Class B / B+ or C Chassis RV’s

[IdleUp]

Class B / B+ or C Chassis RV’s



Hello B Forum Users - Seems that lately there been a lot of interest in B+ RVs - Many manufactures who offer both B & B+ models, have seen the market moving towards B+ RV’s, since they offer the same ease of driving, yet offer many living advantages over a smaller Class B RV.



While the Pencil-Pushers at RVIA - And other organizations refuse to acknowledge there is such a thing as a B+, I assure you they are alive and well and becoming a major player in the RV market. Surely, a Class B+ motorhome has a distinct difference from class C, since most C’s are built on heavy duty E350-450 van and truck chassis with a eight foot rear axle track. In my best summation, the biggest advantage of a B+ RV is; it handles better than a Class C RV and offers more livability and storage over a Class B.






As the images above show - When I put my two vans nose to nose, both the B and B+ models are very similar in design. Most important, the B+ offers more livability thanks to its dedicated sleeping arrangement, walk in shower, larger living quarters, plus allows for higher water capacity.



Another advantage is storage - A major disadvantage of a B is is they offer little to no space for storage, where some B+ models such as my LTV shown offers more storage than some smaller class C or A models.
While I’ll be the first to admit, Class B vans have their own following and surely not every owner uses his van for camping. However, if camping is one of your uses, a B+ RV might be an option since it can be used as a daily driver for work or used as a second vehicle for entertaining, shopping or even going to a local park for the day.






I happen to own both - A Midwest Sprinter 4x4 as well as a LTV B+. The Midwest conversion retains the great look of a stock fan, it still offers the convenience of being used as a camper as well. Since many B and B+ models are built on on the same chassis, they handle very similar.
The only exception when it comes to chassis handling, is the Ford Transit chassis has an edge in stability over the Sprinter since it incorporates a low slung chassis design, low profile tires, and slightly wider rear axle track.



While I’m certainly not insinuating anyone should dump their B for a B+, what I am saying is; if your plans include some serious camping, a class B+ RV will offer the B’s ease of driving, yet the livability of a type C RV.

When it comes to Appearance - As these images show, a B+ RV looks as sharp and in some cases even better than a standard van, yet they retain a traditional van look with its slender width and low overall height.



Some larger B+ RVs - Built on Sprinter and Transit “Cab and Chassis” such a Winnebago View or Tiffin Wayfarer with their tall over-head sleeper, end up entirely too tall and top heavy for these smaller van chassis. Their narrow rear axle track results in poor handling when it comes to roll moment which can be a safety hazard.
Even though these RV’s such are considered Type C RV’s, they do not offer a “Real” Type C heavy duty chassis such as Ford’s hefty E 350-450 chassis, with good load capacity and a 8 foot rear axle track.



The truth of the matter is - Instead of building these RVs on heavier Ford and Ram chassis, manufactures instead use lighter weight van chassis to save cost, resulting in the RV being overloaded in weight, height and width. In fact, these RVs are so close to maximum weight, if you were to add the weight of a few passengers, you would be over gross weight. This is the primary reason many B+ RVs do not offer seat belts on the rear seating, since it would push the weight over the limit.

If happen to be looking for a “Real” Type C motorhome - I would recommend nothing less than a Ford or Ram truck chassis with a good diesel engine. At Hershey, I found these heavy duty Type C units selling for only $135K with a Powerstroke or Cummins engine, which is pretty much the same money as some B or B+ models. My favorite Type C is the 4x4 shown below.



Ultimately only each owner - Will determine which chassis will work best for them. If you’re considering a new van for camping and concerned about the room, a B+ might be a good choice since it offers extra convenience when camping, plus can still be used as a second vehicle.

If you happen to be Shopping - For a new B or B+ RV, be extra careful since the pricing of RV’s are now off the scale. Possible the biggest rip-off of any B+ RV made, is hands down the Airstream Atlas, this B+ RV is built on a $35K Sprinter chassis, retails for $250K + and sells for an insane price of $200,000 - yet almost identical as other B+ RV’s selling for half the price.

Regards - Mike Mas

[avanti]

Moderator's note:

Thread moved to "B+" section.

[HWDean]

If you want my amateur opinion, B+ is a marketing term. Technically the RV should be called a C- due to chassis difference between B and C. But who wants a C- when they can have a B+...just like when you were a kid in school.

