Sprinter 3500 Deck
- Thread starter Big Al
- Start date
I don't have that however I've heard of a shop that modifies the wheelwells to allow a skid to pass between. I believe that's only possible on the older generation units but don't know for sure. I believe the shop is somewhere in PA but can't remember as it's been a long time since I heard about it. Good luck.
I wonder, is adding the extra weight and shortening your available height worth gaining the extra width? I guess it depends on the type of freight your carrier offers you the most.
The extra weight of building a sturdy enough platform cancels out much of the gain in weight carrying capacity. The added width is not enough to carry two skids side-by-side so you will not add any capacity to carry extra skids. You will gain the ability to carry some wider single pieces but is that worth sarificing the ability of carry taller pieces?
The extra weight of building a sturdy enough platform cancels out much of the gain in weight carrying capacity. The added width is not enough to carry two skids side-by-side so you will not add any capacity to carry extra skids. You will gain the ability to carry some wider single pieces but is that worth sarificing the ability of carry taller pieces?
Jack_Berry
Moderator Emeritus
what year sprinter?
like leo said, the older 3500s had the wheel housing shortened to what looked about 2-3 inches off the floor which would be a reasonable height for a deck and not lose much height. i think the first gen used smalled diameter tires than the 2nd gen. to deck the 2nd gen is asking for center of gravity problems and potential to launch the freight thru a side wall on some exit ramps.
lets just say you did this. how high would the deck be off the factory floor and what is left of your height?
like leo said, the older 3500s had the wheel housing shortened to what looked about 2-3 inches off the floor which would be a reasonable height for a deck and not lose much height. i think the first gen used smalled diameter tires than the 2nd gen. to deck the 2nd gen is asking for center of gravity problems and potential to launch the freight thru a side wall on some exit ramps.
lets just say you did this. how high would the deck be off the factory floor and what is left of your height?
And the new 3500's gross out at 11,000 now I believe..
Log territory! Not good at a cargo van rate....
The deck you would lose the ability to double stack some automotive bins...hence lost load opportunities....
The idea is to improve your odds of getting loads...not to diminish them...forget the weight idea..weight costs money to run in added maintenance, stick with volume.
Log territory! Not good at a cargo van rate....
The deck you would lose the ability to double stack some automotive bins...hence lost load opportunities....
The idea is to improve your odds of getting loads...not to diminish them...forget the weight idea..weight costs money to run in added maintenance, stick with volume.
Last edited:
greg334
Veteran Expediter
The rise needed if I remember right is about 11 inches.
The one issue that hasn't been asked is how much is a conversion worth to the owner? I know of a few who can do the work but it isn't cheap.
I believe the problem and the reason for a deck is the distance between the wheelwells is only about 38-39 inches so a skid won't go between them thereby making the 3500 useless for an awful lot of freight. The modification I mentioned gives about a 48.5" gap so a skid will just fit as long as nothing hangs over the sides. The 3500 with the 9990 GVW is excellent as far as capacity and capability with the exception of usable floor width. Get a wide enough floor area and that raises the floor high enough to ruin the CG and a lot of the cargo height advantage of the unit. Modifying the wheel wells seems the only really good option and only on the first gen unit.
Close Greg..at least in my 05...takes 2 empty pallets to be able to clear the wells..so about 9"...Did this once to take a STRAIGHT truck load @ STRAIGHT rate!!
Took a 56" wide crate...used 4 empty pallets end to end and set crate on top...
Opps...I just measured..I stand corrected...closer to 11" you are correct Greg...
Last edited:
2010 170" WB ext 3500 gvwr is 9990. 2500 170" wb ext is 8550 gvwr. If you install a 12" deck you go from a 76.4 "
interior height to 64.4" height for the back 150" )where the length of the deck. Remaining 35" would remain 76.4"
Maybe I am wrong but that seems to give you about 1440 lb payload gain over the 2500 gain with still a height that still 12" plus higher than a regular van.
Also I believe that the stability of a dually would be more stable than a single. My problem is that I want to mount a RV air conditioner,golf cart batteries,refrigerator,generator,etc. By the time I add this I won't be able to have a 2500 lb payload.
I was thinking of using a steel framework with rivets to the body with plywood on top and inlay the e track on top of that. If necessary I could go through the deck with hanger attached to the frame i.e. the same way a pickup attaches a 5th wheel hitch.
Costs would not be that great because of my own abilities and a friend in the RV business. I have considered using a cutaway chasis with a cube box; however, this seems to me as less stable because of a higher center of gravity.
Really like our creature comforts as a team. Quite a few Class C RV's are using this floorplan.
Big Al
interior height to 64.4" height for the back 150" )where the length of the deck. Remaining 35" would remain 76.4"
Maybe I am wrong but that seems to give you about 1440 lb payload gain over the 2500 gain with still a height that still 12" plus higher than a regular van.
Also I believe that the stability of a dually would be more stable than a single. My problem is that I want to mount a RV air conditioner,golf cart batteries,refrigerator,generator,etc. By the time I add this I won't be able to have a 2500 lb payload.
I was thinking of using a steel framework with rivets to the body with plywood on top and inlay the e track on top of that. If necessary I could go through the deck with hanger attached to the frame i.e. the same way a pickup attaches a 5th wheel hitch.
Costs would not be that great because of my own abilities and a friend in the RV business. I have considered using a cutaway chasis with a cube box; however, this seems to me as less stable because of a higher center of gravity.
Really like our creature comforts as a team. Quite a few Class C RV's are using this floorplan.
Big Al
greg334
Veteran Expediter
OK I see what you want but why? The wheel well width is the same for all Sprinters - they heard the complaints and had Mercedes Engineers figure out that the American Pallet is different from the EU standard pallet after studying the different sizes for a year.
