Which 22' to 24' Class C suits these wants/needs?

[Ron Dittmer]

Originally Posted by jackreno

If you never drive your motorhome in snowy weather in the mountains than I don't see why one would want to spend the money on a 4x4 conversion on their RV, as for off road use the average RV would not do so well and you could damage the box frame of the RV and who knows what would fall off the wall.

Oh yea and the MPG would be horrible..

Flat tow a Jeep and use that for off road and use the RV for a base camp.

You took the words out of my mouth. A lifted 4x4 motor home is affected worse by cross winds and such, it bounces harder down the highway, and it's poor fuel economy is made worse yet.

I corrected the stance of our motor home, lowering the front a tad along with softening the ride up front to reduce house thrashing. All motorhomes take a serious beating just being driven. The thrashing of the house is tremendous. Making it worse with a 4x4 conversion makes no sense to me.

I understand there are unique exceptions for people who do go to extreme locations. But if you can, why not do that with your 4x4 Jeep that is designed for it? For the majority of people, a 4x4 motor home is a bad idea.

Here is our rig before I lowered the front by 1.25" when installing softer front springs. Doing so leveled the rig and offers a more comfortable ride for the house and also for us.


Here is the same model with a Quigley 4x4 conversion. Note the increased distance between the rear tires and wheel well. You should have a very good "regular" application for a 4x4 motor home.

[mikf]

Look at the newer Pleasureway XL models. Hard to find but they are very nice well built units. 23 ft. Full bath, but only single sink in kitchen. We have an XLMB ( Murphy bed ) and love it. Park it any where. They also make ones with twin beds in the back. Check out their website. In my opinion they are top notch quality.

[El Chapo]

I don't think most same folks are talking about hardcore off-roading in a motorhome.

It's about having the 4WD to pull you off the grass you parked on at that rally on Thursday when it was dry, but after it rained all weekend, Sunday traction is iffy and getting out needs that extra help.

It's about that boondocking spot you're heading to, but find you pulled your passenger side off into some softer sand and need that extra help getting out.

It's about that night you're crossing the Blueridge in light rain, that turns into unforecasted snow, and the extra traction that shifting into 4HI brings you.

The extra cost is worth it, for us mere mortals that can't see the future and avoid situations like I've described. Those that live mistake free, don't boondock, and only travel from resort to resort, don't need 4WD.

And I tow a Gladiator Rubicon or a Wrangler Sahara. Both have 12K winches, and I've already had to use the winch in the wet grass scenario I described above. That's why 4WD is high on my checklist for my next motorhome.

[DirtRider]

So, one thing I always wonder about when we talk about this—why not a locker in the existing rear axle? Surely one exists for these axles? Seems like that would be an easier retrofit. A person would have to put more aggressive drive tires on, of course.

[jackreno]

Originally Posted by El Chapo

I don't think most same folks are talking about hardcore off-roading in a motorhome.

It's about having the 4WD to pull you off the grass you parked on at that rally on Thursday when it was dry, but after it rained all weekend, Sunday traction is iffy and getting out needs that extra help.

It's about that boondocking spot you're heading to, but find you pulled your passenger side off into some softer sand and need that extra help getting out.

It's about that night you're crossing the Blueridge in light rain, that turns into unforecasted snow, and the extra traction that shifting into 4HI brings you.

The extra cost is worth it, for us mere mortals that can't see the future and avoid situations like I've described. Those that live mistake free, don't boondock, and only travel from resort to resort, don't need 4WD.

And I tow a Gladiator Rubicon or a Wrangler Sahara. Both have 12K winches, and I've already had to use the winch in the wet grass scenario I described above. That's why 4WD is high on my checklist for my next motorhome.

I have taken 2WD trucks in places a 4x4 would get stuck, there is no need for a 4x4 RV even on a snow covered road, I drove thru blizzards almost every year from Las Vegas to Denver over the Rockies in a 2WD truck during Christmas so my daughters could see their grand parents, did this for 10 years straight, I saw many 4x4's wrecked and in the ditch cause they did not know how to drive on icy roads and I would make it every year with a 2WD.

