Off Road Class C Motorhome and Extended Tray

Robert,

Maybe what you're calling "offroad" in reference to your expedition vehicle photos and discussions is close to what we call "rock crawling" here in the States.

Of course my Class C, or no Class C, can do that kind of aggressive roving around in the wilderness.

As you imply (...I think), what I call "offroad" where my Class C can go very safely, reliably, and with great lateral stability ... is places similar to those in the video, in your photos above (including the Algerian desert photo), and in my various destination photos I've shown other places in these forums.

For what it's worth, there are plenty of U.S. Class B 4X4 models on the retail market than can come pretty close to rock crawling and still provide an indoor shower when you get there - but at far, far less dollars then those expedition looking vehicles. I'll even go so far as to state that I'll bet that a Tiger Class C RV could be delivered on just the right standard cab length Ford, GM, or Ram 4X4 pickup setup that would sand dune crawl and rock crawl right up there with the expedition vehicles - and at a lot less dollars purchase cost.

P.S. #1: Yes, I do call what my pickup was doing in my photo the beginning of "offroad". Perhaps you should have seen the 30%-plus side-tipped grades in the ravines that we had to travel shortly after that river crossing shot. I do this kind of stuff several times a year performing volunteer maintenance in a California outback wilderness park where only backpackers/hikers are allowed except via special vehicle permits for us volunteers.

P.S. #2: I'd still like to compare rear wheel track-widths of tall & narrow looking expedition vehicles to that of my motorhome.

Here is a Video of a Normal Motorhome(Despite the Off Road tag it is a Normal 2wd Unit)and typical dirt road and water crossings. Apologies for the painful presenter on the Video.
Normal Class C Off Road Video.

23ft Small Class C water crossing typical of normal Motorhome usage.




A MERCEDES SPRINTER 4 X 4 OFF ROAD
Mercedes Sprinter Off Road.

Pnichols wrote:
My little ole' Class C is nothing like a behemoth American Class A and I can pretty much guarantee that their owners would not go to where we go rockhounding. Here's a photo of my offroad pickup in the California outback as proof that I do know what "offroad" means, by the way:

I think you misunderstand a lot of what I have been saying in this thread. That shot of the Pickup is not what I would consider Off Road, it is more going up a small incline. The dirt/gravel road looks like a pretty normal gravel road not far from where I live(Where I take rubbish to the local tip). I cannot get your going "Off Road" from those shots.

good old SUVs of the same types and sizes as I see in so many Australian photos pulling their tiny raised trailers behind them

"Raised Trailers" utility trailers or a 8000lb Caravan?. The SUV's I encounter go to the V8 Diesel Landcruiser(L200) variety quite common here.
Wheelbase is 11.138 ft. Distance between the tires about 5.5 ft. This is on the non modified truck.
Like Posting this shot of a group European Motorhomes roaming across the Algerian desert.

RobertRyan wrote:
Pnichols wrote:

Ours does not drive like a long length, heavy, rental Tioga probably does - ours has a tight, compact, well-braked feel when going level, up, or down - in winds or not. The E450's thicker steel frame also will reduce longitunal torsion twisting of the frame on rutted roads if the Class C coach above it is a small one. This helps keep the coach from being subjected to floor deformation when on uneven surfaces over what the E350 would provide.

Outside of a completely different vehicle to what I drove, I find that hard to believe, You E450 is as much Off Road from your own photos as that Class A pulling a small Trailer.

Robert,

Going back to the straight-forward point in my very first post in this long and interesting thread: If you would be so kind as to post some of the rear track widths on some of those tall and narrow expedition vehicles in your photos, I'll go out and measure my E450's rear track width and post it here for comparison of geometries.

My little ole' Class C is nothing like a behemoth American Class A and I can pretty much guarantee that their owners would not go to where we go rockhounding. Here's a photo of my offroad pickup in the California outback as proof that I do know what "offroad" means, by the way:



Here's a "very mild and gentle road" we went on to some fossil beds 13 months ago that you probably won't find many/any Class A's trying to travel on. When we got to where this road ended out in the middle of nowhere in Western Utah the only other thing there were - you guessed it - good old SUVs of the same types and sizes as I see in so many Australian photos pulling their tiny raised trailers behind them.

Vikr wrote:
These are replacing the Humvee not because the Humvee was not a good offroad vehicle, but because the Humvee is not built to be resistant to IED/Mine explosions.

The unit you are picturing is the BAE systems RG-31 Mk3A which is resistant to IED explosions. The resistance partly is a result of having a V-shaped hull underneath, which is a feature all the latest IED resistant vehicles share.

Correct and the technology was formed in the "Dirty Wars" that were fought by South Africa in 1980's. The Humvee was very ill suited to coping with mines being a vehicle that was in many ways the perfect vehicle to be destroyed by them. Not that is of any concern to people driving a Motorhome!! No the Humvee has a some limitations Off Road and its replacement, similar in some respects to the Isuzu based Motorhome in my original post(very high ground clearance,) will replace it.
Some concepts:

RobertRyan wrote:

That is not a Humvee, it is a one of the Vehicles being considered as a replacement for it.
These replaced the Humvee in Afghanistan and Iraq. Originally developed in South Africa.

