How many of us are there? Owners of Dodge based RV's?

[whiteknight001]

I'm new here, and curious.

How many of us in Class C own Dodge B300 incomplete
cab/chassis based RV's? I know two others- Steve aka
Ripsaw, with a 1977 Brougham, and Leroy aka 1978_Dodge
_Delta who owns a 440V8 powered sharp looking 1978
Delta RV. I would like to ask, and offer, help, idea
swapping and comparing notes on our particular RV's
which are based on the Dodge B300 van chassis.

Yeah, I know. These are low tech, podgy old RV's that
would be considered "entry level" for folks like me,
but I have a deep and abiding respect for the quality
of these old "monsters of the open road". And anyone
wanting to pick brains, joke about, share notes or just
brag about our old A- Dodge-io's are certainly welcome
to PM or email me. Between all of us we can form a real
good support group, and help each other with problems
we know we'll encounter with an older vehicle.

Sure. I'd love a new RV. But I'd rather have an older
one already paid for, and a lotta great memories. Call
me frugal, an old hippie, or whatever you will. I'm proud
of my old land yacht.

Mopar Madness Manifest in the flesh,

Mark aka White Knight

P.S. Mine's a '72. Is there an older one out there someone's
motorvating in? Maybe even a Travco? W/K

[johngg]

79 24' Monaco. 440
Haven't even used it yet!

[Glenndolph]

They may not be outlawed, but they should... dangerous if the pressure gets low...

[regis101]

Kinda seems that the 8.00 x 16.5's are in the 29.5" diameter range.
Kinda seems that the smallest 16" tire , 215/85's are 30.5

Weird thing is that the single wheel front spare has a 26" diameter tire on it. My guess is that is that it may be the original. I'll check its date code.

As an ex racer, effective gear ratio's help win races and in this case helps the rig get to the top of the hill.

I'll keep looking. No harm. No foul.
My main concern is the unknown of the 16.5 tire safety. They're not outlawed , only scarce.

Happy trails

[Glenndolph]

I put 16's on the 77 Dodge Jamboree and it works just fine... worring over tire diameter is something that a racer would worry about. In the real world, it ain't no biggie... and good tires are affordable. You can go to the trouble of 19's if you want, but I found rims, and tires and spent less than $800...

[regis101]

Soza. I'm researching the 16.5 to 16 rim changeover due to so many more tire choices for the 16's. But...
However, it does seem that the 16" tire diameter that would equate the OE 16.5 is limited.
The worn out twenty year old tires on the rig are ~29" in diameter.
The spare, I'm thinking OE, oh yes, is 26" diameter.
Of the three 16.5 tires I can locate, the Firestone Transforce comes in at ~29.5, if memory serves.
What is the point of this question? How do I find out what the OE tire diameter is as selected for a 1973 B30 chassis, 20' dual wheel with regular front eight lug.

It's all about the tire diameter vs chassis gearing. I'd prefer a smaller diameter tire so as to gain some gearing. I'm just an old RV motorhome mind ya.

[Griff_in_Fairba]

I have to laugh ... this forum's nanny routines had a fit when I tried to combine salt and water into the common single word. (Look at what happens when you combine them into one word ... particularly the four letters following 'sal')

[Griff_in_Fairba]

Now it's time to consider a component that has a role in the charging system, although it's not considered part of that system.

That component is the battery, which is actually part of the starting system. (In the charging system, the alternator provides the majority of the electricity used, while in the starting system, the battery provides the majority of the electricity.)

Before looking at the batteries in our motor vehicles, lets take a brief look at the history, construction, and operation of batteries in general.

Simply put, a battery is a device that converts chemical energy into electrical energy.

Knowledge on how to make and use a battery has existed since prehistoric times. Archeological evidence indicates some prehistoric people may have made and used batteries, most likely for electroplating metals. Likewise, early philosophers (i.e., scientists) made and used batteries in their study of biology. (Fear arising from the publication of the experiments very probably led Mary Shelley to write Frankenstein.)