My secrete was slow and steady and follow a semi and drive in their tracks.

White knuckle you bet, I learned a lot living on a farm in Iowa and we did just fine with 2WD trucks even in thick mud.

Thor sells the Compass in AWD on the Ford Transit, I almost bought one but decided on the big V-8 for towing and more water and fuel capacity.

[TexasJeff]

Personally I'm in the camp of putting your class C on a spot and use it as a base camp. As you can tell by my signature line, we tow a Wrangler and I hardly know it's back there, thanks to that rear-mirror camera.

Now if you REALLY want to off-road in a vehicle that you can sleep in, I'd go for a Pinzgauer High-Mobility All-Terrain Vehicle. What's that? You've never heard of one? Go back and watch the original Thor movie. These things define cool.

[El Chapo]

Originally Posted by jackreno

I have taken 2WD trucks in places a 4x4 would get stuck, there is no need for a 4x4 RV even on a snow covered road, I drove thru blizzards almost every year from Las Vegas to Denver over the Rockies in a 2WD truck during Christmas so my daughters could see their grand parents, did this for 10 years straight, I saw many 4x4's wrecked and in the ditch cause they did not know how to drive on icy roads and I would make it every year with a 2WD.

My secrete was slow and steady and follow a semi and drive in their tracks.

White knuckle you bet, I learned a lot living on a farm in Iowa and we did just fine with 2WD trucks even in thick mud.

Thor sells the Compass in AWD on the Ford Transit, I almost bought one but decided on the big V-8 for towing and more water and fuel capacity.

Regardless of where you, or I, have taken our previous 2WD vehicles, there is irrefutable proof that 4WD gives a vehicle more capability. It's simply not true to state otherwise. If 4WD is an option, why are there so many people here against it?

I have spent my entire adult life driving vehicles off-road and training others to do the same. I was a Cavalry Scout using Jeeps and HMMWV's and drove in deserts, jungles, woodlands, and urban environments in all weather conditions around the world. After retirement, I served as a police officer, later joining our SWAT team (Knoxville). When the snow was bad, we doubled up in the less plentiful 4WD vehicles so we could continue to serve.

Since 2003 I've deployed back to most of those same places, driving in all kinds of dangerous conditions. Who was caught in a blizzard in Northern Iraq, just a couple miles from Iran, with the U.S. Ambassador onboard? This guy. The three 2WD vehicles (Suburbans) on that mountain pass were left behind, the six 4WD Suburban drove out with little drama. Zalmay Khalilizad is currently busy as the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation appointed by Trump, but you might ask him about that cold day in December 2005 if you run across him.

I've been a tactics instructor at various 4WD schools, private and Federal, and kinda know what I'm talking about. I do this work today and for the next 1059 days (34.5 months until I go full-time). At no point did we feel 4WD was not a valuable tool.

My reason for telling you all this? To show I might know a little about 2WD v. 4WD.

A 5500lb 2WD pickup is naturally going to be easier to keep mobile, but an 11,000 - 33,000lb 2WD motorhome could certainly benefit from the extra help that a 4WD gives.
4WD is uncontested in it's advantages over 2WD.

Is it worth the additional cost, weight, and maintenance? That's for the individual to decide. We're in America, where for now we're still allowed to make those choices. But I cringe when people say it offers no advantages to an RV. It's simply not the case.

[Phil G.]

Since this is a Class C motorhome forum, I'll speak in relation to them.

A Class C motorhome has tremendous weight and/or weight bias on it's rear tires, hence it has corresponding tremendous traction from those tires relative to the rear tires on pickup trucks, SUVs, jeeps, small troop carriers, and other vehicles not carrying a house over their rear tires.

In DRY HARD SURFACE CONDITIONS the above permits a small Class C to CAREFULLY navigate off-road ... so long as the driver knows how to straddle ruts, cross-wise traverse wash-outs, climb/descend moderate grades, steer around over-hanging tree limbs or rock outcroppings, and stay out of soft stuff.

