Chevrolet Based Class C *UPDATED AGAIN*

mumkin wrote:

IAMICHABOD wrote:
But of course the one that mumkin has will get better mileage than the "normal class C" It has no large overhead,it is more areodynamic more on the line of a class B and only has a GVWR of 12300 lbs about a ton less than most class C s. according to their website.

I can see why it gets better mileage,but to compare it to the normal class C is like compareing an apple to a pear. :B

Kinda the same but NOT.

But it is on a Chevy Chassis so it is keeping with the theme of the thread.

I would disagree with your interpretation. It is the same Chevy cut-away, only with a much better design. After all, I started with a GWV Class B on the Ford E350 with an overhead bed so I chose to buy something more aerodynamic and to get better handling. As far as weight, that is going to go along with length. Naturally if you have 30+ feet, you are going to weigh more. Other than that... a Chevy cutaway is a Chevy cutaway. Many of the RVs being compared here are 22ft.

I suspect that the difference has as much to do with a heavy foot as the overhead cab.

And Jim... I don't have the 6 speed... I got the last of the older platforms. :C

I would have to disagree on a few facts stated,true they are both on a cutaway chasis but that is where the simularity ends.

On the class C- such as mumkin and gene in ne both have and double didget mileage these are both aerodynamic where a typical Class C is not,and they both have a GVWR of 12300 lbs about a ton lighter than most Class C even the short ones. Most of which have a simular 14000lb or more GVWR

Mine is 26 ft and has A GVWR of 14050 not quite a ton heavier but it
has the aerodynamics of a brick. It Is at least a foot taller,I would guess because I cant stand up in one.

Heavy foot or not pushing a Ton more down the road in a vehicle that is aerodynamic as a brick you can not compare them as equal.

As I said before like compareing an apple with a pear they can be put in the same bag but they are not the same.