2019 Sprinter 3500 chassis

[bgilly]

So the newly 2019 redesigned MB Sprinter is old news now; however, there hasn't been any news as to how much is going to change with the 3500 cut-away chassis that is used for the Isata 3. Wondering if any of the new features (crash avoidance, MBUX infotainment, 7 speed auto trans.) carry to the fleet/cut-away line?
As stated in other areas of this forum, the Europe version got a GVWR upgrade.
I was wondering if anyone heard from anyone near the South Carolina MB Sprinter plant what is going in the fleet/cut-away 3500 chassis? Local Sprinter van dealers are clueless.

[bclemens]

SC MB Sprinter plant is doing vans only, not cab chassis. Ours will still come from Germany, Argentina.

The increased GVWR is a different chassis (4500) that costs more money and comes at a reduced curb weight. So to get the increased GVWR, you have to build a lighter chassis. Well....duh, if we could do that, we would have. It really only helps if you build a B-van.

The new safety features do cross over. They make it very difficult to use your own radio, but to use their radio it has all these packages involved...which of course some are safety related and will be good. All of that will add anywhere from $5000 to $8000 to the price of the vehicle.

[Bill Davis]

BC, I see on the MHSRV website that the 2019 Isata 3 has the electronic stability option. Are you specking all your Sprinters with this option now? Is it helping with the side to side rocking that these vehicles suffer from?

[bclemens]

They have always had this. In high winds it just puts them in limp mode.

[bgilly]

Originally Posted by bclemens

SC MB Sprinter plant is doing vans only, not cab chassis. Ours will still come from Germany, Argentina.

The increased GVWR is a different chassis (4500) that costs more money and comes at a reduced curb weight. So to get the increased GVWR, you have to build a lighter chassis. Well....duh, if we could do that, we would have. It really only helps if you build a B-van.

The new safety features do cross over. They make it very difficult to use your own radio, but to use their radio it has all these packages involved...which of course some are safety related and will be good. All of that will add anywhere from $5000 to $8000 to the price of the vehicle.

Thanks for the response.
I got my info from two sources. An RV manufacturer rep at a show near me told me they were already tooling up for floorplan changes with the new 2019 MBS. He also stated they were getting them from the South Carolina assembly plant. This is for a Class C, not B, I made certain to clarify.
The info I got on the 3500 was from articles written on the new 2019 MBS, there was a mention of a 4500 however it was for fleet, not cut-away.

I know you would know the straight story from MB.
I will make another comment about the whole MB import thing; it sure seems stupid to send cut-away straight from Germany when it should be the easiest to send knock-down to SC.

Thanks again for the information. I really want my next RV to be on a MB Sprinter but I can't go with the current weight limits and the impact it places on limited floorplans.

[bclemens]

1. the rep may not have any "real" information. i also assumed the plant in SC would help us out and asked MB directly. The plan now is just for Van's. Its could change, but that is the plan or now.

2. We do need to tool up changes as they are doing away with the low roof that we use and are only going to do a "high" roof.

[bgilly]

Originally Posted by bclemens

1. the rep may not have any "real" information. i also assumed the plant in SC would help us out and asked MB directly. The plan now is just for Van's. Its could change, but that is the plan or now.

2. We do need to tool up changes as they are doing away with the low roof that we use and are only going to do a "high" roof.

He was a factory rep from a different RV OEM. I believe you - the other guy, not so much.

So, do you know if you will be still building on the 3500 with the 11030 GVWR? Everything I'm reading is mixing fleet in the marketing - like MBS is working on getting a foothold in some of the Ford Transit applications with utility fleet body.
On the other foot, seems more RV OEMs' are backing away from any further building on the Ford Transit.

I did read about the changes in the high roof van body; I didn't consider it would impact cut-away. I guess when you raise the top you change doors and windshield too. I also read about the lower ground clearance to improve center balance.
I guess in 8 months or so we will really see what transitions in the Class C RV. Just gotta have the patience and wait..........

[Mikemdd]

Originally Posted by bclemens

They have always had this. In high winds it just puts them in limp mode.

My understanding is that only the 2500 chassis has the high wind stability system, not the 3500. Have never heard of anyone with the Isata 3 seeing this feature.

[bclemens]

I had a rental dealer back in 2010-ish, that hated this feature. He would roll through the plains heading back to OR and always with high winds. Put him at a max speed of 35mph.

[caswelld]

My eyes just glassed over! Ya gotta splane it to me

The world's authority, Wikipedia, defines "Curb Weight" as: :Standard equipment and hardpoints, all necessary operating consumables such as motor oil, transmission oil, coolant, air conditioning refrigerant, and sometimes a full tank of fuel, while not loaded with either passengers, cargo, and/or weaponry."

