If there was a good 4x4 class C I might reconsider buying a TC.I saw Phoenix Cruisers have a 4x4 option but I can't understand why their features are not as good as TCs. Given that class C is built on the same platform most people haul their TCs with but with a clean slate (no truck bed in your way), why aren't they miles better than a TC?This is the only Phoenix Cruiser model at a reasonable length with a bed that you don't have to fold out every night:http://www.phoenixusarv.com/2350.htmlThe inside reminds me of van camping. Why are the tank capacities so much less? They probably aren't even as ready for the cold as with a TC and a heated basement. Only a single propane tank. And they seem to have higher cost than TC/truck combination.What gives?

Tiger4x4RV wrote:Hmmmph! :B:B:B

I also looked at Super C's instead of a truck/TC combination. I could not find a comparable Super C for the price that had the towing capacity, ground clearance and 4wd available when hauling a TC. On the other hand, we do like the amount of space some of the Super C's offer and the pass through cab.

I saw a F-550 based class C, and it was available with 4 wheel drive, came standard with a 6.7L Diesel engine, and was very heavy.Yes most camper manufactures have gotten very good at making every square foot count! Still the best floorplan that I have seen in a camper was my 1972 Coachman. It was only about 10' long on the main floor, with a 4' or 5' long overhead area. The forward section was a wet bath on the passenger side and closet drivers side. It was separated from the cabover section with orange plexiglass! The 70's remember it? On the passenger side behind the bath is the dinette, raised a few inches to accommodate the black water tank. No grey tank, but I guess one of the first basements? The drivers side was the closet in the bathroom, then refrigerator, stove, counter, sink near the door that was in the center, rear. It had a cabinet bunk above the dinette, and could sleep up to 6. The bathroom was HUGE compared to current wet baths in today's campers. It took up the forward 3' of the camper, and went wall to wall, if you include the closet. When the closet door was open, it blocked off the bath from the living area. They made use of every square inch of space!. Even without slides, it was roomy, and with today's slide outs, it could expand quite a bit.I was reading a recent post about a 1970's camper, and the back wall hinged out, then a solid floor flipped down into a bed, with solid sidewalls that folded into place to make it air tight. Sort of the first of the tip out walls, except this was more a fold out bunk. Yes they can do a lot more with class C designs. Yet as long as people are 'accepting the normal' then they will not manufacture the special floorplans. Check out the newer travel trailers. Outside kitchen with a small electric refrigerator for soda's and such! How handy is that when camped with a lot of friends around? Outside TV too!I still wonder who will be the first to have a slide out where the side walls of the slide out do not slide in when retracted! That is possible, but thinking outside the box is not what they are doing. . . .Fred.

I was looking at the floorplan in the link. http://www.phoenixusarv.com/2350.htmI don't like the idea of the fold up counter in front of the door. Sure looks great on paper, however in real use, when you are calling in the kids to wash up before dinner, you have to constantly move everything from your extended counter to let them in or out! This advice comes from someone who owned a 1977 Exployer RV with that feature. Fred.

Why are TCs so much better than class C? | Good Sam Community

61 Replies

ReneeG
Explorer
Sep 16, 2014
valhalla360 wrote:
jimh425 wrote:
valhalla360 wrote:
A small 20-24' class C is typically less than a truck camper with truck but has a much more spacious interior

There isn't a low priced class C that is as solidly built as a big 3 truck and camper combination. If you buy a solid class C like a Host, then it is just as much money if not more.

If you are just into the cheapest, I'll agree you can buy a cheaper class C, but you are getting what you are paying for.

That was the point. Class C's are generally not built for off road use but for the same money come with much more spacious interiors.

If you want to go off road:
- You can trash a typical class C.
- Accecpt smaller accomodations of a truck camper
- Or spend the big bucks on an off road class C.

Big bucks is right even for a Host Super C. I would love to have one of those.
valhalla360
Navigator
Sep 16, 2014
jimh425 wrote:
valhalla360 wrote:
A small 20-24' class C is typically less than a truck camper with truck but has a much more spacious interior

There isn't a low priced class C that is as solidly built as a big 3 truck and camper combination. If you buy a solid class C like a Host, then it is just as much money if not more.

If you are just into the cheapest, I'll agree you can buy a cheaper class C, but you are getting what you are paying for.

That was the point. Class C's are generally not built for off road use but for the same money come with much more spacious interiors.

If you want to go off road:
- You can trash a typical class C.
- Accecpt smaller accomodations of a truck camper
- Or spend the big bucks on an off road class C.
DiploStrat
Explorer
Sep 14, 2014
toedtoes wrote:
There isn't a BETTER RV type, there's just the RIGHT RV FOR YOU.

Excellent comment!
toedtoes
Explorer III
Sep 13, 2014
There isn't a BETTER RV type, there's just the RIGHT RV FOR YOU.

