Sometimes small systems are plenty

[HiTech]

Friday my wife suddenly got the urge to camp. Immediately.

All the TT has is the original Group 24 battery, 5w solar to maintain it and a 700w/1500w inverter I've never even run under significant load. I didn't really need the system to do a lot since at 103 degrees in full sun we will be absolutely doing full hook ups.

Fired up the fridge at 8 am on propane. Pupmed the over chlorainated full water tank almost dry to be ready for use. Ran the compressor from home on the inverter to air up all 4 tires and headed to work.

At noon the freezer and fridge were cold so she loaded but did not even run the fan as the camper still held the cool from overnight.

1:05 PM we headed out for Fredericksburg and wine country.

The current set up is barely above factory, but the battery was brimming with charge and the inverter did everything we would have wanted except for the AC.

I actually think it is the ability to use the microwave that will finally push me to get the Deka AGMs put in the TT. Putting them in will mean i pit in the solar charger to maintain them without cooking the, dry or leaving the discharged. Other than the microwave though, there is just no burning need for us at the moment.

Now if I went crazy and got enough batteries and inverter to run the AC for an hour 15 times a year, that would he a horse of a different color.

😉

Jim (sipping a nice glass of 2010 Brennan Dark Horse)

[mena661]

Almot wrote:

Other than small-screen automotive market, there isn't much demand for 12V powered TV. Recent 27" LCD/LED models draw less than 3A @12V.

I keep saying this but the 12V TV crowd never has a response. I have yet to see a 12V TV draw LESS power than my off the shelf, 26" Vizio. If there is a 12V 26" LED LCD that draws less than 2A DC, I'll STFU about it.

VIZIO E261VA

[Almot]

pnichols wrote:
Use an inverter occasionally for the microwave if you don't want to use the big generator or don't have air conditioning (hence no big generator). By the way, 12 volt microwaves do exist if you want to hook them up via big cables directly to your RV's battery bank.

MW is essentially an alternating current - AC - device, it needs AC to generate high-frequency energy, i.e. very short wave length, that's why it is called "micro wave". Models that claim to work off 12VDC, have a small built-in inverter. A limited number of them exist, all are failure. In a camper with propane stove there is no need to bother, the stove can do all the same tasks.

pnichols wrote:
Regarding "lousy 12 volt powered" TVs. We have a superb 26 inch LED TV that "seems to" operate from 120 volts AC, but ... actually uses an external brick to make this happen. The brick merely changes 120 Volts AC into 18 volts DC for the TV's circuits. If I change out the brick that came with it for a 12 volt DC to 18 volt DC upconversion DC-to-DC upconverter brick ... then I have a superb "12 volt" TV without suffering the losses from using inversion to make 120 volts AC out of 12 volts DC.

Other than small-screen automotive market, there isn't much demand for 12V powered TV. Recent 27" LCD/LED models draw less than 3A @12V. 12/18 DC-DC converter or 12/120 inverter with 120/18 "brick", doesn't matter, whichever is cheaper. Power is negligible and so are losses. It is often easier to use a small inverter for numerous low-current devices that are either 120V or have their own AC-DC brick: TV, laptop, shaver, small chargers. If your TV works with MSW inverter (not all the TV sets do), a 150-170W inverter for $25 could be the answer.

[mena661]

It looks like the new E450 Itasca does indeed have a 5000 lb tow rating. Like I said, I did see some old one's with that rating but this is the first new one I have seen that had that. Believe me I looked high and low but doesn't this really surprise me that this rig exists. I totally missed the Eagle Cap's too. Kind of irrelevant as I'm not interested in a Class C (LOL!) but good to know. PN, I'm not looking to downsize as my rig is only 33 feet total and a C would essentially be the same thing I have now. BTW, an F550 is not a 1 ton and has more capacity and capability than a F450 chassis. An F450 chassis would be fine but that 14k lb tow rating WHILE that 6000 lb rig sits in the back is compelling and the price difference is negligible. The TC would be much smaller than both of our current rigs but offers more ground clearance, 4WD and diesel (miss that extra power at higher elevations) PLUS more towing capability.

[pnichols]

Mena,

As you know the Ford E450 chassis under many Class C rigs is a ton-and-a-half chassis ... more beef than a one-ton pickup.

