Best TT for retired couple looking to travel

[jk123]

My in-laws have a Volkswagen Tourig Diesel (8000lb towing capacity). I'm trying to help them find the nicest camper that they could tow with their car.

Any advice? So far we've liked the Lance 2295 the most. Is there anything nicer / better built?

Thanks

[eubank]

Ah, Thor was formed in 1980 by Wade THompson and Peter ORthwein for the sole purpose of purchasing Airstream from Beatrice Foods. It was only later that Thor began purchasing other RV companies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor_Industries

🙂
Lynn

brookside wrote:
Oliver has just announced that the 18.5' is in production: http://olivertraveltrailers.com/ They are pricey and I have not seen a price on this new smaller one. To me, they are too fancy but I really like them.

Airstream is under Thor's umbrella now. Although they are beautiful, Thor is on my poop list after 30 years in the RV world. Camplite was also purchased by Thor and I have heard that the quality isn't the same as pre-Thor, that was the same with Airstream.

One thing important to look at in a smaller trailer is the bed size and the inside height since that can be very limiting. Also, wet baths as some people really don't care for them. It does really depend on the couple though and also, how long they hope to keep their trailer and their budget.

[hohenwald48]

I wouldn't buy anything that didn't have a full time bed in it. We had a motorhome one time that required us to make and unmake the dinette into a bed every night and that got old after about 3 days. Got rid of that rig in less than 90 days.

[hohenwald48]

sushidog wrote:
I like the concept of the Airstream, and I'm sure it is a fine camper. However for FT use, the new ones lack slides to expand the interior room, and have a low carrying capacity which is important for FT use.

I'm looking for a travel trailer for FT use too (3 years from now), but I will be towing with a 3/4 ton, so I have a little more towing capacity. Now if they made one with a floorplan and specs similar to this: http://www.candyscampers.com/detail.cfm?id=1743 such as: 3 slides, 3,000+lbs CCC, 80 gal fresh and 80 gal gray tanks (for extended boondocking), 0-100 degree arctic insulation package, wide body design, etc., then they might partially justify their high price. But their top-of-the-line Land Yacht has no slides, only 1614 lbs CCC, water tanks less than 40 gal capacity and a price of around $145K, vs $34k for the previous example of a fully featured TT with much more sq. footage., carrying capacity, twice the size water tanks, etc.

I fail to see what attracts so many to the antiquated (iconic?) design, other than the sleek looks, relatively light weight and aerodynamics. I can't see where you could ever save enough fuel towing one to make up the huge price difference. Durable, sure, but how long do you intend to own one? Looking at the price difference between the 2 afore mentioned models as an example, one could buy 5, that's right 5 new Sprinters for the price of a single new Land Yacht. So if you decide to replace your conventional TT every 10 years (about the time that the rubber roof warranty runs out, rather than replace the roof) that means that you can have a brand new TT every 10 years for 50 years for the price of one new Airsteam Land Yacht (which may or may not last 50 yrs. like the older ones are reputed to do). This example ignores inflation, and rising TT values as the years pass, but it also ignores the residual value of your old trailer, and the time value of money, too, making this consideration favor owning a brand new trailer every 10 years (with all new, modern: interior, tires, appliances, etc.). Besides, how many of us even have 50 years left to live? So if we are at retirement age when considering this purchase and only have half of this RVing time left (optimistically), we might only purchase 1 or 2 more trailers before we expire. This dose of realism favors the purchase of an inexpensive, relatively short lived conventional trailer even more.

No disrespect to others who have made the decision to purchase a new Airstream, as we all (myself included) often do things based on emotion and desire that are not in our best financial interests. I'm just pointing out the financial folly of such a decision for a trailer with less functionality, whether used in an RV park, campground or for boondocking. They sure look sweet and tow like a dream though...just not something I'd recommend.

Chip

Some of us, as we get on in years, find ourselves in a financial position that allows us to make decisions based on emotion, likes or just plain old what we want without having to give much consideration to the financial wisdom of the decision. We made all the right financial decisions in our younger years so we don't have to worry about it in our "golden years". 🙂

[RavensFan24]

We love our Keystone Premier, which is an Ultra Lite, BUT you would have to go smaller than what we have. You'd probably be in the 22-26' range with your tow vehicle.

