Is a 40 foot fifth wheel too long to access neat places?

[outwestbound]

Hi to all. We're 30 days into researching full timing and decided on a fifth wheel/ 1 ton DRW truck based on lifestyle choices. We're in our early 50s and enjoy hiking, kayaking, backpacking, biking and are very active with plans to use the trailer as home base, but wonder out quite a bit.

Would a 40 foot trailer and 16,000 GVWR be too much in terms physically handling that size rig in parks/ roads and/or would it constrain camp location options?

I'm really getting at functional utility of travel as opposed to "livability". We don't necessarily prefer commercial parks that appear on google earth to resemble parking lots. Of course we'll use commercial style parks or even Walmart lots like everyone else at times, but have a preference for wooded parks like state or national parks, because that fits our recreation profile. We'd boondock not as a goal to save money; rather, we'd seek better views and access to hiking, river kayaking, mountain biking, etc..

Is a 40 footer unusual?

Thanks so much!

[pamvanw]

outwestbound wrote:

pamvanw wrote:
We also hike, kayak, and bike. Not full time yet, but we have the rig set up and waiting to go. Even our 32' is limiting in some places. I cheat and put 30' into the computer for reservations. I find that with our previous trailer when I could put 25' in there were often significantly more sites available. I can't imagine a 40'er. The indoor living would be nice I'm sure!

All posts are very helpful. Thanks.

pamvan, the NPs out west and others say 35 max, but that they really don't enforce it. Do you have issues getting your 32 into a space for a 30? Some brands are like 35'2", so I wonder if in the real world, whether this matters if 35 is the cutoff. But 35 may not materially solve the access issue enough to sacrifice the comfort of a 38-40. I suppose we could get a cheaper mid 20 footer and hit the parks, etc. and see how it goes for a year before making the big decision.

Wow, recreation can be a lot of work;)

Well, these posts and links give great pause to rethink lifestyle matters, etc.

We've never had a problem getting our 32' into a 30' site, or our previous 28' into a 25' site. Before that we squeezed our 17' onto a tent site LOL! Maybe a good option for you would be a 35' with more slides. Get the space that way rather than in the length.

[outwestbound]

traveylin wrote:
Its all about the bell curve when talking about site selection

Pops

So pick an average (top of the hump) size? Thanks for the comment.

[traveylin]

Its all about the bell curve when talking about site selection

Pops

[Mootpoint]

Research the limitations of where you want to go and get a rig that works for those conditions. We FT'd in 30' fifth and went almost anywhere that suited us. Our needs have changed and have moved up to a 35'. This suites us just fine now. We can't get it into some of the places we went before so now we search out new places. We do the same things at these new places as we did in the old ones. In some circumstances we can go places we couldn't before because of increased holding tank size.

Everyone's view will be different. I have taken my rig into places some folks wouldn't walk. Some were dumbfounded at this. Skill, knowledge of my rig and preparedness was what was required and one should have these 3 things in order before going anywhere.

No matter your rig size you will never run out of places to go, they just maybe a few more miles up the road. And a few more miles up the road is what it's all about.

[Campforever]

Recently booked a site at Hunting Beach park on the cost of SC. Site was 60 feet. Beautiful park, nice and wooded. My rig is a 40 foot 5th wheel. Have been backing for 40 years so not new to situations. Well met my Waterloo. Site was as advertised. Had to chose to hit a tree or vines and limbs to get to site 112. Next was narrow road, tree in middle of site next to the road, no swoop, no room to swing due to bank on left. So backing was limited. Got in, not lined up normally, but could make it. Still the front was in the road. If I could have backed up another 3 feet would of been ok. Needed to trim some vines, asked Ranger, "maintenence is off in 10 minutes, I am only Ranger." Long story short. Refund, left. NOT A PARK FOR BIG RIGS! AT LEAST THAT SITE?

