How long can you realistically dry camp?

24' class c
2 people
43 gal fresh water
29 gal grey
39 gal black
LPG 18 gal
Fuel 55 gal

The absolute limiting factor for us is holding tanks. We can carry more than enough food, gas, batteries & propane. Could even carry extra fresh water if we had to. But, if we are completely off the grid... No outhouses, no facilities of any kind... When you gotta dump, you gotta dump!

Having said that, we can go 7 days fairly easily and have stretched it to 10 on one or two occasions.

On the related note of traveling full of water or empty, we ALWAYS travel completely full if we have a good source of water. On more than one occasion, we have shown up at campground only to find the water tasted like wet dog, iron or was off color. The absolute worst was at a state campground near Parker AZ where the water came out brown and foamy. In Alaska, we've even shown up in May and found the ground is still frozen so the water isn't turned on yet! What are a few extra pounds compared to peace of mind and water that won't make you sick?

Hi b,

So what DID you eat for 8.5 weeks?

pnichols wrote:

bka0721 wrote:
But, the longest I have gone, recorded, without refilling, after the original start, the fuel tank/s/fuel jugs, water tanks, groceries, propane, traveled through a town that has a traffic signal/stop sign, and never stayed in one spot more than 10 days, was 8 1/2 weeks. (I could have stayed longer but needed to pick up my mail packet)

Obviously 8 1/2 continuous weeks from "base camp" while drycamping in an RV is outstanding! :C

I have only one personal red flag on this ... you (probably?) had to tow something along to do it ... which I don't care to do. I prefer all "provisions" to be carried in/on a single integrated vehicle, with that vehicle also being not too large. Actually the later model Earthroamers are even too huge for my liking. I liked the size of the earlier F450 based models. They were about my size limit for an integrated on-road/off-road RV.

I like the Tiger type and size of vehicle, assuming the truck underneath has a wheel base no longer than that of an extended cab to keep any risk of high-centering to a minimum. The chassis mounted type of Tiger structure allows all heavy items to be down as low as possible to keep the center of gravity low. Of course one main drawback of the Tiger design is the difficulty and expense of adequately isolating the coach box from the end-to-end twisting of the chassis frame on rough surfaces.

Some expedition vehicles come close to my "impossible dream RV" ideal, but of course I can't afford to buy one initially or maintain one long term. Probably none of them could match your 8 1/2 weeks of drycamping without provisioning, anyway.

P.S. I'm curious ..... what is your refrigeration setup that you could carry enough chilled and/or frozen provisions to last that long?

My RV is a normal Truck Camper and Motorcycle trailer. I identified long time ago what factors are and have been, important for long term stays without provisioning. Water, Fuel, Power and Food. From there I expanded on the capabilities of my rig to accommodate this theme. Thus the reasons I post here in this forum and publish articles on how to do extended periods in your vehicle/RV/camper. You go from you biggest limiting factor, Thus the reason I use the term, TP Factor. In the wintertime, your limiting factor would be; Propane, for most in the smallest vehicle can carry enough water to outlast their typical 2X30# or 20# propane tanks. In the warmer months it would be you ability to carry water. The RVs I am familiar with can all carry enough food for 4 people to outlast water or propane that most RVs carry. You just need to think and plan differently than you might if you were living in a stick and motor home.

pianotuna wrote:
Must have been using lots of canned goods.

Pianotuna, no. Generally no more can goods than I can carry in two hands. 3 to 5 cans.

To me, food is not the limiting factor for my extended periods of boondocking (rather than drycamping as the OP titled this thread.)


