# Why do motorhome manufacturers do it?



## Snunkie

As you've probably read in other threads, we have an argos 747 and there are 6 of us, 2 average weight adults 47 and 44 and 4 children aged 12, 11, 7 and 5 all average weights for their ages.

Having weighed it yesterday with myself and the 3 youngest children on board, and having removed anything excess from the MH that we will not need on this trip, we weighed in at 4940kgs and were only just under the max weight on each axle. We had less than 25% water and less than 25% fuel.

What I want to know is, how are manufacturers allowed to produce vehicles that state 6/7 berth if there is not enough payload to actually take 6 people and their clothes and food?

Granted we have a few extras fitted (not by us) such as Aircon, spare wheel, solar panel and Camos dome, towbar and 3 extra water tanks which we have just removed weighing approximately 40kgs, but once we fill up with fuel or water we will be overweight. I just find that ridiculous.

It's a 700kgs ish payload on the 747. Our last MH was a ford Kentucky camp estro 4 with only 200kgs payload which is why we changed the MH because we were well overweight.

Some have been reported ad being overweight upon collection by the customer. How can they be allowed to leave the factory overweight? Are there no laws against it?

Just interested!

Lucy


----------



## Grizzly

Clearly it is not illegal Lucy. It is very much a case of caveat emptor however.

Manufacturers of vans are between a rock and a hard place. They are damned for using flimsy, light weight fittings and they are damned when, like many Continental converters, they use longer-lasting but heavier parts and furniture. There is also the retro-fittings you mention. MH erS are more and more wanting all the comforts of home and each one of them has to come out of the original weight allowance.

Basically it is up to buyers to check, forums to make people aware and all ofvus to boycott vans that start out too close to their limit.

G


----------



## davesport

I've been following (& replying to) your other posts on this. Looking at the dimensions of the tanks you've got, I reckon they hold approx 380 litres of water. If you add 40 Kg's for the tanks & hardware, another couple of hundred for the vans water & diesel. Then add some people 8O, I reckon the previous owner could have been close to a ton in excess of the maximum weight.

D.


----------



## tonyt

User payload - one of the most important factors when buying a motorhome but one which people new to motorhoming are frequently unaware of and one that manufactures, and dealers, are somewhat backward in coming forward.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

I think overweight is an offence rather than a crime, if it was criminalised then the manufacturers would in effect be aiding and abetting, which they would not want to be done for so would make lighter vans.

I'll be interested to see what mine weighs in at once it's finished


----------



## Grizzly

Kev_n_Liz said:


> I think overweight is an offence rather than a crime, if it was criminalised then the manufacturers would in effect be aiding and abetting, which they would not want to be done for so would make lighter vans.
> 
> I'll be interested to see what mine weighs in at once it's finished


It would be interesting to see what would happen if an owner attempted to involve a converter after they had been refused insurance help following an accident in which being overweight played a part. I imagine any court could assess what constitutes a reasonable amount of stuff for a family to take on holiday and work out that in the case of many motorhomes, even stripped down to the basic van with few extras, it is not possible to pack this and still be legal.

G


----------



## 113016

Part of the problem is us owners and prospective owners  
Over the years, we expect more and more fancy trimmings and mod cons, and all of this adds weight.
If a manufacturer fitted a van out as they used to be, years ago, they probably would not even sell one  
It's all one up man ship, from manufacturers and customers alike  
Then we have the 3500kg to contend with with more and more drivers falling into this category  
Never buy any van without, first, checking the payload is suitable for your individual needs :!:


----------



## Grizzly

Grath said:


> If a manufacturer fitted a van out as they used to be, years ago, they probably would not even sell one


How right you are ! Our first van had gas lighting - with mantles that broke every time the van moved- and a foot pump for water to the only sink. There was no fridge- bring your own cold box and get the blocks frozen by the campsite- and no loo- buy your own porta- pottie and carry a toilet tent. It was decked out with thin lino flooring, no blinds and orange and yellow curtains. Cooking was a 2 burner gas stove with a really effective grill. It had no heating but my OH fitted an underfloor heater with a vent in the floor. The dog used to lie on that until he started to singe. I can still smell him !

It was a lot better than a tent however and we loved it and could pack us and a family in it. We could even manage somewhere for the children to sleep inside if it was snowing or too stormy outside for their tents. The dog slept under our bed and used to lift us off the runners when he tried to turn round in the night.

G


----------



## 113016

hey G, you have just reminded me of a time when I lived in a 10 foot caravan on a boat yard, while I was waiting for a showroom to be built. I then upgraded for another year into an 11 foot 6 inch van
We did have mains electric, but I do remember the gas mantles in my Dads caravan  .
We didn't expect as much in those days!


----------



## cabby

Been there done that. got soft now in my old age. :lol: :lol: 
what we need is a sensible adjustment to the weight we can drive on our restricted licenses, change from the 3500 to 7500.max incl trailer.
it will need a new law passed through parliament to get it though.


cabby


----------



## selstrom

Sale of Goods Act states that goods have to be fit for purpose.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

selstrom said:


> Sale of Goods Act states that goods have to be fit for purpose.


It is fit for camping in, you just have to get a low loader taxi to the campsite.


----------



## 113016

There is only the two of us (usually) and our van has a 670kg payload  
We use every kg of it :lol:


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

cabby said:


> Been there done that. got soft now in my old age. :lol: :lol:
> what we need is a sensible adjustment to the weight we can drive on our restricted licenses, change from the 3500 to 7500.max incl trailer.
> it will need a new law passed through parliament to get it though.
> 
> cabby


I think they might not go for that, but a lot of these vans are the same size as the higher weight classification ones even up to 5.5t and it's just wheels, brake and suspension, also the final gearing, the rest is the same and it should be possible to word the licence to allow these to be driven, but don't hold your breath it takes all of DVLAs resources to get our tax disc here on time, why 5 weeks, do they sit on them or what.