While this knowledge has existed for a long time; being discovered, forgotten, and rediscovered repeatedly across human history; putting this technology to wide-spread practical use is relatively recent, within the past century or so.

Basically, a battery consists of two dissimilar materials (the electrodes) separated by a substance (electrolyte) that allows (encourages?) ions to flow from one of the materials to the other. This flow of ions produces electricity.

This can be demonstrated, in a simple exercise used in schools, using a piece of copper, a piece of zinc, and a lemon. An ordinary bare copper wire and a zinc-plated nail or screw will work as electrodes and the citric acid in the lemon serves as the electrolyte. You'll need a good voltmeter (or multimeter) to detect and measure the electricity produced. Alternatively, you can connect several in series to drive a low voltage LED or a small light bulb. (A LED would be best because they will react better to low voltages than most light bulbs.)

The same can be done with a potato, with its phosphoric acid acting as the electrolyte. (You do the same with a can of cola, which also contains phosphoric acid. The aluminum can could serve as one electrode -- and a copper wire as the other -- except soda cans are lined with plastic to prevent interaction between the cola and the aluminum.)

A third possibility is a can of sauerkraut, with a copper wire inserted in the sauerkraut acting as one electrode, the tin-plated can as the other electrode, and the lactic acid in the sauerkraut serving as the electrolyte. (Look up "lemon battery" on Wikipedia if you want to know more.)

These batteries are essentially identical to the common, readily available dry cells used in flashlights, portable electronics, and toys. (Causing significant problems for parents every Christmas when they realized they overlooked the "batteries not included" statement on their children's presents.) People have actually used these to "Macgyver" a source of electricity on emergencies.

The battery we've discussed so far use an electrochemical process, called galvanic corrosion, which is essentially a one-way process. They cannot reasonably be recharged so, once their chemical energy is used up, they have to be disposed of. Adding to this limitation is the galvanic corrosion continues regardless of whether the batteries are being used or stored. Although the process occurs at a slower rate, common carbon-zinc and alkaline batteries continue losing 8-20 percent of their charge per year while in storage, starting with when they are manufactured.

The one-way, expendable nature of these batteries make them less than ideal for our primary uses in motor vehicles. We need batteries that can be discharged and recharged repeatedly. We also need them to be reliable and reasonably inexpensive in terms cost and longevity.

The batteries we use today were, in the old days, called storage batteries and are effectively the same as the batteries first used in cars when manufacturers started including electric starters. The differences between then and now are mostly limited to improvements in design and construction.

The reason we still use this somewhat ancient technology is due to significant existing manufacturing infrastructure and economy of scale, both of which help keep the price down.

Fifty years ago, motor vehicle batteries were simple. They were all flooded lead-acid (cells could be opened to add distilled water when needed) and generally only available in one size, which is known today as BCI Group 24.

Today, there's a bewildering array of size and types, such as sealed, gel, AGM, and so forth. Adding to the confusion is the way various terms are tossed about and combined, with an assumption consumers know what the dealers are talking about. (My example of types actually demonstrates this by combining two distinctly different forms of battery categorization.)

In the next installment of my ramblings, I'll try to sort out and simplify this confusion, as well as go deeper into depth about motor battery technology and use.

In the meanwhile, look up "Battery (electricity)" in Wikipedia to explore more information on batteries. (As before, following the links in this article could lead to discussions chock full of chemistry and mathematics.) Also, Scientific American has a good overview, written in everyday English.

Before closing, I'd like to touch on two areas affected by what I've discussed above, which may be important to people reading this.

The first area is marine corrosion, which is a very important concern among boat owners and operators, leading to significant and possibly catastrophic damage. The galvanic process for batteries is exactly the same as one form of corrosion attacking boats.

Any time two different metals exist on a boat, they can create what amounts to a battery. The speed with which this causes corrosion is determined by the metals, whether they are below or above the waterline, in fresh or sea water, and whether or not the two metals are electrically connected. (Sacrificial zinc anodes are used to redirect the corrosion towards those anodes instead of other, more important and valuable components.)

