Daydreaming- RV [Archive] - The Paceline Forum

Spicoli

08-26-2009, 07:44 PM

WadePatton

08-26-2009, 10:43 PM

i want one for racing. but i'm still young enough to tent it. but rides/trails 'round the country would be better with a hardshell. something like 3000 counties in this u.s.--ride 'em all.

other things in the way for now.

johnnymossville

08-27-2009, 07:40 AM

csm

08-27-2009, 07:49 AM

we did a week in a vw eurovan pop-up this summer. drove to Niagara Falls and then along Lake Ontario into the Adirondacks. It was a great! My 9 yo and I load our mountain bikes into it and take off for weekends too. already talking about what we're gonna do next yr.

c-record

08-27-2009, 08:50 AM

It'll be a while before it happens but I would love to be able to get one and use it. National parks, ride everywhere we go etc. I guess deals are to be had? Good luck and take lots of pics!

RPS

08-27-2009, 09:33 AM

I've always harbored the secret dream and buying an RV, packing the road and mountain bikes and literally seeing the country from the vantage of a bike saddle. Anyone here into the RV thing with the prime purpose of cycling? No kids, semi-retirment on the 2 year horizon and the mrs. is all for it.
I wouldn�t say �prime� reason but I normally take at least one bike with me when I go camping.

My wife and I had a Class C we bought when it was about 18-months old (they depreciate very fast) and made a lot of great trips with it. Before heading out I had a contractor make me a stainless steel bike rack to attach to the rear bumper which could haul a couple of bikes or a tandem. Riding our tandem in Zion still remains a great cycling memory � can�t wait to do it again. Beautiful views, smooth road closed to traffic, perfect silence early in the morning except for stream flowing, wild animals out, etc� I definitely knew I wasn�t in the Houston area. :rolleyes: After owning it for a few years we sold it and got most of the cost back (were very lucky with timing).

We loved it enough that we�ve talked about getting a larger unit to travel the US for a few years as full timers after retirement, but we are taking a wait and see attitude with planning due to uncertainty of fuel cost and availability. For now we travel in our travel/camper van which is great for short trips of up to a week and when needed we rent and pull a camper trailer of appropriate size for the trip. The smaller van saves a lot on gas and makes driving long distances easier.

Even with the van we normally take bikes � whether going to the nearby Texas Hill Country or out west. When we returned to Zion on the way to Interbike a couple of years ago we got to ride our beater bikes from the camp ground down the canyon and back. Still a great ride but the tandem was more fun.

If you can pull it off I'd go for it. And if in doubt whether you will like it rent and try it first � that�s how we got started. :beer:

false_Aest

08-27-2009, 10:09 AM

Hrm,

I just put plywood across the back of my pick-up and slept there as I drove across the country.

This is probably why I'm single.

Ken Robb

08-27-2009, 10:15 AM

William

08-27-2009, 10:32 AM

Too bad VW quit selling these in the U.S. I would consider an MV Weekender for sure.

http://images.thesamba.com/vw/classifieds/pix/2211357.jpg

William

csm

08-27-2009, 10:48 AM

Too bad VW quit selling these in the U.S. I would consider an MV Weekender for sure.

http://images.thesamba.com/vw/classifieds/pix/2211357.jpg

William

Last I checked they still make them for other markets. I have the full-on camper version with the stove (rarely use), sink (ditto), furnace (made sure it worked...) and fridge (keeps beer cold) and averaged 22 mpg during our trip thru NY. there was an updated model that someone in Canada made as a prototype but not sure if it ever saw the production light of day.

here's a link I found....
http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/11/17/eco-camper-by-verdier/

RPS

08-27-2009, 11:01 AM

I borrowed a new class A for a couple of weeks and I had a good time over all but----there were very few places where I could park a rig that big and I never found a place where I was allowed to just park for the night. At 7mpg and $30 a night for camping it cost more than driving a nice car and staying in modest motels. Most commercial campsites are crowded noisy places where you will "enjoy" the smoke and aromas of your neighbors cooking. Our best/roomiest campsites were in state parks.

I still think it would be fun to have a small camper with bikes inside to drive to our local beaches and mountains for day trips. It's the only way I can afford an oceanfront home. :)
Ken, that's why I recommend renting first because one never knows exactly how you will end up using the RV or what you will like about the camping and traveling lifestyle. I agree with you that if cost is an important part of it and you plan to drive a large RV a lot that it�s less expensive to drive a car or minivan and stay in nice hotels.

