coachmen freedom express 192rbs

SoundGuy wrote:
Thanks for your detailed reply. Now that there's just 2 of us I do from time to time give some thought as to whether I really need my Silverado vs a somewhat smaller, more fuel efficient vehicle like the Honda Ridgeline. My wife has an '06 Civic and with the usual regular maintenance required for any vehicle all we do is put gas in it (not much) and drive it - dead reliable. :B However, the question remains - what would I gain? Honda claims 26/19 mpg for the current generation of Ridgeline and if I could actually believe it that 25% improvement over my Silverado might in itself be sufficient justification, especially here in Canada where our fuel costs average 30% higher than in the US. Fuel cost when towing isn't my concern but rather the significant annual cost for fuel when not towing - thousands $$$$$ every year. :E I really like driving a 1/2 ton, the interior space it provides, and of course how easily it tows our 192RBS. :B However, your fuel mileage numbers tell me what I've always believed - your V6 Ridgeline is working a lot harder than my V8 Silverado pulling a 192RBS, despite the fact that some of that extra 5.3L GM engine grunt is being used to push along a much heavier vehicle. EPA numbers for the Ridgeline (not towing) are to me the main attraction but in the real world I question whether it really comes anywhere near close to those numbers. :h

Guys, we are dangerously close to hijacking the OP's thread, so Mods - perhaps if you want - maybe move this over to Tow Vehicles . . .

That said, your analysis is sort of what we've done re. fuel efficiency and how much of a driver that might be in changing vehicles. Keep in mind a couple of base line factors: (1) Your best comparison to mpg efficiency is to the current, "Gen 2" Ridgeline released beginning as a 2017 model - not my older version, "Gen 1" Ridgeline; the Gen 2 has even slightly more interior space than my truck, and mine even sits 5 adults comfortably; its drivetrain is improved with a 6-speed (vs. my 5-speed) and engine has increased its power by 30 hp (now 280) over mine and a very modest torque increase (only 15) to 262 lb/ft.; the AWD trims have a much improved torque vectoring system and still come with a transmission cooler and wiring harness ready to receive your choice of an electronic brake controller (we use a Tekonsha Primus on our truck). The Ridgeline Owners Club forum (ridgelineownersclub.com) shows lots of your fellow Canadians now own them. I haven't found anyone from up your way unhappy with the Ridgeline.

(2) And yes, to state the obvious, of course our V6 is going to "work a lot harder" than your V8. However, remember that the Ridgeline was designed to do this kind of work in a mid-size package. It's drivetrain (I'm talking about my Gen 1, 2011 model now) operates comfortably within its design limits. I set the cruise control to 60-61 mph and let the engineering and technology of the truck do its thing. Of course it will shift to adjust to the operating environment, but the mpgs we achieve with our truck are largely experienced under cruise control. But then again, there are other times that I will manually "feather" the throttle to better manage circumstances. With that said, I have tracked the towing experiences with a number of Gen 2 Ridgeline owners who tow similar loads as we do, and they experience about 3-4 mpg better than we do with our 2011. Is that significant enough to amortize the increased $$ to purchase a new Ridgeline? Well, now you get back to qualitative factors that focus on some of the unique features of the Ridgeline vs. traditional designs (whether other mid-size or 1/2 tons). How much are those worth to someone? Your call. I guess go test drive one and let us know what you think.

SoundGuy wrote:
The fact you're able to tow without weight distribution has me mystified as there's no way I could with my Silverado ... 625 lbs of gross tongue weight just unloads the truck's front steer axle far too much. :E I typically average ~ 13% gross tongue weight but in fact have tried everything I can to increase that just a bit more, the problem being that fully loaded fridge at the far rear of the trailer really counters my efforts. A full black tank on the way home also exacerbates the situation, 'though by that time the fridge contains far less so that does help. In your case, running just 10 to 11% gross tongue weight is awfully low, especially without the use of weight distribution. So - we have essentially the same trailer, typically averaging about the same gross weight (4600 to 4800 lbs) yet you're running significantly less gross tongue weight. Loading as I do I don't see any way I could run that little even if I wanted to and 2) if I did I have little doubt I'd be all over the road when towing at highway speed. I'm mystified. :W