[brookside]

Oliver has just announced that the 18.5' is in production: http://olivertraveltrailers.com/ They are pricey and I have not seen a price on this new smaller one. To me, they are too fancy but I really like them.

Airstream is under Thor's umbrella now. Although they are beautiful, Thor is on my poop list after 30 years in the RV world. Camplite was also purchased by Thor and I have heard that the quality isn't the same as pre-Thor, that was the same with Airstream.

One thing important to look at in a smaller trailer is the bed size and the inside height since that can be very limiting. Also, wet baths as some people really don't care for them. It does really depend on the couple though and also, how long they hope to keep their trailer and their budget.

[philster49]

We just bought a Coleman 16QB. It's quite light (3200 lbs as shipped) and nicely appointed. Should tow easily behind the VW. I was using a Jeep Grand Cherokee, but now using a GMC Yukon. The thing we liked was my wife and I can get out of bed without crawling over each other. I changed the dining from the L-shaped configuration to a traditional two-bench with table in the middle because we like to play cards and look out the window when we eat. It was a simple modification.

[sushidog]

ROBERTSUNRUS wrote:
🙂 Hi, not trying to sway or convince anyone into buying an Airstream. We bought ours for our retirement. We are not campers. We are travelers. We like the fact that our trailer doesn't get blown off of the road in high winds, and we love that our trailer handles great in all conditions. We like that, unlike our house, it is simple and easy to maintain and functional. We like the fact that the storage in limited so we don't bring too much un-necessary junk with us. We have more than enough storage for two old people and one little dog. We also have no desire what so ever to have slide-outs. Ten years later, a similar trailer to ours cost about twice what ours did. There was a lot of thought going into buying our Airstream and this is going to be our one and only trailer.


Things that are maybe not so good; Some times camp ground sewer pipes are too high and things don't flow well up hill. Limited dealers to work on them. There are many places which you wouldn't let them work on your Airstream and there are many places who won't work on them either. Cold weather; I have camped in zero degrees weather at night with a high of 27 degrees during the day and it was fine, but used a lot of propane.


Airstreams are not for full timers, they are for those on the go. If you like sitting in one place for a long time, you should buy a park model, a mobile home, or a prefab house.

Robert, you don't need to justify your purchase to me or anyone else, You chose a fine trailer and it obviously was the right choice for your RVing style. Easy handling and great aerodynamics, minimizing your TV needs is the perfect application for an Airstream.

I know what you mean about sewer not flowing uphill. I have the same problem with my low-slung Aliner. You might want to consider either a macerator pump or the sewer solutions water assisted unit as they will liquefy your sewage and pump it uphill.

At one time I was thinking of FTing in a HiLo (before the company bit the dust) for just the reasons you mention, thinking that I would be towing 2,000 miles a month or more during my retirement. But since this will be my sole residence, and I will be bringing all my worldly possessions with me I decided on a conventional TT (with more room and carrying capacity) necessitating a little bigger TV. But I still wanted one that gets half-way decent fuel mileage and is economical to operate. I chose a TT rather than a fiver because I wanted to use the bed of my truck to carry a couple small motorbikes (and other gear) with us, plus DW has difficulty climbing stairs.

I already bought the 3/4 ton I will be using, an 08 F-250 6.4l supercab, longbed that gets around 20-21 combined mpg unfettered, 18-19 mpg pulling my Aliner, and I hope to get around 12 mpg pulling my FT TT with it. I'm planning on a 1,000 mile/month fuel budget (85 gallons or $300-$350/mo.) which means that we won't always be on the road, but will still be able to move quite often if we wish.

We are also planning on boondocking a lot. I don't know if this is in the OP's plans, but if so, additional weight and storage capacity of larger holding tanks, solar panels and batteries (or at least a generator and fuel) need to be taken into consideration - about 1,000 lbs worth in my case, for a big solar system. Everything in life is a compromise - you must give up something you have to get something you want.

When I initially read the post I incorrectly assumed that the jk123's in-laws wanted a trailer to travel FT during retirement, (prejudiced by my own plans.) But since this is probably not the case, a smaller Airstream may be exactly what they need for vacations and such during their retirement.

