2 12 volt batterys or 2 6 volt

brulaz wrote:
Well, the way *we* camp is rather a red herring.
All I'm saying above is that different people have different needs.
Seems pretty simple to me. There's no single battery technology that fits every single person out there.

The way you camp is anything but a red herring but rather exactly the point and just what I've been saying throughout this entire 10 pages of discussion. RV.NET is a public forum and as of this writing this particular thread shows 2494 views so it's obvious not just a limited few who have actually posted in the thread are interested in this topic. My point is made and IMO bears repeating because even if there's even the slightest suggestion one might camp without shore power self appointed forum pundits constantly inundate discussions like this with automatic responses that always declare the 6 volt deep cycle GC battery as the "best choice" for recreational vehicle owners when in fact the most accurate answer is it depends on how one intends to actually use their battery reserve. For many that can well mean a purpose designed 12 volt RV/Marine battery, Trojan's SCS series being an example.

OK, everyone out of the sand box before it attracts the attention of a moderator. :B

SoundGuy wrote:

...

brulaz wrote:
Some RVer's are like you and rarely boondock. Trojan's recommendations for a Marine/RV would be fine. The lower Cycle life is fine, and they have the advantage of less V drop under load.

But others are full-timers and boondock a lot. They cannot afford the low cycle life of a marine battery. And make do with the V drop perhaps by adding more non-marine batteries.

I'm somewhere in between and can't decide. :)

...
Simply put, the vast majority of recreational vehicle owners aren't interested in camping without electricity and as such your estimation of those that do so willingly grossly exaggerates reality.
...

And where did I present such an estimate?
And where did I say I was only talking about Ontario campers?
Good grief man, calm down and read the posts more carefully.

SoundGuy wrote:

...

brulaz wrote:
Some RVer's are like you and rarely boondock. Trojan's recommendations for a Marine/RV would be fine. The lower Cycle life is fine, and they have the advantage of less V drop under load.

But others are full-timers and boondock a lot. They cannot afford the low cycle life of a marine battery. And make do with the V drop perhaps by adding more non-marine batteries.

I'm somewhere in between and can't decide. :)

According to your profile you're here in Ontario as I am and I'm sure you're as aware that the idea of "boondocking" is just about an impossibility, certainly here in S Ontario where virtually every square inch of land is owned by someone who has no interest in having you on their land. Yes, the Ontario government does run a limited boondocking program in some areas in N Ontario but reality is it's little known and very few actually take advantage of the program ... have you?
...

Well, the way *we* camp is rather a red herring.
All I'm saying above is that different people have different needs.
Seems pretty simple to me. There's no single battery technology that fits every single person out there.

But to answer your question: Most of our camping is in the U.S. as we are Snow Birds. We spend 3-4 months down there in the Winter and prefer the out of the way (and cheaper) areas of the National Parks and Reserves (Smoky Mountains, Long Pine in Everglades and any of the Big Cypress Reserve campgrounds for example). There is no electricity available at these places.

And in the Summer when camping in the Ontario Prov. Parks, we prefer the non-electric sites which are usually less crowded and often more scenic. For example, Killbear has some beautiful non-electric sites right on the lakeshore. And one of our favourite campgrounds is Wakami Lake in the North which has no electric sites. We rarely camp in S. Ontario.

Hi SoundGuy,

Here are some spots near Toronto. Please add to them if you can.

https://freecampsites.net/#!Toronto,%20ON,%20Canada

SoundGuy wrote:
According to your profile you're here in Ontario as I am and I'm sure you're as aware that the idea of "boondocking" is just about an impossibility, certainly here in S Ontario where virtually every square inch of land is owned by someone who has no interest in having you on their land. Yes, the Ontario government does run a limited boondocking program in some areas in N Ontario but reality is it's little known and very few actually take advantage of the program

Wow, limited boondocking opportunities in Ontario, Canuckistan. Needs in the NW,Western and SW USA as well as Mexico will give you different results for needs in a battery. Power pedestals aren't camping... it's called "glamping" here in California... short for Glamor Camping.

brulaz wrote:
According to Trojan, their T-1275 is a "12V Deep-Cycle Battery", and the SCS225 is a "12V Marine/RV Deep-Cycle Battery".

SoundGuy wrote:
While all this forum theorizing makes for interesting reading it seems to me that if the goal is a battery designed for recreational vehicle application one would logically turn to a manufacturer that designs and builds these products for the most appropriate recommendation.

brulaz wrote:
Some RVer's are like you and rarely boondock. Trojan's recommendations for a Marine/RV would be fine. The lower Cycle life is fine, and they have the advantage of less V drop under load.

But others are full-timers and boondock a lot. They cannot afford the low cycle life of a marine battery. And make do with the V drop perhaps by adding more non-marine batteries.

