HOME AWAY FROM HOME
- Thread starter gus
- Start date
LeishaShannon
Adventurer
From NCOP - http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/ro...Tyres_Suspension_Steering_V2_1Jan_2011 v3.pdf
4.2.13 Dual Wheels
Dual wheel assemblies must meet the following requirements:
 The effective tyre width of a dual wheel assembly is the addition of the widths of each tyre in the assembly;
 If replacement single wheels are fitted to a goods vehicle originally fitted with dual wheels, then the tyre width must not be less than the sum of the widths of the original two tyres fitted on the dual rims (except in the case where a complete single wheel axle assembly from another vehicle is substituted). The load rating of the single tyre must be at least the sum of the load ratings of the dual tyres; and
 If a vehicle originally fitted with single wheels is changed to dual wheels, then the maximum combined tyre width of the two wheels must not exceed the maximum permitted for the original tyres on the vehicle (except in the case where a complete dual wheel axle assembly from another vehicle is substituted). The sum of the load ratings of the dual tyres must be at least the load rating of the single tyre.
So we just need to find tyres that are (7.5in x 2) 381mm wide... with a load rating in excess of (1450 x 2) 2900Kgs.
Makes the small fortune ATW are charging for complianced wheels/tyres/brakes/speedo seem quite reasonable
4.2.13 Dual Wheels
Dual wheel assemblies must meet the following requirements:
 The effective tyre width of a dual wheel assembly is the addition of the widths of each tyre in the assembly;
 If replacement single wheels are fitted to a goods vehicle originally fitted with dual wheels, then the tyre width must not be less than the sum of the widths of the original two tyres fitted on the dual rims (except in the case where a complete single wheel axle assembly from another vehicle is substituted). The load rating of the single tyre must be at least the sum of the load ratings of the dual tyres; and
 If a vehicle originally fitted with single wheels is changed to dual wheels, then the maximum combined tyre width of the two wheels must not exceed the maximum permitted for the original tyres on the vehicle (except in the case where a complete dual wheel axle assembly from another vehicle is substituted). The sum of the load ratings of the dual tyres must be at least the load rating of the single tyre.
So we just need to find tyres that are (7.5in x 2) 381mm wide... with a load rating in excess of (1450 x 2) 2900Kgs.
Makes the small fortune ATW are charging for complianced wheels/tyres/brakes/speedo seem quite reasonable
LeishaShannon
Adventurer
445 45 R19.5 rated at 4500KG... BLING! :Wow1:
SkiFreak
Crazy Person
I think that you are quoting the wrong document...
For light trucks, like the 6 tonne Fuso and Isuzu, I think you should be using VSB 6, Section S (Vehicle Rating).
It says:
2.0 Tyre and Wheel Rims
To me this indicates that if the vehicle's GVM is lowered, the tyre placard and mod plate must reflect this.
Well, that's how I read it.
For light trucks, like the 6 tonne Fuso and Isuzu, I think you should be using VSB 6, Section S (Vehicle Rating).
It says:
2.0 Tyre and Wheel Rims
- The sum of the load carrying capacities recommended for all the tyres and rims with which the vehicle is equipped, shall be not less than the GVM.
- The load carrying capacity of any tyre or rim must not be exceeded when the vehicle is loaded to the revised GVM rating.
- For a vehicle manufactured to comply with ADR 24/.., the tyres and rims must be selected and must comply in all respects with the requirements of that ADR at the revised GVM rating.
- Where a tyre placard is fitted to a vehicle, this placard must be replaced or amended as necessary to indicate the correct tyre specifications for the vehicle at the revised GVM rating.
The revised tyre size and load rating must also appear on the modification plate.
To me this indicates that if the vehicle's GVM is lowered, the tyre placard and mod plate must reflect this.
Well, that's how I read it.
LeishaShannon
Adventurer
Our truck is no longer 6 tonne... VSB6 no longer applies as it is for GVMs over 4500Kgs. Our Queensland Transport "Approved Person" who did the GVM downgrade said that as the truck is no longer over 4.5T we didn't even need to get blue compliance plates for the new body. QT confirmed this over the phone (although I should get it in writing)
Geez guys, I’ve read all the discussions about derating GVM’s and the effect on axle loadings, and I still don’t know what’s legal. Can’t wait for Alan’s feedback from Vicroads.
