Caravan Rear Bike Carrier- Trailer Length?

[silverfoxapparently]

Im just looking at the feasibility and legality of a bike carrier to go at the rear of my caravan.

 

Does anyone know if a rear bike carrier would be included in the trailer length or if the only length considered is that of the body (inc built in gas locker).

[RobJS]

there's a lot to consider with this. Does the van have the supporting mechanism for the rack. Some vans have it built in. are your bikes heavy? remember that this is going to be right at the back of the van, furthest away from the axle so the rack and the bikes will add a considerable weight to the back of the van which can affect stability whilst towing. If you were going on a ferry, I would have thought that the length of the van would have to include the bike rack.

 

I personally stick my bike in a carry bag and the wheels in wheel bags, I bung them in the lounge area, no oil goes anywhere and it cant damage the van in any way.

 

Some vans with long hitches can have racks installed there but again, noseweight can become an issue.

[silverfoxapparently]

Yeeeassss. .....

 

I was curious about the possibility of getting a carrier for a motor scooter fabricated to secure onto the chassis.

 

Scooter is 130kg, and a hitch carrier is about 35kgs, so extra 165kgs. As you say- at the rear. ...hmmmm.

 

My van is a twin axle towed with a kerbweight of 2175kgs. Max nose is 135kgs (and roof load 100kgs )

 

Id prefer the extra over the a-frame but we have these silly small UK lengths not like the continentals.

[reluctant]

The short answer to your question is that once you bolt or otherwise fasten the carrier to the caravan then the overall length will include the carrier. It becomes a part of the 'body' of the caravan. The only exemption to the maximum length is the draw bar.

[David in Cheshire]

I have towed thousands of miles (about 25k) with 2 bikes on the back without problems. I never thought about the length issue though. See here how I fitted the Fiamma Universal bracket. Unfortunately the van I have now does not have the strengthening required to fit one. Ifyour van is suitable it is unbeatable

[silverfoxapparently]

The short answer to your question is that once you bolt or otherwise fasten the carrier to the caravan then the overall length will include the carrier. It becomes a part of the 'body' of the caravan. The only exemption to the maximum length is the draw bar.

Cool. So legally its no go with a Cat B vehicle. Cheers.

 

Case closed

[David in Cheshire]

Cool. So legally its no go with a Cat B vehicle. Cheers.

 

Case closed

What does that have to do with a Cat B licence unless it takes the train weight over 3500kg.

[Lutz]

The short answer to your question is that once you bolt or otherwise fasten the carrier to the caravan then the overall length will include the carrier. It becomes a part of the 'body' of the caravan. The only exemption to the maximum length is the draw bar.

 

Who says? It would only apply if the carrier were considered as a permanent fixture, but it's only bolted and therefore removable, Unless there is a clear definition somewhere only a court can decide whether, for vehicle use purposes, the carrier counts as part of the body length.

 

What does that have to do with a Cat B licence unless it takes the train weight over 3500kg.

 

The MTPLM is not affected by the fitment of cycle carrier so the train weight also remains unchanged.

Edited March 9, 2014 by Lutz

[reluctant]

 

Who says? It would only apply if the carrier were considered as a permanent fixture, but it's only bolted and therefore removable, Unless there is a clear definition somewhere only a court can decide whether, for vehicle use purposes, the carrier counts as part of the body length.

 

 

The MTPLM is not affected by the fitment of cycle carrier so the train weight also remains unchanged.

There is no requirement for the cycle carrier to be 'permanent' to be included in the measurement of the overall length. The only requirement is for it to be bolted onto the rear of the caravan at the time of being measured, whereby it becomes a part of the bodywork for as long as it is bolted there. I speak with the experience of someone who had to measure vehicles with a view to prosecuting drivers!

 

It is of course up to the OP whether to follow my advice or take a gamble and try to use your advice as a defense in a court of law! He may not be in a position to gamble with his licence.

 

The Cat B licence I would guess would be as a result of the length of his caravan and the cycle carrier being too long to be towed by a car and requiring a larger (heavier) tow vehicle which may take the combination out of the cat B entitlement.

[AlanNancy]

there's a lot to consider with this. Does the van have the supporting mechanism for the rack. Some vans have it built in. are your bikes heavy? remember that this is going to be right at the back of the van, furthest away from the axle so the rack and the bikes will add a considerable weight to the back of the van which can affect stability whilst towing. If you were going on a ferry, I would have thought that the length of the van would have to include the bike rack.

 

I personally stick my bike in a carry bag and the wheels in wheel bags, I bung them in the lounge area, no oil goes anywhere and it cant damage the van in any way.

 

Some vans with long hitches can have racks installed there but again, noseweight can become an issue.

Why is it every time this question is asked someone will say - weight right at the back will affect the stability when every other Dutch caravan you see has a bike rack on the back?

Stick the bikes in bags and put them in the lounge - great and every time you want to stop for a tea/coffee you have to take the bags/bikes out or climb over them, I think my wife would be delighted to have to do that.

Put a rack on the back and they are out of the way.

