Remount camper

[dhackney]

If anyone can find another public domain example, please post it here.

Well, technically, the subject of any photo taken in a public setting is public domain, but that's a different thread...

IIRC, I've got some photos of examples other than Lance's. If I can find them, I'll post one into this thread.

 

[dhackney]

Found some.

These are all from the pivoting frames and mounting campers thread.

( [rant] Another example of why somebody needs to create a technology that auto-creates and auto-maintains a wiki based on forum posts. Forums are great for exchanging ideas but suck for information storage and retrieval. [/rant] )

Exactly what you want


Army duece and a half version of what you want.




The origin of what you want. These mounts were invented to mount liquid tanks on straight trucks.


Exactly what you want


Unimog U500 version of what you want


Double spring version of what you want



Note that in all cases you need to locate the payload side to side and fore and aft. That means you need to include plates or guides to ensure the payload doesn't slide forward or back or side to side.

After decades of development and use on Fusos, ATW puts the spring on the bottom and integrates the guide into the spring mount. My advice is to follow their lead.

As Owen mentioned, this is not rocket science and any competent fabricator can create these mounts for you.

 

[EarthCruiser]

http://www.earthcruiser.com.au/gallery/photo

G`day All . As mentioned previously it is all in the application.
For the system to work the mounts need to be in the right place along the chassis (there are standards for this) and you need to know what dampening (spring tension) is needed for the application. Too much they don't work at all, to little the mass compounds making it worse. This is where math meets experience.

Doug i really like the Roo, we all live and learn.

Lance

 

[garybo]

Thanks for the pictures and information. I'm out of my element here. It looks to me that proper application would involve hiring someone/company who has successful experience with putting campers on Fuso trucks like ATW or EarthCruiser.

Mitsu service called me today and will put the FG140 spring set on my FG639 truck. Cost about $3500, same as Deaver spring. The Mitsu set would be stock and replaceable everywhere. Don't know the risk/benefit of the Deaver higher arched set?

 

[SkiFreak]

If I were in your situation Gary, I would be talking to a suspension specialist/engineer in order to get the best advice and outcome for your particular setup.

 

[dhackney]

This is where math meets experience.

Doug i really like the Roo, we all live and learn.

Agreed. I lived and learned that it's better to buy a series built product where the lessons learned can be applied to the next unit down the production line. That's where the math + experience + lessons learned take effect.

 

[dhackney]

The Mitsu set would be stock and replaceable everywhere. Don't know the risk/benefit of the Deaver higher arched set?

Upside: replaceable anywhere with another factory part

Downside: the stock spring packs are very harsh

Mitigation to upside: leaf springs are easily repairable anywhere in the world; you don't gain much with the "replace with factory part" in this particular case; it's not the same value as an engine control computer or other proprietary part, where it is very important that the truck is sold in 150+ countries;


Benefit to Deaver:
1) the pack consists of more but thinner leaves than stock; this yields a more compliant ride (big, big difference in our case)
2) custom matched to your load; the stock spring packs are set up for maximum load on all four corners, which yields a harsh, uncompromising ride

 

[dhackney]

It looks to me that proper application would involve hiring someone/company who has successful experience with putting campers on Fuso trucks like ATW or EarthCruiser.

Agreed.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no comparable vendors in the North American market. I'm not aware of anybody who has built more than one camper on an F series Fuso in the U.S.

AFAIK, nobody here has the breadth and depth of experience as the Australians with these trucks.

Chip may be able to help here with references to more experienced vendors in North America that I am unaware of.

 

[garybo]

Thanks Owen, you and Lance and Doug have impressed me with the need for expert input and skills.
I'll ask for one last opinion on my springs. Here are my specs:
GVWR 12000 lbs, my weight 13300 lbs
GAWR front 5510 lbs, my weight 5240 lbs
rear 8600 lbs, my weight 8000 lbs
My choice is to leave the stock FG629 12000 lb springs or put on springs for a 14000 lb truck. Opinions? thanks

 

[garybo]

I am echoing the call for names of F series Fuso experienced vendors in the US.

Deaver seems the informed choice for us. thanks Doug for the analysis. Gary

 

[garybo]

I've learned a lot, but have to abandon my idea of remounting the camper. It will remain u bolted to the frame even though it's not on a flatbed like Lehel's. We really like Owen's rig and can't wait to see the camper. I will say that we haven't seen a camper we like as much as ours. Kim and Don got the size, insulation, livability, and storage perfect, especially for full timers like us, so a big thanks to them. We'll get new springs to fix our last known problem and then....it's travel time! Thanks all. Gary

 

[garybo]

Decided one more post:
All the talk seems to be about the Aussie spring mount (ATW) OR a pivot mount. Why, when most work trucks have flatbed mounts u bolted to the frame, is there no discussion about this type mount with a camper fixed to the flatbed? Surely reliable work trucks populate poor and off roads and have for eons. Perhaps the ATW and pivots are for 'extreme' driving situations, but work trucks surely go way into the boonies to work on utility poles, etc. Just wondering.

 

[garybo]

related thought: "subframe that lets the camper avoid damage when the chassis twists". Why wouldn't this situation break the chassis?

 

[SkiFreak]

On a flatbed work truck the tray will flex along with the chassis. That is not an issue as it is likely it has been designed to do that.
The goods carried on the tray will "move" as they are not an integral part of the structure. Have you ever seen a flatbed where a load has been placed on one rear corner? You will see a lot of flex in the tray.
I doubt that you will see too many 4x4 trucks setup with a pantec body, as this would definitely affect the flex of the chassis.
Having said that, I have looked at quite a few second hand delivery trucks (with pantec bodies) and have seen many that had fractured welds around the front mounting area; and these trucks live most of their lives on good roads.

Basically, the chassis of an FG is part of the suspension system, by design. If you stiffen everything up then somewhere down the track something will have to give.
The problem is that Murphy's Law states that this will always happen at the most inopportune time.

 

[SkiFreak]

related thought: "subframe that lets the camper avoid damage when the chassis twists". Why wouldn't this situation break the chassis?

Because they are not physically joined together.
One can flex (the chassis) and the other can be rigid (subframe and camper body).