Winnebago Adventurer Roof issues

[fenwickfam]

Hi there! I'm hoping somebody out there has some insight for us on this topic:
We have a 2005 Winnebago Adventurer 38J
Over this past weekend (a very windy weekend, I might add!), we were traveling south on I-29. As a semi went by us (we were only traveling around 50 mph due to wind and visibility), we heard a noise. I told my husband that I thought he had blew a tire, as it was a sound I hadn't heard before. When he went to pull off at the exit, we heard an awful sound from above (like somebody wobbling a piece of sheet metal). When we got out of the MH to look, the tires were all fine, however, the roof wasn't. The roof had came out of the seam from above the driver door to behind the front slide out. I called our insurance company, who told us to secure it as much as we possibly could, and continue to drive it.
We used tape (all we had available) and drove it to the nearest campground. I spoke with the insurance company again on Saturday. Of course, no adjuster available, so was told to try to drive it home, and yes, they would still cover the damage if we drove it home. As we headed north on a back highway, the wind was once again terrible from the west, once again hitting us on the driver side. This time, it got under the tape, picked up the roof and tore it. Once again, I climbed up and taped it down as best I could... we turned around and went south and dropped the MH at our sons place, because there was no way we could get it home without even more damage.
Now, our insurance company today tells me that this is a common issue with Winnebago Adventurer roofs, and that they may not cover it.
Has anybody else run in to this problem? Is this a common Winnebago Adventurer problem? I did call one Winnebago dealer service shop that said that they are unaware of this being a common problem.
I would like any information anyone could help me with to argue with the insurance company about coverage on this.
Unfortunate timing, as I am changing insurance companies to the Good Sam Insurance as of October 4th. However, that doesn't change the fact that this occurred while under this insurance company.
Thanks for any information!!

[Mile_High]

Bruce Brown wrote:

fenwickfam wrote:
We are still trying to work with the insurance company. We spoke with Winnebago who said that this is not a defect, as they have been using these roofs for many years producing over 10 million of these and if it were a defect, they wouldn't be using this design. They did state that it does happen, and in our situation, it was a wind issue, not a defect or a design flaw. So... now, back to the insurance company....

Yet how many other motorhomes and travel trailers were on the road that same day, driving in those same conditions that didn't have their roof blow off. And thinking about this even more, have we ever seen a post on RV.Net about a roof blowing off on anything but a Winnebago. :h I'm not saying there hasn't been one, but I sure don't ever remember seeing one. It seems we do see these posts come up with Winnies about 3-4 times a year. Nope - not a design flaw at all, it was a "wind issue". Umm...OK. :S

Good luck with the insurance company - I think you're going to need it.

MMM - I'm assuming your are trying to pin Winnebago as having the only "fiberglass" roofs that blow off in the wind, and that may be true, but overall, I encountered 3 rubber roofs blow off in my social group in the last year. The last one was my brother in laws brand spanking new Avalanche 5er that lost the roof all the way back to the 1st AC driving through Wyoming a few months ago. It peeled past his skylight and even ripped his Sensar antenna off. Damaged the side where it was flapping in the wind before he saw it.

Again the Winnebago fiberglass roof - its not the best design, but compared to a rubber roof, it is light years better.

[Bruce_Brown]

fenwickfam wrote:
We are still trying to work with the insurance company. We spoke with Winnebago who said that this is not a defect, as they have been using these roofs for many years producing over 10 million of these and if it were a defect, they wouldn't be using this design. They did state that it does happen, and in our situation, it was a wind issue, not a defect or a design flaw. So... now, back to the insurance company....

Yet how many other motorhomes and travel trailers were on the road that same day, driving in those same conditions that didn't have their roof blow off. And thinking about this even more, have we ever seen a post on RV.Net about a roof blowing off on anything but a Winnebago. :h I'm not saying there hasn't been one, but I sure don't ever remember seeing one. It seems we do see these posts come up with Winnies about 3-4 times a year. Nope - not a design flaw at all, it was a "wind issue". Umm...OK. :S

Good luck with the insurance company - I think you're going to need it.