Our Class C was only about 23 or 24 feet long and 8 feet wide, so we could park it in most normal parking lots by backing in with the long overhang over the curb. This wasn�t a normal occurrence unless we stopped at a restaurant or shopping center to restock the unit. For me it wasn�t a big issue but it did make me aware of the limitation.

What we learned about our traveling habits was that we didn�t end up staying in one place very long (normally more than one night) because we had to �travel� to distance locations to see what we wanted. This meant we spent a lot of time driving and sightseeing and much less time camping (i.e. � sleeping in the RV). For this type of use I found our relatively small Class C RV quite wasteful � only got about 7 or 8 MPG.

The other thing we learned was that having to park the RV offsite (campers not allowed at home by restriction) was quite an inconvenience and limited how much we used it. Simple things like cleaning it, servicing it, etc� became a PITA. The larger unit could also not be used as a second or third car. For these reasons we decided to try downsizing to a camper van with enough power to pull a trailer when needed. That way we can park it at home, park it anywhere a car can be during a trip, have it serviced at normal dealers/repair facilities, etc�.

Basically we learned as in the 80/20 rule that we can get 80% of the camping/traveling experience with 20% of the inconvenience and complexity of dedicated large RVs. Not enough size to live as a full timer but great for sightseeing and cycling trips.

RPS

08-27-2009, 11:04 AM

Hrm,

I just put plywood across the back of my pick-up and slept there as I drove across the country.

This is probably why I'm single.
If you are a do-it-yourselfer, have tools, and know what you want, try building something more permanent. It can be as much fun as camping itself. :beer:

Matt-H

08-27-2009, 11:36 AM

but I think this modern concept of the VW camper van is pretty cool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_knx10qDUM

PaMtbRider

08-27-2009, 06:28 PM

My wife and I dream of one of these www.sportsmobile.com We would love a custom van on a Sprinter chassis. After getting eaten alive by mosquitos last week while tent camping with our bikes in Massachusetts we are considering a small travel trailer for now. We live close to Hershey, Pa. and are planning on going to the huge RV show they have in a few weeks. Unfortunately my employer is considering closing the factory that I work at, so large purchases are on hold until I know my employment status.

csm

08-27-2009, 08:16 PM

I did the Hershey RV show. It was overwhelming. neat tho. I live on the other side of the river.

Tobias

08-27-2009, 09:16 PM

Hrm,

I just put plywood across the back of my pick-up and slept there as I drove across the country.

This is probably why I'm single.
Imagine the ladies not wanting to sleep under the stars. Who would have thought? :rolleyes:

FWIW, I have a lady friend who is an avid cyclist that owns a midsize truck with a fiberglass shell over the bed, and she built a simple 2 by 6 foot platform over one of the wheel wells to support a camping mattress. Underneath she places her cycling shoes, helmet, tools, a small heater, and small duffle bags. She hauls her bike next to the platform and removes it at night to give her more room inside. It�s small and rudimentary but works well for one person to sleep or sit while protected from the weather.

Before that she used a tent but got tired of having to set it up and take it down, plus the occasional getting wet.

Tobias

08-27-2009, 09:34 PM

My wife and I dream of one of these www.sportsmobile.com We would love a custom van on a Sprinter chassis.
Those are really nice, especially a custom mini toy hauler configured to carry bikes. And who would have thought you could get a van that is 24 feet long and tall enough to stand with plenty of headroom to spare. I remember reading about classic Winnebago motorhomes from the 50s and 60s that weren�t even that long.

The cost is kind of high though; at more than $70K it makes it a luxury for sure. I doubt camping in one of these to save money compared to hotels can be justified. It�s got to be for those who enjoy camping.

Louis

08-27-2009, 10:10 PM

driving a nice car and staying in modest motels

I've always thought that this is the most reasonable / efficient approach. If you want to wake up with the sun & the birds every now and then some hiking / tenting is easy to add in and much more "out in nature" than a campsite with 40 other RV's in the same congested area. No huge up-front cost, and much greater flexibility.