I don't have a Ph.D. in Vehicle Dynamics, so all I can offer you is my own analysis that I've shared previously in other threads - plus my experience. Assuming that we are all rational people and want to have fun in this hobby while maintaining the highest in safety standards :B , I can just honestly tell you that our configuration has been as solid as can be when we camp with the weight ranges I've stated. Perhaps it is a combination of factors . . . though the Ridgeline has a uni-body design, our Gen 1 version has an extremely stiff and strong ladder frame with seven cross members that are welded to the truck's body. It just doesn't twist or torque when under a load. (The Gen 2 version's frame and body is even significantly stronger than mine, so that's the one you would probably seek as a comparison.) But if you don't take my word for it (not saying you don't - it's just always good to get all the objective evidence you can) - how about my friend who followed us last week in his Class C? We had a 288 mile run to Garner State Park with prevailing, modest crosswinds from the south at 12-14 mph. Kind of standard stuff here in Texas. Running westbound on I-10 between Houston and San Antonio in the midst of heavy semi traffic passing us and us passing others - plus the cars, SUVs and other trucks passing us at 70+mph - he rang me up from behind and said (unsolicited) "sure looks like your rig tracks really well; no wiggle or sway with all of this traffic going on." (That's almost an exact quote, but hey, it was last Wednesday and I can't remember what I had for breakfast this morning!)

Do I feel semis going by or by me passing them? Certainly, there is a very small sensation. And occasionally you will have a greater sensation depending on the aerodynamics of the passing truck. But I have absolutely never felt nervous, threatened, out of control nor that we are all going to die! ;)

I will give you a caveat to this based on your comment about how you run toward home; i.e. with a full black tank. We do not run that way, but when I have had a lot of material in our black or gray tank while towing I can feel the difference. THAT is when a good WDH would solve that problem, but we just never have the need to travel that way with our style of camping. Some Ridgeline owners employ them and others do not. As always, there is a great debate on this topic. Our Gen 1 manual did not recommend the use of one since the truck was designed to tow well without a WDH, and "an improperly adjusted WDH . . ." can seriously affect braking and handling, etc, etc. etc. We have been totally fine without a WDH, but other Gen 1 owners wouldn't leave home without one! The Gen 2 manual does not have the same caution as my owner's manual, so again, some Ridgeline owners use one and others do not.

We test drove a 2017 Black Edition trim (tops in the US version), and the dealer offered me the opportunity to bring my trailer over and hitch it up for a test run. I didn't do it since we were not ready for a buying decision, but maybe that's the pathway for you. Head to a Honda dealer and tell them that towing behavior is the critical decision point and see what they say.

Meanwhile, next April we are headed to the Midwest (Illinois and perhaps eastward to Indiana and Ohio) to see friends and enjoy some of the historical sites in our nation's original Northwest Territory. So if we run over as far as eastern Ohio, why don't you drop down from Ontario and meet up with us at a park of your choice. I'll toss you the keys to our truck and let you go have a run where ever you want while doing a test tow! Might be fun to compare our 192 RBS rigs, anyhow. Maybe by then I will have made that 12V wiring run from the vent over our bed to the TV booster power so that I can put in a fan and pwm controller. If not, bring your tool box! :W

While Down Under recently I went to an outdoor RV show with my BIL and a friend, both of whom are in the market for a new camper. BIL currently tows what we'd call a high wall popup with his 2017 3.6L V6 Pathfinder but is really interested in moving up to a "caravan", what we'd call a relatively small couple's travel trailer similar to my Coachmen Freedom Express 192RBS. While at the show we went through an Avan Frances he's interested in, a single axle model but very similar to the 192RBS in terms of amenities, slightly lighter without a slide but about the same length. Although I don't personally care for the new European look many Australian manufacturers are now adopting the overall fit & finish of just about everything I saw was demonstrably better than what we have here in N America. Cost for sure is higher, this particular model being about $50,000 AUD ($37,600 USD), but to be fair this is the tow away price, including everything, even the first year's insurance. If he buys this unit he fully intends to tow it with his Pathfinder which is similar in ability to any other gas aspirated V6 sold in that country. When speaking with various dealers not one of them saw the need for anything larger, such as a 1/2 ton V8 truck, for towing any of these trailers on their lots. Clearly there must be a reason it works for them, I just haven't figured it out yet. :W

