Winnebago Era 70C - with slide out

[Mike]

I like either model, but the Winnie would be my choice based on price. It looks pretty similar to the LTV FS SS, and that layout is really nice, in both.
The "stealth" factor has never been a problem or issue for us. I don't get the concern over it, unless you live in a condo/HOA situation where they would hassle you for having a motorhome parked in your driveway? I'm not sure you can fool anybody with a production conversion van anyway, the motorhome features are pretty obvious to someone that is looking for a motorhome doing "stealth parking". We've always just parked where we want/can, and if we get a knock on the door and a request to move, we move. To date, that hasn't happened. If you want a place to park and nap, find a Walmart. They're everywhere, and almost always hassle free.
When is appearing to look more like a commercial or cargo van, rather than a class B van, an advantage? New thread idea?
I wonder if a Promaster (or eventually a Transit) could be converted with a slideout added? It might become a general trend in class B conversions, the way it opens up enough floor space in the rear and along one wall for a full bathroom and that storage system that we've seen in both the slideout models. Too bad it wasn't an available feature back when we bought our Roadtrek. I could also see a Murphy bed design allowing something similar in terms of bathroom and wall storage layouts, but the slideout really works.

[booster]

This may also be better in a new thread, but I think I am quickly getting more and more tired of the "old" definitions of what class an RV is. When we start seeing 24' long, dually, slide equipped, over 10' tall, 12,000+ gross weight vehicles in the B classification, the lines get pretty blurry to me. They have much more in common with a small class A or C than a "traditional" B. I think only the width would be much different, if you ignore the base van instead of cutaway definition.

Back in the day, there were a bunch of dedicated "demo" vehicles made so manufacturers of hoses, pumps, controls, whatever, could go plant to plant to demonstrate and sell their products. I think most were built on small class A or schoolbus chassis, but were they really a variant of a production van by definition? Would something like a "shortbus" pass the current test for a starting point for a B? Is it that different from a 15 passenger van starting point? It will also be interesting to see how the bigger Sprinters sell into the commercial market, where they will go directly against the cutaways, even their own.

Perhaps Gross weight and/or length would be a better starting point, or even total volume. Or just eliminate the classes and be done with it. That way you just buy a "motorhome" and don't worry about it.

[bobojay]

Originally Posted by Davydd

The second exit in the back doesn't seem to exist in the LTV Free Spirit SS.

i wonder if that's because of the USA built vs the Canadian built regs?

[Davydd]

It is not so much stealth in the issue of the slideout but we spend time at our relatives' homes driveways and in the case of our son's house we visit several times per year we parallel park on the street. A slideout simply does not work in that situation for us nor would a wider body small C.

[bobojay]

We had our fill of beds mounted in slideouts with the Navion. Everytime the wind blew hard in the right directions, the slide topper would flap causing the slide to jiggle around, not to mention the extra noise if it was raining on it.....
Several places we park during the summer visiting months wouldn't necessarily work with a side slide. Be an issue getting around it in a couple of them.
Then you have the extra workings of a slide that add weight on one side, electrical & mechanical issues that you just don't have with a fully enclosed B van body

[Davydd]

Originally Posted by bobojay

i wonder if that's because of the USA built vs the Canadian built regs?

I'm not sure it is required. In a house, an exit is not required through a bathroom and there are actually three exits in the ERA 70C and LTV FS SS in the driver door, passenger door and sliding door. In a house you normally have an exit through the house but a requirement to have one window as a second emergency exit. In this case your "room" where you live and sleep is directly to the outside and I would not think a second exit would be required. In a B where you sleep in the back and have to pass through another space a second exit through the back door should be required. Who regulates motorhomes?

[booster]

Even if if it is not required, it just isn't a good idea not to have it. We have all seen how fast RVs burn, so even a small fire when you were back there could be fatal, especially when you have to open a sliding door. I think it would be a deal breaker for us if there is no exit, but it isn't our style anyway.

[Mike]

Originally Posted by booster

This may also be better in a new thread, but I think I am quickly getting more and more tired of the "old" definitions of what class an RV is. When we start seeing 24' long, dually, slide equipped, over 10' tall, 12,000+ gross weight vehicles in the B classification, the lines get pretty blurry to me. They have much more in common with a small class A or C than a "traditional" B. I think only the width would be much different, if you ignore the base van instead of cutaway definition.