[Mile_High]

Well at least it is not being pointed at you as a maintenance issue. Keep it in their court!

[fenwickfam]

We are still trying to work with the insurance company. We spoke with Winnebago who said that this is not a defect, as they have been using these roofs for many years producing over 10 million of these and if it were a defect, they wouldn't be using this design. They did state that it does happen, and in our situation, it was a wind issue, not a defect or a design flaw. So... now, back to the insurance company....

[Bruce_Brown]

Any update on this one?

[Mile_High]

DrivingMissDaisy wrote:
Sorry about the lag in responding, I'm traveling. RE: glued hood skin? I'm not speaking of the outside skin, the hinges had hold the hood on are glued to the cap. There are no structural fasteners e.g. screws, bolts or rivets.

So was the headlight assembly, glued to the cap. I've thru bolted them with stainless Steel bolts. fenders that came loose from failed pressure sensitive tape have been reattached with drill screws, painted to match body color.

I know it's human nature to speak kindly something you've spent big bucks purchasing, but I speak the truth, there's a lot of stuff shoddily attached to these things.

You got off track and lost- not what we were talking about at all.

[DrivingMissDais]

Sorry about the lag in responding, I'm traveling. RE: glued hood skin? I'm not speaking of the outside skin, the hinges had hold the hood on are glued to the cap. There are no structural fasteners e.g. screws, bolts or rivets.

So was the headlight assembly, glued to the cap. I've thru bolted them with stainless Steel bolts. fenders that came loose from failed pressure sensitive tape have been reattached with drill screws, painted to match body color.

I know it's human nature to speak kindly something you've spent big bucks purchasing, but I speak the truth, there's a lot of stuff shoddily attached to these things.

[Bruce_Brown]

Stormy Eyes wrote:

Bruce Brown wrote:
The skin on the hood wouldn't be considered structural.

Even if the industry does not consider the hood skin structural, isn't the bond vital? A hood skin coming off on the highway sounds like a nightmare....as does an rv roof coming enroute.

Absolutely it is, but it certainly isn't structural.

There are a lot of parts glued together, at work we sell some very heavy industrial adhesives, they are all labeled as non-structural. I do a little body work, most rust repair parts are now glued in rather than welded. The glue is stronger than the metal, but even that isn't considered structural.

Unlike the Winnie deal, these are all a one and done bond.

If Winnie would do a one and done we'd never see these posts. As it is they choose to keep producing a terrible roof design then blame the customer when failures happen. It's sad really, and shame on them. They could do better if they wanted to.

[Mile_High]

Bruce Brown wrote:
The skin on the hood wouldn't be considered structural.

Ah, that makes sense.

[Effy]

Stormy Eyes wrote:

Bruce Brown wrote:
The skin on the hood wouldn't be considered structural.

Even if the industry does not consider the hood skin structural, isn't the bond vital? A hood skin coming off on the highway sounds like a nightmare....as does an rv roof coming enroute.

The obvious difference being that the auto industry has controls, testing and governmental oversight to mitigate and correct these issues. None of that exists in the RV world.

[Stormy_Eyes]

Bruce Brown wrote:
The skin on the hood wouldn't be considered structural.

Even if the industry does not consider the hood skin structural, isn't the bond vital? A hood skin coming off on the highway sounds like a nightmare....as does an rv roof coming enroute.

[Hikerdogs]

There are several manufacturers that are currently using some types of "plastic" for body panels. They include Volkswagen, Honda, and GM. There are also more exotic companies that are now, or have used some types of plastics in their construction. The Porsche 928 with the complete carbon fiber body comes to mind. The Chevrolet Corvette has used fiberglass construction since it's inception in 1953. Almost the entire line of Saturn's also used plastic panels. The Honda Element is another example of plastics being used in body panels.