Alan

[RobJS]

Look at the new swift vans and also the bailey pursuit. ..... The rears are all being designed to be as aerodynamic as possible. If stability isn't affected then fuel economy will be. Got to ask the question, why aren't van makers including the attachments as standard nowadays. Silverfoxapparently wants to add at least 130kgs to the rear if the van. They should check the weight allowance. There is NO WAY I would add that weight to the back if a caravan. Bailey did a lot if stability tests with weight. There are vids on YouTube. More weight at the back. ... Less stable the outfit.

 

Stopping in services gives you the increased risk of theft of the bike if installed on the rear of the van should you leave the outfit (compared to it being locked away in the van). Obviously depending on the layout if the van, that solution may not work for you.

 

My solution works brilliant for me. I take the van on a journey, it's not about the getting there, it's all about the get there. Only time I have left the van on its own on a trip somewhere was onboard a ferry for two days. Bike locked away nicely and didn't have to pay extra for the height on the car or the length of the van.

 

So, not having the rack improves stability, keeps the van as short as possible, helps with stability and fuel economy and stops the wife fiddling in the van which means you get to your destination quicker giving you more time to enjoy the extra bike ride you can get in and then go for a meal using the money you save from the fuel savings.

Edited March 9, 2014 by RobJS

[Lutz]

There is no requirement for the cycle carrier to be 'permanent' to be included in the measurement of the overall length. The only requirement is for it to be bolted onto the rear of the caravan at the time of being measured, whereby it becomes a part of the bodywork for as long as it is bolted there. I speak with the experience of someone who had to measure vehicles with a view to prosecuting drivers!

 

It is of course up to the OP whether to follow my advice or take a gamble and try to use your advice as a defense in a court of law! He may not be in a position to gamble with his licence.

 

The Cat B licence I would guess would be as a result of the length of his caravan and the cycle carrier being too long to be towed by a car and requiring a larger (heavier) tow vehicle which may take the combination out of the cat B entitlement.

 

How can a temporarily fitted cycle carrier be considered as part of the body structure? We are not talking about the overall length of the caravan which is obviously affected but the length of the body structure itself which, by the 7m limit imposed in the UK, determines whether the caravan can be towed by a vehicle with a max. GVW of under 3500kg or not.

[David in Cheshire]

Look at the new swift vans and also the bailey pursuit. ..... The rears are all being designed to be as aerodynamic as possible. If stability isn't affected then fuel economy will be. Got to ask the question, why aren't van makers including the attachments as standard nowadays. Silverfoxapparently wants to add at least 130kgs to the rear if the van. They should check the weight allowance. There is NO WAY I would add that weight to the back if a caravan. Bailey did a lot if stability tests with weight. There are vids on YouTube. More weight at the back. ... Less stable the outfit.

 

Stopping in services gives you the increased risk of theft of the bike if installed on the rear of the van should you leave the outfit (compared to it being locked away in the van). Obviously depending on the layout if the van, that solution may not work for you.

 

My solution works brilliant for me. I take the van on a journey, it's not about the getting there, it's all about the get there. Only time I have left the van on its own on a trip somewhere was onboard a ferry for two days. Bike locked away nicely and didn't have to pay extra for the height on the car or the length of the van.

 

So, not having the rack improves stability, keeps the van as short as possible, helps with stability and fuel economy and stops the wife fiddling in the van which means you get to your destination quicker giving you more time to enjoy the extra bike ride you can get in and then go for a meal using the money you save from the fuel savings.

I am going to repeat again, over 25000 miles, with 2 bikes on the back. Never got stolen, had no stability problems, never made a difference to ferry fares and as far as I could tell made not a jot of difference to fuel consumption. To the OP ignore the theorists and think about the advice from those who have actually done it.

[OWOMW]

I'm always bending my awning pegs and usually hammer them flat on a nearby kerbstone or similar.

Having read some of the advice in this topic I think I'll take a medium size anvil (130kg ish) away with me next time, and strap it to the back of the van

[AlanNancy]

Look at the new swift vans and also the bailey pursuit. ..... The rears are all being designed to be as aerodynamic as possible. If stability isn't affected then fuel economy will be. Got to ask the question, why aren't van makers including the attachments as standard nowadays. Silverfoxapparently wants to add at least 130kgs to the rear if the van. They should check the weight allowance. There is NO WAY I would add that weight to the back if a caravan. Bailey did a lot if stability tests with weight. There are vids on YouTube. More weight at the back. ... Less stable the outfit.

 

Stopping in services gives you the increased risk of theft of the bike if installed on the rear of the van should you leave the outfit (compared to it being locked away in the van). Obviously depending on the layout if the van, that solution may not work for you.

 

My solution works brilliant for me. I take the van on a journey, it's not about the getting there, it's all about the get there. Only time I have left the van on its own on a trip somewhere was onboard a ferry for two days. Bike locked away nicely and didn't have to pay extra for the height on the car or the length of the van.

 

So, not having the rack improves stability, keeps the van as short as possible, helps with stability and fuel economy and stops the wife fiddling in the van which means you get to your destination quicker giving you more time to enjoy the extra bike ride you can get in and then go for a meal using the money you save from the fuel savings.

