In search of the "perfect" camper frame

[IdaSHO]

Hilarious!!! Bashing to me is criticism with no factual basis.

That isn't what's going on here. What's happening here is philosophical debate on old versus new, modern versus antiquated. The debate here won't have a winner and won't have a loser because the point of views will never converge except to say the end result of either scenario will roll down the road and will provide shelter for an undetermined amount of time. You don't need to spring in here to come to the electronic rescue of Mr. IdaSHO because he isn't in danger of feeling badly, changing his worldly views or whether he votes Republican or Democrat in the next election. Fundamental opinions on the technical application of both materials and methods should in theory be something which a little science can prove a clear winner, but as is evidence by Ford Vs. Chevy, Butter side Up vs. Butter side Down, Diesel vs. Gas, BF Goodrich Vs. Michelin, I.E. nobody will have their opinion swayed here. Thanks for stopping in and flashing your badge.

Sincerely, Mr. Ghetto Down by the River Van Man himself...SG.

It would be appreciated if you never posted in this thread again.

I dont need your BS cluttering my thread. Ive quoted you to show your true colors to other member and the mods.

Thanks for your understanding.

Good day.

 

[spencyg]

It would take far more than a single quoted paragraph to ever encapsulate my true colors I'm not sure how this offended you in any way, but have it as you will.

Best of luck.

 

[Ford Prefect]

Wow, sorry Ida,

Truly ignorant. All I said was in response to his calling your idea ghetto and he freaks out. Sorry that so many people are so very rude in your thread. I hope you will keep building and updating us on how it is going and what is new for you. I think your idea has merit, and I hope to see how it goes.


Now back to the idea at hand.

I did have a question for you Ida, With the mount concept you have for the rear end of the bed, how do you feel about the loads it will be asked to carry? IE most of the (well all of the) pivots like yours that I have personally seen photos of have a large triangle that goes from the bed down to the center-point mount. Yours would appear to have a main beam of the bed directly to the pivot point. So here is my main question: do you feel that this may cause a great amount of stress on one point on the bed, where as using a very wide short triangle would transfer the load across the width of that beam?

Thanks

 

[whatcharterboat]

Hi IdaSHO,

Always seems to be lots of heated dialogue going on here but I only wanted to add a little if it helps and don't want to get into any composites Vs ally Vs wood Vs etc.

Quite a while ago I worked for a company building offroad caravans ..... the company was called Phoenix and were probably the first real offroad caravans built here. Now we have plenty ... Bushtracker, Kedron, Kimberly, etc which are excellent and all quite different in their construction and all of them are up to the task of serious outback travel. Thing was ... Phoenix were the only one to use steel base frame, timber upper frame, alminium tread plate front lower panel, fibreglass upper front panel, alluminium strip side panels, polystyrene sheet insulation, aluminium sheet roof panels, internal ply wall panels and timber frame/ ply cabinets.

So that just about covers most of the materials spectrum doesn't it......these were very tough vans built right up until they sold the company in the late '90's. Then the new owners continued with the same use of timber but changed the cladding to flat fibreglass sheet but for whatever reason, the company folded last year. Secondhand Phoenix's, especially the older models, still bring ridiculously high prices here as they are always thought of as being one of the toughest things ever built.

Someone said way back in this thread, if you are going to use wood then use good wood. That was one of the most important things Phoenix did. Even though the frames were only 1" x 1" , all timber was continuous long grain and any knotted section was rejected. Studs were really close .... usually around 1' apart and mainly held to the internal paneling with "Liquid Nails" ... you probably know it by this name too....with just a couple of staples to hold it in place until the glue dried......I know this might sound like stoneage stuff to some but it does work.......also the the timber was treated for rot, termites, etc. Obviously, the roof frames were heavier and they shaped 2" x 1" so that they tapered out towards the sides so there was no chance of pooling water.

Another thing that they did was ... where ever possible, any furniture or cabinets were considered as structural bulkheads and designed accordingly.....these frames flexed without falling apart as many would have you believe. I may have some old photos around ...if I can dig them up I will post them.


I'm not saying this is how I'd build a camper (with my composites and tooling knowledge) but I was only hoping to give you some reassureance (not that you needed it) .

Regards
John.

 

[IdaSHO]

Thanks for the post John! The construction techniques you are describing is nearly 100% on par for what I have cooking. So much so that I too am considering much of the cabinetry as structural items, and the camper will be built as such, to utilize them to aid in the overall structure.

And a quick google search for "Phoenix offroad caravan" turns up some very cool videos. Definitely worth a look. :ylsmoke:

 

[IdaSHO]

I did have a question for you Ida, With the mount concept you have for the rear end of the bed, how do you feel about the loads it will be asked to carry? IE most of the (well all of the) pivots like yours that I have personally seen photos of have a large triangle that goes from the bed down to the center-point mount. Yours would appear to have a main beam of the bed directly to the pivot point. So here is my main question: do you feel that this may cause a great amount of stress on one point on the bed, where as using a very wide short triangle would transfer the load across the width of that beam?

