Forum Discussion
pnichols
Jan 23, 2021Explorer II
When we were shopping for a new Class C in 2005 I reasoned that for the best overall handling and stability when underway, I should find one in which the chassis design margins were pushed minimally by the coach weight, the coach center of gravity, and the coach height.
To keep coach weight relatively low in relation to the chassis weight carrying design limits, I chose a 24 ft. Class C with no slides built on about the only overkill chassis available at the time - the cutaway Ford E450 van chassis. However, the Chevy 4500 cutaway van chassis may have been available then, too. The Ford E350 or Chevy 3500 chassis would have been "adequate" to carry around the weight of a 24 ft. coach, but I wanted a bit more than adequate. We can load our Class C in any way and as much as we want and I can't feel any difference in it's handling.
The E450 chassis also has a wide spacing of it's rear dual tire sets (wider than the E350, maybe wider than the Chevy 3500, and definitely wider than the Sprinter), so lateral (side-to-side) stability is maximized. This additional stability is not only beneficial for taking curves at speed, it is also beneficial to counter-act the force of crosswinds on the somewhat tall sidewalls of a classic Class C. Of course the stiff shocks on the E450 chassis - especially when combined with it's wide rear dual tire sets - also help to produce good lateral stability.
I chose a 24 ft. classic Class C to keep coach weight down as compared to a longer one. Of course all heavy items on it are down low, as is the case on most Class B and Class C motorhomes, so the center of gravity is relatively low ... which helps with lateral stability.
We wanted more interior storage and move-around room, so a narrower coach bodied Class B+ or Class C would have been too constrictive for us. Our coach is a "wide body" one at about 101 inches wide, so the interior feels "open" enough. It's exterior storage is also generous because it's a basement design in which the coach floor is a bit higher than the cab floor. What this provides is taller outside storage cabinets. We have 7 exterior storage cabinets, 2 of which run laterally across the coach width for long items like a shovel and fishing poles. These lateral storage compartments are possibe because the coach floor is a bit above the top of the chassis side frames, which is why there is a step up from the cab into the coach.
Naturally, a more streamlined and narrower and less tall coach configuration is going to reduce wind friction. But fuel mileage pales in comparison to A) the overall expense of owning a motorhome, and B) the overall pleasure payback from owning a motorhome - especially a small one in which you can go to a lot more intimate and more difficult to access exploration and camping places than in a larger one.
The only towing we do is our 14 foot aluminum fishing boat ... which is "nothing" for a small coach on a 400 series truck chassis.
P.S. Our major negative with the overkill chassis used to be the stiff ride in the rear of the coach. We fixed this through use of Koni Frequency Selective Damping ("FSD") shocks. These shocks adjust themselves to ("soft") low damping rates for the rapid crack and pothole stresses, and ("stiff") high damping rates for the slower stresses present on highway curves at speed and such things as entering raised parking lots at an angle, etc..
I apologize for the long explanation ... but there are a lot of subtle things going on when driving a loaded box down the road.
To keep coach weight relatively low in relation to the chassis weight carrying design limits, I chose a 24 ft. Class C with no slides built on about the only overkill chassis available at the time - the cutaway Ford E450 van chassis. However, the Chevy 4500 cutaway van chassis may have been available then, too. The Ford E350 or Chevy 3500 chassis would have been "adequate" to carry around the weight of a 24 ft. coach, but I wanted a bit more than adequate. We can load our Class C in any way and as much as we want and I can't feel any difference in it's handling.
The E450 chassis also has a wide spacing of it's rear dual tire sets (wider than the E350, maybe wider than the Chevy 3500, and definitely wider than the Sprinter), so lateral (side-to-side) stability is maximized. This additional stability is not only beneficial for taking curves at speed, it is also beneficial to counter-act the force of crosswinds on the somewhat tall sidewalls of a classic Class C. Of course the stiff shocks on the E450 chassis - especially when combined with it's wide rear dual tire sets - also help to produce good lateral stability.
I chose a 24 ft. classic Class C to keep coach weight down as compared to a longer one. Of course all heavy items on it are down low, as is the case on most Class B and Class C motorhomes, so the center of gravity is relatively low ... which helps with lateral stability.
We wanted more interior storage and move-around room, so a narrower coach bodied Class B+ or Class C would have been too constrictive for us. Our coach is a "wide body" one at about 101 inches wide, so the interior feels "open" enough. It's exterior storage is also generous because it's a basement design in which the coach floor is a bit higher than the cab floor. What this provides is taller outside storage cabinets. We have 7 exterior storage cabinets, 2 of which run laterally across the coach width for long items like a shovel and fishing poles. These lateral storage compartments are possibe because the coach floor is a bit above the top of the chassis side frames, which is why there is a step up from the cab into the coach.
Naturally, a more streamlined and narrower and less tall coach configuration is going to reduce wind friction. But fuel mileage pales in comparison to A) the overall expense of owning a motorhome, and B) the overall pleasure payback from owning a motorhome - especially a small one in which you can go to a lot more intimate and more difficult to access exploration and camping places than in a larger one.
The only towing we do is our 14 foot aluminum fishing boat ... which is "nothing" for a small coach on a 400 series truck chassis.
P.S. Our major negative with the overkill chassis used to be the stiff ride in the rear of the coach. We fixed this through use of Koni Frequency Selective Damping ("FSD") shocks. These shocks adjust themselves to ("soft") low damping rates for the rapid crack and pothole stresses, and ("stiff") high damping rates for the slower stresses present on highway curves at speed and such things as entering raised parking lots at an angle, etc..
I apologize for the long explanation ... but there are a lot of subtle things going on when driving a loaded box down the road.
About Motorhome Group
38,709 PostsLatest Activity: Mar 08, 2025