Axle weights of Nuevo?

Being anxious to inflate my Nuevo's tyres to the correct pressures, I sought advice from Continental - my Nuevo has Continental VancoCamper tyres, 215/70R15 CP 109. They very helpfully sent me a table for that tyre, showing what the tyre pressure should be for front and rear tyres, depending on the respective axle weight in Kg.

The covering note was as follows:
"The volume and pressure of the inflation medium is what carries the load and if it is not sufficient then the tyre can suffer damage. Experience shows that due to the weight distribution of vehicles in the leisure industry such as Motor homes the likelihood of overloading or uneven weight distribution putting a greater load on the rear axle is far higher than on the front axles where the weight tends to remain more consistent. It is true that when braking the weight transference is to the front but this only tends to be for short periods whereas overloading on the rear axle can be present over long periods when the tyres are rotating at high speed. This is the main reason that with CP Camper type tyres the inflation pressures at the rear are deliberately set higher although this also has a bearing on the contact area when negotiating grassy parking areas and also to the sidewall deflection which influences the body roll."

To determine what pressure I need, I had to have the vehicle weighed - at full touring load (water, bikes, 2 occupants etc). I eventually found an obliging weighbridge, and took it there today. It was a bit hectic as lorries were queueing to be weighed, so I didn't have much time. The weighbridge was about a metre up a ramp, and down the other side. So when my front wheels were on the bridge, by rear wheels were down the ramp a bit. Likewise when I drove the front wheels off the bridge. My wife wrote down the weights. and off we went. I can't remember my Physics as to any impact which the slopes might have had upon the accuracy of the recorded weight.

When I returned home, I looked up the weights in the weight-to-pressure table. My front axle weight was surprisingly measured at 1,380 Kg. The table didn't go that low. It implied a very low front pressure - about 40psi.

The rear weight was 1,940 Kg, suggesting a pressure of about 74psi.

Now there's clearly something wrong here!

(a) Maybe in our rush we got the front axle reading wrong. Or that design of weighbridge was unsuitable for single axle weighing. Hence this request: does any Nuevo II owner have its axle weights, please? They would be a helpful comparison (though of course all vehicles will differ, depending on load). I can then find another weighbridge and re-weigh.

(b) If those weights are indeed correct, then I'll have to seriously redistribute the weight, and get a lot more to the front. But I'm at a loss as to how to do that, because the big weights (water tanks & 2 bikes) are fixed at the back. So what to do?

Any info on axle weights would be helpful. Thanks!

Cymro

When we got our Nuevo someone had written on the book 62psi ..I'm not sure what my partner actually puts in

I doubt you can have got the front weight too low by any significant amount, as you are only 180 kilos under MTPLM with the figures given (unless it's been replated).

As a matter of interest, what are the max axle loads as shown in the third and fourth figures on the van's load plate? The fourth should give you an exact figure for how much (or little) spare you have to play with on the rear axle.

Fortunately if that's with a full water tank, you should immediately be able to take 100+ kilos off the back axle by travelling with the tank empty and just keeping say a 5l water carrier at the front to tide you over until you can fill up on site.

Mojo ....does the plate relate to the boxer van before conversion or would this be as a completed motor home ....

Julie

It wouldn't make any difference. Those are the maximum figures which that particular chassis can carry, irrespective of what's on top of it.

Mojo

Our van is the EK model on a 3300kg chassis and the figures are 1750 for the front axle and 1900 for the rear. I know Cymro has a different interior configuration so his axle weights may not be the same. (He may be already on a 3500 kg chassis.)

It sounds as if his rear axle might be overloaded which is a different, but potentially more serious problem. (Aparently that's not at all uncommon!)

Cymro

What's the Maximum Gross Weight of your van? If it's 3300 kg like ours there's an easy, if fairly costly way to get peace of mind. SV Tech can uprate it to 3500 kg, which gives you an extra 200 kg to play with, so the danger of being clobbered at a checkpoint diminishes to almost zero - and you can travel with full fuel and water tanks.

