How Many on Here Down Sized from a Large Class A to a Small Class C

[Gordon Dewald]

Recently went to Yellowstone. Encountered numerous small parking lots designed obviously years ago when vehicles were smaller. Unfortunately there was a number of small C campers trying to find parking spots in order to view the spectacular sights. Most that parked were intruding into the driving lanes and in one case a Ranger was required to get a unit to move because they were blocking traffic altogether. Several instances involved the driver dropping off passengers and continue circling the parking lot.

Downsizing to reduce the need for a toad is fine but there are times when a rental or Uber should be utilized.

[jackreno]

Originally Posted by tropical36

Don't want to rain on your parade, but with assuming that you traded down for the fuel savings, when do you think you might get your first nickel back?

As for not requiring a toad, we've found that size doesn't matter, but breaking camp and re-setting up does and we can always find a place to park a big rig within walking distance of my destination if need be.

There are most likely others that feel differently, but no way would we go from an A to a C or B and it's usually the other way around.

I traded down for gas savings, getting around easier, no need to flat tow and parking in so many more areas easier.

As to camping and taking RV in town and coming back to the space I don't RV like that anymore, in fact I need very little campgrounds now, can dry camp in town at the bar/pub, store, empty parking lots, ect, i like to travel and sightsee rather than sitting in a campground staring at the drain hose of the rver next to me.

Now I can go do things and not have to drive back to the RV park, its with me all the time and cost nothing.

And down sizing for me cost almost nothing, sold my class A for $50,000 cash, sold my 2018 Tacoma that I flat towed for $24,500 and paid $75,000 for a new Class B+ and 1 less insurance cost, so its a win win however you look at it.

[Ron Dittmer]

Originally Posted by Gordon Dewald

Recently went to Yellowstone. Encountered numerous small parking lots designed obviously years ago when vehicles were smaller. Unfortunately there was a number of small C campers trying to find parking spots in order to view the spectacular sights. Most that parked were intruding into the driving lanes and in one case a Ranger was required to get a unit to move because they were blocking traffic altogether. Several instances involved the driver dropping off passengers and continue circling the parking lot.

Downsizing to reduce the need for a toad is fine but there are times when a rental or Uber should be utilized.

It is for one of many reasons including the one you describe, that we tow our Jeep Liberty with our 24 foot motorhome. We never leave home without it.

[SurfsideGolfer]

I’ve rv’d for nearly 50 years, and if you ask about mpg, don’t do it. Travel trailers for years, around 10mpg towing, NOW, 40ft 400HP Monaco, 10mpg, 9 towing. Only difference is a few hundred dollars per year maintenance. I now full time and will not downsize. This coach is a dream to drive, much better than the F-53 chassis I’ve had, and far superior to Class C’s I’ve had. No more rigs for me, can’t live long enough to wear it out. My coach is 17 years old and still looks like new. Downsizing doesn’t work by numbers, just need to be happy with less!

[Ned B]

I'm following this thread with interest.

My sweetheart and I are zeroing in on our first rig together. I'm an ex full timer, lived out of a small 5th wheel a lifetime ago. This time around it looks like we're getting a class A. i'd be happy with a smaller class C, but she wants something a bit larger. I'll adjust our travel style accordingly. I'm definitely looking for a toad with the class A, one thing at a time... RV first, then toad.

[ArkRVHog]

Originally Posted by Ron Dittmer

Yes, the older E450 with the 4 or 5 speed transmission and low-gear differential lowers the fuel economy to about that figure.

In contrast, our 2007 E350 with V10 engine, 5-speed transmission and higher-geared differential, our 24 foot aerodynamic rig HERE gets 10.5mpg (trip averaging) when not towing, but drops to 9.3mpg when towing the Jeep Liberty pictured in-tow in the link.

I emphasis "~5000 mile long trip averaging" calculated manually for best accuracy, not a tank-full calculated under optimal conditions, or a number taken off a ScanGaugeII.

Wow...that little C packs a punch...I hit your link. But I think you need to wash, wax and keep it up a bit better inside...wink.

My Forester Model 2801 GTS has the same overcab nose which helps a bit and I think looks great. We didn't need/want a model with a bed over the cab and the cabinet storage is great.

By chance, do you have a document you might share on all of the upgrades you've done to your unit? Very nice!

[Ron Dittmer]

Originally Posted by ArkRVHog

Wow...that little C packs a punch...I hit your link. But I think you need to wash, wax and keep it up a bit better inside...wink.

My Forester Model 2801 GTS has the same overcab nose which helps a bit and I think looks great. We didn't need/want a model with a bed over the cab and the cabinet storage is great.

By chance, do you have a document you might share on all of the upgrades you've done to your unit? Very nice!

Thank you for the compliment. To be honest, it's very easy maintenance because our rig is garaged at home and heated in winter. There is no need to bother winterizing the rig. It remains well preserved.

For the benefit of other Phoenix Cruiser owners, I documented what I learned and what I changed. CLICK HERE TO SEE MY LIST. I tried to include lots of pictures and descriptive detail when applicable.

You are so right in saying that the B+ cab-over nose helps, and it does so in a few different ways.
- improved fuel economy
- easier to drive, less influenced by trucks and winds
- seamless means "NO" leaks in the most vulnerable area of a class C

Our rig in particular is exceptionally aerodynamic because of the angled transition walls between the cab and the house. Also the low roof and narrow 93" body. Everything in combination makes a difference in fuel economy and handling.

Women love these rigs, in-part for driving ease. It's interesting to point out that a number of older women who lost their husband, trade-down from something huge, into one of the many different Phoenix Cruisers.

This picture provides a good idea on the aerodynamics of a Phoenix Cruiser.


As compared to a typical class C here.