I refer to the basic panel vans above, not MHs


----------



## davesport

Slighty OT. Grath & Grizz, you've reminded me of the "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch from the Monty Python crew 

On a more serious note. Have a look at the payload on this Hymer tag axle 8O

D.


----------



## 113016

Regarding the above clip.
I did know a man who had no proper furniture, used a soap box for a table and drunk out of steel mugs and he was a proper millionaire in the days when a million was worth something. 50 years ago!
Oh and it was a two up and down!
Very few knew his financial position


----------



## Jezport

If you don't use the toward take it off to get rid of the weight


----------



## suedew

We really looked into the payload issue before choosing our van. In every vehicle there is a compromise to be made, in our case it was a light weight chassis.
We have a 6 berth van, 6 seat belts and a few times during the year travel with grandchildren. have also travelled with 4 adults, the equipment/water we carry is dependent on plans. we take only a 5L bottle of water when going with the children, fill up on site saving 90K weight, we dont take the bikes, mine is electric so another 40K saving.
Usually just the 2 of us, so take awning, bikes more water (our first virgin trip in January was a bit hairy we only had 5L and most aires were turned off lol) tv satellite and clothing for all weathers.
We have never been overweight when weighed, just need to be realistic, majority of manufacturers expect, no matter how many berths/seatbelts that vehicles will be 2 up.
The weight information provided is at best misleading.
sue


----------



## tony50

we had a " A " Class French M/H 3500kgs. put it over 2 weighbridges ,took to the dealer he did not believe me when I said my wife would have to sit in the back to make the front axle weight legal !he did believe me after we went to a weigh bridge he selected !My advice is get a weigh bridge ticket preferably you being there when weighed , if they say no we not doing that walk away , as said above don't take to much notice of the brochure weights .

Tony A


----------



## Jezport

Another way to save some weight is to use calor lite gas bottles. These save 20 KG each compared to standard 13kg bottles.


----------



## Jezport

Another way to save some weight is to use calor lite gas bottles. These save 20 KG each compared to standard 13kg bottles.


----------



## peribro

As has been mentioned already I think it is up to the purchaser to familiarise himself / herself with what payload is needed and what the converter is offering. I suppose it is difficult for converters to anticipate everyone's requirements so inevitably pricing and marketing considerations will play a prominent part in what decisions are made concerning the levels of equipment provided and materials used in the van. However for a first time purchaser this makes it very difficult and I think that most dealers are pretty silent about this issue unless pressed. Also the failure of manufacturers to show the available payload by axle means a lot of people are misled. I have some 350kg "spare" on my front axle (as I did with my last motorhome) but have virtually zero chance of being able to load any more on to this axle. 

In my van the published payload is flattered due to the non-inclusion of a spare wheel, the presumption that the fresh water tank is only half full and the inclusion of only one gas bottle. In common with all other motorhome suppliers, kerb weight includes the driver only and no passengers regardless of the number of passenger seats or beds.

So far as the op is concerned, one option you have is using a trailer. You have a towbar and over 1000kg available between your actual weight and gross train weight, so that would solve the problem for you, although obviously at some expense. You can also hire trailers if that is more appropriate.


----------



## listerdiesel

Since we were overweight last year, we have shed a lot of excess weight, mainly stuff that we 'might' need, but in practice never used.

When we added more bits, we looked to take out the equivalent weight somewhere else.

We don't have water or waste tanks, and only a small Caravanstore Zip awning, but even a cupboard of tinned food or drinks soon add up.

We travel with no water in the system at all, but do carry 2 spare wheels.

We hope that after all the mods this year, we should be under the 3500kg weight that we are allowed for the trailer, but like in real life, putting weight ON is easy, taking it OFF is so difficult. 

Bear in mind that ours is a trailer with 1.3 tonnes of engine in the back, but we are still subject to C&U reg's and weights, and potentially stand more of a risk of a weight check than most motorhomers.

Peter


----------



## Christine600

When you visit a dealer to buy your first motorhome the salesperson should inform you of the payload issue. But if that end up costing the salesperson on his/hers paycheck from lack of bonuses it's not a stretch to imagine it's not discussed to much.



davesport said:


> On a more serious note. Have a look at the payload on this Hymer tag axle 8O


I have seen a 7.5t Concorde with a similar payload. Mindboggeling until you ask and the salesperson who tell you that it really is a 10t van and the previous owner had it downrated so that he could drive it.


----------



## 91502

Hi
A big problem is people want bigger and better motorhomes and the converters continue to use the same base vehicles Ducato/Sprinter etc which are already getting on for their max weight and as we add more and more the only thing that happens is the available weight is reduced.
They could move on to the next size of base vehicle capable of  much more weight but the cost would go through the roof and this would also limit the prospective buyers able to drive them.
So the only way forward is to reduce the weight of fixtures and fittings which if possible costs more or just turn a blind eye.
James


----------



## Snunkie

Thanks everyone. Had a few giggles reading some of those posts too :lol: 

I actually think it is pointless knowing the payload of a vehicle in practice. The only way to know for sure how much weight you're carrying is to go to the weighbridge fully laden (and unladen if you wish to know the real payload) and see how much crap you need to get rid of  

Say the payload on ours was 700kgs as it states on the net, (but I am still certain that somewhere in our paperwork it states 1250kgs as I remember being very impressed), you then have to remember that it has had a spare wheel, full air con, camos dome, tow bar, solar panel, TV and satellite equipment and a 4 bike rack added which all needs to come off that payload before you even included your passengers and all the gear that comes with them. The bike rack is useless to us now with our latest discovery that we are only just under the max weight on each axle, we couldn't possibly put bikes on it. We can't use the underfloor storage other than for a few essentials such as table and chairs for the 6 of us because we would again overload the axle. We have removed 40kgs of unrequired and pointless extra water tanks today which would have held around 400l of water adding an extra 400kgs to the weight (jeez!) and still we don't have enough payload to get the 6 of us in with our now, greatly minimized 'stuff' :evil:


----------



## nicholsong

cabby said:


> Been there done that. got soft now in my old age. :lol: :lol:
> what we need is a sensible adjustment to the weight we can drive on our restricted licenses, change from the 3500 to 7500.max incl trailer.
> it will need a new law passed through parliament to get it though.
> 
> cabby


Cabby

I agree. I recently tried to find out how the 3500kg restriction originated and the only answer I got was from the driving licence restriction, but could not find out where that restriction came from.