Bols2DawaLL wrote:
Soundguy , just following along here but you've mentioned to me in the past that my 2011 6 cyl. (290 h.p V6 ) Grand Cherokee would not be a good tow vehicle for this TT . Just curious but what would make the Ridgeline a better choice ?

I don't know that it would, Last Train with his experience in towing his own 192RBS with his Ridgeline would probably be better able to address this. Truthfully, I'm conflicted as I'm no different than anyone else and would tow with a V6 if I honestly believed it would work satisfactorily. We've just returned from a trip to visit rels Down Under where virtually everyone tows with a normally aspirated V6 gasser or small diesel, most often without weight distribution or add on sway control. Travel trailers, or caravans they're called there, are largely 19' to 23' at most, and very few have slides. In fact, in populated areas along the coast one wouldn't want a 1/2 ton truck as the roadways are just too narrow, the parking lots tight, as are many of the caravan parks. I have countless videos and pics of folks towing trailers the size of a 192RBS so when there I visited both a dealer and went to an RV show to get a better answer. There was none - they just do it simply because there is no other choice, other than limiting the length & weight of the trailer itself. I saw but one 25 footer with a slide at the RV show and it was $135,000, anything else was no more than 23' or it was an off road (outback) style which in most cases would also be towed with a V6 off road vehicle of some description. We here in N America are committed to large vehicles, 1/2 ton and greater, for towing ... the question is how does the rest of the world get along with less? I've yet to come up with that answer. :@

Soundguy , just following along here but you've mentioned to me in the past that my 2011 6 cyl. (290 h.p V6 ) Grand Cherokee would not be a good tow vehicle for this TT . Just curious but what would make the Ridgeline a better choice ? Thanks

SoundGuy wrote:
I typically see ~ 15 miles to the US gallon around town, ~ 22 mpg highway when not towing, maybe a couple mpg less if the terrain is hilly and/or it's quite windy, and typically between 10.5 to 12.5 mpg when towing our 192RBS - rarely if ever below 10 mpg but not much greater if it's hilly and/or windy, well into the 12s if the roads are relatively flat and relatively calm, an overall average perhaps of ~ 11.5 mpg, which is pretty good relatively speaking. In comparison, how does your Ridgeline do? :@

Last Train wrote:
Regarding mileage . . . First of all the Gen 1 (2006-2014 models) Ridgeline (ours is a 2011 model) never was known for its fuel efficiency - especially in its later years when competitive vehicles surpassed it in technology. With that background, in a non- towing regime around town we typically get 16-18mpg. On interstates - like our trip to the Appalachains for Thanksgiving - we get 19-22mpg varying with terrain, of course.

When towing it's roughly 1/2 that we get around town without towing.

Thanks for your detailed reply. Now that there's just 2 of us I do from time to time give some thought as to whether I really need my Silverado vs a somewhat smaller, more fuel efficient vehicle like the Honda Ridgeline. My wife has an '06 Civic and with the usual regular maintenance required for any vehicle all we do is put gas in it (not much) and drive it - dead reliable. :B However, the question remains - what would I gain? Honda claims 26/19 mpg for the current generation of Ridgeline and if I could actually believe it that 25% improvement over my Silverado might in itself be sufficient justification, especially here in Canada where our fuel costs average 30% higher than in the US. Fuel cost when towing isn't my concern but rather the significant annual cost for fuel when not towing - thousands $$$$$ every year. :E I really like driving a 1/2 ton, the interior space it provides, and of course how easily it tows our 192RBS. :B However, your fuel mileage numbers tell me what I've always believed - your V6 Ridgeline is working a lot harder than my V8 Silverado pulling a 192RBS, despite the fact that some of that extra 5.3L GM engine grunt is being used to push along a much heavier vehicle. EPA numbers for the Ridgeline (not towing) are to me the main attraction but in the real world I question whether it really comes anywhere near close to those numbers. :h

SoundGuy wrote:
Also curious - with my 192RBS averaging ~ 4800 lbs loaded & ready to camp I typically run ~ 625 lbs of gross tongue weight so I'm wondering if you're running ~ 4600 lbs GVW how (and why) you keep the tongue weight down so low, ~ 11%. :h

Last Train wrote:
We have kept our tongue weights in that spectrum simply because it has unfailingly worked very well.

