Small Class C

The E450 chassis does more than carry more or tow more.

On small Class C motorhomes that don't need the E450 for the above reasons, an E450 gives you bigger brakes for more time between brake jobs, more transmission cooling for less heat load on the engine and longer transmission life, a 4.5 inch wider rear dually stance for better lateral stability offroad and in high side winds, pump boosted power steering instead of vacuum boosted power steering (at least for our model year of the E450), thicker steel in the chassis frame for less frame torsional twisting transfer into the coach box, and lower differential gearing when pulling up long grades for less heat load on the V10 in hot weather.

We considered the long term benefits of the E450 over the E350 as well worth the (relatively) few extra dollars we had to pay for the option when we bought our small Class C. Since we go offroad in the desert with our Class C, we generally feel more secure with the additional chassis ruggedness under us.

It depends on your budget. It is MUCH easier to find an older short E-350 than any of the others. And they are cheaper. An E-450 may carry more weight, but we stock ours full and are still under full weight. Have not had issues with handling.
We are fine with climbing up into bed in our 22 ft rig. It is not that far when we step on a stool on the dinette bench after the cushion is removed.
We love the short length and have taken it on many an AZ dirt road. We use "training wheels" to keep from losing anything underneath although we lost one set of those wheels and the steps on a particularly rocky unpaved road. We do the repairs and go back out again.
We typically go from 3 to 10 miles off the paved roads to find seclusion and have never tried to tow. We fit in some restaurant and smaller parking spaces by backing in and overhanging a spot that is over grass, and in big parking lots it is OK to take two.
But there are folks who tow jeeps and love the extra ability to go on 4wd roads. Could never get as far off road with the RV though if we towed. Maybe taking a dirt bike on a rear mount would offer the flexibility you want and still be short enough to get out of established spots.
I like to take photos of how isolated we are when we camp. This one is from northern AZ, not far from the northern side of the Grand Canyon.
Have fun shopping!

If you are concerned at all about sleeping comfort or have arthritis problems, you will want a rear bedroom with RV queen sized bed. Sleeping in the overhead or on folding sofas or converting dinettes is no fun for most people. If so, you are limited to rigs no less than 26-27 feet long. Not much good for typical off road or back road travel. A Truck camper may be best for fishing, etc., in back country by one person.

Based on reports here, I use these assumptions on MPG:
Ford B+ 9-10
Ford C 7-8
Chevy B+ 10-11
Chevy C 8-9

Obviously length and weight matter but not as much as you might think.

People say driving them is all the same regardless of length.
Very few of them have levelers.
People seem to feel the Chevy handles better than the Ford, although there are fixes for the Ford ranging from alignment (set caster to maximum positive) to $$$aftermarket parts.

I don't know about the paved road thing Tatest. I have a 24ft 01, Coachmen, with a slide.
Now I admittedly am not the brightest crayon in the box, But I have driven at least a 3 or 4 thousand miles, of gravel roads with it. Some good, some very rough. And probably a thousand miles or so on logging road stuff.

Probably hard on it I agree. But my rule of thumb is if I can get a passenger car up it, I will take the RV.

My Rv being short, has little rear overhang, And better ground clearence than any passanger car

That said I agree, it is not a truck, but I think he can probably gets what he suggests, towing a jeep into some pretty remote boondocking spots, up some pretty rough roads and go forth in the jeep from there

That's been my experience at least. Now the truth is, of course that way of thinking, has well, got me into a situation or two, Thats lets just say, the DW was not real pleased about. But never have been stuck yet. Knock on wood!!!!!! Been yelled at a few times though. LOL

1) Not in my experience, factors other than length matter more, and MPG is determined more by frontal area and how you drive.

2) Some B+ designs are lower and narrower than most C's, and some cap designs help slightly with drag coefficient, so on the whole, B+ is better MPG, but that depends also on which specific model, whether C or B+.

3) I know you can get either a locker or limited slip for the axle used on the E-350, Ford offers it as an option, and limited slip shows up on some emergency vehicles, but RV manufacturers don't buy the option. If what you really want is a locker (drag racing or rock climbing?) you must buy aftermarket. Don't know about Chevy, whether using Dana or GM on the cutaways.

4) Whether or not E-350 is sufficient depends more on weight than length. A 28 with no slides could be a lot lighter than a 22 with two slideouts. E-350 offers opportunity to get a V-8 that does better with MPG, which seems to be an issue for you, or if you find the right one used, a Powerstroke.

