FG buildup

[dhackney]

We're starting the buildup of our FG based rig.

You can follow along at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/

I'll add ongoing photos and comments to the site on the fabrication & assembly process as the project progresses.

We plan to take delivery in late October and depart for 2-3 years in early January.

Doug

[ZooJunkie]

Wow! Most excellent! Your rig is amazing, can't wait to see the completed rig and all your photos from your expedition!

:clapsmile

[Scott Brady]

Thanks so much for posting this up Doug.

Have you had the opportunity to drive the FG on a trail yet? I have never heard a first hand account of its performance.

[mountainpete]

Amazing Doug :archaeolo

[haven]

A fellow posted a note at www.expeditioncampers.com about driving 100 miles of the White Rim Trail at Moab in a Fuso FG 4x4 flatbed (without expedition cabin). He had no difficulty.

Chip Haven

[dhackney]

Thanks so much for posting this up Doug.

Have you had the opportunity to drive the FG on a trail yet? I have never heard a first hand account of its performance.

Scott,

I have not personally driven one on a trail, we've only test driven an FE on pavement.

We spent a few hours in AZ with Don and Kim Green who have an FG rig in South America and they instilled in us a very high level of confidence in the FG's off-road abilities. They've got a pretty extensive off-road pedigree (at least from a 4x4 virgin, dirt-biker perspective) and sang the praises of the FG in the terrain they've encountered so far on that continent. They've got the same kind of "hey, that wash looks interesting, let's see what's up there" mindset that we do, so we felt they've blazed a relevent trail for us in this regard.

I don't know enough to have an opinion on the dual rear wheels, and can only go on the experiences of the Greens and others who have taken this chassis on global expeditions with great success.

Our concept is "base camp," so when things start to look dicey for the rig, we'll park it and get on the dirt bikes. Which is a great theory until you need to get everything over a remote pass...

If we stay on schedule we'll be in Baja for the middle of November running a pit for a friend who is soloing the Baja 1000 and then field testing the rig. Interested in coming down and seeing what it will do?

Doug

[Colorado Ron]

Are you looking for suggestions? If so, I would seriously look at the departure angle. IMO you would have way too much hanging off the rear!

If your not looking for suggestions: Great Project and ignore the above!:D

[dhackney]

I would seriously look at the departure angle.

We're always open to suggestions! That's one upside to being a novice in a new area of expertise, just about everyone knows more than we do about this area, so we're open to learning from everyone.

I agree that the departure angle with the stock wheelbase (as illustrated) would be a real challenge unless we stayed on main roads.

One thing I didn't make clear on the web site is that we are planning to move the rear axle back 12-18" by lengthening the frame. We will determine the exact rear axle location once the camper arrives and we've determined the location of the house bank batteries, LP tank, adl. fuel tank, etc.

It will be a balancing act between weight distribution, turning radius and departure angle.

[BajaTaco]

AHA! I was just asking Scott not too long ago if he knew what you ended up doing/deciding on. This is pretty wild! It sounds/looks very fun.

"One thing I didn't make clear on the web site is that we are planning to move the rear axle back 12-18" by lengthening the frame. "

I was wondering about that departure angle too. One downside to moving the axle back is that you will decrease the breakover angle. The BOA is probably the lesser of the two evils though. Looking at the driveline photos on your website, it looks like this will be a consideration, no? My tendency is to think about the cab-over part of the camper actually being over the cab. BUT, I know you want a place for the moto garage, and I also see the height is over 11' as it is. This may sound crazy, but have you considered mounting the camper body backwards? You could fab a pass-thru from the cab into the camper (yea, I know you'd have to crouch-down to get through), and somehow make another main entry from the side or rear? This would allow you to move the moto garage more over the rear axle, and create a sloping rear profile that would tie the "cab-over" part of the camper into the frame. In that angled portion of the garage, you could fit the sliding gear stow, etc. Maybe this would allow a much better depature angle without lengthening the wheelbase? LOL, I know... this is brainstorming... it might look bizarre...

[Colorado Ron]

Im glad to hear your open to suggestions. Ill try to be to the point and be honest, as Id hate to meet you on the road somewhere saying," why didnt you just tell me it was wrong!"

Anyway, Bajataco--he cant make it go over the cab because the cab has to tilt foward for one thing.

Hackney, if it were mine.......

I wouldnt stretch the wheelbase. You sacrifice too much turning radius and break over angle. You gonna have to come up with a different type camper if you wanna keep it off the cab and reduce your departure angle. I personally wouldnt extend anymore than 12-15 inches past the back wheels unless it was at an angle, then maybe up to 3ft max. Another delima I see is weight. With all those boxes and gear, that is going to be one heavy sucker. I would seriously consider going to a single track setup like this:

http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/12/web/840000-840999/840825_26_full.jpg

Id also get Nospin setup so you got true 4wheel:
http://www.ferret.com.au/articles/2d/0c012f2d.asp

Another thought--have you considered a custom canopy with walls as your garage and just mount the bikes on the back. With all the boxes youll have plenty of room for your tools and such. By doing this and having a canvas type garage would save a ton of room and really help its offroad abilities. Kinda like this:
http://www.maximog.com/images/sublevel/trailer_open_side.jpg

Cant find a decent pic of my canvas with walls idea at the moment but Ill post it as soon as I find one!

[Scott Brady]

As we discussed, I would avoid lengthening the WB by much. In the US we have the luxury of big roads, left hand turn lanes, etc. As you know, small villages will be impossible to navigate if the turning radius changes much.

Since you are bringing the bikes, I believe that the FG should retain as much road and town driveability as possible. If you want to explore a remote area, use the FG as a base camp and explore from there.

Dragging the rear end is much less of an issue than high centering a 12,000lb home on wheels. :smiley_drive:

[dhackney]

Guys,

Thanks for the input! These are all great ideas and valid input.

I did consider mounting the camper backwards for the reasons cited. If it had a side opening door we might have done that. A pass through can be handy, even if you just use it for passing drinks, food, etc. We had a crawl-able one for our proof of concept rental and found it handy for that. In our set of compromises we chose to keep the camper as stock as possible, so no cutting of doorways or passages for this one.

We also considered mounting the camper in a traditional position over the cab, with the bikes stored on the bumpers or behind the camper in some way. With the integrated camper jacks it wouldn't be a big deal to remove it for cab tilt (assuming the chassis was functional enough to drive or roll it forward out from under the pivot frame/camper). The owners I've spoken with have indicated it is a fairly rare requirement to tilt the cab. But, height would be extreme with that design. We'll end up at around 12' / 3.66m as it is, and I think that will be a pretty limiting dimension where we tend to end up.

As to an exterior bike mounting position, we found that simply covering our bike whenever it was parked was a fantastic deterrent to tampering/theft/etc. The only time in over a year of global travel that we had anyone mess with our bike was when we left it parked uncovered in front of a national guard post. The bored soldiers apparently couldn't resist checking it out and tipped it over when they tried to sit on it and the alarm scared the p@## out of them. Out of sight really does = out of mind in most of the world. So, given that experience, we feel keeping the bike(s) under wraps is a good idea. We also know that anything that makes the bike(s) a hassle to mount and unmount like a fussy cover will keep us from riding them. Our goal is to design a clamping/ramp system that will allow extraction from the garage in a minute or so.

Scott hit on the real sleeper issue: weight. Our weight will probably preclude a single rear wheel conversion due to tire weight limits. We will be at or close to GVWR with this thing and the thought of extracting a 12-14k vehicle is humbling for me, whether up to the axles in mud or high centered on a rocky two track.

Another sleeper issue with this chassis is ground clearance. It's not all that much under the axles due to the small wheel size. While we plan to have our fabricator build bash plates for critical components, we won't be able to take on the more radical terrain if it requires high ground clearance for passage.

The people that we've spoken with who have taken these rigs around the planet have told us that they've never come close on departure angle (with the exception of one ferry in China), so it may be less of a limiting dimension than we are thinking right now.

In the end, the rear axle position will be determined by a delicate balancing act between weight balance, turning radius, departure angle and as you've pointed out, break-over angle. The front axle capacity of 5,730 lb / 2,599 k will probably be our limiting factor.

I agree with Scott that turning radius is a very, very precious commodity and one that I will guard jealously and sacrifice grudgingly.

One thing we learned with the proof of concept rental is that a long overhang not only limits you with departure angle, it also creates a huge aft-axle swing/sweep that can be equally limiting in the typically tight environments of developing economies.

We will, no matter where we place the rear axle, end up with a vehicle that will be large by developing world road/village/bridge standards, and we must be pragmatic about that and develop / adapt an exploration style that takes that reality into account. It is our hope that having the bikes will mitigate the inherent limitations of the rig. It is also our hope that the living space, comforts and carrying capacity provided by the rig will enhance our 2-3 years of exploration.

But as they say, hope is not a strategy...

Please keep the observations, suggestions and critiques coming. We can use all the help we can get.

Doug

[flyingwil]

Doug-

IMO, the limiting factor is the pre-made camper portion. Why not go 100% custom?

[Scott Brady]

Doug-

IMO, the limiting factor is the pre-made camper portion. Why not go 100% custom?

Most likely because of his departure date.

[flyingwil]

Most likely because of his departure date.

Yeah, I missed that.

[dhackney]

Doug- Why not go 100% custom?

Will,

Short version is:

Weight (all the custom ones we know of are as or more heavy than the factory camper)
Cost (unless we did the interior ourselves the custom options were more expensive than the factory camper)
Experience (anything we designed and built would be a first effort, with all the attendant rookie mistakes, system integration snafus, etc., the factory camper theoretically has most of the basic kinks worked out)
Time (we ran out of time for a custom build on the house box)


There's more detail on this at: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-FAQ.htm

There's actually a good track record of the factory camper option, at least with this Bigfoot brand. Check the Hunter rig section at http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-samples.htm

Personally, and this is just my opinion, I think North American built RVs and campers are almost all junk. I can't speak for European or Austrailian built products, but what we found in researching the stuff here was dismally depressing. So at first blush, I agreed with your pessimistic assessment of the option. In the end, we think/hope we've got something that will serve us for the time period we're looking at. Time will tell.

Doug

[flyingwil]

Yeah I hear ya'! My pop used to own a moving company, and having logged many miles on a FG, it will not let you down! I would look into the air-ride seat options to save your kidneys a bit, on rough roads such as I-94 outside of Madison, WI, it would become a beast, and I would dread every pot hole, or bump. I am sure you already have something up your sleeve for this, though.

[VikingVince]

Doug,

Thanks for posting this thread, the links, and your design plans. It never occurred to me to use the fifth wheel Bigfoot trailer...your design plan is unique.
I'll be following your site with much interest...no doubt you'll have a a fantastic adventure.

I see from your links that you have not done South America...you're an experienced traveler and no doubt aware of numerous abductions/murders in SA just to get your ATM card and password. There's a thread somewhere here in the forum about a European couple who met their end in Bolivia (there are numerous similar incidents)...their abductors posed as police officers...which makes it significantly more difficult to make a quick decision to flee. Of course there are many people who have travelled SA with no problem...I think I would take VERY specific note of how legitimate police are dressed...thus being better prepared to identify the fakes...just a thought.

[haven]

Regarding the wheelbase extension, remember that the cab-forward truck is different from the typical pickup. The 133" wheelbase Fuso has a longer cargo area and a considerably tighter turning circle than the 160" F450.

So, sure, keep the wheelbase as short as possible, but don't worry about adding 12 inches. When Doug lengthens the Fuso's frame, the truck will drive like a big pickup, not a 30 foot motorhome.

Chip Haven

[dhackney]

Doug,
I see from your links that you have not done South America...you're an experienced traveler and no doubt aware of numerous abductions/murders in SA just to get your ATM card and password.

VikingVince,

Thanks for the heads up on this technique. It would be a bummer to go down in Bolivia, of all places, after spending a couple of months exploring the Middle East during the current Iraqi war.

We've got a friend who was kidnapped and later released in Columbia. The last time we had lunch with him he gave us a stern lecture on the dangers there.

He spent the last couple of years riding around the world, covering much of the same ground we did, as well as some additional areas. He ended up discovering the same thing we did: the rest of the world is much safer than the typical American city. All we ever hear about the rest of the world back here are the exceptionally violent incidents. Imagine what you'd think of America if all you ever heard was the daily murder report out of any major city.

Having said that, we will continue to be diligent and aware, and most important, follow our gut.

Doug

[dhackney]

The 133" wheelbase Fuso has a longer cargo area and a considerably tighter turning circle than the 160" F450.

Chip,

I've got a competitive turning radius comparison at: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-specs.htm

wheelbase: turning radius
----------------------------
FG 109": 42 ft / 12/8 m
FG 133": 49.9 ft / 15.2 m
GMC 136": 49 ft / 14.9 m
GMC 160": 53.7 ft / 16.36 m
Dodge 139" : 46.4 ft / 14.14 m
Dodge 163" : 52.7 ft / 16.06 m
Ford 137" : 49.2 ft / 14.99 m
Ford 161" : 56.4 ft / 17.19 m

As you point out, the FG had a very effecient turning radius for a given payload length.

These #'s came from the Mitsubishi / FUSO sales training manual. Unfortunately, there were no other brands included so I don't know how the FG compares with chassis sold in non-North American markets.

Doug

[VikingVince]

We've got a friend who was kidnapped and later released in Columbia. The last time we had lunch with him he gave us a stern lecture on the dangers there.
Doug

I bet that is one helluva interesting story...he's one lucky guy...it would be informative to hear more about that but don't wanna hijack this thread...did they drain his bank account with his ATM card?

Doug...I would love to see your rig when it's close to completion...no doubt other EP folk would as well! (I have to update my computer to view the "Project" link on your website) I'd even be more than willing to come down for a weekend and offer you my assistance/labor on any aspect of the rig buildup/trip prepartions where I could be of help. (I'd find somewhere to camp) PM me if you wanna take me up on the offer at some point.:)

[dhackney]

I have to update my computer to view the "Project" link on your website

I changed the structure of the components page so you don't need any plugins to see where we're at with the major systems. Things are evolving daily, so those pages will be updated soon.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-components.htm

I'll post as many shots as possible during the buildup. I'll only be there for a couple of weeks, so I'm depending on our fabricator to shoot lots of photos during the process.

You can learn more about the Columbia thing by reading the book, Two Wheels to Terror, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1884313493

You can learn more about Glen, his subsequent circumnavigation by bike and where to get an autographed copy of the book at: http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41699

We welcome all assistance, input, etc. We're experienced at moto adventure travel & offroad riding but total virgins with 4x4s.

[VikingVince]

You can learn more about the Columbia thing by reading the book, Two Wheels to Terror, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1884313493
.

Doug,

thanks for the links...I'm checking them all out. Very interesting title to his book...I'm definitely going to get it...should be a good read! The title implies he encountered numerous "tight" situations. Maybe it should be required reading for anyone traveling SA....of course, the dual sport bike enables one to get further off the beaten path than the expedition vehicle. thanks again for the links...vince

[dhackney]

We finally got all the major components together in one spot.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/BEV_buildup/images/image014.jpg


Updated buildup photos are at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/BEV_buildup/index.htm

Main project web site is at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/

Fabrication of 3 point pivot frame, front and rear bull bars, garage, storage boxes, etc. is underway.

Selection of all systems components (electrical, water, etc.) is finalizing now.

I will post more images as they become available.

[BajaTaco]

Very cool! Lots of progress. That looks really slick! I have no idea what the camper structure is like, but is there any concern about torsional forces due to the way the camper steps up and away in width/height in relation to the chassis?

BTW, I like the looks of whatever vehicle is lurking in the background in this pic (http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/BEV_buildup/images/image021.jpg) :ylsmoke:

[dhackney]

Very cool! I have no idea what the camper structure is like, but is there any concern about torsional forces due to the way the camper steps up and away in width/height in relation to the chassis?

The camper is made from very rigid fiberglass/foam/panel sections. They are incredibly torsionally resistant compared to standard RV construction (which I realize isn't much of a comparison considering typical RV cardboard level strength). The panel construction is much the same as a foam core boat hulll or deck, only much thicker than a typical marine application. So, for torsional rigidity, we're counting on its inherent strength, plus the support of the camper's normal application support/attachment points, i.e. floor base via the 3 point frame and the four tie down points.

The front extension containing the sleeping area also has a large support "rib" extending along the bottom on each side that are about 6" in width and 6" or so in height back near the camper box and tapering down to zero at the front. It is our understanding that they provide additional vertical support to the front extension.


BTW, I like the looks of whatever vehicle is lurking in the background in this pic (http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/BEV_buildup/images/image021.jpg) :ylsmoke:

Yea, she can be a lot to handle sometimes...
http://www.hackneys.com/travel/japan/japan-photos/Japan_Album_06/images/image003.jpg

Oh! You meant the racer... ;)

http://www.hackneys.com/photos/jimco.jpg

It's a 4 or so year old Jimco chassis. Race prepped vette motor making over 500 HP, torque converter clutch crash box 5 speed, etc. It's on jack stands being prepared for its next race. The best looking racer in the shop isn't in these photos...

[BajaTaco]

The camper is made from very rigid fiberglass/foam/panel sections. They are incredibly torsionally resistant ...

The front extension containing the sleeping area also has...