Anyway most van chassis, on which MHs are based can be upgraded above 3500kg so it is not the manufacturers who are restricting the payload but the converters, presumably for marketing reasons.

On the legality point, I think the Manufacturers and Dealers could be in breach of the law for 'Misrepresentation' and/or for the vehicle not being 'fit for purpose'

However the weights and payload quoted are usually in a brochure about the class of vehicle and not stated in respect of the actual vehicle as seen, or if so only orally - then prove he said it. (Having written 'he' I wondered if anyone has met a female MH seller? - I havn't - perhaps females are too honest)

Geoff


----------



## leseduts

We have over a tonne payload and have been thinking of changing our MH. As soon as we start talking payload to dealers they seem to switch off and have no interest in our questions. I am still waiting for various salesmen to come back to me with vehicle weights. As long as people buy without asking questions, they do not need us as customers.


----------



## peaky

The calor gas lite bottles are they shorter and fatter than the 13kg bottles ?? I see we have some here, white plastic looking ones but they look fatter and I would nt be able to fit them in my locker, I hav nt been brave enough to ask to measure one at the garage yet, iv e just replaced my 13kg bottle the locker is quite high, nearly did myself an injury getting it in !! I swear the last bottle I bought was half empty as it was lighter and only lasted half the time !!Spanish man at garage would nt help me get it in either !!


----------



## zappy61

*Pay load*

It's probably true that all M/H's run over or close to the maximum pay load, this is why tyres are 'camper' rated with reinforced side walls. I rarely travel with a full water tank I just carry enough for brewing up etc. and the first thing I do when I arrive at camp site is to fill up. Don't see the point of transporting water unless it is uncertain where your next fill is.

Graham


----------



## 113016

What I did was this.
Shortly after buying our van, I loaded it as we would for normal UK shortish tours. Then I took it to the weigh bridge and did a full and axle weigh. All was well with plenty payload still available  
Then, just prior to a European tour, I loaded the van with everything, including bikes and again visited the weigh bridge and we were just inside the limit, with water tank and an extra 35 litres of water.
I also did a re check earlier this year prior to a 6 week tour  
Regarding gas cylinders, don't forget Alugas refillable cylinders are allegedly, 6 kg lighter than Gaslow.
In our case the manufactures figures were reasonably accurate!
A person must do their own checks and DO NOT rely on the sales person.
Don't forget, some weigh bridges go up in 20 kg increments :!:
We always travel with full water tanks as we frequently wild and / or don't know where we will end up. We very rarely use camp sites :lol: 
I note that manufacturers figures now use 20 litres of water for their payload figures, where it used to be 90% of a full water tank. :!:


----------



## Zepp

Or you could buy one of these before you buy your new motorhome to check the payload of the van before you hand your cash over and then resell it .

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Reich-Wei...ervan_Caravan_Accessories&hash=item461198123f


----------



## 113016

Zepp said:


> Or you could buy one of these before you buy your new motorhome to check the payload of the van before you hand your cash over and then resell it .
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Reich-Wei...ervan_Caravan_Accessories&hash=item461198123f


Could be a long term good investment, and it could save a very costly mistake


----------



## Snunkie

*Re: Pay load*



zappy61 said:


> It's probably true that all M/H's run over or close to the maximum pay load, this is why tyres are 'camper' rated with reinforced side walls. I rarely travel with a full water tank I just carry enough for brewing up etc. and the first thing I do when I arrive at camp site is to fill up. Don't see the point of transporting water unless it is uncertain where your next fill is.
> 
> Graham


We don't travel with more than 25%. I always thought it was unsafe, especially as the tank is on the same side of the vehicle as the 5 passengers. The weight on that side would be ridiculous with a full tank. The only things in the other side are the fridge freezer and the boiler/heating


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

davesport said:


> EDITED
> On a more serious note. Have a look at the payload on this Hymer tag axle 8O
> 
> D.


"Payload: *260kg
*Optional chassis upgrades to 3850/4250/4500KG MTPLM at additional cost with relative increases in payload."

I wonder how much the relative cost are for these upgrades.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

nicholsong said:


> EDITED
> 
> I agree. I recently tried to find out how the 3500kg restriction originated and the only answer I got was from the driving licence restriction, but could not find out where that restriction came from.
> 
> Geoff


I think the restriction came out of a change in the licence limits, now only anyone who passed their driving test pre 1997 can drive up to 7.5t or pull a trailer, without taking a test, possibly to appease some EU ruling, not sure, but now a test is needed to upgrade your licence to go over 3.5t, or to tow a trailer.

I'm not sure what the regulations were regarding Diabetes, or over 70 prior to this change in rules.

So to solve the Payload issue perhaps a lobby to change the law regarding licence weight limits when it applies to none commercial vehicles to also include commercial vehicles which have been converted to comply and receive the classification of Motor Caravan on the V5.

It is the licence which has changed rather than the vans, they've just evolved to take account of customer requirements as we get more enlightened and more becomes possible.


----------



## Grizzly

Kev_n_Liz said:


> I wonder how much the relative cost are for these upgrades.


I'm writing from a position of ignorance so sorry if these are daft questions .

