leaves little room for extra weight and of course I have no self-sufficiency without aircon, generator and solar panels.

 

2. Order a new Liner for Two with more payload and put my extras on the new one. I'll have to have the argument with Chelston regarding the change-over cost of course but at least I have the extras to add ot the new vehicle and the current vehicle is unused.

 

IMP: Can someone please tell me what the best spec would be for a short (7.8m) Liner for Two giving me MAXIMUM payload, either Ducato or Iveco, single or twin axle. I can't make this out cleartly from the brochures.

 

Many thanks

 

Paul

[davidmac]

Hi on the Carthago website they list a liner for two Iveco 3lt 150hp max weight 5600kg. Weight in running order 4115kg 7.8m long. Should give you enough weight capacity to fit all your extras but I think your problem will be with Chelston.

Regards David

[colin]

davidmac - 2019-05-04 10:18 AM

 

Hi on the Carthago website they list a liner for two Iveco 3lt 150hp max weight 5600kg. Weight in running order 4115kg 7.8m long. Should give you enough weight capacity to fit all your extras but I think your problem will be with Chelston.

Regards David

 

As this, seems to be the same layout on a chassis more up to the job.

[TheEscapist]

davidmac - 2019-05-04 11:18 AM

 

Hi on the Carthago website they list a liner for two Iveco 3lt 150hp max weight 5600kg. Weight in running order 4115kg 7.8m long. Should give you enough weight capacity to fit all your extras but I think your problem will be with Chelston.

Regards David

 

Hi David

 

Thanks. I have now figured this out and discussed with Wayne at Chelston. He has agreed to a full refund so no problem there. He is very reasonable and I respect that.

 

Looking for a solution, we will take all the extras from the old van and he can then sell that. Then add to the new van on which he will give me the same percentage discount so I'm in effect only paying for the upgrade to the Iveco.

 

There is actually an Iveco van at the Carthago factory but we need to check the exact spec, otherwise it's a wait until September for a new order. If a new order, I am thinking in terms of drivetrain and chassis, the 205hp engine with 8 speed, the upgraded payload to 5.8t, and the air all round.

 

Does anyone know how Iveco handles compared to Fiat and can recommend the spec?

 

Off to Chelston to their event to have a chat and drink with Wayne and collect our stuff from the van that wasn't meant to be....

 

Thanks

 

Paul