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

I'm in the process of getting ours uprated now (£260 plus VAT!) more for payload than tyre pressure. When I went on the weighbridge without Mrs Gromit in the van, I was 20 kg over the limit!! (It's purely a paper exercise with absolutely no alteration to the van - which makes the cost feel a bit eye-watering, but I don't know how much paperwork SV Tech have to complete.)

Autosleeper payloads are stated fairly accurately in their technical details compared to a number of other converters, so I don't know how some folk get on. I won't mention the make, but an acquaintance has an £80,000 foreign made van and he simply cannot keep within the MGW whatever he does. His handbook says he has sufficient payload available, but the weighbridge doesn't agree.

Sorry for the epistle. Hope this helps a bit.

Dave

I don't know what happened between the Mk1 and Mk2 Nuevo but I had mine weighed by SV Tech at Newark Show (they were offering it as a free service on portable scales) in March 2014 and the total weight was 2880kg (mine is also a 3300 chassis). Ok we weren't fully laden for a fortnights holiday but we always go to shows with a full tank of water and two gas bottles are permanently in the van. My ES is essentially an end kitchen model with the overcab. I think Cymro's rear axle weight is probably wrong.

Juliejuel wrote:Mojo ....does the plate relate to the boxer van before conversion or would this be as a completed motor home ....

As Gromit says, what's on/in the van isn't really relevant - it's a commercial vehicle, so it must be loaded so that it stays within the limits recorded on the plate. Sometimes what's on the plate gets revised by the people that do the conversion (my van for example started life as a 3 tonne van but can now only carry 2.8 tonnes max) but that is a formal process, and the plate must be replaced to show the new figures. And, as above, under some circumstances the owner can get the weights (and plate) modified, but again, it's a formal process.

Gromit: I didn't realise that the Nuevo ES previously came as standard with the lower weight limit - I was looking at the A-S website, which shows the current model's MTPLM as 3500 kilos, and I made the assumption Cymro's would be the same. Either way, the rear axle load looks as though it must be close to the limit...

Hi Mojo

I think I have confused you?

As I understand it the ES model comes on a 3500kg chassis (because it's technically a four berth I presume) and has a 130bhp engine. That chassis is not available with the 150bhp engine - which seems a bit daft to me since it's a heavier van, fitted with a less powerful engine than the 3300kg one.

The EK comes on a 3300kg chassis, with an option when ordering to have the 3500kg chassis instead. I quizzed the chaps at Autosleepers and they said the 150bhp engine is better than the 130bhp. I presumed the 150 would simply be factory "chipped", but aparently it's a different engine altogether. (Is it a Ford Puma??)

I was convinced about the engine, so opted for the 3300 chassis so I could have it, on the understanding that the dozy gits at A/S would uprate it for me. Should have known better - it came rated at 3300kg, hence the business with SV Tech.

Cymro

One further point which may be useful if you are really in bother with the rear axle. SV Tech will uprate it by 200kg for you, if you have Air Rides fitted and (possibly - I'm not sure about this) higher rated rear tyres. It would cost a few quid, but over the lifetime of the van and for complete peace of mind and freedom to load as you please, it could be worth it.

Dave

Goodness me!  What a helpful collection of replies, so quickly. To you all I send my sincere thanks.  Let me bring you all up to date.

I've followed the advice and have looked at the plate. It shows, in descending rows from the top:

3500 kg (I assume that's the chassis' max weight?)
5100 KG (no idea what that is - any suggestions?)
1   1850 Kg (I assume max on front axle?)
2    2000 Kg (I assume max on rear axle).

Thus, if I'm right about 1 + 2 above, the surprising weights I recorded on the weighbridge yesterday are within the legal maxima above - but close to them in the case of the rear. I remain doubtful about those weights, however, given the ramp to and from the horizontal part of the bridge. But if they are correct, then according to Continental's table, my pressures should be 40psi / 74psi which, as I said, seem totally wrong to me insofar as there's such a difference between front and back.