Back in the day, there were a bunch of dedicated "demo" vehicles made so manufacturers of hoses, pumps, controls, whatever, could go plant to plant to demonstrate and sell their products. I think most were built on small class A or schoolbus chassis, but were they really a variant of a production van by definition? Would something like a "shortbus" pass the current test for a starting point for a B? Is it that different from a 15 passenger van starting point? It will also be interesting to see how the bigger Sprinters sell into the commercial market, where they will go directly against the cutaways, even their own.

Perhaps Gross weight and/or length would be a better starting point, or even total volume. Or just eliminate the classes and be done with it. That way you just buy a "motorhome" and don't worry about it.

I'll go with your last line. I've said it before, that I think it's far too easy to get hung up on what class a particular motorhome falls into. The only folks that might really care are the sales people who stock and demonstrate them by their class definition, the stats folks who create those industry sales charts that markopolo updates, and probably the insurers for actuarial table creation to determine how safe a vehicle is by it's dimensions and other physical characteristics. I tend to evaluate each motorhome based on the criteria I might deem to be in descending order from the most important, like price, fuel economy, comfort systems and features, off grid capability, storage, etc. . I wouldn't turn down a small class C by definition, just because of it's classification, if it checked enough of the boxes on my "must have" features list. I don't think any of us would.

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Davydd

It is not so much stealth in the issue of the slideout but we spend time at our relatives' homes driveways and in the case of our son's house we visit several times per year we parallel park on the street. A slideout simply does not work in that situation for us nor would a wider body small C.

In the case where you spend most of your time parallel parked on residential streets, I would agree that it could be problematic, and clearly it wouldn't work for you. But that's the more rare situation, isn't it? If it's only an inconvenience several times a year, as you suggested, but in almost all other situations the slideout would provide extra living space or a more spacious and functional overall (in my opinion) floor plan, I'd figure out how to deal with the more rare inconveniences, to get that extra living space when on the road in real camping situations, where the slide wouldn't be a problem.

[Davydd]

The Sprinter slideout gives you extra floor space when stopped but not underway. I suppose it is nice if you wanted to do yoga, situps and pushups inside for exercise but you can't add anything to your living space other than visual satisfaction and quite frankly an inferior bed for two people.

There is also another issue with the two slideout models so far and even some of the small Cs and that is the lack of zoned living space. With the slideout model all your eggs are in one basket in that you either live in your one space or you sleep in your one space. That doesn't work for us. We can sleep in the back and if one of us desires to get up in the middle of the night can go up front and sit. And even in the evening, usually one of us might want to watch the TV and the other read without the distraction. Bs are small and that zoned living makes them just a tad more tolerable. A lot of older Bs had mid gaucho designs that were either or situations and they died off. What you are really getting with these slideout Bs is a much better bathroom.

[Mike]

Oh, c'mon, why would you want extra floor space when underway?
btw, the LTV floor plan you posted has more floor space with the slideout, than a conversion using the same chassis without. It isn't visual, it's real square footage. Measurable.
I don't mind the layout, and my co-pilot likes the bathroom. Overall, it's workable for us.
Bed quality perception is highly subjective. I agree that one man's Serta, is another man's camp cot.

As for "zoned living space"? In the 70C or FS SS, I can get up in the middle of the night, go to the bathroom, and read while seated on the commode. Or, I can watch TV or read a book while seated in the cab area, simply by adding noise suppressing or enhancing ear accoutrements, read as firearms or industrial grade ear protection, or ear buds/headphones/bluetooth for the TV. All the while my co-pilot can also watch TV, or sleep. Not that it's likely to ever be necessary. We tend to have similar tastes in our TV time, relaxing, and sleeping, and neither of us are big readers on the road, except online, so I'm pretty sure it would work for us, the majority of the time.
I can understand that the layout isn't for everyone. However, those things that some see as a problem, I'm willing to accept, to get the much more functional (in my opinion) bathroom, any day of the week. The "wall of storage" is just gravy, as far as that goes.

[stanw909]

I think davydd looks at rv 's through a fulltimer lens so he knows about living long term in a class b. It would be nice if my wife I had perfectly synced inner clocks but the truth is we don 't so dual living zones are a must for us. We may even want to watch different tv shows. Football for me. Something to do with woman picking out wedding gowns with price tags that defy reason for her.

