-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Incorrect Gas locker plate
- Thread starter Ste6t9
- Start date
Last edited:
So I have been in contact with another Turin (2019) owner whose locker plate says 100kg for the nose and 1000kg per axle and the max is 1800kg. So is his incorrect then? Or has the chassis been down rated for the newer model?
If it is 1000kg peraxle then surely MTPLM should be 2000kg and not 1800kg. Can his be upgraded to 2000kg? The gas locker plate should be the one that DVSA would check and not the sticker on side of caravan.
My gas locker plate is pictured above. I paid for the upgrade which was supplied with an outside sticker and a certificate as I collected the van.
Nothing has changed for the indoor sticker.
Surely if a vehicle has an MPTLM of 1800 the axles between them should a add to a little more otherwise to get 1800 it’s almost impossible unless the back is 900 and the front and nose combined is no more than 900kg.
Please can someone who has had an upgrade done explain if the gas locker should already be at the potential upgrade for numbers or if that should have been changed too??
Nothing has changed for the indoor sticker.
Surely if a vehicle has an MPTLM of 1800 the axles between them should a add to a little more otherwise to get 1800 it’s almost impossible unless the back is 900 and the front and nose combined is no more than 900kg.
Please can someone who has had an upgrade done explain if the gas locker should already be at the potential upgrade for numbers or if that should have been changed too??
The OP has now changed the question beyond the original query. His van has been upgraded to 1800 kg which relates to the locker weight plate and now the new MTPLM label.
First check the NCC Certificate which should also have been upgraded. You may also have a Bailey Certificate of Conformity. The plate in the gas locker is wrong. Contact your dealer. You could also have a look at the AlKo serial number plate on the axles which show the axle rating. They are paper stickers on the forward right side of the axle tube.
Apologies- didn’t think I had changed anything.
When we got the van, it was supplied with the upgrade (I had to stick on myself and pay for the privilege). I had assumed that the gas locker plate was automatically set at the higher MTPLM showing what could be done if one chose to (like I did).
When we got the van, it was supplied with the upgrade (I had to stick on myself and pay for the privilege). I had assumed that the gas locker plate was automatically set at the higher MTPLM showing what could be done if one chose to (like I did).
When my last van was upgraded the new MTPLM aligned with the figures on the plate affixed in the locker. All that changed was new paperwork issued by Swift with a new door sticker. The axle weight limit was 1300 kg which aligned with the original locker plate. No different to what Bailey have done for you.
Apologies I was referring to post #4 regarding his friend's caravan axle weight.
but Bailey has given me the sticker for a new MTPLM of 1800 and my gas locker is still at 1724kg so not aligned at all and if the DVSA decide to check, which will they look at especially with regard to axle limits.
Still confused. My plate says 900 per axle. As does the sticker (it’s a twin) but then isn’t it impossible to attain an MTPLM of 1800 unless your nose weight is 0??
to get any nose weight I seen to be overloading the front axle (there’s a lot of weight on it naturally from the fridge and battery)
MTPLM includes noseweight. It is set by the manufacturer.
This is a conversation we have had many times.
So at the weighbridge, if I’m looking at 1800 as a maximum, I can’t have more than 850 per axle because I have 100 kg of nose weight.
If you balanced the van with zero noseweight it would still have to weigh no more than the MTPLM. The van is considered as a vehicle in its own right.
Last edited:
In practice the two axles may not be equally loaded - eg it may be loaded at 100/800/900 or 100/900/800 or any other variation totalling 1800 kg.
Hello Ste69
It really doesn't matter what anyone elses caravan data plate says as your caravan will be judged on its own plate. It is possible the manufacture has changed the specification of the components they use, or perhaps they make certain modifications to suite a particular national market.
If you have any concern about your data plate the only place you can get that resolved is through the manufacture or the dealer that sold the caravan to you.
You clearly are not understanding the definitions of each of the weight/load criteria and how they interact and how an overload might be detected.