I understood that the majority of upgrades are no more than paper exercises, simply issuing a certificate. Three questions then: 1) how can a charge of £200 ( one that I've read) be justified for this and 2) what authority have the firms who do this upgrades got that allows them to issue a piece of paper that might well become the basis of legal action and 3) do they actually have to see my van first and make sure that it is fit for upgrade ?

G


----------



## 113016

Grizzly said:


> Kev_n_Liz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder how much the relative cost are for these upgrades.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm writing from a position of ignorance so sorry if these are daft questions .
> 
> I understood that the majority of upgrades are no more than paper exercises, simply issuing a certificate. Three questions then: 1) how can a charge of £200 ( one that I've read) be justified for this and 2) what authority have the firms who do this upgrades got that allows them to issue a piece of paper that might well become the basis of legal action and 3) do they actually have to see my van first and make sure that it is fit for upgrade ?
> 
> G
Click to expand...

I believe that SV Tech have previously done tests on various base vehicles.If they have not tested a similar vehicle they would need to do so and the costs would be very high.
When they upgraded our previous van, I had to supply tyre and air suspension details. I sent photographs .
Some vans are built on the normal chassis, then one upgrade is the Maxi Chassis which is heavier and has larger wheels.
Not sure about Alko


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

Grizzly said:


> Kev_n_Liz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder how much the relative cost are for these upgrades.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm writing from a position of ignorance so sorry if these are daft questions .
> 
> I understood that the majority of upgrades are no more than paper exercises, simply issuing a certificate. Three questions then: 1) how can a charge of £200 ( one that I've read) be justified for this and 2) what authority have the firms who do this upgrades got that allows them to issue a piece of paper that might well become the basis of legal action and 3) do they actually have to see my van first and make sure that it is fit for upgrade ?
> 
> G
Click to expand...

You can do it yourself, but after looking at the paperwork involved, I'd pay the fee.


----------



## Ozzyjohn

Morning all,

If they ever did sort out the peculiarities of driving licence requirements for motorhomes over 3,500kg then I suspect the "loophole" of reduced road fund licence that is currently enjoyed could also disappear. 

Sorry, that's possible drifting off the original topic a bit. 


Regards,
John


----------



## fdhadi

Ozzyjohn said:


> Morning all,
> 
> If they ever did sort out the peculiarities of driving licence requirements for motorhomes over 3,500kg then I suspect the "loophole" of reduced road fund licence that is currently enjoyed could also disappear.
> 
> Sorry, that's possible drifting off the original topic a bit.
> 
> Regards,
> John


Thats another area for Lucy (Snunkie) to look at: Road Fund Licence.

The Argos 747 should be taxed as a PHG £165 and not a PLG which is in the £230? bracket.

Over 3.5t is classed as PHG and cheaper  road tax :wink: :wink:

Many vehicles over 3.5t are in the wrong RFL bracket which was a mistake by the supplying dealer, as was ours :wink:


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

Yes our 2000 Laika had been paying the higher 3.5t rate, I reduced it to the 3850 rate when it needed re-taxing.

Odd though I'd have though it would be the other way around, and also thought at the time that there should be a lower rate for MHs as we don't use the road very much compared to other vehicles


----------



## Jezport

If you don't use the toward take it off to get rid of the weight


----------



## cavs

Grath said:


> Zepp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or you could buy one of these before you buy your new motorhome to check the payload of the van before you hand your cash over and then resell it .
> 
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Reich-Wei...ervan_Caravan_Accessories&hash=item461198123f
> 
> 
> 
> Could be a long term good investment, and it could save a very costly mistake
Click to expand...

Grath, not only might it be a good long term investment, in the event of being stopped it might demonstrate that you've done your best to make the vehicle legal. This might make a difference to the judgement of the checking officer about whether to knock you off or not. (If all else fails, it's good mitigation in front of the beak  ) I have one and carry it with me together with recent weighing results.


----------



## listerdiesel

Just commenting on the 3.5T chassis/van limit:

In the UK we had a plating/testing weight threshold of 30cwt UNLADEN vehicle weight, so under that weight the vehicle was classed and treated as a car/van, over it was classed as a commercial vehicle.

The 3.5Tonnes threshold is the breakpoint between a light commercial vehicle and no Operator Licence and a truck which requires an Operator Licence (for commercial use) although that threshold has been blurred by increasing weight limits for Sprinters and the like.

The use of tyag axles was to provide the weight capacity required without jumping over to a full truck chassis, very few of which were made in the 5tonne range that could be used for M/H conversions.

3.5tonnes is also the threshold for requiring a tachograph, for commercial use, which is why so many 3.5 tonners are around.

Peter


----------



## prof20

Sorry - couldn't resist it!






Happy memories.

Having had to upgrade my old Hymer I fully agree about ridiculous payloads - and mine is sixteen years old.

Roger


----------



## Snunkie

fdhadi said:


> Ozzyjohn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Morning all,
> 
> If they ever did sort out the peculiarities of driving licence requirements for motorhomes over 3,500kg then I suspect the "loophole" of reduced road fund licence that is currently enjoyed could also disappear.
> 
> Sorry, that's possible drifting off the original topic a bit.
> 
> Regards,
> John
> 
> 
> 
> Thats another area for Lucy (Snunkie) to look at: Road Fund Licence.
> 
> The Argos 747 should be taxed as a PHG £165 and not a PLG which is in the £230? bracket.
> 
> Over 3.5t is classed as PHG and cheaper  road tax :wink: :wink:
> 
> Many vehicles over 3.5t are in the wrong RFL bracket which was a mistake by the supplying dealer, as was ours :wink:
Click to expand...

My road tax is £165


----------



## Snunkie

Our motorhome has an expensive twin GasLow system fitted which is very convenient so the last thing we're going to do is replace that with gas bottles!