Ti-Boy

08-28-2009, 04:12 AM

Thanks to all for the replies. Seems to come down to fantasy vs. reality. If it rains, I'll hit the Hershey show. If it doesn't rain, I'll ride. Perhaps I'll rent an RV for a trip down to the Blueridge Pkw and Pisgah in October.

billrick

08-28-2009, 08:37 AM

Westy meets the Element. I'd prefer to have this on an Odyssey, but this is the set up I'll be looking at when my boys are old enough for cycling/fly-fishing/camping trips:

http://www.autoblog.com/gallery/ursa-minor-ecamper-1/#2

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/02/640grayopen.jpg

:)

RPS

08-28-2009, 10:10 AM

I've always thought that this is the most reasonable / efficient approach. If you want to wake up with the sun & the birds every now and then some hiking / tenting is easy to add in and much more "out in nature" than a campsite with 40 other RV's in the same congested area. No huge up-front cost, and much greater flexibility.
You are introducing logic again where it doesn't apply. ;)

IMO small fuel-efficient class Bs (i.e. -- van based) are not that unreasonable a compromise between efficiency, comfort, and capability for two adults (plus maybe two small children).

Small units based on Mercedes Sprinters can get 20 to 22 MPG on the road when driven with care, which isn�t much different than large SUVs. Granted Sprinters are still pricey but so are large SUVs.

And not only can you stay in hotels anyway (it�s always an option), they offer much more room to carry bikes, gear, and other things. And they add an extra dimension to those who like to wing it occasionally because you always have food, a place to sleep, and �other� comforts of home with you. I�m much more likely to take detours and go exploring when I don�t have to think much about basic needs. It�s a sense of freedom I don�t get when traveling by car.

SEABREEZE

08-28-2009, 10:56 AM

Last year I had one for a week during a Stage Race I did. It was a Navion IQ based on the Diesel Dodge/Mercedes Sprinter chassis. We had the most amazing time! My wife and kids still talk about it.

Yeah, I too daydream of RV's and the open road. LOL

Good Luck!

I own one and recommend the Navion highly. as I would a Serotta. This bad little boy with its mercedes engine gets 20 mpg. You see lots of these simular type of rigs along the whole tour de france route. The europeans understand great gas economy.

Spent two weeks last summer in ours on the Blue Ridge Parkway.

Another forumite, recently left for 6 weeks in Breckenridge in his rv, Dan if you are reading this, hope you are enjoying those mts.

Tobias

08-28-2009, 12:55 PM

I own one and recommend the Navion highly. as I would a Serotta. This bad little boy with its mercedes engine gets 20 mpg. You see lots of these simular type of rigs along the whole tour de france route. The europeans understand great gas economy.
I've noticed while watching the tours that European campers don't often drive 40-foot buses as many do here. In time I hope the US industry learns to make smaller units like theirs more functional instead of just making them bigger.

I looked up a Navion (Itasca I think?) and it's fairly big. How slow do you have to drive to get 20 MPG? I'm also assuming that it's the newer V-6 and not the older and smaller I-5?

link

08-28-2009, 02:34 PM

On the spendy side. Very functional. Small enough to go most anywhere.
They offer Sprinter conversions too.
Sports Mobile (http://www.sportsmobile.com/3_bikes.html)
http://k53.pbase.com/o4/20/672420/1/61503714.Tundraonshowroomfloor.jpg

SEABREEZE

08-28-2009, 04:09 PM

I've noticed while watching the tours that European campers don't often drive 40-foot buses as many do here. In time I hope the US industry learns to make smaller units like theirs more functional instead of just making them bigger.

I looked up a Navion (Itasca I think?) and it's fairly big. How slow do you have to drive to get 20 MPG? I'm also assuming that it's the newer V-6 and not the older and smaller I-5?

Yes the europeans know how to economize very well,when it comes to trasportation, they had no choice, because of the cost of fuel. Now us americans are seeing it from the same light.

I beleive my Navion is around 23ft, not considered a large rv, plenty big and roomy enough for my wife and I. We can park in any regular parking spot, no problem. Thats was one of the reasons that it attracted us to it. Its versitility. As far as the engine, yes it s the v6 version,and we averaged around 60 -65 mph on flat land as well as in the mts. I really coulnt beleive the gas milage it was giving us. We love ours.

I have a generator onboard,as well as a couple aux honda generators,so no need for rv parks.We go wherever we want.

Recently we spent a week camped out by a resevoir in western Pa, nice rolling hills,for riding, great scenery, peaceful and quiet, we had our two german shepehrds with us and we had a ball.This may be not for everyone, but we enjoy it.

PaMtbRider

08-28-2009, 05:24 PM

I own one and recommend the Navion highly....
Spent two weeks last summer in ours on the Blue Ridge Parkway...

.
I really like the idea of the Navion. My only concern is how to transport the bicycles. Do you use a rack in the receiver hitch? I am not crazy about the bikes hanging off the back and being exposed to the weather.

