User1213 2006 Roadtrek 210 Popular Build

[User1213]

Originally Posted by Bud

Basically, simply an insurance policy. Hey Hondo, you have put a lot of time, energy, stuff you might not want to share and...................

Makes sense to me. I would do the same.

Bud

not sure what you are saying there Bud...(send me a PM please)

[User1213]

Originally Posted by cruising7388

With regard to increasing tire load, isn't the ultimate limitation the maximum axle load? Hondo replaced his Dana 60 with a Dana 70 which probably cuts the mustard but wouldn't the 3750 lbs rating exceed the load rating of a Dana 60?

Replacing tires requires the right ones that can handle the weight of the vehicle (according to the mfg). That doesn't mean you can actually load a vehicle up to the tire capacity...the max axle weight still rules.

[booster]

Originally Posted by Hondo

Replacing tires requires the right ones that can handle the weight of the vehicle (according to the mfg). That doesn't mean you can actually load a vehicle up to the tire capacity.

Yep, and there are other limiting factors also, depending on what vehicle the wheels came off of. They might only have a rating for 3040# or 3195# which would line up with the tire capacity that came on the vehicle.


To get that much more load capacity, I would guess they had to load up the sidewall strength with extra belts, maybe even steel ones which are rare in most sidewalls, I think. It will be interesting to see how they ride, as they could be quite harsh.

[Bud]

Originally Posted by Hondo

not sure what you are saying there Bud...

I may not have followed very well. I thought that you already had tires that were rated for your 210 total weight.

[User1213]

The reviews that I read online were very favorable, I'll report back.

[User1213]

Originally Posted by Bud

I may not have followed very well. I thought that you already had tires that were rated for your 210 total weight.

I do, I have BF Goodrich TA KO2 Radials that are rated at 3,195 lbs per tire.


The Roadtrek rear axle capacity is 6,084 lbs - each tire must be able to handle 1/2 of that load or 3,042 lbs. The KO2s will provide 153 lbs of extra load margin and that's about 5%.



In the interest of safety, I want a tire that has a higher load rating to increase the margin of safety. Going to a tire that has a load rating of 3,750 lbs increases the margin to 708 lbs per tire and that's a 23% increase over the axle limitations.



For me, it's all about safety & reliability. The higher capacity tire will not be working as hard as a lower capacity tire and satisfies my goal of making my 210 safer on & off road.

[cruising7388]

Originally Posted by Hondo

The Roadtrek rear axle capacity is 6,084 lbs - each tire must be able to handle 1/2 of that load or 3,042 lbs.

If 6084 is the axle limit, of what use are tires with load capacities that exceed that limit and probably have a rougher ride to boot?

[cruising7388]

Originally Posted by booster

Yep, and there are other limiting factors also, depending on what vehicle the wheels came off of. They might only have a rating for 3040# or 3195# which would line up with the tire capacity that came on the vehicle.


To get that much more load capacity, I would guess they had to load up the sidewall strength with extra belts, maybe even steel ones which are rare in most sidewalls, I think. It will be interesting to see how they ride, as they could be quite harsh.

Deano's photo shows 3042 as the maximum load for the AR aluminum wheels. Do you know what this figure is for the 7 inch steel wheels you have?

[User1213]

Reliabilty.


Loaded to 6084 lbs a tire rated for the same is running at it's maximum limit.


Using a tire that is rated for higher load capacity means that the tire will not be anywhere near it's limit and thus run cooler and this reduces the probability of failure.


Booster and I installed Dana 70 axles for the same reason. They are not taxed as much as a Dana 60 thus an increase in reliability.

[User1213]

Originally Posted by cruising7388

Deano's photo shows 3042 as the maximum load for the AR aluminum wheels. Do you know what this figure is for the 7 inch steel wheels you have?

AR RT wheels are a lot different than the OEM wheels. Many aftermarket aluminum wheels are rated up to 3,600 lbs.

The Chevrolet wheels that I have were optional on Chevrolet 3500 HD Silverado trucks (gas/diesel) with rear axle GAWR of 7,050 lbs (from what I have seen online) and single rear wheels though I am still researching that. Finding load rating for OEM wheels is elusive so axle ratings + available wheels might be as close as we can get.



This is from a 2008 Silverado brochure...some of the 16 & 17 inch wheels-

[booster]

From what I found when first looking at all this was that the 28mm offset wheel years for the Silverado had the 245-75-16 tires on the 5 opening 6.5" steel wheels (sames as our vans) and had 265-75-16 tires on the optional 6 opening 7.0" wheels that have been what most of us used to upsize.


I think that the 17" wheel came with 265-70-17 tires.


This would indicate that the stock steel van wheels (16X6.5) would have at least 3040# rating, the Silverado wheels (16X7) would have at least 3400# rating (this would make sense because they were on the heavier duty trucks that would have had at least a 7000# rated rear axle)., and the aluminum Silverado (17X7) would be about 3200#.

The wheels may be stamped with a load capacity on the backside of the wheel, like the AR wheels are.

[User1213]

The only thing cast into the wheel is 17 × 7.5. 28


No load info...just some part numbers

[cruising7388]

Originally Posted by Hondo

Reliabilty.


Loaded to 6084 lbs a tire rated for the same is running at it's maximum limit.


Using a tire that is rated for higher load capacity means that the tire will not be anywhere near it's limit and thus run cooler and this reduces the probability of failure.


Booster and I installed Dana 70 axles for the same reason. They are not taxed as much as a Dana 60 thus an increase in reliability.

