60% Rule- is it the length or the weight?

Mock Tender

Adventurer
Had a chance to look over some trailers this week with a tour through BC and down to Oregon. I am pretty sure now that I have seen the Bigfoot trailer that is the way to go. Unfortunately, BF has the 17' (13'6" body length) and the 21' (17'6" body length). I like the 17', but the wife really wants the 21'. Using the 60% rule, that means her desires are 2'3" too long. My question is- is it too much weight or too much length hanging out past the rear axle? The total weight on the Bigfoot 21 is 4,450 lbs (2018kg). Even if we load it up we would be under 7000 pounds- and with judicious tank placement at or in front of the rear axle- far from being *** end heavy- would it work?

Mark
 

Gatsma

Adventurer
The 60% rule is about length, and only in Australia; NOT here. I don't know your CA measurement, so can't make an educated guess whether it'll work or not.
 

SkiFreak

Crazy Person
As has been mentioned... the 60% rule seems only to apply to us of the land down under. The overhang can be 60% of the vehicle's wheelbase, measured from the centre of the rear axle (assuming a single axle).
If you place your heavier loads between the wheelbase, I see no issue, other than affecting your departure angle, with having a extra 27" out the back. You could always do a chassis extension if you were concerned about being too heavy behind the rear axle. This would address the departure angle issue but make your turning circle larger. You'd just have to figure out which one of these issues were less important.
 

dlh62c

Explorer
My question is- is it too much weight or too much length hanging out past the rear axle?

Its length!

But could the weight placement vary depending on the BF floor plan selected?

Kind of off topic; but will BF even warranty their camper after placing it on the back of a Fuso?
 
Last edited:

Jfet

Adventurer
In researching our overhang (which will be 119 inches past the rear axle on a 176 inch wheelbase) I have not found anything in the USA that limits what you can build if you keep the axle loads correct and C.G. between the wheelbase.

I looked at some class C RV designs and plenty of them have 10 to 12 feet of overhang on a 14000 pound chassis (much less a 19,500 pound one).
 

yabanja

Explorer
If you are going to have that much overhang, what is the point of using a Fuso? There are many other chassis available(pickup style) which would be much more comfortable, and likely more cost effective.

Allan
 

Mock Tender

Adventurer
We are looking at a long wheel base Fuso- so 134.4" wheelbase with aft of cab to rear axle 104.8" per specs. With the Bigfoot 17' at 13.6' (163.2") and the 21 at 17.6' (211.2") that that would be 58.4" beyond the rear axle on the 17 and 106.4" for the 21. So roughly 4.8' or 8.8' over hang.

I am not too worried about the BF warranty and I think that I could move tanks to be at or before the rear axle. The weight of the 17 is 3,300 lbs. and the weight of the 21 is 4,500 lbs.

yabanja- I am confused and intrigue by your "What is the point of using a Fuso?" Which truck are you suggesting and why would the Fuso, in your opinion not work if I went with the longer trailer?

Mark
 
Last edited:

Maninga

Adventurer
That's a lot of overhang and weight being concentrated at the rear of the frame.

This is what mine looks like with 2m overhang. You're looking at another 2' past where mine ends. Departure angle would suffer.
014.jpg


Chassis extension would help a lot I'd think, distribute the weight and make it seem more proportional. Have you read Doug Hackneys build? Lot of similarities to what you're intending on doing.
 

Jfet

Adventurer
Just to give you another point of reference, I decided to reduce the length of our garage pod to 10 feet from 11 feet, making it overhang the flatbed by just one foot.

The length from the center of the rear axle to the tail end of the garage pod is now 107" and the wheelbase is 176" meaning the ratio is 60.8%

I would suggest you model up your bigfoot and truck in CAD just to get a visual feel for how it will look.

I like the look of our shorter garage vs the previous version and it will still hold what we need it to hold:

lowgarage2.jpg
 

dlh62c

Explorer
I would suggest you model up your bigfoot and truck in CAD just to get a visual feel for how it will look.

Not a bad idea!

Its the step in the FG's frame that can really make body mounting problematic.

1091551_10151748563619004_1103352483_nmarker.jpg
 
Last edited:

yabanja

Explorer
yabanja- I am confused and intrigue by your "What is the point of using a Fuso?" Which truck are you suggesting and why would he Fuso, in your opinion not work if I went with the longer trailer?

Mark
Mark,
To me the primary attraction of the Fuso is it's lack of overhang, and therefore it's ability to traverse rough terrain. There are several severe drawbacks to the vehicle which I am willing to live with in order to gain this capability. Primarily lack of power, and discomfort. If driving over rough terrain is not a priority for you, then why subject yourself to the above drawbacks. I would strongly recommend driving a Fuso as soon as possible prior to moving any further with your plans.

Allan
 

Jfet

Adventurer
Mark,
To me the primary attraction of the Fuso is it's lack of overhang, and therefore it's ability to traverse rough terrain. There are several severe drawbacks to the vehicle which I am willing to live with in order to gain this capability. Primarily lack of power, and discomfort. If driving over rough terrain is not a priority for you, then why subject yourself to the above drawbacks. I would strongly recommend driving a Fuso as soon as possible prior to moving any further with your plans.

Allan

To me the advantage of a cabover (Isuzu) is the short length vs cargo potential and the excellent field of view from the cab. If you got a truck like a topkick with the long hood, not only do you add about 5 feet to the overall length for the same cargo but your front field of view is cut off by several feet.
 

Flys Lo

Adventurer
To me the advantage of a cabover (Isuzu) is the short length vs cargo potential and the excellent field of view from the cab. If you got a truck like a topkick with the long hood, not only do you add about 5 feet to the overall length for the same cargo but your front field of view is cut off by several feet.
Add Servicability to that list.

I moved from a Fuso to an F250 for the comfort/power reasons that Allan stated. I really miss the 15s job it was to flip up the cab and have excellent access to the entire engine.
 

Mock Tender

Adventurer
Thanks for the feedback.

Maniga- What are you putting on the back of your Fuso and how big is that storage area behind the cab?

JFet- I have drawn out trailer on the Fuso- but until I get an idea from the frame builder I am not sure how much space their will be above the ground at the rear. Hopefully were are talking more like Carl Hunter and bigollies have (same frame builder)instead of the picture dlh62c posted.

Our Fuso/trailer will be home for at least 9 months out of every year-so livability is prime for us. Next I want to be able to mostly go to remote areas- not always in the easiest to get to places. So as short and also long as possible is preferred. So finding a compromise between those two is what I am looking for, and an F-250+ would just add even more length.

Mark
 

Maninga

Adventurer
Maniga- What are you putting on the back of your Fuso and how big is that storage area behind the cab?

It's about 40cm wide, 2.1m long, 1m high. Keeping my spare wheels there and maybe an outboard motor for inflatable boat.

Storage bin is going above it. Not sure yet what'll go in it, we're certainly not lacking for storage options.

image.jpg

Side Wall Assembly.EASM.jpg
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,544
Messages
2,875,700
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top