As it happens, I am taking the Nuevo ES to A/S early next month to have Air-Rides fitted. I had booked that before yesterday's weigh-in. I want them (a) because leaf springs will inevitably sag, so let's get the benefit now; and (b) because apparently they improve stability generally. (I was convinced by earlier threads on our Forum).

However, will Air-Rides have any effect upon the tyre pressures? I assume not - unless by lifting the rear it transfers some mass to the front axle. Anyone know?

Finally, does anyone happen to know whether A/S have a weighbridge or similar at Willersey? If so, I'd have the axles weighed again after fitting the air-rides; we'll be fully loaded with water / fuel / bikes usual gear as we're spending a few days at Broadway.

Sorry this is long-winded, but courtesy and friendship demand nothing less!

Thanks to you all, once again. Maybe the answer is for me to reduce my mass by the 2:5 diet!!

Cymro

My thoughts exactly about front tyre pressure so kept at 60 which is a lot less than the 72 as on the door pillar but used the chart as you have for rear tyres.
Would be good to have some input from AS.

Cymro
You know that dealer in Bishops Cleeve - well there's a weighbridge there at Grundon Waste Management. Otherwise Google 'Weighbridges Gloucestershire ' for a few more.

Hi Cymro

5100 kg is the maximum gross train weight, which indicates the permitted maximum combined weight of the van plus whatever you might want to tow with it.

Your assumptions are correct on all the other figures.

Only my opinion, but if it were me I wouldn't worry too much about your rear axle loading. As I mentioned in an earlier post, Messrs SV Tech will uprate the rear axle loading if air rides have been fitted, which suggests that they (the air rides) provide more than adequate additional load bearing capacity.

You have 60 kg in hand on the rear axle, and you are statistically very unlikely to be pulled in for a weight check - and if you did get stopped they are interested in your overall weight rather than individual axle loadings. You will be well inside the 3500 kg limit I'm sure.

Only my opinion of course!

Dave

Hi Gromit ,
I've also got a new Nuevo EK , not sure of the tyre pressures required , can you help. My tyres are Vanco. camper 215/70 R15 CP.
My other query is , I have the tyre pressure monitor , which I think is now a legal requirement for new vehicles , but if a tyre pressure is, for example , supposed to be 60 psi and it drops by say 5 psi, does the system warn you ?

Just had a thought:

The data plate says that the front maximum axle weight is 1,850 Kg; using  Continental's table, that states that at that maximum weight the front tyre pressure using those VancoCamper tyres [215/70R15 CP 109 ] should be between 58psi and 61.6 psi [4bar - 4.25 bar]. But the Peugeot plate (generic for a Boxer, not specific for a Nuevo ES] says that the front tyres should be at 5.bar [72.5].

As suspected, the Peugeot plate is misleading - I presume that it's a general maximum, rather than the approved pressure for those particular tyres.

In other words, even if your front axle weight is at the maximum permitted [1,850Kg] your front VancCamper tyres should be at no  greater pressure than 59 psi.  In my case, if my apparent front axle weight of 1,380 Kg is to be believed, my tyres should be considerably less. But I don't believe  my weight so I'll get it re-done!

Hi Fred

I'm no more expert than anyone else, and just as confused by all the different advice received from the various (theoretically) technical and informed sources!! Having trawled the internet for information, no two seem to tell the same tale. No wonder poor old Cymro is thinking of reverting back to solid rubber tyres!

From what many others have concluded, plus my own "averaging" of different official suggestions, I reckon between 55 and 60 for the front and 65 to 70 for the rear has to be about right. If heavily loaded or intending to drive at speed the higher figures would obviously be best, but as Cymro said, I think the plated figures are the maximum permitted, and designed for White Van Man to tear around the countryside in heavily overloaded vans!

