Easy to drive Short, Class A, do they exist?

[OregonJim]

Originally Posted by Floridafran

We have a 2011 Winnebago Vista 30W. Calculated the ratio and it's .512, which puts us the "dangerous" category. Interestingly, before I read about those numbers, I was going to tell the OP that we love our Vista and suggest he try driving one. We've added nothing to it to improve the handling because we've never found the issues that he mentioned. We've both driven it in all sorts of weather; on roads good, bad, and everything in between; and at whatever speed we felt was right for that particular situation. Maybe we've just been lucky and the statistics will catch up to us one day. I think I will tell him we should start traveling with little water in the tank except in those instances where we'll be dry camping and can't fill up at our destination.

The big question is: where have you driven it? On I-80 in Wyoming with high winds and a wet road surface? Across southern Texas in a stiff crosswind? Ever had a semi pass you at 10-20 mph faster than you were driving while going downhill?

These are the kinds of conditions where the danger of a short wheelbase becomes critical. If someone only drives on secondary roads from their home to a campground and back a few times a year, they may never face the kind of conditions that make these vehicles dangerous. Keeping speeds low also helps a great deal. However, even if the rig handles well, that doesn't negate the safety issues.

Improper load distribution can compound the danger as well. If the tanks are full and located behind the rear axle, and the floor plan is such that most of the storage is behind the midpoint between the axles...well...that's the problem with an unregulated industry. You *have* to do your own homework before buying. There's no safety commission like there is for the auto industry.

[geerhed]

Originally Posted by Floridafran

We have a 2011 Winnebago Vista 30W. Calculated the ratio and it's .512, which puts us the "dangerous" category. Interestingly, before I read about those numbers, I was going to tell the OP that we love our Vista and suggest he try driving one. We've added nothing to it to improve the handling because we've never found the issues that he mentioned. We've both driven it in all sorts of weather; on roads good, bad, and everything in between; and at whatever speed we felt was right for that particular situation. Maybe we've just been lucky and the statistics will catch up to us one day. I think I will tell him we should start traveling with little water in the tank except in those instances where we'll be dry camping and can't fill up at our destination.

I sure wish ours would have handled that well. We loved it but it was just plain scary to drive in the wind. It drove well when not windy. It was a little shorter than yours however.

[Floridafran]

Originally Posted by OregonJim

The big question is: where have you driven it? On I-80 in Wyoming with high winds and a wet road surface? Across southern Texas in a stiff crosswind? Ever had a semi pass you at 10-20 mph faster than you were driving while going downhill?

These are the kinds of conditions where the danger of a short wheelbase becomes critical. If someone only drives on secondary roads from their home to a campground and back a few times a year, they may never face the kind of conditions that make these vehicles dangerous. Keeping speeds low also helps a great deal. However, even if the rig handles well, that doesn't negate the safety issues.

Improper load distribution can compound the danger as well. If the tanks are full and located behind the rear axle, and the floor plan is such that most of the storage is behind the midpoint between the axles...well...that's the problem with an unregulated industry. You *have* to do your own homework before buying. There's no safety commission like there is for the auto industry.

This should give you a better idea of what we do.

In addition to a few short trips each year which may be anywhere from an hour to a day from home, we take at least 1 trip that's 5-6 weeks. From our Florida home we've been up through Maine to the Canadian Maritimes. And to the UP of Michigan then along the southern shore of Lake Superior on up to Grand Portage, Minnesota. But most of our trips have been out "west." We've been to the Black Hills and Badlands, up to Glacier, down to Yellowstone and Tetons. Up and down both sides of the Rockies in Colorado. And covered a considerable part of Utah with some Arizona and New Mexico thrown in. Depending on where we want to go and how we want to get there we do both Interstate and secondary road driving. And, yes, we've experienced all those situations you mention. In addition, we've had 2 separate occasions where a rear dual blew.