Very well described, and sounds like you have it covered. Bueno! This is a really fun build to follow along. Thanks for taking the time to share all of the little details.




Yea, she can be a lot to handle sometimes...
http://www.hackneys.com/travel/japan/japan-photos/Japan_Album_06/images/image003.jpg

Oh! You meant the racer... ;)

http://www.hackneys.com/photos/jimco.jpg

It's a 4 or so year old Jimco chassis. Race prepped vette motor making over 500 HP, torque converter clutch crash box 5 speed, etc. It's on jack stands being prepared for its next race. The best looking racer in the shop isn't in these photos...

HA!! When I first posted, I wrote "I like the looks of whatever is lurking in the background of this pic" ... and then I clicked the pic after I had posted... and realized that maybe I should qualify that statement with the word "vehicle" .... LOL But now that you mention it... ! I can see you have every reason to be quite proud :ylsmoke:




The best looking racer in the shop isn't in these photos...

Hey, I'm waiting - where's the pics? :p

[dhackney]

Couldn't resist on the lurking bit. Too good of a straight line...


Hey, I'm waiting - where's the pics? :p

I'll see if it is in the shop when I go back up there tomorrow. If so, I'll try to get a shot of it.

And I need to be clear, none of these racers is mine. The spouse says "one toy at a time." I figure I'm ahead of the game if she's counting the rig and the bikes as "one." ;)

[Joaquin Suave]

I have an idea for you...

Looking at your truck/camper photo gave me an idea how you can "fit" your bikes without doing any modifications to them and also have them rapidly deployable.

My concept would have the base of the lift mounted to the truck frame rails then by using a "come-along" or small electric winch, you would swing the motos up and under the camper.

If you arange the pivots correctly, i believe that you can have the bikes in the stored possition at an angle so that the outside edge of the handlebars would be inside of the edge of the truck.

I think the look of the bikes "hanging" on each side of your camper would look really cool.

[VikingVince]

Doug,

I love the pics...thanks for posting them. It must be really exciting to see your design ideas taking shape with the "real McCoys"...what an adventure you have in store in a worthy and comfortable (theoretically:wavey:) rig. Over a two year trek, I think you're really going to appreciate the comforts of the Bigfoot...look forward to your updates.
PS - that shop looks major serious/professional...those frame extensions look like excellent quality. For future reference, if I do something similar, could you give the name of the guy/shop that's doing the work? Thanks.

[dhackney]

...that shop looks major serious/professional...those frame extensions look like excellent quality. For future reference, if I do something similar, could you give the name of the guy/shop that's doing the work? Thanks.

The shop you're seeing is actually just the assembly/display area. The metal fabrication happens in another area.

Our fabricator is:
Metal Tech Innovations
Riverside, CA
Mark Johnson
Mobile (951) 965-0055
Fax (951) 776-0324

[dhackney]

I have an idea for you...


I think the look of the bikes "hanging" on each side of your camper would look really cool.

Awesome idea. I'll see if we can integrate that concept in the design.

We definately want the bikes inside the garage for security reasons.

The only downside to this I can see is that the longitudal orientation of the bikes would block access to anything stored in the garage inboard of the bikes.

thanks!

[Joaquin Suave]

We definately want the bikes inside the garage for security reasons.

I kind of envisioned ballistic nylon covers for the bikes that would double as sides for the "garage"



The only downside to this I can see is that the longitudal orientation of the bikes would block access to anything stored in the garage inboard of the bikes.


I don't think it would be hard to elaborate on the design to include a gas strut, lock onto bike, and lock in to store mode.

I just "saw" the concept (when i saw the picture of your rig) and wanted to share.

What are you doing for stairs? i have an idea for a slick stairway that I want to market to "us" "expedition class vehicle" folks...ALL 5 OF US!

[dhackney]

What are you doing for stairs? i have an idea for a slick stairway that I want to market to "us" "expedition class vehicle" folks...ALL 5 OF US!

All we've got for stairs right now are the standard scissors type. I'm open to new ideas if you're willing to share!

[haven]

Austrian expedition camper manufacturer Action Mobile has a cool design for stairs. The body of the stairs pivots underneath the top step so you can extend the stairs parallel to the side of the truck in tight spaces. The stairs slide under the truck body when not in use.

http://www.actionmobil.com/gallery/albums/album20/aaf.sized.jpg

You can find lots of photos of Action Mobil vehicles in the "News" section of their German language website at http://www.actionmobil.com

Chip Haven

[Joaquin Suave]

I'm open to new ideas if you're willing to share!

Of course I will!

I've just been loaded up with work from a client, so it might be towards mid next week before I can send you some images.

In the mean time, could you PM me with these dimensions:

Frame rail width and hight (outside to outside, wall thickness).
height from top of rail to threshold of camper door.
Height from top of rail to ground (of course this dim constantly changes, so a ballpark number is just fine)

[dhackney]

What could be more fun than collecting components for the rig?
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_02/images/image089.jpg

Putting it together!
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_02/images/image064.jpg

Updated buildup photos in Album Two at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[dhackney]

Of course I will!

I've just been loaded up with work from a client, so it might be towards mid next week before I can send you some images.

In the mean time, could you PM me with these dimensions:

Frame rail width and hight (outside to outside, wall thickness).
height from top of rail to threshold of camper door.
Height from top of rail to ground (of course this dim constantly changes, so a ballpark number is just fine)

I'll try to measure these out this week and get them to you. Thanks!

[BajaTaco]

What could be more fun than collecting components for the rig?


Putting it together!


Updated buildup photos in Album Two at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

Cool! I think that was a good idea to do the length comparison with the GMC in the parking lot. That really gave me a perspective on the length (and it's not as long as it had seemed by itself).

Lots of goodies you have piling up there... :box:

[dhackney]

We did the first test fit of the 3 point pivot frame and the camper today.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_03/images/image034.jpg

More updated photos at http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm in Album Three.

[Grim Reaper]

Cool! I think that was a good idea to do the length comparison with the GMC in the parking lot. That really gave me a perspective on the length (and it's not as long as it had seemed by itself).

Lots of goodies you have piling up there... :box:

Agreed. The Fuso is not nearly as big as I thought.

[dhackney]

Agreed. The Fuso is not nearly as big as I thought.

These are our current best estimates on dimensions. We should end up pretty close to these measurements.

We will be about 18-24" longer than I'd hoped and have more rear overhang that I'd have preferred. We did pretty good on centering the mass on the chassis, so the handling will probably be OK, but there will be a lot of length swinging around aft of the rear axle when making turns in small villages.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/key-dims-side.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/key-dims-rear.jpg

[Joaquin Suave]

Great job!!!

I do however have a concern...

IMHO, I think that your pivot frame might not be stought enough. Your probably going to weld more tubing under the angle stock. I'm afraid if you didn't, there would be too much flex for the camper to stay in one piece. You might want to see what Big Foot has to say (given that truck campers use the bed to support their structure).
You might want to set up air bags between the truck frame and the pivot frame so that you can "control" the movement of the camper with respect to the frame. "Liven-up" the frame on dirt roads (low speed) and "deaden" the frame on the freeway (high speed).

Also, if it were my truck...I'd use removeable aluminum propane tanks as opposed to built in tanks. I'd also make the batteries instantly accessable and not use "fancy" batteries.

These are just my opinions, and you know what opinions are like:) .

[dhackney]

pivot frame might not be stought enough.
This is a tack welded version of the pivot frame we used to test the fit.

In terms of material, it's actually bigger stock than used in previous 3 point pivot frames on the FG chassis (check examples here (http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-samples.htm)).




I'd use removeable aluminum propane tanks as opposed to built in tanks.
The permanent propane tanks use a remote fill panel with multiple international fill valves. We also have a portable tank housed in the stock camper location hooked to a manual selection valve. We wanted maximum flexibility for fills.


I'd also make the batteries instantly accessable and not use "fancy" batteries.
There is a trap door in the bottom of the garage for access to the two between frame rails house batteries. The second two house batteries mount in a tray just forward of the start batteries and are accessable from the side similar to the start batteries. The house batteries are Lifeline AGM marine batteries. They were the maximum Amp hours per cubic centimeter that I could find and were sized to maximize the area between the frame rails.


You might want to set up air bags between the truck frame and the pivot frame so that you can "control" the movement of the camper with respect to the frame. "Liven-up" the frame on dirt roads (low speed) and "deaden" the frame on the freeway (high speed).

Very interesting idea. We are using air bags on the suspension so we'll already have the compressor, controls, etc. Might be able to use small suspension air bags for this purpose. We'll have to see how it rides once we get it on the road. The pivot frame itself isn't all that long and provides quite a bit of torsional strength even in its current test/tacked form.


These are just my opinions, and you know what opinions are like:) .
All opinions, feedback, constructive critism, etc. is very, very welcomed! :)

[Joaquin Suave]

In terms of material, it's actually bigger stock than used in previous 3 point pivot frames on the FG chassis (check examples here).

I gather that your giong to be suspending your cargo box's off the frame also. So maybe going lighter tubing and making a space frame (incorperating the frames of the saddle boxes into the overall structure of the camper frame)is the good idea.

My guess is that Unicat and the other european "Uber-truck" companies make the the 3-point mounting for their boxes to keep the camper from twisting and breaking up on the ultra flexy Mog frames...Rather that trying to provide their customers with more articulation.

I think you might be adding unnecessary cost, weight and complication with doing your 3 point mounting. It would be easy to test the flex of the truck, then look at isolating JUST the camper (not the cargo boxes) with uyrathane buggy bumpers. You could potentially save A LOT of weight!

I've travelled in (and constantly remodeled) Casa Azul for over 12 years now. I have put quite a bit of energy (designing / buileing) into paring down weight every place I can find. and when I can't pare it down anymore...I try to get it as low as possible. Even then, when were all packed up to head into Mexico...WE ARE MAXED OUT.

Your Fuso is smaller and lighter that Casa Azul (F700 4x4) and I don't carry motorcycles or a big generator.

Have you figured a thumbnail weight?


Lifeline AGM marine batteries.

I have become some what of a Ludite and my experiences in Mexico have taught me that commonly replaceable electrical components are BY FAR the way to go. I first learned this when my uber-trick alternator crapped out in Baja and F'd up the first 2 batteries in my home bank(over voltage). My mechanic buddy (in Mulege) and I cobbed a repair and I just took the bad battery out of the circuit. I did'nt dare put in a stock lead acid due to the difference to charging voltage requirements.

I now use a stock Delco alternator and lead acid deep cycle batterys. I think this is one place that "low tech" trumps "state of the art."

[dhackney]

3-point mounting for their boxes to keep the camper from twisting and breaking up on the ultra flexy Mog frames...Rather that trying to provide their customers with more articulation.

I share that opinion. This shot of an FG from the RUF site shows why we chose a 3 point pivot frame for the project.

http://www.ruf-inc.com/subframe-test-2.jpg

Don & Kim Green (http://www.questconnect.org/)have an FG with a rigidly mounted, custom built camper box. I think their custom box is quite a bit stronger than anything I could buy off the shelf. I don't have enough faith in any factory built camper box to subject it to the tortional stresses reflected in the RUF shot.

By the time we build a platform robust enough to support the camper and the upper storage boxes we're not adding much weight to make the rear end of it pivot. IMHO it's worth the weight to keep from twisting the camper apart.

This a shot of the side of a rigidly mounted 4x4 camper. It isn't the worst of the wrinkles and bends caused by chassis flex on this unit, but this is the best I could do with the available lighting.
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/camper-wrinkles.jpg



Your Fuso is smaller and lighter that Casa Azul (F700 4x4) and I don't carry motorcycles or a big generator. ...WE ARE MAXED OUT. ... Have you figured a thumbnail weight?

The weight spreadsheet is on the web site. I built it before we started. Grim reading... I was incredulous when I learned the weight of the RUF FG and we ended up building something that will be at least that heavy.

BTW, if we were staying around here we would probably be on a similar Ford chassis. We needed global parts and service so we were limited to the FG for what we could buy here.

But you must have a TON of stuff. I just did one quick search but every result on F700 GVWR came back with 22k lbs. That's 8k more than the FG. If you are maxed out and you don't have all the excess crap that we are starting out with, what are you carrying that weighs so much? :Wow1:

If our experience with this 4x4 is anything like our travel by boat and bike we'll start out with a lot excess stuff and shed it as we go along. You'll probably be able to find us by following the trail of ejected hardware. :p

[Grim Reaper]

My guess is that Unicat and the other european "Uber-truck" companies make the the 3-point mounting for their boxes to keep the camper from twisting and breaking up on the ultra flexy Mog frames...Rather that trying to provide their customers with more articulation.

I think you might be adding unnecessary cost, weight and complication with doing your 3 point mounting. It would be easy to test the flex of the truck, then look at isolating JUST the camper (not the cargo boxes) with uyrathane buggy bumpers. You could potentially save A LOT of weight!



It is by design that Mog frames flex. By building in a certain amount of flex its less likely to have high stress points that will cause a catastrophic frame failure.

When you consider the width of the body as compared to the width of the frame you will see the frames on large trucks are pretty narrow. It is very easy for the cargo box to put a lot of stress on the frame since it has more leverage. The manufacture recognized that it was easier to allow the frame to flex then to make it so rigid as not to flex for the benefit of a flat cargo floor and force the the suspension to do all the travel. Also to make the suspension travel more you have to raise the vehicle higher off the frame or arch the frame higher over the axle. That means the load deck has to go up so the COG goes up as well.

The amount of weight you would have to add to make it rigid enough for a 4 point mount is probably near what it takes to make the bed on a three point mount with a pivot on one end. The bed or box has to have a frame already to deal with the fact that its wider then the frame it sits on so you are at a wash on the bed weight for either argument. I would actually argue that the Three point on a box may be able to be built lighter especially for a box like a camper. The reason being is to make it rigid you box may well have to be stronger to combat racking from the twist a 4 point mount could put on it even on a very rigid frame.

To handle the large weight you need to have a heavy spring. Well you are going to need a lot more locating hardware or longer springs to deal with that weight and still have the wheel travel if it all comes from the suspension.

Another thing to consider is to locate a long travel suspension you get into problems where as the axles change planes in relation to the frame they will tend to turn and change direction of travel to the centerline of the vehicle. It will steer the vehicle sideways. Now when the frame flexes the wheels still point the same direction so it doesn't steer sideways as it articulates.



When it comes down to it wheel travel is wheel travel and if it comes from the spring or by design in frame twist doesn't matter if the end result is the wheels stay on the ground.

No offense to your 700 but it was built for a total different target market. You have adapted it to your needs but that was not its original design.
The 700 is a road truck that somebody put a drive axle under the front. Its initial design was for graded road.


A Mog is a farm tractor that happens to be able to go 65mph. The manufacture knew from the onset of design that the vehicle would be on uneven terrain and have all wheel drive. Thats why even its cab is on 3 point point mounts.

[dhackney]

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_05/images/image002.jpg

updated buildup photos in album four and five at http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[Scott Brady]

Looks great Doug. Where did you source the LP tanks? I like the size and the gauge availability.

[dhackney]

Where did you source the LP tanks?

Scott,

The LP tank came from:
Sleegers Engineering Inc.
980 Green Valley Road
London, Ontario, Canada
N6N 1E3
ph:519-685-7444
fx: 519-685-2882

Contact is:
Aaron Robbins

Sleegers has a very complete range of tanks for vehicle fuel applications and can custom make a tank to practically any spec. Excellent customer service. Very highly recommended.

We used model 11X11X28SEUW, which is a stock unit. The fill valve on this tank comes out of the side, which is a tight fit between the frame rails.

Sleegers can build this tank with the valves mounted in any position, but we couldn't wait for one to be built to our spec and had to take an off the shelf model. Locating the fill valve in a different position would have made it easier to implement.

For possible valve locations, see this page:
http://www.sleegers.on.ca/pt_valve_layout.shtml

Our "tanks" are actually one tank, with integrated tubes that connect the two cylinder components.

Our tank's specs are:
LP Capacity: 16 gallons / 60.57 liters
LP 80% Capacity: 12.8 gal / 48.46 liters
Tank weight: 110 lbs.
LP weight:
100% - 16 gallons / 60.57 liters = 68 lbs. / 30.91 kilos
80% - 12.8 gallons / 48.46 liters = 54 lbs. / 24.55 kilos

We are building an LP fill valve manifold with fill valves from all the regions of the world that we could identify and source. The fill valve manifold will be connected to the tank fill valve. This will enable us to fill wherever we are (hopefully) with a minimum of "they don't have an adapter for our tank" situations. The fill valves we have currently identified are:

ACME / POL (ACME - US, Austria, Belgium, Germany, South America, South Africa, POL - other markets) these two types are combined in one valve - model 7647DC, source REGO)
Bayonet (Holland, Spain, UK) - source Rotarex
Dish (Italy, France, Portugal, Greece, Denmark, Poland, China) - source Rotarex


We are currently waiting for valve info on Korea, Thailand, etc.

The Rotarex valves are made in Luxembourg, of all places, and take 6-8 weeks for custom production. They can make them to match any output thread, i.e. NPT.

US contact for Rotarex is:
Western LP Tank, LLC
P.O. Box 1790
Peralta, NM 87042
(505) 869-1770
Scott Helmick

Again, excellent customer service. Very highly recommended.

