Pre birth of a camper - No laughing!

Overland Hadley

on a journey
2) Buy 2 steering/all location tyres for the 19.5" front. Trouble is - I don't know if this will behave the same way as the 17.5".

Could you buy a set of used steer tires to test it out? If it feels better then you can get new, and if it does not help then you would not be out as much money. Better yet would be if you had a friend with a spare set of steer tires you could borrow.... or maybe a shop would let you borrow a used set for a couple weeks.

Also, did you encounter this problem before you had the camper box fitted? I am wondering if part of the tail wag is from the weight/bulk and higher center of gravity of the camper box?
 

LukeH

Adventurer
Right. let's have a look at this.
What car do you drive? If it's any way modern, has independant suspension and comfortable stop using it straight away! Go for a drive in an old series LR or a leaf sprung Toyota. Before attacking the problems of the truck have a look at what you expect from it. It is the most primitive structure of two beam axles with a bunch of flexy metal leaves holding the chassis onto them. With a leaf sprung setup the axles are free to move back and forth, side to side and to rotate against the leaves; as well as going up and down as intended. There is nothing rigid between chassis and axle!
It will wander, the axles will go all over the place when bounced around, that's just the nature of the beast. Find soemone with a 814 van that's not too heavily loaded and give it a try; you'll be horrified; they're HGVs not big cars.
Putting 8 tonnes on such small tyres is pushing the limits a bit, but it just about works.
My memory of irish roads is a phenomenal camber, so the moment you put a tyre on a white line it didn't contribute to keeping you on the road, and the other tyre did all the work. You have a minor "bump steer" issue with the offset change, but even that is something one can learn to live with. The slow front end is completely normal for tall tyres and leaf springs. you point the front wheel off the current direction and it has to flex before it can pull the axle to that side. The springs have to bend towards that side before they can start pulling the chassis over in the desired direction. As there's a lot of weight on the front (IIRC you're quite near the max) it all has to preload all the wobbly bits in the desired direction by a fair bit; the very act of preloading the springs actually changes how much the steering track rod has turned the hub on the kingpins.
So it's all a very approximate affair up front. Wheel/tyre combos will change things: less sidewall height and more steel is generally better, but even then you have to be sure of the wheels, and a floppy steel wheel is a death trap.

The rear is more concerning. At 3400kg you're a long way from max loading so the above mentioned preloading of the wobbly bits is much less. Your first phenomenon is the tail working the front wobbly bits. You initiate a turn, the font preloads and starts pulling it all round; then the inertia of the rear swings into action and undoes the front preloading, which you then have to correct with the steering wheel. Unnerving, but completely normal for a truck.
Two points worry me:
Your liquids
your subframe

French law imposes baffles in tanks over 100 litres; even having 100kg sloshing around can upset the way a truck behaves. Your tanks are right above the axle, once you're in a corner all the water is on one side of the truck, that's going to make a difference. Every corner, dip or pothole throws your water to one side or another, compressint one or other spring. Compressing springs randomly changes the geometry of the axle configuration, causing wander. It's the nature of leaves, they're not rigid. Have you tried the same corner or poor road with tanks in different levels of fill?

You re-bushed the anti-roll bar at the back, but as you have no direct link between the anti-roll bar and the actual load that's not going to help.
You've chosen the "semi rigid" subframe, and because the cab is glued to the box you're rigid up front, not at the wheels where you need it.
When a wheel dips into a hole it takes the chassis with it because of your super roll bar bushes. But the chassis separates from your subframe to do that, leaving the little springs to close the gap later.
That "later" is undetermined and can be put off further depending on the state of the road.
In a corner your load is pulling hard on those little springs, which are pulling on the chassis, which is pulling on the anti-roll bar, which is in turn squishing the outside tyres on the corner.
You can see that the tyre is only a small part of the problem, thus changing them only makes a small difference...