[Campforever]

Recently booked a site at Hunting Beach park on the cost of SC. Site was 60 feet. Beautiful park, nice and wooded. My rig is a 40 foot 5th wheel. Have been backing for 40 years so not new to situations. Well met my Waterloo. Site was as advertised. Had to chose to hit a tree or vines and limbs to get to site 112. Next was narrow road, tree in middle of site next to the road, no swoop, no room to swing due to bank on left. So backing was limited. Got in, not lined up normally, but could make it. Still the front was in the road. If I could have backed up another 3 feet would of been ok. Needed to trim some vines, asked Ranger, "maintenence is off in 10 minutes, I am only Ranger." Long story short. Refund, left. NOT A PARK FOR BIG RIGS! AT LEAST THAT SITE?

[Veebyes]

Not the answer you want to see, but of course size does matter. Suitable site availability drops rapidly as you get bigger. The situation is not helped with many NPs & SPs being non size selective sites so a CG with 50 sites but only 5 suitable for 35' or so rigs may have them occupied by class B or C rigs leaving many smaller sites unoccupied & unusable by the larger units.

[tonyandkaren]

Just to throw a little more in the mix of confusing and conflicting information - if you really want to see how to get back into the neat places you need to look at some of Whazoo's trip reports! 🙂

http://www.rv.net/cforum/Index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26483939/gotomsg/26484060.cfm

[2gypsies1]

rfryer wrote:

When someone says “neat places”, that to me means undeveloped, minimal or no services, and away from the mass of campers.

"Neat places" to you can mean something altogether different to others. One doesn't have to drive 25 miles on a dirt path to find them.

And I can say unequivocally that you won’t find anything remotely approaching 40’ within miles of me, even a 25’er would be a rare sight. So obviously we’re not going to the same places, ....

No, we're probably not. You have a 16' and we have a 40'. As I stated previously we research places that we can fit and we find places that are "neat" and beautiful to us with no services and away from the mass of campers. Not being able to get to your 16' spots doesn't mean we can't find 40' spots for us and ones we consider "neat". We've been by ourselves on mountain tops and next to rivers and lakes. No one else around. I think that's kind of "neat".

I don't know where you are but you state Phoenix on your profile so I assume in Arizona. Perhaps these places aren't within miles of you but we have found some pretty special places regardless. You stated that a big rig can write off national forests and most state parks. I disagree.

We have boondocked or used public parks in all the western states and some of the eastern ones. Since you're from Phoenix here are some places where we've been in Arizona. Perhaps we've been fairly close to you at times:

We've stayed at ALL of the Arizona state parks (which you said we could write off as not being able to fit). We've volunteered at some, too.

We've been in the Phoenix Maricopa County parks (which is what the OP is looking for in terms of site space in natural surroundings with hiking)

National forests from Payson over to Greer/Alpine
National forest - Flagstaff area
Grand Canyon - North Rim FR22 and 611 and east of Jacob Lake
Cordess Jct - 5 miles off the highway on the top of a mountain with gorgeous views
Ajo area traveling 5 miles on gravel to get to "neat places"
...and many others

The OP's stated his preference is state or national campgrounds or some boondocking. His question was could he find them? Some folks said no. My response is: yes, he can find those spots.

No, as you stated, we're definitely not on the same wave length when folks say you can't find spots for a 40' RV. I just wanted to give another opinion - that we do find them. Safe travels!

[Lantley]

rfryer wrote:
2gypsies, I think posts like ours confuse OP’s and that’s unfortunate. One says no way and the other says I do it all the time. And that’s not all that uncommon on the posts that I see. Since neither one of us is trying to mislead the OP its clear there’s something important missing in the posts or we wouldn’t have that much difference of opinion.

When someone says “neat places”, that to me means undeveloped, minimal or no services, and away from the mass of campers. And I can say unequivocally that you won’t find anything remotely approaching 40’ within miles of me, even a 25’er would be a rare sight. So obviously we’re not going to the same places, but that’s not coming through on the posts. Your extensive list of forest cg’s threw me a little, too, as offhand I can’t think of any of those FS cg’s I normally use that someone could get a 40’ anything into. Except for a few of the more developed ones right along the highway mentioned earlier.

I’m not taking issue with your post, I’m quite sure you’re doing what you say you are. I’m more interested in figuring out how to word my own so that the OP doesn’t get seemingly opposite answers to his questions.

