Payloads
The MH I am considering has a nominal 630Kg payload on a plated weight of 3300Kg. which would seem to be sufficiently generous. I am wondering if it is worth getting it uprated to 3500Kg at the outset just to be on the safe side. The base chassis can go up to 3650Kg. What are the thoughts of you M/Homers? How much "stuff" do you actually load in real life situations?
Comments
-
My M/H has a payload of 620kg ,and I am no where near that ,probably 150kg short , but we travel light but still a comfortable stay on sites, when I first loaded I weighed everything with luggage scales and then took it to a weigh bridge to get a total weight
it all comes down to how much stuff you want to take
0 -
630kg sounds ample to me, many have to accept much less, although I'm suspicious about it being so high on a rather lightweight 3300kg motorhome, unless it's a van conversion of course.
0 -
agree with Peedee, if you can get it done 'gratis' even better (only a paper change).
dont go to 3650kg as not necessary given the numbers you are talking about, however theres no point in restricting yourself to 3300 if ypu can get a larger margin without any license issues.
again, Peedee raises good points in that you may look to pit a rear rack for bikes/scooter etc so any larger payload is worth having.
ok, now youve let the cat out of the bag, CY.......more info, please.
0 -
I'd go for the upgrade to 3500. You find yourself with a full water tank and a full fuel tank and want to pick up an extra crate of plonk in Calais.....
0 -
2670kg (3300 - 630) is a very light MRO....so we are talking about a pretty small (short and narrow) non fixed bed coachbuilt or quite possibly a 6m (or less) PVC?
as continentals dont (generally) run on a 3300 chassis, im guessing a UK van.
ive seen some PVC on a 3300 chassis, so this is definitely a possibility.....
so, ill wager its a 7.5m 4 berth Hymer using the latest lightweight technology
0 -
We have a payload of 530 kg to get to the maximum of 3500. Weighed it with full diesel, full water, two people and all provisions and we were 40 kg under the maximum i.e a payload of 490 kg. BUT we travel very light. No bikes, no loungers, no picnic table (we use the Motorhome table), very light "Director's" chairs, miniscule lightweight mat under the canopy. I should also say that my wife and I are fairly lightweight - under 20 stone combined weight (yes, it makes a difference!).
Our A/S Broadway is only 6.3 meters and I have seen far bigger continental vans with claimed max. of 3,500kg which must have an impossibly small payload. Frankly, it is dishonest to advertise some of these Motorhome as "3,500 kg").
There are many restrictions throughout Europe for weights over 3,500, not just the licence problem - speed limits, motorway tolls, restricted access etc.
0 -
Sorry, I should have said that we were 60 kg under, i.e. a payload of 470 kg. We can afford to put on some weight as we travel!
0 -
630kg is an ample payload for two in a smallish van. However, you need to check whether this is with any accessories etc fitted because these can quickly ramp up the weight; e.g. some don't come with a spare tyre and if you want one, that adds weight. So check the payload after you have identified any accessories and their weight.
My van weighs in at 2900kg according to the manufacturer but accessories - some of which may be deemed essential for the UK - take it up to 3100kg before I add my kit and caboodle. We tour lightly for three weeks at a time and and the van weighs in at just over 3400kg.
If I carry a third passenger and 50 litres of water , which I do sometimes, I would be over 3500kg.
I'd go for 3500kg model for peace of mind unless they are asking silly money for the uprated 3500kg model. I'd probably not bother with 3650kg because of the potential driving licence issues unless I intended carrying something exceptionally heavy like a motorbike!
0 -
Thanks for the input. Most of the posts reflect my thinking on the issue. Having hit the magic 70 a while back, I'm now restricted to 3500Kg. so BB can forget 7.5m vans. I'm sticking to 6m as that is all that will fit on the drive. At the moment the front-runner is a Marquis Majestic 125 or one of the other 'dealer special' versions of the Elddis Accordo.