A smart RV owner will do his/her research and find what is the best fit for their needs, and will ignore those that condemn an RV type simply because it's not the same as another type. That's why they make different types of RVs - because different families are looking for different amenities. If you don't like what's offered in a Class C, then don't get a Class C. If you think a 5er is the best, then buy a 5er and be happy. If you want what is offered in a TC, then get a TC and be happy.
DiploStrat
Explorer
Sep 13, 2014
jefe 4x4 wrote:
Again, form follows function. The hidden problem in taking any 4x4 TC or 4x4 C off-road to any degree is how the camper body is attached to the frame. Only the HIGH bucks TC's, like XP camper has solved this universal problem. I tried to find out from Tiger's website how the Tigers are attached to the frame of the truck chassis and could find no information, leading me to believe, rightly or wrongly that they simply have four to six bolts holding the camper to the frame or subframe. If they did have a way to keep the camper structure flat and unracked while the frame twists away (as all of them do) I would think they would be trumpeting that feature, even without giving away their proprietary secrets. This is why, for me, a 4x4, class C is pretty much a dead end. You will spend the big-bucks to get to the category of camping vehicle that has an equalizing, 3 or 4 point frame attachment. The Euros have done this for years.
...

jefe

Traditional pickup truck based Tigers (CX, Bengal, et al) are built on six transverse square steel tubes, welded to the truck frame. (There used to be photos on the old site.) Scholars love to debate whether Tigers are "real" off road vehicles. Tiger owners simply drive them around the world.

Malayans and Siberians use a rear pivot mount steel sub-frame. Essential for the Siberian due to size, but some of us debate the utility of the pivot mount for the smaller Malayan.

One reason that Tigers cost more than most Class C RV's and truck campers is the cost of their internal systems (tank capacities, heating systems, battery capacity, etc.) and the reinforced construction required to assure that they don't fall apart on the dirt.

As jefe noted, put 4x4 in your requirements and your costs begin to increase rapidly because the real challenge of 4x4 is not getting all the wheels to turn, but rather keeping the whole mess from shaking itself apart.

There is even a nationalistic aspect to this; American off roaders tend to focus of low speed torquing of the the vehicle. In other parts of the world, the issue is vibration on washboard roads, not twisting. Ironically, a pivoting sub frame can actually more vulnerable to vibration damage.
run100
Explorer
Sep 13, 2014
OK, I have to admit, I've been an RV junkie going way back to a family visit to a boat and rv show when I was maybe 6 or 7 years old. Since that outing, I've always been attracted to the whole notion of having a house on wheels - regardless of the rv type . . . A, B, C, popup, truck camper, etc.

I truly appreciate the benefits each rv style provide. From one end of the spectrum to the other, each has its benefits and drawbacks. I marvel at the low profile, weight and cheaper price (in some cases) of the popups and the ability to even park it inside the garage. On the other end, my jaw drops at the over the top luxury inside the high-end class A's. I've always been impressed with the atmosphere of 5th wheels, because the bedroom is truly a separate room from the kitchen and living area, making it feel more like a two story house.

However, we really love owning a truck camper for many reasons - it's cozy, has most of the same features as other rv's (just less dead air space) and even a full-size (60x80) queen bed. Shoot, some giant 36-foot 5th wheels don't even offer that! We can pretty much take our camper anyplace our truck can go. In fact, since the truck & camper are so maneuverable, we seldom take it off during trips, because we like having our bathroom and food with us during our excursions. I also like that the bedroom is over the cab, because it shortens the overall length, dedicating the space in the bed of the truck to all other amenities.

Furthermore, "Bedlam" brought up a valid point:
Bedlam wrote:
The ability to upgrade truck, camper and garage independently is quite a bonus

Plus, the camper can be unloaded when the truck needs service - - not so with A,B or C motorhomes.

On the Class C quality topic - if a Class C is priced the same, or close to, the price of new truck, you can just imagine where the manufacturer had to skimp on construction. As they say, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

No matter what rig you own, I wish you many happy travels ahead.
Bedlam
Moderator
Sep 13, 2014
Bumpyroad wrote:
well I have my eyes on a Travato for $70,000 which mercifully isn't a MB diesel.
bumpy

Link for this Class B:

http://media.goitasca.com/models/globalElements/brochure/wb_52d83b32_travato_digital_bro_2014_x.pdf
Jeepers92
Explorer
Sep 13, 2014
As I age, I would love to have a 27 foot long Class B. I would want the back bedroom with a slide and a couch slide for the added room. A 450 chassis. There are 2 reasons that keep us in a TC. We have a pontoon boat which requires a smaller turning radius at launch ramps. We do long trips which we park, sleep, and go. We can park in a lot of smaller places if we need to. A TC is easy to drive. This said, I still look at Class b+ units and dream.
Bumpyroad
Explorer
Sep 13, 2014
Jfet wrote:

Ok, gotta ask, which brand new diesel Class C motorhomes are only $65K?

well I have my eyes on a Travato for $70,000 which mercifully isn't a MB diesel.
bumpy
jimh406
Explorer III
Sep 13, 2014
Jfet wrote:
Ok, gotta ask, which brand new diesel Class C motorhomes are only $65K?

Rvtrader says 84K for a Forest River built on a Mercedes/Sprinter platform, 2 wheel drive.

Gasoline built on a Chevy van platform for as low as 49K, 2 wheel drive.

Forum Discussion

Why are TCs so much better than class C?

61 Replies

About Travel Trailer Group

Related Content

class A safety

Class C Recommendations

Gas Class A

From a class C to class A ??

Class A Motorhome Gasser