Introduction
Aftermarket conversions come in all shapes and sizes, but the Volkswagen Transporter Razorback takes things a little bit further than your average mobile workshop or Truckman bolt-on body. This van, with backing and full guarantees from Volkswagen, is the only vehicle we know of with a load bay that lowers to the ground.
You probably already know this but it bears repetition, because this is a truly innovative design offering a number of operational advantages – the sort of idea that makes you take a couple of steps back and say to yourself: “Why didn’t I think of that?”.
Product Profile
Put the Razorback next to an unadapted neighbour from the Transporter range and the resemblance is there. But its muscle-bound haunches mark it out as the mean-looking member of the family; an image helped by the blackened rear window, striking logo and street ninja-style name.
The major changes are all behind the cab. Diagonal trailing arm suspension is whipped out and replaced by independent, coil-sprung trailing arms with gas filled shocks. The exhaust is lopped off after the first box and a redesigned system is bolted on, complete with catalytic converter and gas re-circulation, which emerges halfway down the loadbay on the driver’s side.
U-section chassis rails are retained for rigidity and house the split handbrake cable that runs either side of the body before meeting at a T-bar equaliser at the back. Cross-members are removed and the hydraulically powered steel loadbay installed that is the whole point of this conversion. The hydraulics run off the standard VW battery; automatic transmission fluid is pumped through four cylinders to ensure even lowering (patent applications are pending).
This set-up is mounted behind one of two lockable panels on the sides of the van which add to the girth and give the Razorback the hunched look of a bare-knuckle fighter.
The other panel, on the passenger side, houses the spare wheel which is removed from its traditional home underneath at the back, while a loadbed-position warning light and alarm are wired up to the cab. Other than these changes, and some heavier-duty parts including pivot and wheel bearings, the van uses the standard kit that comes with the chassis-cab, from gear ratios to brakes.
The Razorback is offered in high-roof, standard-roof and pickup variants with three engine choices – a 2.5-litre petrol and two 2.5-litre diesels, both turbocharged and one charge-cooled to boot.
Power ranges from 88hp at 3,600rpm for the standard diesel to 102hp at 3,500rpm for the charge-cooled version and 114hp at 4,500rpm for the petrol model. Torque is 195Nm for the less powerful diesel and 250Nm for the top baby, both spread between 1,900 and 2,500rpm, while the petrol can deliver up to 200Nm at 2,200rpm.
All in all, the Razorback conversion costs £5,736 over the price of a chassis-cab. A similar payload Vito costs around £5,000 less while the hefty Transit 150 we tested recently is £3,000 lighter on the pocket.
Productivity
Eye-catching is an adjective that is easily and two frequently bandied about. But when the driver of a (hardly inconspicuous) Ford Transit Flareside almost rear-ends a Citroën Saxo as he stares wide-eyed and slack-jawed at the Razorback, it makes you realise you’re driving something different.
When we took it to our friendly local Harley-Davidson dealership to demonstrate its virtues and borrow one of their beasts we were waylaid by admiring passers-by. We even gave a pair of print work owners and prospective customers Razorback’s phone number (we wouldn’t object to a 10% finder’s fee on that scale). This kind of attention may eat into your turnaround times.
So what did the Harley-Davidson dealer think of the Razorback? Once the initial shock and disbelief had warn off the response was, well, unambiguous. “****ing cool,” said the main man, nodding his head in approval, “but it could do with being a lot bigger.” A bog-standard Transit, he pointed out, will take two of his beasts side by side rather than the lonely one we wheeled in.
The Razorback is a little like a Tardis in reverse: smaller on the inside than it looks on the outside. But how much smaller?
Razorback claims it’s wider than a normal van in the places that matters, between the wheelarches. Because the wheelarches are outside the loadbay area the Razorback offers 60mm more than its standard sibling down the length of the loadbay. It is 340mm narrower than a standard Transporter at its widest point, but the Razorback team say this space is rarely used.
Its 85mm higher than standard, at 1,500mm, but also 370mm shorter, which means the van has an overall load space of 3.3m2 (down by 1.3m2), and it loses 1.5m3 in volume, with 4.8m3 to fill. However, this volume is the same as the admittedly smaller Vito, and not too far behind the Transit.
A carrying capacity of well-nigh a tonne (925kG including CM’s standard-issue 75kg driver) brings the Razorback to a very important benchmark. Cynics might predict that with all the gadgets and adaptions the van would be a few kilos short of a decent load, but it clearly isn’t.
And it’s undeniably useful. Rolling a bike on, or a fridge or a couple of pallets, is easy. The hydraulics never complain and it’s a matter of minutes before you’re off again. Razorback lists an A to Z of uses from “amusements and leisure” (fruit machines) to “zinc and alloy product movers” (X is for X-ray apparatus). And it is true that many more businesses than motorcycle retailers could find a genuine use for it.
Mind you, with the floor on the ground it can be difficult to judge if you will have enough headroom as you raise the bed. A kind of Plimsoll line on the side of the load bay would be handy to help judge this (and could easily be added with a marker pen).
The Razorback has a beefy 3,300kg GVW, compared with the standard Transporter’s 2,800kg, so you might expect fuel consumption to suffer. In fact it was a little better than the last equivalent-engined version we drove, giving us 32.5mpg (8.7lit/100km).
