Weights and whether need to alter suspension?

If your wheels ar steel ,there will be stamped on them some numbers and possibly the pdc ( this is the spacing between the bolt holes) have a look for this

cheers chris - helpful - appreciated  - no one told us that this afternoon

I have just had a quick look on eBay for Peugeot boxer steel wheels and there are plenty listed for 16inch with different PDC’S

Not sure but I think that there are only 2 different PDC’S for your age boxer 118 or 130

yeah the issue is they are for the maxi version not the standard version I think - it is an issue ho hum

The 118 pdc is for the light chassis and is possibly your only option of fitting 16inch rims to get the load rating tyre you need ,or there is also the possibility of aftermarket heavy duty alloy wheels

thanks freelander

FreelanderUK wrote:The 118 pdc is for the light chassis and is possibly your only option of fitting 16inch rims to get the load rating tyre you need ,or there is also the possibility of aftermarket heavy duty alloy wheels

yes, there are two PDC measurements, as mentioned.
we are on the light chassis but have 16" wheela as a factory fit option and they are 118, somthey are available.
i was looking for a new spare wheel/tyre and this was where i came across the difference. check ebay etc.
the 'usual' 16" wheel for the Maxi chassis has a different (130) PDC spacing so wont fit the hub.
one reason is that the Maxi chassis has larger brakes and hubs than the light chassis...

Reply to All
         I was going to post this as a PM to plymouthwelshboy but decided to send it as an open letter to all members. Our friend asked the forum for advice which many have given, what we must not do is adopt a holy than thou attitude it will put people off asking for help.He has been very unfortunate he has purchased the MH of his dreams, bought electric bikes fitted a towbar and rack to take the weight, by the look of it not been given the correct advice by the dealer. The amount overweight is very little and from previous posts if stopped would probably have been advised. I am not suggesting in any way that a MH should be taken out overloaded but the risks involved are minimal, every thing has some sort of margin built in. It is not practical to change his MH, you cannot turn the clock back,remember this MH ,complete with electric bikes was probably the purchase of his dreams. so everyone be positive and give the best advice on how to rectify the problem.
regards
Alan

if the dealer had not 'given the correct advice' in response to specific questions re: ebikes, towbar, racks and weights, then the purchaser will have some redress...
'just winging it' as its the MH of your dreams might well lead to a nightmare instead.
get it sorted but involve the dealer if the van doesnt do what they said it would.
while its ultimately the owners responsibility to ensure his vehicle is roadworthy, over enthusiastic salesmen are rarely forthcoming with 'awkward' info that might jeopardise a sale and manufacturers are equally to blame for marketing vans that clearly cant do what a mh is supposed to...
i know some vans that would be close to overweight by just adding a passenger and putting water in the fresh tank....not a good state of affairs and there doesnt seem to be any 'industry body' regulating this.
a job for the NCC?

I read about someone who returned there van when they found out they Cound not tow anything and the dealer had told them there would be no problem towing, think it was on Motor home fun

Not clear if the towbar supports the bike rack, if not remove the towbar which will weigh maybe 30/40 kgs. As mentioned the weight reduction will be magnified due to the cantilever effect.

gemdeco wrote:Reply to All
         I was going to post this as a PM to plymouthwelshboy but decided to send it as an open letter to all members. Our friend asked the forum for advice which many have given, what we must not do is adopt a holy than thou attitude it will put people off asking for help.He has been very unfortunate he has purchased the MH of his dreams, bought electric bikes fitted a towbar and rack to take the weight, by the look of it not been given the correct advice by the dealer. The amount overweight is very little and from previous posts if stopped would probably have been advised. I am not suggesting in any way that a MH should be taken out overloaded but the risks involved are minimal, every thing has some sort of margin built in. It is not practical to change his MH, you cannot turn the clock back,remember this MH ,complete with electric bikes was probably the purchase of his dreams. so everyone be positive and give the best advice on how to rectify the problem.
regards
Alan

Well said that man
Terry

bolero boy wrote:..
i know some vans that would be close to overweight by just adding a passenger and putting water in the fresh tank....not a good state of affairs and there doesnt seem to be any 'industry body' regulating this.
a job for the NCC?

OT I know but.

Has anyone heard of anything good from the NCC.

It seems to me that they 'Approve' anything that the manufacturer who pays them does and they defend them against the Customer.

