Welcome to the "Last Word Café".

[Mr. Flibble]

Hahaha.... Good to hear from you Nitty. The Last Word Café is kind of like Magic Rocks, first a spurt then a lull before it really starts to grow. I don't know if you ever had "Magic Rocks" in Australia, or perhaps by another name. Pretty coloured items that had the shape of small gravel that you put into a glass jar full of water and they started growing. Pretty psychedelic when you think about it.


Falco.

Wow, those things sit just on the edge of my memory! I remember seeing how cool they looked on TV, and I really did not get to play with them much because I was young and the chemicals used to make them work were (if I remember correctly) fairly toxic.

Magic Rocks, huh. I need to find some of those again...

[Nitty]

mmm Nah, me never heard of magic rocks, but me sure would likes to find some well tis coffee time, and me is up and cleaning oh, oh, how exciting lol,,mmm so gots to find some thing else to fiddle with lol,,,

cheers nitty

[Erebus]

Numbers come from the 2009 Easter campout in Hope. On the way back to town, we passed through the weigh scales to see how we did. Some interesting differences.

front back total (all in kg)
1380 1000 2380 Fexlboi = 58.0 %
1310 1080 2390 Delicat = 54.8 %
1250 0810 2060 QuebecDelica = 60.7 %
1330 1080 2400 Erebus = 55.4 %
1420 1020 2430 TardisDeli = 58.4 %

Percentage is weight on front wheels. QuebecDelica was the most stock one, so 60% weight on the front wheels is the norm. Ya, I'd say pretty light rear end. Empty pickup trucks might have a worse ratio, but they also have much longer wheelbases.

I can echo the low tongue-weights, my tent trailer is almost neutral, and the towbar rattles and cluncks. No other trailer I've towed has ever done that.

[Green1]

Numbers come from the 2009 Easter campout in Hope. On the way back to town, we passed through the weigh scales to see how we did. Some interesting differences.

front back total (all in kg)
1380 1000 2380 Fexlboi = 58.0 %
1310 1080 2390 Delicat = 54.8 %
1250 0810 2060 QuebecDelica = 60.7 %
1330 1080 2400 Erebus = 55.4 %
1420 1020 2430 TardisDeli = 58.4 %

Percentage is weight on front wheels. QuebecDelica was the most stock one, so 60% weight on the front wheels is the norm. Ya, I'd say pretty light rear end. Empty pickup trucks might have a worse ratio, but they also have much longer wheelbases.

I can echo the low tongue-weights, my tent trailer is almost neutral, and the towbar rattles and cluncks. No other trailer I've towed has ever done that.

And that's with all the camping gear in the back (unless people were loading their gear on their laps...) so it looks like empty the ratio is likely even worse for front heaviness...

[thedjjack]

Not as bad as a Willys FC150 (I had the longer FC170). The factory added a 750lbs counter balance weight to the back end to keep them from falling on there nose!!

Read more: http://blogs.canoe.ca/time_machines/gen ... d-control/

[FalcoColumbarius]

Numbers come from the 2009 Easter campout in Hope. On the way back to town, we passed through the weigh scales to see how we did. Some interesting differences.

front back total (all in kg)
1380 1000 2380 Fexlboi = 58.0 %
1310 1080 2390 Delicat = 54.8 %
1250 0810 2060 QuebecDelica = 60.7 %
1330 1080 2400 Erebus = 55.4 %
1420 1020 2430 TardisDeli = 58.4 %

Percentage is weight on front wheels. QuebecDelica was the most stock one, so 60% weight on the front wheels is the norm. Ya, I'd say pretty light rear end. Empty pickup trucks might have a worse ratio, but they also have much longer wheelbases.

I can echo the low tongue-weights, my tent trailer is almost neutral, and the towbar rattles and cluncks. No other trailer I've towed has ever done that.

Those are interesting numbers that back up my argument. Weight centre is just forward of centre, which makes sense ~ engine on and behind the front axle; the transmission & transfer case virtually extending to the aft axle. The weight is just forward of centre (60%) but it's not all in the bambie bars. Does anyone know what the weight difference is between the engine, the auto tranny and the transfer case?

Thank you, Erebus

Falco.

[Erebus]

Those are interesting numbers that back up my argument. Weight centre is just forward of centre, which makes sense ~ engine on and behind the front axle; the transmission & transfer case virtually extending to the aft axle. The weight is just forward of centre (60%) but it's not all in the bambie bars. Does anyone know what the weight difference is between the engine, the auto tranny and the transfer case?