To add further confusion, the plated figures will refer to commercial vehicle tyres (it began life as an embryo White Van after all) so they will not be entirely relevant when the resulting motorhome is fitted with (say) Vanco Camper tyres!

If anyone ever finds a definitive answer, I'm buying the beer!!

Dave

Cymro, having just said elsewhere I don't have sufficient experience to comment here I am doing just that .  I just had the thought that tyres probably have a lower safe limit for operation and 40psi seems very low.  With the potential variations in loading (we won't go over our user payload) my inclination is to use the Continental chart to reduce my tyre pressures to a figure in line with their recommendations. I had to take my van to the garage on Tuesday and got it back yesterday, 20 miles each way with no passenger, no water, no food or drinks, no bicycles, no extra clothes (yes, I went dressed ).  If I used a weighbridge to set my tyres to the right level when fully loaded, how much would they have been over inflated on those journeys?  I'm taking all that has been posted into consideration and also going down the average route.

Yes, Askit, your point is well made: if one is being meticulous, the tyre pressures should vary according to load. So ideally we should get our vehicles' axles weighed both with an empty van (for the sort of journeys you described) and at full holiday-mode load.

But, as you say, an average is best, remembering to inflate when going on hols.

Subject to another attempt with a weighbridge (and it's a faff to have to put on the holiday load just for that) for the time being I'm going to set at about 55:65 for running around, adjusting for holiday mode appropriately.

Cymro

Cymro wrote:  . . . . for the time being I'm going to set at about 55:65 for running around, adjusting for holiday mode appropriately.
Cymro

Great minds think alike - obviously!

That's what I decided upon, with an added 5psi front and rear for holiday mode.

But then, partly because I'm an idle git, I decided to use 60 front and 70 rear all the time. Our trips in the van are almost exclusively for holidays, albeit somewhat more heavily laden for three weeks in France (specially on the way back!! ) and if/when we do use it for lightly loaded local jaunts we can put up with it bouncing a bit on the potholes. 5psi ain't going to make a lot of difference anyway, and I would always prefer to over-inflate a little, rather than under!

Dave

I recently had 4 new tyres fitted by a well known chain, I've just been out to check what pressures they put in, 55-65 front, 60-70 rear. The 10 psi difference is because I have three gauges, two digital and one analogue dial, all quite expensive, all with different readings... But gauge accuracy opens up a whole new can of worms..

Cymro wrote:Just had a thought:

The data plate says that the front maximum axle weight is 1,850 Kg; using  Continental's table, that states that at that maximum weight the front tyre pressure using those VancoCamper tyres [215/70R15 CP 109 ] should be between 58psi and 61.6 psi [4bar - 4.25 bar]. But the Peugeot plate (generic for a Boxer, not specific for a Nuevo ES] says that the front tyres should be at 5.bar [72.5].

As suspected, the Peugeot plate is misleading - I presume that it's a general maximum, rather than the approved pressure for those particular tyres.

In other words, even if your front axle weight is at the maximum permitted [1,850Kg] your front VancCamper tyres should be at no  greater pressure than 59 psi.  In my case, if my apparent front axle weight of 1,380 Kg is to be believed, my tyres should be considerably less. But I don't believe  my weight so I'll get it re-done!

Yes get a new weighing. I suggest front axle ,with rear axle just off the weighing part
Then a weight with the vehicle on with both axles.
Subtract the front fig to get the rear.
Come back with the figure.

Micky

Bikeralw, I think the accuracy of gauges is very pertinent to the discussion (especially as I only have the old one that the AA used to give away free ).  I have read threads elsewhere on both buying portable compressors that are giving trustworthy readouts and the chances of getting a petrol station with a read out you can believe.  They seem to be far from easy to find. 

Cymro and Gromit, make that three in the tyre pressure stakes, it's a 60 & 70 from me as well  (all depending on what Peugeot get back to me with of course)

Well, Well!  This is an interesting development, about which I'd welcome advice:

Following the points made in this thread, and pending a more accurate weighing of axles, I set my tyres at 60:70. They had been set a little higher (65:73) but not at the 72: 79 on the Peugeot plate.