So if curb weight, i.e. the weight of the chassis is decreased, why doesn't that allow for more cargo, that is, the house Dynamax builds on top of the chassis, and all the stuff I can load on it?

Why doesn't lower curb weight translate into more OCCC?

[bclemens]

Originally Posted by caswelld

My eyes just glassed over! Ya gotta splane it to me

The world's authority, Wikipedia, defines "Curb Weight" as: :Standard equipment and hardpoints, all necessary operating consumables such as motor oil, transmission oil, coolant, air conditioning refrigerant, and sometimes a full tank of fuel, while not loaded with either passengers, cargo, and/or weaponry."

So if curb weight, i.e. the weight of the chassis is decreased, why doesn't that allow for more cargo, that is, the house Dynamax builds on top of the chassis, and all the stuff I can load on it?

Why doesn't lower curb weight translate into more OCCC?

It does translate to more CCC. The issue is...the curb weight on the 12k Sprinter 4500 chassis is lower than on the 11k Sprinter 3500.

So...let me round this numbers to keep it simple.

11k Sprinter has a curb weight of 10k. Which means we can build it to 10k, you end up with 1k of CCC.

The 12k Sprinter has a curb weight of 9k. So I can buy this chassis for $3000 more...but I can only build it to 9k, which leaves you 3k of CCC.

Well, if I had that weight savings on the 11k...why would I not just build it to 9k and give you 2k of CCC and save the money.

None of it makes any sense.

If it made sense, the curb weight would be the same on BOTH.

So whether it is 11k or 12k chassis, the allowable curb weight is 10k. So for that extra $3000 I can get you an extra 1k of CCC.

[Nknussman]

Originally Posted by bclemens

It does translate to more CCC. The issue is...the curb weight on the 12k Sprinter 4500 chassis is lower than on the 11k Sprinter 3500.

So...let me round this numbers to keep it simple.

11k Sprinter has a curb weight of 10k. Which means we can build it to 10k, you end up with 1k of CCC.

The 12k Sprinter has a curb weight of 9k. So I can buy this chassis for $3000 more...but I can only build it to 9k, which leaves you 3k of CCC.

Well, if I had that weight savings on the 11k...why would I not just build it to 9k and give you 2k of CCC and save the money.

None of it makes any sense.

If it made sense, the curb weight would be the same on BOTH.

So whether it is 11k or 12k chassis, the allowable curb weight is 10k. So for that extra $3000 I can get you an extra 1k of CCC.

Brian,

Who sets the C class RV curb weight definition and limits? Government regulators, chassis OEM, RV OEM or other? I assume the definition is standard equipment, no options?


I agree a reducing the curb weight limit on a vehicle with an increased GVWR makes no sense. Something is awry.



Thanks,


Mike

[bclemens]

The auto maker sets the curb weight....but they set that based on a number of different factors.
1. braking ability (can they meet DOT requirements for braking safety)
2. Transmission ability. Can the transmission handle the weight they are asking it to pull.
3. Emissions...and this is the one that seems to trip people up. Braking and transmission can be engineered based on historical values...they have a pretty good track record. Emissions due to CARB regulations is a moving target. Obama's fuel economy regulations have caused a lot of what you see going on. While the automotive industry has done a lot to improve emissions...frankly, people don't want electric cars. They want big, safe SUV'sto haul their family. So in some cases, an automaker (I believe) to meet an emissions rating, will lower the curb weight so that it will pass testing. Lighter the unit, the better the fuel economy the lower the emissions.

They have to meet "average" fuel economy. They can continue to make more efficient cars....but with more people buying trucks and SUV's posts recession, it gets tougher.

[Nknussman]

Originally Posted by bclemens

The auto maker sets the curb weight....but they set that based on a number of different factors.
1. braking ability (can they meet DOT requirements for braking safety)
2. Transmission ability. Can the transmission handle the weight they are asking it to pull.
3. Emissions...and this is the one that seems to trip people up. Braking and transmission can be engineered based on historical values...they have a pretty good track record. Emissions due to CARB regulations is a moving target. Obama's fuel economy regulations have caused a lot of what you see going on. While the automotive industry has done a lot to improve emissions...frankly, people don't want electric cars. They want big, safe SUV'sto haul their family. So in some cases, an automaker (I believe) to meet an emissions rating, will lower the curb weight so that it will pass testing. Lighter the unit, the better the fuel economy the lower the emissions.

They have to meet "average" fuel economy. They can continue to make more efficient cars....but with more people buying trucks and SUV's posts recession, it gets tougher.

Brian,
Perhaps this Sprinter with 9K curb weight/12.5K GVWR suits work and utility vehicles and fuel economy for such.
Do you believe MB will offer a cab chassis with similar GVWR that works for C class RV (curb weight~10K). If so when?

[bclemens]

your guess is as good as mine.