----------



## 747

I have 1250 Kg payload on the Burstner 747-2 Active I own. Unfortunately it is nearly all on the tag axles at the rear as the front axle runs at nearly its max all of the time. I sweat whenever I fill the fuel tank and travel with either no water or 25% max. I have warned owners and prospective buyers a number of times and have even sent PM's to owners, so there should have been some record of the problem somewhere on here (probably in the Burstner section).

Slightly off topic but Caravan owners are in just as bad a position, if not worse than motorhome owners. The payload on most Caravans is derisory, 125 Kg on a 2 berth and around 250 Kg on a 4 berth. The next time you see a caravanner chucking his awning, wastemaster and fresh water gubbins in his van, he will probably be overweight. Maybe that is why so many turn over on the Motorway. 8O 

It is possible for a Caravanner to get his van replated. it costs around £65 with Bailey and they give you an extra 30 Kg (and a new plate to stick on the van). :lol:


----------



## Jezport

If you don't use the toward take it off to get rid of the weight


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

Jezport said:


> If you don't use the toward take it off to get rid of the weight


Why do you keep posting that? it doesn't make sense and you usually do.


----------



## trek

I think Jezport's advice is spot on - but what does Snunkie think of it ?



if you don't tow then why have a heavy towbar fitted & its not just the dead weight of the towbar that you need to consider but also how it affects the weight distribution over the axles due to it being at the end of the vehicle i.e the cantilever effect (or seesaw) it has over the back axle


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

trek said:


> I think Jezport's advice is spot on - but what does Snunkie think of it ?
> 
> if you don't tow then why have a heavy towbar fitted & its not just the dead weight of the towbar that you need to consider but also how it affects the weight distribution over the axles due to it being at the end of the vehicle i.e the cantilever effect (or seesaw) it has over the back axle


I would agree, but he doesn't say Tow bar, but toward, several times so unlikely to be a typo.

Although we had a tow bar on the back of the Laika, it saved the rear end going on to ferries due to the huge overhang, massive thing too, must have weighed 50kg at least.


----------



## peribro

trek said:


> I think Jezport's advice is spot on - but what does Snunkie think of it ?


I think Snunkie said in a previous post on either this thread or another one that she wanted to keep the towbar because it provides protection to the rear of the van.


----------



## JockandRita

Kev_n_Liz said:


> I would agree, but he doesn't say Tow bar, but toward, several times so unlikely to be a typo.


Kev, I think Jez's repeat posts and spelling may be something to do with his smart phone, and the predictive texting. :?

Cheers,

Jock.


----------



## tonyt

.
Would it be reasonable, when buying a van, new or old, from a dealer, to insist on a weighbridge certificate?

For sure it wouldn't be a popular request with the dealer but would they be prepared to lose sales for lack of one if enough prospective buyers asked for one?

Just really thinking aloud.


----------



## nicholsong

tonyt said:


> .
> Would it be reasonable, when buying a van, new or old, from a dealer, to insist on a weighbridge certificate?
> 
> For sure it wouldn't be a popular request with the dealer but would they be prepared to lose sales for lack of one if enough prospective buyers asked for one?
> 
> Just really thinking aloud.


Certificate from a dealer? - I think I would want to be present at the weighbridge and dip the tanks 

If the dealer does not agree tell him to find another mug - it does not seem to be difficult :roll:

Geoff


----------



## Grizzly

tonyt said:


> .
> Would it be reasonable, when buying a van, new or old, from a dealer, to insist on a weighbridge certificate?
> 
> .


A perfectly reasonable request but logistically, I suspect it would be a nightmare for the dealer. Not too bad if they are close to a weighbridge but otherwise it means one driver tied up taking each van they sell to the weighbridge.

If each major part- aircon, awning, bike rack and so on had a clearly labelled mass and, before the dealer fitted them on request he did the sums and so presented the new owner with final figures, before they committed, it would help.

Surely though the onus is on the original manufacturer ? They know perfectly well that extras will be fitted to the van and they must make sure that an allowance is made for this and still leaves a sensible margin for everyday things.

I think that it would also help if forums like this did more to publicise the matter. Clearly not everyone knows that there could be a problem and it must be brought to their attention.

G


----------



## nicholsong

And another thought :roll: 

Do manufactures have weighbridges on site, or near, before they write the brochures? Can they produce certificates to show to Trading Standards Officers?

Have any manufacturers or dealers been prosecuted for non-compliance/misrepresentation? Maybe no MHs have been sold as per the brochure weights?

Has anyone ever bought one as exactly specified in the brochure?

OR are all potential MH buyers so starry-eyed and concentrating on the colour of the upholstery that they open their wallets without asking?

OR have so few MHs been stopped and weighed that nobody really cares?  

Geoff


----------



## nicholsong

Grizzly said:


> tonyt said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Would it be reasonable, when buying a van, new or old, from a dealer, to insist on a weighbridge certificate?
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> A perfectly reasonable request but logistically, I suspect it would be a nightmare for the dealer. Not too bad if they are close to a weighbridge but otherwise it means one driver tied up taking each van they sell to the weighbridge.
> 
> If each major part- aircon, awning, bike rack and so on had a clearly labelled mass and, before the dealer fitted them on request he did the sums and so presented the new owner with final figures, before they committed, it would help.
> 
> Surely though the onus is on the original manufacturer ? They know perfectly well that extras will be fitted to the van and they must make sure that an allowance is made for this and still leaves a sensible margin for everyday things.
> 
> I think that it would also help if forums like this did more to publicise the matter. Clearly not everyone knows that there could be a problem and it must be brought to their attention.
> 
> My answer would be to make the stated payload a condition in the sale contract, in which case if the MH did not meet the stated specification it could be rejected as not conforming to its description.
> 
> I shall also be suggesting to Nuke that he allows Manufacturers and Dealers free access (read-only of course - I do not want him to miss out on revenue) so that they understand better MHF Members concerns on payload.
> 
> Geoff
> G
Click to expand...