Well it is a given that the centre of balance is between the wheels, otherwise it would sit on its nose with the back wheels in the air.

Where exactly the centre of balance is would have to be measured on a balance. I don't think it is near the centre of the vehicle. It is close enough to the front that when I pulled my 3rd row seat and replaced it with my bed platform (itself made from 3/4" plywood, so not that light), I could feel how much lighter the rear end was.

There is another factor that hasn't been mentioned that is very relevant to how tippy the vehicle is -- namely how high above the ground is the centre of gravity? Suppose you had two vehicles, same wheelbase, same weight, same size tires, same 60% of the weight on the front wheels, but one of them the centre of mass was 6" above the ground, the other the centre of mass was 36" above the ground. Obviously the second one will do a nose dive much more quickly than the first.

But all of this discussion is pretty much irrelevant to the original question of tongue weight.

[Green1]

But all of this discussion is pretty much irrelevant to the original question of tongue weight.

Not entirely, the already light rear end is why a negative tongue weight on a delica isn't just "rattly" but downright dangerous, anything that lightens the rear end more than it already is, coupled with more weight on it's own wheels further back, and a pivot at the hitch can cause some very scary situations! (as has been discovered the hard way by some members on this site)

[FalcoColumbarius]

Those are interesting numbers that back up my argument. Weight centre is just forward of centre, which makes sense ~ engine on and behind the front axle; the transmission & transfer case virtually extending to the aft axle. The weight is just forward of centre (60%) but it's not all in the bambie bars. Does anyone know what the weight difference is between the engine, the auto tranny and the transfer case?

Well it is a given that the centre of balance is between the wheels, otherwise it would sit on its nose with the back wheels in the air.

Where exactly the centre of balance is would have to be measured on a balance. I don't think it is near the centre of the vehicle. It is close enough to the front that when I pulled my 3rd row seat and replaced it with my bed platform (itself made from 3/4" plywood, so not that light), I could feel how much lighter the rear end was.

There is another factor that hasn't been mentioned that is very relevant to how tippy the vehicle is -- namely how high above the ground is the centre of gravity? Suppose you had two vehicles, same wheelbase, same weight, same size tires, same 60% of the weight on the front wheels, but one of them the centre of mass was 6" above the ground, the other the centre of mass was 36" above the ground. Obviously the second one will do a nose dive much more quickly than the first.

But all of this discussion is pretty much irrelevant to the original question of tongue weight.

I agree with Green1, vehicle displacement has much to do with tongue weight ~ I would think.

Regarding my sarcastic comments to do with the weight not being in the bambie bars: Green1 said "well forward of centre"; Loki posted a vid of a modified L300 doing a nose stand; Luna Sea talks about the engine being well forward of centre and himself in the fo'c'sle ~ thereby I theoretically should be able to walk up to the rear end and lift it into the air as there should be enough counter balance to compensate for my skinniness. Wait a minute.... there's a great big transmission that I think actually weighs more than the engine (not sure), followed by a transfer case. However if your posted weights are 55-60% on the front axle ~ would that not put the weight centre 5-10% of the overall vehicle length forward of the middle of the wagon?

As far as potential tippiness ~ I refer back to my experience on the Causeway when doing sixty I locked up my brakes in an emergency. She bowed before the emperor but didn't do a somersault; and when the other vehicle braked, the only way I could avoid collision was to turn the wheel and put the MLB into a sideways skid. The fact that I could even do that tells me that the vehicle is fairly evenly balanced. When I started the sideways skid I was still doing 30 or 40 KPH. She did not roll. I would say that the centre of gravity is low on the body and would be pretty much at the frame and drive train.

You must remember that Japan has some very strict rules that the auto manufacturers must follow. One is a vehicle must be stable at a minimum of 35 degrees, lateral list.

You might remember these pictures that Mystery Machine posted of his beloved Mud Monkey:









Falco.

[Green1]

She bowed before the emperor but didn't do a somersault; and when the other vehicle braked, the only way I could avoid collision was to turn the wheel and put the MLB into a sideways skid. The fact that I could even do that tells me that the vehicle is fairly evenly balanced.

Actually the fact that you could do that proves that the vehicle ISN'T evenly balanced, the lighter the back end, the easier it is to cause it to come around (which is why when the weather gets bad, the first vehicles in the ditch are usually pickup trucks)

As for picking it up at the back, we're talking a 2000kg vehicle, even if only 5% of the weight were at the back that would still be 100kgs, I doubt you'd be able to lift that! I have never stated that the centre of gravity was in front of the front wheels, only that the vehicle is severely front heavy.