Doug

[VikingVince]

Doug...the extensiveness of the research and info you've accumulated just on propane tanks and valves blows my mind!!...makes me realize the extent of preparations for a trip like your planning is MEGA more than I imagined:exclaim: thanks for taking the time to share the info

[dhackney]

the extensiveness of the research and info you've accumulated

I wish I felt better prepared, researched, etc. I felt I was very well researched on sailing, having a couple of years invested in it.

This 4x4 overland expedition arena is totally new to me. I've been drinking from the fire hose for a few months, but still feel very unimformed and underprepared. We are on such an aggressive timeline that as soon as I find what I think is a solution for a given system / challenge, I procure it and move on to the next one. The downside is that there may be a much better solution, lower cost, superior customer service & support, etc. right around the corner, but I will never find it. I don't even have the available bandwidth to properly research the available forums. We're going to do the best we can on this vehicle design and construction, get some professional 4x4, medical and survival training, get some language skills and head out. It will have to be good enough.

To do this properly, I'd recommend two years of research, reading, preparation, training, certification, planning, designing, vendor interaction, event attendance, etc. As an example, I read over 50 books on sailing, got certified to the highest levels, sailed across an ocean, visited countless industry events, looked at hundreds of boats, etc. to prepare for that endeavor. I won't be anywhere near that level of knowledge and experience when we leave for this overland expedition.

[VikingVince]

To do this properly, I'd recommend two years of research, reading, preparation, training, certification, planning, designing, vendor interaction, event attendance, etc. As an example, I read over 50 books on sailing, got certified to the highest levels, sailed across an ocean, visited countless industry events, looked at hundreds of boats, etc. to prepare for that endeavor. I won't be anywhere near that level of knowledge and experience when we leave for this overland expedition.

"two years of research...etc" WOW:exclaim:...that is quite sobering but obviously important for anyone contemplating a trip like yours. My guess is that you will be just fine:ylsmoke: If it's any consolation to your feeling less prepared for this trip, I would surmise that theoretically the land will be a little more forgiving than the sea...yes?

[dhackney]

theoretically the land will be a little more forgiving than the sea...yes?

That is a very intriguiging question. There is no doubt that the sea simply is. The sea will be calm or tumultuous whether you are there or not. The sea will have hurricanes, raging currents and towering waves whether you are there or not. So, in that regard, yes, it could be viewed as unforgiving. The sea demands and deserves ultimate respect.

On the other hand, if you make a trade winds passage, as most people do, and avoid the high lattitudes, the sea is a fairly known entity, with fairly predictable probabilities of wind, sea and weather. Coupled with modern communications and weather forcasting, there are some who make the case that there is simply no excuse for a modern sailor to ever be caught in truly bad, non-freak weather, wind and wave conditions.

In addition, modern blue-water sailboats are built and equipped so well that the sailor will usually give up long before the boat will. In the popular book and movie "The Perfect Storm" a delivery crew is rescued from their storm tossed sailboat off the Atlantic coast by heroic Coast Guard crewmen risking their lives to do so. Although some of the sailboat crew were convinced they were destined for certain death if they stayed with the boat, that same sailboat was found a few days later sailing along, unmanned, in perfectly good condition. This scenario is repeated more than a few times every year. If you keep them buttoned up and the bilge pumps working modern boats will survive most anything short of sailing directly into a hurricane.

The overland route forces you down paths of human commerce and well worn trails of human conquest, exploration and interaction. You move through towns, villages and cities filled with other humans. It's a very human interaction dominated experience, except in remote areas where you can travel for days without seeing anyone else. Compared to our overland travels by motorcycle, I found sailing more about you and the sea, you and nature.

So, more forgiving, I'm not sure. Taken to the extreme, ultimately, if you break on land, you need to be prepared with skills, knowledge, parts, tools, food and water. If you break on the water, you need the same. If you break catestrophically on land, you can walk out. If you break catestrophically on water, i.e. hit a submerged freight container and crush the hull, then you'll be in the dinghy hoping your EPIRB works. That's definately more unforgiving. But that's the absolute far end of the spectrum of potential outcomes. You have to make your own choice if the trade-offs are worth it to you and your goals.

In the end, sailing is a LOT safer than driving on US highways. Some people are overwhelmed by driving in Rome, India, Tokyo or narrow roads filled with monkeys, burros, elephants, camels, carts, kids and scooters loaded with families of eight but we've found them all manageable.

There are dangers everywhere and if you go out convinced the dangers will seek you out, that's probably what will happen. We've been fortunate and the few times we've had any problems they have been relatively trivial in the grand scheme of things, whether on the bike or boat.

[Joaquin Suave]

It's me and my silly questions again...

Won't the camper contact to the top edges of the garage frame when the 3-point frame travels. In the pictures it looks dangerously close.

I'm sure you have your reasons, but...It would seem to me that you could save 60 to 80 lbs by just making bottom trays and front cabinet faces (with hatches) to fit under the sides of the camper, as opposed to fitting the spaces with steel saddle boxs.

Have you thought about putting fiberglass gratting for the floor of the battery box as opposed to metal?

are you concerned about the exaust pipe being a little close to your batterys?

The picture look great! Its VERY impressive how fast your moving ahead. Your "doing" in months, what took me years of doing by trial and error.

[dhackney]

It's me and my silly questions again... I've always said "there are no silly questions, only silly answers" ALL questions, observations, feedback, etc. are welcome and appreciated!



Won't the camper contact to the top edges of the garage frame when the 3-point frame travels. In the pictures it looks dangerously close. The 3 point pivot frame is rigidly attached at the front of the camper base. There should be zero relative flex between the two at that point. We are allowing a few inches at the front of the garage for longitudinal camper flex. We don't know how much that camper flexes in real life, and don't want to cut it too close over the longitudinal span of the garage. This part of the project is seat of the pants engineering. All we have going for us is Mark's experience building factory team off-road race trucks from stock truck chassis. That has given him a feel for how much frame flex we'll get given the characteristics of this frame.


I'm sure you have your reasons, but...It would seem to me that you could save 60 to 80 lbs by just making bottom trays and front cabinet faces (with hatches) to fit under the sides of the camper, as opposed to fitting the spaces with steel saddle boxs. Agreed on potential weight savings. I believe Mark made this choice due to timeline and ability to acheive a relatively weathersealed box versus the additional rigidity required in the support frame with a conformal design. The saddle boxes have inherent strength that would have had to be added to an open support frame.


Have you thought about putting fiberglass gratting for the floor of the battery box as opposed to metal? No. We don't have readily available fiberglass fabrication skills on the team. We can make just about anything out of metal. If all you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail...


are you concerned about the exaust pipe being a little close to your batterys? Yes, we will be putting a heat shield there.


Your "doing" in months, what took me years of doing by trial and error.Any success we achieve is due to the fact we stand on the shoulders of giants such as yourself. Thanks!

[Joaquin Suave]

The 3 point pivot frame is rigidly attached at the front of the camper base. There should be zero relative flex between the two at that point. We are allowing a few inches at the front of the garage for longitudinal camper flex. We don't know how much that camper flexes in real life, and don't want to cut it too close over the longitudinal span of the garage. This part of the project is seat of the pants engineering. All we have going for us is Mark's experience building factory team off-road race trucks from stock truck chassis. That has given him a feel for how much frame flex we'll get given the characteristics of this frame.

Thats cool. I was under the impression the front of your camper frame was on Heim joints or something. It should be fine.



ability to acheive a relatively weathersealed

McMaster-Carr cataloge page # 3181: Polyurethane sealants

This is your new best friend....DONT LEAVE HOME WITHOUT IT!!!!


No. We don't have readily available fiberglass fabrication skills on the team. We can make just about anything out of metal. If all you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail...


McMaster page #1924: Type "E" would be my choice.


Any success we achieve is due to the fact we stand on the shoulders of giants such as yourself. Thanks!


:xxrotflma :xxrotflma :xxrotflma Your kill'in here! Remember advice is worth exactly what you pay for it!

[VikingVince]

Doug...your response to my theoretical question was VERY good reading...obviously the musing and thoughts of an experienced adventurer and traveller. Your reflections could easily be part of a good book...I hope you plan to write one!!:wavey:

[dhackney]

I hope you plan to write one!!:wavey:
I've been avoiding that...

When you go into an experience with writing something about it in your mind it changes what and how you experience the moment. I guess it's the human version of the Hiesenberg Uncertainty Principal. It's the same with shooting. If I walk into a place and I'm pre-determined to shoot it, then my mind is consumed with absorbing the place and people and experiences as a photographer, looking for shots, lighting, mood, angles, etc. If I walk into a place and I'm predetermined to write about it, as if it were an assignment, then what and how I experience things is changed from what it would have been otherwise. I'm looking for a hook, a theme, an analogy, etc.

I much prefer to let my writing just happen, just percolate up in my head until I have to get it out or my head will explode.

If you are interested, there's lots of writing and photography at our main travel site.

Writing http://www.hackneys.com/travel/index-writing.htm

Photography http://www.hackneys.com/travel/index-photos.htm

I may compile some of it into a book when we get back. I'd rather do it after than during. During would change what and how we went about the whole thing.

I plan to continue to post short essays on what we are experiencing on our main travel site during this next 4x4 overland expedition chapter.

[dhackney]

We have seats...

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_07/images/image037.jpg

Updated buildup photos at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[dhackney]

Updates to the project web site - http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/

1. Updated the weight worksheet.
2. Added downloadable XL file version of the weight worksheet.
3. Updated the resources page to include project components.
4. Updated project design illustrations, drawings & schematics

Previous updates
1. Added FG driveline specs
2. Added F series body builders drawings Part 1 & 2
3. Added extracted builder's drawings circuits of interest
4. Added Yokohama tire specs PDF
5. Added Michelin XZL specs PDF
6. Added Bigfoot 30C10.11FR floorplan
7. Added Bigfoot 30C10.11FR wall construction
8. Added Bigfoot 30C10.11FR specs
9. Added international LP fill valve info PDF
10. Added National Seating Sportster specs PDF
11. Added FG stock seats drawing PDF
12. Added project components by desc/location/connector
13. Added project procurement data (mfr, part #, sales, etc.)

[dhackney]

I never thought Freightliner Coronados were all that big anyway... :Wow1:

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_08/images/image001.jpg


Updated photos in Album Eight at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[dhackney]

We have storage boxes...

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_10/images/image071.jpg

Updated photos in album 9 & 10 at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

.

[dhackney]

Camper mounted. Packed and ready to depart tomorrow AM for an Alpha Test of the base configuration.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_11/images/image001.jpg

There's a few shots of this configuration in album 11 at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[bigreen505]

Congratulations, it looks like a truck! And a little be bigger than a Land Cruiser too. You will hae to let us know how it all shakes out.

[Joaquin Suave]

Congradulations!!!

Any chance your heading up the coast? I'd love to see your truck in person.

I'm in San Luis Obispo county.

[Scott Brady]

Awesome Doug!

I am like a school kid waiting to see this thing in person. :victory:

[VikingVince]

Awesome Doug!

I am like a school kid waiting to see this thing in person. :victory:

DITTO, DITTO:bowdown:
Will we get a chance?:wings:

[dhackney]

And a little bit bigger than a Land Cruiser too.

Yes, a size or two bigger!

It is strange how you go from one decision to another and where you end up. I was telling a friend how I started with a vision of a completely 12VDC vehicle with a tiny, relatively light and very fuel miserly 12VDC genset and ended up with a 7,500 watt, three cylinder, 500 lb. (albeit still fuel miserly) Onan genset. Each little decision along the way made sense, but it sure was a big (no pun intended) move from the initial design and concept to the end result.

We'll find out this week how the base package aligns with our needs and requirements that drove us down the path to end up with a vehicle this big.

[dhackney]

DITTO, DITTO:bowdown:
Will we get a chance?:wings:

Our fabricator is having an open house on 2 December. If we don't rip the thing up or roll it down a mountain doing our 4x4 training with Bill Burke the week before we will try to have it there. Location will be Riverside, CA.

That would probably be the best chance to see the rig in the U.S.

We're doing some training with Scott the following week, so he will get to see it for sure. He may be interested in putting together an ExPo thing around that, but I haven't talked to him about it. You all will need to negotiate directly with Scott on that one... :sombrero:

We plan to depart for Mexico, Central & South America, SE Asia and back to the Himalayas in January.

No plans for central coast or points north prior to then.

Thanks for the support, greatly appreciated. We're all running low on energy right now. I hope we can recharge with a few days when we can think about something else other than the next thing on the buildup list...:camping:

[VikingVince]

Our fabricator is having an open house on 2 December. If we don't rip the thing up or roll it down a mountain doing our 4x4 training with Bill Burke the week before we will try to have it there. Location will be Riverside, CA.

That would probably be the best chance to see the rig in the U.S.
:

Riverside on 2 December...FANTASTICO:exclaim: :exclaim: I'll be there...will love seeing your rig, hopefully get to meet you as well, plus make a contact with your fabricator for possible future project of my own. MUCHO GRACIAS.

PS - just got "Two Wheels Through Terror" from Amazon yesterday.

[dhackney]

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/2006-11-17-1DMkII-HN7J0097%20crop%20title%20small.jpg

Our Alpha Test is complete.

# Days: 6
Miles: 1,138
Fuel used: ~100 gallons
Tank capacities used:
...Black water: ~85%
...Gray water: ~30%
...Fresh water: ~85%

Conclusions:
1. Rig is suitable for our intended purpose.
2. You could take the rig out as it is configured here, with the addition of driving lights, paint/powdercoating of the components, raw water filtration system, additional house batteries, solar cells & a small genset (Honda 2k), and do very well.
3. Power is minimal for US highway use, but more than adequate for developing economies where speed is not a big factor.

Purpose:
Pit support for solo motorcycle competitor in 2006 Baja 1000. See more at:
http://www.hackneys.com/video/2006-10x-baja-1k.wmv

Additional photos of the Alpha Test are in album twelve at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[Scott Brady]

Great photo's and video Doug, glad to see you and the truck back in the US.

[blupaddler]

Doug,

thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences with us.
Great pics and videos too. Now I want to go back to baja, I just need a " " swell for that beach...




I would love to come up to your fabricators on Dec. 2. It would be great to meet you guys and check out your rig!

[Gear]

Hello Doug,
Miles and I captured these two photographs of 10x just north of check point 3. I have be reading up on your new camper. If you decided to give a expo tour. Please keep me in mind. I would love to see it in person.

http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b6cf06b3127cce8f4fe9defb6f00000026108EatWzFu0cO

http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b6cf06b3127cce8f48b5a61adc00000026108EatWzFu0cO

[dhackney]

Miles,

Thanks for the shots! Greatly appeciated.

BTW, I found out that Jimmy was held at the last pit for 50 minutes to get warmed up. He was soaked and well into 1st stage hypothermia when he came in. If the kid hadn't thrown the roll of barbed wire into him 12 miles into the race he would have finished an hour earlier.

As it is, we believe he beat every class 50 multi-team entry (he's 52).

Doug

[dhackney]

The open house is:
2 December, 2006
5pm - 8pm
Riverside, CA

PM me for address & directions if you are interested in attending.

The rig will NOT be complete, but you can meet Mark, our fabricator, and inspect the chassis, pivot frame, etc. We will not be doing tours of the camper interior, as it will be packed for depature the next day for training.

[VikingVince]

Thanks for posting the open house info, Doug. I have emailed (found address online...could be outdated...it was a juno.com) Mark Johnson and left messages for him twice this week asking him to confirm the open house, would like to meet him, that I might be interested in a project like yours in the future, etc etc...NO RESPONSE...so typical of some owner-operators in the offroad/fabrication business!

The hours of the open house don't work so well for me...have a 7pm conflict...so may or may not make it. Thanks again, though. I found the address online, assuming it hasn't changed recently and looked it up on Yahoo maps.

[BajaTaco]

Hi Doug, I have been super busy so not able to drop in here for awhile. But I saw some of your alpha testing pics and it is looking awesome! Good luck with your sessions next week (don't let Scott actually drive it - unless you want to see what it looks like on 3 wheels... LOL). Sorry I won't be able to make the exPo "open house", wish I could.

[dhackney]

left messages for him twice this week ...NO RESPONSE...so typical of some owner-operators in the offroad/fabrication business!

That's because I paid the phone company to dead-end all phone calls to him until he finishes our project... :D Just kidding.

Mark is super busy right now on our truck, plus has all the stuff he's got stacking up behind our project, plus he's a hard guy to get ahold of even when he's working on your project, so don't feel bad. He doesn't do email much and doesn't have very good cell coverage at the fabrication shop. He's a super, super guy. Couldn't ask for a better person as a supplier. He will have availability starting in Jan/Feb assuming we are out of his hair by then.

[dhackney]

(don't let Scott actually drive it - unless you want to see what it looks like on 3 wheels... LOL). Sorry I won't be able to make the exPo "open house", wish I could.

Hey, thanks for the tip on Scott! (pun intended) ;)

We may try to put an "open rig/house/something" together for late Jan or Feb when we're back from training in Moab, or do something out there in late Jan. The truck should be done then and it will be more representative of what we'll actually be going out in anyway.

This is a very short notice deal, and the open house is really more for the other businesses here anyway. We'll just have the rig parked in the parking lot as representative of what Mark can do.

