ThanksDepends whether it's within the standard specification for your model or whether it's an extra cost item - the former will be within the MIRO but the latter won't.
The spare wheel isn’t an extra
ThanksDepends whether it's within the standard specification for your model or whether it's an extra cost item - the former will be within the MIRO but the latter won't.
On my caravan the spare wheel was NOT an extra, it came supplied with the van, but it was not counted in the MRO, weight. So another 21 kg including the carrier.Thanks
The spare wheel isn’t an extra
Strange as in most cases the general MIRO is as it comes out of the factory? You learn something new every day. Ours includes battery and wastemaster as we have an onboard tank and it was built after 2011.On my caravan the spare wheel was NOT an extra, it came supplied with the van, but it was not counted in the MRO, weight. So another 21 kg including the carrier.
This really is a nightmare for you.
Can anyone confirm if the spare tyre is also included in the MIRO, presume so as it’s fitted in factory
Not so much nightmare, just learning 😂On my caravan the spare wheel was NOT an extra, it came supplied with the van, but it was not counted in the MRO, weight. So another 21 kg including the carrier.
This really is a nightmare for you.
I can't comment on the accuracy of your particular device, nor how it operates in reality, but the methodolgy is correct.When weighing the second wheel which also takes a portion of the first wheels downwards weight, there must be a discrepancy in the exact total KG for the passenger side. There has to be a percentage reduction for the combined weight of the total, given that it’s basically a “shared weight”
I am fairly sure that the Reich scale takes that into account as it did similar with the nose weight gauge.An observation on the use of the Reich for twin-axle caravans - the device itself has thickness, up to 45mm according to the internet - so the measured wheel will be higher than the other wheel on that side which will distort the readings and equally distort the reading when the other wheel is weighted.
So you need to arrange planks either side of the device so that the other wheel is at the same height as the wheel being measured - to be really pedantic you need the same thickness planks on the other side to prevent the tilt of the caravan affecting the reading.
How can it take it into account - every caravan would be different.I am fairly sure that the Reich scale takes that into account as it did similar with the nose weight gauge.
Lifting one wheel by 45mm will increase the weight on that wheel and reduce the weight on the other wheel that side - caravan springs are very high rate, in terms of kg per mm, because the movement range between no load and full load is relatively small, much smaller than a car - that 45 mm is around half the total movement so could have a major effect on the meaasurement.45mm isn't going to shift the Centre of Gravity that much to make a difference worth considering.
CoG doesn't need to move - the weight is transferred to the wheel being weighed, increasing it's apparent load - and the weight is then transferred to the other wheel when that is weighed, increasing it's apparent load.Only if the CofG moves and if the wheel is lifted by 45mm the CofG will move much less than this. The springs don't matter as they cannot alter the overall weight.
You can shift wheel load on a twin axle from one to the other without altering the CoG.Sorry to disagree but you can't shift weight without moving the CofG.
Conversely if you redistribute the weight the CofG will move accordingly.
Yeh thinking the same mate,Saxo, after reading reviews on Caravan talk and on Amazon, on the Reich unit it looks like it is a 50 / 50 result for the CWC. As you are within your return envelope, and not happy with it, send it back.
Load your van with all the normal things you would take away, pots pans, chemicals, TV, etc. then weigh the van.
That is "YOUR " MRO. Then you know how much payload you have left, and can add clothes toiletries etc.
That is what I done a couple of years ago.
My postings #96 and #106. Refer I wouldn't buy a new one.
That's Reich confirming what I was trying to suggest - it'll be interesting to see what it brings your weights down to.So due to the above, the calculation is much higher than it seems due to the spring pushing down on the Reich with more force then what it would be due ti compression, think I’m reading that correct.
If I’m returning the Reich, which is a very high chance, and which will be before we are at the caravan again to weigh…That's Reich confirming what I was trying to suggest - it'll be interesting to see what it brings your weights down to.
I surrender 😉 This needs discussing over a beer. I'm used to pushing electrons around not springs.You can shift wheel load on a twin axle from one to the other without altering the CoG.
For example, assume the spring rates are 10 kg per mm and that the front wheel is on a 20mm block while the rear wheel is in a 20mm hole so the caravan is level across the axles - the load on the front wheel will increase by 20 x 10 = 200 kg and the load on the rear wheel will decrease by the same - any measurement of the front wheel will be 200 kg more than normal - if you then change the configuration so the rear is higher while it's being measured it will equally read too high - thus adding the two figures together will overstate the total weight on that side of the caravan.
The only way to use the Reich accurately is to make up planks to match the height of the Reich measuring pad.
I think my assumed spring rates and wheel deflection are of similar order to Saxo Appeal's testing and that his computed weight is over-stated significantly.
A twin axle caravans has two springs each side - so very possible for the force on one to increase while the force on the other decreases by the same amount - the inaccuracy occurs when you're only weighing one axle at a time and then switching the forces around before weighing the second axle.I surrender 😉 This needs discussing over a beer. I'm used to pushing electrons around not springs.
But I can't resist a final thought. You can only compress a spring by increasing the force on it. No weight change on the static caravan, no compression.
I reserve the right to be wrong. However, I'm still sceptical that a 45mm lift on one wheel would give the discrepancy the OP is seeing.
If the overall height is 45mm the load cell (the bit the wheel sits on) appears to be around half that. I'm confident that raising one wheel (on a twin) will increase the load on that wheel but I have no idea by how much. I'd speculate that it will vary from caravan to caravan depending on chassis, suspension and weight.I surrender 😉 This needs discussing over a beer. I'm used to pushing electrons around not springs.
But I can't resist a final thought. You can only compress a spring by increasing the force on it. No weight change on the static caravan, no compression.
I reserve the right to be wrong. However, I'm still sceptical that a 45mm lift on one wheel would give the discrepancy the OP is seeing.