E-Series is Best for Overlanding; here's proof

[deserteagle56]

So, for the best “overlanding” experience, I need to throw $250k at a van? No, thanks.

My almost stock truck and Jeep with a tent and food in the back gives me what I need.

I guess we all have our preferences as to what makes a comfortable camp. And those preferences change as we age. 60 years ago all I needed was a ratty old sleeping bag on a ground sheet rolled up on the back of the bike. That changed to carrying a small tent - mainly to keep out the "creepy-crawlies". At 80 years old if I were to sleep on the ground today with only a ground sheet beneath me, someone would have to help me up off the ground and I'd be sore for the next two weeks.

When I folded up my tent from this camp 50+ years ago I found three very pissed-off scorpions underneath it!



And it not necessary to throw $250k at a van to use it for overlanding. How much you spend depends on how you want to configure it to meet your expectations. I haul my dirt bike or quad inside so the main addition was insulation. I've less than $40k (including the purchase price) in this van - and I've been driving it for 18 years. And I find it very comfortable to live in.

 

[86scotty]

Agreed, I did my own conversion from a passenger van and have about 60k total in the van I think. Started with a bone stock 2011 Quigley with 100k miles, paid $20k.

Biggest expense for me by far was the pop top.

 

[DzlToy]

Someone mentioned flexing? Just bolt a 12' long and 6' high aluminum box on the back. Stiffens it right up.
First real off pavement trip after I bought it 6 years ago.

View attachment 904957

Whaddaya know, a giant monocoque!

The stiffest, most rigid, most torsionally resistant 'beam' is one that maximises the amount of material furthest from the neutral axis. It is for this reason that a larger diameter tube with thinner walls is more resistant to deformation, save local buckling, than a smaller diameter tube with thicker walls.

Your 5-6' tall aluminum ambulance box is a '5 foot tall frame rail'. A floppy box mounted on a sub frame is not. Why have most OEMs moved away from body on frame construction? Buyers want comfort, low NVH and great street manners. A unibody SUV, car or wagon is a 2-3 foot tall 'frame rail'.

Try to break a twig with your hands, now try to break a 2x4 or a 2" diameter PVC pipe. This is basic physics that seems to be lost on so many people. Could Ford make a 16" tall frame rail? Sure, they've no incentive to do that, even thought that would create a REALLY stiff chassis. You may as well use the box, it's there and you are carrying it everywhere you go.

 

[DzlToy]

Do you have a granted patent number or published application number I can reference? I'd love to read more about it.

I searched across web sources, patent databases (including Google Patents, USPTO granted patents via patft.uspto.gov, and patent applications via appft.uspto.gov), company website content, social media, forums, and videos. Despite my efforts, no granted patents were found directly associated with Globe Trekker, their Zero-Torsion subframe, or the E-Flex variant. Thank you Dave.

If you aren't familiar with box-mounting options or the person explaining the system does not describe it correctly, it's easy to get confused. The speaker says, "Patent Pending" which would explain why it cannot yet be found, then says, "Patented". The two are quite different.

Further, he goes on to explain that there is a "torsion free sub-frame". All three point/four point-based mounting systems use a torsion free sub-frame. That is the whole idea. Think of a shoe box, now glue some 1/2" x 1/2" sticks to the bottom of it and set that whole assembly on a cushion or a spring of some kind. The sub-frame, the grid of sticks glued to to the bottom of the shoe box is torsion free, meaning it does not twist. This does not change the characteristics of the frame or chassis of the truck and is not relative to the pivots or springs on top of which it rests. It is the foundation of the box itself, which often does not have proper mounting integrated during construction. So, a bolt-on or bonded sub-frame is installed. This is the interface between the box and the truck frame, not the box itself.

For proponents of this system, the idea is to ensure the box is well-supported and allow it to flop around -I've never seen shocks or dampers on a box, only simple springs or rubbers, on its own, while the chassis twists under it, possibly at a different rate or to a varying degree or extent.

If the idea is to allow a stand-alone box (Unicat, Action Mobil, Bilss, etc) to move relative to the frame of a cabover truck (MAN, Unimog, Atego, etc), mounts are generally constructed appropriately. Affixing a body to a van cab, as if you are making a Transit van or a Sprinter van out of an E-series, then expecting that rear section to flex separately, is asking for trouble, IMO. Maybe there is a soft coupling or something else I am missing, but this seems like marketing hash or poor design, to me.

Just build a box the right way, ditch the pass through, it weakens the structure considerably and leaks heat, light and sound, and be done. If you are stopped in a place that is so unsafe you fear you may need to jump into the cab and drive away, maybe you should reconsider where you park or vehicle-based travel, in general.

If you can't get out of the cab to open another door in the cold or rain, see notes above and consider moving to NYC or LA. There are loads of vacancies in both places.