My suggestion would be to try replacing your little springs with rigid steel tubes, at least on the four closest to the anti-roll bar. drive the same road with empty tanks, half full tanks, and full tanks and note the difference.
If you find that makes a difference, your little springs were way too soft, you can start playing with spring combinations and bellville conical washers until you find a compromise that you find acceptable.

For the front you can improvise a panhard rod or woblink to help with the sideways precision, and add some swingarms if tramping is an issue. Or you could just live with it; once you're on your RTW you won't feel the pressure to drive it like a car, and everyoune behind you will just have to wait :)

Hope I've given you some pointers, I'm part of a company that does a lot of suspension design and dynamic calculations for Renault Trucks in Lyon and for a while this kind of issue was my daily bread.
 

LukeH

Adventurer
If you have a sports camera you could mount it pointing at the chassis/subframe/rollbar/axle and go for a drive. You'll see how everything moves more than you feel comfortable with ;-)
 
You might try one front alignment thing before doing anything expensive:
Increasing the front wheel caster drastically increases directional stability. I don't know if your front axle has leaves or coils but if leaves insertion of a steel wedge between the spring pack and axle pad is simple. You want to rotate the front axle (or hub, if IFS) backwards (so the diff pinion drops a bit with solid axle/leaves) to increase caster. Try maybe 1 or at the most 2 degrees more than specification.

Charlie
 

ianc

Adventurer Wannabe
Luke,
First of all thank you for taking the time to make such a comprehensive response. I think I understand the points you are making and I've commented or responded to some of the specific points inline.
At a higher level though - I think your point is that trucks like this are not the best handling to start with and while there are measures to help improve them, they are always going to be "ok" at best. Is that fair?

I do agree with this. But I should have more clearly stated that I would be happy for the truck to handle as per the original (taller) tyres. It wouldn't be perfect, but nothing in this world is! What I'm struggling to understand is - why is the handling so much poorer with the 19.5" wheels and what steps should I take to get back to the "Ok" handling. ideally while sticking with the 19.5" wheels.


Right. let's have a look at this.
What car do you drive? If it's any way modern, has independent suspension and comfortable stop using it straight away! Go for a drive in an old series LR or a leaf sprung Toyota. Before attacking the problems of the truck have a look at what you expect from it. It is the most primitive structure of two beam axles with a bunch of flexy metal leaves holding the chassis onto them. With a leaf sprung setup the axles are free to move back and forth, side to side and to rotate against the leaves; as well as going up and down as intended. There is nothing rigid between chassis and axle!
It will wander, the axles will go all over the place when bounced around, that's just the nature of the beast. Find someone with a 814 van that's not too heavily loaded and give it a try; you'll be horrified; they're HGVs not big cars.
Yep - I have done that and they handle less than ideally
Putting 8 tonnes on such small tyres is pushing the limits a bit, but it just about works.
Just as a note the GVW is 7.5T but I'm at about 6T
My memory of irish roads is a phenomenal camber, so the moment you put a tyre on a white line it didn't contribute to keeping you on the road, and the other tyre did all the work. You have a minor "bump steer" issue with the offset change, but even that is something one can learn to live with. The slow front end is completely normal for tall tyres and leaf springs. you point the front wheel off the current direction and it has to flex before it can pull the axle to that side. The springs have to bend towards that side before they can start pulling the chassis over in the desired direction. As there's a lot of weight on the front (IIRC you're quite near the max) it all has to preload all the wobbly bits in the desired direction by a fair bit; the very act of preloading the springs actually changes how much the steering track rod has turned the hub on the kingpins.
So it's all a very approximate affair up front. Wheel/tyre combos will change things: less sidewall height and more steel is generally better, but even then you have to be sure of the wheels, and a floppy steel wheel is a death trap.

