HOME AWAY FROM HOME
- Thread starter gus
- Start date
blackduck
Explorer
Gus
Id say the majority of private use canters do as much serious off road work as most family 4WD's
and as such dont really suffer the strains and stresses of commercialy operated vehicles
in saying that even with your RTW plans your canter should last you a life time where as the business use trucks maybe last 2 to 5 years depending on the environment they constantly operate in
Id say dont stress to much about the chassis breaking in half and be more prepared for having a great time and enjoying yourself
better to add extra weight by carrying a few spares for things that might break or fail rather than supersising your chassis with an extra ton or so of steel
dont forgert all that extra weight = extra fuel consumption
Ill stand corrected but in my case my 4.5T FG is a 6T FG with an extra compliance plate
they all come into country as 6T the derating process revolves around licensing
I had mine derated to 4.5T so the dragon could drive it on her car licence
I should have made her get her MR licence instead, you'd be suprised just how fast that load weight increases when you start putting bits on
and all it takes is one weighbridge and you day could be ruined
Id say the majority of private use canters do as much serious off road work as most family 4WD's
and as such dont really suffer the strains and stresses of commercialy operated vehicles
in saying that even with your RTW plans your canter should last you a life time where as the business use trucks maybe last 2 to 5 years depending on the environment they constantly operate in
Id say dont stress to much about the chassis breaking in half and be more prepared for having a great time and enjoying yourself
better to add extra weight by carrying a few spares for things that might break or fail rather than supersising your chassis with an extra ton or so of steel
dont forgert all that extra weight = extra fuel consumption
Ill stand corrected but in my case my 4.5T FG is a 6T FG with an extra compliance plate
they all come into country as 6T the derating process revolves around licensing
I had mine derated to 4.5T so the dragon could drive it on her car licence
I should have made her get her MR licence instead, you'd be suprised just how fast that load weight increases when you start putting bits on
and all it takes is one weighbridge and you day could be ruined
SkiFreak
Crazy Person
Don't hang the tanks off the chassis... hang them from the subframe instead.
This will remove a lot of the torsional stresses from the chassis that OEM tanks produce when hung on J brackets. The J bracket design is absolutely fine for highway use, but less ideal when the tanks are being jostled around in an off road scenario.
As far as I know it is just paperwork and a different compliance plate. When buying a FG new, you have to option of having it derated before delivery.
Well, that's what I was told when I made enquiries.
whatcharterboat
Supporting Sponsor, Overland Certified OC0018
Great advice IMO,.....that is if we are talking heavy large capacity tanks and heavy off road use.
That is right. Same goes for the Isuzu NPS. The 4.5t variant is a de-rated 6 ton GVM (or 6.5 t depending on the year model) truck and the de-rating is solely a plate change and without physical differences.
Last edited:
Well, the replies are in and I have to say the feedback on potential chassis weaknesses has been pleasantly reassuring. It’s always good to hear that little to no money needs to be spent.
Though when you’ve read so many reports of failures over such a lengthy timespan, it’s hard to avoid the impression the FG chassis virtually cracks if you look at it!
From your comments it’s obvious that the right sub-floor mounting system plays a big part in helping the chassis go the distance.
I’ve been reading how lots of people have tried many different approaches over the years with varying success.
Is there such a thing as the ‘proven and preferred’ sub-floor design for Australia’s outback conditions, and if so are any drawings/specifications available.
As Skifreak and whatcharterboat have confirmed, hanging the fuel tanks from the sub-floor would seem a good idea for a RTW vehicle.
I’ll be building on a MWB.
Though when you’ve read so many reports of failures over such a lengthy timespan, it’s hard to avoid the impression the FG chassis virtually cracks if you look at it!
From your comments it’s obvious that the right sub-floor mounting system plays a big part in helping the chassis go the distance.
I’ve been reading how lots of people have tried many different approaches over the years with varying success.
Is there such a thing as the ‘proven and preferred’ sub-floor design for Australia’s outback conditions, and if so are any drawings/specifications available.
As Skifreak and whatcharterboat have confirmed, hanging the fuel tanks from the sub-floor would seem a good idea for a RTW vehicle.
I’ll be building on a MWB.
SkiFreak
Crazy Person
John can probably confirm this, but as far as I know, none of the buses/campers built by ATW using their spring mount system have had problems with the chassis.
That was a primary reason that I utilised a similar system for my own subframe mounting system.
This type of mount is not really proprietary, as they appear in VSB6 (Section J - Page 7). If you do a Google image search you may find other examples of this style of mount but I am not sure that you will find any spec sheets, as these mounts are normally purpose built to meet the requirement.
That was a primary reason that I utilised a similar system for my own subframe mounting system.
This type of mount is not really proprietary, as they appear in VSB6 (Section J - Page 7). If you do a Google image search you may find other examples of this style of mount but I am not sure that you will find any spec sheets, as these mounts are normally purpose built to meet the requirement.
whatcharterboat
Supporting Sponsor, Overland Certified OC0018
Yeah Owen,
No dramas with the chassis really but a couple of issues from time to time have arisen regarding how the mounts attach to the floor frames (sorted now) .... but then it's always a very fine line between saving weight and adding strength isn't it ..... especially if you're trying to come in under that 4.5 ton dream weight.
Your build as shown on your website and adaptation of this type of system looks perfectly executed .....as is everything you seem to put your hand too.
No dramas with the chassis really but a couple of issues from time to time have arisen regarding how the mounts attach to the floor frames (sorted now) .... but then it's always a very fine line between saving weight and adding strength isn't it ..... especially if you're trying to come in under that 4.5 ton dream weight.