One person I know severely shortened the life of his new boat, which he often used in salt water, by using stainless steel fasteners below the waterline on the aluminum hull. The aluminum hull protected the stainless steel fasteners by acting as a sacrificial anode, resulting in the hull being rapidly eaten away by galvanic corrosion.

While galvanic corrosion is a constant, on-going process varying only in terms of the speed with which it happens, a related form of marine corrosion -- electrolytic corrosion -- is just as detrimental.

As we've seen, galvanic corrosion creates electricity as an output. On the other hand, electrolytic corrosion is a form of electroplating, requiring an input of electrical current to occur.

Electrolytic corrosion is almost always the result of improper wiring, either within the boat itself or other nearby boats in a harbor.

The second area is galvanic corrosion in fasteners used to hold buildings together.

Decades ago, wood was pressure-treated using chromate copper arsenate (CCA). Irrational public fear about the arsenic component led to the use of CCA being heavily restricted and effectively phased out in the U.S.

The copper component in CCA did interact with building fasteners, causing some galvanic corrosion. However, the amount of copper in CCA is relatively small, limiting the rate of corrosion to the point where there was little concern in terms of the expected life of buildings. (The possibility of failure was much greater due to common rust, as compared to CCA.)

The issue of wood rot didn't go away with the ban on CCA so manufacturers had to use a other chemicals for pressure treating wood, such as alkaline copper quaternary (ACQ). Unfortunately, all available replacement chemicals either had significantly higher copper content, were prohibitively expensive, or ineffective against some forms of wood rot and insect infestation.

During the transition period, builders continued using the same fasteners on ACQ wood that they had used with CCA wood. The higher copper content resulted in greatly accelerated galvanic corrosion affecting the fasteners. (Galvanized fasteners only slowed things a bit because copper loves zinc, eating through it quickly before going on to attack the steel in the fastener.)

In one documented case, a builder went back to inspect houses he'd built less than a decade before and discovered the ACQ had corrode the sill plate fasteners to the point where gravity was effectively the only thing holding the houses on their foundations. I fully expect, in the near future if it hasn't already happened, a relatively mild wind storm or earthquake to cause a large number of these houses to come off their foundations while leaving older buildings in place.

The problems with ACQ and similar pressure treatment chemical has led to the larger variety of significantly more expensive fasteners, typically coated with plastic, appearing on the lumber yard and big box shelves.

This is the reason I insist on CCA wood in the house I'm building. I also use the more expensive plastic-coated fasteners to help extend the house's expected life span.

A comedian once said, "Every time a rat dies in Canada, we lose something else to eat." To that I'd add, "Every time the people in California have a hissy fit, we lose something useful and our lives get more expensive and complicated."

Okay, I'm done with my ranting … someone else can have the soapbox.

[Griff_in_Fairba]

Sorry for the delay in continuing … I got side tracked looking at what has changed with marine electronics since I last looked, 20 years ago.

As I said before, we're going to start a checklist for diagnosing vehicle electrical systems. Before we start, I want to stress a systems theory truism:

A relatively small change or event in one part of a system can cause a massive, possibly catastrophic, event in another -- apparently unrelated -- part of the system.

1. Battery.

Make sure the battery is in good condition and is fully charged. A dead battery is obvious. (Although apparently in need of replacement, some batteries are so deeply discharged that they need special procedures to bring them back to life.) A battery that is in the process of dying or is partially discharged can cause baffling symptoms in other parts of the system.

For example. a customer came into CarQuest wanting a warranty replacement for an alternator that was less than a year old. A quick charging system test indicated the alternator was just fine. He insisted the alternator wasn't keeping the battery charged up so I asked him if I could keep his battery overnight to run some tests on it. (I happened to have an old battery in the back of my truck that was still good, which I loaned him to use while I tested his battery.)