0 -
agree with, Hitch and Aspenshaw, running 'comfortably' at 3500kg is not as easy as many brochures/salesmen will have you believe.
our prevoius van had 350kg of 'extras' over an above the listed MRO, which could scupper the best laid plans. we were on the 4250kg chassis so not that much of an issue, but, when we decided to go for a slimmer, lighter van, i really wanted it to be truly lighter....
i got the dealer to weigh 'our' van (complete with all factory fitted extras/packs, so no brochure figures relied on) and then added in the MRO items to get a 'real' running order weight.
i had already weighed all the 'stuff' that was going to be moved from the previous van, so we knew (confidently) what our all-up weight would be.
i calculated 3400 incl full water, fuel etc....the weighbridge (after purchase) confirmed 3420kg, along with axle weights (again, a pretty good estimate on my part) to ensure correct tyre pressures.
there will be many 3.5t vans out there (especially those with long rear overhangs and poor rear external storage) which have rear mounted storage boxes or electric bikes where not only is the MTPLM exceeded, but also the rear axle weight, and probably massively so.
its so easy to drive to a weighbridge these days, theyre all over, but so much more easy to 'rather not know'
0 -
Ha, CY my comment about the Hymer was tongue in cheek, as you know...but i was spot on with a 'smaller/slimmer' coachbuilt....
the Marquis versions are selling very well, the 125 is a similar floorplan to to classic 'Adria Twin' which has been used by loads of manufacturers....rear transverse bed, front lounge/dinnete, central washroom and kitchen....
in fact, our van (although being 40cm longer) is a very similar layout, with the extra lenght being used to stretch the lounge and add a tall fridge/freezer. we looked at the eqivalent Carthago/Malibu PVC with the same layout but thought it a tad too cramped.
the vertical sides of a coachbuilt give a more roomy feel to those of a PVC which curve inwards towards the roof line...
just had a look at the 125 and it packs a lot in a small van, with good rear storage..
however, a couple of things worth checking...
check out that the 2kw whale heating is ok, one review suggested the rear bedroom was a bit chilly...(old review so things might have changed)...
that boot looks great, is access ok with the bed fully in place?
table stores under the bed, so if bed is full made up (fitted sheets etc) lifting it to retreive/replace table could be annoying....perhaps only really necessary when about to travel....
can a bike rack be used, bearing in mind the rear opening boot? perhaps a towball unit would work if you need one?
what fresh water filling system does it have? i have a feeling it uses the whale 'pump it in' system where you need to fill a container (aquaroll) and then use the pump to fill the tank. some of these systems dont like (or even dont allow) the 'normal' filling of a tank with a hose at a MHSP, not can be topped up with a watering can or similar....
worth checking, you may not want to carry an Aquaroll as they take up lots of room.
ok these are only details, and the main job is to get the the size/layout right for you, but sometimes these little things can drive you nuts....
good luck, but give the van (any van) a 'real life' going over to check that design hasnt compromised functionality.
0 -
Hmmm, you've already got the 'kitchen sink' on board ,,BUT the more you carry the more the motor has to work/pull .You could find with lots of 'stuff' on board it could struggle on gradients etc and fuel economy will suffer.I paired down a lot of unused/unwanted stuff when I changed motor homes .Still thinking of ditching some saucepans etc It's all weight ,as I eat out a lot .Go for it and ENJOY !!.1
-
The payload figures given by the Dealer and Manufactures are either worked out on the back of a fag packet or taken from a Fairy story.
Rarely do they relate to the actual payload and you'll only find the payload by taking the MH, whether new or second hand, to a weighbridge.
We were told by the Dealer, and the information in the brochure, that our MH had 525 kg payload – in your dreams!
It was more like 350kg when I weighed it and we just about meet the limit when going abroad.
350kg is eaten up by full fresh water tank, second battery, 2 bottle gas system, fridge/freezer full, enough clothes for a month and every type of weather, spare wheel (should be part of the original spec but isn't), tables and chairs, a tool kit for every known or imagined disaster and other bits and bobs too numerous to list.