I used the Nuevo this morning for the first time since lowering the pressures. To my very great surprise, a beeper sounded on the dash, with a message saying that my front left tyre pressure was too low at 4.3bar. A warning tyre light remained on. I didn't know that the 2015 Nuevo has a tyre pressure monitoring system.

I only drove a mile or so (to DaveH's house to check ground clearance over his kerb). On my return home I checked the pressures. They were as set: 60:70.

To cancel the warning, I inflated the front tyres from 60 to what they had previously been when no warning had appeared (65). But on start-up, the warning again sounded and the light stayed on. Likewise when I inflated them to 70.

Now I don't want my fronts at 70, nor 65 - I want them at the pressure specified by Continental for my axle weight - or not more than 60psi. How do I reconcile what Continental advise with what the warning system will allow? Either I set tyres correctly, and have the warning all the time, or I bounce without it!

I'll ask Peugeot if the pressure warning system can be recalibrated, so as to warn only when the pressure drops below, say, 50F: 60R.

I have a monitoring system on my Passat. 
Just googled this and my system relies on measurement of circumference whereas your system has a sensor in each tyre. You can reset by driving for 10 minutes at a speed between 35 and 100kph. Interesting comment regarding puncture repair aerosols so I hope you got a spare wheel.

http://www.mytyres.co.uk/TPMS-Info.html

Paulmold wrote:I have a monitoring system on my Passat. 
Just googled this and my system relies on measurement of circumference whereas your system has a sensor in each tyre. You can reset by driving for 10 minutes at a speed between 35 and 100kph. Interesting comment regarding puncture repair aerosols so I hope you got a spare wheel.

http://www.mytyres.co.uk/TPMS-Info.html

Paul: you've excelled yourself!  Thanks so much for the link. I didn't know it was becoming obligatory.

I'm not sure about the reset, because the mytyres info says this, and it would seem that Peugeot fall into the third category:

"There are three types of training/programming for a new sensor (depending on the capabilities of the vehicle):

   Self-training of the vehicle: During a 10-minute drive at a speed between 35-100km/h the vehicle reads the sensor automatically, the warning light goes out automatically (e.g. for Mercedes, Vauxhall/Opel, VW, Ford, Mazda, Hyundai).

   Manual teach-in by vehicle owner/keeper over the vehicle menu: A given process, which can be referred to in the vehicle manual (e.g. for Audi, Mercedes, BMW, Porsche).

   Teach-in on certain programming/diagnostic tools: The sensors are taught by building a connection between the programming tool and the OBDII interface (= On Board Diagnostic interface) (e.g. for Renault, Citroen, Peugeot, Nissan, Vauxhall/Opel, Fiat and Lancia). This interface is also used for example in problem diagnosis when the warning lamp is lit."

I shall, however, try the 10 minute run, just in case that works. I'll also let you know what response I get from Peugeot (whom I've emailed).

But again, many thanks indeed.

Cymro

I didn't know the system was now obligatory either but I think I've created more questions than answers with the link above. If you have a spare, what pressure is that set at. If set for front or back and it has to go on the axle it's not programmed for, the alarm with go off. As you say the 10 minute drive probably won't work on a Peugeot. The system on my Passat makes much more sense. It measures the rolling circumference  of each wheel on an axle and detects loss of pressure due to the circumference of a 'flat' tyre being different to an inflated one. I suppose this is another Brussels initiative (wait for pro-European backlash) that has been introduced to give technicians (they are no longer mechanics) some work as cars become more and more reliable with less servicing. For once buyers can't blame AS as they obviously have no choice. Therefore there will be vans, cars and motorhomes running around on pressures which don't match their usage. Look inside my fuel flap and you see pressures for solo driving and fully laden driving. can you imagine me having to alter (via a technician) the pressures when driving with one passenger or four with luggage (I use a compromise pressure). Ho hum !!