The Dana 60 has been supplied on Roadtrek Chevvies for over two decades. There have been reports of wheel bearing failures but this apparently is attributed to higher bearing loads caused by the AR wheel offset. Have there been reports of axle shaft or differential failures with the Dana 60 on the RT 190 and 210? With your 4 x 4 conversion, you'll undoubtedly see greater stress on your axles but for 2 x 4 on road use, IMO, going through the labor and parts intensive process, changing out the rear axle is an expensive solution for what is for practical purposes, may be a non-existent problem.

[User1213]

[User1213]

[GinnyWatlington]

Hondo, That's a nice stereo unit. You are doing some amazing work on that Roadtrek!

[User1213]

Thanks!


Installed the new tires today.

After ordering the 5 new Nitto 285/75R-18 tires I called around and found a tire dealer that could get me a reconditioned wheel locally to use as my spare -it looked like new -



I wanted to get a matching wheel so that I could do 5-wheel rotations.

When the tires came in I went to Discount tire and after installing one new tire we test fit the combo on the Roadtrek - success! The 285-70R-17 tires fit with no interference at all, 1-1.5 inches of clearance at the closest point.

Then they installed all 4 tires and we tried to mount the spare tire onto the spare tire holder but the tire was hitting the bumper when lifted into position. Tomorrow I will have to lengthen the main tube to raise the tire up a few inches (cut/weld/grind/paint)...should be fun!

Here's the Roadtrek 210 Popular 4x4 with the new tires -



I do like RWL tires but it still looks great with the black walls

[User1213]

Originally Posted by cruising7388

The Dana 60 has been supplied on Roadtrek Chevvies for over two decades. There have been reports of wheel bearing failures but this apparently is attributed to higher bearing loads caused by the AR wheel offset. Have there been reports of axle shaft or differential failures with the Dana 60 on the RT 190 and 210? With your 4 x 4 conversion, you'll undoubtedly see greater stress on your axles but for 2 x 4 on road use, IMO, going through the labor and parts intensive process, changing out the rear axle is an expensive solution for what is for practical purposes, may be a non-existent problem.

I don't know of reports of failures on Dana 60s (I did read something about that or heat theory mentioned here) but what I do know is that the Dana 70 is a heavy duty axle assy (factory option) that can handle more weight than a Dana 60 and thus provide improved reliability. If you would go back in this build thread you would read that I also installed the Dana 70 to add a limited slip differential ie: replacing the open Dana 60 for better traction.

There is no reason to think that the axles will see more stress due to the 4X4 conversion as it only added 310 lbs to the weight of the vehicle. The front end has been professionally converted to 4WD using Chevrolet 3500 suspension pieces including torsion bars & control arms, a tried and true system with IFS. With 4WD disengaged the vehicle operates like any other 2WD truck/van. With the 4WD engaged it operates like other 3500s with IFS. As far as use goes, I won't be thrashing the 210 offroad but utilizing the 4WD & the lift going to places that stock height 210s probably shouldn't.

Changing out the rear end wasn't expensive, maybe $400 total after I sold the Dana 60. I did do the install myself so the labor cost was zero. This upgrade would cost more to someone to hire out the job and that's what mechanics are for. If someone wants a limited slip rearend they can either swap out the entire rearend or have the internals changed.

Increased load capability/axle reliability and a limited slip upgrade using factory parts are IMO practical for my 210 and how I use it.

[cruising7388]

Originally Posted by Hondo

I don't know of reports of failures on Dana 60s (I did read something about that or heat theory mentioned here) but what I do know is that the Dana 70 is a heavy duty axle assy (factory option) that can handle more weight than a Dana 60 and thus provide improved reliability. If you would go back in this build thread you would read that I also installed the Dana 70 to add a limited slip differential ie: replacing the open Dana 60 for better traction.

Can't quarrel with a word of this. You have done an incredible job turning your coach

There is no reason to think that the axles will see more stress due to the 4X4 conversion as it only added 310 lbs to the weight of the vehicle. The front end has been professionally converted to 4WD using Chevrolet 3500 suspension pieces including torsion bars & control arms, a tried and true system with IFS. With 4WD disengaged the vehicle operates like any other 2WD truck/van. With the 4WD engaged it operates like other 3500s with IFS. As far as use goes, I won't be thrashing the 210 offroad but utilizing the 4WD & the lift going to places that stock height 210 probably shouldn't.

Changing out the rear end wasn't expensive, maybe $400 total after I sold the Dana 60. I did do the install myself so the labor cost was zero. This upgrade would cost more to someone to hire out the job and that's what mechanics are for. If someone wants a limited slip rearend they can either swap out the entire rearend or have the internals changed.

Increased load capability/axle reliability and a limited slip upgrade using factory parts are IMO practical for my 210 and how I use it.

Can't quarrel with a word of this. You've turned this 210 into a pretty formidable beast. Roadtrek should take your cue and if they ordered the platform with a Dana 70 and put on the right tires, they would have enough weight headroom to have Quigley, or equal, to convert to 4 x 4. I think it would sell quite well.

[User1213]

Originally Posted by cruising7388

Can't quarrel with a word of this. You've turned this 210 into a pretty formidable beast. Roadtrek should take your cue and if they ordered the platform with a Dana 70 and put on the right tires, they would have enough weight headroom to have Quigley, or equal, to convert to 4 x 4. I think it would sell quite well.

Thanks, it's been a great project and a wonderful learning experience. Props to Booster, Photog and the other members that posted up their findings and modifications, they were a great help and inspiration to me and my project. The 210 really does drive great right now and I'm confident that it will be safe & reliable wherever I take it.

If someone were to take a 190 and do the same it would provide additional payload capability as they weigh less than the 210s from the start but use the same platform. If I had to take more weight I could use a trailer vs the 190 just packing it in/on.

I'm taking a trip in the 210 next week to the Black Hills & Devils Tower and look forward to it's 1st run as it sits now.