I'm not saying we didn't feel those cross winds or semis, but neither us of felt in any danger at all of losing control. I think perhaps that's at least in part because we try to be even more conscientious to drive the RV the way we do our cars - not beyond what is safe/prudent for the current conditions.

Back in the mid-60s, when I was in high school, they still taught driver's ed, using a simulator as well as actual time on the street. I find even after all these years I still use the things they taught us - be aware of what's going on a round you - front, sides, and rear. They drilled it into us to anticipate what might happen and how you'd react to it to avoid an accident. Important in a car, but even more so in an RV IMHO. It's worked so far. The only accident I was ever in, I was a passenger in a car and the other car's driver was at fault. And that was almost 40 years ago.

We can't change our RV. But we can be vigilant in how we maintain, load, and drive it.

Safe travels, everyone.

[Isaac-1]

Originally Posted by OregonJim

The big question is: where have you driven it? On I-80 in Wyoming with high winds and a wet road surface? Across southern Texas in a stiff crosswind? Ever had a semi pass you at 10-20 mph faster than you were driving while going downhill?

These are the kinds of conditions where the danger of a short wheelbase becomes critical. If someone only drives on secondary roads from their home to a campground and back a few times a year, they may never face the kind of conditions that make these vehicles dangerous. Keeping speeds low also helps a great deal. However, even if the rig handles well, that doesn't negate the safety issues.

Improper load distribution can compound the danger as well. If the tanks are full and located behind the rear axle, and the floor plan is such that most of the storage is behind the midpoint between the axles...well...that's the problem with an unregulated industry. You *have* to do your own homework before buying. There's no safety commission like there is for the auto industry.

Wow, what a question, as the owner of a short wheel base coach (177 inch wheel base P32 chassis, though one with most of the available suspension upgrades), I can say yes, I have done most of those things.



I have driven I-80 between Rawlins WY, and Kearney NE, in fact as I was west bound heading into Laramie the east bound lanes were being closed down due to a tanker truck being blown off the road what I later found out was only maybe a mile or two behind me. I have also driven across much of southern Texas with cross winds (I am in central Texas right now). As to being passed by trucks going faster, many times, I am sure some of those were while going down hill. Though in general I try to not travel on wet roads unless I have to, still that can't always be avoided.

[cvd]

Reading* this thread, I see most of the conversation is on gas coaches. I know there are plenty of shorter pushers with low WB/total length ratios, but don't hear much about their handing problems (e.g Tiffin Red 33, 35 ft coach on 198" WB).

Does the air bag suspension,* or different weight distribution (DP has heavy engine & trans behind rear axle, gas coach has engine over front axle) allow reasonable handling w shorter WB ratios?

[Ray,IN]

cvd, When we bought our MH in 2013 I was having trouble staying centered in my lane, constantly sawing the steering wheel. Then one day I was talking to a friend who has owned and traveled in a MH for over 40 years. He told me to stop watching the road close in front of me, instead focus on the road about 1-2 blocks in front while being aware of my surrounding by peripheral vision. His advice is valid, it made driving the MH comfortable and relaxing to me.
He said this is harder in a MH than in a car or pickup due to the drivers height above the road.

[paddler1954]

Our previous coach was a 36 ft DP with a 225" wheel base giving us a .52 ratio. It did alright in most driving conditions. The one condition it didn't handle very well was when a semi passes you then cuts in front of you with very little gap, then a second semi passes you. I guess, the short wheelbase and the weight of the engine/transmission hanging behind the rear wheels causes the front end to be light. The buffeting effect of the lead semi gets the front end rocking from side to side then the second passing semi gives you the shove to the right. Could cause some white knuckle driving.

Our new coach has a better ratio (nearly .55) and Frieghtliner's new V ride rear suspension. It handles the above condition much better, you still get the buffeting from the lead semi but the side to side motion is greatly reduced. My wife, who can suffer from motion sickness, is very happy with the longer wheelbase.