Ray

08-28-2009, 05:42 PM

I have a generator onboard,as well as a couple aux honda generators,so no need for rv parks.We go wherever we want.
What's the deal with water and sewage with these things? Looks like pretty decent little bathrooms, but do you have to hook up to something to use it or does it have a couple of large tanks that you just have to fill and empty periodically? If the latter, about how often for a couple of people?

-Ray

Louis

08-28-2009, 06:22 PM

If the latter, about how often for a couple of people?

Depends on how many Big Macs they've been eating...

RPS

08-28-2009, 08:09 PM

What's the deal with water and sewage with these things? Looks like pretty decent little bathrooms, but do you have to hook up to something to use it or does it have a couple of large tanks that you just have to fill and empty periodically? If the latter, about how often for a couple of people?

-Ray
Most have three water tanks -- fresh water for drinking etc., gray water to collect sinks and shower, and black to hold what comes form the toilet.

My relatively small class C had a 30 gallon fresh water tank, about the same size gray, and slightly smaller black. We could go for days without having to empty the tanks as long as the showers were short. That's what uses lots of water -- more so than flushing toilets IMO.

RPS

08-28-2009, 08:20 PM

As far as the engine, yes it s the v6 version,and we averaged around 60 -65 mph on flat land as well as in the mts. I really coulnt beleive the gas milage it was giving us. We love ours.

That�s impressive mileage for a Class C; regardless of it being a compact C. I�d seen reports of Sprinter Class Bs getting 22 MPG (some drivers claiming up to 25 when driven below speed limits) but that was for the smaller 5-cyclinder diesels and pushing a smaller frontal area. Reports I had seen of the newer and bigger Class Bs with the bigger V-6 had them in the range of only 20 MPG, so I�m glad to see you can do as well by driving a little slower.

I guess many here now realize that smaller units with small diesels are the way to go for improved fuel economy, and also that taking it slow helps a bunch when pushing a big box through the air. For what it�s worth in Europe the Sprinters are offered with smaller 4-cylinder diesels which should be adequate for the smaller Class B van-type RV. Too bad they are not imported.

SEABREEZE

08-28-2009, 09:18 PM

I really like the idea of the Navion. My only concern is how to transport the bicycles. Do you use a rack in the receiver hitch? I am not crazy about the bikes hanging off the back and being exposed to the weather.

On short trips I have a basket tray thats slides right into the 3rd class receiver. It can handle 3 beach crusiers comfortably or 4 road bikes. I picked it up very resonably @ tractor supply. We keep a tarp handy in case there are signs of rain.

On long trips I have a small enclosed trailer , which carries bikes and other necessities. You dont even know you are pulling it, and no decrease in milage.

TMB

08-28-2009, 09:33 PM

We have had a class C - 28 feet for 9 years.

We travel and vacation in it.

We all love it. It eats a lot of gas but the incremental cost of the gas each year is no more than the incremental cost of everything from restaurant meals to hotels.

We will keep this unit until the kids make it clear they no longer want to travel with us then we will go looking for a Navion. Those are nice little units.

We always carry bikes.

If we are somewhere for a few days I head out every morning before the girls are awake and get in a few hours - I have seen lots of things this way.

If it is a travel day - I usually point to a place on the map and say see you there.

My wife drives the beastie and picks me up. They usually all pass me on the highway along the road - and cheer as they go by.

Fun times all around.

Tobias

08-28-2009, 10:00 PM

I really coulnt beleive the gas milage it was giving us. We love ours. Thanks for sharing info. That is excellent MPG for a full-feature unit.

Tobias

08-28-2009, 10:08 PM

I really like the idea of the Navion. My only concern is how to transport the bicycles. Do you use a rack in the receiver hitch? I am not crazy about the bikes hanging off the back and being exposed to the weather.
As I recall seeing at an RV show, there are various floorplans available, some may lend themselves to carrying bikes inside better than others. Winnebago (or some other major company) makes a floorplan with bunks at the very back where the bottom bunk folds up out of the way to make a very large storage area with a large door on the side of the unit for loading. I recall thinking that it was perfect for a couple of bikes if all the beds were not needed (or the bikes locked outside during the night).

SEABREEZE

08-28-2009, 10:13 PM

What's the deal with water and sewage with these things? Looks like pretty decent little bathrooms, but do you have to hook up to something to use it or does it have a couple of large tanks that you just have to fill and empty periodically? If the latter, about how often for a couple of people?

-Ray

Looks like rps has answered this question pretty well. Only thing I can add iis, you can dump at rv parks for a fee , many larger truck stops have free dump stations, and if you have a septic system, you can tie into that at your home.