My small Class C's E450 has a 5000 lb. tow capacity and the motorhome underloads the chassis by about 2200 lbs. (the DW likes to collect a lot of rocks on trips!). My E450 chassis can travel with a combined motorhome-trailer weight of 20,000 lbs.. I believe the new E450's under motorhomes are rated a bit higher and can handle 22,000 lbs. in combination between the motorhome itself and anything you might want to tow.

As a point of reference, my daughter hauls one and two horses around all the time with my GMC 1/2 ton 4X4 350ci gas pickup. However, I did install an after-market front differential manual engage/disengage mechanism so she can be in 4X4 low range but still in two-wheel drive. This allows her to get terrific torque in two-wheel drive for pulling the horse trailer up steep grades on hard surface grades (4X4 drive on hard surfaces will wrap-up and ruin my truck's non-front/rear-differentiated drive system).

1-ton trucks with diesel engines are not always needed for less than over-the-top hauling ... with one important exception: IMHO, in case of a rear tire blowout for the safety of the horse(s) one should always, if one can afford it, haul horses with a dually tow vehicle so you have another tire left on each side if a rear tire should fail. We so far cannot afford a dually pickup for her horses, so we're taking a chance with the horse(s). 😞

[mena661]

pnichols wrote:
Just as a datapoint on what's possible with a small Class C (although on the E350 chassis in this example) ... here's a 22 foot Itasca Spirit owned by EMD360 and this is a partial quote of his from another thread on how he uses it:

"We love the short length and have taken it on many an AZ dirt road. We use "training wheels" to keep from losing anything underneath although we lost one set of those wheels and the steps on a particularly rocky unpaved road. We do the repairs and go back out again.

We typically go from 3 to 10 miles off the paved roads to find seclusion and have never tried to tow."

Soo ... a TC may not be required for adventures offroad while still maintaining superior comfort, room, and stability. Here's a photo of a typical road we sometimes find ourselves on with our 24 foot Itasca Spirit:

Nice picture! I'm not sure a 24ft MH has appreciably more room than an Eagle Cap 1165. Probably more storage though. Also, can't tow my horse trailer with most Class C's. I looked. Was VERY hard to find a 5000 lb tow rating on one and none of the new one's I saw had that capability. DW would never give that up (and why should she). With a TC and a F550, I can tow 14,000 lbs. There's a lot of flexibility there. I can pretty much do what I do now and then some. Even if my MH was fully loaded to GVWR, it has 5500 lbs between that and its GCWR. It can, and has, easily towed our horse trailer. Towing the horse trailer is a requirement.

[Old___Slow]

pinchols, I once owned the same RV as yours. Had lots of fun in it.

Now, here I am still at home. Had a bad night so was unable to hit the road to Oklahoma today.

Here is what I found in OK. A Toyota 20' fully self contained, that has only been driven 24,000 miles and never lived in as a base camp. But, there seens to always be the 'but' guess everone has one. It's DW. I want to down size. ~ "Sometimes small systems are plenty" ~ Someone states, how small?? Anyway DW drives a Volvo S80 twin turbo and she says the Toyota on the old type pick-up, 'looks funny'. Well setting beside her Volvo, maybe? To me, the Toyota pick-up keeps the RV low slung and close to the ground. Only one step to get in the rear door. Easy intry to the cab. No high climb for Old and Slow. I see myself with the old comfy shoes I ware, my hair longer than DW would like but its me. Just me.

O&S

[JiminDenver]

Yeesh. We drag the trailer over worse than that. Lol
Most of the time the ruts are in better shape that the roads.
Speaking of not needing to worry. This week is the flat test for our system as ultimately I don't want to have to aim it. Other than seeing near 13a when I set it up at 10:30. I haven't done anything but check the grp 27 voltage a few times a day. We get a few hours of sun in the morning and then clouds except yesterday which was pretty cloudy all day. Still I haven't seen lower than 12,47v and we ain't roughin it.

