Bent Chassis on my MN GRRRRRR

[NitroGLXRin]

^^^^hahaha very interesting. but dont you need to compare the actual requirement spec between our ADR's and south africas? Our ADR's may only look at being compliant with 95% of roads or something, and then if south africa also looks at 95% of roads, but because there roads may be twice as bad as ours for that 95%, then you could see why they have the reduced capacity. just spinnig shit here, dont know how they do it

[NitroGLXRin]

hey does anyone know an answer to this question.

Your max towball down load, is that assuming absolutely no weight in the back??????????

[4wd26]

Its the nomads with there 26 foot twin berth vans that Mitsubishi (and others) are trying to apeal to.
these guys are (mainly) hiway tourers so really static loads.

I have never seen any reference to towing weight being restricted for offroad use (from Mitsubishi), BUT I have run my own safety factor over my setup, with intended use factored in.

Another item to be aware of is the use of weight distribution hitch/ bars.

[4wd26]

hey does anyone know an answer to this question.

Your max towball down load, is that assuming absolutely no weight in the back??????????

Max towball load has to be taken from the load of the vehicle.
In the case of the dual cab- payload is ~ 950kg
So (not sure on the MN) but my ML has a 250kg ball weight leaving 700kg payload.

take away my heavy ass (100kg well maybe I lied a bit )- 600kg
fuel (including long range tank) 140kg leaves- 460kg
wife and kids and handbag (150kg) - 310kg
Bull bar rear bar spare tyre (100kg) -210kg
Canopy (100kg) 110kg
put beer or anything in tub ???? your going over.........

If the MN has 300kg ballweight even worse........

I would love to see ratpatrol weighbridge certificate- including rear axle weight (for triton 1800kg)
With that much weight so rearward- and with trailer downforce added (it counts as vehicle loaded weight).

If its all legit- should be no problems posting up...... and thats where the problem lies so many things have to be right.....

[sam]

The Uk's tow capacity is basically the same as ours as you can only tow 3,000 if it has a tray fitted and 2700 with the well body .

[Kegsy]

I didn't think you could weld onto a chassis due to weakening through the heat or some such thing.

if the chassis has a cetain heat treatment on the material and you weld it you will defineately change the properties. But you just have to re-do the heat treatment process to that localised area to bring it back to spec, if possible. In airrcraft the do similar things to fishplates but instead of welding they rivet so that the proerties are unchanged.

Doesn't Apply to our chassis. You just weld it and it's fine.

However you do need to be aware of haz and the sequence in which you weld. Also a jig is highly recommended.

The chassis must be allowed to naturally cool, water or air is not to be used to speed up the cooling process.

[NitroGLXRin]

^^^yeh, the naturally cooled is the heat treatment process.

[patrolus]

the towing cap. is the same for the german version,
trailer without breaks 750kg
with breaks 2700kg (over the whole range of models)
but the max towball weight is 115kg!

[snowman]

A couple of point s to ponder (and debate );
1. It seems from posts that this failure is an automatic write off.
2. In NSW now (started Oct 1 2010) you cannot repair write offs. It is now only good for parts.
3. Remember that it is not who is right or wrong in these legal cases but he who has the biggest cheque book.
4. If the insurance companies do pay out on these (?) then at $40k+ a pop insurance will go up overnight if they start seeing more than isolated cases. They work on hard claims data and won’t hesitate to significantly up the premiums if they see this as an issue. They may even do it to the ML’s as it is the same chassis?
5. If insurance companies due start to pay out a few then maybe they will take it up with MMAL –they do have bigger cheque books and legal departments.
6. Insurance companies don’t take $40k payouts lightly – they will try and find a way out of this as well.
7. If you think you can beat MMAL in a legal fight good luck. It will be cheaper to replace your car. A government department is your only option and I feel for these people – big time.
8. I have said from the beginning of my well documented ML canopy issues that there seems to be too much chassis flex – obviously the lengthened MN has pushed this over the line when it is placed in the upper limits of load and terrain type.
9. In my opinion the best engineering option, long term for existing MN’s (and maybe ML’s) is for Mitsubishi Motors to combine its engineering might and provide an aftermarket MM approved chassis strengthening kit. Maybe some form of bolt on two piece (per side) clamping type brace that relocates the weak spot to another stronger location. I would buy one in a second for the ML as it would probably reduce the flex in hard 4wding situations and as long as it is MM approved it should alleviate any hassles with warranty etc.
10. I can hear the people saying why should we pay for it blah blah – well many people have upped their completely useless bash plates as well but I don’t know of anyone who has taken their receipt to MMAL for a refund…… This is definitely a problem but if you think MMAL will ‘recall’ a undersized chassis then you are dreaming……..
11. Most of the MN Tritons won’t see the extreme use as some of these cases and will never have a problem. The ‘bolt on solution’ as indicated above would become standard fitment with all MMAL towbars I would bet.
12. If I owned an MN now and towed heavily I would seriously look into a load equalizing hitch as a matter of urgency. Obviously the ‘load’ is still carried along the chassis but the hitch provides some lifting moments to the area in question which may help. Problem is these hitches are no good in outback (4wding) territory.