The fact you're able to tow without weight distribution has me mystified as there's no way I could with my Silverado ... 625 lbs of gross tongue weight just unloads the truck's front steer axle far too much. :E I typically average ~ 13% gross tongue weight but in fact have tried everything I can to increase that just a bit more, the problem being that fully loaded fridge at the far rear of the trailer really counters my efforts. A full black tank on the way home also exacerbates the situation, 'though by that time the fridge contains far less so that does help. In your case, running just 10 to 11% gross tongue weight is awfully low, especially without the use of weight distribution. So - we have essentially the same trailer, typically averaging about the same gross weight (4600 to 4800 lbs) yet you're running significantly less gross tongue weight. Loading as I do I don't see any way I could run that little even if I wanted to and 2) if I did I have little doubt I'd be all over the road when towing at highway speed. I'm mystified. :W

SoundGuy wrote:
Last Train - while we're on the subject of towing a trailer like the 192RBS with a V6 Ridgeline as you do or a V8 Silverado as I do the question for those contemplating a trailer like this might be - is there an significant difference in fuel mileage between these two vehicles when not towing and when towing? I typically see ~ 15 miles to the US gallon around town, ~ 22 mpg highway when not towing, maybe a couple mpg less if the terrain is hilly and/or it's quite windy, and typically between 10.5 to 12.5 mpg when towing our 192RBS - rarely if ever below 10 mpg but not much greater if it's hilly and/or windy, well into the 12s if the roads are relatively flat and relatively calm, an overall average perhaps of ~ 11.5 mpg, which is pretty good relatively speaking. In comparison, how does your Ridgeline do? :@

Also curious - with my 192RBS averaging ~ 4800 lbs loaded & ready to camp I typically run ~ 625 lbs of gross tongue weight so I'm wondering if you're running ~ 4600 lbs GVW how (and why) you keep the tongue weight down so low, ~ 11%. :h

Those are both great questions, SoundGuy. And maybe this will help a potential buyer of a TT like our 192RBS have some additional decision points.

Regarding mileage . . . First of all the Gen 1 (2006-2014 models) Ridgeline (ours is a 2011 model) never was known for its fuel efficiency - especially in its later years when competitive vehicles surpassed it in technology. With that background, in a non- towing regime around town we typically get 16-18mpg. On interstates - like our trip to the Appalachains for Thanksgiving - we get 19-22mpg varying with terrain, of course.

When towing it's roughly 1/2 that we get around town without towing. Specifically, (I just checked my mileage-trip log/spreadsheet), over the 12,203.3 miles we have towed our 192RBS (including since we pulled it off the dealer's lot), our Ridgeline has averaged 9.13mpg. Sometimes we have averaged over 10mpg but when the winds have hit us hard much lower. I just reviewed one hunting trip I had last year that showed 7.6mpg. My notes showed dead-on headwinds that afternoon of 18-20mph on that short, 63 mile run. All mpg figures were hand calculated.

So perhaps back to the general point of this thread, anyone towing a travel trailer should recognize that fuel cost is a necessary part of this recreational hobby. For some it's more and for others less so. Each person has to decide what is acceptable in their situation.

Regarding tongue weight . . . We have kept our tongue weights in that spectrum simply because it has unfailingly worked very well. We have never had a hint of sway or instability, despite the inevitable winds and maneuvers that come with towing. It appears that we have hit a sweet spot in weight and balance for our truck and TT. Honda's specs allow for two 150 lb passengers on board plus an allowance for additional personal gear for each. Max tongue weight in these conditions is 600 lbs. And, FWIW our truck's yellow sticker notes a maximum 1,470 lb payload. Throw in a standard heavy duty transmission cooler, a couple of radiator fans and a very efficient all-wheel drive . . . The system works.