Essentially every limit defined on a data plate is immutable. Where two or more limits are involved with a third such as axle limits and MAM, you always have to ensure that NON of the limits are exceeded, and it can mean that one or more of the limits cannot not be explored fully all at the same time. Its far from uncommon to find the sum of a cars axle limits exceed the cars MAM, it simply means you have to reduce one or more of the other loads to bring the whole car back under its MAM.
Exactly the same logic applies to trailers, but it is further complicated by the transference of any developed nose load from the trailer to the tow vehicle.
Don't forget these are limits not targets.
It really doesn't matter what anyone elses caravan data plate says as your caravan will be judged on its own plate. It is possible the manufacture has changed the specification of the components they use, or perhaps they make certain modifications to suite a particular national market.
If you have any concern about your data plate the only place you can get that resolved is through the manufacture or the dealer that sold the caravan to you.
You clearly are not understanding the definitions of each of the weight/load criteria and how they interact and how an overload might be detected.
Essentially every limit defined on a data plate is immutable. Where two or more limits are involved with a third such as axle limits and MAM, you always have to ensure that NON of the limits are exceeded, and it can mean that one or more of the limits cannot not be explored fully all at the same time. Its far from uncommon to find the sum of a cars axle limits exceed the cars MAM, it simply means you have to reduce one or more of the other loads to bring the whole car back under its MAM.
Exactly the same logic applies to trailers, but it is further complicated by the transference of any developed nose load from the trailer to the tow vehicle.
Don't forget these are limits not targets.
Last edited:
Forgive me, Prof. I do understand it. However it seems that Bailey have therefore designed a caravan that is either a) impossible to load with overloading the front front axle or b) easy to load without overloading the front axle but making the van wildly nose-light and therefore highly dangerous on the road.
If we’re going to keep it (which we are) then I think it’s going to have to be towed by a pickup so I can put everything in the towcar and not worry.
What is most upsetting in all this is that (as you are all well aware) I have put probably way too much time and effort into trying to ensure I am safe and legal whereas clearly most caravanners don’t give a toss and don’t ever get caught.
This resulted in what should have been a lovely drive through the Cotswolds being more of a constant worry that I was doing something wrong.
Anyway, I’m here now and I’ll try to sort it out another day.
I'm sorry but this shows you have not understood the detail of the weights and limits and their interactions related to caravans.
The limits the Bailey/Al-Ko caravans have given are perfectly reasonable and rational, It all depends on how you distribute your load within the caravan as to which proportions of the load are supported by the wheels or the hitch.
As I pointed out previously trying to work with loads that are so close to the limits is massively complicated, and you should be applauded for trying. But it's become so complicated because you're trying to eek out the odd kg here and there and you are working right at the very top of the margin and there is so little wriggle room.
it is highly unusual for any one to take it so seriously. I'm not suggesting that is wrong, But I do agree that some caravanners may well be running illegally without realising it, and apparently getting away with it.
But that is not a reason to allow complacency to rule becasue it is no secret that with modern technology it is possible to take quite accurate axle load measurements on fast moving traffic. There are trials of such systems in the USA and I believe some UK port authorities are testing them for commercial and safety reasons for loading ferries.
Even if these systems only highlight a possible issue it could be enough just cause for the police to pull any vehicle over for a more detailed VOSA investigation.
I do understand and have had to come to the realisation that as we like to take plenty of stuff, it’s clearly not going to go in the van. And if I put more in the car, I will be close to the MAM of the tow vehicle.
Therefore my solution as stated previously is to take the van out of the equation to a degree by looking at a tow car that can take what we need comfortably within the MAM and axle limits of the car (including any transferred nose weight) and then not have to worry that the van is too heavy on either axle. That vehicle is likely to be a pick up and as we like Mitsubishi, possibly an L200.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Mandatory eye tests for drivers over 70 being proposed by HMG. Good or bad?- Started by Dustydog
- Replies: 227
-
-
When does a repeated failure over say ten years become a Product Recall , if at all?
- Started by Dustydog
- Replies: 9
-
Caravan Battery we think is dead even though we have solar- Started by Saxo Appeal
- Replies: 172