[NitroGLXRin]

hey does anyone know an answer to this question.

Your max towball down load, is that assuming absolutely no weight in the back??????????

ok here is where im comming from. If the above answer to my question is a YES, then from Rats weights provided it looks like its over the load ability.

if you take the max load in the tub of 938odd kg, and assume a bending moment acts at the front of the tub. Then a uniformally distributed load off 938kg will create a moment of approx 703kg/m. Now from rats weights of 717kg payload and 228kg towball download, thatn means a bending moment of approx 948kg/m. approx 248kg/m more than should be allowed.

If this is correct then people really need to consider what accesories and load they have in the back before towing offroad. open to any criticism on this

[borngeek]

the towing cap. is the same for the german version,
trailer without breaks 750kg
with breaks 2700kg (over the whole range of models)
but the max towball weight is 115kg!

Thanks for the info patrolus!

ball weight again 185kg difference

how do they justify it? German roads are famous for their quality!! ours are famous for being....

[Tony]

Hey smowman, I think a chassis reinforcing option would be the go. We have been doing it to our Range Rovers for years. And it works. Very different type of chassis how ever.

The only problem I can see with reinforcing a ladder chassis is it may cause the passenger compartment to crush or even dislodge in a hard rear impact.

I'm pondering what to do with my MN as do heaps of towing on rough roads. I wont be mounting two spare tyres etc to the bar, that's for sure.

[Blue]

hey does anyone know an answer to this question.

Your max towball down load, is that assuming absolutely no weight in the back??????????

Max towball load has to be taken from the load of the vehicle.
In the case of the dual cab- payload is ~ 950kg
So (not sure on the MN) but my ML has a 250kg ball weight leaving 700kg payload.

take away my heavy ass (100kg well maybe I lied a bit )- 600kg
fuel (including long range tank) 140kg leaves- 460kg
wife and kids and handbag (150kg) - 310kg
Bull bar rear bar spare tyre (100kg) -210kg
Canopy (100kg) 110kg
put beer or anything in tub ???? your going over.........

If the MN has 300kg ballweight even worse........

I would love to see ratpatrol weighbridge certificate- including rear axle weight (for triton 1800kg)
With that much weight so rearward- and with trailer downforce added (it counts as vehicle loaded weight).

If its all legit- should be no problems posting up...... and thats where the problem lies so many things have to be right.....

It's funny how these things add up - Payloads can sound impressive, as can towing ability until you start crunching numbers... Landcruiser200 is a good example:

Kerb weight:2700kg
GVM: 3300kg

Now add 5 blokes at or around the 100kg mark and you have 100kg to play with...

Toss in a fridge, bacon, eggs & meat (real men don't eat vegies on boys trips) and a few slabs and you suddenly find yourself with no capacity to carry clothes, recovery gear or tow the bike trailer (ball weight incorporated in GVM), which was the initial purpose of the trip...

[GNK]

Surely mma can't sell accessories on new vehicles and then deem said vehicle not covered? this seems beyond belief. Good luck mate, believe the engineers report will make it extremely hard for them to prove your mods were the cause, esp as location pre axle.

[ultimate]

It's funny how these things add up - Payloads can sound impressive, as can towing ability until you start crunching numbers... Landcruiser200 is a good example:

Kerb weight:2700kg
GVM: 3300kg

Now add 5 blokes at or around the 100kg mark and you have 100kg to play with...

Toss in a fridge, bacon, eggs & meat (real men don't eat vegies on boys trips) and a few slabs and you suddenly find yourself with no capacity to carry clothes, recovery gear or tow the bike trailer (ball weight incorporated in GVM), which was the initial purpose of the trip...

