my fg/camper pre purchase plan "101"

[Gold Boy]

Bear in mind that I have never personally driven a DRW off road:
Many people say that SRW's handle much better off road, especially in ruts (ie: sand, mud & snow). The Aussies have way more offroad driving that is accessible to a large off-road camper than you will find in North America. I talked to a tour bus driver in Western Australia who was driving a DRW Canter (Fuso) tour bus and he said if he owned one, the first mod would be to switch to SRW's. I can put you in touch with an Aussie company that builds lots of Canter buses and RV's and use super single steel wheels.

Cheers
Mark

thanks Mark

please do put me in touch with that company.

We have put super singles on many HD trucks. We use Alcoa and if you watch the offset you can get one wheel that will work on both ends of the truck as they can be ordered reversible. I do not know if Alcoa makes a wheel with your required pattern. I have had Canadian Wheel Industries supply me with shells and I would install the centers on odd ball applications, I just got a set of wheels for one truck running 53" Michelin XZL's from Stockton Wheel and they were cheaper than buying shells, laser cutting centers, and building them myself. They were built to specs I provided and fit great. If you set your track width properly you will not be adding any extra stress, you may be reducing stress by reducing the rotating mass of a set of duals. You will increase driveline stress as the tire size grows in diameter and gearing is not compensated for.

Good luck, great project,
Mark

thanks also Mark

i know this is a redneck question......

but can i put the front rims "wrong way around" on the rear?

thanks

Simon :26_7_2:

 

[39Ronin]

Pm Sent

 

[Jeep]

That's the point of using a reversible "super single". You find the offset that sets the front and rear track width where you want it, you can than work the numbers to get the offset in the wheel matched or close to your desired track width. We do that to run 1 wheel on a truck rather than 2 different wheels. You might have to alter your desired track width a little to get an "over the counter" wheel but usually not by much.

 

[Gold Boy]

That's the point of using a reversible "super single". You find the offset that sets the front and rear track width where you want it, you can than work the numbers to get the offset in the wheel matched or close to your desired track width. We do that to run 1 wheel on a truck rather than 2 different wheels. You might have to alter your desired track width a little to get an "over the counter" wheel but usually not by much.

:elkgrin: oh... now i get it, thanks jeep.....

 

[haven]

track of front vs rear axles

"can I put the rims 'wrong way around' on the rear?"

Here's what that looks like

The Mitsubishi Body Builders Guide says the dual rear wheel extends out about 18mm, about 3/4 inch, wider than the front wheel, on each side. Removing the inner rear wheel will subtract about 3/8 inch (the thickness of the wheel where it mounts to the axle) from each side of the axle, making the rear and front wheels line up pretty closely.

The Mitsubishi Body Builders Guide for FE and FG models is located here
http://www.mitfuso.com/pages/bodybuild.html

Of course, removing two wheels and tires from the rear axle will reduce its carrying capacity by half.

Chip Haven

 

[Bajaroad]

Single rear wheels

By my calculations, the front axles are 6.9 inches wider (per side), but the rear tires stick out 3.7 inches more than the front - subtract 0.4 per side for the disk thickness if you were using only one stock rear wheel.

This leaves you with about 5" more offset from the hub mounting surface compared to stock. This offset is said by some to be potentially catastrophic to the hub, but others use single rears without problems. My feeling is there is some truck load at this offset that places no more stress on the hubs than the stock setup with the GVWR. It might be 1000lbs or it might be 10,000lbs. If anyone has details on the hub bearings (hub dimensions), I will volunteer to do a simplified analysis. There are many forces at play on these bearings such as trust and torsional loads when the truck goes through a turn and brakes, so one would hope there is a large safety factor built into the hub.
If I go with single rears then I will be inspecting/lubing my hubs more frequently than not.

Based on my potentially flawed calculations and design, an 8 inch wide wheel is a good choice for single wheel setup. This custom wheel would need about 3.7 inches of mounting disk offset for the front and rear to have the same track. Below is a drawing of the wheel with 285/75R16 tires (33in dia). I am not sure if these actually fit the front without fender modification, as I suspect the plastic fenders may need to be flared out to accept the extra width (11.6in) and extra 1.0 inch diameter. Using this wheel in the back, the extra offset from the hub is about 3.3 inches. This is the difference between the centerline of the single wheel to the plane between the two dually mounting surfaces. If you use a 10 inch wheel with bigger tires you can get the offset just below 3 inches, but your track will be off by about 0.7 inch.

-Brent

 

[Robthebrit]

I know that with a mog if you use wide track wheels the gross weight drops drastically. I think flipping the rims around halfs it and gives about a foot wider track. I assume its the same for the fuso too unless they use massively oversized bearings.

Rob

 

[dhackney]

There are potential interference issues with the left front tire.

The steering arm runs down that side and can interfere with the tire if you use a wider or taller tire or alter the offset to move the front track inward (narrower).

The arm can be modified or a new one fabricated that would avoid the interference.