[Mike]

In the case of full timing, and when either or both participants feel like, "I need my space", there are better options than a B. There are a few exceptions, folks that spend more than a few months at a time together in their vans that we are familiar with, but overall, something larger than a B is probably a better choice when considering full timing, if you truly need a way to get some space away from your companion. A few feet between "zones" in a class B van is insignificant, in my opinion. Maybe one inside and the other outside would provide some real separation? I guess it's a subjective thing.
I think everyone is entitled to their opinions. and to evaluate those of others.
You are an adventurer, Stan, attempting to analyze and interpret Davydd.
Just like in my case, many try, few succeed.

edit: I was thinking of our situation, and ran it by the co-pilot, and we remember times early on when we were going through our class B van acclimatization period. We probably could have used some extra space back then, on those first couple of trips, but we managed to adapt without any major damage. Now when we travel, we don't even think about it. I guess we just mesh better, now that we're used to the limited interior space available inside our van. For example, either of us can fall asleep quite easily and quickly while the other watches TV in the same bed, we rarely seem to get in each other's way in the aisle, and we try to do most of our inside stuff without interfering with each other. We certainly don't always see eye to eye on things, but as far as the actual logistical operations inside the van, we seem to manage pretty efficiently now. Maybe we're just lucky, or we don't mind the close quarters, or we just find ways to make it work without having to be physically apart.

[Davydd]

I'm not a fulltimer and if it ever got to that point, which I doubt will ever happen, it would not be in a B. It is the right tool for the job thing. But we do go on extended trips, we are on the road almost daily on those trips with a few generally 2-3 day and never over 5 day interludes. And even on those interludes we drive around the area. We generally follow the weather in our planning to avoid any extremes. We live outside generally until dark. Over an 8 year span we've tried to analyze what works and what doesn't work after two Bs. That's how I base my observations. They are not based on what looks like a good idea or what I might think I will do sometime in the future and I think by now I have a good sense of what works and doesn't work in travel (for me, mind you). I might add I am not interested in trying to make a B not a B in conceptual use with slide outs, pulling trailers, pulling toads, etc., or even adding a cargo carrier on the back end. All those things diminish what a B is capable of doing to the point, duh, get the right tool.

BTW, here is a model, a Pleasure-Way Plateau FL that has probably maxed out interior livability for two people better than anyone else. This is one of the first Sprinter plans that made both the front seats turned around functional without the extraneous third or fourth passenger seat with a very comfortable zoned front separate from the back.

[Davydd]

I might add Winnebago already has a winning plan in the ERA 70A but they don't give you any modifications options. If I had this plan I'd do like a lot have done and leave the bed notch at home, put in a pantry where the bed notch is stored, get rid of the TV on the kitchen counter and mount it on the refrigerator wall, dump the sofa/bed and put in a small work table so there would be ample room in front of the turned around driver's seat. And I would need the sliding screen door at the sliding door and the back door screen as well. It seems Advanced RV has modified some ERA 70As with screens and pantry but not Winnebago.

[Mike]

Either of those layouts looks pretty good, except for the lack of a more residential (larger/fully enclosed) styled bathroom, like the vans with the slide out options. I actually just picked out the clever pocket door in the LTV floor plan. That would be a bonus, as you could make use of the forward living space in more quiet seclusion, while someone was using the shower. Sound baffle?
It's all very subjective (obviously) as we all have different takes on what works and what doesn't for each of us. We've always desired a fuller (like a class C or A) bathroom incorporated into the class B floor plan. I'd be willing to bet the slide out doesn't affect the overall functionality and fuel economy of the chassis much, if at all. It just moves the bed forward from it's more common placement at the rear of the coach in most predecessor class B designs. The bed opposite the side sliding door might make escape easier in the case of an emergency, too. There was some concern about that with the rear bed floor plans. My only concern might be the additional complexity, if the slide out were to have functional problems. Could be a pain in the ass to deal with, in that case.

[Davydd]

The luxury bathroom is the biggest plus for the slide out models and one of the few ways to create a separate shower stall in a B size RV. A lot of early Bs were doing that as well with the mid bed design so you could get a bath across the back. That style died off. So in effect we are bringing back ideas with a new twist with the slide out.

Emergency exiting is not a problem with most all Bs if the back doors are accessible and in the case of the Sprinters with beds in the back, I think they all are.

I've never had a slide out but BoboJay made some negative points about sleeping with a slide out situation (Navion) that speaks from experience. I just think it an innovative idea but I really don't want to sleep in a 54" wide bed if I can help it. As a young newlywed I didn't mind it. Decades later I've gotten used to king and queen beds.

After seeing the ERA 70A setup, I'm evolving to not wanting to have to convert spaces with an either or decision for its use. In the case of the slide outs you have to make a decision for use of the space and then there is no optional zoned space as I mentioned. That's a lot of sacrifice for a shower stall that still dribbles water slowly and miserly and Navy style vs a nice hot high pressure spray you can spend several minutes under in a campground shower. Because of tank capacities, B bathrooms are good for a quick wipe down to clean up, brush teeth and number 1.