I should note that our truck now has over 152,000 miles on the odometer, and there will come a day when we will need to move on to another truck, but our Ridgeline still doesn't have a squeak or rattle and is extremely comfortable as a daily driver, so for now we're fine with it. That said, I'm a great admirer of the great 1/2 tons out there, and one of those may be ours one day. But if we do,we lose AWD, our dual action tailgate, our in-bed trunk that holds a ton of stuff, easily fitting in our garage and probably my wife's ability to see over the hood (we're talkin' really short!)!

Last Train - while we're on the subject of towing a trailer like the 192RBS with a V6 Ridgeline as you do or a V8 Silverado as I do the question for those contemplating a trailer like this might be - is there an significant difference in fuel mileage between these two vehicles when not towing and when towing? I typically see ~ 15 miles to the US gallon around town, ~ 22 mpg highway when not towing, maybe a couple mpg less if the terrain is hilly and/or it's quite windy, and typically between 10.5 to 12.5 mpg when towing our 192RBS - rarely if ever below 10 mpg but not much greater if it's hilly and/or windy, well into the 12s if the roads are relatively flat and relatively calm, an overall average perhaps of ~ 11.5 mpg, which is pretty good relatively speaking. In comparison, how does your Ridgeline do? :@

Also curious - with my 192RBS averaging ~ 4800 lbs loaded & ready to camp I typically run ~ 625 lbs of gross tongue weight so I'm wondering if you're running ~ 4600 lbs GVW how (and why) you keep the tongue weight down so low, ~ 11%. :h

TheHound wrote:

mountainkowboy wrote:

From what I can tell the nose cap was changed in 2018 and they added LED lights to it. As for the fresh tank, there is a "C" channel brace that is bolted to the frame under it and over the now enclosed under belly. I don't know if it's the same on the 2017, they didn't show the underbelly, and the video I mentioned was changes from 2016 to 2017.

I appreciate the update. You know this stuff better than me... does that c channel bracing resolve the problem or would you be adding additional support?

Look forward to your thoughts after you check one out on the weekend.

I believe it was a "factory fix" to the sagging issue, from what it looks like. As for me knowing more...this is just the stuff I could find on the interwebs, although I've been RVing for 40 years I've never owned a TT. Another interesting tid-bit is the frontal area has never been calculated by Coachmen, but they stated 56sq' if it was flat...which it's not. So I would say with the curve is has to be under 50sq'.

babock wrote:
I agree...wheel base is WAY to short. I have towed with short wheel base vehicles like that in the past and it was not fun going down mountains in California.

The wheelbase of the ridgeline is 125". Wheel base of my Silverado is 143".

Which is why we would probably not tow in the Rockies or Sierras, etc.. We've managed some fairly steep grades in the Ozarks in Arkansas and also in the Quachitas/Winding Stair Mountains in SE Oklahoma (I "think" I recall Flattestroute.com showing me somewhere along the way 13-14% grades), but none of those lasted for miles like we would see in our western mountains. That V6 just doesn't provide significant engine braking and yes, a longer wheelbase is always better.

I'm a long time mariner, and I sort of approach towing (with any configuration) like I do heading out in our boat to one of our bays or out into the Gulf. An abundance of caution is always the watchword along with understanding the specifications of your equipment and then having the discipline to stay within that performance envelope. Not much margin for error if you are miles from shore and things go sideways! I take that same approach in towing.

babock wrote:
You are using an equilizing hitch right?

Sorry babcock for not answering earlier but have been a little under the weather.

And not to hijack the OP's thread . . . To your question, no we do not. The Ridgeline's design specs for towing these kinds of weights (our camping configuration at a local CAT Scale regularly show us 4600-4700 lbs; our tongue weights come in 480-520 lbs) do not require a WDH. We do use a friction sway bar. The entire rig handles very well in this arrangement.