When I contacted them about the TPMS problem they showed they had little understanding and made it quite clear that if I paid them a fee to investigate a complaint there was little chance of me getting any redress, yet they should be the very body to ensure standards in the industry.

marconi wrote:

bolero boy wrote:..
i know some vans that would be close to overweight by just adding a passenger and putting water in the fresh tank....not a good state of affairs and there doesnt seem to be any 'industry body' regulating this.
a job for the NCC?

OT I know but.

Has anyone heard of anything good from the NCC.

It seems to me that they 'Approve' anything that the manufacturer who pays them does and they defend them against the Customer.

When I contacted them about the TPMS problem they showed they had little understanding and made it quite clear that if I paid them a fee to investigate a complaint there was little chance of me getting any redress, yet they should be the very body to ensure standards in the industry.

They are a trade organisation there to protect the industry from bolshy customers. Their membership includes manufacturers, dealers, mobile techs and the major clubs, amongst others. That's why it's a huge joke expecting a club to look after the interests of its membership by taking the industry to task.

Duplicate deleted.

Apologies for my earlier post if it appeared I was being holier than thou.  This thread raises interesting points that are relevant to us all.  As you can see through the link below, Continental through TyreSafe for safety reasons recommend setting tyre pressures for an axle mass that is 10% higher:

https://www.continental-tyres.co.uk/car/about-us/sponsoring-and-partnerships/tyresafe

Using the OM's front axle mass of 1440 kg this equates to a front axle mass of 1584 kg and therefore a front tyre pressure of 50 psi (3.42 bar).  Using the same 10% safety margin, a rear axle mass of 1873 kg equates to an axle mass of 2060 kg and a rear tyre pressure of 80 psi (5.5 bar).  Any mass above 1873 kg on the rear axle is eating into the 10% safety margin because 80 psi (5.5 bar) is the tyre's maximum permitted pressure.

I think it is fair to assume that when all the A-S coachbuilts with long rear overhangs are progressively loaded, the rear axle MTPLM of 2000 kg will be met before the van's MTPLM of 3500 kg.  This means that if the front axle mass is below 1500 kg, which it probably will be, loading margin is wasted.  In the OM's case this is 60 kg (assuming the rear axle is brought back down to 2000 kg).  The front axle mass on my Nuevo never exceeds 1375 kg so even if my rear axle was fully laded to 2000 kg (which it never is), 125 kg of my loading margin is wasted.

Plymouthwelshboy wrote:Hi folks. newbie question
Put our Broadway EB on weigh station. Front axle was 1440 kg (rated for 1850 kg) rear axle was 2060 kg (rated 3000). Overall weight was  3520 kg with 3/4 tank fuel and 20 litres of water onboard. We have pared everything to the bone. So, thoughts and options....do we up plate? Do we get suspension altered on rear axle and if so.....what are the options? Do we just live with it? We have a tow bar and electric bikes and bike rack hanging off the back 
Thanks in advance

I also have a Broadway EB. My weight without bikes or tow-bar rack was 1560kg front and 1880kg rear, total 3440kg, also with ¾ fuel and some water in the tank. Thought you'd be interested for comparison, although there are bound to be differences in what we carry.

gpilky wrote:

I also have a Broadway EB. My weight without bikes or tow-bar rack was 1560kg front and 1880kg rear, total 3440kg, also with ¾ fuel and some water in the tank. Thought you'd be interested for comparison, although there are bound to be differences in what we carry.

That's good that you can get your front axle as high as 1560 kg.  It's probably because you haven't got all that weight at the back bearing down on the rear axle and transferring significant weight off the front axle onto the rear axle.

Caraman wrote:

gpilky wrote:

I also have a Broadway EB. My weight without bikes or tow-bar rack was 1560kg front and 1880kg rear, total 3440kg, also with ¾ fuel and some water in the tank. Thought you'd be interested for comparison, although there are bound to be differences in what we carry.

That's good that you can get your front axle as high as 1560 kg.  It's probably because you haven't got all that weight at the back bearing down on the rear axle and transferring significant weight off the front axle onto the rear axle.

It could be that I'm more 'well built' than average!!!

I do think the fulcrum effect is important - if you put weight beyond the back axle it bears down on the back axle but also takes some load off the front. I've made an effort to keep most of my weight between the two so each axle shares the load....