Safari trek

I know someone with an 02! It has been for sale for over 2 Years.

Go to this website and ask all of your questions. It is for Safari Trek owners and want to be owners. Safari Trek Owners
You will find people there that have Safari Treks of all years and you can get accurate information about anything that concerns you.

zigpep,

Driveability issues would be with the chassis, not the brand of coach. The chassis, if gas, would be Ford or Workhorse (Chevy engine). Workhorse chassis has a better reputation for ride and stability. Much of a coaches handling characteristics are due to overloading, or improper inflation of tires.

The Ford F53 chassis, up to about 2004, was noted for poorer handling and more aftermarket steering/suspension modifications were needed.

The Safari coaches have a decent repututaion for build quality. The best advice I can give you is to look for the coach that gives you more of what you want. The considerations are, IMHO, floorplan, slide-outs, amenities, chassis.

I suggest you drive as many different coaches as possible before you buy to see how they drive and handle. Walk through them and check out the features each coach offers. There are so many different configurations that it can be confusing, but when you come across one that strikes your fancy, go for it.

One other thing to consider, if you have not RV'd before, rent one for a week to see how you like the lifestyle. Or, you could buy an older, less expensive coach, then trade up if you love it!

Happy Trails! :W

Darryl

I had a 1999 Ford V-10 chassis, which was the first "modern" one. it drove and handled just fine. they did up the horsepower a year or two later but the folks I talked to with those got worse gas mileage than I did. I also had mid 90s Chevy P30-32s with the front wheels 4 1/2 ft apart and they sucked. if you are looking at Workhouses of the early 2000s, be sure you aren't just getting a rebadged P30-32.
bumpy

There than what chassis it is on, a BIG factor in handling is wheelbase/overall length.

Many Treks have a very poor (very short) wheelbase to overall length ratio. That long overhang negatively affects handling and ride.

wolfe10 wrote:
There than what chassis it is on, a BIG factor in handling is wheelbase/overall length.

Many Treks have a very poor (very short) wheelbase to overall length ratio. That long overhang negatively affects handling and ride.

Having put many miles on the shortest(24') and the longest Treks(30'), I have never had a problem with poor handling or poor ride. I have found, from actual driving experience, that proper load management is the key to better handling rather than some arbitrary wheel base ratio. A poorly loaded coach will handle bad, no matter what the wheelbase ratio is, or overhang length.

rgatijnet1 wrote:

wolfe10 wrote:
There than what chassis it is on, a BIG factor in handling is wheelbase/overall length.

Many Treks have a very poor (very short) wheelbase to overall length ratio. That long overhang negatively affects handling and ride.

Having put many miles on the shortest(24') and the longest Treks(30'), I have never had a problem with poor handling or poor ride. I have found, from actual driving experience, that proper load management is the key to better handling rather than some arbitrary wheel base ratio. A poorly loaded coach will handle bad, no matter what the wheelbase ratio is, or overhang length.

I totally agree-- weight distribution is a major factor in handling. Many coaches with long overhangs have weight distributed such that it unloads the front axle (lots of weight behind rear axle). This degrades handling and ride.

But, even without improper weight distribution, long rear overhangs add to driver fatigue when driving in a cross wind. Afterall, a large surface area "tail" is how windvanes work.

Please don't misread that I am negative on Treks-- these same principles affect all coaches.

I am refurbishing a 1993 Safari Trek 2600. I am doing so because of it's compactness, it's solid maple, and an ISUZU NPR Diesel Chassis, I was a Trucker of 40 Years. I found one with all the papers.

All the parts to do so, were also still available.

There is a serious learning curve to operating any motor home, should you not have driven anything larger than a "Sprinter".

However, once you have all the Details down, being a "Full Timer" of many years, there is no better way of life in my estimation.

If you have issues with your motor home, a Reputable mechanic, or References to one, is found here, on RV.net. Have Fun, "The Truth Is Out There".

Trucker_18a wrote:
I am refurbishing a 1993 Safari Trek 2600. I am doing so because of it's compactness, it's solid maple...

Wonder if that is clear Alder, not Maple. Will only make a difference if you wish to make mods.

I have owned a Safari Simba 2007 for 4 years and it has been a reliable and fun RV. Thought about getting a newer one, but why this one works just fine.