I put his battery on our tester, which charged it up and tested it as being good. On a hunch, I left it sit and, after six hours, put a voltmeter on it. The meter showed the battery had less than 10 volts in it, which indicated the battery was dying. (There's a number of reasons a battery can appear to be getting fully charged up but quickly lose its charge.)

Although a new battery cost more than a rebuilt alternator, replacing the battery solved his problem.

2. Battery Cables.

Are the battery cables and terminals in good condition?

Is the insulation intact and reasonably clean? Some "clean" dirt is okay but too much can collect moisture, which could create a current path over the outside of the cable, possibly to a short. Likewise, grease and other petroleum products can degrade the insulation, creating the potential for a short circuit. (Insulation issues are relatively unimportant for negative cables but critical on positive cables.)

Are the wires inside the cable intact and reasonably corrosion free?

If you have a multimeter, you can test the cables' resistance, with a high ohms reading indicates breaks or other wire issues. Otherwise, use an 1156 bulb, which should burn brightly unless the cable is bad. (If the bulb acts like a camera flash attachment and burns out, your cable is probably just fine.)

Some oxidation of the exposed parts of the cables' wires is okay. However, a build-up of crystals is an issue. Bluish-green, reddish, or black crystals are probably copper oxide, indicating the cables' wires are becoming corroded and impeding electrical current. White crystals are usually lead, zinc, or aluminum sulfate, which is less critical but should be cleaned off. (Some white crystals are copper sulfate, which indicates the same issues as other crystals, so look for pitting in the wires after cleaning.)

The cable terminals should be tightly fastened to the cable wire, with few, if any, broken or loose strands. The battery terminals that clamp onto the cable with a metal strap and bolts are problematic and only be used as a temporary fix.

Finally, are the connections at both ends of the cables clean and tight? Grease and loose connections increase resistance and can create an open circuit. The connections should be oxidation free (bare, bright metal on both parts) and the fasteners well tightened.

Note: I keep mentioning grease as being bad for electrical connections. However, there is one type of grease -- dielectric grease -- that is actually made for electrical connections. This type of grease is electrically conductive and is useful for sealing out water and oxygen that causes corrosion in electrical connections. Used carefully, it can significantly improve your system's reliability. Too much grease can create unintended circuit connections and, on positive wires, create a short circuit to ground.

If you replace the cables, the replacements should only be as long as necessary to reach the connections, with an inch or two slack. (e.g., use a 19- or 20-inch cable for connections that are 18 inches apart.) On one vehicle I was restoring, someone had replaced the negative (ground) cable with a six foot cable when 18 inches would have been ample. In addition to quadrupling the resistance, the excess length could easily have been caught in the fan belt.

Standard gauge cables are fine but, being a belt-and-suspenders kind of guy, I often replace battery cables with the next heavier gauge wire. (I usually need to have them custom-made, with the added cost being arguably worth it when I want to increase vehicle reliability and head off potential problems.)

Top post battery terminals have always been somewhat problematic so threaded terminals, such as on side terminal batteries, are more preferable. The European Union is in the process of banning products containing lead so the old-fashioned lead terminals on top-post cables are becoming hard to find. Unfortunately, the replacements for lead terminals often create additional problems and should be avoided.

3. Voltage Regulator.

There's not much you can do with internally regulated alternators except replace the whole expensive alternator. Fortunately, most older Dodge motorhomes have externally regulated alternators, which provides added less expensive options in terms of diagnosis and repair.

Way back when, it was possible to repair and adjust the old external electro-mechanical voltage regulators, which is good because they were a helluva lot less reliable than modern electronic regulators. This small advantage was offset by the extremely finicky adjustment process. (To prevent under- or over-charging, it required a level of precision similar to that required to produce computer chips.)

Modern electronic voltage regulators are essentially mysterious sealed black boxes chock full of PFM. We know what they do but average people like most of us don't know how they do it nor how to tell if they're actually doing it correctly.

Theoretically, being electronic devices, modern voltage regulators should last forever. That being said, ask any technician how often reality intrudes on theory.

