Winnebago Era 70C - with slide out

[bobojay]

The AXIS may just put the final nail in the coffin of the VIA/Reyo Winnebago twins. There's been rumors the last year or so of their demise because of sales.
Their just too expensive for what you get if you ask me, along with virtually no cargo capacity.

[Davydd]

The tanks on a Via are not any bigger than a B and not very Class A like. Is that because of a weight limitation of a Sprinter chassis? I suppose if you act Class A like and seek out full hook up campgrounds then it would not make a lot of difference.

[bobojay]

Originally Posted by Davydd

The tanks on a Via are not any bigger than a B and not very Class A like. Is that because of a weight limitation of a Sprinter chassis? I suppose if you act Class A like and seek out full hook up campgrounds then it would not make a lot of difference.

Yes, one of the 3 floor plans available only has a little over 800 lbs left after construction. Doesn't include people or water/waste liquids

[Mike]

Originally Posted by bobojay

The AXIS may just put the final nail in the coffin of the VIA/Reyo Winnebago twins. There's been rumors the last year or so of their demise because of sales.
Their just too expensive for what you get if you ask me, along with virtually no cargo capacity.

The Reyo, compared to the Axis is definitely pricey for what you get. I think it comes down to the chassis selection underneath them.
Reyo 25T, Sprinter F50 chassis, decent specs on the 170" WB, MSRP around $125,000.
Thor Axis 24.1, Ford F-350 chassis, decent specs for a gasser, and the MSRP is around $96,000.

Next question.
Once you get up into these small class A models, where do you go to get the chassis stuff done?
MB/FL for the Sprinter models, and any old Ford dealer for the F-350? I doubt it.
One of the nice things about the old Ford/Dodge chassis models was you could usually take them to your local dealer for service.

[booster]

Originally Posted by Mike

The Reyo, compared to the Axis is definitely pricey for what you get. I think it comes down to the chassis selection underneath them.
Reyo 25T, Sprinter F50 chassis, decent specs on the 170" WB, MSRP around $125,000.
Thor Axis 24.1, Ford F-350 chassis, decent specs for a gasser, and the MSRP is around $96,000.

Next question.
Once you get up into these small class A models, where do you go to get the chassis stuff done?
MB/FL for the Sprinter models, and any old Ford dealer for the F-350? I doubt it.
One of the nice things about the old Ford/Dodge chassis models was you could usually take them to your local dealer for service.

I can't speak for either of the two brands you mention, MB or Ford, but I can for the GM chassis motorhomes. The local GM truck service center where we had some of the warranty work on our Roadtrek done told me they do motorhomes of many sizes on a regular basis, both warranty and non warranty.

[Davydd]

Somehow we got off track on the Era 70C and into these small As. You have to get back in perspective. These RVs so far discussed are a good 25.5 feet long x 7.5 - 8 feet wide. Seriously by no stretch, IMO, can they take the place of a B in all the advantages B offers as an RV. We have had numerous discussions on that. I think this line started in believing you could make a small A the size of a B. Those really don't exist. That's a small C cab/chassis advantage because I don't think you can get much advantage with an A since I don't see a small A that is going to save length over the C and be as safe. The small As push the engine forward now instead of having you sit on top of it.

Anyway, with the soon to be three options for European style vans (Sprinter, ProMaster, Transit) I doubt there will be much interest in small As.

Since European style vans are unibodies with full height I doubt we'll ever see ripping out the back end and building fiberglass enclosures again like the Pleasure-way Excel and Roadtrek Chevys. Cab chassis are better suited for that and there will be little incentive or advantage that I can see to replicate a unibody in narrow width even with small Cs.

Even though the small Cs can be as wide as As they still have an advantage over an A in a tight parking lot squeeze in that the driver and passenger door are still relatively narrow and open the same as a B van.

[booster]

It has drifted a bit to the existing "small" A's which really don't fit the description of a small A that could capture some of the B market. What has been shown, though, is that the weaknesses that were mentioned in the "reduced" size A have not been tried, and are seen by many, or most, of folks as problems. Top ones seem to be (in no order) width, tank sizes, and load capacity. What has been missed by some is that there really isn't a comparsion to the cutup Excel, or Roadtrek 210, nor is there a reason that anyone would consider using a cutaway chassis, as that is just a C. In particular, the Sprinter based stuff, including cutaways just doesn't seem to have enough capacity available, and probably not enough power, either. We were behind one of the newer larger Sprinter C's going up a moderate grade in the UP of Michigan, and he could barely make 40mph, and it was not that much grade. Our Roadtrek didn't even stay downshifted all the way up.