The return trip with the contents of a Vineyard in the garage probably makes us illegal but we take that risk – and we always keep enough cash handy in case the wife has to catch the train home should we need to reduce the weight!
0 -
Payload is an issue that will continue to haunt motorhome design and there's no easy answer other than having a very basic interior or using ever lighter materials.
Broadly and simply speaking, the vast majority of folk under 40 and over 70 will opt for the 3500kg gvw as opposed to an expensive test / 3 yearly medicals.
The issue is that we all want and expect better quality kit in our 'vans at the same time as the weight of the base chassis gets heavier and heavier with each incarnation.
For example a Euro 6 chassis is around 60/80 kg heavier than an otherwise identical Euro 5b due to the Adblue system.
This is a problem for 'stripped back' commercial vehicles, but at least they spend some of their time running without load. Whereas a motorhome is permanently heavily loaded.
I've spoken to a number of manufacturers of the years and all admit that the quoted weights for any given make model are essentially based on a combination of the weight of all the components, adjusted after putting the prototype on a weighbridge.
In the real world all the various spec options, extras, etc., can add a lot of weight, particularly if you go for a wind out awning.
Then add a bike rack and a couple of bikes and you're almost certainly in trouble, as the laws of physics dictate that whilst you may be within the overall GVW limit, the back axle will most likely be well over.
And with the latest roadside enforcement that could be a big problem.
To answer the OP's question, there's no such thing as too much payload capacity (as opposed to too much actual payload) so definitely opt for the basic upgrade to 3500kg.
0 -
AFAICS the water inlet was a straightforward lockable filler cap, so a Mk 1 jerry can should do the trick. I wondered about the heating levels, so I'll just have to encourage the OH to snuggle closer. A bike rack would have to be mounted quite high to clear the hatch but current thinking is folding bikes.
0 -
along with the jerry can (i have a plastic 10 ltr one) i use a plastic guttering 'elbow' which fits snuggly (may need to 'adjust' by wrapping tape round it....) into the water inlet, as a fixed 'funnel'.
this allows 'two handed' pouring should this be required.
normal funnels are hard to keep in place whilst pouring....
assume that the heating could be supplemented by a chap fan heater?
the issue i read about was mainly that there were no heating outlets near the bed. it may not be too difficult to take a 'spur' from another pipe and fit another outlet...Perhaps a mention to the dealer...??
0 -
I'd check out comments on other motorhome forums about Marquis's customer service and Elddis' build quality. I'd recommend such research whatever dealer or manufacturer you decide on.
My Hymer is 6m long and works well for two of us taking 3 week breaks in Britain. However, we found in the smaller van that the furniture takes more knocks. Also, the smaller the wheelbase, the worse the ride - ours is 3m and the ride is poor although parking is great!
Rumour has it that Marquis signed a £20m deal this year with Elddis for dealer specials.
If you're new to motorhoming, I suggest you join the Motorhome Matters forum. It's free - sometimes slow - and linked to the MMM magazine publishers. The technical advice is good and if you can master the search function, there is a wealth of past advice. Other dedicated motorhome forums exist including 'Motorhome Fun' [the biggest].
0 -
good advice, A
MH Facts and MH Fun both have technical sections categorised by brand...you'll get some more in depth 'reporting' on these forums.
there may well be some common ground in these areas that will give some items to check out.
Elddis are at the lower end of the price spectrum and, to a degree, this has to have an effect on build quality....in materials (even down to things like hinges/catches/handles etc and even design and the finishing of pipework and cabling.
so, have a good crawl all over any specific van and have a good old poke about...
as i said in my earlier post, a lot of van in a small footprint, with good storage, easy to drive/park, cheap on ferries, and a good price.
just get the lowdown on the above forums from those who have already taken the plunge...
good luck HTH.