So, we need to have a way to figure out if they're working correctly or not. Considering they're relatively inexpensive, I use the brute force method of diagnosis and repair -- I simply replace it when in doubt. I usually have a good spare laying around, often left over from a previous diagnosis adventure. (if I have to buy another, I always consider the possibility the new one might have a manufacturing defect.)

Another -- more risky -- test is to bypass the voltage regulator. (Called "full fielding" the alternator.)

If you have a multimeter, the battery should have roughly 12.6 volts with the engine off. (If not, use a battery charger to bring it up to full charge before proceeding.) With the engine running, the meter should show around 13.4 volts at the battery., which indicates your problem is somewhere other than the voltage regulator and alternator. (The reading will rise and fall slowing as the regulator turns the alternator on and off … typically 1/2 - 1 volt either side of 13.4 volts.)

Next, check the regulator and alternator grounds by running jumpers from the battery's negative terminal to the case of each. (Make sure to connect to bare metal parts of the cases.) A faulty ground will cause a voltage regulator to misbehave and could fry the regulator. (I already mention what a faulty ground can do to alternators.)

Having eliminated a lot of other possibilities, it's time to full field the alternator. Run a jumper from the battery's positive terminal to the alternator field terminal. With the engine running at fast idle (roughly 1500 RPMs), the voltmeter should read roughly 14.6 volts. If so, your voltage regulator is probably bad. If the reading is less than this, especially below 13 volts, your alternator is probably bad.

WARNING: Do NOT full field the alternator longer than necessary to run the test. Leaving the alternator in full field mode for an extended period will overcharge and cook the battery.

If replacing the voltage regulator doesn't solve your problems, check the regulator's wires and connections to the electrical system and alternator. (Yes, you might want to check these before replacement … but, the relatively low cost of replacement is offset by the hassles of checking for wiring problems that may or may not exist.)

I once nursed a vehicle out of a remote location by telling my (then) girlfriend to pretend she was a voltage regulator. (She didn't think it was funny until she realized the alternative was a 30 hike.) I used a jumper and switch to bypass the regulator and told her to watch the multimeter, turning the switch on when the voltage dripped below 13 volts and off when it rose to 14-1/2 volts. (I also kept the headlights and heater blower on to help stabilize the system.)

4. Alternator.

We've already seen (above) how to determine if your alternator is the problem. However, there's a few things to check before going to the (significant) expense of replacing the alternator.

Make sure the belt is in good condition and reasonably tight. I have someone turn on the headlights and heater blower and start the engine while I watch the alternator. (This places a significant load on the alternator, causing the belt to slip if it's loose or bad.)

Next, check the alternator's ground, as well as the alternator's wires and connections to the rest of the system.

Finally, take the alternator somewhere that can bench test it. A business that specializes in automotive electrical is best because the people in parts stores may not know what they're doing or their tester may be broken or out of adjustment.

5. Ignition Switch.

Problems with the ignition switch and its wiring is the final things that may cause charging system. However, I think we'll wait until we look at the vehicle's ignition system.

Until then, this rounds out the charging system diagnostic and repair checklist.

This is based on my experiences, research, and memory and is quite generalized. Additional and more detailed information is available all over the Web but be careful … some of the information is wrong and/or dangerous to yourself and your vehicle.

TTFN.

[regis101]

Didn't make it to the boneyard today. Instead, the two Fantastic Fan roof vents came today so I put them into existing locations due to the lids being disintegrated , gone, nothing, kaput. I'll source the 12v from near by lights. All will be well.
Dunno how long its been like this but the wood was still solid.
There is a third vent for the bathroom that ended up being wonky so I ordered a non powered vent and two plumbing cap things since they were rotted and crumbled in my hand.
I'll power wash the metal roof after these next few items are installed and think about some type of roof paint/sealant.

