Aug-29-2020 05:46 AM
Sep-18-2020 07:42 PM
pnichols wrote:Bordercollie wrote:
We had a 23 foot class C and before that a Dodge van conversion. I grew to hate having cardboard boxes in the aisle etc. and having to convert couches into beds and and back again. There was little space for storage and clutter became depressing on long trips or extended camping. Going from a 32 foot to a 24 foot RV will be a big change.
Probably some small Class C motorhomes do much better on storage than what you describe. For example, our 24 foot Class C has:
- The entire area under both dinette seats available for storage.
- Large partitioned-off separate areas at the foot and head of the overhead cab bed available for storage that run the full width of the bed.
- Overhead cabinets above the lounge chair, above the dinette area, and above the kitchen double sink area.
- Two closets for storage of clothing.
- Drawers and cabinets under the kitchen areas, under and over the bathroom sink, under the refrigerator, and under one of the closets.
- Overhead cabinets above and around the corner of the rear corner bed area.
- Seven outside storage bays, with two of them extending under the floor laterally across the width of the coach for storage of long items.
- Two storage areas under each cab seat.
We don't have to transport anything on the roof, on either bumper, or strapped to the roof-access ladder. The only thing "under foot" when we travel is the enclosed crate, seat-belted in a dinette seat, for the dog so that she can travel somewhat restrained and safe. 😉
Sep-18-2020 06:25 AM
whizbang wrote:Did you need any suspension add on's to make it handle like a breeze? Or did it handle well from the factory?
Gjac,
We have a 2002 Winnebago 24v Class C withe the 158" WB on a E350 chassis.
Completely empty, it weighs just under 10,000 pounds. Full of fluids and gear for a long trip, we topped out at 11,400 pounds, just under the GVWR of 11,500.
On ALL of our other RV's (truck campers, truck&trailer, diesel pusher, etc) my wife refused to drive. With this Class C, my wife does 2/3's the driving. The Winnie handles like a breeze.
The new chassis are supposed to be even better. I would not be concerned about a E350 chassis.
Sep-16-2020 07:57 PM
Bordercollie wrote:
We had a 23 foot class C and before that a Dodge van conversion. I grew to hate having cardboard boxes in the aisle etc. and having to convert couches into beds and and back again. There was little space for storage and clutter became depressing on long trips or extended camping. Going from a 32 foot to a 24 foot RV will be a big change.
Sep-15-2020 07:57 PM
Sep-15-2020 03:09 AM
Sep-14-2020 08:07 PM
DrewE wrote:Drew that was RV hyperbole, to make a point. I don't know how to make those smiley faces that some on here make.
I very much doubt the "economy" tune gets better mileage at equal power outputs and RPMs. The "premium" tune just lets the engine produce more power (and of course also consume more fuel) when pushed hard, and possibly alters the shift points to favor higher gears more.
You won't get 12 mpg with a typical class C motorhome at highway speeds with any gas engine, at least not without a rather radical redesign of the body to improve aerodynamics (which will necessarily also reduce interior space for a given length). It would be nice, I agree.
Sep-14-2020 08:53 AM
Sep-14-2020 04:46 AM
pnichols wrote:. 50 more HP out west climbing hills would be nice and getting 12 mpg with the detune for the rest of the trip would be nicer.
With the tuning on modern engines being so much under electronic control, wouldn't it be super nice if there could be a switch on the dash to flip between "economy tune" and "premium tune"?
What a wow that would be!!
Sep-13-2020 11:23 PM
Sep-13-2020 11:02 AM
Sep-13-2020 10:42 AM
Sep-13-2020 09:25 AM
Sep-11-2020 11:13 AM
pnichols wrote:Here is the distribution of our weight. Our front axle weighs 3160 (rig empty), and 3260 (rig full during a trip including people in the front seats), obviously the teeter-totter effect is in play here. Note that we don't have a slide-out and we always carry a full load of fresh water.ron.dittmer wrote:Ron, your 2350's floor plan is very similar to that of our 24 ft. 2005 Itasca 24V on it's 158" WB Ford chassis.Gjac wrote:Our rig is surely "tail heavy" which takes weight off the front axle, thanks in-part to the wheel base.ron.dittmer wrote:. Hi Ron, I must be missing something if you do the math a 24ft MH with a 158 in WB will have a WB/L ratio of .54 or 54% which is suppose to be good. So I don’t think poor handling of these shot MH’s is do to poor WB/L ratio. That is why I thought there must be something else causing poor handling like height to length or weight distribution or too much weight for the Ford chassis.Gjac wrote:Any class C with a poor wheel base ratio (like we have) will not handle as well as one with a better ratio. Fortunately if your new rig has a "handling" problem, $1000-$3000 in aftermarket upgrades will get you satisfied.
Never realized that short C's had handling issues with a WB/L ratio of .54 of 54%. Mine is 52% and I drive it like my car with one hand even with trucks passing me. I notice most of the C's I looked at were as high as my A. I wonder if the height to length has more affect because of the higher CG. Do shorter C's feel tippy when cornering than say longer C's on the same chassis? ............just not sure of the corner bed and getting up 3 times a night to go to the bathroom, but everything is a trade off.
You should have a much better chance with a brand new E350/E450 today than I did back in 2007, to have the rig handle well without that additional investment. I read somewhere that Ford is installing some of the aftermarket "equivalent" upgrades into the RV package of their new 2021 chassis with 7.3L-V8 engine. They got with the program installing heavy duty front and rear stabilizer bars. You might still have to invest in a rear trac bar or heavy duty steering stabilizer, but you are at a much better starting point. You might even find your new rig to handle just fine without further investment.
Some time since, our specific rig became available on a Sprinter with a 170" wheel base. The Sprinter handled our model rig much better because of the longer wheel base that also distributed the weight better....more weight placed on the front axle.
However, I have never experienced the handling issues you had that you attribute to maybe not enough coach weight forward onto the front suspension of your chassis.
From a weight distribution perspective ... where is your motorhome's generator and propane tank located?
My Onan 4000 and 18 gallon propane tank are centered under our dinette. Those two relatively heavy items towards the front help to load the front suspension.
Also, my spare tire is not way at the back above the bumper like yours is. My spare is down low between the frame members and slightly further forward right up against the gas tank. The spare is fairly heavy, so maybe having it mounted both down low and slightly further forward help with front loading and tail wagging a bit.
These are just me thinking out loud on what could be going on. :h
Sep-11-2020 09:39 AM