Lance or Artic Fox or ???
I saw a recent post on one of the truck camper forums (It was the NATCOA forum) from a new owner of a Lance and he was fed up with the numerous problems he was experiencing and was going to trade it ...
Forum Discussion
My basis for comparison of AF and Lance are the following. I bought my Lance 981 new in 2007. Aside from some minor faults all is well, Im satisfied. A friend from work has a A Fox , similar year and layout. Both have 1 full wall slide, with the dinette and fridge in the slide. The Fox is heavier. The fox makes better use of the iterior space with clever storage ideas, nice layout, nice cabinetry. The Lance is simpler in interior design and layout. Cabinetry is more streamlined, not as "home quality,look" as the Fox, but more than adequite. In practice, my Lance, is easier to keep clean, and less cluttered. First impression for me favored the Fox, but in use Im very happy with the Lance.
Where the 2 diverge is in what you dont see as opposed to what you do. I'll give 2 examples. While filling his fresh water tank off the truck, (Fox) the tank blew through the belly of the camper. Upon inspection it turns out the supports for the water tank were flimsy thin wood. I had occasion to have the belly off my Lance and my tank is supported by metal angle irons, I think aluminum. In any case, way more substantial support.
Second, I ended up very familiar with the refridge ventalation in my Lance when augmenting the air movments with fans to perform better in very hot conditions. The sheetmetal work in the Lance was well done, prefabbed for the particular application. While helping with the AF I noticed the same function was a sloppy amatuer looking mishmash mess instead of the tidy metal work of the Lance.
Also the similar sized AF was heavier than my Lance. Weight is a huge factor to consider.
Admitidly this is annectdotal observations of models from 6 years ago, limited to the 2 TCs we own. The big picture could be differant. But based on this, Ide be looking more in Lances direction than AF if I were looking now. I would defintly give the Fox a long hard look, with an open mind. But Fox has had delamination issues in the past which Im not sure are totally illiminated.
Oh, if you have the chance to get a TC without that damn Hiekki skylight , do so. I hate mine. Over engineered piece of c**p waiting to break.
Where the 2 diverge is in what you dont see as opposed to what you do. I'll give 2 examples. While filling his fresh water tank off the truck, (Fox) the tank blew through the belly of the camper. Upon inspection it turns out the supports for the water tank were flimsy thin wood. I had occasion to have the belly off my Lance and my tank is supported by metal angle irons, I think aluminum. In any case, way more substantial support.
Second, I ended up very familiar with the refridge ventalation in my Lance when augmenting the air movments with fans to perform better in very hot conditions. The sheetmetal work in the Lance was well done, prefabbed for the particular application. While helping with the AF I noticed the same function was a sloppy amatuer looking mishmash mess instead of the tidy metal work of the Lance.
Also the similar sized AF was heavier than my Lance. Weight is a huge factor to consider.
Admitidly this is annectdotal observations of models from 6 years ago, limited to the 2 TCs we own. The big picture could be differant. But based on this, Ide be looking more in Lances direction than AF if I were looking now. I would defintly give the Fox a long hard look, with an open mind. But Fox has had delamination issues in the past which Im not sure are totally illiminated.
Oh, if you have the chance to get a TC without that damn Hiekki skylight , do so. I hate mine. Over engineered piece of c**p waiting to break.
