Subframe according to the 2015 Body Builder directive.

nicknoxx

New member
I've been reading the Fuso Canter 2015 Body Builder directive.

For FGs it says "An continuous assembly frame with rigid, positive-locking connection to the Chassis is required. It must not be possible for the longitudinal member to move in relation to the chassis longitudinal member. The assembly frame longitudinal member must follow all movements of the chassis (bending and twisting)."

(Paraphrased slightly from p183 of the above document.)

This means you shouldn't use a spring arrangement and offers no suggestion of how you'd fit a rigid body to the subframe without either twisting the box or putting stresses on the frame.

Fuso_Body_excerpt-000.jpg
Fuso_Body_excerpt-001.jpg
Fuso_Body_excerpt-002.jpg
 

kerry

Expedition Leader
Interesting. My 99FG has a service body attached with ubolts and it's been on there for 211k miles without any problems I'm aware of.
 

Czechsix

Watching you from a ridge
Well, they also say that the later FG with Duonic shouldn't be used off road. Go figure.
 

mog

Kodiak Buckaroo
I've been reading the Fuso Canter 2015 Body Builder directive.

This means you shouldn't use a spring arrangement and offers no suggestion of how you'd fit a rigid body to the subframe without either twisting the box or putting stresses on the frame.

I guess if you want to stay within their guidelines (warranty) you could attach a subframe as per their guide and then add a sub-subframe on to that subframe with spring mounts. You might end up with a pretty high mount but with some creative thinking I bet you could keep it reasomable. The frame step is about 6 inches, so a 3 inch subframe and a 3 inch sub-subframe instead of 'normal' 6 inch subframe?
 

yabanja

Explorer
Interesting Subject

This subject is the one that gave me the most heartache in the build of my truck.

There are many ways to build a camper, and everyone will tell you you are doing it wrong if you didn't do it their way. After boatloads of research this is where I ended up.

Unless you want your camper to fall apart you have to put some kind of mechanism in place to prevent the camper from twisting with the truck chassis.

To answer your question, all of these systems will have a hard mount point at one end if properly built to conform not only with the body builders guide, but with the law.

There are three basic systems to do this.

Spring mount.

Rest the subframe for your camper on the truck using springs all the way down the chassis. This was designed for tanker trucks to prevent torsional stress transferring to the tank. This is how earth cruisers are built and they have had great success with this system. This is a very light, elegant, and simple solution. I think that careful research into the stiffness of the springs is important to try and limit chassis flex. If you attach the frame solidly to the chassis at one end as you pictured in the body guide it will still flex the same amount. (Think Dumptruck)

3 point mount.

Firmly attach the camper at two points at one end and make a pivot in the center at the other. This system will not work properly without a subframe underneath it as it allows unlimited chassis flex and concentrates all the weight of the camper onto the three small points on the frame.

4 point mount.

Mount the camper on four pivots. One front and center, one rear center and one one each side in the center. When viewed from above they form a diamond shape. They must all be in the same plane to work. This is the system most often used on Unimogs. Once again, a subframe underneath is necessary to prevent excessive chassis flex and spread the load.


The chassis is made of very flimsy steel and therefore the truck frame twists a lot. The builders guide states that you must build a subframe and bolt it in place. I believe they designed the chassis with the idea that there would be a full length subframe adding rigidity to the the truck. This is what I did. I built a full length subframe which is firmly attached with many Ubolts per the body builders guide. It has a plate at one end bolted to the frame of the truck to prevent fore aft movement. I then built a 3 point mount attached to this subframe. With a full subframe between the three point mount and the chassis the weight is spread out preventing single points of stress. This also prevents excessive twisting of the chassis.

The best known case of three point mount frame failure was with a truck which had an extended frame and was way over weight. I discarded this as an example when making my decision as these two factors are adding significantly compounding stresses on the frame.

There you go! One more opinion in the multitude.