[dhackney]

We have electrons:

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_13/images/image062.jpg

Updated photos in album thirteen at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[Scott Brady]

I just spent a few days with Doug and Stephanie and their UBER cool FG. The truck performs excellent on rough secondary roads, with the FG exhibiting good traction (strong limited slip), and articulation. The torque in the diesel combined with the 60:1 low range, first gear is awesome.

http://www.expeditionswest.com/Training/clients/hackney/IMG_5922.JPG

[dhackney]

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/2006-12-04-SD550-IMG_2937-beta1-title-small.jpg

Some thoughts and conclusions from the tests:
1. The truck is extremely easy to drive. Scott termed it "The Camry of Trucks." Clutch effort is easy and engagement smooth. The throttle throw is a little short but manageable. Throttle tip in is fine and well matched to the driveline. It is tough to foot-roll throttle, but manageable. Extremely, eerily quiet in the cab, especially on the highway. Smooth transmission. Very tight turning radius.
2. The rig meets our design goals for access. We didn't set out to build a Unimog, we set out to build a truck to take us as far as we felt comfortable and then we'd get on the dirt bikes. Scott rated the rig as capable of trails "a solid 2, a 2.5 if required." In real 3rd world terms, that means we'll be able to go down any "paved" road, any primary unpaved road and most "secondary" roads - given adequate bridge capacities. We'll also be able to do some two tracks if thoroughly scouted on the dirt bikes.
3. I was very surprised by what the truck could traverse. We never once made ground contact during the tests, including over some whoops that I thought for sure would drag the departure angle. It will always be limited by its short tires and low inherent ground clearance of the transfer case & diffs. Aside from that, we'll be limited by weight & height characteristics and pucker factor related to roll center.
4. This was the first opportunity for me to watch the truck in action. The camper is very "active" off road. The three point pivot frame performed exactly as designed in protecting the camper from torsional forces. However, we need to add some dampening to quiet some of its transverse motion. This should help a lot on paved roads as well. We'll probably use motorcycle shock absorbers attached to the rear of the pivot frame for this purpose.
5. We plan to replace the stock components with Deaver springs & Bilstein shocks. We believe this will significantly improve ride quality on paved surfaces and off road performance.
6. Weight for this test was 10k lbs. on the rear axle and 5,180 lbs. on the front axle. For this test all suspension components were stock. Air bags were installed on the rear axle and portions of the test were run with the bags inflated to ~90 lbs. No significant differences in handling or off road performance were noted when using the bags inflated. No measured or instrumented tests were performed.
7. The camper is extremely comfortable, roomy and well appointed. The camper remains water tight and free of rattles, squeaks, etc. There is a lot of storage space available, more than enough for our needs. Construction quality is probably as good as it gets in the RV world and most materials have a quality feel to them.


Photos from Beta Test One are in Album Fourteen at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[flyingwil]

Looks great Doug!


It will always be limited by its short tires and low inherent ground clearance of the transfer case & diffs.

Do you have any options for this or are you "stuck" with what you got?

[Joaquin Suave]

Congradulations Doug!

Again, my hat goes off to you for your research and your ability to make this HUGE project come together so quickly!

May you have fair seas & the wind at your back.

[Scott Brady]

2. The rig meets our design goals for access. We didn't set out to build a Unimog, we set out to build a truck to take us as far as we felt comfortable and then we'd get on the dirt bikes. Scott rated the rig as capable of trails "a solid 2, a 2.5 if required." In real 3rd world terms, that means we'll be able to go down any "paved" road, any primary unpaved road and most "secondary" roads - given adequate bridge capacities. We'll also be able to do some two tracks if thoroughly scouted on the dirt bikes.
[/QUOTE]

Here is the trail rating definition (http://www.expeditionswest.com/resources/expedition_handbook/trail_rating.htm) for Doug's comment above.

2
Formed Track: Not passable by standard passenger vehicles.High clearance preferred, AWD preferred. Steep grades present, larger rocks embedded in trail (less than 7”). Some loose trail surfaces and shallow water crossings possible. A spotter may be required on the most challenging portions to prevent body damage on vehicles with less clearance. Sand and dry washes may challenge available traction requiring lower air pressure on some vehicles. Trail may be narrow and require backing to allow other vehicles to pass. (Example Trails: Temporal Gulch, AZ / Red Canyon, CA)

2.5
Rugged Track: Not suitable for 2wd vehicles, or low clearance cross over vehicles. AWD required, Low Range preferred. Rutted, crossed axle terrain possible, with loose, steep climbs required. Deep sand possible. Some rock crawling possible on loose rocks up to 8” in diameter. Some larger rocks may be present, possibly requiring a spotter to negotiate. Small ledges possible, with larger embedded rocks present. Water crossing to 12” possible. Loose surfaces will be present, with tight clearance, smaller margin for error, and the possibility of body damage. Within the capability of any high clearance stock SUV or truck. AWD cross-over vehicles will struggle and may suffer damage due to lack of low range gearing. (Example Trails: Chloride, AZ / Chiricahua's, AZ)

[BajaTaco]

:lurk: I love this thread. It's an epic build-thread if I ever saw one.

Congrats to the Hackney's on a well laid out plan and great documentation so we can all enjoy the outcome. Sounds like you still have some things to finish, but my guess is not much. I can't wait to see the reports from the trip!

[dhackney]

Do you have any options for this or are you "stuck" with what you got?

We will add 1.5 to 2" of sprung weight ground clearance when we put the Deaver springs on, but that won't change the Lilliputian tire height or the low hanging diffs and transfer case. The Michelins would add 2-3" of circumference and give us about 300 lbs. more front axle capacity.

I agree with Scott on the fundamental character of this chassis: "It's a delivery truck capable of working in unpaved environments." If we carved off the lower level of storage boxes and moved the spares to the back or genset space we'd have more rough terrain off-road capability, but that wouldn't help us in deep mud, silt or sand, where the dragging diffs will always be the limiting factor.

From what I've seen so far, it will function very well as a delivery platform for the camper and the dirt bikes, which was our fundamental design requirement.

I'd like to close our knowledge gap on roll angle, which is a pretty easy test on a sailboat but very "expensive" with a truck of this size unless we can find a tilt table that can accomodate its dimensions & weight. Untill then we'll be operating with only our "pucker factor" as gauges, and my wife's kicks in at about 2.327 degrees.

[BajaTaco]

Untill then we'll be operating with only our "pucker factor" as gauges, and my wife's kicks in at about 2.327 degrees.

:xxrotflma

question: It looks like the over-cab tubing/rack has been removed. What is the status of that? (sorry if I missed it earlier in the thread).

[dhackney]

to make this HUGE project come together so quickly!

When it's in the shop HUGE is definately my operative perception. Strangely, when we got it out on the trail and I had the opportunity to stand and watch Scott or my wife drive it around, it just didn't seem all that large.

In open savanna or Baja / Sonorran desert terrain it will fit fine. In tight, twisty forest roads and Byzantine alleys of Old Cities, not so well. :rolleyes:


fair seas
And thanks for the support! Greatly appreciated. I think we're all ready for this development, fabrication & assembly chapter to conclude so we can begin the final testing, provisioning and departure portion of the adventure.

[dhackney]

:question: It looks like the over-cab tubing/rack has been removed. What is the status of that? (sorry if I missed it earlier in the thread).

Mark pulled the rack off to finish the fabrication. We may delete the rack portion and just run a light/antenna bar across the front. We can't put any more weight on the front anyway, so we wouldn't be able to carry anything up there but toilet paper.

I'm also reaching the limit of what I can lift with the cab. Even with the torsion bar cranked up to max pre-load, those air seats really make it a grunt to tilt.

[dhackney]

An update on weight:

Mitsubishi Fuso FG 140 4x4
GCWR......17,045 lbs.
GVWR......14,050 lbs.

Stock chassis weight....................5,842
Stock max body-payload capacity...8,208

GAWR..............Front..5,730
......................Rear.. 9,480
Combined axle rating..15,210

Front axle tire capacity...6,084
Rear axle tire capacity...11,112
Total tire capacity........17,196


Our Beta Test One meausured weight was 15,180 lbs. The spread was 10k on the rear and 5,180 on the front.

Based on our measured weight in Beta One configuration I estimate our finished weight at around 16,164, probably more like 16,300. That’s with only one bike. If we take both bikes we’d be at 16,402 (estimated) / 16,550 (probable).

That would keep us within 110% over combined axle rating and below tire capacity front and rear (assuming we maintain our current front/rear weight distribution) and below GCWR.

Our challenge remains front tire capacity, as most of the remaining weight is located directly behind the cab (2 batteries, gen set, 2nd bike, etc.).

[sleeoffroad]

Excellent reply. I was looking at the pics of the water distribution panel. Have you ever considered the "push to connect" type fittings. Less clutter than a gazilion hose clamps and easy to fix. Search www.mcmaster.com for "push to connect" fittings.

[FusoFG]

I'd like to close our knowledge gap on roll angle, which is a pretty easy test on a sailboat but very "expensive" with a truck of this size unless we can find a tilt table that can accomodate its dimensions & weight. Untill then we'll be operating with only our "pucker factor" as gauges, and my wife's kicks in at about 2.327 degrees.

Turns out that you can measure the height of the center of gravity pretty much the same way you can on a sailboat. Weigh it level and then tilt it and weigh it again.

All you need is a truck scale and a couple ramps like people use for oil changes to create the tilt. But in this case all you have to do is raise the front wheels a little bit.

Once you have the height of the center of gravity and the track you can quickly calculate the the theoretical maximum side angle.

here's the web site detailing the procedure and calculations:


http://www.jeepaholics.com/tech/cog/

All his explanations aren't text book perfect but the science is right.

Fuso used to sell a nice dash mounted tilt gauge that helps prevent arguments between driver and navigator.

The Fuso body builder manual states you should keep the cog height under 59 -60 inches above the ground. I thought it was 60 for the FE and 59 for the FG, but I can't find the 59" reference anymore.

The chassis only cog is 28 inches, just below the frame rails which is theoretically good enough for driving across a 100% percent grade ( a 45 degree slope). About the same as a Hummer H1.

Then there's traction, bumps, holes and dynamic movement and the weight of whatever structure you add that detracts from that ability.

It sounds like you added about 10,000 punds to the bare chassis. Some of that weight is at or below 28" so that's good. Some of it's above 28". The question is how much weight and how far above 28".

I think that worst case, if the cog of the 10,000 pounds of payload you added was less than 78 inches above the ground you would be within in fuso's 60 inch guideline.

I think that would be a theoretical maximum side angle of 28 degrees. That's static - the dynamics of a vehicle going over bumps and down into holes and springs compressing would make it risky to approach that angle.

It's unlikely that your cog is that high, but if it is, the worst offenders are the roof rack and anything you stow there (very high), the generator (high and heavy, the motorcycles (high and heavy), the roof mounted air conditioners and the 3rd and 4th house battery.

It's obvious that you should load your heaviest gear in the lowest tool boxes, but it's not obvious that you shoul load the vehicle evenly side to side. If you don't the cog will shift closer to the heavy side and your side angle capability will be less on the heavy side.

That's why I dob't like inter connected fuel tanks. The weight will slosh to the low side.

It would make sense to determine the cog from a safety point of view as well as peace of mind and to answer those naysayers you will meet along the way who will tell it must be top heavy because it "looks" top heavy.

good luck on the journey.

Tom

[dhackney]

Have you ever considered the "push to connect" type fittings.

Christo,

I hadn't looked at that type of connection. I need to re-engineer the entire water system around a new valve so I'll take a look at that option. Thanks for the info.

And thanks again for your help when we were starting out on this expedition vehicle path. This thing is a long ways from an LC100!

Doug

[dhackney]

Weigh it level and then tilt it and weigh it again.

Tom,

This is super info. Thanks for the link.

Agreed on vehicle dynamics affecting any theoretical limit. All it takes is one rock or hole.

But having said that, I'd take great comfort in knowing the lateral, longitudinal and vertical location of the CG and resulting roll angles.

On the measurements that this guy is using for Jeeps, do you think a 24" front tire patch lift is valid for the FG? He is adament about >24", which I'm assuming is related to the wheelbase of the Jeeps he is including in his sample set. If the FG has a longer wheelbase would we need to elevate the tire patches to 36", 48", etc.? I don't know enough math to calculate this out for myself.

Our camper weighed 3,700 lbs. out of the factory. There have been some things taken away and some added since then, so there's no current way to know exactly how much it weighs sitting in the assembly shop, but 3,800 is a reasonable estimate. Fully loaded and wet I'd estimate the camper at around 4,500 lbs.

We've had a number of conversations walking around it talking about where the CG of the camper itself is. The longitudinal CG is marked on the camper, but what we don't know is lateral and vertical CG.

If we can, we'll get a bare chassis and a chassis with camper weight and then we'll know how much that element itself weighs.

Until then we'll have to be content with an estimated loaded wet chassis weight of 10,680 (half tank of fuel). I think the majority of that weight is at or below 38 inches. We did everything we could to centralize the mass between the axles and the frame rails.

Based on the weights we took this week we know that 66% of the loaded wet weight is on the back axle, so using the Jeep guy's calculations the longitudinal CG is 33% ahead of the rear axle.

Vertical and lateral is unknown, but I'd guess the longitudinal is just forward of the AC/DC distribution panel located in the step up into the berth. Vertical could be anywhere, but I'd love to find out it's below the floor level of the camper. (one can always dream...) After working through this exercise I would be surprised if it is 60" or higher, which I wouldn't have said just looking at the rig.

Doug

[Scott Brady]

I think that would be a theoretical maximum side angle of 28 degrees. That's static - the dynamics of a vehicle going over bumps and down into holes and springs compressing would make it risky to approach that angle.

Tom,

Based on my time with Doug's FG, this is a good number in my book too as a maximum. I would avoid anything over 20% on the trail, and that would be with very slow and smooth progress.



That's why I dob't like inter connected fuel tanks. The weight will slosh to the low side.


Good point. Cross-linked airbags fall into the same category IMO.

[dhackney]

We have broadband.
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_15/images/image019.jpg

Updated photos in Album Fifteen at http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[dhackney]

We have alternating current.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_16/images/image009.jpg

Updated photos in album 16 at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[Joaquin Suave]

I'm surprized that your genset is not on rubber damper feet.

[dhackney]

I'm surprized that your genset is not on rubber damper feet.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_16/images/image008.jpg

Those dome shaped things between the genset and the slide are rubber mounts. It's hard to discern that since they are all painted red.

[Joaquin Suave]

Your right! amazing what paint can hide.

So what do you guess you GVW to be?

[dhackney]

So what do you guess you GVW to be?

The spring packs are designed for 10,000 lbs / 4,536 kilos rear and 6,000 lbs / 2,722 kilos front.

I think we'll be right up on that.

We're taking the rig to a scale when we get it done and fully loaded so we can weigh each axle, each side and the front axle weight when elevated. The goal is to calculate the roll center so we'll know what the baseline static roll angle limits are. Keep in mind however that whatever the math says our limit is, our actual limit is determined by my wife's Pucker Factor Meter (PFM). :littlefriend:

[BajaTaco]

Whoa - talk about "Big Red" :Wow1: Is it loud?

And any comments on the BGAN yet?

[dhackney]

Whoa - talk about "Big Red" :Wow1: Is it loud?
I don't know if they've had it running over there at the fab shop or not. Every single fitting for the cooling system is a different size, so they had to round up suitable adatpers first. The truck is due back at the assembly shop next week so I can let you know then. All I can tell you is that the genset weighs 160 lbs and the muffler feels like it weighs half that, so hopefully it will be quiet. How loud can 18 c.i. be, anyway? :rolleyes:


And any comments on the BGAN yet?
Dry install of the software went very smoothly. I was up there until 2AM last night configuring all the electonics, network, etc. The camper is on jackstands in the shop, with no sky shot available, so I can't test the signal or get registered on the network yet. I've got quite a bit of work to do on finishing up the rig once the truck gets in so I probably won't be able to see the sky for a couple of weeks. I'll post up on it when we get a chance to get everything going.

[dhackney]

We have a shop mascot:

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_17/images/image002.jpg

Updated photos in album seventeen at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[Scott Brady]

Incredible progress Doug.

I like the swaybar :)

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_17/images/image063.jpg

Have you driven the chassis with the new shocks, swaybar and springs?

[dhackney]

No driving test yet. I don't think the chassis has moved under its own power for quite a while now.

Here's a couple of shots from today:
http://www.hackneys.com/photos/IMG_3311-small.jpg
cab without headliner, sound isolation mat installed, overhead console mount & position test

http://www.hackneys.com/photos/IMG_3319-small.jpg
sway bar mounted, awaiting heim joint linkage

Things are heating up, fast and furious now. It won't be long...

[flyingwil]

:victory: Incredible progress Amigo! Keep up the outstanding work!

[dhackney]

We have opiate of the masses, a.k.a. Berth TV

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_18/images/image126.jpg


Updated photos in Album Eighteen at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[Scott Brady]

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_18/images/image100.jpg

:bowdown:

[RoundOut]

Also known as the electronic income reducer. LOL


We have opiate of the masses, a.k.a. Berth TV

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_18/images/image126.jpg


Updated photos in Album Eighteen at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[dhackney]

We have a chassis:

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_19/images/image044.jpg

Updated photos in album nineteen at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[kcowyo]

Things are heating up, fast and furious now. It won't be long...