The storage walls in the slide outs look impressive but in reality I'm not sure there is that much more storage considering the upper cabinets that wrap around a rear bed setup. I wish there were a way to get information about actual cubic inches of storage is available in Bs. Then under storage in my current tri-fold sofa is tremendous and I think even more so in that hiked up ERA 70A fixed bed. I've stored a lot away under sofa beds that would not be appropriate or possible in that wall cabinet such as our two inflatable kayaks. The LTV slide out has that back storage area where they show golf clubs. I'm not sure what the ERA 70C has there but the idea of exiting through that spot makes little sense if you are going to store things there. That to me is a conflict. Rather than golf clubs upright, I would want to shelve that space.

[georgelesley]

In our ERA 70A the rear doors can be opened from the inside for emergency exit purposes. For us, the sit down on the pot wet bath is ideal. I have to sit down when showering anyway, so a separate shower stall would not work for us. I think that having a slide out that mostly provides a larger bath would be a waste of space. How much time do you spend in a bath anyway vs the rest of the RV?

We did have an American Cruiser for several years and it had the bed in the middle. That floor plan did not suit us because of the one area does all DavyDD mentioned. We much prefer the separate zoning we now have.

Bottom line, I don't see any need for a slide out in a "B". If one wants/needs a slide out a class "C" would be a better choice.

[bobojay]

Originally Posted by georgelesley

In our ERA 70A the rear doors can be opened from the inside for emergency exit purposes. For us, the sit down on the pot wet bath is ideal. I have to sit down when showering anyway, so a separate shower stall would not work for us. I think that having a slide out that mostly provides a larger bath would be a waste of space. How much time do you spend in a bath anyway vs the rest of the RV?

We did have an American Cruiser for several years and it had the bed in the middle. That floor plan did not suit us because of the one area does all DavyDD mentioned. We much prefer the separate zoning we now have.

Bottom line, I don't see any need for a slide out in a "B". If one wants/needs a slide out a class "C" would be a better choice.

What georgelesley says...

[Mike]

More interesting food for thought.
I'm guessing there are ways of escaping from the rear end of almost all class B vans no matter what the chassis or configuration. You might have to fight your way through "stuff" in an emergency in some of them, but I'm sure it's do-able. Otherwise I'm sure we'd have heard about the issue by now from the NHTSA, or who ever the agency is that looks into vehicular safety issues.
Agree about the use of most existing B bathrooms, although fresh water refills are usually fairly easy to find, so low tank capacity can usually be mitigated fairly easily. A lot of primitive campsites we've visited have potable water available in close proximity.
The miserly, dribbling, water pressure issue can probably be fixed by changing out the factory installed (usually weaker) water pump. Or, as you suggest, connecting to shore water (and it's pressure) in a campground. We connect to our garden hose tap to fill up before a trip, and get residential pressure as a result.
I guess the desire for a self contained shower stall is for a number of reasons. The steam inside the main living area can't be good for anything but growing bacteria and possibly mold in areas you can't always easily see. I'm pretty sure an enclosed bathroom would be better for prevention of that. Not having to straddle or sit on a toilet while bathing, as it doesn't work for us (personal preference). No foot bacterial, fungal, or other infections because you are responsible for cleaning your own bathroom and shower stall (we do the flip flop thing in all public showers and have still known of folks who've had problems). The ability to shower comfortably in off grid situations, where we might not be near public bathroom/shower facilities for more than a few days. We boondock a lot as it is, and a full bathroom would give us more flexibility when choosing where to stay. And lastly, if there's a full shower/bathroom available as an option, my wife would prefer it over the typical current class B floor plan. Unless another feature completely negated it for some catastrophic reason. I would guess that would be unlikely.
Did Bobojay have the retractable slide out covers installed over the slide roof on their Navion, I wonder? My cousin has mentioned the clean up before you retract them, too. If you are near or under trees, debris can collect on top of the slide. It might be a legit negative, but the clean up is pretty easy, too. The roll up covers can help with that, and the noise of rainfall. I hear rain on the roof of my B, and it doesn't have a slide out, so I don't know how valid the rain noise issue really is.
The bed is what it is, I'm used to our queen/king bed in the Roadtrek, but I'm pretty sure we could adapt to whatever we're faced with. It might be the biggest issue of the slide out option, but it would probably be worth it to us, to get the bathroom.