----------



## listerdiesel

Most new trucks have to be weighed so their unladen weight can be recorded for future payload calculations.

I can't see a big problem with a motorhome manufacturer doing the same thing, for their own protection as much as for the buyer's information.

A weighbridge ticket is less than £20, £5 at our local scrapyard.

Peter


----------



## 91502

I think you will find that the brochure weights are accurate and there will always be small print somewhere explaining what this means to cover themselves. 
It's just what they class as optional extras are very often expected to be standard fit, after all how man MH's do you see on the road without an awning?
The thing is they just don't design with enough available weight limit for reasonable extras and enough basic living equipment for the number of beds.
It would have to be something that all manufacturers changed as the cost of giving say another 500-1000kg would price them out of the market unless they all increased weight and price.
There are some manufacturers who have plenty of load capacity on their models but these tend to be high end high price MH's.
I really don't see how weight limits can be increased by a reasonable amount (more than a couple of hundred kg's) and still make the vehicles affordable therefore it won't happen.

James


----------



## nicholsong

747 said:


> I have 1250 Kg payload on the Burstner 747-2 Active I own. Unfortunately it is nearly all on the tag axles at the rear as the front axle runs at nearly its max all of the time. I sweat whenever I fill the fuel tank and travel with either no water or 25% max. I have warned owners and prospective buyers a number of times and have even sent PM's to owners, so there should have been some record of the problem somewhere on here (probably in the Burstner section).
> 
> Slightly off topic but Caravan owners are in just as bad a position, if not worse than motorhome owners. The payload on most Caravans is derisory, 125 Kg on a 2 berth and around 250 Kg on a 4 berth. The next time you see a caravanner chucking his awning, wastemaster and fresh water gubbins in his van, he will probably be overweight. Maybe that is why so many turn over on the Motorway. 8O
> 
> It is possible for a Caravanner to get his van replated. it costs around £65 with Bailey and they give you an extra 30 Kg (and a new plate to stick on the van). :lol:


"I cannot believe it"

747 talked a (bit) of sense and did not slag off anybody - AMAZING :lol: :lol: :lol:

Geoff


----------



## tonyt

Grizzly said:


> A perfectly reasonable request but logistically, I suspect it would be a nightmare for the dealer. Not too bad if they are close to a weighbridge but otherwise it means one driver tied up taking each van they sell to the weighbridge.
> 
> If each major part- aircon, awning, bike rack and so on had a clearly labelled mass and, before the dealer fitted them on request he did the sums and so presented the new owner with final figures, before they committed, it would help.
> 
> Surely though the onus is on the original manufacturer ? They know perfectly well that extras will be fitted to the van and they must make sure that an allowance is made for this and still leaves a sensible margin for everyday things.
> 
> I think that it would also help if forums like this did more to publicise the matter. Clearly not everyone knows that there could be a problem and it must be brought to their attention.
> 
> G


Yep - it would be something the dealer/manufacturer would have to face up to as part of selling in this age.

Things change, customer needs change and the dealers/manufacturers need to keep up.

Payload is such a crucial aspect made even more difficult with the ever increasing gizmos customers want but when you're spending £30k/£40k/ £50k and more for something that may turn out as completely unusable for your needs because of insufficient payload, then it's about time things changed.

So what if the dealer has to set up a weighbridge driver/contactor and would it be so difficult for the prospective buyer to be "in on" the weigh?

We've already seen some inexpensive electronic weighing devises in this thread - there must be more commercial models that the dealer could install on-site.

People power - give me what I want or I walk.


----------



## Grizzly

tonyt said:


> Yep - it would be something the dealer/manufacturer would have to
> People power - give me what I want or I walk
> .


I think you'd better get your boots on then Tony because there are enough people out there , ignorant of the facts and wanting to buy a new van, that the dealer does not have to worry about you.

Surely what is more of a problem is the dealer buying in a part-exchanged van and not having any idea how much payload it still has.
If he is trying to sell it to a savvy buyer then he would have to have some means of gauging the payload. At the moment I suspect, if they do anything at all, then it's an educated guess but would you- as others say- trust this ?

G


----------



## rayc

The problem of payload could be solved at a stroke by increasing the MGW allowed for a class B licence to 4250kg. They could separate it from the vocational lorry / bus licences by making it a leisure only licence. The requirements for a medical at 70 could likewise be relaxed.

You can tow a trailer up to 750kg with a 3500kg MH on a class B licence. With a BE licence you can tow a trailer up to such that the MH maximum train weight is not exceeded. I cannot see that a 4250 kg or so MH requires any extra skills or medical fitness over towing the trailers.


----------



## goldi

Morning all,

What really needs to happen is that the rules for 3500 kg need lifting to 4000kg. The 3500 vans an commercials are massivly streched as it is. Everything else has increased in quantity and size over the last forty years. However its unlikly to happen because of the EU.


norm


----------



## goldi

Hello again,

Looks like rayc beat me to it by 2mins.

norm


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

JockandRita said:


> Kev_n_Liz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would agree, but he doesn't say Tow bar, but toward, several times so unlikely to be a typo.
> 
> 
> 
> Kev, I think Jez's repeat posts and spelling may be something to do with his smart phone, and the predictive texting. :?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Jock.
Click to expand...

Ah, the predictive text thing, It never occurred to me, I can correct on mine, Ta Jock.

Apologies to Jezport.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

Or they could by that single wheel gizmo and weight them in front of the customer, charging the customer £5 if the weight is sensible and the customer doesn't buy, You could have some fun at a Burstner dealer for a skin diver by the sound of it.


----------



## Grizzly

goldi said:


> Morning all,
> 
> What really needs to happen is that the rules for 3500 kg need lifting to 4000kg. The 3500 vans an commercials are massivly streched as it is. Everything else has increased in quantity and size over the last forty years. However its unlikly to happen because of the EU.
> 
> norm


I don't know anything about this Norm. Is there an EU ruling that would stop this lift or is it as simple as no-one with any authority has even thought about it in the first place ?