Looks good to me! :clapsmile

With everything you need at your fingertips (nice TV, can an on-board humidor be far behind?) are you sure you're ever going to want to come back home?


:lurk:

[charlieaarons]

You have an absolutely enormous amount of storage space in those steel boxes on the sides. What are they for? Have you calculated your weight with them full of whatever you intend to put in them?

Charlie

[dhackney]

With everything you need at your fingertips (nice TV, can an on-board humidor be far behind?)

I was going to take a wine cave unit apart and use the compressor/condensor to make the entire basement storage compartment a wine cellar, but I ran out of time. I will have a small jacket size humidor with me. I try to just buy cigars when I'm going to smoke them right away. I've had too many good ones dry out on me from neglect.


are you sure you're ever going to want to come back home?

We sold our house a couple of years ago and donated most of our stuff to get ready for this. We're more than a year behind schedule on departure because my wife nixed the sailboat, so I had to build this FG.

[dhackney]

You have an absolutely enormous amount of storage space in those steel boxes on the sides. What are they for? Have you calculated your weight with them full of whatever you intend to put in them?

Charlie

Charlie,

The giant box in front is the garage to carry our twin Honda 150cc dirt bikes.

We will be at 16k lbs. when fully loaded. 10k on rear axle, 6k on front.

We're planning on spending 2-3 years exploring the world in the rig, so we'll either (typically) be carrying excess stuff we'll later eject or dragging along things we pick up along the way.

We do carry some supplies we use for a philanthropic thing we do with photography. We go out into the bush untill we find people who have never held a picture of themselves, then we give them one. Instead of taking pictures, we give pictures. This requires we carry several thousand sheets of 4x6 printer paper and corresponding ink ribbons for the twin Canon printers we use for that purpose.

My wife is also planning to teach local kids how to build scrapbooks to put their pictures in, so we'll be carrying supplies for that too.

http://www.hackneys.com/travel/India/india-photos/Sikkim_Album/images/image016.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/travel/India/india-photos/Sikkim_Album/images/image017.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/travel/Bhutan/bhutan-photos/Bhutan_Album/images/image098.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/travel/Syria/syria-photos/Syria_Album_06/images/image120.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/travel/Syria/syria-photos/Syria_Album_06/images/image129.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/travel/Syria/syria-photos/Syria_Album_06/images/image132.jpg

Doug

[dhackney]

We have electrical systems.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_20/images/image292.jpg


Updated photos in album 20 at http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[dhackney]

Center and overhead consoles are in.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_21/images/image196.jpg


Updated photos in album 21 at: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[kcowyo]

Some nice final touches. Is the overhead console a custom piece or something offered for the Fuso's?

So are you two any closer to setting a firmed up departure date? I'm sure you must be chomping at the bit to get going. :jumping:

[dhackney]

The overhead console is from Tuffy. It's the single compartment model #103. More info here: http://www.tuffyproducts.com/consoles/overhead/103.html

I added the dual dome light (red/white light) and the two map lights. The mounting was custom built by Mark & Brad.

The Tuffy overhead console is steel and is pretty heavy. The radio is easily removable for shipping and secure while parked.

The locking aluminum center console is custom and was fabbed by Mark Johnson of Metal Tech, who did all the custom metal work on the project. It is very light when not loaded with electronics.

The center console is made to be easily removable for rig shipping or long term storage. The GPS antenna, rear video camera feed and the Pioneer head to control unit cable are the only three I have to unplug and fish back out of the console to remove it. All the other cables have quick connects. It does require removal of the sub to get at the rear mounting bolts. I considered leaving them as just studs with no nuts, but opted to fully lock down the console to them since there is so much weight back there with the amp & sub.

Your little bouncing guy icon perfectly illustrates our state of mind regarding getting the heck out of here.

I should be done with the cab in the next day or two and the remaining things will hopefully go pretty fast after that. The "to install" shelves are pretty empty and the white board "to do" list is full of check marks.

The remaining major installs are the chassis relay panel and the fuel filter array.

Remaining wiring/connection includes the air compressor, driving/fog/pencil/reverse lights, garage & passenger side box lights and chassis interconnect panel chassis cables.

The cab has been as much of a quagmire time-wise as the electrical systems compartment. It will be good to get the cab done and get the rest of the items wrapped up.

Sorry for not being better about posting progress reports. I'm working very long days and just don't have the bandwidth right now to maintain a diary of this project. I've tried to caption each photo so you can reconstruct what was going on during that phase of the project.

Doug

[freetomeander]

All the design, planning and modications, plus your time and expense....big undertaking and my hats off to you. Did you consider just buying an Earthroamer and taking off? Put the cycles on a small capable offroad trailer or front and rear receiver hitch carriers for small bikes? No doubt you did since I can see you are a meticulous planner. Just wondering why that didn't appeal to you. This can't be that much cheaper is it?
We have your basic motorhome and love it. You're going to have a great adventure goin around the world.

[dhackney]

All the design, planning and modifications, plus your time and expense....big undertaking and my hats off to you.

It has been a big undertaking. I've been on it full time, 12-16 hours a day, seven days a week, since mid-Sept. with about 14 total days off in that span. Once we get done I'll try to post up some thoughts on the scale/scope of the project and the effects of so much work, especially the long hours, physically & emotionally.


Did you consider just buying an Earthroamer and taking off?

Yes, we did consider them. I called them and talked to them, but did not visit the factory or see a unit in person.

We decided against them for a variety of reasons that now look pretty ludicrous. As I recall they were a) too heavy (we'll be in the same general weight class as an Earthroamer and overweight on our chassis), b) too ostentatious for 3rd world countries we like to travel in (the jury is out on this, but we'll be anything but inconspicuous), c) too big (we'll be every bit as big), d) too complex for 3rd world travel (I think we'll be even more complex), e) too long to take delivery - they could have gotten us one in December 2006 (we'll be done sometime in early April 2007) f) US market chassis (we do have an advantage here with a truly world chassis.

With the Earthroamer we would have enjoyed completely integrated systems, without all the added complexity of interconnecting the chassis/camper/system boxes. This is something I didn't fully appreciate at the time we were making our decisions.

The Earthroamer would have a roomier cab, with much more in the way of factory options available.

Upsides of what we are creating compared to Earthroamer are:
- Fully secure garage / bike storage area
- Tighter turning radius
- Raw water treatment capability

We may have higher capacities in LP & total water, but I'm not sure. I'd have to look that up.

And yes, there have been many, many times during this project when we have revisited our decision matrix.


Put the cycles on a small capable offroad trailer or front and rear receiver hitch carriers for small bikes?

We probably would have gone with some type of hitch or bumper/frame mount carriers. We didn't want to deal with a trailer. We've been down those dead end super narrow market town roads with our big GS and wouldn't want to think about backing a trailer out of there.



This can't be that much cheaper is it?.

Ours will end up costing less than a 747.

You could duplicate the basics of our rig for under $100k.
Truck: 32k new
Camper: ~30k new
3 point frame and boxes: depends on what your fabricator charges

The rest is all the systems & electronics we've put on it.


We have your basic motorhome and love it. You're going to have a great adventure goin around the world.

Thanks for the encouragement. Hugely appreciated. Some days I think that bright glow at the end of the tunnel is a train.

http://www.illisoft.net/trains/books/images/solomon_02.jpg

[dhackney]

Glovebox mounted GPS is in:

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_22/images/image128.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_22/images/image137.jpg


Relay panel is in:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_22/images/image164.jpg


Camper rub rails are on:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_22/images/image006.jpg

Updated photos in album 22 at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[dhackney]

Test fit of camper to chassis tonight. I'll be measuring seal / interface, etc. and then we'll pull the camper back off. Plan to do the production / final camper placement in 1-2 days.

It's been four months since the camper was on the chassis and none of us could remember the reference points. It took us three attempts to get it placed correctly. Once we had it on we made liberal use of painter's tape to mark reference points to aid the removal and subsequent final placement.

Measured dimensions at loaded weight are:
Height: 12.04' / 3.67 meters
Width: 8.58' / 2.62 meters (rub rail to rub rail)
Length: 26.17' / 7.98 meters (tip of front bumper to rear bumper)
Ground clearance to xfer case bash plate: 12.5" / .32 meters

Weights to come.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/HN7J0727-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/HN7J0735-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/IMG_6197-crop-small.jpg

I'll post some more pictures in a few days once we do the production / final install of the camper.

[Scott Brady]

looks really good Doug. Can't wait to see it in person!

Does the new rear suspension seem to take the load better?

[dhackney]

Scott,

The entire suspension looks a lot happier with the load. I won't know how it handles for a few days until I get a chance to get it out on the road. Just crawling underneath and seeing the spring packs, Bilsteins, rear roll bar and the shocks on the 3 point pivot frame make me feel better about the prospects for improved handling and chassis dynamics.

Based on the "climb up into the camper without the stairs" test we think we achieved about a 2" lift at the rear bumper. I'd guess about 1-1.5" at the front. Unfortunately we didn't measure a hard point before we built and installed the new spring packs, so I can't give you an accurate measurement for improved chassis clearance.

We've now got 7.25-8" of clearance between the rear wheels and the bottom of the storage boxes, which is an improvement of at least an inch. The new chassis spring packs, chassis shocks and 3 point pivot frame shocks should also help limit, if not eliminate, the box/wheel contact we experienced in our alpha & beta tests.

I'll be taking the chassis up to weigh it before we put the camper on, then weighing everything fully loaded & wet. If we can coordinate it, I'm going to use a flatbed wrecker to ramp up the front axle and get the weights needed to calculate the roll center.

Doug

[dhackney]

Quick update:

Connected the BGAN terminal tonight and got immediate lockup with the bird @230k.

Skymate remains intermittant. I haven't done any troubleshooting on that yet.

All other systems nominal.

Updated dimensional/capacity data:

Project: Hackney Expedition Vehicle
Goal: Self-sufficient, Self-Extracting Global Expedition Vehicle
Mission: 2 - 3 years of unsupported exploration primarily in developing countries

Project time: One year
Build time: Nine months

Project type: Private
Funding: Privately funded, no commercial sponsorships, endorsements, financial or product support

Concept design: Douglas Hackney - inspired by an FG/Bigfoot design of Carl Hunter
Bumpers, frame extension, pivot frame, storage box, etc. design and implementation: Mark Johnson
Electrical, plumbing, electronics, etc. systems design and implementation: Douglas Hackney
Custom storage boxes: Fleet Metal Box
Powder Coating: Jerico Metal Fabrication and Powdercoat

Chassis: 2007 Mitsubishi Fuso FG 140 4x4
Camper: 2006 Bigfoot 20C10.11FR

Engine type: DOHC 4-stroke cycle, water-cooled, turbocharged, intercooled diesel
Power: 147 HP @2700 RPM / 108.12 KW
Torque: 347 ft/lb (lbf/ft) @1600 RPM / 47.97 kgf/m
Displacement: 299 c.i. / 4.899 liters
Bore/Stroke: 4.49x4.72" / 114x120mm
Drivetrain: four wheel drive, manually selected, dual range
Front axle: open
Rear axle: limited slip
Transmission: 5 speed manual
Overall gear ratio (1st Gear - Low 4 Wheel Drive): 64.2:1

Tires: Mud & Snow Yokohama Y-7428 LT742 235/85R16; 3 polyester plies sidewall, 2 steel plies tread
Spare tires & wheels: two

Overall length: 27.17' / 7.98 meters (tip of front bumper to rear bumper)
Overall height: 12.04' / 3.67 meters
Overall width: 8.58' / 2.62 meters (rub rail to rub rail)
Front axle track: 65.6" / 166.62cm
Centerline to centerline rear duals: 10.75" / 273.05mm
Outer edge of tire tread to outer edge of tire tread - front: 71.75" / 1822.45 mm (stock tires)
Outer edge of tire tread to outer edge of tire tread - rear: 79.00" / 2006.60mm (stock tires)
Wheelbase: 154" 12' 10" / 3.91 meters
Turning radius: 28.2' / 8.56 meters (outer tread edge of outer front tire)
Mid Wheelbase ground clearance: 15" / .381 meters (stock tires)
Minimum ground clearance: 12.5" (xfer case skid plate) / .318 meters (stock tires)
Front differential ground clearance - max load: 8.5" / 215.9mm (stock tires)
Rear differential ground clearance - max load: 7.625" / 193.68mm (stock tires)
Horizontal centerline front differential, max load: 14.375" / 365.13mm (stock tires)
Horizontal centerline rear differential, max load: 14.125" / 358.78mm (stock tires)
Breakover: 79 degrees (from vertical at mid wheelbase), 11 degrees from wheels (stock tires)
Approach angle: 29.4 degrees (to front cab step) (stock tires)
Departure angle: 17.1 degrees (to departure caster wheels) (stock tires)
Top of rear wheel to box: 7.25" / .184 meters (stock tires)
Bottom of frame rail to ground @ rear axle: 26.5" / .673 meters (stock tires)
Bottom of frame rail to ground @ front axle: 29.5" / .749 meters (stock tires)

Chassis (everything except the camper) % of total weight: 63%
Camper % of total weight: 37%
Front axle % of total: 36%
Rear axle % of total: 64%
Left side % of total: 51%
Right side % of total: 49%
Left front % of total: 19%
Right front % of total: 17%
Left rear % of total: 33%
Right rear % of total: 30%

Center of gravity behind front axle: 98.14" / 249.28cm
Center of gravity from passenger outer tread: 36.19" / 91.92cm
Center of gravity height: 72.28" / 183.59cm

Maximum left roll angle: 26.20
Maximum right roll angle: 26.60
Maximum back roll angle: 37.70
Maximum front roll angle: 53.63

Shocks: Bilstein
Springs: Deaver
Rear sway bar: 1.25" / 31.75mm x 36" / 91.44cm

Camper & storage box frame: three point pivot
Pivot frame suspension: 50/50 Fox shocks

Fuel capacity: ~100 gallons / 378.54 liters
Range: >1,000 miles / 1,609 kilometers
Fuel tanks: dual saddle
Fuel filters: dual one micron with online hot swap backup
Genset fuel rate: ~.2 gallons / .76 liters per hour

Air compressor: 4 cfm / 113.27 liters per minute
Air tank: 4 gallon / 15.14 liters
Maximum system working pressure: 150 psi / 1034 kpa / 10.34 bar
Air seats: dual, 3" stroke, 5 air bladders, heated
Air horns: triple, 152 decibels

Drinking water capacity: ~75 gallons / ~284 liters
Gray water: 32 gallons / 122 liters
Black water: 32 gallons / 122 liters
Macerator pump output hose: 75 feet / 22.86 meters

LP capacity: ~20 gallons / 75.7 liters

House bank batteries: 840 amp hours
House bank dedicated alternator: 135 amps
Solar panel output: 19 amps

External AC input: 120/220 VAC / 60HZ, 30 amps single phase
Guest power output: 120/220 VAC / 60 HZ, 20 amps single phase
Diesel genset: 30 amps 120V single phase
Inverter: 3000 watts, 120V single phase

Raw water input: any fresh water source
Drinking water filtration: <1 micron
Drinking water purification: activated charcoal, Ultraviolet light sterilization
Input pump rate: 7 gallons per minute / 26.5 liters per minute

Internet access: global
Bandwidth: >200kbs
Voice communications access: dual global, cab and camper external antennas for primary, camper external antenna for backup
Local voice communications: GSM 3G
Low data rate access: global
Emergency Beacons: EPIRB 406 MHZ global
Radios: VHF (bike to bike, bike to truck), CB (US band)
GPS: one fixed, three portable, cab and camper external antennas

Front winch: 16,500 lbs. / 7,484 kilos
Rear winch: 16,500 lbs. / 7,484 kilos

LAN: Gigabit Ethernet
WLAN: 802.11g
Data storage: 2TB configured as 1.5TB RAID5
Document handling: color scanner/copier/ink jet printer 8.5x11" / 21.59x27.94cm
Photo printing: 4x6" / 10.16x15.24cm dye sublimation

Cab video: DVD playback, rear color camera w/microphone
Cab stereo: 300 watts, four 4.5" / 114.3mm drivers, one 10" / 254mm subwoofer
Camper stereo: 70 watts, four 5.25" / 133.35mm drivers
Camper TV: 21" / 53.34cm LCD HD (US standard ATSC)
Camper TV sound: 5 channel Dolby/DTS wireless headphones
Campter TV playback: upconverting DVD
iPod integration: cab and camper

Berth: fixed ~60x80" / 152.4cm/203.2cm
Head: dry, fixed shower
Range/cooktop: three burner
Oven: convection microwave
Furnace/heater: 30,000 BTU
Water heater: 6 gallons / 23 liters
Refrigerator (3 way: LP, 12VDC, 120VAC): 6 cf / 169 liters
Air conditioner: 11,000 BTU
Galley sink: dual
Integrated exterior LP Grill: 12,000 BTU stainless steel

Primary chassis materials: steel, stainless steel, aluminum
Primary camper materials: chopped mat fiberglass & wood ply sandwich cored with injected foam, wood, single layer fiberglass
Camper glass: dual pane

Camper leveling jacks: electric / manual
Fire extinguishers: Four ABC type (cab - 1; storage boxes - 1, camper - 2)
Ditch bags: two
Vehicle recovery kits: one
Winch line extensions: two
Winch anchor: 14,000 lbs / 6,350 kg capacity
Hand tools: ax, cross bow saw, pick, short and long shovel, pry bar
Pneumatic impact wrench: 1/2" / 12.7mm 500 ft/lb / 69.13 kgf/m

Locking external storage capacity: 268.01cubic feet / 7.59 cubic meters / 7,589 liters
Camper internal storage: 92.98 cubic feet / 2.63 cubic meters / 2,633 liters
Total storage: 360.99 cubic feet / 10.22 cubic meters / 10,222 liters
Auxiliary vehicle storage capacity: two motorcycles up to 94" / 238.76 cm long and 48" / 121.92cm high (taller bikes can be accommodated if you compress the forks)


We plan to weigh the full rig tomorrow. We are just about fully packed so this is a representative load.