Your build as shown on your website and adaptation of this type of system looks perfectly executed .....as is everything you seem to put your hand too.
Last edited:
Had a look at VSB6 on sub-frame mounting and a detailed reading of Skifreak’s website. Very helpful and make the apparently complex seem straightforward.
A couple of questions Skifreak.
If ATW don’t use a polyurethane separator between chassis and sub-floor why did you choose to go that route? Looks like a great solution by the way, but takes a bit more work and as you say it isn’t cheap.
Also, if the 25mm poly thickness was only to accommodate the bolt-down system, did you ever consider adhesive attachment … if anyone was brave enough to try it in that application, it could cut costs by allowing use of thinner/cheaper material.
I’m curious how the system performs in the rough, and if anything has shown-up that you’d change next time round.
I may have missed it on you website, but would you happen to know the all-up dry weight of your steel sub-frame including tanks.
A couple of questions Skifreak.
If ATW don’t use a polyurethane separator between chassis and sub-floor why did you choose to go that route? Looks like a great solution by the way, but takes a bit more work and as you say it isn’t cheap.
Also, if the 25mm poly thickness was only to accommodate the bolt-down system, did you ever consider adhesive attachment … if anyone was brave enough to try it in that application, it could cut costs by allowing use of thinner/cheaper material.
I’m curious how the system performs in the rough, and if anything has shown-up that you’d change next time round.
I may have missed it on you website, but would you happen to know the all-up dry weight of your steel sub-frame including tanks.
SkiFreak
Crazy Person
It takes a lot more work and the cost of the polyurethane was nearly as much as all of the steel for the subframe!
Basically, the more contact between the chassis and the subframe the better as this will reduce any point loads.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the ATW attachment method, but if using this style of mount you need to ensure that the attachment points on the subframe are strong enough, as they will be bearing more of the load.
The mount system I designed is based around the ATW mounts, but it has significant differences. The main one being that my mounts do not take the load of the camper body. The primary function of my mounts is to provide fore/aft/lateral support and allow separation of the chassis from the subframe when the chassis flexes. The polyurethane in my setup takes the vertical load of the camper, not the mounts.
The thickness of the polyurethane could be less, but because I am bolting the polyurethane to the underside of my subframe, 25mm gave me a decent thickness to work with.
I do not know how well any adhesive would go with the polyurethane I used.
The weight of the subframe and mounts comes in at about 150Kg, which is not that much at all (in my opinion).
I cannot give you a total dry weight, as not all of the tanks have been built yet.
Would I do things differently if doing things again? Absolutely!
In fact, I would probably change about 70% of everything I have done to date. Not because I think that there is anything wrong with what I have now, I just thought of better/easier ways to do things.
I also committed to certain gear a long time ago, so I was "stuck" with using it or writing off the cost of the equipment. Don't have an endless supply of money, so I had to use what I had bought.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
So far you guys have walked me through truck choice, chassis modifications and sub-frame design and made most things appear quite straightforward.
The next issue logically is suspension. I’ll be wanting long travel for the articulation and soft for the ride. With only a wet finger to the wind for guidance at this stage, I’d expect the GVM to finish just under five tonnes.
What’s the consensus on having longer leaves made vs the ATW parabolics, in terms of both cost and performance? The coil spring system is just too expensive for me.
Also, what’s considered the best value damper choice for the FG, and is it possible/preferable to install a dual damper set-up for maximum ride quality?
The next issue logically is suspension. I’ll be wanting long travel for the articulation and soft for the ride. With only a wet finger to the wind for guidance at this stage, I’d expect the GVM to finish just under five tonnes.
What’s the consensus on having longer leaves made vs the ATW parabolics, in terms of both cost and performance? The coil spring system is just too expensive for me.
Also, what’s considered the best value damper choice for the FG, and is it possible/preferable to install a dual damper set-up for maximum ride quality?
whatcharterboat
Supporting Sponsor, Overland Certified OC0018
the biggest problem with canter suspension is the travel, there is none! if your on a budget get the standard leaf springs reset with more arch at least 45mm more this will give the leafs a chance to soak up the the bumps before they hit the bump stops and try and throw you through the roof, i would go for tough dog adjustable shockers this will give you the option to fine tune it for different driving conditions and loads, you should be able to do the whole thing for about $2000 dollars, and when i mean reset leaf springs i don't mean bending them in a press like some places do these days, in a furnace is the correct way.
blackduck
Explorer
Gus
dont sell yourself short on GVM
if your building an expo truck and plan to go to places unknown chances are your going to weigh a tad more than 5T
take into account the water, gas, fuel and batteries youll be carrying for remote longevity and your probably looking at over 1/2 a tonne easy
plus the weight if the body, and spares etc, and ill guarantee you end up taking loads more personal effects than youll ever need
this i say from experience based on travelling without a home base for years.
and as far as suspension goes dont scrimp,
the one thing thats going to stop your spine being thrust out of your throat is the correct choice of suspension and wheels/tyres
once again this is speaking from experience
if you have to sell a kidney to pay the extra for a professional after market setup - do it
comfort over cost thats what I say :victory:
blackduck
Explorer
me neither alan in fact im still riding on standard springs and rims unlike you and owen
was going to get parabolics and singles before we left perth but put it off
bad choice
reset springs have a tendancy to sag faster - learnt that one from landcruisers
thousands of bone jarring kilometers has told me its better to spend a few extra sheckles and go the real deal
one day ill sit on parabolics and maybe a nice set of shiny alloy rims