0 -
the AutoSleepers Corinium RB has a quoted payload of 263kg (almost 8m with enormous rear overhang) on a 3500kg chassis.
there are a couple of option packs, which virtually every van will leave the factory with, which (with the auto transmission option) must add around 130kg to the MIRO, which, of course, includes NO water.
so, fill the tank, add the OH and youre already 50kg OVERWEIGHT before you even put anything at all in it.
id wager that the rear axle loading is likely to be perilously close to its 2000kg maximum when it leaves the factory before its even upto MIRO levels.
its scandalous that a van can be sold on any chassis other than the optional 4000kg one.
whats worse is that in 'magazine tests' we see plenty of comments about the lovely upholstery but none suggesting that it would likely be illegal to drive out of the showroom with just two people in it.
dealers arent interested in flagging these things up as theyll likely lose a sale as many older customers cant or wont want to go to the Maxi chassis for license reasons.
3 -
Accepting everything you state here is accurate. I'm not questioning your knowledge by any means so please don't think I am. What the hell do our club look at, apart from the pretty things, when reviewing products? Surely this is a fundamental issue with potentially legal implications and safety issues that buyers are not aware of. There are so many implications on this sort of thing. Articles suggest awnings and cycles going on trips and all of this just compounds safety issues.
In fact until I starting reading posts like this I assumed, yes I know ass u me 😉, that filling the fuel tank and reasonable 'luggage' before a journey was just a formality. Am I any more naive than most people? I'm off to find our handbook and going to have a serious discussion with OH. We do travel light - well I think we do.
It would be brilliant if a member if staff could comment on reviews in the magazine. After all comments on fb about people not liking the new look and articles in the magazine are commented on AND referred to the magazine team. Who apparently are always interested in feedback.
0 -
Agree that the payload issue should be much higher profile. Knowing that our A/S Broadway weighs in only 60 kg below max. and that we have no bikes and travel very light, we were chatting to a very nice English couple in the Lot valley. Their Burstner (Ixeo I think) was much bigger than ours, fixed bed, air conditioning etc. so I asked what the maximum weight was and they said 3500 kg. If it was the Ixeo the quoted payload is around 360 kg without extras.
I struggled to contain my scepticism because apparently the guy had had several cancer scares and was delighted to be able to travel. I would bet a lot of money that it was over 3500 kg and therefore illegal. Just as well they hadn't used a weighbridge or it would have spoiled their holiday. I am sure they were oblivious to the weight issues.
0 -
B2, im sure there are many purchasers who know nothing about MH weights and just rely on the salesman/brochure to give them the necessary information....
infortunately, the clubs are not interested in being critical at all about payloads.....the usual comment goes something like 'if you choose to upgrade the chassis weigjt, ensure ypu have the correct license groups', rather than the far more helpful 'theres not a cat in hells chance of running this van sensibly (and legally) at 3500kg, so you will need to select the heavy chassis option, please ensure you have the correct license groups'
having, or not having, the full tank of water included in the Miro can make 100kg difference to the 'apparent' payload....
manufacturers now leave it out (or only include 20ltr) which makes the payload sound much larger...the wan still weighs the same when the water is in the tank, but it looks better in the brochure.
add in twin leisure batteries, solar panel, satellite system, 2nd gas bottle, and as you say, electric bikes, batteries and chargers and that payload has disappeared up in smoke.
the other thing is that its not just the MTPLM that has to be watched, but axle weights as well.
...and with most MH, especially those with large rear overhangs and storage at the rear, its the rear axle limit that will likely be exceeded before the overall MTPLM.
This is mainly due to the pendulum effect....100kg placed in a rear garage of a van with a long overhang might place a load of (say) 140kg on the rear axle, but take off 40kg on the front axle.
the wans weight has only risen by 100kg but significantly more than this is pressing down on the rear axle.
some vans, like our short A-class with a short rear overhang are fairly well balanced across the axles, but some bans really do exaggerate this effect.
what van do you have, have you ever weighed it? do you know what your MTPLM and axle weights are?
ypu should find all this info on the metal weight plate within the van...under the bonnet, inside a doorway are common locations.
there should be four weights...