[pnichols]

Just as a datapoint on what's possible with a small Class C (although on the E350 chassis in this example) ... here's a 22 foot Itasca Spirit owned by EMD360 and this is a partial quote of his from another thread on how he uses it:

"We love the short length and have taken it on many an AZ dirt road. We use "training wheels" to keep from losing anything underneath although we lost one set of those wheels and the steps on a particularly rocky unpaved road. We do the repairs and go back out again.

We typically go from 3 to 10 miles off the paved roads to find seclusion and have never tried to tow."

Soo ... a TC may not be required for adventures offroad while still maintaining superior comfort, room, and stability. Here's a photo of a typical road we sometimes find ourselves on with our 24 foot Itasca Spirit:

[mena661]

westend wrote:
You guys need to get styling with the Unimog. 30 degrees of axle articulation so pile the weight on...:B

That would be fantastic but it would see very light duty use in my care.

Pnichols, I understand what you're saying about center of gravity but that's not my concern really. People drive TC's in all kinds of places. And I'm not interested in hard core off roading. Being able to get down a forest service road would be about all I'd do. I just would like to have access to all CG's and occasionally hit those out in the middle of nowhere spots that people post about in the TC section. And maybe even some desert camping. All of my friends with RV's do that except me. I do like those Tigers though. The price is scary. Towing capacity on some is 14k lbs. Sounds like a F550 chassis which is what I would use to haul the Eagle Cap around if I were so inclined (owners say they weight almost 6k lbs loaded). Yeah, a F550 is a bit overkill (10k lb payload WITH 14k lb towing) but then I could tow a big trailer behind it with a car and an extra FW tank, batteries, solar and inverter). If the MH ever comes up for sale, I'll be looking seriously at TC's. I don't think a Tiger will be in my budget though but I'll probably look at them anyways. I'd probably get two rigs for that price.

[westend]

You guys need to get styling with the Unimog. 30 degrees of axle articulation so pile the weight on...:B

[pnichols]

Mena,

I'm sure you're aware of the physics of weight up high no matter what one does with the suspension and tires in the truck - there's virtually no way around the physics of up-high weight versus down-low weight. That's why military Hum-Vees and race cars are low and wide ... in addition to their fully engineered best-there-is suspension systems.

Of course wide stance duals absolutely help ... over and above what one can do with suspension systems. However, not all dual stance widths are the same. i.e. I'm pretty sure your Class A MH has about an 101-102 inch wide coach body ... as does my Itasca Class C. The spacing of our outer rear duals is probably about the same. However, this is only the case because I did not buy our Class C on the stock and otherwise adequate E350 chassis, which has a 4.5 inch narrower rear dually stance than the E450 chassis. I'll bet 1-ton dually pickups have a rear stance about the width of that of the E350, not that of the E450 and your chassis. Hence you and I are getting the stability physics benefit of the wider stance rear duals over both an E350 chassis and a 1-ton pickup chassis. For a huge TC of roughly the same height and weight as my Class C - of course on a 1-ton dually pickup - the lateral stability would suffer as compared to yours and mine because of the narrower rear tire stance of a stock 1-ton pickup.

Also, there's no way that a TC's grey tank, black tank, fresh water tank, propane tank, coach batteries, and generator can be as down low as those on your Class A and my Class C ... on our MH Winnebago has built them in way down there very close to the height off the ground as the Ford's frame rails. On a TC everything of course sits on the bed and above the truck's frame rails, hence a TC will always have a higher center of gravity than your Class A and my Class C.

The above physics are why I rate a Tiger as a superior offroad boondocking rig as compared to a TC - assuming both would be based on equivalent base truck chassis starting points. I'm sure Tiger could/would custom fit larger tanks in one of their models if one was to order a new one that way. FWIW, one poster in these forums has a Class C with and additional 100 gallons of water carried in one or more tanks mounted up in between the frame rails in the voids not occupied by the driveshaft.

Capacity and comfort wise, a Class A can be an excellent medium-long term boondocking rig ... except for one type of boondocking ... the type where their length, height, and ground clearance is a gotcha. Something smaller and higher will always trump a Class A for out-in-the-middle of nowhere camping via rough roads.

[Old___Slow]

Well, Jim has done, done it. To me. This thread may be a long running one. who knows at this time.