The rear is more concerning. At 3400kg you're a long way from max loading so the above mentioned preloading of the wobbly bits is much less. Your first phenomenon is the tail working the front wobbly bits. You initiate a turn, the font preloads and starts pulling it all round; then the inertia of the rear swings into action and undoes the front preloading, which you then have to correct with the steering wheel. Unnerving, but completely normal for a truck.
Two points worry me:
Your liquids
your subframe

French law imposes baffles in tanks over 100 litres; even having 100kg sloshing around can upset the way a truck behaves. Your tanks are right above the axle, once you're in a corner all the water is on one side of the truck, that's going to make a difference. Every corner, dip or pothole throws your water to one side or another, compressint one or other spring. Compressing springs randomly changes the geometry of the axle configuration, causing wander. It's the nature of leaves, they're not rigid. Have you tried the same corner or poor road with tanks in different levels of fill?
There's about 500l fresh water capacity on-board split into 2 heavily baffelled tanks. I've tried it with them empty and full. No noticeable difference in the handling
You re-bushed the anti-roll bar at the back, but as you have no direct link between the anti-roll bar and the actual load that's not going to help.
You've chosen the "semi rigid" subframe, and because the cab is glued to the box you're rigid up front, not at the wheels where you need it.
When a wheel dips into a hole it takes the chassis with it because of your super roll bar bushes. But the chassis separates from your subframe to do that, leaving the little springs to close the gap later.
That "later" is undetermined and can be put off further depending on the state of the road.
Good point. However I did the old trick of putting tape between the chassis and the subframe and it stayed in place on paved roads. It only separated when I took it over uneven surfaces offroad. It may be that I have those springs set too tight - but there appears to be little movement under typical road conditions.
In a corner your load is pulling hard on those little springs, which are pulling on the chassis, which is pulling on the anti-roll bar, which is in turn squishing the outside tyres on the corner.
You can see that the tyre is only a small part of the problem, thus changing them only makes a small difference...

My suggestion would be to try replacing your little springs with rigid steel tubes, at least on the four closest to the anti-roll bar. drive the same road with empty tanks, half full tanks, and full tanks and note the difference.
If you find that makes a difference, your little springs were way too soft, you can start playing with spring combinations and bellville conical washers until you find a compromise that you find acceptable.
Even though I did the tape test (for different reasons). I'm going to run this test as it's a straightforward one. Thanks
For the front you can improvise a panhard rod or woblink to help with the sideways precision, and add some swingarms if tramping is an issue. Or you could just live with it; once you're on your RTW you won't feel the pressure to drive it like a car, and everyoune behind you will just have to wait :)
I have thought about fabricating a Panhard rod for the rear. I hadn't thought of it for the front. Is there enough side deflection in the springs in this sort of vehicle to make them worthwhile? Maybe that camera you suggest in the later post would help here? But then I might not want to drive the thing at all once I see then dance going on down there :)
Hope I've given you some pointers, I'm part of a company that does a lot of suspension design and dynamic calculations for Renault Trucks in Lyon and for a while this kind of issue was my daily bread.

Thanks again for the response
 

ianc

Adventurer Wannabe
You might try one front alignment thing before doing anything expensive:
Increasing the front wheel caster drastically increases directional stability. I don't know if your front axle has leaves or coils but if leaves insertion of a steel wedge between the spring pack and axle pad is simple. You want to rotate the front axle (or hub, if IFS) backwards (so the diff pinion drops a bit with solid axle/leaves) to increase caster. Try maybe 1 or at the most 2 degrees more than specification.

Charlie

Thanks Charlie. They are leaf springs. The manual says the caster "is incorporated into the springs. It is not possible to adjust with wedges"
Now that just sounds like a challenge to me! I'll have a look at this
 

ianc

Adventurer Wannabe
Also, did you encounter this problem before you had the camper box fitted? I am wondering if part of the tail wag is from the weight/bulk and higher center of gravity of the camper box?

The truck was loaded in a very different way when I first got it - but I'm pretty sure it did not feel tail happy.
 