That's why GVM upgrades are becoming so important even for touring vehicles. The 200 series in particular has become an interesting vehicle as we are now getting GVM upgrades applied and engineered for vehicles which have already been registered. A lot of people are buying the vehicle, modifying it and than finding themselves stuck between legal obligations. The price isn't cheap either. Most standard kits are around $1100 for a 200 Series but a GVM upgrade is about $3300.

[sam]

So Brendan what do you get for $3300 is it just a piece of paper or is something done to the suspension etc as part of the GVM upgrade

[RockoWallaby]

hey does anyone know an answer to this question.

Your max towball down load, is that assuming absolutely no weight in the back??????????

This is garbage half the time, I reckon
My old Holden frontera had a 2000kg towing capacity, so I made the usual assumption it had a ball mass of 200kg (ie: 10% towing capacity). The Ball mass wasn't listed in the manual, which only had the towing capacity. I only found out after years of towing it had a ball mass of 90kg!!
This was useless for my small caravan (or virtually anything, in reality). Sure, it'd happily towed everything thrown at it for 10 years, but the legalities worried me.
So, I sold it and bought the Triton.
Only to find that Holden had later revised the ball mass to 200kg, but hadn't circulated the modified information.
So, what it states doesn't necessarily reflect wat it is. I think it's manufacturers covering their arses.
Scotty

[ultimate]

The GVM upgrade kits are bit different to normal upgrades. You actually pay for a pre-engineered kit which is why the price is a lot more. For a pre-registered vehicle you get federal compliance and the kit includes all of the heavy duty suspension components, 2 decals and a compliance plate. So not much in the way of bells and whistles but it is a necessary option for owners of 200 series land cruiser who have a need to carry loads to a GVM of 3800 kg (up from 3300kg standard GVM). The GVM upgrade meets all of the practical and compliance requirements of work safety, police licensing, insurance, lessors and fleet managers. The kit is complianced by department of infrastructure, transport, regional development and local government and comes with a secondary manufacturers compliance plate. State compliance can be achieved on vehicles which have already been registered.

Currently there is no GVM or GCM upgrade available for the Triton.

[4wd26]

I have had a look at this (GVM upgrade) for the upcoming purchase of the MN.
We will not get a usable upgrade because other componants are not rated highly enough- namely the rear diff.

If you add the front and rear diff loads together (memory 1260 and 1800kg) 3060kg- we could ask and get engineered a GVM increase of approx 100kg (difference between GVM now and theretical alxe loads)

Not worth the $3k for such a small increase.

[rat patrol]

hey does anyone know an answer to this question.

Your max towball down load, is that assuming absolutely no weight in the back??????????

ok here is where im comming from. If the above answer to my question is a YES, then from Rats weights provided it looks like its over the load ability.

if you take the max load in the tub of 938odd kg, and assume a bending moment acts at the front of the tub. Then a uniformally distributed load off 938kg will create a moment of approx 703kg/m. Now from rats weights of 717kg payload and 228kg towball download, thatn means a bending moment of approx 948kg/m. approx 248kg/m more than should be allowed.

If this is correct then people really need to consider what accesories and load they have in the back before towing offroad. open to any criticism on this

Mate maybe I did not explane it clearly but the 717kgs was allup payload includong the drawbar down load.I was roughly 25% under weight that was the buffer I alowed myself I thought that would be plenty.
Cheers
Rat

[NitroGLXRin]

^^^ok. but re-doing it with that taken into account it still comes out as a moment 70kg/m above what the equivalent moment that just having a full payload in the tub would create. But theres a few assumptions in this, ie: uniform weight distribution in the tub and dimensions used. And I am assuming that you can either have a loaded tub or a loaded towball, not both, even if under the GVM or under the rear axle limit (not sure on this but makes sense, or am i dribbleing shit again , dont know much about gvm, kerb weights etc).

So we have seen the point where this bending moment acts now from your mis fortune. So I am just saying your towball weight and weight in the tub in whatever configuration need to be carefully considered so as to minimize the bending moment on the chassis. I would never have even thought about this, would have just ssumed it will be strong enough.

[borngeek]

hey does anyone know an answer to this question.

