Roadtrek 210P Suspension

[Brian B]

Purchased 2017 Roadtrek 210P. Drove across Canada, Ontario to BC, in difficult conditions. Unit handled well but suspension seems "soft". Read a post in FB Group of one owner that added Bilstein shocks to tighten things up.

Have others added additional suspension and what was the result?

Thanks.

[markopolo]

I don't have a 210.

I'd check tire pressures first. 80psi rear and fronts up to 65psi seems to be a fairly common choice for Chevy 3500 based B vans.

Bilsteins are a very popular choice.

210's are heavy - http://www.classbforum.com/forums/f5...bels-5844.html

Replacing after-market spacers with rear air suspension would be my preference on a 210.

[booster]

I think you wound up on the right forum for this question as there is probably more information on Chevy handling and suspension here than most anywhere else.

Although a lot of the work done is on 190s, the 210 is very similar and probably also gets more benefit.

Here is a thread that got it all going around here. It says lift, but the lift and handling go together on the Chevies because the extra weight has them riding too low. It is a long discussion, and there are multiple other threads around also.

http://www.classbforum.com/forums/f8...190v-1552.html

Bottom line, IMO, is to add Bilsteins all around, airbags in the rear, and new springs from Bill Erb in the front. That will get you up higher and right at factory ride height. Most have used Erb springs that are the same spring rate as factory springs, so if you like a firmer control like I do, you might need to have him make them stiffer.

Two other options that are possible are to go up to larger tires but may require a wheel change to steel wheels if you have aluminum (we don't know the specs for the newer Roadtrek aluminum wheels). The other possibility is adding a big rear sway bar, which can greatly improve handling. If you don't have a generator, a Hellwig fits in easily. If you do have generator, you either have to move the generator back a couple of inches, or have a custom bar fit in.

Marko's comments about the 210's being heavy and near max capacity, or over, are well taken, as the link he provided will show.

[Brian B]

Thanks for the info. Very helpful.

[cruising7388]

Originally Posted by booster

I think you wound up on the right forum for this question as there is probably more information on Chevy handling and suspension here than most anywhere else.

Although a lot of the work done is on 190s, the 210 is very similar and probably also gets more benefit.

Here is a thread that got it all going around here. It says lift, but the lift and handling go together on the Chevies because the extra weight has them riding too low. It is a long discussion, and there are multiple other threads around also.

http://www.classbforum.com/forums/f8...190v-1552.html

Bottom line, IMO, is to add Bilsteins all around, airbags in the rear, and new springs from Bill Erb in the front. That will get you up higher and right at factory ride height. Most have used Erb springs that are the same spring rate as factory springs, so if you like a firmer control like I do, you might need to have him make them stiffer.

Two other options that are possible are to go up to larger tires but may require a wheel change to steel wheels if you have aluminum (we don't know the specs for the newer Roadtrek aluminum wheels). The other possibility is adding a big rear sway bar, which can greatly improve handling. If you don't have a generator, a Hellwig fits in easily. If you do have generator, you either have to move the generator back a couple of inches, or have a custom bar fit in.

Marko's comments about the 210's being heavy and near max capacity, or over, are well taken, as the link he provided will show.

What about a third option to stick with the same rear tire size but convert it for duals. Adaptors are made for that and because the rear body is widened on the 210, with the addition of fender flares, I think duals would fit. This would make the cargo capacity issue moot and perhaps could help as much with the tail end wag experienced on windy roads as a sway bar would.

[booster]

Originally Posted by cruising7388

What about a third option to stick with the same rear tire size but convert it for duals. Adaptors are made for that and because the rear body is widened on the 210, with the addition of fender flares, I think duals would fit. This would make the cargo capacity issue moot and perhaps could help as much with the tail end wag experienced on windy roads as a sway bar would.

I have never seen one, or even heard of one, that went to duals on a chevy. With the limited load capacity they have already, the extra weight of the conversion might put you very close without much load at all. It would also likely mess up the ABS brakes unless you put the smaller tires on the front also. I don't think you can use the stock tire size on the dual kits, but I don't know for sure.

The Chevy design isn't all that bad, but it is right near max weight so at the worst spot. There is no rear sway bar because of safety issues that they would have with empty cargo vans if they had a rear bar (oversteer induced end swapping). Personally, I think the big rear sway bar did the most to improve the handling, the Bilsteins did the most for better feel and bouncing, the springs and airbags get you away from the horrible ground clearance that stock has, and the bigger tires give some extra window in load capacity. If you have the aluminum wheels that have the wrong offset, changing them for correct offset wheels will make the feel better and tighten it up some what, as well as reduce scuffing. We have done all the changes and it has turned the van into an extremely easy drive, even in big winds and high speeds.