You have a bib on the side of the rv that you attach a hose to, to feed water to your tank. At a rv park or at your residence you can by pass the tank and feed the water to your sources in the rv. Advisable to have a good filter that ataches to your hose. .

BengeBoy

08-28-2009, 10:27 PM

Saw one of these at a trade show a couple of years ago - an Airstream Basecamp.

It's a utilitarian travel trailer / toy hauler. A big step up from sleeping in a pickup bed, but stripped down to the essentials:

http://www.airstream.com/products/2009-fleet/travel-trailers/basecamp/photo-gallery.html

SEABREEZE

08-28-2009, 10:33 PM

That�s impressive mileage for a Class C; regardless of it being a compact C. I�d seen reports of Sprinter Class Bs getting 22 MPG (some drivers claiming up to 25 when driven below speed limits) but that was for the smaller 5-cyclinder diesels and pushing a smaller frontal area. Reports I had seen of the newer and bigger Class Bs with the bigger V-6 had them in the range of only 20 MPG, so I�m glad to see you can do as well by driving a little slower.

I guess many here now realize that smaller units with small diesels are the way to go for improved fuel economy, and also that taking it slow helps a bunch when pushing a big box through the air. For what it�s worth in Europe the Sprinters are offered with smaller 4-cylinder diesels which should be adequate for the smaller Class B van-type RV. Too bad they are not imported.

Its a no brainer, the compact c is much more roomier than a class b. From my perspective, the extra couple of miles vs the roominess of the compaact c . I would choose the compact c. Know if the class b was getting many more mpg
, the choice would be the b , however thats not the case.

Funny you should mention 4 cylinder diesels. I have a freind who is from France and he recently bought a Versa, which gets pretty good mpg. he was just complaining to me the other day, he wants to sell it and go back to france and bring his vw that gets 50 - 60 mpg using diesel.

RPS

08-30-2009, 11:59 AM

Its a no brainer, the compact c is much more roomier than a class b. From my perspective, the extra couple of miles vs the roominess of the compaact c . I would choose the compact c. Know if the class b was getting many more mpg
, the choice would be the b , however thats not the case.

Funny you should mention 4 cylinder diesels. I have a freind who is from France and he recently bought a Versa, which gets pretty good mpg. he was just complaining to me the other day, he wants to sell it and go back to france and bring his vw that gets 50 - 60 mpg using diesel.
You�re correct that there isn�t much difference in fuel economy at present, but historically that hasn�t been the case. Many of today�s large Class Bs and small Class Cs are both based on Sprinter platforms so they blur the line in size classes (similar length, height, and weight), and with identical powertrains fuel consumption is mostly affected by the slight extra width of the new smaller Class Cs.

I�ve followed RV designs and attended shows for many decades � more than I�d like to admit � and in the past differences in fuel consumption were significant � and could be again. Historically the van-based Class Bs were much smaller than the cutaway Class Cs. Way back at the beginning and through the first decades many had pop-up roofs to keep aerodynamic drag down, or like the Xplorer or Transvans some dropped the floor in a limited area to allow for headroom on a permanent basis (feature allowed standing while traveling without adding height). And later many popular Class Bs like Roadtreks relied on a combination of a low-profile �sports� fiberglass roof (in lieu of the very tall roof) with less floor drop to obtain adequate headroom without making the units as tall.

On the other hand present-day Sprinter-based Class Bs are almost 9-feet tall and with roof-mounted AC they get close to 10-feet in height (can�t even pass through a typical drive-through) � which makes them like mini Class As. In my opinion comparing these in a historical context with smaller class Bs that in many cases were garageable (at under 7-feet in height) is like comparing apples and oranges.

The best technical successes towards fuel economy and space have been RVs that were purpose-designed and constructed; but that made their cost fairly high which often kept them from being successful in the market place. Given a choice Americans preferred to buy a much bigger RV for the same cost even if fuel consumption was much higher (gas was cheap). Instead of relying on work trucks or vans which have high floors and therefore lead to high aero drag, some small yet clever units have gone to front-wheel drive (Cortez, GMC, Revcon, etc�) or rear-engine (Corvair UltraVan, Vixen, etc�) to maximize space and MPG. The Vixen which was made in the US had a rear-mounted BMW diesel and reportedly could get 30 MPG. The step-in height was only about 1-foot (similar to a car) because the body/frame was unitized and there was no drivetrain underneath. The result was lower aerodynamic drag, easy entry, low center of gravity, low weight, and car-like handling. There is no reason (except for initial cost) that economy in the 30 MPG range can�t be achieved with small Class Bs � or small purpose-built mini-Class As like Vixen and UltraVan -- using modern technologies as long as driving speed is kept moderate.

