24 ft or less B+ with over head bed.

[Gjac]

In looking on line I notice most B+ MH's eliminate the long overhang over the front cab and the Queen bed. They look more aero dynamic and have less overall height. Some claim they ride better than a C. The ones I looked at have an entertainment center and you lose the overhead storage and bed. What models if any come with a single bed over head and not the entertainment center? Also do any of the B+ models come with a large storage area in the rear like many of the C's have?

[bobndot]

way2roll wrote:

bobndot wrote:
By the time you finish researching these rvs , you will have to start over with class D and class E models. :B


If you need extra sleeping in a smaller rv ........
See the Dynamax 24RB models. Other mfgs might offer the same floorplan.
Its not a cabover bed for one but a QB for 2. Plus a sofa and dinette which both can made into a sleeper.

The 24RB while it did have a nice drop down bunk, that was really the only bed unless the sofa pulled out. Where the bed would normally be was all bath space. So nice bunk, but no bedroom.

Hi, yes I thought it might offer G an alternative for that extra sleeping space. I think that QB can be left made then retracted and it appeared someone could also sleep on the sofa while that drop down QB was in use. Maybe, maybe not ? I just saw the floorplan and offered it as a possible solution.

At the end of the day , once any of us find that floorplan that we think is best, they find that the water pump is hidden below the shower pan with no access. Remember that post a few months ago ?

[bobndot]

IMO, I think the E450 is an E450 no matter class c or B+. You have to have the correct alignment which might be a little difficult to find the right shop to do that.

Maybe the Transit drives better but not sure about the payload. Same thing with the Pro-Master which is FWD .
Loading up the rear on that model might causes the wheels to spin on loose gravel or very wet surfaces, at least that's what dealer told me. Spinning on gravel was the Pro Master owners biggest complaint when the rear was loaded up.

The P. Cruiser seems more aero dynamic and has less cabover which I would think would drive better from an engineering point of view but Ron did all the same mods as I did to allow his rig to handle and ride better. Mine is a class c square box which drives very well now after the mods. I wish they would build these things to drive correctly from the get-go.

mods:
-shocks, Bils front - FSD rear
-Roadmaster steering stabilizer
-alignment with caster kit
- rear track bar
- heavy duty sway bars front and rear
- experiment with PSI in all tires

I tried a set of wireless Air bags with compressor $1700 but had them removed bc they did not raise my MH more than level. I was looking to gain some driveway clearance of and inch to 2 inches but the bags only offered 1/2", if that, above normal and the compressor constantly malfunctioned causing massive air loss. Swapped the bags out, swapped the compressor and leak tested all the lines and connections and never found the leak source, so I had them removed. Go figure that one out. All the air leaked out in 3 hours but no bubbles anywhere. Maybe Rod Serling built my rv. The dealer was very helpful in trying to resolve the issue but even the AirLift folks didn't understand it.

[way2roll]

bobndot wrote:
By the time you finish researching these rvs , you will have to start over with class D and class E models. :B


If you need extra sleeping in a smaller rv ........
See the Dynamax 24RB models. Other mfgs might offer the same floorplan.
Its not a cabover bed for one but a QB for 2. Plus a sofa and dinette which both can made into a sleeper.

The 24RB while it did have a nice drop down bunk, that was really the only bed unless the sofa pulled out. Where the bed would normally be was all bath space. So nice bunk, but no bedroom.

[DrewE]

I don't have personal experience to compare with, but ride quality should be fairly similar if they're based on the same base chassis. Most of the weight of a motorhome is towards the floor; the CG difference between a normal class C and a "class B+" is not that great, and the overall height is also not all that different as it's mainly determined by the height of a human plus the floor height, neither of which change a great deal between the two styles. The somewhat improved aerodynamics probably would contribute to a bit better cruising at highway speed (better acceleration when passing, etc.). Likewise, if a little less tall overall, they logically should do a bit better with crosswinds and not getting pushed around by passing semis.