Chip

[colliehauler]

Chip you said it in perceived value. To you and I it might not be worth the premium price to others it is. Same thing can be said about any premium product. I will never pay 10k for a bottle of wine.

As far as slideouts I'm in the process of rebuilding a slideouts to the tune of 3k because of poor design on a entry level trailer. A higher priced trailer might have a better design and never had that issue but doubles the price.

Just because someone buys a higher quality unit does not mean they have to keep it 50 years. New Airstream will have a LCD not a CRT to use your TV analogy.

Same thing can be said about a Newell or Prevost motor coach. You could buy a half dozen lesser coach's for the money that have the same features.

In the end it allows all of us to enjoy camping no matter what are budget is.

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

🙂 Hi, not trying to sway or convince anyone into buying an Airstream. We bought ours for our retirement. We are not campers. We are travelers. We like the fact that our trailer doesn't get blown off of the road in high winds, and we love that our trailer handles great in all conditions. We like that, unlike our house, it is simple and easy to maintain and functional. We like the fact that the storage in limited so we don't bring too much un-necessary junk with us. We have more than enough storage for two old people and one little dog. We also have no desire what so ever to have slide-outs. Ten years later, a similar trailer to ours cost about twice what ours did. There was a lot of thought going into buying our Airstream and this is going to be our one and only trailer.


Things that are maybe not so good; Some times camp ground sewer pipes are too high and things don't flow well up hill. Limited dealers to work on them. There are many places which you wouldn't let them work on your Airstream and there are many places who won't work on them either. Cold weather; I have camped in zero degrees weather at night with a high of 27 degrees during the day and it was fine, but used a lot of propane.


Airstreams are not for full timers, they are for those on the go. If you like sitting in one place for a long time, you should buy a park model, a mobile home, or a prefab house.

[sushidog]

colliehauler wrote:

sushidog wrote:
I like the concept of the Airstream, and I'm sure it is a fine camper. However for FT use, the new ones lack slides to expand the interior room, and have a low carrying capacity which is important for FT use.

I'm looking for a travel trailer for FT use too (3 years from now), but I will be towing with a 3/4 ton, so I have a little more towing capacity. Now if they made one with a floorplan and specs similar to this: http://www.candyscampers.com/detail.cfm?id=1743 such as: 3 slides, 3,000+lbs CCC, 80 gal fresh and 80 gal gray tanks (for extended boondocking), 0-100 degree arctic insulation package, wide body design, etc., then they might partially justify their high price. But their top-of-the-line Land Yacht has no slides, only 1614 lbs CCC, water tanks less than 40 gal capacity and a price of around $145K, vs $34k for the previous example of a fully featured TT with much more sq. footage., carrying capacity, twice the size water tanks, etc.

I fail to see what attracts so many to the antiquated (iconic?) design, other than the sleek looks, relatively light weight and aerodynamics. I can't see where you could ever save enough fuel towing one to make up the huge price difference. Durable, sure, but how long do you intend to own one? Looking at the price difference between the 2 afore mentioned models as an example, one could buy 5, that's right 5 new Sprinters for the price of a single new Land Yacht. So if you decide to replace your conventional TT every 10 years (about the time that the rubber roof warranty runs out, rather than replace the roof) that means that you can have a brand new TT every 10 years for 50 years for the price of one new Airsteam Land Yacht (which may or may not last 50 yrs. like the older ones are reputed to do). This example ignores inflation, and rising TT values as the years pass, but it also ignores the residual value of your old trailer, and the time value of money, too, making this consideration favor owning a brand new trailer every 10 years (with all new, modern: interior, tires, appliances, etc.). Besides, how many of us even have 50 years left to live? So if we are at retirement age when considering this purchase and only have half of this RVing time left (optimistically), we might only purchase 1 or 2 more trailers before we expire. This dose of realism favors the purchase of an inexpensive, relatively short lived conventional trailer even more.

No disrespect to others who have made the decision to purchase a new Airstream, as we all (myself included) often do things based on emotion and desire that are not in our best financial interests. I'm just pointing out the financial folly of such a decision for a trailer with less functionality, whether used in an RV park, campground or for boondocking. They sure look sweet and tow like a dream though...just not something I'd recommend.