Thanks

You are correct that most use a larger -V- In order to keep things as low slung as I can, I opted to not go that route. That particular portion will be strengthened considerably though. Both the chassis and the bed.

 

[IdaSHO]

A bit more done this evening.

All of the crossmembers welded in place, all clearance lamp holes plasma cut, rear apron mocked up, and working on fuel fillers too.

Im extending the fuel fillers. Solid portion of the filler is getting extended using 2" exhaust pipe.

A few pics...

Fitting one of the fillers. Im considering mounting the filler neck from inside the bed frame, in hopes of tucking it in a bit more.

How I love having a plasma cutter :ylsmoke:

 

[Ford Prefect]

You are correct that most use a larger -V- In order to keep things as low slung as I can, I opted to not go that route. That particular portion will be strengthened considerably though. Both the chassis and the bed.

Would it be of value then to put two hinge points on the back? IE one in front of the other? Would that bind up, or would it just give a second point at which they could be stronger?

 

[IdaSHO]

That would work, so long at all of the mounts are functioning on the same plane. With just front and rear mounts, there is room for error. And I like the simplicity of this design. It also makes bushing replacement (if needed) pretty straight forward. Having one inboard over the fuel tank area would be impossible to replace.

 

[Outback]

I dont want to hear about alternatives. Maybe you have reading comprehension problems?



Triangulation is for a tube chassis. This is a camper. Campers utilize sheer. NOT triangulation.

Interior paneling bonded to the structural framing is plenty strong.





Oh, I get clues now? Arent you kind!

Aluminum is not an option for cold weather travels. The best you can do is minimize the thermal bridging. You will never beat it.

Also, considering Turtle to have aluminum frames is a stretch, at best. They are Nida-Core campers with heavy aluminum corners.

And Nida-Core is FAR from a good insulator. With an R-value of less than R4 per inch, Id have to run 4 inch thick walls :yikes: to meet my R14 requirement.

Found these: Structural Honeycomb - Foam Filled I believe R10 for 1" thick panel is pretty good and VERY strong and VERY light weight.

 

[Outback]

Just read the Entire thread. Never mind my first post. Since your not using foam panels look into having someone spray foam inside your frame after you have the outer skin on. You can even buy a do it youreslf foam spray kit. This will give you even more R value than the foam panels and give you even more rigidity of the walls (shear).

 

[Clutch]

Do what ever you want, to Hell with the naysayers.

Perfection is in the eye of the beholder. As long as you "get out there"....that is all that matters.

Funny reading people arguing over what materials to used, heck there are guys who have been more places
in their Honda Civics than guys with fancy composite campers.

IdaSho: You'll get more praise on Pirate than on here...:ylsmoke:

 

[IdaSHO]

Yeah, with the stigma the Expo crew seems to have with anything made of wood, I think once Im rolling with the camper build I will push it over to Pirate.

For now, Ill post a bit more info about this 3-point mount, and how it seems to be kicking butt. Im 100% thrilled about how todays flex tests went.

Sort of a cross-post from pirate, in search of ways to stiffen the flatbed a bit.

...

Needing the truck this week I tossed it together temporarily. Hit all of the raw steel with cheapo rattle can black, threw some 1/2 CDX on the deck, wired it up, and tossed it on.

Then I took it down the street and around the corner to a fresh subdivision that has some dirt to drive on

I stuffed the truck into the bank as good as I felt comfortable.

Best estimate, I had roughly 14 inches of height difference between LR and RF. She was twisted up further than Ive ever had her.

Even with all that twist in the chassis, flatbed remains FLAT :ylsmoke:

Tire stuffed VERY well. I have less than 3/4 of an inch from two cross members here, and 2" from the bottom of the deck. Unless I change things, I guess I just ruled myself out of larger rubber next time this truck is due.

 

[Ford Prefect]

Going to pirate is a bad idea...

We really want to see the build here. Perhaps just copy pirate on the build, but show us here as well??? please?

Well anyhow, with the tire stuff issue, how difficult would you anticipate it being to give the bed a lift once the camper is fully constructed? I ask because if you decide later down the road you may be able to just remove it (like to do a bushing job), then lengthen the connections and have yourself a simple one inch lift. (or am I speaking from a point of complete naivete?)

 

[Clutch]

Yeah, with the stigma the Expo crew seems to have with anything made of wood, I think once Im rolling with the camper build I will push it over to Pirate.

Bit of an OCD persnickety bunch on here, eh? :ylsmoke:

It is looking good BTW.