Take care,

Allan
 
Last edited:

nicknoxx

New member
I guess if you want to stay within their guidelines (warranty) you could attach a subframe as per their guide and then add a sub-subframe on to that subframe with spring mounts. You might end up with a pretty high mount but with some creative thinking I bet you could keep it reasomable. The frame step is about 6 inches, so a 3 inch subframe and a 3 inch sub-subframe instead of 'normal' 6 inch subframe?

You could do this, and it could be a neat way of levelling out the chassis, but to stay within the guidelines you have to bolt the subframe rigidly to the chassis at the front. This would prevent the chassis twisting at the front which is right where it needs to move most.
 

nicknoxx

New member
The point is there isn't a solution in the body builder directive which will allow the chassis to twist and prevent that twist from being transmitted to a rigid box. Sure there are solutions from other manufacturers but none from Fuso.

One thing that strikes me it that no chassis will twist rearward of the rear spring hanger so it makes sense to bold a subframe rigidly to the chassis in this area and then have a pivot or spring arrangement (or both) at the front. That way the engine and cab will move with the front axle and the body will move with the rear axle. There's no need for any damping.

So, we HAVE to fit a full length subframe that's bolted rigidly to the chassis and then put something above that which will allow movement be it a 3/4 point mount or a sprung subframe. This increases the height significantly.

It really does seem that Daimler/Fuso/Mitsubishi don't want us to take their truck anywhere other than a slightly muddy building site.

This, to me, the most beautifully engineered solution but overkill for my situation.
936399_171258783034282_1228674508_n_zps8mt6ypdm.jpg
 

nicknoxx

New member
This subject is the one that gave me the most heartache in the build of my truck.

There are many ways to build a camper, and everyone will tell you you are doing it wrong if you didn't do it their way. After boatloads of research this is where I ended up.

Unless you want your camper to fall apart you have to put some kind of mechanism in place to prevent the camper from twisting with the truck chassis.


Allan


Allan have you got a build thread somewhere?
 

yabanja

Explorer
That is very similar to the design I ended up with only with fancy machined parts. I have to laugh at the Ohlin's external reservoir shocks on the cab. A serious case of looking for places to spend more money than necessary.

Take care,

Allan
 
Last edited:

SkiFreak

Crazy Person
I have commented many times about suitable mounting systems for the Fuso/Canter FG, so my views on this subject should be pretty well known.
At the end of the day all you can do is look at what others have done and to make a personal decision on what you believe will work for you. Just be mindful that what works on another truck may be totally unsuitable for the FG chassis. That step in the chassis makes a significant difference to how forces are transmitted around the chassis and that can definitely not be overlooked.
Basically, you need to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges.
 

nicknoxx

New member
At the end of the day all you can do is look at what others have done and to make a personal decision on what you believe will work for you. Just be mindful that what works on another truck may be totally unsuitable for the FG chassis

But this is the fundamental problem. Other manufacturers, MAN for example, give detailed instructions on how to mount various loads on their chassis, whereas the official Fuso guide simply does not give a solution to the problem of putting a rigid box on a twisty chassis. Furthermore, their insistence that any subframe must be rigidly fixed and able to twist and bend exacerbates the issue.
 

SkiFreak

Crazy Person
There are numerous people on this forum who have FG 4x4 trucks and lots of them have differing mounting systems for the camper body. Most of those people will also have their own reasons as to why they have done things as they have.
I have been on this forum for quite a while now and during that time this subject has been covered many times. My personal opinion is that the few companies that do work regularly with these 4x4 FG trucks and build for commercial use, and have to give warranties for their work, are probably the ones to steer towards for mounting ideas. Commercial vehicles will normally cop much more abuse than someone's personal camper. From what I have seen (and I have looked at the mounting systems on a lot of these trucks), a spring mounted system is definitely the most widely used here in Australia. Take what you will from that.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,905
Messages
2,879,416
Members
225,497
Latest member
WonaWarrior
Top