Chip

Chip someone could say that about your Aliner, (You know how many tents I could buy for the price of a Aliner). Next person could say (You know how many plastic tarps I could buy for the price of a tent).

It's all relative. Some people love the Airstream and had enough success in life that its not a financial burden.

The Airstream might not be for you or I but there is enough market to keep the company going and that speaks volumes in today's economy.

I hear what you are saying, but I think you missed my point. It's not about the money - it's about value. To use your analogy, I can look at tents and see the features they offer that a plastic tarp does not (irrespective of price). I can also look at an Aliner (or any camper) and see the advantages they give me that a tent does not. However, leaving price aside, I fail to see the advantages of buying an Airstream over a conventional TT (for full-timing) that has more room, capacities, insulation, etc. This has nothing to do with price, but suitability for an intended purpose.

I guess it just depends on what you value. If you value a sleek look and excellent towing performance over the superior livability (defined as more square footage that multiple slides provides, more storage space, more storage weight capacity, larger holding tanks, better insulation, etc.) - all things that many other TTs provide that Airstreams do not - then an Airstream is for you. Maybe towing with a smaller, lighter TV is so important that it outweighs all other considerations. Heck, this is the reason I chose my 4cyl towable Aliner rather than getting a bigger conventional trailer and TV. But I bought it for vacations, not to live in full-time.

Even if a modern full-featured TT, like the referenced Sprinter, and an equal length Airstream were the exact same price, I can't see the attraction of the Airstream for a full-timer, someone wanting to live in their RV with no other home. I'm certainly happy this iconic brand has survived for so long, but its arguable that the Airstreams produced today have the same legendary durability as those of old. So if durability is the primary reason for getting one, I merely considered the economics of the decision.

Would you rather buy a very durable TV, computer, car, etc. built a decade ago or a more modern, larger one with more and better features and benefits (yet not quite as durable) for 1/5th the price, allowing you to continuously upgrade to newer, better models when they become available? I'd rather buy a modern 50" color. hi-resolution, flatscreen television for $500, and upgrade to a better one every few years, than to buy a 1970's technology 19", low-res, tube type, retro style TV that looks cool for $2,500 that promises to last 100 years. The money is not entirely the issue; the performance and value is.

The lack of slides alone would be a deal breaker for me (as it is for most people). For FT use, I would choose an equal length conventional trailer with 3 slides over an Airstream (or any trailer for that matter) with none, even at the exact same price point, let alone at 5 times the price. It makes me wonder what others see in them that makes them so desirable? Of course there is no right choice, just what's right for you based upon the things you value. I'll choose comfort and function over style any day, but that's me.

Chip

[beth4652]

We have a Keystone Passport Ultra Lite, and love it. Good year 'round. Just the right size for the two of us.

[colliehauler]

sushidog wrote:
I like the concept of the Airstream, and I'm sure it is a fine camper. However for FT use, the new ones lack slides to expand the interior room, and have a low carrying capacity which is important for FT use.

I'm looking for a travel trailer for FT use too (3 years from now), but I will be towing with a 3/4 ton, so I have a little more towing capacity. Now if they made one with a floorplan and specs similar to this: http://www.candyscampers.com/detail.cfm?id=1743 such as: 3 slides, 3,000+lbs CCC, 80 gal fresh and 80 gal gray tanks (for extended boondocking), 0-100 degree arctic insulation package, wide body design, etc., then they might partially justify their high price. But their top-of-the-line Land Yacht has no slides, only 1614 lbs CCC, water tanks less than 40 gal capacity and a price of around $145K, vs $34k for the previous example of a fully featured TT with much more sq. footage., carrying capacity, twice the size water tanks, etc.

I fail to see what attracts so many to the antiquated (iconic?) design, other than the sleek looks, relatively light weight and aerodynamics. I can't see where you could ever save enough fuel towing one to make up the huge price difference. Durable, sure, but how long do you intend to own one? Looking at the price difference between the 2 afore mentioned models as an example, one could buy 5, that's right 5 new Sprinters for the price of a single new Land Yacht. So if you decide to replace your conventional TT every 10 years (about the time that the rubber roof warranty runs out, rather than replace the roof) that means that you can have a brand new TT every 10 years for 50 years for the price of one new Airsteam Land Yacht (which may or may not last 50 yrs. like the older ones are reputed to do). This example ignores inflation, and rising TT values as the years pass, but it also ignores the residual value of your old trailer, and the time value of money, too, making this consideration favor owning a brand new trailer every 10 years (with all new, modern: interior, tires, appliances, etc.). Besides, how many of us even have 50 years left to live? So if we are at retirement age when considering this purchase and only have half of this RVing time left (optimistically), we might only purchase 1 or 2 more trailers before we expire. This dose of realism favors the purchase of an inexpensive, relatively short lived conventional trailer even more.