[regis101]

Probably head out to the boneyard to look for 8 lug 16" rear duals and 8 lug regular 16" front singles. I'm not opposed to using the Firestone Transforce 8.75r16.5's but thought I'd take a look.
The date code on the tires is a bit different than what seems to be the present style of markings but my senses tell me that I'm reading year of manufacture is 1994.
The rear has the 5/8 studs , torque is 300-350 ft lbs according to the owners manual. The fronts use the smaller 1/2" studs with the manual stating 60-85 ft lbs.
The rig came with one spare for the front and I suppose there is no rear spare since having four tires helps get somewhere safely.

[rehoppe]

A LOT depends on the year of the engine as well. Horsepower decreased substantially from the 60s.

Some of the 70-80s engines were so detuned that they DESERVE to have a turbo added.

The added 'breathability' is most welcome in the mountains.

[Ballenxj]

toedtoes wrote:
Honestly, I don't know anyone with the 360 who wishes they had the 440, and I don't know anyone with the 440 who wishes they had the 360. I think whatever folks get, as long as they can get the engine running well, they are happy. If an individual engine is a dog, then all bets are off as to how people feel about the engine size (some will blame the size, some won't).

I'm sure that having optimum geared differential for the engine used had a lot to do with it as well.

[toedtoes]

Honestly, I don't know anyone with the 360 who wishes they had the 440, and I don't know anyone with the 440 who wishes they had the 360. I think whatever folks get, as long as they can get the engine running well, they are happy. If an individual engine is a dog, then all bets are off as to how people feel about the engine size (some will blame the size, some won't).

[Leeann]

Ballenxj wrote:

Leeann wrote:

The 360 class C I had prior to my 440 class A was a total dog. And no better gas mileage (same overall length).

What length are we talking about?
Reason I'm asking is I've found 22' C class running a 360 for reasonable money.
Also, I'm thinking it will have a 727A transmission?

19' Class C (technically 19.5') vs 20' Class A. Both have 727 trannies.

[Griff_in_Fairba]

Ballenxj wrote:
Since we have some pretty knowledgeable Mopar folks hanging out in this thread, I'll ask here.
Which would you guys rather have in todays economy, a big engine, of the 440, 413 family, or a smaller 318, 360 engine?
Will I really get any better fuel economy from the smaller engines, or will they be forced to work harder and get about the same?

One of my preferences is the 383 big block. I had one in a '66 Polara with a two barrel carburetor in 1974-75. If I behaved myself, I got over 30 mpg. Of course, that was with the better leaded gas we had back then. Plus, I think it was one of those few engines that comes from the factory in perfect balance and working order. And, to repeat, if I behaved myself (55-65 mph).

If tried cruising at 100-120 mph, which sometimes happened, the gas gauge dropped much, much faster. Plenty of power if I wanted it. By three weeks after I bought it, I'd removed all tread from the rear tires. (First speeding ticket was 87 mph in 30 mph zone 1/2 block from the stoplight. Fortunately, the cop was a friend who didn't know I had a different vehicle ... so he subtracted a few mph from what the radar said.) I also used it to tow a 1-1/2 ton stepvan 90 miles across the bottom end of Minnesota.

I'm convinced a larger engine that's hardly worked tends to get better mileage, within limits. (A buddy's experience supports this when he went from 115 hp to 150 hp outboard.)

Daughter is going with a 383 in her '59 Savoy, in part because of all the times she heard me talking about mine.

For many people, the 413 was the best big block and I have one (see signature block).

On the other hand, 318 is my favorite small block. I had one in a '77 B200 that I drove the hell out of, often towing an outboard jetboat all around Alaska. Again, if I behaved myself, I got 15-16 mpg with a trailer and 18-20 mpg without.

My 1970 Class A Explorer had a 318 that got 16-18 mpg. (Mileage dropped if I took speed limits sign as suggestions.) It climbed Turnagain Pass easily, passing cars and small trucks all the way up. I'd have to downshift for the last 1/4 mile but other people had long since downshifted.

That engine is going into the 1973 chassis, with extensive changes intended to maintain the same torque and horsepower while decreasing gas usage.