Class C extended chassis, Thoughts or your experiences

Chum lee wrote:
In the size range of Class C you are considering, you have to be careful about overloading and being out of balance.

Chum lee

I've actually observed that since about 2009-ish, carrying capacities have gone up it seams like. The GVWR on the E450 went up a little, but I think the RV makers have also lightened their bodies. Less wood. More aluminum and foam, in general.

I do agree completely about being out of balance. Some of these floor plans put all the heavy stuff on one side, like the full length slideouts with kitchen and fridge in the slideout. That could easily overload the tires on that side, even if below GVWR. Not the mention the tippy feeling when turning one direction.

In the size range of Class C you are considering, you have to be careful about overloading and being out of balance. Most newer Ford Class A's have 19.5" or larger wheels which allow GVRW's 18,000 lbs. and above. Not so with Class C so it's really very easy to exceed max weight which isn't safe. Many will say, "Yeah, I do it all the time!" but as a pilot, the safety side of me suggests that you don't. Remember, . . . you're driving a house of cards, structurally. When things get hairy, bad things happens real fast.

Chum lee

Thanks to all for the replies. Now I'm back at ya for some more opinion / tech intelligence. We looked at a 31' but rule out the 31' in part because of some of what you taught me above. Other considerations were it's very difficult to store at home & wife would not drive it. Also determined that for the type of travel we intend something shorter would be better. Saw a nice Itasca Spirit R22 but just too short. Now I'm going to look at a Winnie 25B. On paper looks nice. Priced right but now the confusion. I'm convinced, sure some of you are too, that the RV industry wants to keep us confused so we just throw in the towel and buy.

j-d wrote:
Ford and Chevy both have specific specs on how far their chassis may be stretched, and how it is to be done. Ford, if I recall, allows just a little more than GM does, so the very longest ones will be on Ford. Ours is a 31, a little over 32 overall. As the coach is stretched, several things can happen:

1. Turning circle will increase. The E-Series only has about 25-degrees of front wheel "cut" so we have a HUGE turning circle. It has never prevented us from making a turn on a road, except a U-Turn. Takes four lanes and one shoulder to do that.

2. The overall coach may be very close to GVWR. Longer frame and bigger, therefore heavier, body go together.

3. Handling may or may not suffer. The floor plan seems to have more to do with wheelbase than actual weight distribution. That's unfortunate. It's possible for a coach to be over weight on the rear axle while too light on the front axle. Not just hard on tires. Too light a front end will allow the coach to wander on the road. Ford wants AT LEAST 1/3 of loaded weight on the front axle. That's probably skimpy for a long, wide, high motorhome.

Wheelbase affects all this! The newer 31's have a wheelbase around 220". ALWAYS weigh a coach you're considering. Drive it to a CAT Scale, get Front and Rear Weights, then adjust Tire Pressure according to Michelin's RV pressure chart. Then continue your test drive and see if it's better.

EDIT: I see you posted this in Super C. Same factors apply, you just have more weight to work with.

X2 The front axle should be at 80% of rated weight or there well be handling issues that can NOT be solved. Weight behind the rear axle takes weight off of the front and the farther back the more it will take off.

piconroy wrote:
, i.e. turning radius, maxed out to total GVWR, rear end swing out, etc..

From a fellow 'conroy' - we're in a Jayco 31FK. Turning radius is awful. As you'd expect. Since it's their largest Class C, there's not a lot of spare CCC left, but we make do as a family of 5.

We were in a 21 (Coachmen 21QB) but it just was too small for five. We appreciate the extra room.

We just sold a 24ft E450 because it had poor sleeping arrangements. 'no bed'.

We considered a 31ft E450 and decided it was too close to GVWR. We finally decided to jump to a class A that has more carrying capacity.

fourthclassC wrote:
Howdy, please understand that this is only my opinion and my point of view. I would not drive anything longer then 26 feet. I have had a 21', 29, 26 and 25' class C's . The 29 had a terrible turning radius and I only felt comfortable during regular travel after I put new shocks and air bags on. Call me a wimp but the 25' is much easier to drive and deal with in more congested traffic situations.

Does anyone make a 21' class "C" these days? That sounds pretty cool, size-wise.

All modern motorhomes follow Ford's chassis stretching policy (apparently even when they stretch the Chevies, since GM didn't publish the same sort of document). Ford says following the policy maintains all original specifications. I've never heard of a modern motorhome having a frame problem, even when many are way overloaded on their hitches.

Howdy, please understand that this is only my opinion and my point of view. I would not drive anything longer then 26 feet. I have had a 21', 29, 26 and 25' class C's . The 29 had a terrible turning radius and I only felt comfortable during regular travel after I put new shocks and air bags on. Call me a wimp but the 25' is much easier to drive and deal with in more congested traffic situations.

Hey Guys thanks for the very helpful info. Yeah, I'm not an engineer but instinctively wonder about stretching a chassis, how it's done and how much weight the stretch and the additional box adds. Thanks for the other tips too, i.e. turning radius, maxed out to total GVWR, rear end swing out, etc. Looking to do something in January and just narrowing it all down to a decision. Planning a cross Country trip (homecoming) for April from FL to Nor CAL. Anymore ideas would be apppreciated.