Overall ride quality will be influenced much more by the chassis used, the length, wheelbase, weight, and balance of the finished vehicle, the suspension setup and tuning and improvements (if any), etc. Since most B+ styles are more towards the upper end of motorhomes in price and furnishing and so forth, it's not unreasonable to expect that they've paid due attention to these sorts of things, which may not always be expected to be the case as much for more budget class C's. Expectations and reality are, of course, not necessarily exactly the same.

[klutchdust]

Having owned a Itasca Cambria for 6 years I know this. The front aerodynamic nose will not support a human sleeping in it, it is a fiberglass nose cone, that's it. It bobbed up and down when traveling and had no structural framing or support. I would not store anything up there. It contained some wiring for the audio and entertainment systems. The TV was mounted to a cheesy aluminum frame , speakers to each side. As far as "does it handle differently". I was not pleased with the handling of that coach, a 31 footer, , until I installed new shocks and had the front end aligned. it came with Roadmaster sway bars front and rear. The new shocks alone took out the pounding when even railroad tracks were crossed. Highly recommend spending $$$ for shocks. Good shocks will cost you , worth it though.

[Gjac]

I don't watch TV when I camp or travel so the storage to me is more important. I guess the real question is do B+ MH's that are usually lower height ride any better than a Class C with the overhang in front, assuming the same length and WB? Lower height, lower CG, one piece FG cap, rear FG cap would be the main benefits I see. Also as Ron pointed out the cutaway roof would be important to get in and out off the front seat. If the ride quality is the same I think the outside and inside storage, more FW and a lower price would be a good trade off. Am I missing anything?

[Gjac]

bobndot wrote:
By the time you finish researching these rvs , you will have to start over with class D and class E models. :B


If you need extra sleeping in a smaller rv ........
See the Dynamax 24RB models. Other mfgs might offer the same floorplan.
Its not a cabover bed for one but a QB for 2. Plus a sofa and dinette which both can made into a sleeper.

Your right Bob, trying to get all the important features you want in a small C is very daunting. The 24 RB is interesting, I have not seen that drop down queen in a Class C before. Too bad Dynamax doesn't make these anymore they were $69k brand new, on a Promaster chassis, the new ones on the Mercedes Chassis are $165K.

[ron_dittmer]

The Phoenix Cruiser has always been a B+. I own one with the typical cabinets and TV in that area. You could special order that space as a bunk. To get it so, you would sacrifice what I have plus the easy entry into the cab area. The overhead bunk would make an excellent loft for a child or pet to sleep in as well as for open bulk storage. It would also increase roll-over protection because the van roof with its rear support would not be cut.

Here is an old Phoenix Cruiser, maybe a 2002 model year, with the overhead bunk. I think today it would be finished off with more interior volume. If you sought an exceptionally deep bunk, I think you could have the factory build it some additional inches more rearward.


For comparison, here is my rig.


This is what is done to every PC like mine which is just about every one made. It is also what happens to every other class B+ and C motorhome.

[Ed_Gee]

theoldwizard1 wrote:
No overcab bed is the biggest difference between a B+ and a C.

That is a fallacy. There is no such thing as a Class B+ Except in the minds of some marketing sales persons. Take the Dynamax Isata 3 for just one example...
No overhead cab bed, But clearly a Class C . There are many others, too. If its built on a Cut-A-Way chassis like the Sprinter or Ford Transit, its a Class C. If it is a modified van chassis, it is a Class B.

[bobndot]

By the time you finish researching these rvs , you will have to start over with class D and class E models. :B


If you need extra sleeping in a smaller rv ........
See the Dynamax 24RB models. Other mfgs might offer the same floorplan.
Its not a cabover bed for one but a QB for 2. Plus a sofa and dinette which both can made into a sleeper.

[rlw999]

To get that nice aerodynamic look that you like, the overcab area is very shallow and narrow, not really enough for a comfortable bed, even single sized... you'd never be able to sit up because of the angled portion. I've never seen one that tried to squeeze a bed in that area, but you could probably do something custom if you had a small person to put up there.

[theoldwizard1]

No overcab bed is the biggest difference between a B+ and a C.