Almost complete. Just a few trim items and a couple of guard plates to add.

Updated photos follow.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/IMG_6907-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/IMG_6910-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/IMG_6911-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/IMG_6914-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/IMG_6916-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/IMG_6918-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/IMG_6852-small.jpg

[j_nigrelli]

VERY impressive!!!

[jayshapiro]

Hey Doug,

You're almost there! The rig is looking fantastic now that it's fully loaded. Still the most amazing part to me, is that you can actually get 2 bikes to fit in that garage. It doesn't look half big enough until you see the interior shot.

I know it's been a long hard project, but I can't imagine the satisfaction that you must be starting to feel now...

To reference back to one of your earlier posts a few months ago: Yes, maybe in the end you could have just bought an Earthroamer for roughly the same size / spec, etc. But the value of having hand-built every system in that rig, knowing them inside and out, and knowing that "I built it" will be worth more than any time/money/complexity savings you could have ever had with an 'off the shelf' rig.

I've loved following your progress over the months, and wish you guys all the best on your (hopefully) imminent departure.

Hope that we catch up to you some day / some where in our rig.

Cheers,
Jay.

[dhackney]

But the value of having hand-built every system in that rig, knowing them inside and out

My wife has continually stressed that point over the duration of this project. I've been so close to it that aspect has not been readily apparent to me until yesterday when I was making a 2nd pass through my tools to cut unessesary weight. I realized while sorting that I knew exact places where specific sockets/screwdrivers/pliers/etc. were required. So, yes, for the systems that I designed and built, troubleshooting and repair should be greatly facilitated. I probably won't be able to truly appreciate it until we've actually been out there like you.


I've loved following your progress over the months, and wish you guys all the best on your (hopefully) imminent departure.

Hope that we catch up to you some day / some where in our rig.

We sure hope the departure is imminent! You'll be able to locate me in our nearest psychiactric facility if it doesn't happen soon! :yikes:

Look forward to meeting you in person out there somewhere.

Now if I can just remember where I put that can of anti-gravity paint...

be well,
Doug

[FusoFG]

Doug,

Congratulations on your accomplishments so far.

But don't be too hard on yourself.

I've built / outfitted 2 Fuso FG campers and considering you:

stretched the wheelbase ~20 inches
built a custom flexible sub frame
mounted a slide in camper with nothing to slide it into
found space for a diesel generator and 2 motorcycles
added custom springs, shocks and air seats
installed an amazing amount of plumbing, wiring and sophisticated electronics
and who knows what else that hasn't been done before,

I think you time line is just fine.

If there is anything I would change it would have been your estimate for how long it would take to do a project with so many unknows.

That, and as I mentioned before, I wouldn't have published a departure date.

Good luck and keep up the great work. And stay calm. You don't want to make a mistake now just because of a self imposed timeline.

Tom

[dhackney]

If there is anything I would change it would have been your estimate for how long it would take to do a project with so many unknows.

:) Agreed. I left the original timeline estimate on the web site for comic relief. I think it's a great lesson for any other neophytes who follow in our footsteps about how challenging it is to estimate time for something this complex, this custom and this completely heretofore unknown.

Our motto on the project became, "everything takes a day." Even the simplist, little things, that I thought would take an hour, ended up taking about a day. Or more. And some things, such as the electrical systems box, cab, garage, etc., became quagmires that I never thought I'd escape from.

Psychologically it became very important to focus only on a few things at a time, which was a challenge due to the parallel design & procurement requirements. The overall project contained so many individual design decisions, research elements, procurement contacts, implementation challenges, problem solving processes and first-time experiences that I had to keep a narrow focus to keep it from becoming overwhelming.

So its pretty humorous for me to look back and remember my thinking "hey, it's a truck that we're going to put a camper on, how much work than this be?" The answer is: a lot. I've been on the build full time, as in 8-14+ hours a day since 15 September, 2006, with about 20 total days off in that span. There was a lot of design time in the preceeding months, but I have no way of estimating how much. Lots of man hours in this one.



That, and as I mentioned before, I wouldn't have published a departure date.

:) Another huge agreed. Just after we started I received an email from a guy who'd circumnavigated with his wife in their sailboat. His biggest piece of advice, repeated several times, was to NEVER STATE A DEPARTURE DATE. In his experience, you get hounded into a premature departure by your friends and family if you state a date.

We experienced the same phenomenon. It is not intentional, in most cases, it's just a the most relevent conversation topic they can bring up. And they are naturally curious about progress, etc. A depature date is a solid rock they can hook onto and measure progress against, etc. I found that talking about any date, about any aspect of the project, just ended up putting unessesary stress on me. My attitude became "it's done when it's done."


And stay calm. You don't want to make a mistake now just because of a self imposed timeline.

That is an excellent insight. A few months ago Jon told me a story about all the car restorations he's seen where guys doing a frame off restoration would spend huge amounts of time and money in the early stages of the project making all the stuff nobody sees perfect and then when they were near the end, when the project was late and they were beaten down psychologically and physically, they'd slap a horrible paint job on it because "it's time to paint it and be done." So they'd end up with a perfect resto underneath, but the single most important element, the one everyone saw, was terrible.

I've thought of that story often in the last few months as I've repeatedly bounced off of my physical and mental exhaustion red line. I've tried to always choose to maintain our goal of quality and attention to detail rather than slap it together at the end just to get it over. And there have been more than a few times where that decision has been a real struggle.


Good luck and keep up the great work.

Thanks Tom. Coming from you, with your track record of building two of these things, that is the highest praise we could ever receive.

[Christian P.]

Our motto on the project became, "everything takes a day." Even the simplist, little things, that I thought would take an hour, ended up taking about a day. Or more. And some things, such as the electrical systems box, cab, garage, etc., became quagmires that I never thought I'd escape from.



you are ready for Africa my friend...

:)

seriously, this is actually good because it puts you in the right frame of mind even before you leave...it usually takes several weeks on the road to reach that point.

[charlieaarons]

I checked on the www.michelintransport.com site about the 7.50R16 XZY. It is now 14 instead of 12 ply rated and supports 3300 lb at 7.0 bar (101.5 psi) single, 3190 dual.
That would probably be your best choice. I can tell you by personal experience it's probably the toughest most durable 32" tire available. Your "deltas" would be 8/15%. And it's tubeless.

Charlie

[dhackney]

Charlie,

Thanks for the info. I will check that tire out. Could be a good fit for us.

Doug

[dhackney]

[I believe these results to be erroneous. Please see my post here: http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showpost.php?p=79104&postcount=148 for more information.]
[edited 23 May, 2007 to correct data points and calcualted values]

The weigh-in.

After nine months of fretting about this, as most things that you turn into a big deal, this turned out to be nearly painless.

We used a local moving and storage scale and a local towing company for the tilt.

I took all the weights required to calculate our roll center using the spreadsheet located here:
http://www.jeepaholics.com/tech/cog/#_Toc535118709

I used the front track width for all of these calculations. If you use the rear track width you get better roll angles, but I'd rather stay conservative on these calculations.

The results are:
Chassis, storage boxes, 3 point frame (everything except the camper) % of total weight: 63% (based on a previously measured weight of the chassis w/o camper)
Camper % of total weight: 37%
Front axle % of total: 36%
Rear axle % of total: 64%
Left side % of total: 51%
Right side % of total: 49%
Left front % of total: 19%
Right front % of total: 17%
Left rear % of total: 33%
Right rear % of total: 30%

Center of gravity behind front axle: 98.14" / 249.28cm
Center of gravity from passenger outer tread: 36.19" / 91.92cm
Center of gravity height: 72.28" / 183.59cm

Maximum left roll angle: 26.2
Maximum right roll angle: 26.6
Maximum back roll angle: 37.7
Maximum front roll angle: 56.63


Lifting the front axle. We raised it 28.5" off the deck. When raised the centerline of the front axle was at 42.875" / 108.90cm.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/2007-05-22-SD550-IMG_6965-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/2007-05-22-SD550-IMG_6967-small.jpg

Resulting CG/ roll centers with the three point frame at static level follow. I plan to re-weigh the rig with the 3 point frame jacked full over so we can find out what the actual left & right roll limits will be. Based on putting some estimates into the spreadsheet I think we could lose 2-3 degrees.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-front.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-front-left.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-front-right.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-side.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-side-back.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-side-forward.jpg

I was initially surprised at how high the CG was until I went back and looked at the %s. The camper is 37% of the total weight, so having much at all of its mass up high really pushes the CG up quickly.

Of course, all of this is based on trusting the spreadsheet that is generating the numbers...

[charlieaarons]

So what were the weights? I showed you mine....
Charlie

[dhackney]

I checked on the www.michelintransport.com site about the 7.50R16 XZY.

Charlie,

I can't find anything on a 7.50R16 on the XZY model page:
http://www.michelintransport.com/ple/front/affich.jsp?codeRubrique=46&lang=EN

The only 7.50R16 I can find is an XS here:
http://www.michelintransport.com/ple/front/affich.jsp?&codePage=47_05062005231733&lang=EN&codeRubrique=47

Where did you find the 7.50R16XZY info?

[dhackney]

So what were the weights?

Heavy, but do-able.

The FG is such a small chassis to start with that you are pretty limited weight-wise. Once we knew the general range we'd end up in we put aftermarket springs & shocks on it to handle our anticipated load.

Both the springs and shocks made a very notable and discernable difference in ride and handling. The rear sway bar and the 50/50 shocks on the 3 point frame made a huge difference in handling as well. The whole rig drives so much better than when we tested it feels like an entirely different vehicle. The ride is still a cab over truck, but what used to be full on crash-to-the-stops bumps are now well damped and controlled. Tonight we will drink to the health of Deaver Spring and Bilstein.

When you combine that with the almost eerie quietness of the cab, it's a very, very comfortable driving experience period, much less in a cab over truck.

And how about that weather we've been having...

OK, I can see I haven't thrown you off the scent. If you are looking for specifics, see Darrin's disclaimer page on singles here:
http://www.ruf-inc.com/srt.htm. All the MFG quotes there are from Mitsubishi Fuso USA.

If you are still wondering, check out the heart of darkness here:
http://www.atla.org/
Note that they rebranded themselves for better PR.

If we come across you in South America, SE Asia, India or Africa I'd be glad to share them with you over a glass of wine.

Doug

[charlieaarons]

The info about the XZY is under "tyre characteristics", "technical tyre catalog".

Your CG height is not right. Eyeballing things I think it's under 60". Something is wrong with your calculation, I think.

Charlie

[dhackney]

Your CG height is not right. Eyeballing things I think it's under 60". Something is wrong with your calculation, I think.

I used the spreadsheet from the Jeep site. It is the only way I know to calculate the CG. If anyone is aware of another spreadsheet I'd love to run the numbers again. Especially if they came out with a lower CG.

[etbadger]

First: Awesome build. I can fully understand (and empathise) with all the delays. We were so gung-ho to get going on our travels that we ended up spending a month here, a month there just fixing and repairing while on the go. It would have been much better overall (time and facilities) to have it done right up front.

Second: That CG location looks way too high in the pictures. Unless you are carying a large slab of lead on the roof I cannot picture how the point would be so high.

The logic behind the CG calculations on the Jeep page are correct as best as I can figure from a quick glance, but I would suspect perhaps an implementation issue in the spreadsheet.

Would you be willing to dish out the raw numbers (weights, height of axle when on the tilt-bed, etc) for a few people to double check the numbers?

-e

[jgolden]

I'm dying to know what the final weight is!!!!:)

[dhackney]

Thanks to everyone who has contacted me regarding the CG / roll center, etc.

I did find an error in my inputs. Once I corrected that input the model lowered the CG to 72.28" / 183.59cm.

I located another model at:
http://www.kettlemorainemotorsports.com/cg.html

I ran the numbers through that model and it returned exactly the same values as the Jeep model.

Unless both models are identically flawed, I am assuming these to be valid for a static 3 point pivot frame, i.e. level load.

I am researching pivot tables that we can put the rig on and get an empirical measurement of the roll angles. I think that is probably the only way we'll ever know for sure where we are at with the 3 point pivot frame against the stops on either side.

I edited the previous "weigh-in" post to correct the values and calculated data points.

[dhackney]

Some further thoughts on the CG / roll angle test.

Tom has pointed out to me that if our rig was a solid block of mass, with no voids and of a completely consistent matter, the CG would be about 72”, or halfway up through the mass. This is just one more reason why I find if very hard to believe that our CG is 72” high.

If I make even slight alterations to the Jeep model that allow for even a small portion of the liquid rearward transfer or rearward suspension weight shift during the lift the CG drops to ~60” / 152.4cm and the roll angles increase to > 30 degrees.

My conclusion is that our CG is probably well below 72” / 182.88cm, probably closer to or well less than ~60” / 152.4cm.

I believe that in order for the Jeep model or others to be used accurately a much more rigorous approach must be taken to the test. I tried to be as accurate as I could with the front axle height measurement but I question the validity of the results of this model unless you take the additional steps of eliminating liquid transfer and the insertion of solid rods to eliminate suspension expansion/compression.

Due to the 3 point pivot frame, I believe our roll angles can only accurately be measured on a tilt table. I continue to seek that opportunity and will post the results if I can conduct that test.

I am currently unaware of any expedition vehicle with a 3 point pivot frame that has undergone a tilt table test, but would welcome those results if any are available.


My methodology for the lift was:
1. Locate and mark the horizontal centerline of front axle. This ensured I would always be using the loaded tire radius for the calculations. Since both tires are the same circumference, I didn’t have to worry about averaging those as you would on a race car set up for stagger.
2. When we lifted the front axle by driving it up on the tilt bed, I used the mark on the front axle and a laser level to obtain the lifted front axle centerline height of the loaded front tires.
3. I did not replace the shocks with solid bars to eliminate suspension height change, as this would have been impractical in my circumstances. I made no allowance for the compression of the rear suspension, the corresponding lift of the front suspension and the resulting weight transfer rearward.
4. I made no allowances for the shift of liquids in the tanks, specifically the fuel tanks, which are long and narrow. The estimated 185 lbs. of fuel in those tanks would have shifted towards the rear.
5. I only took one measurement and one weight at one height.


Test conditions:
• Fuel tanks: ~25 gallons. The tanks are saddle tanks located under the garage along the frame rails. Equal amounts in both tanks via a crossover. There are no baffles, so this weight would have all shifted back. That’s 180 lbs @7.2 lbs/gallon.
• Raw water: ~35 gallons. The tank is mounted between the frame rails aft of the garage. No baffles. That’s 291.5 lbs. but since the tank was ~75% full there would have been minimal shifting.
• Fresh water: 33 gallons. The tank is mounted under the dinette, left side of camper centerline, aft of the rear axle. Full load, 100% full. That’s 266.56 lbs.
• Gray water: 0
• Black water: 0
• Front axle centerline, static: 14.375” / 365.13mm
• Front axle centerline, raised for test: 42.875” / 1,089.03mm
• Amount front axle centerline raised for test: 28.5” / 723.9mm
• Front contact patch elevation raised for test: 28.5” / 723.9mm
• Front track: 71.75
• Rear track: 79
• Wheelbase: 154

On the front axle lift amount, I had previously contacted the author of the Jeep spreadsheet and asked if I needed to go higher than 24” since our FG was a longer wheelbase. He responded that any higher lift would not significantly improve the accuracy of the model.

Doug

[dhackney]

I'm dying to know what the final weight is!!!!:)

Surprisingly, the final weight and the cost are exactly the same: less than a Boeing 737. :)

[dhackney]

I adapted the Jeep Center of Gravity (CG) XL model so you can enter weight and weight shift to rear axle data and see the corresponding change in CG / Roll Center / Roll Angles / etc. to our FG data set.

The model demonstrates how relatively tiny amounts of weight shift make a very large difference in the CG.

The model is at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/docs/CG-model-hackneyFG.htm

[dhackney]

Revised roll center photo comps based on latest estimates of weight shift data.

These revised calcs are based on a very minor (relative to vehicle weight and weight of fluids) allowance for rearward shift of liquids and suspension travel during the tilt test.

CG is probably lower, but I'm going to stay conservative. R&L roll angles are based on front track. Values using the rear track are ~two degrees higher. Due to the 3 point pivot frame for the camper & rear storage boxes, I don't think there's any way to know the real roll angles until we get it on a tilt table.