[cruising7388]

Originally Posted by booster

I have never seen one, or even heard of one, that went to duals on a chevy. With the limited load capacity they have already, the extra weight of the conversion might put you very close without much load at all. It would also likely mess up the ABS brakes unless you put the smaller tires on the front also. I don't think you can use the stock tire size on the dual kits, but I don't know for sure.

Good point regarding the potential for ABS complications. But with respect to cargo capacity I would think that the duals would increase it significantly and in any even wouldn't such a conversion constitute unsprung weight that would not affect cargo capacity?

BTW, doesn't Chevy offer the 3500 chassis configured with dual wheels?

[booster]

Originally Posted by cruising7388

Good point regarding the potential for ABS complications. But with respect to cargo capacity I would think that the duals would increase it significantly and in any even wouldn't such a conversion constitute unsprung weight that would not affect cargo capacity?

BTW, doesn't Chevy offer the 3500 chassis configured with dual wheels?

Gross vehicle weight includes unsprung weight, so it would count if you were on the scales. Cargo capacity is base on gross weight, so it would change. From a suspension standpoint is would only change the application point of the weight to the road, moving it outboard. On dips, this wouldn't be of much effect, but on one wheel bumps it will actually effectively soften the rear springs and shocks do to the longer distance to the load.

It has been documented that a member weighed his 210 on the ride home from the dealer after picking it up, and he had barely over 200# of capacity left.

[QUOTE]I can tell you what our 2006 210 weighed at a CAT Scale the day we drove it off the lot.
4120 lbs front axle GAWR 4300 lbs
5260 lbs rear axle GAWR 6084 lbs
9380 lbs total GVWR 9600 lbs

And that was with only the full tanks of fuel, propane and fresh water it came with, plus the two of us and 115 lbs of German Shepherd. /QUOTE]

Chevy does make a dual wheel Express, but it is on the cutaway models. I don't ever recall an OEM dual full body van, at least that I have come across. The factory dually would have a different rear axle to accommodate the dually wheels, and likely different front hubs to be able to use the wheels front and rear.

[cruising7388]

[QUOTE=booster;54622]Gross vehicle weight includes unsprung weight, so it would count if you were on the scales. Cargo capacity is base on gross weight, so it would change. From a suspension standpoint is would only change the application point of the weight to the road, moving it outboard. On dips, this wouldn't be of much effect, but on one wheel bumps it will actually effectively soften the rear springs and shocks do to the longer distance to the load.

It has been documented that a member weighed his 210 on the ride home from the dealer after picking it up, and he had barely over 200# of capacity left.

I can tell you what our 2006 210 weighed at a CAT Scale the day we drove it off the lot.
4120 lbs front axle GAWR 4300 lbs
5260 lbs rear axle GAWR 6084 lbs
9380 lbs total GVWR 9600 lbs

And that was with only the full tanks of fuel, propane and fresh water it came with, plus the two of us and 115 lbs of German Shepherd. /QUOTE]

Chevy does make a dual wheel Express, but it is on the cutaway models. I don't ever recall an OEM dual full body van, at least that I have come across. The factory dually would have a different rear axle to accommodate the dually wheels, and likely different front hubs to be able to use the wheels front and rear.

Thanks for the analysis. The actual weight increase would be just the weight of a single tire since you could delete the existing spare and the carrier.

[booster]

[QUOTE=cruising7388;54642]

Originally Posted by booster

Gross vehicle weight includes unsprung weight, so it would count if you were on the scales. Cargo capacity is base on gross weight, so it would change. From a suspension standpoint is would only change the application point of the weight to the road, moving it outboard. On dips, this wouldn't be of much effect, but on one wheel bumps it will actually effectively soften the rear springs and shocks do to the longer distance to the load.

It has been documented that a member weighed his 210 on the ride home from the dealer after picking it up, and he had barely over 200# of capacity left.

Thanks for the analysis. The actual weight increase would be just the weight of a single tire since you could delete the existing spare and the carrier.

Two tires, plus 2 wheels, plus I assume some sparcer and lug stud stuff. A tire and wheel are around 80# so by the time you are done, maybe 200# added. That would give the guy in the example I quoted 20# of capacity above the delivered weight. He would probably need to carry more than that in dog food

I have to repeat again that anyone with a 210 should be getting to the scales to see how heavy they actually are, especially if they have some of the heavier options like 4 agm batteries.

This is the 210 label from before the change in how it is done.



They now list the 210 as having 1450# of "occupant and cargo carrying capacity". It is no wonder there are lots of confused and overloaded owners around. The gross weight hasn't changed over the years, and it also does not appear that the way it is built is lighter, and the weighed example would point that out. Just over 1000# of phantom capacity that people think they have.