LukeH

Adventurer
Luke,
First of all thank you for taking the time to make such a comprehensive response. I think I understand the points you are making and I've commented or responded to some of the specific points inline.
At a higher level though - I think your point is that trucks like this are not the best handling to start with and while there are measures to help improve them, they are always going to be "ok" at best. Is that fair?
You've got it. And you'll never get away from that live axle "tremor" that runs through a truck when a wheel has to deal with an obstacle.
I do agree with this. But I should have more clearly stated that I would be happy for the truck to handle as per the original (taller) tyres. It wouldn't be perfect, but nothing in this world is! What I'm struggling to understand is - why is the handling so much poorer with the 19.5" wheels and what steps should I take to get back to the "Ok" handling. ideally while sticking with the 19.5" wheels.
Well yes, you've made the investment, it would feel counterproductive not to use them.
What is the thickness of the steel where the bolts go through on your new and original wheels? The relation between flask height and thickness is somewhat complicated.
The theory states that if there's LESS sidewall to preload in one direction or another, then the vehicle will respond better to driver input. This is illustrated in the huge rims used by frustrated people to make their VW golf handle better. If, however the extra height of steel flask is not rigid enough, you can see that it would be the wheel that flops from one side to the other instead of the sidewall.
This is another argument in favour of that sports camera, mounted on an axle and pointing at a wheel
I guess nothing's changed in the wheel bearings and knuckles.


Yep - I have done that and they handle less than ideally Just as a note the GVW is 7.5T but I'm at about 6T

...

I have thought about fabricating a Panhard rod for the rear. I hadn't thought of it for the front. Is there enough side deflection in the springs in this sort of vehicle to make them worthwhile? Maybe that camera you suggest in the later post would help here? But then I might not want to drive the thing at all once I see then dance going on down there :)
Apart from the wheel/tyre problem and the lack of power, the other thing that turned me off the Vario is that the front axle can hardly be loaded. Compare unladen and max; there's not much margin. This means that the springs are already dimensioned to be compliant when unladen, so they'll be wibbly at the best of times. The Vario is a bit like a rickshaw, you can load up the rear merrily, but if you change what's happening up front you upset the whole balance. A Panhard would considerably reduce the lateral wobble, which is what seems to be the main issue; but first we must ascertain whether the wheels are fit for purpose.

Another experiment if you have access to weighing facilities: with the original trins on the rear and your new 19.5s up front, load the rear overhang until the front axle is at unladen weight. The tail swing will be horrible, but it should track in a straight line like an unladen van.
Unfortunately if that is conclusive, you'll have to put everything in front of the rear axle on a diet; and that won't be easy.
Happy hunting
 

ianc

Adventurer Wannabe
You've got it. And you'll never get away from that live axle "tremor" that runs through a truck when a wheel has to deal with an obstacle.

Well yes, you've made the investment, it would feel counterproductive not to use them.
What is the thickness of the steel where the bolts go through on your new and original wheels? The relation between flask height and thickness is somewhat complicated.
The theory states that if there's LESS sidewall to preload in one direction or another, then the vehicle will respond better to driver input. This is illustrated in the huge rims used by frustrated people to make their VW golf handle better. If, however the extra height of steel flask is not rigid enough, you can see that it would be the wheel that flops from one side to the other instead of the sidewall.
This is another argument in favour of that sports camera, mounted on an axle and pointing at a wheel
I guess nothing's changed in the wheel bearings and knuckles.
The new wheels are of considerable heavier construction than the originals. I'd say the flask wall is at least 50% thicker probably more (The weather is horrible here today otherwise I'd measure it now).
The rims are also 8.25" - which is on the wide end of the spectrum for the 285/70 and should reduce sidewall flex.
Apart from the wheel/tyre problem and the lack of power, the other thing that turned me off the Vario is that the front axle can hardly be loaded. Compare unladen and max; there's not much margin. This means that the springs are already dimensioned to be compliant when unladen, so they'll be wibbly at the best of times. The Vario is a bit like a rickshaw, you can load up the rear merrily, but if you change what's happening up front you upset the whole balance. A Panhard would considerably reduce the lateral wobble, which is what seems to be the main issue; but first we must ascertain whether the wheels are fit for purpose.