Anyway, wheel and tyre choice remains a fair way down the track for me. Still have to pick a vehicle.
On that front, Amesz00 says that in their experience in WA the Canter 649’s fuel control computer has proven ultra-reliable, and that model offers me the best chance of finding a low mileage unit with minimal electronics.
I’ve been trying to chase down specifications and dimensions for the 649, but its getting a bit long in the tooth. Would anyone have a brochure that I could get a copy of?
In the meantime, with your help I’d like to consolidate what needs to be done to address the Canter’s major issue, chassis weakness.
From the Fleet Mechanic interview posted by Whatcharterboat, it appears anyone planning to hammer an FG camper would be mad if they didn’t first:
• replace the rear spring hangers with cast iron units from the 2WD … what about the front hangers?
• plate the ends of the crossmembers and weld the units solid
• weld steam pipe inside the rear shock mount tubes
• plate above the front suspension mounting bracket
• fit a flexible body mounting system that evenly distributes the load.
I’m already aware that the transfer case selector cable needs re-routing.
However, Engineer recently posted that they just discovered a Canter’s front crossmember cracked underneath the engine mounts. What’s the recommended fix for that?
Are there any other chassis weaknesses that need to be addressed, with what otherwise has proven to be a very reliable vehicle.
I know there’s a fair bit of work involved, but I would much prefer to strengthen what’s needed in advance, than climb underneath the truck at the end of every day looking for cracks where they’re known to occur! It would just have to take all the fun out of the trip.
Anyway, wheel and tyre choice remains a fair way down the track for me. Still have to pick a vehicle.
On that front, Amesz00 says that in their experience in WA the Canter 649’s fuel control computer has proven ultra-reliable, and that model offers me the best chance of finding a low mileage unit with minimal electronics.
I’ve been trying to chase down specifications and dimensions for the 649, but its getting a bit long in the tooth. Would anyone have a brochure that I could get a copy of?
In the meantime, with your help I’d like to consolidate what needs to be done to address the Canter’s major issue, chassis weakness.
From the Fleet Mechanic interview posted by Whatcharterboat, it appears anyone planning to hammer an FG camper would be mad if they didn’t first:
• replace the rear spring hangers with cast iron units from the 2WD … what about the front hangers?
• plate the ends of the crossmembers and weld the units solid
• weld steam pipe inside the rear shock mount tubes
• plate above the front suspension mounting bracket
• fit a flexible body mounting system that evenly distributes the load.
I’m already aware that the transfer case selector cable needs re-routing.
However, Engineer recently posted that they just discovered a Canter’s front crossmember cracked underneath the engine mounts. What’s the recommended fix for that?
Are there any other chassis weaknesses that need to be addressed, with what otherwise has proven to be a very reliable vehicle.
I know there’s a fair bit of work involved, but I would much prefer to strengthen what’s needed in advance, than climb underneath the truck at the end of every day looking for cracks where they’re known to occur! It would just have to take all the fun out of the trip.
whatcharterboat
Supporting Sponsor, Overland Certified OC0018
Gus ......you're stressing a bit much there. The chassis on those vehicles in that thread are in extreme conditions under max load or even over loaded. Keep the weight down and be careful how much weight you swing off the sides and most of those problems will never be a worry........even under the worst an owner driver would put their vehicle through.
I don't think I have any 649 brochures anywhere but will double check. What specs do you want to know?
Regards john.
I don't think I have any 649 brochures anywhere but will double check. What specs do you want to know?
Regards john.
Last edited:
This tow truck I just bought has 317,000 hard miles on it towing cars, mostly in the Colorado high country. As far as I can tell the frame looks fine. I'll know more when I get the tow bed off. The bed is bolted to the sides of the frame and to plates welded in the end of the frame.
mog
Kodiak Buckaroo
I'd be interest in that truck's performance mods, I never seen a Fuso that can pull a wheelie ! :sombrero:
I’d just like to say a very big ‘thank you’ publicly to Blackduck for the wealth of printed material he forwarded on the 649 Canter. Way beyond anything I’d hoped for, must have taken a heap of time to organize, and the effort is sincerely appreciated.