Opportunities are there, but won�t happen IMHO until fuel costs are much higher.

SEABREEZE

08-30-2009, 02:59 PM

Opportunities are there, but won�t happen IMHO until fuel costs are much higher.

Could not agee more. As I said earlier, we need to follow in the Europeans foot print,as they have been at it for may moons, because of the cost of petrol. They get double the fuel economy with half the motor size or there about.

Recently KIA came out with a subcompact ,that I wanted to see, the one in the showroom was from the european market, it was brought in for the public to see the model ,as the american version was still not available That little sucker had a estimated 50mpg.I told the salesman, I wanted to buy the one on the showroom floor, he refused, siting it was a european version,and would not meet our EPA requirements. I beleive the american version was estimated to get somewhere in the 30's mpg. There is a perfect example.

Tobias

08-30-2009, 03:26 PM

The best technical successes towards fuel economy and space have been RVs that were purpose-designed and constructed; but that made their cost fairly high which often kept them from being successful in the market place. Given a choice Americans preferred to buy a much bigger RV for the same cost even if fuel consumption was much higher (gas was cheap). Instead of relying on work trucks or vans which have high floors and therefore lead to high aero drag, some small yet clever units have gone to front-wheel drive (Cortez, GMC, Revcon, etc�) or rear-engine (Corvair UltraVan, Vixen, etc�) to maximize space and MPG. The Vixen which was made in the US had a rear-mounted BMW diesel and reportedly could get 30 MPG. The step-in height was only about 1-foot (similar to a car) because the body/frame was unitized and there was no drivetrain underneath. The result was lower aerodynamic drag, easy entry, low center of gravity, low weight, and car-like handling. There is no reason (except for initial cost) that economy in the 30 MPG range can�t be achieved with small Class Bs � or small purpose-built mini-Class As like Vixen and UltraVan -- using modern technologies as long as driving speed is kept moderate.
I saw a low and wide very small RV in Colorado flying around Independence Pass and didn�t know what it was, but seeing pictures in the WEB of the Vixen shows that�s probably what it was. It was cornering about as fast as most cars; very fast for an RV.

I don�t see how small designs based on dedicated platforms will ever be financially competitive with RVs that are based on mass-produced vans or other volume vehicles. And of the two layout options, I don�t think rear engine vans like the VW and Corvair will be produced again because commercial use requires a flat floor at rear for loading. That leaves FWD vans and I think Ford and other companies may make large-box FWD commercial vans in Europe which would lend themselves very well to economical RV conversion ....... but for now they are not available here.

The other option would be a lower van with a pop up roof � and Sportsmobile already makes one based on the lower roof Sprinter (although at over 8 feet still too tall for standard garage door). Besides, with the larger 3-liter V-6 it�s unlikely that 30 MPG is possible unless driven painfully slow. Only if fuel costs go above $5 a gallon will there be resurgence to small and creative designs IMO.

WadePatton

08-30-2009, 03:49 PM

SEABREEZE

08-30-2009, 04:27 PM

iffin' you're going to talk engines--well diesel is always more efficient, and require less maintenance. and have much more torque for the grades.

my 7200# pickup gets 20mpg with the venerable 5.9 cummins turbo jobbie.

my camper will be a pull-behind for that monster--it only has 224k on the ticker and i expect a couple hundred more won't be any trouble.

Yes Wade, I have a Ford F350, we use here on the farm, and on the road to deliver.( apprx 100,00 per year ) We too get around 20 mpg with the diesel engine, pulling a little trailer behind it. . It got alittle better mileage when we added a cap.

With that said, I am seriously considering my next work vechile to be a Sprinter, based on the mileage I have been getting with my Navion. Our fed x driver thats here all the time, tells me, his sprinter is getting around 25mpg , its a little taller than the normal sprinter. ( raised roof )

RPS

08-30-2009, 08:24 PM

I don�t see how small designs based on dedicated platforms will ever be financially competitive with RVs that are based on mass-produced vans or other volume vehicles.
History suggests that is correct, purpose built are not extremely cost competitive and relegated to low volume production � at least while fuel costs are very low. BTW, improved fuel efficiency compared to larger units was partly due to proportionally low power on most of these � the Vixen with BMW turbo diesel only had a 2.4 liter with 115 HP � definitely not in Cummins or Powerstroke territory. However, due to light weight they still had good power-to-weight compared to larger RVs of their time.

