Could this be a good base?

[Muggnz]

I'm thinking about buying a Campomatic, such as

http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q135 ... atic1s.jpg
http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q135 ... atic2s.jpg
http://s135.photobucket.com/albums/q135 ... atic5s.jpg

Stripping the bits I don't need to build a TD & selling them to help pay for the important bits. So that all that's left of it would be the metal frame. The tyres & wheels will also go as they're only 10".

I can't recall exactly what the underside is, but think it's 1" square metal tube, like the rediish uprights in the last photo. Other than adding diagonal bracing to the tongue. I'm hoping that I'll only have to move & replace the wheels & suspension. Or perhaps remove the rear portion of the frame to bring it to within the size limits of our plywood. Which is 1200x2400.

The length of the body is around 2 meters ( roughly 6' 6" ) And is about 1.7 meters ( 5' 6" ) wide.

Does 1" square tubing sound strong enough for a TD?

Bearing in mind that these were built in the early '70's & will at the very least need minor rust eradication.

TIA
David

[Geron]

howdy David,

Photos don't show. If you have an URL don't bracket it with the Img brackets.

The url itself should take us to the picture.

something like this:
go to image you want to post
right click on image
select copy image location
paste image location url in the body of the message.

I think that's right. I'll be corrected if I'm wrong

Get'em to work. I want to see what you got.

g

[JunkMan]

David,

Without seeing the underside, it's hard to say if it will work or not. I recently scrapped out a Coleman camper that was similar to that one, and when I got down to the basic frame, there wasn't much there! The sheet metal sides gave it most of it's strength, and the actual frame was very thin steel, which was cracked in several places. After I was finished, all that I had left that I could use was the axel, springs, and toungue. Unless the trailer is free (or darn close to it), it may not be worth the trouble.

[angib]

It does look like the 'frame' might be an integral part of the body structure and separating the two might be hard.

Also it looks like the axle is mounted under the springs which appear tall - if you want a teardrop with lots of ground clearance that would be ideal, particularly if you're going to put bigger wheels on. But if you want to tow it behind a car, starting with a frame 600mm off the ground isn't helpful.

Andrew

[Muggnz]

Andrew,

Can you clarify what you're referring as the frame? Is it the metal 1x1 uprights? Or the wooden floor? Or the fibreglass sides? or ???

I'd probably keep the metal framework, except for cutting access for doors.

The floor might me structural or not. Either way I'm sure that modern structural grade plywood would be stronger that from 30 years ago. So aren't overly worried about that. As long as the metal underneath hasn't rusted away.

I'm not sure I'd get rid of the fibreglass sides, but probably will as they'd not look nice with the woodie look I like.

I see what you mean about the floor being 600 off ground level ( took me a while, but I got there ). That will be changing, when I put standard Toyota wheels on it. With new suspension to lower the floor level. And internal wheel arches.


Junkman,

I'm hoping that the trailer will be mostly free after I sell off the bits I don't need. Which is the canvas, that can be seen & an attached side piece. Which will be easy to sell in spring.

As long as the metal frame under the floor is sound & free of major rust problems, it will be significantly cheaper that getting a new frame made. Although I'm going to look at that option also. It'd certainly be more fun & last longer.

thanks
David

[angib]

My suspicion - and it's not much more than a guess, really, from looking at the photos - is that there will be some 1" tubing at floor level just like the tubing visible at the top of the side panels. I think anyone building half the frame in 1" tubing is more than likely to use it for the rest. So I would expect that you've got nearly a unibody/monocoque structure - cut the top level of tubing off and a lot of the strength disappears.

But I stress, this is just guessing, without seeing a photo of the underneath.

The strength of the floor is pretty much irrelevant - all it does is stop people from dropping out the bottom, so if it does that, it's a keeper.

Is this a dumb question: when you've cut off most of the body, half the frame, put on new Toyota wheels and replaced the suspension, isn't all you've got left of the original trailer the rear lights, one metre of tubing and the license plate?

I've no idea what level of testing a new trailer has to meet (though we do get a Kiwi traffic police series here and surely the answer has to be 'very little'?), but my gut feel is that it's worth thinking about whether it would be easier to start from scratch.

Andrew

[Muggnz]

I agree that the frame under the floor is likely to be 1" tube. I only wish I'd taken a picture to prove it.

I wouldn't cut the metal uprights off, except for cutting a gap for the door. I like the idea of the extra strength they'd give to the frame. Although I'd probably add 45degree braces to the cutout area to add strength.

After thinking about it. I doubt that I'd have to cut any of the floor level tubing, to match the length of our plywood. Leaving the only portion to be destroyed, the door cutouts & wheel mounts.

There's no such thing as a dumb question. Only dumb answers. Which hopefully I can avoid. With the above info.

I also have no ( almost no ) idea what the legal testing requirements are for new trailers. It does seem like "very little". There's info on their www site. Unfortunately it's not as all encompassing as it could be. EG I don't know how wide a trailer can be, before I have to use extension mirrors on my car. Heck, I think that initially, with just the metal frame & tyres in place I can probably run it legally without lights.

It may well be easier to start from scratch. At the moment I can't decide where to start. With the Campomatic method, seemingly cheaper & quicker. And the scratch method easier, longer lasting & more aligned with my requirements.

Either way I DO WANT a Wood exterior.

[Alphacarina]

It may well be easier to start from scratch. At the moment I can't decide where to start. With the Campomatic method, seemingly cheaper & quicker. And the scratch method easier, longer lasting & more aligned with my requirements

While it may or may not be 'easier' it would almost certainly be better for your needs . . . . and it may even be cheaper in the long run, depending on how much you were going to invest in the old camper and what you'll wind up adding to it to make it safe - Could be all you'll really be getting is an undersized 1 inch tube, a tongue (maybe too lightweight as well) and a set of tail lights as Andrew says - Building from scratch with the proper materials might not cost much more than adding on to the 'frame' from the camper . . . . assuming it actually has a usable frame

It looks like a pretty lightweight unit - I wouldn't even consider using it if my build was going to wind up significantly heavier than that original camper. They really skimp and save weight anywhere they can when building those ultra-lightweight units and just replacing the wheels with something heavier duty doesn't mean what you have left is still capable of supporting a much heavier unit

Don

[Muggnz]

Don, thanks for the advice. I hadn't realized that 1" tube probably wouldn't be strong enough. Whilst I like the lightweight idea, I'm not that keen it.

The pendulum swung in favour of the build it from scratch option at lunch.

When I discovered a friend with a gas welder. I didn't get a chance to ask if it was oxy/acetylene or MIG etc. So I hoping that I can either get him to do the welding, or borrow the gear.