โAug-10-2019 10:08 AM
โSep-30-2019 06:13 AM
RLS7201 wrote:scbwr wrote:
This article on wheel base ratio may be of interest.
https://axleaddict.com/rvs/Why-RV-Wheel-Base-Ratio-Is-Important
Hog wash! If you can't figure out why a coach handles poorly, blame it on the wheel base to chassis ratio.
I drive what is considered one of those foul handling coaches.
190" wheel base, 33' coach.
It drives and handles quite well. Get the chassis and steering right and they'll all drive well. Yes I still do part time work in the alignment business.
Richard
โSep-25-2019 05:25 AM
RLS7201 wrote:scbwr wrote:
This article on wheel base ratio may be of interest.
https://axleaddict.com/rvs/Why-RV-Wheel-Base-Ratio-Is-Important
Hog wash! If you can't figure out why a coach handles poorly, blame it on the wheel base to chassis ratio.
I drive what is considered one of those foul handling coaches.
190" wheel base, 33' coach.
It drives and handles quite well. Get the chassis and steering right and they'll all drive well. Yes I still do part time work in the alignment business.
Richard
โSep-25-2019 05:08 AM
crawford wrote:I think what you heard was the ratio of wheel base to over all length. The lower the ratio the more the more likely of handling problems. Actually the Vegas MH has a ratio of 59% which is higher than many longer MH's. I am surprised more people don't actually own these MH's, they seem to be a good alternative to a Class C.
I'm not sure but was told shorter the unit them more handling problems before you buy take one out for a good ride before you find out for sure. Not just around the block like a few company's do.
โSep-22-2019 11:42 AM
scbwr wrote:
This article on wheel base ratio may be of interest.
https://axleaddict.com/rvs/Why-RV-Wheel-Base-Ratio-Is-Important
โSep-22-2019 04:48 AM
โSep-21-2019 08:23 AM
way2roll wrote:This is interesting, with the IFS it should ride better than the solid front axle of the F53 chassis(that everyone complains about) also. Has anyone on here driven both and can comment on the ride?Gjac wrote:way2roll wrote:Are you saying that because of the lower CG it should ride better than a Class C on the 450 chassis?
The axis is on the E450 chassis which will handle differently than the F53. The E/F450 is traditionally the platform for class C's. Thor decided to make a small Class A on it. The Axis does have an independent front suspension though and that should help the ride. It will also have a lower center of gravity which should help pitch and roll.
That's what I read on another forum. I have no personal experience.
โSep-21-2019 06:47 AM
Gjac wrote:way2roll wrote:Are you saying that because of the lower CG it should ride better than a Class C on the 450 chassis?
The axis is on the E450 chassis which will handle differently than the F53. The E/F450 is traditionally the platform for class C's. Thor decided to make a small Class A on it. The Axis does have an independent front suspension though and that should help the ride. It will also have a lower center of gravity which should help pitch and roll.
โSep-20-2019 01:58 PM
way2roll wrote:Are you saying that because of the lower CG it should ride better than a Class C on the 450 chassis?
The axis is on the E450 chassis which will handle differently than the F53. The E/F450 is traditionally the platform for class C's. Thor decided to make a small Class A on it. The Axis does have an independent front suspension though and that should help the ride. It will also have a lower center of gravity which should help pitch and roll.
โSep-16-2019 10:09 AM
โSep-16-2019 09:31 AM
โSep-16-2019 09:23 AM
โAug-11-2019 04:09 AM