But the 170 curb weight is what?
Why is so many people looking at stablity?
Duallies are not there for a stable platform, they are there because of a safety issue with tires. You can mount the RV A/C unit, not a problem, but if you put batteries on top, then there is the issue. Being on the floor with the lower than normal CG will not raise the CG but actually keep it a bit lower.
I was thinking of using a steel framework with rivets to the body with plywood on top and inlay the e track on top of that. If necessary I could go through the deck with hanger attached to the frame i.e. the same way a pickup attaches a 5th wheel hitch.
Costs would not be that great because of my own abilities and a friend in the RV business. I have considered using a cutaway chasis with a cube box; however, this seems to me as less stable because of a higher center of gravity.
Really like our creature comforts as a team. Quite a few Class C RV's are using this floorplan.
Big Al
I would seriously consider the box on the sprinter chassis if you like that idea, there is no problems with stability with that configuration. The problem would be setting freight with heavy items on top and then taking corners at high speeds.
I concur that the main reason for duallies is for the tires but if you've ever towed a tag along traler with a dually vs a regular, you'll see a vast difference in stabilty. This is really different with a 5th wheel.
I wish Sprinter would have done like the old Dodge duallies where they added a tire to the outside and put small fender to cover instead of putting it to the inside.
Curb weight of the 3500 is6196 lbs, payload 3794 lbs. 2500 5678 lbs with a payload 2872 lbs.
Maybe it's just me but the cubes seem higher and the price would be greater than putting a deck in. This may be the way to go but it'll also be heavier and that's going to decrease payload.
Big Al
I wish Sprinter would have done like the old Dodge duallies where they added a tire to the outside and put small fender to cover instead of putting it to the inside.
Curb weight of the 3500 is6196 lbs, payload 3794 lbs. 2500 5678 lbs with a payload 2872 lbs.
Maybe it's just me but the cubes seem higher and the price would be greater than putting a deck in. This may be the way to go but it'll also be heavier and that's going to decrease payload.
Big Al
There ya ll go with that weight thing again...
Since you all ignored my post about weight being over rated...
Weight is a killer in a sprinter...I am not saying the weight shouldn't be consider...most of our loads are Height!! Then volume and weight last...
Weight will increase your wear and tear..for which no carrier re-imburses for any extra weight.
Since you all ignored my post about weight being over rated...
Weight is a killer in a sprinter...I am not saying the weight shouldn't be consider...most of our loads are Height!! Then volume and weight last...
Weight will increase your wear and tear..for which no carrier re-imburses for any extra weight.
Between the wheel wells
2500 - 53.1 inches
3500 - 38.5 inches
Mercedes-Benz Sprinter: Cargo Van Specifications
There is a wide single rear tire variant available in Europe that has the wide load width but has the 3500 rear axle.
Last edited:
Really good point. I had no idea that height was such a big factor. Thanks.
I guess the Sprinter motor is little light with the extra weight? I am used to a powerstroke so weight never been a problem. I thought the new 3.0 V-6 would be a little stronger.
What % of loads do you get that need a full height inside.
I guess I could get by with less than 872 lbs add on. That would still give me a 2000 lb payload, would this be ok with most loads or is it a little light.
Big Al
I really appreciate all of your inputs!!!
I guess the Sprinter motor is little light with the extra weight? I am used to a powerstroke so weight never been a problem. I thought the new 3.0 V-6 would be a little stronger.
What % of loads do you get that need a full height inside.
I guess I could get by with less than 872 lbs add on. That would still give me a 2000 lb payload, would this be ok with most loads or is it a little light.
Big Al
I really appreciate all of your inputs!!!
Double stacked auto bins are around 64-66 in. range...
I'll run up to 2500lbs but that legally is just over the limit...
I've found without the shock upgrade it gets spongy handling at the 2700-2900 mark. It doesn't set down like a CV does.
Majority of loads are between 50 & 60 in.
Also if you have 2 medium size skids if you can you can stack them and not have to go thru the trouble at delivery to drag the 2nd on off...Personally I like the wiggle room to manuever the load with the space.
After all we have to leave some loads for the straights...they are a whiney bunch ya know...
I'll run up to 2500lbs but that legally is just over the limit...
I've found without the shock upgrade it gets spongy handling at the 2700-2900 mark. It doesn't set down like a CV does.
Majority of loads are between 50 & 60 in.
Also if you have 2 medium size skids if you can you can stack them and not have to go thru the trouble at delivery to drag the 2nd on off...Personally I like the wiggle room to manuever the load with the space.
After all we have to leave some loads for the straights...they are a whiney bunch ya know...
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Hey the 2009 body builders manual and the chassis engineering manual both list the width as 53" for the 3500 - the same as the 2500. Sent an email to MB to tell them about the error - thanks Piper.
SO back to what I asked before - you got a 3500, how much would you pay to get the changes made to the body to haul a standard pallet?
I guess I am trying to get the best of all worlds,space for max loads,comfortable sleeping quarters & still stay under 10,000 gvwr.Hey the 2009 body builders manual and the chassis engineering manual both list the width as 53" for the 3500 - the same as the 2500. Sent an email to MB to tell them about the error - thanks Piper.
I would guess about $500-700 if I did the work myself.
But after considering OntarioVan Mans comments about height I guess I'll go with the 2500
Years ago I thought a C Unit might be best for us; however there doesn't seem to be any on the market. At least with a 96" sleeper (approx) and about a 12-14' box. Of course there we run into weight problems because with a CDL class C we would have to stay under 26K. If you buy new I guess we're talking about 80-85K$.
We would like this as a business and we have over 5 years of experience. All profit after expenses would go to help with Missionary Work.
Big Al