5) Your local Ford TRUCK dealer should have an excellent brochure on the E-series. I've been collecting them since 2005 and find them more useful than Ford's website, which doesn't have all the information in one place, you have to make multiple "build" passes to draw out answers. I've not found a comparable brochure from Chevy, but my local dealer may not really be a truck dealer.

6) I don't think you need a power leveling system on anything, but the larger the RV the more work it can be to level, and yes the systems are nice if your leveling problem is in the range of operation. C's do not usually have power leveling, the cost works against sales in the price sensitive C market. If you are thinking off road or back road, power leveling tends to add to a motorhome's already difficult clearance problems.

7) Whether a C (or A, or truck camper, or van) handles well or poorly depends less on manufacturer, more on whether the house is too big for the chassis, and the distribution of mass and surface area relative to pivot points. It also depends on who is driving it, expectations, experience, and driving skills. I know that driving a 22 foot (overall) box truck on Express 3500, E-350, E-450 cab-chassis, especially lightly loaded (about 8000 GVW), feels like a sports car compared to my 12,500 pound 30-foot motorhome on the same chassis. But what a 22 footer filled to 12,000 to 14,000 pound capacity feels like, I don't know, because I haven't rented a box truck to carry a heavy load, only lightweight bulky loads.

8) Mass producers Winnebago, Thor, Coachmen, Forest River, Fleetwood, Jayco, use similar construction techniques, a box constructed of laminated panels stiffened by aluminum frame members. There are differences on how the box is assembled, Winnebago using interlocking aluminum members, most others using point fasteners. Forest River and Winnebago have been skinning the roof with fiberglass sheeting, others are still using lighter synthetic fabrics. If you inspect different mass production RVs closely, you will find significant differences in fit and finish, materials, type and number of fasteners, quality of other hardware items.

Holiday Rambler built motorhomes differently, with aluminum framing built up from floor, then skinned and filled. This was when Holiday Rambler was still building the C's and A gassers for the Monaco brands.

That changed to laminated panel box construction, like everybody else, when the H-R (and other Monaco) brand was put on models built at the recently acquired R-Vision plant.

I inspected Thor, Coachmen, Jayco, Fleetwood, Forest River examples closely, and visited four of the factories, which made me go with Winnebago. But they are not the best, as you can get better construction using either modern or traditional construction methods, from some small RV builders, if you want to pay the price. For construction quality, have LazyDaze build you one.

There is no taking most C's very far from very good paved roads. They are too long, too much wheelbase, too much rear overhang, too little ground clearance to deal with even minor bumps, dips, crowns and ruts. A big part of the house is built in a "basement" hanging down over the sides of an already too low frame.

Short C's do better than long ones, but even short conventional C's will have nearly half the house behind the rear axle to get weight distribution right at maximum weight.

There are important exceptions, like Tiger, the old Xplorer line, and Host Industries' expedition vehicles. You will find these built higher, on conventional cab chassis with higher frames, and with less of the house hanging low under the floor and the frame rails.

I would rather have a truck camper to get to remote fishing areas. It would depend on how remote, are you having to go 2-3 miles from a convenient RV campground, or is your fishing site going to take you 20-50 miles from the nearest facility that can handle the motorhome?

Here is a website for the Chevy Express Cut away that may be helpful.

Chevy Cutaway

As stated before the Fords seem to be Plagued with bad handling that takes $$$ to fix. Like HERE

While the RV's built on the Chevy Chassis do not seem to suffer the same fate.

A discussion about that can be seen HERE Among other things such as fuel mileage and cockpit room.

I tow my Jeep with my 25 foot MH and it works out great. I have the E450 and it tows the Jeep with ease. And when I get to my destination, my Jeep takes my ANYWHERE I need to go. Especially off the beaten path to find secluded fishing spots!

I've owned a Thor Chateau 22E for 3 months and 1800 miles. I'm happy so far. It's only 24 ft bumper to bumper but includes everything we need for comfortable travel.

An E-450 chassis would only increase the GVWR. Generally not necessary on shorter lengths.

The MPG is horrible so if fuel economy is an issue, refrain from purchasing any RV.

I keep reading about Ford E-Series Cutaway Handling issues but can't say I've noticed anything unusual.

Leveling systems are not necessary on shorter lengths.

The length of a unit does impact handling.

Traction control is available but you would almost certainly need to special order to get it.

http://www.ford.com/commercial-trucks/eseries-cutaway/features/

I have a small class C and have been very happy with it. Sleeps 2-4, about 10 MPG. I believe Thor makes a 22 foot Chateau model with a Chevy Van front.