[ilmor]

To each his own. Some want a heavy, bulky home on wheels for carrying seemingly all their normal life possessions in, while other prefer a much more minimalist and truer camping approach. Personally, I much prefer the size, simplicity and minimalist nature of the 18 ft. class B i've purchased (the Tofino). I've owned all the rest (pop-ups, trailer, C's and A's) and grew weary of the bulk. The Tofino is nimble enough that it's become one of the household "cars" and extremely useful.

[Kab449]

https://www.winnebago.com/models/pro...s/class-c/ekko

[booster]

if your plans include some serious camping, a class B+ RV will offer the B’s ease of driving, yet the livability of a type C RV.

I found this particular odd a statement.



I guess I have always consider the more serious campers to be the minimalist ones like backcampers or camper van outdoor people. B+, if you consider it a real designation, and C users with lots of "livability" to me would be called tourists.

[ilmor]

Originally Posted by booster

I found this particular odd a statement.



I guess I have always consider the more serious campers to be the minimalist ones like backcampers or camper van outdoor people. B+, if you consider it a real designation, and C users with lots of "livability" to me would be called tourists.

Agreed! ..........

[MsNomer]

Yes, absolutely.

[Jon in AZ]

For me, 19' x 80" is a tipping point. Below that is a regular vehicle. Above that is an oversized vehicle. A little extra length creates fewer issues than a little extra width.

[Bertiboo]

I’ve been flamed more than a few times trying to defend that the category, even though not recognized by RVIA,is a useful distinction being larger than a Class B, but smaller than most Class C’s. I assume that’s why the moderators of this site who are experts themselves have given is B+ Owners our own section.

I like the new term B-Box and am hoping it might avoid some of the opinion wars that B+ generates. I have to laugh at the earlier comment that B owners are “campers” and the rest of us are “tourists”. In BC I’ve heard discussions between true backwoods wilderness campers that “real campers” can wipe their behinds with snow, and that anyone with toilet paper in their backpack is living a life of luxury. So, everyone here is a glamper!

[wny-pat]

Originally Posted by ilmor

Agreed! ..........

Then I'm not a serious "camper". Have done enough of it in my lifetime. I like comfort today, and don't need any campfire smoke. My Roadtrek B+ class coach is comfortable and convenient transportation. I like having my own bathroom and bed at every stop while traveling. Have spent enough time out in the woods. If I were to do that to day, I would want something along the lines of Advance RV's B-Box or a Unimog based RV. To each their own!!! Having had a Foretravel motor coach spoiled me.

[Davydd]

Originally Posted by Bertiboo

I’ve been flamed more than a few times trying to defend that the category, even though not recognized by RVIA,is a useful distinction being larger than a Class B, but smaller than most Class C’s. I assume that’s why the moderators of this site who are experts themselves have given is B+ Owners our own section.

I like the new term B-Box and am hoping it might avoid some of the opinion wars that B+ generates. I have to laugh at the earlier comment that B owners are “campers” and the rest of us are “tourists”. In BC I’ve heard discussions between true backwoods wilderness campers that “real campers” can wipe their behinds with snow, and that anyone with toilet paper in their backpack is living a life of luxury. So, everyone here is a glamper!

B-Box is now a registered trade name by Advanced RV. I mentioned before if it wasn't it could have been the next "Kleenex". You might want to use "Ekko".

I don't care if the B+ term is used but it has been abused by companies. One company labeled a 34 ft. Class C as a B+.

[ilmor]

Not to get too far off topic but, lets face it, real camping is done in a tent...the most traditional and historical way - or maybe even sleeping on the ground LOL. Next in line is the popup camper (some have toilets). After that, moving up to a camper van (no toilet or shower) class B. After that, moving to a class B with a toilet / shower. Then a B+....and so on. Each one is further away from true camping and closer to being in a house while calling it "camping". Similar sizes and shapes of trailers are mixed into all this as well.

[wny-pat]

Originally Posted by ilmor

Agreed! ..........

Originally Posted by ilmor

Not to get too far off topic but, lets face it, real camping is done in a tent...the most traditional and historical way - or maybe even sleeping on the ground LOL. Next in line is the popup camper (some have toilets). After that, moving up to a camper van (no toilet or shower) class B. After that, moving to a class B with a toilet / shower. Then a B+....and so on. Each one is further away from true camping and closer to being in a house while calling it "camping". Similar sizes and shapes of trailers are mixed into all this as well.

Yep, and I've done enough tent stuff all around the world. Even tent camped in the snow! Have to thank all of you for supporting me during my active military duty time!!!