A longer rig will always have less site selection vs. a shorter rig. That does not mean there are no sites for big rigs. However if you want to get into the more remote off the grid places a smaller rig is a better option vs. a 40'.
I have a 40' rig and have no problem finding neat places, however I am not finding the same neat places as someone with a 25 footer. Furthermore as others have mentioned I have crossed a few neat places off my list because my rig is just too big.
Nevertheless I have no problem finding sites and I enjoy the spaciousness of my rig. Compromise is a must when selecting a RV.

[outwestbound]

Ivylog wrote:
Full time equals twice the husband on 1/2 the income in 1/10th the space... wait at 30' that's 1/15th the space on a rainy day.

Funny! (I'm a guy). Approaching it as a newbie, the 40s are sweet for sure. I don't need any more lumps on my head from a frying pan!

Good advice. These pickup truck tents are interesting for overnights away from home base.

[outwestbound]

Thanks so much for the input- everyone - very helpful. Some frank comments that I need to hear so I may avoid problems. I understand that the rfryer' and 2gypsies' contextual differences; each is correct given different geographic and topographic assumptions. I get it.

rfryer correctly interprets my "neat places" comments as smaller, remote campgrounds off the beaten path. I love those places and spend time seeking them out. 2gypsies' campsite pictures are just the type of site I like - trees, etc. I'm happy some treed sites in state/national parks are accessible to a 40, albeit significant compromise at that length must be made generally. I must say at this active point in my life, I'm no fan of commercial style "parking lots". I'd roam the US year round as a full timer; not a snow bird in most likely two week intervals.

Terryallan's comment about Julian Price Memorial Park hits home, because he's talking about very narrow, windy roads with very poor road shoulders. These types of roads are common in the Smoky Mountains in the East. I grew up in Tampa, but am in Greenville SC now and love the Smoky Mountains. As another poster said, a site may be big enough, or not, but that's irrelevant if you can't get safely to the site in the first place, due to low branches and bad roads. This is what I need to hear so I can prepare. It's just geographic context and I need to research destinations much more.

Not decided by any means, but I may scale back to say a 35 FW plus take along a good quality truck tent to access some of the little lakefront or stream sites that I like, which are typically tight and small. Or as crazy as it sounds, I may find a home base out west and buy (or rent) a second (very old and cheeeeeeapo)small travel trailer to explore the neat little hideaways.

Lots the consider........

[Ivylog]

Full time equals twice the husband on 1/2 the income in 1/10th the space... wait at 30' that's 1/15th the space on a rainy day. I made the mistake of listening to posts on here that 36' was the biggest for off the beaten path. Did not take long to realize that was not true so bought a 40' single slide MH. Once we became half timers there's not enough difference in a 42 but with four slides it's a huge difference for livability. I get stares many of the places I go even having some stop and ask how I got it into that site. Like I said to begin with... a 40' is too big for weekends but for FT it's worth having to work harder to find a site. You are not going to be looking for a site every week if you do not make the mistake of trying to see too much the first year. Tank size becomes very important for extended boondocking. Good Luck.

[tsetsaf]

Good advise so far. We are incredibly active fulltimers who now have a young son with us. This necessitated a new and larger rig 44' vs our previous 37'. We have always preferred private parks but have found that the big issue with the bigger rig is planning and reservations. Previously we could just show up and fit in a site. Now we are having to make reservations several months out and we are forced to take the "deluxe" sites due to size. We knew this going in and love the new rig. Staying in a commercial park does not eliminate our ability to be active and adventurous.

[tonyandkaren]

rfryer wrote:
2gypsies, I think posts like ours confuse OP’s and that’s unfortunate. One says no way and the other says I do it all the time. And that’s not all that uncommon on the posts that I see. Since neither one of us is trying to mislead the OP its clear there’s something important missing in the posts or we wouldn’t have that much difference of opinion.

This happens every time the question of size is brought up and I'm sure that it's confusing to people who are trying to decide which RV to buy. It's true that the most popular national parks have some very large sites that will accommodate almost any size RV. Yellowstone, Grand Teton, Glacier, Zion, Rocky Mountain, mentioned by 2gypsies are good examples, but if outwestbound wants to get away from the crowds he'll want to visit some of the smaller parks and forest campgrounds. We don't go nearly as remote as you do but we still find campgrounds and boondocking spots where we have a hard time fitting with our 25'class C.