We do this with our 24ft. Class C going slowly and having everything inside secured. And of course, once out there on the far side of beyond we can camp right there without having to drive back to a base camp.

It can be done with only 2WD under the above conditions with certain vehicles. In contrast my off-road 4X4 pickup truck has sometimes been outright dangerous under certain marginal traction situations when in 4WD and with it's bed not heavily loaded.

[El Chapo]

Where can it be found with veracity that 2WD will outperform 4WD off-road?

The extreme weight on the rear of a motorhome is matched by the extreme weight on the front, so there's no traction advantage over a 4WD version of the same vehicle. The DRW's are a disadvantage over SRW vehicles in the first place.

They aren't prerunners (trophy or baja) trucks. 2WD Vehicles specifically designed to drive, at extremely high speeds, off road. Those suspensions would not a good RV make.

4WD only enhances what a 2WD vehicle can do. And "small troop carriers" weigh much more than Class C RV's. An MRAP is anywhere from 14 to 18 TONS. Even the relatively "light" LMTV is almost 7 5 tons empty. Both of which I've spent considerable time with as an "advisor" to American troops.

And yes, I've driven my 26" Class C off road plenty of times, including Burning Man, and this is my 3rd Class C spanning 18 years of continuous ownership. They are limited and would be somewhat less so with 4WD.

The OP should consider that 4WD will come with an MPG cost, higher maintenance, more things that could break, possibly less CCC, even some ride/steering issues (depending on what they get) BUT nobody should think that a 2WD will give better off-road ability than a comparable 4WD vehicle.

[wanderso]

I used to park our 2003 Chinook Concourse next door to an Earthcruiser https://earthcruiser.com 4x4 Motorhome. It was a sweet setup designed at a height that it could fit in a cargo container and be shipped anyplace in the world by boat for outback camping. I’d own one in a millisecond if the bank account would allow and use it for some great campsites. These are purpose built in Oregon and Australia.

Our Concourse was offered in a Baja (4X4) model. Mine wasn’t, but the prior owner had installed an Actionvan (lifted) suspension. http://www.actionvansuspension.com/system.php. I got a kick out of how many folks would look under the front bumper for a differential. It handled fine - better when I installed a rear sway bar. I seriously considered the upgrade. The Concourse is an all fiberglass house - built like a boat, and things didn’t flex like the RV that I currently own.

[Phil G.]

Originally Posted by El Chapo

Where can it be found with veracity that 2WD will outperform 4WD off-road?

The extreme weight on the rear of a motorhome is matched by the extreme weight on the front, so there's no traction advantage over a 4WD version of the same vehicle. The DRW's are a disadvantage over SRW vehicles in the first place.

They aren't prerunners (trophy or baja) trucks. 2WD Vehicles specifically designed to drive, at extremely high speeds, off road. Those suspensions would not a good RV make.

4WD only enhances what a 2WD vehicle can do. And "small troop carriers" weigh much more than Class C RV's. An MRAP is anywhere from 14 to 18 TONS. Even the relatively "light" LMTV is almost 7 5 tons empty. Both of which I've spent considerable time with as an "advisor" to American troops.

And yes, I've driven my 26" Class C off road plenty of times, including Burning Man, and this is my 3rd Class C spanning 18 years of continuous ownership. They are limited and would be somewhat less so with 4WD.

The OP should consider that 4WD will come with an MPG cost, higher maintenance, more things that could break, possibly less CCC, even some ride/steering issues (depending on what they get) BUT nobody should think that a 2WD will give better off-road ability than a comparable 4WD vehicle.

(The "small troop carrier" type vehicle I had in mind is the classic Humvee - which weighs way less than what even a small Class C motorhome weighs.)

Well - thinking about the physics of what's going on: On firm surfaces (NOT sand or thick mud) the more weight on a tire pushing it down against the surface, the better it's traction will be.