Many have met me out in remote areas to check out and find ways that will work for them. Including the Moderator of this forum. At various times I host classes on some of these techniques and write about them in different publications, like Truck Camper Magazine. Tomorrow I am teaching a class at a Motorcycle Adventure EXPO on the subject of Basecamping for extended periods. So there is a lot to learn and share on this subject, alone.

b

Must have been using lots of canned goods.

bka0721 wrote:
But, the longest I have gone, recorded, without refilling, after the original start, the fuel tank/s/fuel jugs, water tanks, groceries, propane, traveled through a town that has a traffic signal/stop sign, and never stayed in one spot more than 10 days, was 8 1/2 weeks. (I could have stayed longer but needed to pick up my mail packet)

Obviously 8 1/2 continuous weeks from "base camp" while drycamping in an RV is outstanding! :C

I have only one personal red flag on this ... you (probably?) had to tow something along to do it ... which I don't care to do. I prefer all "provisions" to be carried in/on a single integrated vehicle, with that vehicle also being not too large. Actually the later model Earthroamers are even too huge for my liking. I liked the size of the earlier F450 based models. They were about my size limit for an integrated on-road/off-road RV.

I like the Tiger type and size of vehicle, assuming the truck underneath has a wheel base no longer than that of an extended cab to keep any risk of high-centering to a minimum. The chassis mounted type of Tiger structure allows all heavy items to be down as low as possible to keep the center of gravity low. Of course one main drawback of the Tiger design is the difficulty and expense of adequately isolating the coach box from the end-to-end twisting of the chassis frame on rough surfaces.

Some expedition vehicles come close to my "impossible dream RV" ideal, but of course I can't afford to buy one initially or maintain one long term. Probably none of them could match your 8 1/2 weeks of drycamping without provisioning, anyway.

P.S. I'm curious ..... what is your refrigeration setup that you could carry enough chilled and/or frozen provisions to last that long?

pnichols wrote:

jefe 4x4 wrote:
Of course, we don't need to worry about baffles with an 18 gal. tank. A 100 gallon tank; yes. On longer trips, I like to keep the fresh tank at about 30%, filling up when we are close to the turnoff to boondocking. Just enough to use the toilet en route. It really is a fluid situation (yes, that's a pun) that we adjust for each day's sojourn. One other thought is a full tank of water does not need baffles as there is no weight transfer or sloshing around.

We use the opposite approach ... we always leave home with every tank full that should be full and every tank empty that should be empty ... to keep our RV off the grid as long as possible right from the beginning of the trip. This approach is in line with my "impossible dream RV" that is able to leave home completely provisioned and never have to pickup or drop-off anything provision-wise until we arrive back home X number of days or weeks later. (Can even the biggest Earthroamer well optioned come close to this? ;) )

HOWEVER, we can start out with all tanks full because of over 2K lbs. of extra carrying capacity, plus one other thing. Since we have a small Class C motorhome all tanks are way down low just about contained within areas existing between the two frame members. Truck campers usually have many heavy things up a bit higher, so sloshing around of liquids could be a bit more of a problem.

Well, I am certainly not any Earthroamer owner and happily 100s of thousands of dollars happier for it. But I am not within your parameters of returning home, unsupplied from the time I left. But, the longest I have gone, recorded, without refilling, after the original start, the fuel tank/s/fuel jugs, water tanks, groceries, propane, traveled through a town that has a traffic signal/stop sign, and never stayed in one spot more than 10 days, was 8 1/2 weeks. (I could have stayed longer but needed to pick up my mail packet)

And again, I was not in an Earthroamer.

b

jefe 4x4 wrote:
Of course, we don't need to worry about baffles with an 18 gal. tank. A 100 gallon tank; yes. On longer trips, I like to keep the fresh tank at about 30%, filling up when we are close to the turnoff to boondocking. Just enough to use the toilet en route. It really is a fluid situation (yes, that's a pun) that we adjust for each day's sojourn. One other thought is a full tank of water does not need baffles as there is no weight transfer or sloshing around.

We use the opposite approach ... we always leave home with every tank full that should be full and every tank empty that should be empty ... to keep our RV off the grid as long as possible right from the beginning of the trip. This approach is in line with my "impossible dream RV" that is able to leave home completely provisioned and never have to pickup or drop-off anything provision-wise until we arrive back home X number of days or weeks later. (Can even the biggest Earthroamer well optioned come close to this? ;) )

HOWEVER, we can start out with all tanks full because of over 2K lbs. of extra carrying capacity, plus one other thing. Since we have a small Class C motorhome all tanks are way down low just about contained within areas existing between the two frame members. Truck campers usually have many heavy things up a bit higher, so sloshing around of liquids could be a bit more of a problem.