There are over a dozen manufacturers that make adhesives for the purpose of adhering plastic panels to steel, aluminum, or other automobile substrates. They include companies like 3M, SEM, and Loctite. These products are used at both the original assembly level, and in body shops.

[Bruce_Brown]

The skin on the hood wouldn't be considered structural.

[Mile_High]

DrivingMissDaisy wrote:
This is in reference to your statement that automotive manufacturers commonly use adhesives. I worked in an auto assembly plant for 37 years and they do not glue anything structural together. The only thing I can think of that is attached with pressure sensitive tape is emblems and door side molding. My winnie has headlight assemblies, fenders, hood hinges, the roof, front grill and who knows what else glued on. The is no comparison between auto engineering and that of an RV.

I always thought the hood sheet (aluminum) on my Expedition was just glued to the frame. You can see the glue squeezing out.

[DrivingMissDais]

This is in reference to your statement that automotive manufacturers commonly use adhesives. I worked in an auto assembly plant for 37 years and they do not glue anything structural together. The only thing I can think of that is attached with pressure sensitive tape is emblems and door side molding. My winnie has headlight assemblies, fenders, hood hinges, the roof, front grill and who knows what else glued on. The is no comparison between auto engineering and that of an RV.

Hikerdogs wrote:

DrivingMissDaisy wrote:
I have a 2000 Winnebago Adventurer and about two years ago the fiberglass roof was sucked out of the aluminum channel by a combination of cross wind and passing tractor trailer. Drivers side front to back roof peeled up and all the foam insulation sucked out. I duct taped it together and drove home, I reinserted the fiberglass and glued secured it with urethane caulk/adhesive. Here's the kicker, I swear, there was never any adhesive in the roof to aluminum track. Both sides of the motorhome were like that. I assumed Winnebago left it loose so it could move when the motorhome flexed.
Wheel wells attached with pressure sensitive tape, most of the end cap accessories glued on with epoxy, how could we expect anything remotely resembling quality construction!

It sounds like you bought the motorhome used, and it hadn't been properly maintained by the previous owner. I'm not surprised caulking was missing if it hadn't been inspected in over 14 years.

Over the years there have been complaints about the Winnebago roof design. In almost all cases the units were purchased used with no knowledge of the previous owners maintenance history. In all cases the owners did not seem to be aware of the need to complete the maintenance procedure and in fact had never inspected or replaced any caulking during their time of ownership.

The OP has a coach 12 model years old and again has no history as to whether or not the maintenance procedure was ever performed, and was not even aware that it should be performed. In the lifetime of the coach if the owners had followed the Winnebago recommendation it should have been performed 24 times. Even performing the inspection and maintenance procedure on an annual basis it has missed 12 maintenance cycles.

It's unfortunate that the OP has had a problem, and even more unfortunate that the insurance company exacerbated the problem by telling them it was OK to drive the unit and is now denying the claim using an excuse like you didn't talk to the right person. In my opinion the person they were directed to call was a representative of the insurance company regardless of whether they contracted by, or employed by the company. It is the inaccurate information provided by the insurance companies representative that turned a minor problem into a major one.

I would agree with those that suggested contacting the state insurance commissioner. We had a problem with bad advise given by an insurance company representative several years ago. We wrote the state insurance commissioner a letter with dates and times of contact, and the advise given by the representative. We called the insurance agent and he suggested we send him a copy and hold off sending it to the insurance commissioner until we heard back from him.

Long story short our agent presented the letter to the insurance company president. The president agreed with our assessment of the situation and covered the problem. Since the situation was resolved we never sent the letter to the insurance commissioner.

As for the use of adhesives to secure plastic or fiberglass panes to steel, aluminum or plastic substrates, it's a common practice for almost all automobile manufacturers. It's been in use since the late 1980's and has proved to be an excellent practice. There are even adhesives specially made for the job. An example would be SEM Weld Bond 39537 Adhesive. It's used at the OEM level and by body shops.

While it is a proven method of securing panels I do agree that Winnebago could improve their implementation procedures.