Another experiment if you have access to weighing facilities: with the original trins on the rear and your new 19.5s up front, load the rear overhang until the front axle is at unladen weight. The tail swing will be horrible, but it should track in a straight line like an unladen van.
Unfortunately if that is conclusive, you'll have to put everything in front of the rear axle on a diet; and that won't be easy.
Happy hunting

My Vario is factory fitted with the heavier 3000Kg rated front springs and the 2600kg figure is all up including passenger & fat driver. But your point is correct, it is designed to carry most of the load over the back.
I'll see if I can get the weight reduced on the front and test.
 

mmmartin

New member
Ian

Its really hard to read how the vehicle performance has turned out after all the work you have put in, but as always it about engineering problems out I guess. You are familiar with the 814DA I converted. 2.5t on the front, 5.3t on the rear, length 8m, height 3.7m and ran on standard wheels and Michelins. I had a few issues to begin with that we did manage to get on top of, swaying around was evident once we began to use the vehicle, corners were interesting and every mile was hard work. The changes we made we did all in one go as it was on a lift and made sense to do it all together. First job was to change the front springs, ours was a 1992 and had spent 16 years standing on the originals at maximum load all of its life. It was evident once they were changed how they had lost there 'spring' once of the floor next to the new and the new one's made a tremendous difference to the ride/sway. At the same time I changed the rubber spring bushes for the harder nylon type making it stiffer. Are you aware there is a white plastic bush designed to wear that fits over the bolt that the bushes sit over. If you have not changed them, make it a priority as this will give you tremendous movement and should be changes every 50,000 km. I am sure you have already checked for toe in as per the manual spec. Same can be said for the rear end, here we fitted an extra leaf making it stiffer as well as changing all the bushes with harder one's and then new shockers all round. In all this work made a big difference to the ride and it did not suffer with the instability problems afterward
 
Thanks Charlie. They are leaf springs. The manual says the caster "is incorporated into the springs. It is not possible to adjust with wedges"
Now that just sounds like a challenge to me! I'll have a look at this

Actually a leaf spring suspension is very easy to adjust with wedges. Make sure they are steel, make sure the spring center bolt head (they make bolts with lengthened heads for this purpose) goes through the hole in the wedge and seats sufficiently in the hole on the pad on the axle. If factory caster is for example +1.5 degrees, I would suggest slightly over that, like 2.0-2.5 deg.
I can tell you that with 40 series Landcruisers front end caster makes a HUGE difference in handling.

Charlie
 

mmmartin

New member
I forgot to say that the drag link are prone to wear and again should be checked regularly, I have known vehicles to be fitted with a new genuine Mercedes part and still fail next day on the MOT. If you change it, keep the old one and carry it as a spare because they can snap when off road
 

ianc

Adventurer Wannabe
I forgot to say that the drag link are prone to wear and again should be checked regularly, I have known vehicles to be fitted with a new genuine Mercedes part and still fail next day on the MOT. If you change it, keep the old one and carry it as a spare because they can snap when off road

Martin,
Good to hear from you.
I have changed the drag link as one of the ball joints failed the DoE test. Hearing that they snap is a bit disconcerting!.

On the other points - I only checked the bushes by sticking in a crowbar and I didn't see much movement. But with 230KKm on it they probably could do with replacing. I just need to find a ramp!
The front springs on mine are the newer parabolic ones with just 2 leaves, but they are very close to their limit. I'll get a quote for changing them.

Thanks
 

ianc

Adventurer Wannabe
I got a price for having the front springs reset and fitted with new bushes. €450. Seem pricey compared to adding airbags.
 

graynomad

Photographer, traveller
I've had our truck springs reset a couple of times, first time we added leaves as well, $700 (or $500 for cash and no receipt :), plus I did a lot of the work). Second time about $500 just for resetting.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
188,194
Messages
2,903,706
Members
229,665
Latest member
SANelson
Top