I will report back what "Sometimes small systems are plenty' means to me. In the A.M we are going on "ONE MORE" 😉 look see adventure. To Oklahoma. The rig will fit the Old & Slow image. Less is more. But A/C and on board gen, yes. Still need Solar and that sweet little Honda EX650 to go with solar.

O&S

[mena661]

pnichols wrote:
What TC would that be??

Eagle Cap. Three slides, kitchen island, large FW tank (80 gallons). Looks like a decent amount of outside storage too (would have to see one to know for sure).

pnichols wrote:

Those step-height and center-of-gravity issues are why I consider the ultimate go-anywhere-in-complete comfort (affordable) RV to be a Tiger chassis-mounted coach built unto a 1-ton 4X4 pickup.

Money and parts can fix stability issues, if it's really an issue, and we're still pretty young so no worries about the stairs. I've looked at Tigers and the only problem with them is no bed. We have horses and need a bed for hay and other stuff. Also, Tigers don't have the FW capacity I want. I like not having to worry about water. We have a 75 gal FW tank and there's plenty for two showers each plus dishes and cleanup after a 3 day trip. Have yet to run out. I would consider 75 gallons to be minimum. My goal is to have a bad ass boondocking setup where we can go a month at a time without dumping or hooking up to shore power. Of course, a month long trip would be in retirement but I want to figure it all out by that time.

[pnichols]

mena661 wrote:
A little OT but I "discovered" a TC that eliminates all I don't like about TC's.

What TC would that be??

We long ago decided that those long steps up into a TC were too much for us - not only just going in/out when camping - but also when going in/out for all the loading/unloading before and after a camping trip.

Also I don't care for the high-up center of gravity you get with a TC. It looks unstable to me. My BIL finally got rid of a large immaculate condition TC (that he originally got a good deal on) because his wife not only would not drive it ... she felt unsafe even riding in it!

Those step-height and center-of-gravity issues are why I consider the ultimate go-anywhere-in-complete comfort (affordable) RV to be a Tiger chassis-mounted coach built unto a 1-ton 4X4 pickup. With this setup you get a low ground hugging center of gravity vehicle for maximum stability offroad and easy access, plus - you get room up in and along the chassis members for several batteries and another fresh water tank to be custom mounted - in addition to a permanent connection to the main engine's alternator(s) for battery charging backup just like in a Class A or Class B motorhome (I consider a Tiger to be a Class C RV). Another bonus of the Tiger over a conventional TC is cab access without going outside. This also means that the cab A/C and heating systems can back up, or add to, those systems that come built-into the Tiger's coach area.

The next best choice to the above for "more senior" but still slightly adventuresome RV'ers is, IMHO, what we have - a small classical design Class C built onto an over-kill base chassis.

[mena661]

pnichols wrote:

You're less stressful concerns over camping electrical power are probably pretty common for us motorhome owners with our easy-start, easy-fuel-supply, built in generators and main engine alternators full-time-connected to our coach battery banks ... regardless of whether or not us motorhome owners have particularly huge battery banks or whether or not we have solar arrays on the roof. It's the pop-up trailer, regular trailer, fifth-wheel, and truck camper owners that as a rule have the hassles with storage, set-up, and securing of separate generators and the fuel supplies for them - especially if they don't have solar arrays at all ... or large enough solar arrays.

To camp in a low stress power source way, we know that if push comes to shove we can in any weather just push a button to start the Onan connected to a 55 gallon fuel tank or quietly idle the V10 connected to the same 55 gallon fuel tank. That's one reason we bought a motorized RV instead of a towable - convenience. We have a minor hassle in that we use a very small super-quiet generator to replace solar panels. Now ... if only we could reach the same camping spots as a TC can ...

Very true. You get no arguments from me here! A little OT but I "discovered" a TC that eliminates all I don't like about TC's. Too bad I already bought the MH. Still love the MH though.

pnichols wrote:
I suppose the ultimate non-hassle power sourcing setup for any weather any time drycamping is a well-installed, quiet, large built-in generator for air conditioning, a large battery bank, and a 24/7 automatic battery-top-up fuel cell so that having the sun is of no concern/worry. This is an expensive arrangement, though. 😉

Like the idea of those fuel cells but the expense makes LI customers cringe. :B I'd rather have a fuel cell than solar honestly. Hopefully prices will come down in a few years.