 

[Jeep]

On the trucks we convert the front wheels are generally moved out a bit which would alleviate any interference, and the rear wheels are generally moved slightly inward from where the outside of the dual wheel is so in perspective of hub and bearing loading you would be increasing the load on the front and decreasing the load on the rear. You are removing some rotating unsprung mass by removing one set of wheels at the rear and unless you are seriously upgrading the tire capacity you cannot carry as much weight on the rear which would again reduce hub and bearing stress. Now how much bigger of a tire can you put on without having negative effects seems to be more of a little trial and error combined with a little engineering.

For an extreme example we remove tandem duals on hydrovac and water trucks and install 48"tall x 31" wide floatation tires. Throw 20 000-30 000 pounds on the back and operate in 2' of mud ranging from clay to muskeg in consistency. At that point breakage is much more reliant on operator ability rather than engineering and componentry, and they really don't break that often.

 

[805gregg]

You can buy a Dodge 4x4 4500 crew cab, cab and chassis with 16,500 gvw for less money and get a better truck and cummins diesel.

 

[dhackney]

You can buy a Dodge 4x4 4500 crew cab, cab and chassis with 16,500 gvw for less money and get a better truck and cummins diesel.

I grew up in a Mopar family and had friends who owned and raced them. I've always had a soft spot for Mopars. But, having said that, and with all due respect, "better" is just an opinion.

I also consider the Cummins to be a great motor with a solid reputation. But that is just my opinion. I've never owned one in a Dodge truck, but drove some commercial trucks with Cummins power. I've had two Mitsu gas motors go over 225k and still be running strong. Our FG is my first Mitsu diesel. I hope it proves as durable as those gas motors.

But, and this is the important part, I don't have any empirical evidence to directly compare the Cummins and the Mitsu diesels within the scope of my personal experience. And even if I did, it would be anecdotal evidence with a sample set of one, which is statistically insignificant. More importantly, I don't have any long term durability comparison tests between the two motors conducted by an unbiased source to reference or refer to.

The Mitsu Fuso Canter / F series is very popular in the world's medium duty market and has a very good reputation for durability and low total cost of ownership. There are several examples of Fuso expedition vehicles that have been all over the world with zero engine, driveline or chassis problems.

The Dodge product you are enthusiastic about is a forward engine chassis. The FG is a cab over chassis. When you build on an FG platform you do so because, generally, you want to realize the payload packaging efficiencies of that design and trade off the ride comfort and potentially greater safety of the engine forward design. For international travel, the fact the Fuso is sold in over 150 countries is a very important decision criteria.

If you've purchased the Dodge and are happy with it, more power to you. Congratulations. That's a great deal.

But I learned back when I was a street racing kid that brand bigotry is just what it is: bigotry. Just about all the major manufacturers make good product. Every one of them has their strengths and weaknesses.

IMO, we stand to gain more by researching, accepting and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each manufacturer and each product than we do by blind tribal loyalty to our chosen brand.

Doug

 

[39Ronin]

Goldboy, I PMed you about my Truck. My Canter (FUSO) FG is for sale and is registered here in BC. This was my project that was stalled with my the birth of my second child. You may have seen my post before:http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2759
Mine could save you $20,000.

 

[Bajaroad]

There are potential interference issues with the left front tire.

The steering arm runs down that side and can interfere with the tire if you use a wider or taller tire or alter the offset to move the front track inward (narrower).

The arm can be modified or a new one fabricated that would avoid the interference.

This wheel design is no closer to the steering arm than the stock. But you are correct the steering arm is very close to the stock wheel. If I go forward with this wheel design I will buy only one wheel initially and then confirm the fit.

-Brent

 

[Tom_D]

Srw

Does Fuso N.A. approve any super singles? I talked with Darrin in the spring and so far they do not approve and for FG/FE or FM series.

The example of Auzzie Cantors is interesting but these trucks always seem to be pretty light weight (as is the one in the picture). My camper is usually loaded close to MAX GVWR on any extended trip. I know at least one FG that is above GVWR empty!

A broken hub in the middle of NWT would end up as an incredibly expensive nightmare. If you are a commercial outfit or a weekend warrior then the options are different.

Tom

 

[Bajaroad]

You can buy a Dodge 4x4 4500 crew cab, cab and chassis with 16,500 gvw for less money and get a better truck and cummins diesel.

My $.02 . . . . .

The cheapest 4500 4x4 msrp: Chassis Cab SLT Regular Cab 4x4 $41,555
- not less money. I don't know what the MSRP is on the Fuso but I paid $33k before tax.

If better truck = more power, then I agree.
If better truck = safer, then I agree
If better truck = better for expedition camper, then I disagree
If better truck = more economical and more reliable, then I disagree

I owned a Dodge 3500 4x4 Cummins - sold it and bought a Fuso. The Cummins is a great engine, but otherwise I don't believe Dodge comes close to Fuso in reliability. Good truck, but not better. The Fuso was designed from day one to be a plain and simple workhorse.
My opinion is the 4500/5500 is a reaction the hot selling Ford 450, 550.


-Brent