I'm somewhere in between and can't decide. :)

According to your profile you're here in Ontario as I am and I'm sure you're as aware that the idea of "boondocking" is just about an impossibility, certainly here in S Ontario where virtually every square inch of land is owned by someone who has no interest in having you on their land. Yes, the Ontario government does run a limited boondocking program in some areas in N Ontario but reality is it's little known and very few actually take advantage of the program ... have you? The reality is that the only connection to "boondocking" for the vast majority of RV owners here in Ontario is when some might camp on a non-electric site in the provincial park, federal park, conservation park systems, etc. That's hardly boondocking and it certainly can't be "full time" as all these park systems have limits on length of stay, 23 days max in the provincial park system as an example. As you're probably also aware electric campsites in any of these park systems are always the first to go, often being reserved months in advance, meaning that many of those you see dry camping aren't necessarily doing so by choice but rather by default because it's the only site they could get. Anytime the Ontario government decides to add a new park to the system or upgrade existing facilities additional campsites are always electric for one simple reason - they know they can sell every one of them each summer while dry sites remain empty. Simply put, the vast majority of recreational vehicle owners aren't interested in camping without electricity and as such your estimation of those that do so willingly grossly exaggerates reality. Of course if you yourself dry camp exclusively that would bear on your decision as to which battery type would best suit your needs but the vast majority will simply never realize full benefit of repeated deep discharging from a pair of 6 volt GC-2s. Whether you are one of those who would only you can determine ... but it won't be "boondocking" here in Ontario that will be the cause.

SoundGuy wrote:
......snip........ as this to me is a clear indication that Trojan believes their SCS series is the most suitable, designed specifically for recreational vehicle use by engineers who understand far better than any of us the many considerations in battery design.

TomG2 wrote:
Don't go quoting facts and manufacturer's information to us. We know what we know and have known it for a long long time.

Whoa, somebody get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? :W

You may consider yourself a well informed "battery expert" but this is a public forum where anyone can drop by to digest the various opinions offered ... mine included. ;)

UUUUUU EEEEEEE

Post - New Years Hangover Stress - Trauma - Antler Sharpening. Other threads likewise.

Here's some little hints, to foam the beverage...

Scrubber batteries do not have as thick of plates as L-16's.

A 1969 Group 27 CAR BATTERY had EXACTLY the same plates as a 2016 Super Duper RV DEEP CYCLE $150 Trojan does. The 1969 battery had a tar top and no envelope separators. YEAH A CAR BATTERY! Ford Galaxy, Chevrolet Impala, you name it. Hi antimony .065" plates.

A 1969 8-D truck battery also had thick plates. This is why they weighed 150 lbs yet only had 800 CCA.

You folks are swallowing a massive smoke & mirrors campaign but there are no alternatives. This is real ingenuity in action by battery OEM.

My TWIN 2-volt cells barely have 3,200 ampere hours, yet each (with cage) weighs almost one ton.

Select your compromise. Choose wisely.

SoundGuy wrote:

brulaz wrote:
According to Trojan, their T-1275 is a "12V Deep-Cycle Battery", and the SCS225 is a "12V Marine/RV Deep-Cycle Battery".

While all this forum theorizing makes for interesting reading it seems to me that if the goal is a battery designed for recreational vehicle application one would logically turn to a manufacturer that designs and builds these products for the most appropriate recommendation. Go to the Trojan Marine / RV Webpage, scroll down to the bottom, download the Marine / RV Brochure, and one doesn't even find the T-1275 listed as an appropriate solution. Indeed, if one ignores the many variations of any given battery that is listed as appropriate for RV use there really aren't that many different choices ... but interestingly, of ALL of those choices recommended by Trojan only one - the 12 volt SCS series - is offered with the terminal that makes the most sense for recreational vehicle use - the DWNT (double wing nut terminal) which allows easy connection of many cables to the batteries. Coincidence? ... hardly, as this to me is a clear indication that Trojan believes their SCS series is the most suitable, designed specifically for recreational vehicle use by engineers who understand far better than any of us the many considerations in battery design. Yes, the popular T-105 is also considered suitable but it's also listed in the Golf and Utility Vehicle brochure along with the T-1275, making these universal use deep cycle batteries which are NOT offered with recreational vehicle specific DWNT terminals. My point - who are we to argue with Trojan? :h If it weren't for the fact I can get a deal on a pair of RV Care branded Deka 12 volt Group 31s for half the cost I'd have no hesitation in accepting Trojan's recommendation that a pair of Trojan SCS225s would be an excellent choice for my intended use with my own travel trailer. :D

Some RVer's are like you and rarely boondock. Trojan's recommendations for a Marine/RV would be fine. The lower Cycle life is fine, and they have the advantage of less V drop under load.

But others are full-timers and boondock a lot. They cannot afford the low cycle life of a marine battery. And make do with the V drop perhaps by adding more non-marine batteries.

I'm somewhere in between and can't decide. :)