[Jon in AZ]

Originally Posted by Davydd

I don't care if the B+ term is used but it has been abused by companies. One company labeled a 34 ft. Class C as a B+.

I kinda do care. RV classifications are based on structure, not size. To do otherwise undermines the whole point of classifications.

You can call a lion a cat, even though it’s much larger than a house cat, but you wouldn’t call a small dog a cat just because it’s the same size...

I know... this cat’s already out of the bag. And long gone.

[mumkin]

Originally Posted by Jon in AZ

I kinda do care. RV classifications are based on structure, not size. To do otherwise undermines the whole point of classifications.

You can call a lion a cat, even though it’s much larger than a house cat, but you wouldn’t call a small dog a cat just because it’s the same size...

I know... this cat’s already out of the bag. And long gone.

Perfect description. A "B+" is nothing but a Class C without a bed over the cab. That is the only difference. So many salesmen and owners' obsession with calling their C a "B+" just proves that it is really all about ego and often inaccurate perceptions. For some reason having a B is considered classier and/or sexier than owning a C. Much of it is the reputation of better construction in the B's and so much junk being sold as a C.

I've owned both as my signature shows. I had a Leisure Travel which was definitely a Class C and not a Class "B+", in spite of salesman hype. Other than the fact that the nose/cab was the same as a Chevy 3500 van, it was a completely different experience than owning the true Chevy B. That fact alone confirms the RVIA definitions as accurate.

[jakegw2]

I think part of why you find such disagreement on this topic is because many people are actually trying to classify their own camping style when they identify their RV class.

RV class is a surprisingly useful and informative shorthand for camping style. People in 40' 5th-wheels have such an entirely different experience and expectation from someone in a 17' van camper as to hardly be engaged in the same activity at all.

Many people, including Mike as you can read between the lines of his post, see that a travel-heavy, non-RV-park-centric, no-toad, outdoor-focused type of experience can be had in a "B+" in a way that is qualitatively different from the experience of a larger Class C camper. Unfortunately we lack a simple word to distinguish this type of camping style and so some variant of "Class B" gets recruited to fill the gap. This blatantly erroneous denotation of chassis type particularly annoys those who don't pick up on the underlying camping style connotation.

For my part I think the big divisions in camping style fall along two axis: 1.) Do you primarily travel to a new location every day or stay put at a destination? and 2.) Do you spend nearly all of your time outside or do you mostly hang out inside your unit and just enjoy having a different view through the windows from time to time?

Our family's answers are: "mostly new locations" and "almost always outside (frequently even in rain)." On the second question the number of people per linear foot of camper is a good measurement of where you fall. We have 5 people in a 24' "B+" camper. Some seem to struggle to squeeze 2 into 24' which is an indication of probably spending less time outside then we do.

About 18 months ago we had the same five but only a 17' camper van, so our people-to-length ratio has fallen considerably. I will own up to a corresponding increase in time inside our camper as a result (though still fairly limited)!

The bottom line for us is that when we socialize we find commonality with vehicle tent campers, pop-up campers, and Class B campers, while frequently finding fewer things in common with those that drive Class C, A, or trailers. I won't get into the underlying cultural difference between the groups as it would be too easy to offend!

[GeorgeRa]

We have a love affair with product codes which without decoding tables are useless:

G24, E27, G4…… Light bulbs
8, 6, 1/0, 4/0……Wire gauges
1, 5, 49, A, C, F……. Drill sizes

So here are camping vehicles:

“B-“ – kind of tiny, maybe minivan maybe not, maybe big station wagon maybe not, but enjoyable

“B” – as already mentioned multiple times a factory van with factory metal chassis and RV guts

“B+” - kind of bigger but not too big, from 1 mile away looks like a C but from 2 miles away it looks like a B, but don’t confused with a C, if B is necessary in the marketing name sign a peace treaty with B folks first.

“B-box” – exclusive by ARV, expensive to acquire, could be worldwide patent, looks big but it isn’t, very boxy but don’t confused with https://www.itb.ca/ as it would be sacrilegious,

“C” - …..
“A” - ……

Having fun?

[booster]

Time to copywrite a new and innovative RV THAT DOES IT ALL!!!!!


The soon to be released ALPHABET.......40' long inside but fits in a single parking spot!

[GeorgeRa]

Originally Posted by booster

Time to copywrite a new and innovative RV THAT DOES IT ALL!!!!!


The soon to be released ALPHABET.......40' long inside but fits in a single parking spot!

....and it has 1GWh from Advanced Cold Fusion powered by 1 cc of hydrogen.