[jessef]

The L300 has a very light rear end.

The side to side load is excellent on the L300 (Falco's links to mudmonkey).

The front to rear load is horrible. This is consistent with many L300 owners experiences while driving in slick conditions including towing.

I did tests on ice, rain, etc

in a stock L300 it is very easy to have the rear end do a 180 going around a corner on a slick surface compared to an average vehicle.

This is due to two things that have been discussed many times over.

1. Light rear end - similar to a pickup truck
2. Very short wheelbase - similar to a Jeep (YJ/CJ,etc)

combine these two ingredients and you can get some funky chicken maneuvers out of the L300.

To say that the L300 is surefooted in slick conditions can be misleading.

Simple testing can be done by anyone with some cones in a parking lot during/after rain so it's nice and slick.

I tried to have the rear end kickout and was sucessful. After loading the rear (over the axle) with six 45lbs plates, it took a considerable effort to try and kick the rear end out.

My old man showed me this a long time ago with an empty pickup.

This applies to towing with the L300 as well since the rear end is so darn light, coupled with the unusually short wheelbase, trailer loading is very important.

Adam was the person who flipped his L300 while towing because of these factors (light rear/short wheelbase/trailer loading/road conditions).

See here :

http://www.delica.ca/forum/just-flipped ... -5892.html

[jessef]

where can I order a latté in this café ?

[FalcoColumbarius]

Actually the fact that you could do that proves that the vehicle ISN'T evenly balanced, the lighter the back end, the easier it is to cause it to come around (which is why when the weather gets bad, the first vehicles in the ditch are usually pickup trucks)

Are you familiar with the concept of drifting? A balanced car is ideal for drifting, take the Porsche 911, for instance ~ it has a rear engine mount which allows for excellent vehicle manipulation. So the weight displacement is probably more to the rear of centre on a 911 with the engine in the back. So how does the Porsche do a sideways drift if the weight is in the back? I ask this because you have told me that the because I could put my wagon into a sideways skid ~ it was proof that the vehicle was front heavy. The Delica is a mid engine machine. Now let's take a look at the Delica: It's a short wheel base machine. What is the difference between a little forward of centre and well forward of centre whilst still keeping it between the axles?


Where are the engine, the tranny and the transfer case (the three most heaviest items on the drive train) located in this picture?

And that's with all the camping gear in the back (unless people were loading their gear on their laps...) so it looks like empty the ratio is likely even worse for front heaviness...

Camping gear..... we are talking about tents, sleeping bags, pots & pans, fluffy pillows, an axe, a shovel perhaps... these are not major load shifting items here... Perhaps if you were bringing along an anvil I could see your argument.

Falco.

P.S.: The reason that pick-ups wind up in the ditch is because their turning wheels are no longer relevant for the speed and surface they were driving on, i.e.; ice, scree, snow, &c.....

[Erebus]

A balanced car is ideal for drifting, take the Porsche 911, for instance ~ it has a rear engine mount which allows for excellent vehicle manipulation. So the weight displacement is probably more to the rear of centre on a 911 with the engine in the back. So how does the Porsche do a sideways drift if the weight is in the back?

Oh, man, don't use a 911 as an example of anything except that engineering and tuning can overcome problematic design.

There are two ways to make a vehicle's back end swing out: very light rear end, or very heavy rear end. The Delica is a front mid-engine design, the 911 has its engine BEHIND the rear wheels. They used to joke that you could go to scrap yards and pick up lots of undamaged 911 front ends, but no undamaged rear ends, because they always hit things ass-end first.

Porsche engineers have expended huge resources to reduce that tendency, both with fat tires, geometry, 4WD, etc.

But going back to the original question, tongue weight should be 10% of the trailer's weight, and don't let the trailer's weight be too much compared to the tow vehicle's weight.

[FalcoColumbarius]

Thank you Erebus for that added point. So we have established then, that a vehicle with more weight in the rear is able to slide sideways. We have established that the front axle of the L300 Delica carries between 55 & 60% of the vehicle weight which places the displacement centre between 5 & 10% forward of the vehicle's centre. The vehicle's centre is half way on the sliding door, when it's closed. Ten percent forward of that would be where the key hole is on the sliding door ~ so the displacement centre is at or just behind the sliding door key hole.

With all this overwhelming evidence I just can't see how it can be assumed that the rear axle is so much lighter than the front. Erebus has amply demonstrated with a Transport Canada scale that there is only a five to ten percent difference in weight distribution. What am I missing?

Falco.