RobJS you raise a few points here. Aerodynamics - I would be very surprised if a bike rack on the flat rear panel would affect the aerodynamics and increase fuel consumption.

I think some common sense is required, the idea of hanging 130kg on the back it nuts! That of course is only my opinion.

You obviously travel in a very different way to us. The idea that with the bikes inside the van stops you wife fiddling and you get to your destination quicker is certainly not our way. en-route we stop at lunch time for a fresh salad or if it's cold a bowl of soup, on a long journey we also stop for coffee/tea in the afternoon - easy to do with no bikes in the way. On the way back from the Koln Christmas Market when we arrived at the port we had to wait two hours for the next ferry - no problem we got in the van made some hot food and read until called to get on board, not easy to do if we had bikes in the way.

As David in Cheshire has said twice - 25,000 miles with two bikes on the back and no problems.

Alan

[CommanderDave]

Is this a April 1st joke ? 165kg added to the rear of a caravan would make it very unstable and the extra weight would be added to the axle weight. 165kg is more than most caravans payload. Safer and easier to tow with a van and put the motor scooter in the back of a van.

You would need to add about 200kg to the front to have a noseweight to stop the caravan tipping up.

Dave

Edited March 10, 2014 by CommanderDave

[David in Cheshire]

Is this a April 1st joke ? 165kg added to the rear of a caravan would make it very unstable and the extra weight would be added to the axle weight. 165kg is more than most caravans payload. Safer and easier to tow with a van and put the motor scooter in the back of a van.

You would need to add about 200kg to the front to have a noseweight to stop the caravan tipping up.

Dave

The OP was about a bike I j have now noticed it has been qualified to be a scooter, have to agree quite mad in spite of my enthusiasm for bicycle racks.

Edited March 10, 2014 by David in Cheshire

[beejay]

Is this a April 1st joke ? 165kg added to the rear of a caravan would make it very unstable and the extra weight would be added to the axle weight. 165kg is more than most caravans payload. Safer and easier to tow with a van and put the motor scooter in the back of a van.

You would need to add about 200kg to the front to have a noseweight to stop the caravan tipping up.

Dave

 

 

Howe about this?

[CommanderDave]

Not many UK vans would have the payload in their chassis . There are caravans over here that are imported toy movers I have seen. .

 

Anglo American advertise this one . In the midlands.

 

http://www. youtube. com/watch?v=ZbutvivRFHw#t=54

http://www. americantruckand5thwheel. co. uk/

Dave

Edited March 10, 2014 by CommanderDave

[Lutz]

Is this a April 1st joke ? 165kg added to the rear of a caravan would make it very unstable and the extra weight would be added to the axle weight. 165kg is more than most caravans payload. Safer and easier to tow with a van and put the motor scooter in the back of a van.

You would need to add about 200kg to the front to have a noseweight to stop the caravan tipping up.

Dave

 

Agreed. My caravan has over 400kg payload and even without bicycles we get close to using all of that up. I don't know what chance anyone would have in ensuring a reasonable noseweight with 165kg hung on the back of a caravan without exceeding the MTPLM. I also find it difficult to take the whole idea serioiusly.

[beejay]

 

How can a temporarily fitted cycle carrier be considered as part of the body structure?

 

 

So are you suggesting is it an overhanging load as permitted by the regulations? If it is bolted on to the bodywork and requires tools to remove it that makes it a permanent addition and part of the overall length.

 

Alko make a bolt on scooter/motorcycle carrier for motor caravans and that is definitely a permanent addition to the overall length.

[Gordon]

The OP was about a bike I j have now noticed it has been qualified to be a scooter, have to agree quite mad in spite of my enthusiasm for bicycle racks.

Agreed, a scooter is a complete no - no.

How about this?

A motorbike inside the caravan is equally daft.

 

As for fitting a pedal cycle carrier to the rear of a caravan. As others have stated I too have travelled many thousands of miles with one of these, and never experienced any problems with the twin axle caravans. The only single axle one I had with a factory fitted rear bike carrier was noticeably less stable (but that was true also without a bike on the back). In each case though, the rear wall of the caravan had to be strengthened at the factory in order to support the additional load.

 

I like to travel with the caravan / motorhome in a usable state throughout the journey, so keeping bikes, awnings etc. , out of the caravan / motorhome is a requirement for me.

 

My understanding regarding length, is that a rear mounted rack would be included in the overall length, but should the bike(s) protrude beyond the rack, they would not be included as they constitute an overhanging load.

 

Whatever method is used to transport bikes, care must betaken not to overload the vehicle

[Lutz]

 

 

So are you suggesting is it an overhanging load as permitted by the regulations? If it is bolted on to the bodywork and requires tools to remove it that makes it a permanent addition and part of the overall length.

 

Alko make a bolt on scooter/motorcycle carrier for motor caravans and that is definitely a permanent addition to the overall length.

 

I didn't say that the carrier would not be included in the overall length but that it doesn't count as part of the body length.

[CommanderDave]

Not forgetting in some countries any overhang at the rear requires a plate.

 

 

Dave

[Gordon]

Not forgetting in some countries any overhang at the rear requires a plate.

Like this one on the rear of our outfit in France. . .