No disrespect to others who have made the decision to purchase a new Airstream, as we all (myself included) often do things based on emotion and desire that are not in our best financial interests. I'm just pointing out the financial folly of such a decision for a trailer with less functionality, whether used in an RV park, campground or for boondocking. They sure look sweet and tow like a dream though...just not something I'd recommend.

Chip

Chip someone could say that about your Aliner, (You know how many tents I could buy for the price of a Aliner). Next person could say (You know how many plastic tarps I could buy for the price of a tent).

It's all relative. Some people love the Airstream and had enough success in life that its not a financial burden.

The Airstream might not be for you or I but there is enough market to keep the company going and that speaks volumes in today's economy.

[myredracer]

The payload capacity of the VW will be the limiting factory, not "towing" capacity. Check what the payload capacity is and also the receiver limit.

Whatever they get, for aging folks I would get something with a slide out and a sofa. This may very well not be possible with that VW tho. If they are TV watchers, pay attention to where the seating is compared to the TV location - sometimes it can be difficult to see the TV and/or the seating is uncomfortable. Swivel recliners would be a nice feature to have.

Get something that has decent circulation space for two. In our 1st TT, the kitchen counter was opposite the bathroom and we had to squeeze by each other all the time. Got tired of that really quick and sold it a year later.

[sushidog]

I like the concept of the Airstream, and I'm sure it is a fine camper. However for FT use, the new ones lack slides to expand the interior room, and have a low carrying capacity which is important for FT use.

I'm looking for a travel trailer for FT use too (3 years from now), but I will be towing with a 3/4 ton, so I have a little more towing capacity. Now if they made one with a floorplan and specs similar to this: http://www.candyscampers.com/detail.cfm?id=1743 such as: 3 slides, 3,000+lbs CCC, 80 gal fresh and 80 gal gray tanks (for extended boondocking), 0-100 degree arctic insulation package, wide body design, etc., then they might partially justify their high price. But their top-of-the-line Land Yacht has no slides, only 1614 lbs CCC, water tanks less than 40 gal capacity and a price of around $145K, vs $34k for the previous example of a fully featured TT with much more sq. footage., carrying capacity, twice the size water tanks, etc.

I fail to see what attracts so many to the antiquated (iconic?) design, other than the sleek looks, relatively light weight and aerodynamics. I can't see where you could ever save enough fuel towing one to make up the huge price difference. Durable, sure, but how long do you intend to own one? Looking at the price difference between the 2 afore mentioned models as an example, one could buy 5, that's right 5 new Sprinters for the price of a single new Land Yacht. So if you decide to replace your conventional TT every 10 years (about the time that the rubber roof warranty runs out, rather than replace the roof) that means that you can have a brand new TT every 10 years for 50 years for the price of one new Airsteam Land Yacht (which may or may not last 50 yrs. like the older ones are reputed to do). This example ignores inflation, and rising TT values as the years pass, but it also ignores the residual value of your old trailer, and the time value of money, too, making this consideration favor owning a brand new trailer every 10 years (with all new, modern: interior, tires, appliances, etc.). Besides, how many of us even have 50 years left to live? So if we are at retirement age when considering this purchase and only have half of this RVing time left (optimistically), we might only purchase 1 or 2 more trailers before we expire. This dose of realism favors the purchase of an inexpensive, relatively short lived conventional trailer even more.

No disrespect to others who have made the decision to purchase a new Airstream, as we all (myself included) often do things based on emotion and desire that are not in our best financial interests. I'm just pointing out the financial folly of such a decision for a trailer with less functionality, whether used in an RV park, campground or for boondocking. They sure look sweet and tow like a dream though...just not something I'd recommend.

Chip