Melbourne 4x4

pnichols wrote:

vikrv wrote:
If I had this I'd go back to some of the high ground clearance roads in the Medicine Lake volcano area of northern California.

We've been into that area with our 24 foot Itasca Class C. No problem where we were offroad - but we had to of course slow way down and it was the dry season.

I think we went back in there to get into Lava Beds National Monument through the back entrance ... we made it too. We'd like to go back and stay awhile at Medicine Lake to try the fishing.

That whole four-corners area of California/Nevado/Idaho/Oregon is right up there with Utah as my favorite RV'ing areas.

Our first trip we were doing the Volcanic Legacy Scenic Byway, California section from Lassen Volcanic National Park, and were slowed down by all the road expansion joints and cattle guards (where are those FSDs?). The one turn-off we saw looked rutted and more clearance than we had. Ended up going around on the highways and arriving from the North at Indian Well CG at dusk.

2nd trip we knew we wanted to explore more and went up by Mammoth Crater out of Lava Beds. Road not bad MH would have been fine if I recall correctly. Took a look at going up the Glass Mountain loop road which was steep and rocky, but decided to save it for next time. That would be an interesting place to boondock with a 4x4.

Is there a price yet? I'd love to see them come out with a 23' version.

vikrv wrote:
If I had this I'd go back to some of the high ground clearance roads in the Medicine Lake volcano area of northern California.

We've been into that area with our 24 foot Itasca Class C. No problem where we were offroad - but we had to of course slow way down and it was the dry season.

I think we went back in there to get into Lava Beds National Monument through the back entrance ... we made it too. We'd like to go back and stay awhile at Medicine Lake to try the fishing.

That whole four-corners area of California/Nevado/Idaho/Oregon is right up there with Utah as my favorite RV'ing areas.

The Melbourne is an existing B+ product that has been optioned up, 4x4ed, repainted, lifted, and white letter tired to make the Melbourne 4x4. Perhaps they are referring to Melbourne, Florida...If I had this I'd go back to some of the high ground clearance roads in the Medicine Lake volcano area of northern California. Instead we rented a FJ Cruiser to tour the area and left the rv parked at Lava Beds NM.

I didn't realize how big it is (31-ft-7-in) which is about like our old 31A. The 4x4 wheelbase is 212" vs. our 218". With 2 slides forward plus the added weight of the 4x4 package, I'd guess it needs the WB a little shorter to not overload the front axle. Still, about the same rear overhang as our On-Road Class C...
I see they've gone to an aluminum subframe vs. our steel one. That's gotta help the weight. And a fiberglass roof too. At the price that coach has gotta be, it better be!

pnichols wrote:
What's with the somewhat dark exterior - cool looking, if that's your thing - but good luck with interior heat control when boondocking in the spring/summer/fall sun.

It's nice that Jayco is at least recognizing the market for a factory-built 4X4 Class C, though ... they are even making an attempt at offering token suspension tweaks above Ford stock (... however in a 23-24 foot length, stock Ford suspension is probably just fine). Inclusion of Load Range G tires would be a great ruggedness upgrade, too.

Not just the Dark exterior(That could get very hot in the summer). The Overhang on the Motorhome would make it very much less than ideal Off Road, the high COG would also be a concern. In other words you would be basically stuck on mainly graded dirt roads. The irony is is called a Melbourne, NOT a Very Australian Off Road Motorhome:)

This unit looks great but I'd have serious concerns about it holding up after owning a a 2WD Jayco.

You may have a point on tank heater pads at 0F on down. Our Itasca 12 volt tank heaters supposedly suck up 6-8 amps continuous, each (we have two), if not cycling and hence ON continuously. In less severe, but below-freezing conditions, I believe their average current draw per hour should be a lot less.

For extreme cold drycamping, IMHO, one should have at least a 400 AH battery bank, anyway, so electric tank heating should not be an issue if you're packing generator capability along, too. Personally, I wouldn't camp in cold temperatures without also having double generators along for systems redundancy. We have the built-in Onan for full electric heat (including tank unthawing) and battery charging if the propane system should ever fail in the field and we also carry a small Honda along with extra fuel for topping up the batteries every day - so as to not have to resort to the Onan or idling of the V10. The little Honda can even run a couple of our 150W personal electric heaters plus top up the batteries for backup, In an extreme emergency, long term idling of the V10 can of course heat everything and charge everything as long as the up to 55 gallons of fuel lasts.

IMHO, equipment flexibility and redundancy are the name of the game for RV boondocking - at least when one finally reaches the age where they are no longer immortal!

I agree with most of your assessment but am looking for cold weather performance. Tank heaters will not be sufficient at 0F boondocking unless you are running continuous generator internal or external or have sufficient solar. I like Triple E's cold weather capability better, and they don't use electric tank heaters. Triple E also had the over cab bed but dropped that model.

The black color scheme looks cool but would be hot in the summer. Since it is getting cold out now not a problem. Perhaps flip the black to white paint.

Tires yes, there is a huge rv market for tire manufacturers that would make the 225-75r16 with greater design load margin. Toyo has their tuff duty models with a 3rd steel belt but not in 225-75r16.

Tanks are small but comparable to Triple E. Smaller than what we currently have at 43/40/40.

Thanks for the heads-up on this!

Jayco should also offer a 23-24 foot non-slide version of the 4X4 Melbourne for even more serious boondocking use.

The tanks are too small -> especially the critical black and fresh water tanks are too small. Also, what is the propane tank size? 18 gallons is minimum for serious worry-free comfortable Class C boondocking, but they don't mention the size.

Inclusion of a one-piece, no-seam, no-forward-facing-window classic cabover bed area would also be good for those who want double queen beds.

Way to go Jayco on the tank heating pads - assuming all liquid line runs are within the interior. (For boondocking, I prefer 12 volt heating pads over areas around tanks that have to be constantly exposed to furnace-warmed air.)

What's with the somewhat dark exterior - cool looking, if that's your thing - but good luck with interior heat control when boondocking in the spring/summer/fall sun.

It's nice that Jayco is at least recognizing the market for a factory-built 4X4 Class C, though ... they are even making an attempt at offering token suspension tweaks above Ford stock (... however in a 23-24 foot length, stock Ford suspension is probably just fine). Inclusion of Load Range G tires would be a great ruggedness upgrade, too.