If the latter then why are we not pounding on their doors ?

G


----------



## listerdiesel

You're not going to see that weight increase anytime soon, as it affects all of the commercial users/manufacturers, who sell vastly more to the delivery van market than they do to motorhome converters/builders.

A lot of manufacturers build to the 3.5tonnes and then jump to 7.5tonnes in their next range of vehicles, there has not been a big market in between as few manufacturers covered that sector. Plus there is the question of tachographs and Operator Licencing for the commercial operators to consider.

Then you have issues with wheels and tyres, and existing users trying to up-plate their wagons.

It would be a huge logistics nightmare, but not impossible, just no real driver for it to be done.

Peter


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

We need a tame MP who want to drive a MH over 3.5t, but sees the test as a problem for him/her.


----------



## Grizzly

Kev_n_Liz said:


> We need a tame MP who want to drive a MH over 3.5t, but sees the test as a problem for him/her.


Power to the people Kev !

No need for an MP; anyone -and everyone- who cares enough should write to the relevant authorities and suggest that this is an issue that needs reconsidering

I don't know if it is something that dealers and manufacturers care about ? If so, perhaps they would lobby too.

G


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

Grizzly said:


> Kev_n_Liz said:
> 
> 
> 
> We need a tame MP who want to drive a MH over 3.5t, but sees the test as a problem for him/her.
> 
> 
> 
> Power to the people Kev !
> 
> No need for an MP; anyone -and everyone- who cares enough should write to the relevant authorities and suggest that this is an issue that needs reconsidering
> 
> I don't know if it is something that dealers and manufacturers care about ? If so, perhaps they would lobby too.
> 
> G
Click to expand...

Hmm, we need someone good with worms to write a good letter we could all use as a template and lobby our own local MPs and our Euro MPs, every question has to answered so I read somewhere.


----------



## 91502

I now see little point in contacting MP's, having done so several times asking for support mine have never actually answered my questions just giving the party answers. 
When I pushed Edward Leigh on why he sees it ok to treat police pensions one way and MP's pension totally different he just refused to answer.
I also don't see the point in online petitions, you get all the signatures required for it to be discused in parliament and the backing of some major names but all you get is less than 5 minutes in some obscure back office discussion that is forgotten moments later.
They will do what they want, the only way to influence is by voting with your feet and marching right out of the door to the next party who may be better!
James


----------



## Grizzly

JP said:


> I now see little point in contacting MP's, having done so several times asking for support mine have never actually answered my questions just giving the party answers.
> When I pushed Edward Leigh on why he sees it ok to treat police pensions one way and MP's pension totally different he just refused to answer.
> I also don't see the point in online petitions, you get all the signatures required for it to be discused in parliament and the backing of some major names but all you get is less than 5 minutes in some obscure back office discussion that is forgotten moments later.
> They will do what they want, the only way to influence is by voting with your feet and marching right out of the door to the next party who may be better!
> James


I don't think the matter under discussion is a suitable one for either an MP or an online -or any other kind of-petition. I imagine that somewhere, in some small corner, there is a technical bod i/c such matters and he is the one that needs to have the matter brought up for his consideration.

Does anyone know what government department, or sub section thereof, oversees this sort of thing ?

G


----------



## listerdiesel

Probably UNECE

http://www.unece.org/

Transport link:

http://www.unece.org/trans/welcome.html

Before them it was part of the EC harmonisation rules on transport in the EC.

Peter


----------



## Grizzly

listerdiesel said:


> Probably UNECE
> 
> http://www.unece.org/
> 
> Transport link:
> 
> http://www.unece.org/trans/welcome.html
> 
> Before them it was part of the EC harmonisation rules on transport in the EC.
> 
> Peter


Thank you Peter.

I'd write and ask except for the fact that I really don't know all the technical terms and could not enter into any technical discussion with anyone on the subject of MIRO and so on..

Why don't one of you write to them and describe the problem and ask if there are possible solutions ?

G


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

I disagree with the view that it's pointless, it will have more effect than sitting and doing nothing would ever have, at least if we all did it it would, these people do talk to eachother and if they think there might be a few votes in it, then they might try to exert a bit of influence in the right department.


----------



## rayc

Kev_n_Liz said:


> I disagree with the view that it's pointless, it will have more effect than sitting and doing nothing would ever have, at least if we all did it it would, these people do talk to eachother and if they think there might be a few votes in it, then they might try to exert a bit of influence in the right department.


I think it will be pointless as my MP is a LIB Dem and is anti car as is the remainder of her party. It would appear that motorhoming will not continue in any even beyond 2040 if they have their way.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...ol-and-diesel-cars-from-UK-roads-by-2040.html


----------



## Junebeere

User payload?? Ok as a newie and not yet an owner of a motor home - what is this all about - can anyone direct me towards some good insight on this subject?


----------



## Grizzly

Junebeere said:


> User payload?? Ok as a newie and not yet an owner of a motor home - what is this all about - can anyone direct me towards some good insight on this subject?


Try this one:

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftoptitle-65112-a-guide-to-motorhome-weights-and-the-terms-used.html

Basically your motorhome will have a maximum mass that you can drive; usually 3500kg. That 3500 kg must cover everything in the van; engine, wheels, body,furniture, fridge, cooker, extras that you add like bike racks, air con, awning as well as some water, passengers, fuel and so on. The problem with many vans is that all this adds up so close to the 3500kg figure that there is very little left to add clothes, food, bikes and all the other oddments !