Despite Whatcharterboat’s reassurance that the Canter chassis stand-ups quite well in the hands of ageing owner drivers (way more empathetic than commercial operators), just one comment caused a raised eyebrow.
Of possible chassis weaknesses which might be worth strengthening in advance, he said, “… most of those problems will never be a worry”.
I’d also like to think so, but how would I know which ones to address before a RTW trip, and which ones could safely be left alone.
It’s this search for mechanical certainty that has me asking what prior strengthening really must/should be done, and what things could reasonably be expected to last under reduced weight and considerate driving.
I know the short answer is strengthen everything and get total peace of mind, but I’m looking for a solution that equates a little more closely with our budget. In other words, like most of us I only want to spend money on the truck where I have to.
Despite Whatcharterboat’s reassurance that the Canter chassis stand-ups quite well in the hands of ageing owner drivers (way more empathetic than commercial operators), just one comment caused a raised eyebrow.
Of possible chassis weaknesses which might be worth strengthening in advance, he said, “… most of those problems will never be a worry”.
I’d also like to think so, but how would I know which ones to address before a RTW trip, and which ones could safely be left alone.
It’s this search for mechanical certainty that has me asking what prior strengthening really must/should be done, and what things could reasonably be expected to last under reduced weight and considerate driving.
I know the short answer is strengthen everything and get total peace of mind, but I’m looking for a solution that equates a little more closely with our budget. In other words, like most of us I only want to spend money on the truck where I have to.
blackduck
Explorer
Twas my pleasure Gus
Just a thought re your issue with chassis weakness
might be worth having an electronic chat with Alan
if youve looked at his tale of re construction the original chassis on his truck looked like it had been fairly well abused over the years and showed signs of stress and age
it might assist you in figuring out where to strengthen and where to leave
its just a thought
Just a thought re your issue with chassis weakness
might be worth having an electronic chat with Alan
if youve looked at his tale of re construction the original chassis on his truck looked like it had been fairly well abused over the years and showed signs of stress and age
it might assist you in figuring out where to strengthen and where to leave
its just a thought
Sorry for delay fella's i spoke to vic roads today and this only relates to Victoria as far as i know, if you derate your canter to 4500kg you are derating the axles as well, front and rear axle loads must not exceed 4500kg combined, i explained the alloy wheels i sell which are rated for 1800kg each, he then said and i quote the back axle is then rated to 3600kg, end quote, leaving 900kg for the front, from what he tells me you would also change the tyre placard to suit.
Based on this information you could fit singles to a 6000kg canter as long as you don't exceed 3600kg on the back axle, going to bigger diameter tyres is another issue, legally you are allowed up to 25mm bigger diameter than factory diameter, going larger requires an engineers report.
blackduck
Explorer
Thank god for Qld where the most important detail regarding motor vehicles is the cash transaction
"show me the money"
Come on guys, there must be someone who has suffered some sort of chassis failure when operating their Canter as an enthusiastic owner driver.
Or, as whatcharterboat says, are all the chassis problems I’ve read about on ExPo really confined to commercial operators and those private owners who’ve overloaded their trucks and/or fitted incorrectly mounted sub-floors.
For instance, has anyone suffered cracks from hanging extra large diesel/water tanks off their chassis, and if so, what was the fix.
Largely driven by fear of being stuck in the middle of nowhere on our RTW travels, I’m just trying to catalogue every foreseeable chassis weakness with the Canter so I can carry-out any required work before the body goes on.
Also, can anyone tell me if the 4.5T Canter and the 6.0T share the same axles, or does the factory fit lighter-rated axles to the lighter vehicle?
Or, as whatcharterboat says, are all the chassis problems I’ve read about on ExPo really confined to commercial operators and those private owners who’ve overloaded their trucks and/or fitted incorrectly mounted sub-floors.
For instance, has anyone suffered cracks from hanging extra large diesel/water tanks off their chassis, and if so, what was the fix.
Largely driven by fear of being stuck in the middle of nowhere on our RTW travels, I’m just trying to catalogue every foreseeable chassis weakness with the Canter so I can carry-out any required work before the body goes on.
Also, can anyone tell me if the 4.5T Canter and the 6.0T share the same axles, or does the factory fit lighter-rated axles to the lighter vehicle?