CG: 58.92" / 149.66cm high, 98.14" / 249.28cm behind front axle centerline
Roll angle left: 31.12 degrees
Roll angle right: 31.56 degrees
Roll angle back: 43.48 degrees
Roll angle forward: 59.02 degrees

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-side-view-02.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-side-forward-02.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-side-back-02.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-front-02.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-front-left-02.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/roll-center-front-right-02.jpg

[Bob_Sheaves]

The above is a perfect example of "a little knowledge being dangerous".

"Roll center" is defined as ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll_center ):

"The roll center of a vehicle is the notional point at which the cornering forces in the suspension are reacted to the vehicle body." -taken from the military (and later SAE) Suspension Engineering Handbook

What is being calculated above is NOT the roll center, but the center of gravity of the vehicle. In a Hotchkiss suspension, as used in the 4x4 Fuso, the roll axis is simply a line drawn through the axle to spring interface from the left to right springs and the particular suspension roll center is where this line crosses the vehicle lateral centerline. Then a line is drawn through this point from the front suspension to the same point for the rear suspension. This resultant line is the actual roll axis for the vehicle. The CG of the vehicle is then connected to the vehicle roll axis by a normal line (not vertical, necessarilly) through the CG. This becomes the moment arm the mass of the vehicle acts upon the vehicle handling dynamics.

There are far more points of failure in the "backyard" method of approximating (and not very accurately, at that) the tipover of any vehicle than this method is capable of determining. See "Multi-Leaf Spring and Hotchkiss Suspension CAE Simulation" at http://www.simulia.com/download/solutions/automotive_cust%20references/chassis_mulitleaf_auc02_chrysler.pdf for a more definative answer than is possible here.

The point of this comment is NOT to denegrate this builder, but to point out that there MAY be some very deadly omissions this user is not aware of. Consultation with a professional engineer, trained in vehicle dynamics would have removed all uncertainty, and provided a legal backstop against the shown modifications and potential liability.

Best regards,

Bob Sheaves
CEO
catNET Incorporated
http://www.catnetsolutions.com

[erod]

very impressive build...that rig is way nicer then my apartment!

[FusoFG]

Bob,

What are you saying?

That that the term Roll Center has been used incorrectly? I agree, but I don't think any claims are being made by the builder about high speed cornering stability.

I assume the builder knows that darting in and out of traffic on the 405 in rush hour at freeway speeds is going to be dangerous.

If by your reference to the wikipedia article you are saying:

"Load transfer is of critical importance for vehicle stability in vehicle such as SUVs...... In a steady state .... is only related to the position of the center of mass above the ground, the track width and the lateral acceleration. SUVs must shift their center of mass lower or decrease their lateral acceleration to avoid tipping...."

I agree with that also.

If by saying:

"There are far more points of failure in the "backyard" method of approximating (and not very accurately, at that) the tipover of any vehicle than this method is capable of determining"

you mean the effects of tire flex, suspension movement, free surface effects of the fluids in tanks, fluid shift between the tanks (I personally don't like the cross connected fuel tanks) and the errors in estimating those effects.

Not to mention the dynamic effects of dropping the downhill wheel in a hole, driving an uphill wheel over a bump and turning uphill to avoid an obstacle while tranversing an off camber shelf road.

I agree again.

But I hope the vehicle manufacture has taken all that into consideration when it said in it's body buider manual "the center of gravity height should not exceed 60 inches ....".

I think the builder is just attempting to determine where his vehicle fits within those requirements.

If you know a more accurate method of measuring the center of gravity I would appreciate hearing it.

I know it's difficult to make changes after the fact, but if there was any concern about the center of gravity height I would:

1. remeasure with all tanks full to eliminate the effects of fluid shift.

2. consider remeasuring with, as some methods suggest, the shock absorbers replaced with rigid links.

3. consider not using the bigfoot water tank (higher) and instead use your in frame water tank (lower).

4. Stow gear if possible to put light things (tp, paper towels, etc) up high and heavy things (pots, pans, tools, etc) down low.

5. consider removing (or moving) any unnecessary or luxury items from the cab roof and camper roof (roof rack, a/c, etc).

[Bob_Sheaves]

Please see my inline comments.... in bold:
Bob,

What are you saying?

That that the term Roll Center has been used incorrectly? I agree, but I don't think any claims are being made by the builder about high speed cornering stability.

The point I was making is, not that the term is being used incorrectly, but rather that the concept of what the gentleman appears to be thinking he is measuring (an assumption on my part, I admit, due to the wording and methodology used) is actually, nothing of the kind. High speed cornering is not the issue either, but rather the side slope ability of the chassis and suspension to keep the vehicle from "turning turtle" on it's own at ANY speed.

I assume the builder knows that darting in and out of traffic on the 405 in rush hour at freeway speeds is going to be dangerous.

If by your reference to the wikipedia article you are saying:

"Load transfer is of critical importance for vehicle stability in vehicle such as SUVs...... In a steady state .... is only related to the position of the center of mass above the ground, the track width and the lateral acceleration. SUVs must shift their center of mass lower or decrease their lateral acceleration to avoid tipping...."

I agree with that also.

Again, speed is not the issue, but the side slope capability is.

If by saying:

"There are far more points of failure in the "backyard" method of approximating (and not very accurately, at that) the tipover of any vehicle than this method is capable of determining"

you mean the effects of tire flex, suspension movement, free surface effects of the fluids in tanks, fluid shift between the tanks (I personally don't like the cross connected fuel tanks) and the errors in estimating those effects.

Not to mention the dynamic effects of dropping the downhill wheel in a hole, driving an uphill wheel over a bump and turning uphill to avoid an obstacle while tranversing an off camber shelf road.

Not only correct, but your list is fairly inclusive. The missing pieces are tire slip angle, tire carcass stiffness (I assume this is what you were aluding to in the comment re: "tire flex"), static weight transfer reaction and dynamic weight transfer reaction in 3 axis measurement.
I agree again.

But I hope the vehicle manufacture has taken all that into consideration when it said in it's body buider manual "the center of gravity height should not exceed 60 inches ....".

That 60" dimension is an overall approximation, given the primary design direction for the vehicle, 80/20 highway/off highway use in commercial service. That is why I say the entire battery of calculations and tests SHOULD be performed to ensure the occupants safety and knowledge of the new design limits of the revised package (vehicle, it's contents, and it's operational considerations).
I think the builder is just attempting to determine where his vehicle fits within those requirements.

If you know a more accurate method of measuring the center of gravity I would appreciate hearing it.

For measuring the CG-no-that is adequate, BUT it is not the only parameter. The moment arm associated with it cannot be measured directly-it can only be calculated by direct measurement of the vehicle suspension roll axis, NOT just the roll axis of the front or rear by itself. That PDF I referenced has more detailed info.

I know it's difficult to make changes after the fact, but if there was any concern about the center of gravity height I would:

1. remeasure with all tanks full to eliminate the effects of fluid shift.

2. consider remeasuring with, as some methods suggest, the shock absorbers replaced with rigid links. ABSOLUTELY CORRECT

3. consider not using the bigfoot water tank (higher) and instead use your in frame water tank (lower).

4. Stow gear if possible to put light things (tp, paper towels, etc) up high and heavy things (pots, pans, tools, etc) down low.

5. consider removing (or moving) any unnecessary or luxury items from the cab roof and camper roof (roof rack, a/c, etc).

As I stated before, I am NOT trying to say anyone did something "wrong", I am saying that not enough research and calculation, as well as understanding of the operating parameters, was done, not through intent, but rather, a lack of knowledge of what it takes to design a vehicle.

Best regards,

Bob Sheaves
CEO
catNET Incorporated
http://www.catnetsolutions.com

[dhackney]

Bob,

Thank you very much for your informed and detailed comments.

My goal with this thread and our web site is to leave a trail that others may follow, specifically to learn from our mistakes as complete novices heading into this project.

I agree that I was under-researched for this project. I believe that a minimum of 24 months would be required for an undetaking of this nature. Due to our last minute switch from a sailboat and our resulting timeline requirements I only had about 90 days from "we need to use a four wheeled land vehicle" to selecting the FG/camper design.

I was unable to identify any qualified resources to perform an engineering analysis of the type you describe before, during or after this project. I would welcome your referral to any resources who are capable of the measurements and calculations you mention and recommend.

Specifically, I am interested in getting the vehicle on a tilt table so we can accurately determine our ultimate CG/roll angle/whatever the correct engineering term is with the 3 point pivot frame in operation.

During our tests we had the vehicle reviewed, including test driving off road, by an experienced expedition vehicle consultant, who has extensive experience in the design and implementation of current market vehicles. I encourage this step as a minimal process for those doing custom builds. We made several design changes based on our consultant's input, all of which dramatically improved our vehicle's on- and off-road handling characteristics.

I applaud your efforts to shine some light of knowledge and experience into this area. Those of us who are forced to, through lack of available market offerings, or choose to create our own vehicles of this type could profit greatly from knowing more about the parameters you describe.

In our project we attempted to keep as much mass as we could as low as possible and located between the frame rails if possible. The execptions to this design goal, which will be typical systems in projects such as this, include the diesel genset and two of the house batteries.

We were also limited by the factory camper we ended up with, as we lacked the opportunity of optimally locating systems for a lower center of gravity, etc. that those who build a custom camper box are afforded.

Thanks again for your input. I believe your comments to be valid and continued input of this type can only serve to make future projects better engineered.

Doug

[dhackney]

fluid shift between the tanks (I personally don't like the cross connected fuel tanks)

Tom,

The cross connect line between the fuel tanks includes shutoff valves on each tank. Our methodology is to shut those valves when we are heading off-road.

The dual tanks enabled us to keep our fuel load as low and as close to the center line of the vehicle as possible, while also offering the opportunity to keep the fuel load equally spread on the chassis.

For dynamic effects while the valves are open the fuel load shift is limited by:
- valve state (i.e. closed, partially open, fully open - normal is fully open, partially open would achieve our purpose of fuel capacity and dual side filling while limiting fuel load shift)
- size of the cross connect line
- amount of air space in the receiving tank (air will compress)
- size and throughput capacity of the breather lines for both tanks (one sucking air in as fuel drains, the other expelling air as the fuel flows in)

For transients, I believe the effects of the cross connect line to be minimal. For extended exposure on a side hill, with the potential effects of downhill wheel drop into a hole, uphill wheel on a rock, etc. that you mentioned, I believe the effects could be significant depending on the factors cited above.

Doug

[Joaquin Suave]

I can only bite my tongue for so long.

Doug wrote

My goal with this thread and our web site is to leave a trail that others may follow, specifically to learn from our mistakes as complete novices heading into this project.

What is the use!

Other are as likely to listen to you...As you were likely to listen to me!

Joaquin wrote last November:

I've travelled in (and constantly remodeled) Casa Azul for over 12 years now. I have put quite a bit of energy (designing / building) into paring down weight every place I can find. and when I can't pare it down anymore...I try to get it as low as possible. Even then, when were all packed up to head into Mexico...WE ARE MAXED OUT.

Your Fuso is smaller and lighter that Casa Azul (F700 4x4) and I don't carry motorcycles or a big generator.

Have you figured a thumbnail weight?


Maybe its time to go use your truck rather than obsess over the fact that you overbuilt! All the calculations in the world are not going to change that fact. Better luck next time.

[Bob_Sheaves]

Please see comments inline...in bold:
Bob,

Thank you very much for your informed and detailed comments.

No problem, I love working on trucks and vehicles of all kinds....so much it's been a career that is so intense I am STILL far from a "know it all"....LOL.

My goal with this thread and our web site is to leave a trail that others may follow, specifically to learn from our mistakes as complete novices heading into this project.

Very commendable, I am sure many will learn from your site.

I agree that I was under-researched for this project. I believe that a minimum of 24 months would be required for an undetaking of this nature. Due to our last minute switch from a sailboat and our resulting timeline requirements I only had about 90 days from "we need to use a four wheeled land vehicle" to selecting the FG/camper design.

As a sidebar here, it takes most OEM's about 3-4 years to fully design and develop a commercial cab and chassis...no joke. There actually IS that much work to ensure "it" is a safe and economical vehicle that meets the customer's needs. SOmetimes we miss, sometimes we hit the target exactly.

I was unable to identify any qualified resources to perform an engineering analysis of the type you describe before, during or after this project. I would welcome your referral to any resources who are capable of the measurements and calculations you mention and recommend.

I will not recommend myself, as I feel it is unethical for me to solicit business on a hobby board. Therefore, I would recommend using Google search terms " vehicle suspension consulting engineer" which will return the names of many individuals and companies that provide this very service. Some are Mr. Herb Adams in Detroit, Mr. Andre Reynard, and others.


Specifically, I am interested in getting the vehicle on a tilt table so we can accurately determine our ultimate CG/roll angle/whatever the correct engineering term is with the 3 point pivot frame in operation.

Ohio TRC (Transportation Research Center), NATC (Nevada Automotive Test Center), and others all have commercially available test centers for just this type of work. Not cheap, but you would get the same service that the OEMs receive.These centers are quite well versed in this type of analysis, especially NATC (I had a lot of fun there when I was working with the military vehicles for AMGeneral).

As a sidebar to this, if you are looking to determine what the amount of frame twist is in the FG, you should ask about a wave course test-this is a test where the vehicle is driven over a series of concrete half cones in the roadway that are 3' tall at the outside edge opposite the next cone. The purpose of this is to make the axles and suspension travel to the jounce (upper travel limit) and rebound positions opposite at each end of the vehicle. In other words, the left front tire would move to it's lowest position in travel, the right front would be in it's highest position, the left rear tire would be in it's lowest position, and finally, the right rear tire would be in it's highest position. What this twist does is to maximize the amount of travel the frame flex and suspension is capable of, without turning the vehicle over (ideally, if the design is correct, the body will be perfectly level in this position). If the body is not level in this test, you can see directly where the "binding up" of the vehicle is occuring.

During our tests we had the vehicle reviewed, including test driving off road, by an experienced expedition vehicle consultant, who has extensive experience in the design and implementation of current market vehicles. I encourage this step as a minimal process for those doing custom builds. We made several design changes based on our consultant's input, all of which dramatically improved our vehicle's on- and off-road handling characteristics.

I applaud your efforts to shine some light of knowledge and experience into this area. Those of us who are forced to, through lack of available market offerings, or choose to create our own vehicles of this type could profit greatly from knowing more about the parameters you describe.

Thanks for the kind words, but remember that even with 30 years of doing this job, I STILL do not know everything. That is why I can design and predict in a computer (experience tells me what is generally valid) BUT testing is ALWAYS required to verify what I thought would work, actually does.

In our project we attempted to keep as much mass as we could as low as possible and located between the frame rails if possible. The execptions to this design goal, which will be typical systems in projects such as this, include the diesel genset and two of the house batteries.

We were also limited by the factory camper we ended up with, as we lacked the opportunity of optimally locating systems for a lower center of gravity, etc. that those who build a custom camper box are afforded.

Thanks again for your input. I believe your comments to be valid and continued input of this type can only serve to make future projects better engineered.

Doug

Best regards,

Bob Sheaves
CEO
catNET Incorporated
http://www.catnetsolutions.com

[dhackney]

I can only bite my tongue for so long.

Doug wrote


What is the use!

Other are as likely to listen to you...As you were likely to listen to me!

Joaquin wrote last November:


Maybe its time to go use your truck rather than obsess over the fact that you overbuilt! All the calculations in the world are not going to change that fact. Better luck next time.

Joaquin,

When you made your post we did have a thumbnail weight, and a series of weight slips from scales. We made continuous design changes throughout the project regarding systems and materials based on the results from component, system and vehicle tests.

As to your advice, with all due respect, if we took every single piece of advice we've received on this project we'd have ended up with a camel, a.k.a. a horse designed by committee. We had a design goal and a set of criteria that can be very hard for others to relate to. While we have been open to input, and have incorporated much input from many parties, it was necessary to stick to the essential criteria, else we could have ended up with something cobbled together that led nowhere.

I'm sure we'll end up like you, shedding gear as we go along. You'll probably be able to locate us by following the trail of discarded items.

The CG testing, data gathering and calculations have been included in our project plan since day one. The purpose is to know, to the greatest extent possible, what the operational parameters of our rig are. Do you know where your CG is, or the roll angle limits for any dimension of anything you've ever built, are building or plan to build? I think those things are good to know, especially with a 3 point pivot frame that dynamically changes those parameters as you are moving. If you feel knowing that data has no value, then we will need to agree to disagree on that point.

My goal with this thread and our web site remains the same: that others can learn from what we've done right and from our mistakes. I believe it adds value to the community to openly share all the aspects of the project, including all the screw-ups. I think people learn more from what didn't work out than from a carefully edited compilation of all the things done right. If you feel that goal is of no or little value we will have to agree to disagree on that point.

I believe the people with experience and expertise who have regularly provided input into this thread during the duration of the build have added tremendous value to this project and to those that will follow. Comparitively, I see much less value in a solitary post near the beginning of the project followed by a 20/20 hindsight / Monday morning quarterback post in the closing days.

Specifically related to your assertion, if you felt so strongly that we were overbuilding, why were you not regularly posting that opinion or emailing me with your opinions? You've obviously got a wealth of experience and hard earned knowledge. Why not share it regularly and repeatedly, especially with rookies and neophytes? You are in a position to greatly aid those who are entering this field of interest. I hope you have the opportunity to do so in the future.

