Desirable MH features? Forums

travelman868

I had Fiat FWD on my last van, gross weight 4.5 ton. Always had problems with loose surfaces on a slope. When the going gets slippary its the FWD vans are the ones in trouble.

Not a problem if parked on hard standing but a lot of sites are grass.

Humber-Traveller

Greetings,

I have had front wheel drives in the past but they were always touchy on wet grass, never had a real problem but it could have been a possibility if I got stuck.

The rear wheel drive of our Chausson is very good, it also appears to hold the road better especially on corners, ours has the twin rear wheels which improves traction further and spreads the load giving a better carrying capacity over the rear axle.

bandaid

general thoughts on cars and front wheel drive .v.rear wheel wossname is that with fwd, the wheels have too much to do all at once, whereas with rwd they sort of job share more efficiently.

JeanLuc

Agree with all that has been said so far. Ours is on a Merc Sprinter RWD chassis. Much better traction in slippery conditions. I have watched FWD Fiat- based MHs slither about on very modest wet inclines. There is a partial cure of course - turn round and reverse up the slope, but that is not always easy to effect.

Don't worry about loss of space due to prop-shaft. The MH floor is well above that level anyway. The only issue is that with RWD you will not get an ALKO twin-floor van. (At least, I have not heard of an ALKO chassis bolted onto RWD vans.) But don't assume that you have to have a twin floor for good winterisation. That was a wrong assumption we made when we began to search.

One other point in favour of RWD - they tend to have a tighter turning circle because the steered wheels do not have to accommodate drive-shafts.

DocHoliday

Thanks for the opinions and observations. As a one-time vehicle handling engineer at MIRA, I know there are quite a few reasons for preferring RWD from a handling POV. But it seems counter-intuitive to me that FWD would suffer from less grip since with the engine up front there's plenty of weight over the front wheels. I know RWD would be a more balanced vehicle in terms of weight distribution fore and aft and obviously twin wheels help a lot. Anyway, the proof is in real life experience and I accept that seems to indicate RWD has more traction on grass etc. Smile

JeanLuc

Doc,
You say it is counter-intuitive that a FWD van will have insufficient weight over the front wheels to achieve good grip. I sense you are thinking about weight distribution from the perspective of a car driver. Most cars are designed with 'a wheel at each corner'. Most moterhomes are not. The rear wheels are normally some way forward of the back of the vehicle and there is a significant overhang at the rear. Since a lot of the load is at the back of the vehicle, the effect is create a lever about the fulcrum of the rear wheels. So the more weight is distributed towards the rear, the greater the upward force on the front wheels. Whilst the engine and gearbox of a car represent probably the greatest object of mass within the body they are, by comparison, relatively light weight when seen in the context of a motorhome weighing upwards of 3.5 tonnes. So a fully loaded FWD motorhome will tend to struggle for grip on damp grass

hilldweller