Bounder 35K or Challenger 37KT? good and bad features?

22,000 lb chassis on a 37 foot motorhome seems wrong to me, I have a 2008 32W Bounder with the 22,000 lb chassis but never thought they would use that same chassis on a 37 footer..

And one more thing is the V-10 with all that extra weight in the mountains, I tow a jeep and it seems fine but not much extra power left over as far as I am concerned.

peruky wrote:

teddyu wrote:
Have a 371, predecessor of the 37KT. Nicest layout to be had. The convience of the 3 rooms makes it a fantastic RV for FT or occassional guests. Sometimes we don't deploy the front slides, especially in winter or short term stays. Many pass through basement compartments for added storage. Did a minor mod to the furnace for better heat control. This a good ticket for fulltiming in a gas unit. JM2¢...but I'm biased

Teddyu, does the doors rattle loudly while driving down the road? Do you have to open the bedroom slide to sleep? Because sometimes if we are on the road to a destination and I would prefer to just stop at a rest area so I can take a nap without opening the slide and then get back on the road again.

Doors are captured with locks, no noticable noise from the four of them. I don't need to open the diningroom/bedroom slide to sleep. We can get to the bedroom through the bathroom. When we do this we change the direction we sleep from athwarthship to longitudinal for the night. As for the carrying capacity, mine is on a 22K chassis. When last weighed in normal traveling mode (all the toys and food) with 1/2 fuel, full propane and freshwater, and 2 people, still had 2100 lbs reserve capacity. I tow a Cobalt and my gross combined vehicle weight is 22600 lbs for the 26K GCVWR.

Rick Jay wrote:
In my opinion, neither of those would be good for full-timing. Cargo carrying capacity is way too low. Now, if they were on a 24,000 lb. chassis...maybe. But 22,000 lbs., no way.

We don't full-time, but when researching our first (and current) RV over 10 years ago, I estimated we would need between 2,000-2,5000 lbs. of capacity for people, food, fuels, water, clothes, spare parts, etc. Our rig weighs in empty 18,800 lbs. Fully loaded for an extended trip, we are near 21,500. Our Honda Odyssey weighs in just about 4,450 lbs., so all connected and ready to go, we flirt with the 22,000 lb. GCWR. For shorter trips where we don't pack quite so heavy, we can be as much as 500 lbs. or so lighter.

Anyway, full-timing for most people will require that they bring more stuff than we have. Our rig couldn't carry the weight and keep under the weight limits, and ours is 36' with 2 slides. These newer rigs are even taller than ours, so there's some extra weight there as well.

While I think both of those floorplans are interesting, I couldn't buy either one as I know I'd be rolling down the road overloaded if we packed the way we wanted.

I know Workhorse used to have a 24,000 lb. GVWR chassis. I thought Ford did too. In my opinion, both of those floorplans would be viable on a heavier chassis, but not on a 22,000 lb. chassis.

ON EDIT: I just checked and Ford does make an F-53 with 24k and 26k GVWs. These motorhomes should be on one of those.

Just my $0.02.

Good Luck in your search,

~Rick

Thank you Rick, I will start looking for the overall weight restrictions when looking at floor plans. I will try to see if there are any in my price range. Thanks once again.

In my opinion, neither of those would be good for full-timing. Cargo carrying capacity is way too low. Now, if they were on a 24,000 lb. chassis...maybe. But 22,000 lbs., no way.

We don't full-time, but when researching our first (and current) RV over 10 years ago, I estimated we would need between 2,000-2,5000 lbs. of capacity for people, food, fuels, water, clothes, spare parts, etc. Our rig weighs in empty 18,800 lbs. Fully loaded for an extended trip, we are near 21,500. Our Honda Odyssey weighs in just about 4,450 lbs., so all connected and ready to go, we flirt with the 26,000 lb. GCWR. For shorter trips where we don't pack quite so heavy, we can be as much as 500 lbs. or so lighter.

Anyway, full-timing for most people will require that they bring more stuff than we have. Our rig couldn't carry the weight and keep under the weight limits, and ours is 36' with 2 slides. These newer rigs are even taller than ours, so there's some extra weight there as well.

While I think both of those floorplans are interesting, I couldn't buy either one as I know I'd be rolling down the road overloaded if we packed the way we wanted.

I know Workhorse used to have a 24,000 lb. GVWR chassis. I thought Ford did too. In my opinion, both of those floorplans would be viable on a heavier chassis, but not on a 22,000 lb. chassis.

ON EDIT: I just checked and Ford does make an F-53 with 24k and 26k GVWs. These motorhomes should be on one of those.

Just my $0.02.

Good Luck in your search,

~Rick

ON EDIT: Changed 22,000 lb. GCWR to the correct 26,000 lb. GCWR.

dahkota wrote:

peruky wrote:


Thanks Effy, I see the wheelbase and that's good news and we have 4,000 weight. Is that decent and acceptable for long term/full time rving?

Where do you find 4000 weight? Where is that referenced? Do you mean the GCVW, which is 26K? That 4000 is for a towed...

See how much I have to learn ... lol. I didn't know that was a for a tow, I thought it was for passengers, water, fuel, and supplies/storage weights. Thanks for letting me know. I really appreciate all this information and advice.

dahkota wrote:
Here is a review of a bounder 35K. It is a 2012, but they haven't changed much. The wet weight (no supplies or passengers, full water and gas) was 20,020 lbs. With a 22K chassis, there is 1980 lbs. for cargo and passengers. But, that is if your towed weighs less than 4000 lbs. If it weighs between 4K and 5K, anything over 4K reduces the CCC. This coach is 2 feet shorter than the Thor, with one less slide.

We travel very light, even for fulltimers. Most full timers carry a lot more stuff. Many full timers go for a heavier capacity chassis when they get longer coaches. Tiffin and Newmar both make coaches with a 24K chassis, which will give you more wiggle room at that size.

Thank you I'm going to go read the information right now. I love how you all share and give good info. and advice.

Here is a review of a bounder 35K. It is a 2012, but they haven't changed much. The wet weight (no supplies or passengers, full water and gas) was 20,020 lbs. With a 22K chassis, there is 1980 lbs. for cargo and passengers. But, that is if your towed weighs less than 4000 lbs. If it weighs between 4K and 5K, anything over 4K reduces the CCC. This coach is 2 feet shorter than the Thor, with one less slide.

We travel very light, even for fulltimers. Most full timers carry a lot more stuff. Many full timers go for a heavier capacity chassis when they get longer coaches. Tiffin and Newmar both make coaches with a 24K chassis, which will give you more wiggle room at that size.

peruky wrote:


Thanks Effy, I see the wheelbase and that's good news and we have 4,000 weight. Is that decent and acceptable for long term/full time rving?

Where do you find 4000 weight? Where is that referenced? Do you mean the GCVW, which is 26K? That 4000 is for a towed...

peruky wrote:
The longer wheelbase will definitely help it ride nicer.

Here's the specs page:

Challenger specs

Thanks Effy, I see the wheelbase and that's good news and we have 4,000 weight. Is that decent and acceptable for long term/full time rving?

Depends on how much stuff you have. You won't get too much more out of a gasser. If you need more than 4-5k you'd probably have to step up to a DP. If you plan on towing a car, that's also a consideration. At MAX a gasser hitch is rated at 5,000. DP's typically are rated at 10k.

I will say I love the 37kt layout. We aren't anywhere near full time but as my son gets older it's an appealing concept for him to have his own "room". Can't say that about too many Rv's. Matter of fact I can't think of any. I am sure they exist.

The longer wheelbase will also put more weight on the front axle which is not always a good thing.