And better luck next time to you, as well, on your new project, and I am not saying that in a negative way. I hope you are successful in applying all of the lessons you have learned over the years and that your new rig fulfills everything that you feel your previous attempts lacked.

As to using the rig, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who is more anxious to get going than we are. We're not just parked here twiddling our thumbs. As John Prine said, "if lighting were desire, this house would have burned down a long time ago."

Be well,
Doug

[Bob_Sheaves]

http://www.natc-ht.com/V_TRCS.htm NATC vehicle development course information. There are several videos of vehicles undergoing offroad development there and IIRC, there is some pics of the wave course.

http://www.natc-ht.com/Vehicle_Dynamics_and_Vehicle_Stability.htm NATC tilt table in use....

Best as always,

Bob Sheaves
CEO
catNET Incorporated
http://www.catnetsolutions.com

[dhackney]

Bob,

Thanks for the info. I put an email into them last week but haven't heard back yet.

Doug

[dhackney]

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_23/images/image124.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_25/images/image044.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_25/images/image133.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_26/images/image078.jpg

Photos from the last two months' final push to completion are posted in albums 23 - 26 at:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[Grim Reaper]

Be careful with that Dewalt. Dewalt chargers have a nasty habit of catching fire. Make sure power is cut and battery out of the unit when not actively charging.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=501168&page=5&highlight=dewalt+fire

After reading that I don't leave any battery chargers from any manufacture plugged in after they complete their charge cycle.

[dhackney]

don't leave any battery chargers from any manufacture plugged in after they complete their charge cycle.

Good advice. Thanks for the heads up.

Our charger is new, so hopefully they've fixed them since their 2000 recall.

[dhackney]

Project completed Sunday 3 June, 2007 ~8pm PDT / 0300 GMT/Zulu

Rollout:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/rollout.jpg

[Scott Brady]

Awesome Doug!

I am so proud of your commitment and accomplishment. Please let me know if the Expedition Portal community can ever be of assistance!

[kcowyo]

Project completed Sunday 3 June, 2007 ~8pm PDT / 0300 GMT/Zulu


Hallelujah! :bowdown:

If cool were currency, you'd be a gazillionaire. Very best wishes for a safe departure and beginning of your long awaited journey. I look forward to updates from the trip.

Best - :beer:

[Willman]

congrads!!!!

Keep us updated on how things go!!!!

:)

[jayshapiro]

Amazing job Doug!

I'm so impressed how you have stuck with it and stuck with it. In the end, you've built a fantastic vehicle.

I'm sure we'll all be very curious to hear what learnings you get out of the first couple of months on the road. Nothing tests design theory like driving down that road...

Safe journeys!

Jay.

[dhackney]

Please let me know if the Expedition Portal community can ever be of assistance!


Scott,

If it were not for the ExPo community, I don't think we would ever have been able to accomplish this goal.

As I posted over on ExCamper, "If anything is good about this thing, we owe it to those went before us and plowed the field, such as Carl & Mary Hunter, Don & Kim Green, Darrin Fink, etc.; the professionalism, knowledge and capability of professionals such as Scott Brady; and the input, advice and constructive criticism of this expedition community. I take 100% responsibility for all screw ups, design flaws, poor execution, etc.

Your patience and understanding with a total 4x4 / overlander / expedition camper neophyte has been both exceptional and noteworthy.

We could never repay you all. All we can do is say, sincerely, thank you."

There is, however, one member of this community who deserves special recognition for their input, advice, consultation, constructive criticism and support for our project, and that is Scott Brady.

Scott provided specific input to the design of the project that has made all the difference in the world. Specifically, he recommended adding the shocks for the 3 point pivot frame and reinforced a friend's recommendation of Deaver Spring and Bilstein shocks for the chassis. Those additions alone, in conjunctioin with the rear sway bar, made the truck drive and ride like a completely different vehicle. We owe much of our comfort and safety to Scott's input in these areas.

However, his greatest contribution is one we will be forever indebted to him for: his enthusiastic support for the grill light & cutting board.

Priorities, after all... :)

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_26/images/image056.jpg

So, Scott, can the ExPo community do any more? Could I, in good concience or faith, ever impose on this community, or you, for anything more? Never!

Oh, but wait, I guess there is one more thing. About that anti-gravity paint you promised... :)

To all the members of this forum, be well,
Doug

[dhackney]

I've spent the last couple of days updating the web site with as much detailed project information and lessons learned type information as I could. Other than posting the buildup photos, I didn't have the available bandwidth to put much time into the site during the run of the project. I think I've put about everything I've got in my head up there now.

New data & content includes:


Ratings of the outcome vs. our specific design goals
Actual timeline with as many discrete project tasks as I could document
Updated FAQ
Top 10 Mistakes
3 Point Pivot Frame documentation
Calculating Center of Gravity and related data points documentation
Updated lessons learned
Detailed list of project components
Updated comments on Alternative Vehicles Considered
Added US-Metric and Fractional to Decimal & MM conversion spreadsheets


Project web site:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/

.

[dhackney]

Thought you guys might enjoy some utilization shots.

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/2007-06-19-SD550-IMG_7328-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/2007-06-13-SD800%20IS-IMG_2704-crop-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/2007-06-13-SD800%20IS-IMG_2661-small.jpg

http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/2007-06-12-SD550-IMG_7274-crop-edit-04-small.jpg

[dhackney]

http://www.hackneys.com/photos/2007-11-12-SD870%20IS-IMG_0051-600.jpg

After a huge project by Steph collating and organizing all of the project receipts and hours on the laptop by me updating the cost spreadsheets I abandoned last December, we finally have a definative answer to the question, "What did it cost?"

We now know, without any doubt, that the project cost us exactly four inches.

http://www.hackneys.com/photos/2007-11-12-SD870%20IS-IMG_0053-600.jpg

For those interested in a different means of measuring cost, here are some specifics on the basic elements of the project:

2007 Mitsubishi Fuso FG 140 $36,187.50
Includes all fees, etc. - total out the door price. Kearny Mesa Truck Center, San Diego.

2006 Bigfoot 30C10.11FR $31,920.00
Includes all dealer fees, options, etc. You can do a lot better than this price. There were only two left in the country at the time, so we didn't have much leverage.

External storage boxes, garage, etc. $5,711.00
This includes all external locking storage boxes, spare tire boxes, etc. Fleet Metal Box (FMB), Colton, CA

Aluminum custom fuel tanks $1,682.00

Stainless steel raw water tank $1,265.00

Three point pivot frame: $ will depend on your fabrication costs. For design ideas, etc. click here: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-pivot-frame.htm

If you know someone who can fabricate, you can create the basic concept for about $100,000. Obviously, if you can fabricate yourself, you can do it for these costs and the raw material costs, which will be significantly less.

The rest of our total cost is in all those receipts: all the marine grade materials, marine systems, equipment and capabilities that we added to the rig.

Tonight was the first time we've had a cost total that we felt was complete and detailed enough to be pretty close to what our total investment was. It actually turned out to be less than I thought. :)

[dhackney]

Some more thoughts on cost. (this is an excerpt of a post I made on RV.net in a thread related to building your own Earthroamer)

It takes a tremendous investment of time and a significant investment of dollars to build one of these things on a custom / one-off / bespoke basis in a quality manner.

For instance, I worked on this full time, usually 12-14 hours a day minimum from 15 September 2006 to 4 June 2007. That's 263 days. My wife thinks I took at most 20 days off during that span, so that's a net of 243 days. That day count does not include the research and design work that started three days after she walked into my office and told me she couldn't go out by sailboat in early January. (The three days was a period of mourning, wailing and knashing of teeth, not necessarily in that order.)

I couldn't begin to estimate that total investment of time, but I was on it pretty much full time, 6-8 hours a day, from mid-January until we left for the proof of concept camper rental 2 July 2006. We were on that test for six weeks to see if this concept was viable for us. Starting in mid-August we were on the road dispersing our worldy goods (a bit like the reading of your will while living experience - very cool) driving all over the U.S., but I still worked on design and research every night while were on the road. Figure at least 20-25 hours a week. That lasted until 15 September.

So, timewise, I was on this full-time, plus overtime, for about 1.5 years, with very, very little time off, from the point the sailboat dream died to the point this rig rolled out. It's 505 days from 15 January 2006 to 4 June 2007. I estimate I worked on this 400-420 of those days.

How do you value that time? I don't know. I knew nothing, zero, zilch, nada about 4x4s, expedition vehicles, RVs, campers, etc. when I started this, so you can't value my time much over minimum wage at that point. By the end I was reasonably competent, if you ignore the fact I usually did everything 2 or 3 times until I got it up to the point where it could be viewed in the context of our master artist fabrictor Mark's work.

If you take an average day of 10 hours X 410 days that gives 4,100 man hours. Just by me. If I average out at $15 or 25 per hour, then that's between 60 and 100k for my time. If you think the design and assembly work was valued more like typical shop rates then that would be more like 4100 X $80 = $328k.

That does not include subcontractors, of which Mark was the primary - probably 98% of the subcontracted work. I honestly don't know how many hours Mark had in this project. He worked on it very hard from September through the holidays, including over the holidays themselves. He had some other projects during that time too, so figure at least two man months of his time. Mark is an absolute master craftsman, an artist, at metal fabrication, so you need to have a very high rate when you start doing your back of the envelope calculations. If you figure eight weeks at 20 hours a week at $100 per hour for him thats 160 hours X $100 or $16k for fabrication. He also had an assistant, plus he farmed out the stainless steel raw water tank, the aluminum fuel tanks and the storage boxes.

So, when you think about building one of these because you think it will be less expensive than an Earthroamer or a Unicat or similar factory built solution, you may want to re-read those previous paragraphs.

How much is a year and a half of your time worth? Even if you say you are going to do everything exactly like we did so you only need to put in the nine months to build it, how much is nine months of your life worth? These are not short days. Say goodbye to your friends and family for those nine months. How much is that worth?

And what are the consequences for doing it poorly, cobbling it together? Only you can answer that.

Larry Lord, the owner of Fleet Metal Box where we had our storage boxes made, after viewing our rig told me, "I couldn't tell you how many guys have come in here over the years with big plans and big stories. Yours is the first one I've ever seen that fulfilled the vision."

It takes a very high, very sustained commitment to quality, and a tremendous investment in time, material and, yes, money, to achieve that goal.

I contend: Buy quality, buy what you can, build what you must.

[Speaker]

Just thought I'd say how much I admire this build. You've done an amazing job. I especially like how you carry your bikes around.

I have to ask though.. do you work for Baja Designs or something?

[dhackney]

Just thought I'd say how much I admire this build. You've done an amazing job. I especially like how you carry your bikes around.

I have to ask though.. do you work for Baja Designs or something?

Thanks for the kind words on the build.

RE: Baja Designs

No, I don't work for them, but I am expecting a Christmas card from them considering how many of their photons come out of the front of the rig. ;)

I do know a guy who races Baja, Jimmy Sones, the 2006 Baja 1000 motorcycle solo Ironman champion, who is sponsored by them, but that is as close as it gets, one degree of separation. (click here for more on Jimmy's ride last year: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xgmi-IrKYME )

[dhackney]

We are pulling out to put the rig on the ship to Chile in a couple of days. I am still working down the last items on the endless "to do" list.

Today I discovered that the spare main circuit board for our refrigerator we've been carrying around for the last six months is the wrong part. It was fortuitous to discover it here in San Diego instead of Bolivia or Cambodia.

Nevertheless, I've completed all the major fabrication and modifications I needed to do prior to shipping overseas.

I posted the final fabrication and modification photos in Album 27 on the project design and build site here:
http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

I updated the home page of the site to reflect the final project data. Click here and scroll down: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/

[Scott Brady]

We are pulling out to head for Houston to put the rig on the ship to Chile in a couple of days.

Awesome Doug!

Stephanie and I will be thinking of and routing for you all the way. :jumping:

[canucksafari]

Today I discovered that the spare main circuit board for our refrigerator we've been carrying around for the last six months is the wrong part. It was fortuitous to discover it here in San Diego instead of Bolivia or Cambodia.


Don't know about Cambodia, but I can tell you it is truely amazing what you can find in some places in Bolivia and the capacity of the locals to fix what they do not have replacements for. Just be real careful while driving there. It is common for drivers to be DUI and then to chew coca to try to keep themselves alert.

Your rig is a real dream build and an inspiration to us would be world treckers. I wish you both a safe great adventure.

[kcowyo]

Bon Voyage!!



:lurk:

[dhackney]

I would also like, at this time, to acknowledge the significant contribution you have made to "the community" in chronicling this build up.

Your generosity of spirit and time shown by your postings shared here and elswhere is commendable. Countless hours must have been spent on your detailed website. For the benefit of others, you have created an informative and substantial legacy.

I'm sure I speak for many others in saying "Thank You" for all your effort. Know that it is appreciated.

Happy journeys!


Thanks for your kind words, they are very much appreciated.

I invested the time and energy into the web site to provide as much information as I could for anyone interested in building an expedition vehicle. I hoped they could learn from our experiences, challenges, setbacks and small triumphs.

[dhackney]

Due to the focused nature of the forum during our buildup I did the majority of my posting, Q&A, etc. on the Expedition Campers forum. ExCamper has been closed for posting and it is planned that the threads will eventually be integrated here into ExPo.

For those who are researching FGs Chip Haven, one of the founders of ExCamper, was kind enough to gather links to my ExCamper threads for our build and related topics. I am posting these links so all of the information will be in one thread here at ExPo.

Some of these will be duplicate initial posts to those here at ExPo but will contain unique comments, Q&A, etc.

FG Expedition Vehicle Buildup
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=200

shipping term glossary
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=428

3 point pivot frame info
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=402

Core-Trax / Quick Fist Clamps mod
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=405

factory camper tie down to storage box seal solution
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=404

Stock Yokohama vs. Michelin XZL
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=237

FG Tire Tools & Wheel Nut info
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=281

FG / cab over air seats > SOLVED <
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=207

Stereo/GPS wiring loom color codes & stereo install info
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=318

FG chassis lighting & van body dome light wire colors
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=317

The Fuso Dream...
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=243

2007 FG chassis photos
http://www.expeditioncampers.com/php...opic.php?t=191

[dhackney]

I posted the final photos of preparing the rig for shipment and delivery to the docks at: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/photos/buildup_album_28/index.htm

The entire collection of rig buildup photos is here: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

We are currently in Santiago, Chile awaiting arrival of the ship carrying the rig. We are taking care of final logistical and procurement items and enjoying exploring the city. We plan to visit some of the local wine producing areas while we wait for the ship to arrive, then move down to Valparaiso for the customs clearance process.

We created our overall framework for exploring South America yesterday with Jorge Valdes, a South American overland expedition guide who was referred to us by ExPo major domo Scott Brady. More on Jorge here: http://www.terraultimaexpeditions.com/main.html

To create the framework we used a hand drawn map, a few guidebooks, a highlighter, some red wine, a little food and lots of conversation. It's the Chilean way. I like it. Especially the wine and conversation components.

Assuming the rig arrives, and arrives intact, we should be on the road in a few weeks.

Once we get going I'll start a thread in the In Progress Expeditions topic.

[dhackney]

I created some photo albums of our Fuso in action here: http://www.hackneys.com/gallery/v/travel/fuso/

[mwoods]

I created some photo albums of our Fuso in action here: http://www.hackneys.com/gallery/v/travel/fuso/

Doug, thanks for sharing your BEV photos and your invaluable advice!

Best regards,

[dhackney]

I get asked about these a lot so I created overviews of the water and electrical systems on our rig.

They are located here: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/index-buildup-photos.htm

[dhackney]

I added our maintenance and fuel log data to the route map.

The route map is here: http://www.hackneys.com/travel/index-routemap.htm

[nonamegiven]

Doug,

Although it's been a while since your last post, I just found ExPo a week ago and while searching the forums I came across your FG. I saw it in a thread of pics and couldn't find it again. I asked about it and somebody ended up posting a link to it.
I knew I had recognized it, as my brother and I had met you and your wife while camping on the Oregon coast a couple of years back.
Not sure where you are right now, I'm assuming exploring the globe, but just thought I would say hi again.

Brian

[dhackney]

Brian,

Good to hear from you. My wife and I were just discussing Oregon yesterday. Great area.

Our expedition thread here on ExPo is here: http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10616

Our travel web site is here: http://www.hackneys.com/travel/

The Fuso Build site is here: http://www.hackneys.com/mitsu/

Doug

[dhackney]

After much consideration, we've decided to sell our Fuso.

We are not currently using it, and we'd rather see it out there exploring the back roads, being used for what it was built for.

The sale site is here: http://www.4x4camper4sale.com/


Many thanks to everyone here in the Fuso forum.

Since the very early days of Chip's Expedition Campers, this has been a special place full of supportive people.

It's been a pleasure to add to the knowledge base of all things Expedition Fuso related.

And, it's been a special pleasure to meet a few of you in person.

I look forward to the next time I see you all again, virtually or in person.

Oh, and BTW, I've got three pallets of spares and parts that are included with the Fuso. I don't mention that for the casual RV buyers, but I know the people here know what to do with that stuff...

:)

[SkiFreak]

Let me be the first to say that at $60K this vehicle is a steal. :Wow1: