Go Back   iRV2 Forums > MOTORHOME FORUMS > MH-General Discussions & Problems
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-10-2013, 11:27 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
JFXG's Avatar
 
Newmar Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Today? Mercer, PA
Posts: 3,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by usinvestment View Post
...If you have spent any time reading this blog and researching the Ford Chassis you would also know that all the gas class A coaches with the Ford chassis have all recommended some chassis mods... I've found the rear track bar was well worth the time and money.

All of the Gas class A owners with the Ford chassis will tell you these mods do make a difference....

Thanks for asking. Home work pays off and if you owned a gas class A with the Ford chassis I doubt you would have asked.
Thanks. I've never researched a Ford chassis because I've never been in the market for one.

I'm glad you explained. Your earlier comment was:

Quote:
Originally Posted by usinvestment View Post
...I expected a rough handling coach based on the ratings but found a much different (Pleasant) experience.
The rating you refer to from RVCG makes no reference to rough handling, but merely says that driving the coach "...could be fatiguing for most people because the vehicle could wander and be difficult to steer much of the time...".

But you do, as quoted above, point out that anyone who has experience with these Ford chassis (including yourself) finds front and rear suspension and chassis mods necessary to improve and stabilize handling.

So, to summarize your points: the RVCG rating is wrong, but most Ford chassis owners find it necessary to modify the chassis for enhanced stability and control.

Thank you.
__________________

__________________
John & Diane, Fulltimers. RVM103 NHSO
On the road since June '12 with Lincoln, the guard cat.
2002 Dutch Star 40, Freightliner, Cat 3126, 2004 Element
JFXG is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 09-11-2013, 02:12 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
B Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,162
Regards the RVCG and their handling rating.

1. Their handling ratio is based on the length of the chassis vs the length of the house/box/body. It is a fact and in no way subjective that longer overhangs on either end will exert more leverage on the chassis than short over hangs. Basically the longer the lever the higher the force. Simple high school science.

2. They also add in their rating a % of rated chassis capacity to used capacity. Basically CCC %. This one is harder to apply. But I think the idea is that an RV near or over it's rated capacity has a harder time resisting the inertia from truck wash or high winds once the movement of the body is started. I agree with this, but a bit harder to understand than #1.

3. What is subjective is their cutoff points and some of the conclusions they make from those points. Like, every coach over 55% handles well, and /or every coach under 53% handles poorly. (I just wrote those % from memory so they may not be the exact %)

4. When we were out test driving motorhomes 4 years ago I paid attention to the handling ratings in the RVCG CD disks that listed maybe 5,000 coaches. It would be my impression as an amateur RV driver that the coaches with the high handling ratings from the RVCG did drive better. The coach we bought was rated 100% by the RVCG. It goes down the road like it is on rails.

What I found when researching RVs is that there is no Consumer Reports or Motor Trend for RV's. The magazines that test motorhomes like Motorhome and FMCA seem to like them all. So 4 years ago you either used the RVCG ratings or you had nothing.

And yes Gallant is very opinionated. But mostly in a good way. If anything he is a crusader for RV safety. I wholeheartedly agree with his passion here. Too many RVs are built without enough attention to safety.

Things I disagree with regards Gallant. He rated (4 years ago) Monaco and Beaver coaches way down on quality. My own personal experience is that Beavers have beautiful high quality interiors and so do many Monacos. He also did not seem to like Blue Birds. Blue Birds are likely the safest production coaches ever built. (When I say production coaches I am excluding special built ones like Prevost, Marathon, and Newell and so on). Some Blue Birds were actually roll tested as they were used as school buses.

So once again (And this is my last post on this thread) I stick up for the RVCG because of how useful it was to me 4 years ago.
__________________

__________________
B Bob
Country Coach 42' Affinity
2013 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
B Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 04:18 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 5
late to this party, sorry! We are researching 30 - 35' MH's. And, pretty universally, RVCG gives the smaller ones poor handling ratings. I'm assuming this is because of their size, a small RV will get pushed around by a big truck. And, I'm assuming this is something we will just have to learn to deal with. True?
__________________
lizmn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 04:33 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
JohnFreyja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Anacortes, Wa.
Posts: 487
Send a message via AIM to JohnFreyja Send a message via MSN to JohnFreyja
Yes, I used RVCG too and they did give higher ratings based on wheelbase but many things affect the handling.
__________________
John
08 Intrigue
2014 Ford Edge
JohnFreyja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2014, 09:34 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
B Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,162
Generally higher ratings on DP's with longer size. This is due to the drive axle being in front of the motor and with shorter rigs not enough chassis size to give good handling characteristics. This is just a general rule though. Some owners of shorter rigs claim good handling. The proof is in your driving the motorhome and making sure the handling is to your liking.
__________________
B Bob
Country Coach 42' Affinity
2013 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
B Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2014, 10:30 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
dennis45's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: BC
Posts: 6,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by B Bob View Post
Regards the RVCG and their handling rating.

1. Their handling ratio is based on the length of the chassis vs the length of the house/box/body. It is a fact and in no way subjective that longer overhangs on either end will exert more leverage on the chassis than short over hangs. Basically the longer the lever the higher the force. Simple high school science.

2. They also add in their rating a % of rated chassis capacity to used capacity. Basically CCC %. This one is harder to apply. But I think the idea is that an RV near or over it's rated capacity has a harder time resisting the inertia from truck wash or high winds once the movement of the body is started. I agree with this, but a bit harder to understand than #1.

3. What is subjective is their cutoff points and some of the conclusions they make from those points. Like, every coach over 55% handles well, and /or every coach under 53% handles poorly. (I just wrote those % from memory so they may not be the exact %)

4. When we were out test driving motorhomes 4 years ago I paid attention to the handling ratings in the RVCG CD disks that listed maybe 5,000 coaches. It would be my impression as an amateur RV driver that the coaches with the high handling ratings from the RVCG did drive better. The coach we bought was rated 100% by the RVCG. It goes down the road like it is on rails.

What I found when researching RVs is that there is no Consumer Reports or Motor Trend for RV's. The magazines that test motorhomes like Motorhome and FMCA seem to like them all. So 4 years ago you either used the RVCG ratings or you had nothing.

And yes Gallant is very opinionated. But mostly in a good way. If anything he is a crusader for RV safety. I wholeheartedly agree with his passion here. Too many RVs are built without enough attention to safety.

Things I disagree with regards Gallant. He rated (4 years ago) Monaco and Beaver coaches way down on quality. My own personal experience is that Beavers have beautiful high quality interiors and so do many Monacos. He also did not seem to like Blue Birds. Blue Birds are likely the safest production coaches ever built. (When I say production coaches I am excluding special built ones like Prevost, Marathon, and Newell and so on). Some Blue Birds were actually roll tested as they were used as school buses.

So once again (And this is my last post on this thread) I stick up for the RVCG because of how useful it was to me 4 years ago.
B Bob, I agree with your posts 100%. Before we bought out coach we had no idea what to look for or even how to look. I have said many times on this forum, "It was the best $150 we spent" during our search for a used coach.
__________________
Dennis & Carol
2003, 4006, 41' DutchStar, Spartan, ISC 8.3L W/BanksPower - 2013 Honda CRV, BlueOx Baseplate, Aventa Bar & Patriot Brake. And the 04 Bird, Sunshine Car.
dennis45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2014, 10:46 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
micd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 479
I didn't read all the replies so maybe no one will read mine but I found the RV Consumer Group material invaluable. When you are brand new the How to Select, Inspec and Buy an RV book was very helpful.

The ratings showed us several small manufacturers that we had never heard of and are not sold in our area that have good quality. We also learned what to look out for in terms of problematic construction techniques and things to consider that we would never have thought of or realized were available.

I don't think it matters what price level your buying at, if your the type to research, then it is very helpful.

To answer a question above. Our 30' RV has excellent handling and flies down the road faster than in should because it is hard to notice how fast you are going because it is so stable. I think it is partly because we have no slides which concentrate weight in one area of the frame and probably would make it more unstable.
__________________

__________________
Proud owner of 1994 Winnebago Brave 29RQ.
Chevy 454 on a P30 chassis.
http://1994brave29rqrv.blogspot.com/
micd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.