Some examples that couldn�t compete effectively due to cost for their small size (i.e. � they mostly competed against Class Bs and small Class Cs that sold for much less):

Cortez FWD from 60s thru most of 70s built by Clark Forklift Company
UltraVan based on Corvair engine/transaxle (rear engine very low floor)
Vixen with BMW diesel or Buick V-6 (rear engine with very low floor)
Mauck Specialty Vehicle MSV (GM rear engine and low floor)

Total numbers of these were very small compared to mass produced Winnebago and the like. Note all were light enough to run on four wheels instead of the typical RV duallies.

TMB

08-30-2009, 10:42 PM

As I recall seeing at an RV show, there are various floorplans available, some may lend themselves to carrying bikes inside better than others. Winnebago (or some other major company) makes a floorplan with bunks at the very back where the bottom bunk folds up out of the way to make a very large storage area with a large door on the side of the unit for loading. I recall thinking that it was perfect for a couple of bikes if all the beds were not needed (or the bikes locked outside during the night).

Most RV dealers or places like CAmping World sell what are essentially bags that go over the bikes on the bike rack and wrap tight with a bottom closure.

The bikes are completely enclosed and dry.

I usually just use a tarp.

Ken Robb

08-30-2009, 10:56 PM

I don't know that the 115hp BMW diesel was turbocharged.

weaponsgrade

08-31-2009, 12:33 AM

10 years ago I moved out from the east coast to the west coast. At the time I was just mountain biking. I spent about a month slowly making my way across and making various stops to hike and bike. I mixed in backpacking, car camping, and when I got a little too gamey would spring for some cheap motel to get a hot shower. I met up some other bikers on a trail in Durango. At the time I was camping out. They let me use their shower at their motel and afterwards we went out for dinner. Wish I hadn't lost their contact info. Good times.

RPS

08-31-2009, 07:05 AM

Most RV dealers or places like CAmping World sell what are essentially bags that go over the bikes on the bike rack and wrap tight with a bottom closure.

The bikes are completely enclosed and dry.

I usually just use a tarp.
Tarp while driving or parked at night? I may have to give one of those "bags" a try.

I tried a tarp wrapped tightly during a rain storm and it flopped around a lot. Ended up taking the bike off and placing it inside. Since then I've moved the bike(s) closer to the van so maybe the wind turbulence won't be as bad.

RPS

08-31-2009, 07:10 AM

I don't know that the 115hp BMW diesel was turbocharged.That was a long time ago, before high pressure injection and other advances. 115 HP out of 2.4 liters for a diesel was quite good.

http://www.vixenrv.org/viki/tiki-index.php

SEABREEZE

08-31-2009, 08:12 AM

Tarp while driving or parked at night? I may have to give one of those "bags" a try.

I tried a tarp wrapped tightly during a rain storm and it flopped around a lot. Ended up taking the bike off and placing it inside. Since then I've moved the bike(s) closer to the van so maybe the wind turbulence won't be as bad.

We use bunji cords to secure the tarp.Additionally we put folded towels between the bikes ,as not to allow them to rub or touch one another,also using bunji cords for that purpose as well.

Tobias

08-31-2009, 08:43 AM

I don't know that the 115hp BMW diesel was turbocharged.
Just under 50 HP per liter sounds about right. It's about the same as the specific power of the 90 HP 1.9 liter VW turbodiesel of the past. The newer BMW 3-liter diesels are putting out about 90 HP per liter, more than plenty of power for a small RV.

Tobias

08-31-2009, 08:52 AM

Like with bikes this stuff is not rocket science. Make the units lighter and they require less power to accelerate and climb. Make them more aero by reducing frontal area or reducing coefficient of drag and they'll go faster with same engine or go longer at the same speed before they run out of fuel. It's pretty basic stuff that works the same.

From the pictures it looks most RVs still have a box shape which implies high Cd. I know that's probably for cost and to make packaging of the interior easier, but if they want to reduce drag they might want to look at the shape of modern cars; many now having the same look. The Toyota Prius and Honda Insight are good examples of how the back end has to slope down gradually, as well as taper inward slightly. Not too unlike the back of airplanes too. RVs could do better if they move away from a box shape at the back.

johnnymossville

08-31-2009, 03:20 PM

Then there's the Dunkel.

http://www.dunkelindustries.com/images/stories/exterior/16.jpg

http://www.dunkelindustries.com/

csm

08-31-2009, 04:47 PM

the dunkel.... wow.

