Forum Discussion
gerrym51 wrote:
burlmart wrote:
I assume SRW, but could they use duallys to gain better stability? I am aware its front drive.
I keep staring at those 2 floorplans and thinking they are really lacking on liveability, and not too friendly to large people (tall or wide).
Compare either plan to a Class B with rear king or twin beds, where one can sleep while the other uses the living room.
I chalk it up to a first pass effort overly influenced by the murphy bed trend, which is also guilty of wiping out the living room w/ the bed.
We have this same situation w/ our TL 213 floorplan.
burlmart-while i think the 23l bed is too small for 2 people wouldnt one be able to be in thebed while the other at the dining/lounge area.
Definitely my 1st thought. So the early riser (me) would take the drop bed. I was thinking two beds when I made the rear bunk post, not because I like particularly like bunks.
The rear bath plan, while lacking in bedding, sure is wide open in the middle.puttd wrote:
Just saw it at Hershey. For a single person, the 23L was really nice. I kept going between the Phoenix Cruiser and it. It has very efficient use of space. I don't think it has enough storage for six people. But it has very nice storage-- both a wardrobe and a small pantry. Outside storage will work for smaller groups. I think it is very nicely designed.
It was too busy to get the bed down, but it looked sturdy.
The biggest negative I found was that it was difficult to get to the front cab with the seats forward. My butt was too big, but that was the worst I could say.
The propane was a bit small with 13 gal capacity.
It's at least $20k less base price than anything comparable, if not less, and it has the gas mileage over a V-10.
Oh, and the TV location stunk.
specs say both plans have optional tv locationsburlmart wrote:
I assume SRW, but could they use duallys to gain better stability? I am aware its front drive.
I keep staring at those 2 floorplans and thinking they are really lacking on liveability, and not too friendly to large people (tall or wide).
Compare either plan to a Class B with rear king or twin beds, where one can sleep while the other uses the living room.
I chalk it up to a first pass effort overly influenced by the murphy bed trend, which is also guilty of wiping out the living room w/ the bed.
We have this same situation w/ our TL 213 floorplan.
burlmart-while i think the 23l bed is too small for 2 people wouldnt one be able to be in thebed while the other at the dining/lounge area.Dakzuki wrote:
If I recall it has but one house battery. Was it a group 31? If so I hope they left room for a couple of 6 volt batteries to replace it.
it does have all LED lights. uses far less power- I assume SRW, but could they use duallys to gain better stability? I am aware its front drive.
I keep staring at those 2 floorplans and thinking they are really lacking on liveability, and not too friendly to large people (tall or wide).
Compare either plan to a Class B with rear king or twin beds, where one can sleep while the other uses the living room.
I chalk it up to a first pass effort overly influenced by the murphy bed trend, which is also guilty of wiping out the living room w/ the bed.
We have this same situation w/ our TL 213 floorplan. - If I recall it has but one house battery. Was it a group 31? If so I hope they left room for a couple of 6 volt batteries to replace it.
- Ugh, wrong twice in wrong thread... I'm on a roll here. I only saw the "roof skin warranty", and not the "fiberglass". Thanks for the corrections.
All and all, this rig is looking like it might be a very good seller, as I can't see anything glaring wrong with it unlike some stripped down rigs I've seen which end up getting rid of a shower or other stuff to cut prices. - Just saw it at Hershey. For a single person, the 23L was really nice. I kept going between the Phoenix Cruiser and it. It has very efficient use of space. I don't think it has enough storage for six people. But it has very nice storage-- both a wardrobe and a small pantry. Outside storage will work for smaller groups. I think it is very nicely designed.
It was too busy to get the bed down, but it looked sturdy.
The biggest negative I found was that it was difficult to get to the front cab with the seats forward. My butt was too big, but that was the worst I could say.
The propane was a bit small with 13 gal capacity.
It's at least $20k less base price than anything comparable, if not less, and it has the gas mileage over a V-10.
Oh, and the TV location stunk. mlts22 wrote:
There is one item which I am dubious about -- the roof is a rubber one (this assumed by the "roof skin warranty" quote on WGO's page.) Rubber roofs, compared to fiberglass or one piece aluminum offerings, are "when, not if", when it comes to leaks. However, one gets what they pay for, and hitting the top with Dicor every so often may not be a bad trade-off for a decent price.
From the Winnebago web site: "With the purchase of any new Winnebago or Itasca motor home, Winnebago Industries offers a comprehensive 12-month, 15,000-mile warranty, a 3-year, 36,000-mile structural warranty and a 10-year fiberglass roof skin warranty."
Using the standard 25% off number for negotiating, one should be able to get this RV for a bit over 65 grand (based on MSRP) before adding options.SkiMore wrote:
MPG: The lichtsinn video says it has a "24 gallon gas tank with an estimated cruising range of just under 500 miles". If you can believe the video it works out to almost 20.8mpg.
Lichtsinn also tells fairy tales about Sprinter fuel economy.