G

Edit: As a newbie there are perhaps other articles here you might like to read:

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/forum-185.html


----------



## tony50

listerdiesel said:


> Probably UNECE
> 
> http://www.unece.org/
> 
> Transport link:
> 
> http://www.unece.org/trans/welcome.html
> 
> Before them it was part of the EC harmonisation rules on transport in the EC.
> 
> Peter


I have just looked at the UNECE (minefield ! ) website and I can imagine all these boffins sitting round a table , thinking how can we extend our job ie. what other Regulations can will bring in Worldwide to make some of the the previous Regulations null and void ,and cause a big head ache for the Vehicle Industry (Makers , Vosa , Repairers , End Users ) who have to apply this Legislation , all in all, I found what they do is so complicated , uprating 3500 kgs by writing to your MP's would probably have next to no effect .

Tony A.


----------



## nicholsong

tony50 said:


> listerdiesel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably UNECE
> 
> http://www.unece.org/
> 
> Transport link:
> 
> http://www.unece.org/trans/welcome.html
> 
> Before them it was part of the EC harmonisation rules on transport in the EC.
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
> I have just looked at the UNECE (minefield ! ) website and I can imagine all these boffins sitting round a table , thinking how can we extend our job ie. what other Regulations can will bring in Worldwide to make some of the the previous Regulations null and void ,and cause a big head ache for the Vehicle Industry (Makers , Vosa , Repairers , End Users ) who have to apply this Legislation , all in all, I found what they do is so complicated , uprating 3500 kgs by writing to your MP's would probably have next to no effect .
> 
> Tony A.
Click to expand...

Tony

I think you are starting to point us in the right direction.

Go overweight, get nicked, appeal, apply for legal aid to appeal the the ECHR.on the basis that the regulatiions are too complex/ ill-defined/ are not based on research/ they have lost the paperwork.

Meanwhile carry on MHoming, with a sticker on the back with the ECHR Case no. on it - should put plodd/flic off :lol:

Not ourMHF Mr. Plodd of course because he will have read this 'ruse'

Geoff


----------



## Hatikvah

Our first motorhome was a Burstner Salano, It said in their brochure that it had 450kg of payload after allowance for driver, 90% fuel, water and gas, and all necessary tools, no spare wheel. we thought that would be adequate for just the two of us. Off we went to the weighbridge with the correct amount of fuel, water and gas, I got out it was weighed and we only had about 80 kgs spare, couldn't believe it, my husband has a HGV licence and would not risk being overloaded, even though we realised that not many people get stopped, he wasn't going to risk his licence. We now have an Autotrail plated at 4250, we had it weighed fully loaded for Europe and had over 400 kgs spare. I think the German vans are very close to their payload limit and not always true to what the brochure says , but I do think this should be allowed to be contested, we wish now we had taken it back, saying it was a false description, but you would need to weigh it as soon as you got it.


----------



## 113016

Hi Hatikvah.
I think it depends on which van and not a particular country the van is from. We have had 3 German Hymers, and all three have had sufficient payload. I might mention that I carry everything for wilding, including full water, plus extra water. I honestly very rarely see people carrying as much stuff as me 
I also hold an HGV and I regularly weigh my van, including axle weights!


----------



## Pudsey_Bear

tony50 said:


> listerdiesel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably UNECE
> 
> http://www.unece.org/
> 
> Transport link:
> 
> http://www.unece.org/trans/welcome.html
> 
> Before them it was part of the EC harmonisation rules on transport in the EC.
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
> I have just looked at the UNECE (minefield ! ) website and I can imagine all these boffins sitting round a table , thinking how can we extend our job ie. what other Regulations can will bring in Worldwide to make some of the the previous Regulations null and void ,and cause a big head ache for the Vehicle Industry (Makers , Vosa , Repairers , End Users ) who have to apply this Legislation , all in all, I found what they do is so complicated , uprating 3500 kgs by writing to your MP's would probably have next to no effect .
> 
> Tony A.
Click to expand...

You could be right, but in the absence of an alternative, it's a good starting point but it does need to be a concerted effort, perhaps in coordination with some of the UK manufacturers to provide a united front, as it would lead to increased sales, it is only a paper exercise to change it, albeit at a high level so a paper effort is appropriate.


----------



## erneboy

Grath said:


> Hi Hatikvah.
> I think it depends on which van and not a particular country the van is from. We have had 3 German Hymers, and all three have had sufficient payload. I might mention that I carry everything for wilding, including full water, plus extra water. I honestly very rarely see people carrying as much stuff as me
> I also hold an HGV and I regularly weigh my van, including axle weights!


No problems with our pervious German made van either, a Frankia. It had 250kgs to spare even when fully loaded, Alan.


----------



## 113016

I last weighed, prior to our earlier tour in May this year and fully loaded with Bikes, full water, including an extra 35 litres, two 11 kg full gas cylinders, tools, two jacks with blocks, plenty of clothes for all weather, Honda 2 kw geny and 1 gal of fuel, two large chairs, two tables, one for cooking on, a drinks table, a Cadak and a two burner with grill, long and short electric lead, hose and adapters, two large bottles of toilet chemical, lots of tins, guitar in hard case, lap top, spare water pump and gas regulator, lots of bits and pieces, even 6 bottles of San Miguel and 6 bottles of wine. Just to keep us going for a few days so we don't need to rush and shop. I hate shopping  
With the above, we were just inside our weight. In a few days time, we will be off again and with our Daughters dog which weighs 20kg, so the geny and fuel will stay home to compensate.
I did say I carry a lot   :lol:


On top of this, I then have the Bord Atlas, and other maps and vehicle documentation folder. You would be surprised how heavy maps and paper work is. Plastic bags, 4 large tubs of wet wipes, walking boots,and even a spare wheel and electric pump, awning sun block, and large awning mat.
Our present van was supposed to have a 670kg payload, prior to extras fitted. I have never weighed it empty, but going by what I put in, I think it must be near enough.

edit

Top and bottom of it, is it depends on the size of habitation area and amount of comforts built over the base chassis, and depending on chassis gross weight. 
If the chassis is 3500kg or under, a heavy long hab area is a no no!


----------

