Nose Weight of Bailey Oklahoma

[WatsonJohnG]

Having emptied the van I decided to check the noseweight of the unladen van

Unladen that is except for 2 partly full Camping Gaz bottles in the front locker and the spare wheel in the Alko carrier to the rear of the axle and the leisure battery which sits over the wheel.

I was prompted to check the noseweight as a reply to another posting a few months ago asserted that European vans leave the factory with 65kg nose weight or thereabouts.

Well it doesn't work like that with the Bailey Senator Oklahoma.

The noseweight is completely over the max of the noseweight gauge and about double the 65kg hoped for.

 

[RichardS1]

According to my handbook John the Alko hitch has a 100kg limit on the van. I am coming around to the train of thought that manufacters are now designing vans to use the storage space under the rear fixed bed to counteract the heavy noseweights. When I towed with the Accord tourer loading towards the rear of the van was the only way I good get the Oklahoma's noseweight down to the 75kg limit for the car. Even though the caravan remained perfectly stable even on several hundred mile tows. Its no wonder though that people new to the hobby get confused about correct loading and noseweight etc.

 

[trucker]

Watson (johnG),

This subject came up a ferw months ago on the forum and apparently if the caravan is facing down hill on even a slight slope it can alter the nose weight, the reverse was said if it faced up hill.

My drive is on a slight slope and I checked the nose weight before reading the posts and as you have said the nose weight was off the gague. After reading the previous posts i checked it out in the road where it is level and it was different, 85k I beleive i achieved.

hope this helps

Kevin H

 

[WatsonJohnG]

Richard I agree with what you say about the fixed bed loading and had achieved 90-100kg nose weight when loaded

It goes against the ingrained belief that it is bad to load at the rear but there is little option.

Kevin thanks for your input

My drive slopes down at the front so I have the noseweight gauge on the trolley jack and raise it so that the caravan adopts the attitude it takes when attached to the car.

It was in the same position when I weighed the noseweight with the van loaded as above.

When we were on holiday with our friends we checked the noseweight on their Bordeaux and it was far too heavy.

My friend a died in the wool caravanner of many years experience then proceeded to remove the chairs fron the rear locker and put them in the front of the caravan as you don't carry heavy loads at the rear.

Old habits die hard

The posting a few months ago makes me wonder if a German van next time may be the answer..

 

[Guest]

A German van, or any mainstream European van is likely to come with the longer A frame, an extra 50mm. This does have the effect of reducing a given van weight at the tow hook end due to physics. However, it can be all too easy to add extra load to the front loacker and be back at the starting point. But I do agree that when empty the noseweight is usually well within limts.

 

[WatsonJohnG]

I know what you mean

Those double bike racks on the drawbar must redress the balance

 

[trucker]

JohnG, are you saying that if the front of the van is raised to level the van on a slope it will alter the nose weight to the same as being on flat ground??

Kevin H

 

[WatsonJohnG]

Well yeh but yeh but yeh but.....

What I am saying is that the van is at the same attitude as when it is on the car and that it was in exactly the same position when the nose weight was taken loaded and unloaded.

Not quite a level playing field but near enough

 

[RichardS1]

Road level outside our house and still get same result as John. Another thing that compounds the noseweight issue on the Senators is the automatic gas changeover system. It is a great system but to benefit from it you have to carry two gas bottles in the front locker.

 

[WatsonJohnG]

Thanks for that Richard

The Oklahoma weight distribution is pretty good from side to side with the cooker and fridge opposite the wardrobe,microwave and the battery box .

In our Statesman the battery was at the extreme rear corner which at 4st 3lb did a lot to reduce the noseweight but it was on the same side as the fridge and cooker.I was never happy with all that weight at the extreme corner.At least loading the underbed area the heavier weights can be placed centrally across the van and further forward.

In my mind it raises the question of legality of nose weight and coupling load when the caravans are being delivered.

Usually there are 2 vans on the lorry with one being towed.

Its all a compromise .

 

[Anthony3]

Watson (John G) reported

"I was prompted to check the noseweight as a reply to another posting a few months ago asserted that European vans leave the factory with 65kg nose weight or thereabouts.

Well it doesn't work like that with the Bailey Senator Oklahoma.

The noseweight is completely over the max of the noseweight gauge and about double the 65kg hoped for."

Still seems that UK manufacturers can't design caravans to have manageable noseweights.

No caravan should be sold that has a noseweight in excess of 100kgs. It's out of the chassis manufacturer's specification and unfit for sale. An exworks noseweight of ~50kg would give leaway for loading gas bottles, batteries and spare wheels etc in 'their dedicated places', such that legal towing noseweights are easily achievable. Unfortunately this is rarely the case and I would never take delivery of a caravan without checking it had a suitable noseweight.

Due to the design of continental 'vans having longer A-frames, noseweight is rarely a problem with them.

In fact with my Hobby, the locker is full of gas cylinders and gear AND there are two 85Ahr batteries in one front bed locker + a built-in water tank (usually 50% full) in the other!!

I have difficulty loading the 'van to get the noseweight above ~50kg!!!

It is far more mangeable to have to increase noseweight to achieve a suitable legal towing figure, than having to back-load to reduce an inherently high figure.

When will manufacturers get this sorted? It's been a problem for ~20yrs; engendered I suspect by keeping the overall length of 'vans as short as possible so as to get the cheaper cross-channel crossing rates that used to be applied on a length basis.

 

[Lutz]

I agree that UK caravan manufacturers seem bent on providing the maximum body length on a minimum possible overall length, with the result that the drawbar tends to be rather short and the noseweight correspondingly high.

Unfortunately, this may mean that ballast is required at the back end but the manufacturers can shrug their shoulders and say that's none of their business. So long as they have provided the owner a means of placing ballast at the rear, they've done all that is necessary. Such an attitude is more than unsatisfactory, but there it is.