We really need to do some proper awards!

Jim

Jim

Ringleader
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Posts
38,266
Likes collected
143,744
Location
Sutton on Sea, UK
Funster No
1
MH
Adria Panel Van.
Exp
Since 1988
I've just been reading the Practical Motorhome of the Year Awards and there is some great stuff there and I'm sure they mean well but ..... The winner of our Best luxury motorhome under 3500kg category is the Mobilvetta Kea P67, a neat sub-7m 'van that's packed with Italian style and luxury and a teeny weeny payload not big enough for two, let alone the 4 berths it boasts :doh:
 
Last edited:
Difficult to judge for awards without a variety of members having use of exactly the same vehicle or product to assess.
 
M-J said:
Difficult to judge awards without a variety of members having use of exactly the same vehicle or product to assess.
Click to expand...

I agree, but IMO a van with a payload of less than 270kg boasting four berths and three designated travel seats, shouldn't really be winning awards.
 
That's odd Jim, I looked at the same site and it said 340kg?? Still crap though.
 
I am casting no aspersions, but how much did the manufacturer pay the magazine to review it's van and for advertising in the next year?
 
olley said:
That's odd Jim, I looked at the same site and it said 340kg?? Still crap though.
Click to expand...


When you consider that we worked out that conservative average payload of Funsters vans for a couple is 400kg. You could of course stay under the 270kg but it would be no fun.
 
TheBig1 said:
I am casting no aspersions, but how much did the manufacturer pay the magazine to review it's van and for advertising in the next year?
Click to expand...


I wouldn't suggest anything underhand for a moment. I think the editor of that mag is more than honest. That said if we're too honest I think we might struggle for advertisers in the new mag :D

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Payload quoted at 340KG with
120Ltr fresh water tank & 110 grey waste.weighed empty? or just 25ltrs of fresh water?, I bet.
I 110amp hour battery, 1 11KG gas bottle, 2 double beds for 4 people.
Were the fuel tanks full or at 75%
There is no awning as standard, there goes another 55KGs of the payload if one is fitted as they are by most owners.

Practical Motorhomes only gripe was that it didnt come with Cab Blinds.!!!!(no I wont swear)

What makes me angry, very angry is that this supposed to be an honest "independent" professional review, that the public trust as being accurate, and the one major safety issue...Payload,or indeed lack of it, has not been mentioned

As you say Jim, its time that all van manufacturers were made to prove that their vans have usable payloads that enable the vehicle to be loaded with passengers, their personal kit, and still remain under weight, legal and safe in use.
Practical Motorhome should be more responsible to their readers also, if not why not?
Les
 
If it's on a public road then the number plate is not legal ?
KEA P67 ?
kea.JPG
 
TinaL said:
Payload quoted at 340KG with
120Ltr fresh water tank & 110 grey waste.weighed empty? or just 25ltrs of fresh water?, I bet.
I 110amp hour battery, 1 11KG gas bottle, 2 double beds for 4 people.
Were the fuel tanks full or at 75%
There is no awning as standard, there goes another 55KGs of the payload if one is fitted as they are by most owners.

Practical Motorhomes only gripe was that it didnt come with Cab Blinds.!!!!(no I wont swear)

What makes me angry, very angry is that this supposed to be an honest "independent" professional review, that the public trust as being accurate, and the one major safety issue...Payload,or indeed lack of it, has not been mentioned

As you say Jim, its time that all van manufacturers were made to prove that their vans have usable payloads that enable the vehicle to be loaded with passengers, their personal kit, and still remain under weight, legal and safe in use.
Practical Motorhome should be more responsible to their readers also, if not why not?
Les
Click to expand...
Can you point to the review you mention, cheers (y)
 
Stretto Boy said:
A diabolical payload has got worse! :eek:
Click to expand...

You can understand that the manufacturers really want to make a nice van for those that need to stay under 3500kg, that's a lot of people. But to do so and give them a decent payload is so hard to achieve. I'm sure some makers just rely on peoples ignorance. And if you knew nothing and saw a van that had just won a major award... :doh:
 
Jim said:
You can understand that the manufacturers really want to make a nice van for those that need to stay under 3500kg, that's a lot of people. But to do so and give them a decent payload is so hard to achieve. I'm sure some makers just rely on peoples ignorance. And if you knew nothing and saw a van that had just won a major award... :doh:
Click to expand...
Exactly My Point Jim
The public are being conned by a professional review magazine giving reviews/opinions that most, even us as newbies, would have trusted, then we learn the hard way.
Something needs to be done about this ASAP.
Les

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Jim said:
When you consider that we worked out that conservative average payload of Funsters vans for a couple is 400kg. You could of course stay under the 270kg but it would be no fun.
Click to expand...
But not with three passengers..BUSBY.
 
Jim said:
You can understand that the manufacturers really want to make a nice van for those that need to stay under 3500kg, that's a lot of people. But to do so and give them a decent payload is so hard to achieve. I'm sure some makers just rely on peoples ignorance. And if you knew nothing and saw a van that had just won a major award... :doh:
Click to expand...

Totally agree Jim. I have lost a bit since then but - based on my weight in May - put two of me on board and it’s illegal ? That’s without food, water, booze, accessories, the dog and with both of me in our birthday suits :rofl:

“Please officer, don’t charge us with public indecency. We were only trying to keep within the permitted payload. Yes, I know we failed because you have already charged me for driving with an excessive load.” :rofl:
 
Perhaps it's time someone ordered a new van with the written proviso that it MUST have a minimum payload of say 250kgs after a reasonable/usable amount of fuel and water is loaded and all belted seats are occupied by "standard" passengers. Otherwise the purchaser may reject the vehicle. Once the dealers have a few rejected purchases things just might begin to change.

It would be interesting to get the view of the government agencies responsible for vehicle safety.

Sadly you're not going to get the magazine editors/proprietors on board because of the potential loss of advertising income.
 
The Mobilvetta MIRO does not include any water so the 270kg is the standard payload without equipment (but fuel is 90%).

If you add an awning, full water and a few extra bits n' bobs then your payload will be 60kg before any +/-5% variation to the MIRO figure, as per the Mobilvetta official info.

Add a single passenger and then a 3% variation to the MIRO weight and you could have a minus 100-150kg payload figure before you even add your gear.

Not a good van for an award

.......apart from a crap award that is!

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
It's also recommended by Mobilvetta that you travel with fully empty water tanks.

I wonder why eh.
 

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Join us

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Back
Top