These are replacing the Humvee not because the Humvee was not a good offroad vehicle, but because the Humvee is not built to be resistant to IED/Mine explosions.

The unit you are picturing is the BAE systems RG-31 Mk3A which is resistant to IED explosions. The resistance partly is a result of having a V-shaped hull underneath, which is a feature all the latest IED resistant vehicles share.

PNichols, the Humvee was a failure as an Off Road Vehicle and a Military Vehicle. That is why the US army has replaced or is tbe process of replacing it.

That yellow HumVee in Robert's photo has straight-through axles - don't know where that came from - maybe an alternate (and less expensive) military configuration. The black HumVee has the high-clearance drive configuratio

That is not a Humvee, it is a one of the Vehicles being considered as a replacement for it.
These replaced the Humvee in Afghanistan and Iraq. Originally developed in South Africa.

Pnichols wrote:
Ours does not drive like a long length, heavy, rental Tioga probably does - ours has a tight, compact, well-braked feel when going level, up, or down - in winds or not. The E450's thicker steel frame also will reduce longitunal torsion twisting of the frame on rutted roads if the Class C coach above it is a small one. This helps keep the coach from being subjected to floor deformation when on uneven surfaces over what the E350 would provide.

Outside of a completely different vehicle to what I drove, I find that hard to believe, You E450 is as much Off Road from your own photos as that Class A pulling a small Trailer.

garyhaupt wrote:
hey RobertRyan...no need to over-do the lecturing, bud. Our needs are so much different that yours in Australia anyway. I, too, run a 4x4 C, a '99 E350 and while it won't rock crawl, I can get into more than enough trouble right here at home

Basically US RV's are geared for a graded dirt road. Not Off Road as we know it, your correct.
Outside of the Drive in the Tioga, I shared driving a a Winnebago Esperance(IVECO Daily based) with 4 of us across Australia, then a rental Apollo 23ft Motorhome built on a Ford Transit with my wife. Owned a Custom Truck Camper built on a Ford Falcon Ute. Prior to that tents.

(Some) expedition vehicles ONLY have greater ground clearance than a HumVee because they (the expedition vehicles) have larger diameter tires on them than the standard military-issue HumVees do. Most of the expedition vehicle photos I see have good old fashion straight-through solid axles. The HumVee vehicles have a way more advanced and higher ground clearance wheel-drive configuration than solid axles. Put monster tires on a HumVee, then measure the distance between the ground and it's engine pan and it's differentials. Then compare those measurements of a purpose-built expedition vehicle to those of the monster-tired HumVee. I'll bet some eyes would be opened. Large diameter tires can lift a lot of stuff that otherwise would have to be moved up through expensive and/or unique engineering approaches to keep offroad damage and traction-loss to a minium.

Look at vikrv's front profile photo above of a black HumVee - notice no big old differential down there in-line with the center-line of the tires. The differential is way up high so it can't get smashed on rocks.

That yellow HumVee in Robert's photo has straight-through axles - don't know where that came from - maybe an alternate (and less expensive) military configuration. The black HumVee has the high-clearance drive configuration.

I guess I have to measure the distance between the centers of the outer tires of my rear dual sets to prove my point - since no one has yet posted a scale rear view of it against a scale rear view of a high-up expedition vehicle. I'll bet it's NOT narrower than a UniMog monster ... I maintain that it even MAY be wider. Remember that Ford's E450 specs state that it's rear track is 4.5 inches wider than the E350 - so the two chassis ARE NOT the same. For what it's worth in the "strength" department - the E450's frame is also specified by Ford to be of thicker steel stock than the E350. My 11,800 lb., 24 foot Class C is well supported by the overkill ton-and-a-half truck chassis under it ... that's why we wanted a short Class C but on the optional chassis - for the bigger brakes, increased cooling, hydralically boosted power braking, and wider track that you get with the ton-and-a-half Ford chassis. The fender wells have clearance for, probably, at least three tire size diameters larger than what Ford delivers them with. Ours does not drive like a long length, heavy, rental Tioga probably does - ours has a tight, compact, well-braked feel when going level, up, or down - in winds or not. The E450's thicker steel frame also will reduce longitunal torsion twisting of the frame on rutted roads if the Class C coach above it is a small one. This helps keep the coach from being subjected to floor deformation when on uneven surfaces over what the E350 would provide.

I'll admit though, that the toughest road we've had it on to date has only been the valley loop "not recommended for RV's" within Monument Valley. Our Class C was pretty much alone down there with respect to other RVs. It did just fine, by the way ... by driving slow and picking our track carefully ... just like should be done offroad with any vehicle.

hey RobertRyan...no need to over-do the lecturing, bud. Our needs are so much different that yours in Australia anyway. I, too, run a 4x4 C, a '99 E350 and while it won't rock crawl, I can get into more than enough trouble right here at home. Between my 250w's of solar, clearance, 4x4, winch and all the doo dads I have on there, I maybe not be ready for the 'outback' but there are few places I can't go..and tell you what? I have seen a European Expedition type vehicles bogged here in Canada. Some of our roads are much to narrow to take such a vehicle and then we throw in the mud/clay..and we have one very messed up and expensive recovery job.

And..looking at your profile..I am not seeing what you run about in. Please post that.

Gary Haupt