That means that a 6000 lb. 4X4 PU on firm surfaces could very well have LESS overall forward-thrust friction traction with it's 1500 lbs. per drive tire than a 12,000 lb. dually Class C might have ... with it's 2000 lbs. per dually drive tire from it's rear drive axle weight of ~8000 lbs. pushing down on it's 4 rear dually tires.

Hence ... my Class C could possibly do better in certain situations than my 4X4 PU. However, of course my Class C could always do a little, or a lot, better relative to itself in certain situations if it had all tires driven. When I can control the situation, my rear-axle-only-driven heavy Class C could wind up with more forward thrust friction traction than my lighter 4X4 PU.

BTW, I prefer my rear duallies over singles on heavily rutted roads. That's because the width of the duallies makes them ride up higher in the rut than singles would - thus keeping the under-carriage from being banged up by things that protrude up from the mound in the center of the two ruts.

The main "problem" with a Class C that's been converted to both axles driven is that it requires a lifted coach so as to make room for the front diferential. This then raises the overall roof height - which of course can be a negative on heavily treed back roads, but probably worse yet - the increased height also raises the overall center of gravity of the vehicle, which makes for more lateral instability on curves and in high side-winds when traveling the open road.

Also, I had rough road "frame twisting" in mind when I bought new our small Class C on the optional E450 chassis, in that it has a stronger frame than the usual E350 found under a lot of small Class C motorhomes.

[Tatanka]

Originally Posted by El Chapo

I don't think most same folks are talking about hardcore off-roading in a motorhome.

...snip

Originally Posted by El Chapo

...snip

Is it worth the additional cost, weight, and maintenance? That's for the individual to decide. We're in America, where for now we're still allowed to make those choices. But I cringe when people say it offers no advantages to an RV. It's simply not the case.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

This will be my purchase for me. I don't plan to do any hardcore stuff in the RV.

I do regular hardcore off road in my second gen Raptor as a necessity for Search & Rescue. I don't care to off road for leisure. I live in a very rural area in Montana with no cell services.

If a yuppie customer of the nearby resort fails to return on a rented snowmobile at night (ATV in the summer) I'm dispatched. People suck at navigation without electronic help, particularly in dark.

The weather is forecast to be NEGATIVE THIRTY (that's farenheit, ambient temperature) next few days. The human body doesn't last that long in those conditions. We zip up a few body bags per season. The local corner just left tonight's spectacle.

Enough about that. I know already miserable fuel economy will be worse. However, on road performance and handling is significantly improved. This I know from owners of recent Ujoint conversions. There is much weight added with the suspension, axels, larger tires, etc.

If I wanted to do hard core overlanding, I'd consider Stewart & Stevenson by Acela, any variety of MAN, a Unimog, a Pinz, or even EarthRoamer to rob my retirement.

**BTW, prior mentioned nearby resort has a brand new EartRoamer sitting out front. The owner says it's her THIRD 'roamer.

I've looked at Quadvan in Oregon, have considered Quigley, and also Adventure in Salt Lake City. I'm still leaning toward Ujoint in North Carolina with a Minnie Winnie 25 as donor vehicle. They seem to be the experts as Class C's are now the bulk of their builds. They export all over the globe.

I'd love to see considerable empirical evidence or even a scholarly reviewed article with supporting quantitative evidence that 2WD is superior to 4WD. Other than I drove once on I-70 in the Western Slope and saw a 4x4 off the road.

Again, this is something for me. Some may see it as a foolish waste of $100k and 4 MPG but ya only live once.

[Msmoto]

Just my thoughts... I carry tire chains for the rear outer dual on my LTV. This is primarily so if I get into a situation on wet grass, e.g., where the incline does not allow enough traction to back into a space where I am boon docking I can slip on the chains and back in. I have had a 44' Moho stuck on level ground, wet grass, had to use lots of boards under the rear drive wheels to get out.

These situations arise when assigned parking spots at spectator events, like race courses, present as non level and require building up with boards or other items to level up the RV. Road America in Wisconsin is one I have been to dozens of times which presents this problem.

I like to believe that my trip planning will not put me at risk for any situation where I would need more that the rare instance of using the tire chains.