54ny77

09-01-2009, 09:53 AM

As others have said, check out Sportsmobile. Nothing like 'em anywhere. Sky's the limit on configuration. :beer:

johnnymossville

09-01-2009, 09:56 AM

Look at a Sportsmobile. Nothing like 'em anywhere. Sky's the limit on configuration. :beer:

I went over to the sportsmobile site. They really are amazing. I'm with you on that one.

RPS

09-01-2009, 02:32 PM

I went over to the sportsmobile site. They really are amazing. I'm with you on that one.
As far as I know they are the only major �custom� builder of Class B (van-based) RVs. They have a factory in Austin, Texas and normally have a couple of their units at the Houston RV show; and of all the RVs there I always look forward to seeing what�s new at Sportsmobile.

They are a true custom shop. If you want something really �different� like a small garage to haul bikes or a tandem they can build it. You can choose all electric and eliminate propane if that's your thing, can choose the type of toilet (permanent or Porta Potti) and whether you want a built-in shower or not. With other manufacturers you don�t really get to customize the unit based on your intended use, needs, or preferences.

One of the really clever designs they had (and unfortunately I don�t believe it�s available with Sprinter vans because it voids warranty, or at least not yet) was an air conditioning system for the rear area that used some of the van�s components so the entire unit was hidden from outside view. When parked for camping the van�s condenser still served as the air�s condenser with an auxiliary fan. From the outside you can�t see that they had a camping air conditioner. Not only does it look a lot cleaner, but requires a lot less new equipment, reduces air drag when going down the highway, and reduces overall height compared to typical roof mounted air conditioners.

goonster

09-01-2009, 02:49 PM

It's about the same as the specific power of the 90 HP 1.9 liter VW turbodiesel of the past.
The two can't really be compared because the VW AHU (which I have) is direct injection, and the 80's BMW is not.

The newer BMW 3-liter diesels are putting out about 90 HP per liter, more than plenty of power for a small RV.
Common rail FTW.

One of the really clever designs they had (and unfortunately I don�t believe it�s available with Sprinter vans because it voids warranty, or at least not yet) was an air conditioning system for the rear area that used some of the van�s components so the entire unit was hidden from outside view. When parked for camping the van�s condenser still served as the air�s condenser with an auxiliary fan.
You're right. That's a great feature.

johnnymossville

09-01-2009, 02:50 PM

Speaking of the Sprinter Chassis, Last Summer when I had that Navion IQ I averaged just a hair over 20mpg for the week (Diesel). Mostly level highway driving and I took it easy on it, but that's not bad for such a large vehicle.

And the thing drove VERY nicely.

http://i1.imagesrv.com/1/479/i/539116/i_479_539116_1715087.jpg

Tobias

09-01-2009, 10:05 PM

The two can't really be compared because the VW AHU (which I have) is direct injection, and the 80's BMW is not.
Not that it really matters, but please define what you mean by direct injection, because I would have thought that by the 80s all modern automobile diesels would have been direct injection.

Regardless, I'm not sure why you think the two can't be compared for specific power (i.e. -- HP per liter) since it turns out the two are almost the same.

Louis

09-01-2009, 10:23 PM

Someone needs to alert the economists.

Based on this thread I conclude that the recession is definitely over :beer:

Ken Robb

09-01-2009, 10:24 PM

I agree--I don't think one can have a diesel without direct injection. I think that is a given and so some makers would think it redundant to say "direct injected diesel" in their ads.

RPS

09-02-2009, 06:48 AM

From my very old �Internal Combustion Engines and Air Pollution�

�The trend in medium and high-speed engines has been toward the direct-injection or open-chamber diesel (which is the basic design of the slow-speed engine). An open-chamber diesel has the entire compression volume in one chamber formed between the piston and head (although the chamber may have an involved shape).�

FWIW, many of the old high-speed automotive-type engines used divided-chamber designs, where the diesel fuel was injected into an antechamber or pre-combustion chamber � hence the fuel was not injected �directly� into the primary combustion chamber. These kinds of engines were generally less efficient but lent themselves to auto use because they were quieter than direct injection engines like used in trucks, tractors, etc�. However, the development of modern fuel injection where fuel can be delivered more precisely prevents much of the added noise of older direct injection and makes for higher efficiency. I�m not aware of any new engine that uses a pre-combustion chamber (i.e. � I guess you could call it indirect injection).

I�m guessing that�s probably the distinction goonster was making, although I have to admit that I don�t know whether the BMW M21 diesel used in the Vixen motorhome used an open chamber or divided chamber.