Originally Posted by cvd

Reading* this thread, I see most of the conversation is on gas coaches. I know there are plenty of shorter pushers with low WB/total length ratios, but don't hear much about their handing problems (e.g Tiffin Red 33, 35 ft coach on 198" WB).

Does the air bag suspension,* or different weight distribution (DP has heavy engine & trans behind rear axle, gas coach has engine over front axle) allow reasonable handling w shorter WB ratios?

[FLRosebud]

Regarding the handling issue - we have a NationalRV Seabreeze LX gasser with a Hellwig rear sway bar, bilstein steering dampener, correct tire pressure (from being weighed and checking the tire charts), and correct alignment. The key is as someone said earlier in this thread - SLOW DOWN. If I try and drive 70mph it indeed becomes a white-knuckeled experience. If I set the cruise on 60-62mph it drives pretty easy (one handed if I wanted to), with the occasional bump from a semi.

Al

[PKI]

Appreciate the information on coach stability with respect to wheelbase and the associated upgrades that help improve handling. Thank you for contributing.

[iluvuk]

My DP is just under 35ft and it handles great. better than my two prior gas coaches. the suspension system and weight distribution are very important for handling and can make up for any potential wheelbase ratio shortcomings in my opinion.

[cvd]

Originally Posted by iluvuk

My DP is just under 35ft and it handles great. better than my two prior gas coaches. the suspension system and weight distribution are very important for handling and can make up for any potential wheelbase ratio shortcomings in my opinion.

Thanks, that's what I was wondering about. What are the 3 coaches you mentioned?

[georgebonord]

Originally Posted by iluvuk

My DP is just under 35ft and it handles great. better than my two prior gas coaches. the suspension system and weight distribution are very important for handling and can make up for any potential wheelbase ratio shortcomings in my opinion.

The DP has a much different chassis that is highly improved and beefier than any gas powered MH. And, the air bags on a DP add to the stability of a DP

Yes, weight distribution makes a difference, but in the end it boils down to the better, stronger chassis used in a DP which makes them day and night more stabler.

[cvd]

Originally Posted by georgebonord

The DP has a much different chassis that is highly improved and beefier than any gas powered MH. And, the air bags on a DP add to the stability of a DP

Yes, weight distribution makes a difference, but in the end it boils down to the better, stronger chassis used in a DP which makes them day and night more stabler.

There is no question a 40’ DP on a well balanced 276” WB chassis provides a better ride than any gas F53 based coach (better suspension, better weight distribution, heavier duty everything). But I’m wondering about the shorter pushers and where the line is crossed that a well balanced gas coach may handle better than a similar length DP?

Here are two similar length Tiffin’s, a pusher with a 47% ratio (supposedly unsafe per some internet experts) and a gas coach with a 58% ratio:

RED 33AA, GVW: 32k, length: 35’2”, WB: 198”, ratio: 198/422 = 47%
AllegroBay 34PA, GVW: 26k, length: 36’1”, WB: 252”, ratio: 252/432 = 58%

Anyone driven both of these coaches and can comment on how they handle in wind?

[iluvuk]

Originally Posted by cvd

Thanks, that's what I was wondering about. What are the 3 coaches you mentioned?

My current DP is a Palazzo 33.3. Handles and rides great.
I previously had owned a Fleetwood class C 26 feet and a similar Winnebago class C...neither handled as well. I also have rented several other gas coaches over the years (can't recall specific models). My DP is far and away much better to drive. I don't know the ratios on my DP (you could look them up) but you asked about short DPs so I responded with my experience.
I personally believe the design of the suspension components, weight distribution, tires, etc. are much more important at effecting handling than the length to wheelbase ratio. Evidence for that is all the people on this forum that have tremendous improvements in handling (of their poor ratio coaches) by adding components to their suspension to assist with handling (stabilizers, sway bars, shocks, etc.). There are many testimonials about improved drivability with adding these components, none of which change the ratio.
In short, ignore the ratio and drive the coach and see.