1. MTPLM (possibly 3500)
2. gross train weight
3. front axle (possibly 1850)
4. rear axle (possibly 2000)
0 -
F.A.O. BoleroBoy - This is a genuine suggestion & my apologies if you have already done so but perhaps it would be helpful to others considering purchasing/changing a motorhome etc. if you wrote a letter/email about motorhome payloads as you understand them & submitted it for publication to various magazines[including the club one] involved in promoting this type of holiday/hobby where it may be read by a wider audience.
0 -
Practical Motorhome published an article in May.
https://www.practicalmotorhome.com/advice/45391-motorhome-weight-limits-and-sensible-loading
I like to think it was in response to a suggestion from me as I had spent some time exploring weight issues with the DVSA and published my findings on several forums including Club Together.
Hardly anyone read my post on CT but it was well received by the forums Motorhome Matters and Motorhomeowners.
MMM magazine/website has also covered the topic.There used to be a few videos on You Tube. There are books on buying a motorhome.
SVTech is one well-known firm who take the issue seriously. Its website contains advice and a programme that enables you to better understand your van's axle loading and overall weight.
Given the coverage, I doubt it is a lack of available information. It's more the case of people not finding the information, or understanding its importance, when they are thinking of shelling out tens of thousands of pounds. Some dealers and manufacturers do not help. Insurance companies could do more as they will be quick to invalidate your insurance cover if your van is found to be overweight when a claim is made.
N1805 - Getting BB to write another article is a good way of continually pressing home the message.1 -
While having 2 new tyres fitted last Friday the fitter told me about his friend who is a motor bike racer who uses a RV to go to race meetings. This year on the way back from one meeting he got pulled over by the police who took him to a layby that had officials with weighing equipment and found the racers van was way over the weight limit. He did have 4 yes four motorbikes on board, two in the garage and two more on a rear rack. The racer guy got a very heavy fine and had to find somebody to transport his motorbikes back home for him. He was told that caravans and motorhomes were being targeted as on a purge the police had over 70% of vans stopped were over weight. Makes you think !!!.
0 -
When we've looked at MHs it's our experience that dealers never volunteer any info relating to payload/weights. Doesn't apply to every single dealer, but it does to most of the ones we've had dealings with. And when asked, they often didn't even want to find out. I don't expect a salesman to know the weight and payload of every single MH on his forecourt, but surely he can find out? There always seemed to be some sort of reluctance to do so. Perhaps not surprising given the woefully inadequate payloads of some MHs out there, but nit really is an important issue. As BB said up thread, any reviews never pay much attention to payload, I remember one in the C&CC magazine a couple of years ago, which had a payload of just short of 300kg. But it was a very good MH in the opinion of the reviewer!
0 -
Just looking a payloads is not enough. As BB says you also need to consider the axle loadings. The first motorhome I owned had a payload of 700Kgm but I had to jump through hoops to make sure the rear axled wasn't overloaded and more to the point the rear tyres.
peedee
0 -
im flattered that anyone should suggest me writing a 'payloads document'...
my days of technical documents, specifications, manuals, procedures, handbooks etc are long behind me now.
however, i really do think that any test should involve the weighing (including axle weights) of the 'actual' test van.
that way, a supplier kitting a van up to impress the tester/reader with 'bling/extras' will at least understand that the 'report' will highlight whether the van is actually usable at that weight.
i saw at least three tests on the Corinium i mentioned up thread, only one even mentioned the payload, suggesting an upgrade might be useful....no good if you're restricted to 3500kg and have been drawn in by the AS adverts.....'all models available on 3.5t chassis' or other such enticing stuff.
the other tests merely repeated the above quoted strapline, in fact offering this up as a selling point!
ill have a look at Aspenshaws links. i may well have read them.
there are a small number of MHers on CT who are fully aware of their van's specifications, overall weights, axle loadings and subsequent tyre pressures....they are the same few who get involved in most things 'MH Tech'.
beyond this small group, including some i know personally, i have little faith that many others on CT really understand (or are, frankly, interested) in the numbers mentioned above.
compared to some other forums, CT is not an overtly 'technical' forum and this may be why there seems to rather less interest in these types of discussion.
0