Your max towball down load, is that assuming absolutely no weight in the back??????????

ok here is where im comming from. If the above answer to my question is a YES, then from Rats weights provided it looks like its over the load ability.

if you take the max load in the tub of 938odd kg, and assume a bending moment acts at the front of the tub. Then a uniformally distributed load off 938kg will create a moment of approx 703kg/m. Now from rats weights of 717kg payload and 228kg towball download, thatn means a bending moment of approx 948kg/m. approx 248kg/m more than should be allowed.

If this is correct then people really need to consider what accesories and load they have in the back before towing offroad. open to any criticism on this

Mate maybe I did not explane it clearly but the 717kgs was allup payload includong the drawbar down load.I was roughly 25% under weight that was the buffer I alowed myself I thought that would be plenty.
Cheers
Rat

Hi Rat!

I understand your frustration right now and further to what everyone has said here you also outlined that you are a professional driver (road trains so a MC license) at the other forum which some people may not know here?

This means that you are quite knowledgeable about load limits and all the rules regarding transport of heavy goods. My bro is a MC driver too and you HAVE to know your stuff regarding loads to obtain that license.
I believe this puts your case in good stead. Your not a punter that just hung fruit off your vehicle and drove blind across the countryside. You considered your load and packed it correctly according to specification sheets supplied by the manufacturer's distributor in Australia as well as the compliance sticker located on your vehicle.

You have every reason to have a song and dance, I believe you are totally in the right and have a strong case.

Read some of the advice sent out from Ultimate and Snowman. Also have a look at the 185KG discrepancy between international Tritons VS our Tritons in the way of allowable ball down weight.. Its a bit concerning!

Have you heard from the other cases of this yet? We are all interested and adding only in a capacity of 'outsiders' entirely curious and full of opinion, but also hoping to learn something!

[jock71]

.Rat
I have ordered a GLR from here in Adelaide, which will have a Heavy duty ally tray ( Genuine Mitsubishi tray) Mitsubishi tow bar Arb bull bar long range tank installed before I take delivery, the reason I have a tray being fitted is I want to install a tray back camper and tow a motorcycle trailer. I have phoned Mitsubishi Australia and asked them about it and they said I would need to talk with the dealer. So I phoned Adelaide, they said they have not heard of any case and they believe it would be covered. So I then phoned Ireland's in Cairns, they said they had only heard of a couple and that if all genuine accessories where fitted and within load tolerance it would be covered. Still not convinced hope you have success. The girl did say the manager knew that repair takes some time so maybe they have fixed under warranty may be helpful for you.
Best of luck and will be keeping a close eye on thread.
Cheers
Jock

[gregned]

So what load can I put in with my 1200kg Cub Drover camper trailer assuming a 120kg ball weight
Now I'm panicking.

[rat patrol]

What I should point out is that since I took delivery of the vehicle on the 9th of Feb 2010 till the day of the failure in August. I had travelled 43,000 klms. Most of that was well loaded BUT I stress not over loaded, the spares were only put on about a month before we left for the trip.
Trips that I have towed are.
The camper from Brisbane to Wooli and back, with gear in the back.
Brisbane to Bowen with the camper, 3poeple on board plus gear. Then on the return trip into Stanage bay and turkey Beach then on to 1770 and Agnes waters then down the back road to Bundy, then home
Towed a 1.3 ton Cherry picker to Townsville from Brisbane, this was the first trip with the spare tyres on the back.
Then we left for the trip we went from Brisbane via Narromine then (as I had a job there to do before we went to the desert.) then west along the Barrier highway in to Pt Augusta then on to Cober Peady then west 300ks into the Anne bedal when the failure happened.
My main beef is that the car is not able to do the job that Mitsubishi allege it to be able to do. When you get right down to it and start having a real good look around the car it is obvious.
The Chassis rails are made of 2 (c) sections of pressed metal [ ] like this. Now in older trucks the c sections would be overlapped so as you had double thickness of metal top and bottom. On the MN they just meet in the middle and are seam welded, and the metal would not be 2mm. Put your finger in one of the holes and see for yourselves.
Now all of the thoughts and reasons that people have put up are maybe half rite.
Working out moment arms and kgs per metre is not the issue; it is like trying to find the square root of the pickle without taking the lid of the jar. The vehicle is pure and simple not built for the task Mitsubishi are advertising it to be able to do.
The tow rates from South Africa and Pommy land are very interesting and I will be brining those up with Mitsubishi today. Maybe they have realized that the Chassis is not up to it and have weighted it as such.
There are some happenings today that should be very interesting will let you all know tonight.
Cheers
Rat