Dodger,
I agree. Good thinking here. Sounds like the voice of experience. But it's usually not that simple. We have wonderful well water and like to take it along on a trip in the outback and will only use the water we have on board. Of course, we don't need to worry about baffles with an 18 gal. tank. A 100 gallon tank; yes. On longer trips, I like to keep the fresh tank at about 30%, filling up when we are close to the turnoff to boondocking. Just enough to use the toilet en route. It really is a fluid situation (yes, that's a pun) that we adjust for each day's sojourn. One other thought is a full tank of water does not need baffles as there is no weight transfer or sloshing around.
jefe

dahkota wrote:
If one is dry camping at a camp ground, one can use the toilets and/or shower there, extending your length of stay by days - potentially up to the 14 day limit.

If one is boondocking, one is limited by the size of one's fresh water tank. Our fresh water tank is 85 gallons. We can stay 8 days if we are conservative and don't add water while there (we carry a five gallon tank portable tank).

We travel with our fresh water tank at least 2/3 full all the time. We have never had any problems. The problem people typically encounter with traveling with full tanks is the weight limit/cargo capacity of the rig - as long as we travel with less than 100 gallons (800 lbs) between our various tanks, we are not over weight. TTs often have a lower cargo capacity and so are more sensitive to the weight of the water.

Typically, we go 5-7 days between dumps. Even with full hook ups, we try not to dump until 2/3s full, minimum.

Not to get off topic but: I think what should be considered with hauling all that liquid is this: those tanks are not baffled. Therefore you have all that weight shifting side to side and back to front. In a sudden maneuver (which we all strive to avoid) this may be enough to shove the trailer out of control. At the very least it may induce sway. Something I never experience. Also many tank designs really are not made, from a support standpoint to be hauled full.

I just see no reason to haul all that liquid around when tanks are so easily filled so many places.

Phil, it's all relative to the pound feet of torque and where the engine makes that torque. The 2001 H.O. Cummins puts out 505 pound feet of torque @ 1600 rpm. That's a pittance compare to the 850 pound feet of pure grunt they put out now, but it's enough. It doesn't end there. It pulls all the way down with no apparent loss of pulling power. The newer, hi torque engines put out gobs of torque but not down low. It drops off rapidly. That's a round about way of saying "the older 2001 H.O. can pull even in lower rpms. My bro has a 1999 Ford 7.3 F250/6 speed manual and I cannot drive it the way i do the Cummins as I invariably stall the engine pulling away from a stop sign. No low end torque, even on the jewel of the Navistar engines. The other aspect is my NV5600, 360 pound, cast iron case, 6 speed manual transmission. There is virtually no hill for which I cannot find an appropriate gear, and you have forward 12 to choose from. Going up hill in the San Juans i was in 3rd & 4th gear, low range a lot, rarely having to go lower except to go slower at some obstacle. The other plus at that altitude is a turbo charged engine. I felt no loss of power even above 13K feet as the turbo keeps ramming air in there, unlike my carb'd Chevy V8 gas powered land cruiser which ran out of steam on a rock pile going up the Black Bear Pass trail out of Telluride.
I feel a slight power loss with larger tires and wheels with the 3.54's, but I can always downshift to another close by gear. I would say I wind up being in 6th gear maybe 10% less than when I had stock tires, especially in mountainous territory. After I get the new heavier wheels and larger tires, I have a friend who has as set of 4.10's he wants to get rid of. I will happily swap RG&P'S as he has a Power Lok also on his D-80/35 spline. This will be the time I swap in a True Trac gear driven limited slip in the front. In the end, traveling with less weight will help the ability of the TC as much as anything if you have appropriate gears one pop down.
For those that want to see how camping at high altitude effected things here are links to our Sept. 2010 trip called "San Juan High":
http://www.rv.net/cforum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/24528960.cfm
http://www.rv.net/cforum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/24529897.cfm
http://www.rv.net/cforum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/24566904.cfm