To make it really work, and cover the things we listed as "wants", you would need a chassis with the capacity of the F450 or F550, I would think, but not on a cutaway. Get the capacity up in the 15k pounds range, with turbo diesel from the bigger chassis, with a frame designed as an RV. Maybe 6.5 feet wide and 22-24 feet long and big tanks fit well into the frame and winterized. IMO, a full fiberglass body would be fine. With the B's getting so spendy, somebody may just decide to try it.

[Davydd]

The Thor Axis is built off the Ford E-350 stripped chassis, the smallest Ford makes and it is a 25'-6 L" x 7'-10" W x 11'-3" H. I think you might be able to get a shorter length chassis by about 20" but that would still get you about a 23'-10" long RV and the frame seems higher boosting the overall RV height above that magical under 10 ft. height. I'm not sure how the width could be reduced with those wide dually wheels. So does anyone else make a chassis any smaller than a van or that E-350 with higher capacity loads? I just don't see it happening and looking at the Axis plan I think you can get just as much in a small C plan wise. To get bigger tank capacities and attendant loads it would have to be a Ford right now. The Axis probably has maximized that. The Via has shown load limiting restrictions.

I would imagine if they could make Class As smaller than the Axis and Via that they would have attempted it by now.

[booster]

Originally Posted by Davydd

The Thor Axis is built off the Ford E-350 stripped chassis, the smallest Ford makes and it is a 25'-6 L" x 7'-10" W x 11'-3" H. I think you might be able to get a shorter length chassis by about 20" but that would still get you about a 23'-10" long RV and the frame seems higher boosting the overall RV height above that magical under 10 ft. height. I'm not sure how the width could be reduced with those wide dually wheels. So does anyone else make a chassis any smaller than a van or that E-350 with higher capacity loads? I just don't see it happening and looking at the Axis plan I think you can get just as much in a small C plan wise. To get bigger tank capacities and attendant loads it would have to be a Ford right now. The Axis probably has maximized that. The Via has shown load limiting restrictions.

I would imagine if they could make Class As smaller than the Axis and Via that they would have attempted it by now.

I don't think you read what was suggested. It would need to be a DEDICATED RV CHASSIS. Existing F350,450,550 chassis are built to accept various truck bodies, not rv parts, so they won't work very well, will be too tall, too wide, etc. Again the repeat, it would be a built for RV chassis. If a dually Sprinter isn't too wide for you, why would a dually something else not have room for duals? There is also the possibility of a tag axle, like several of the older, relatively small A's used.

[bobojay]

Ok boys, time to chill out and get back to the 70C subject.....

[markopolo]

I cut a few posts out. The whole Class A as a Class B replacement discussion is interesting and more relevant than ever with slide-out equipped B's but let's try to get this back on the Winnebago Era 70C topic.

The Winnebago Era 70C hasn't shown up on http://winnebagotouring.com/ yet. Maybe it will be at the Tampa RV show.

[mlts22]

As for the 70C, I'm curious about the slide mechanism. Schwintek sounds like what they will likely be using because it is lightweight, functions on two aluminum rails, and is fairly inexpensive.

[bobojay]

Originally Posted by mlts22

As for the 70C, I'm curious about the slide mechanism. Schwintek sounds like what they will likely be using because it is lightweight, functions on two aluminum rails, and is fairly inexpensive.

Wouldn't be surprised if it's the same slide they use on the 24G & V models. It's fully enclosed with the whole mechanism weather protected except for the rails, which very well may be the Schwintek...don't know the specific brand. I know our Navion IQ with the rear slide, worked easy with no issues in 3 years, and it was the fully enclosed type, (single underneath rail)

[SiennaGuy]

If I'm not mistaken, the refrigerator in the Era 70C is next to the bed. In the Free Spirit SS, the refrigerator is on the opposite side of the van. If the Era's fridge made noise next to my bed during the night, I wouldn't be a happy camper.


Also, the Era's press release mentions that "an exterior storage shower conversion package with adjustable rear storage rack system provides massive storage space for four sets of golf clubs." Is that what the photo is showing? It also looks like this second entrance to the shower would be a great place for moisture and mold to collect. (Please Winnebago, come up with better wording for whatever it is in the rear.)


SiennaGuy

[markopolo]

My guess is that the second shower door would remained closed most of the time.

[mlts22]

I think things may change between preproduction and production. The Travato had a few tweaks, so I wouldn't be surprised if the ERA gets some revisions so water intrusion from the shower or noise from the fridge is dealt with. Hopefully someone will try sleeping in the vehicle for a night as a test.

[Mike]

An excerpt from an article on the Lichstinn blog site suggests the ERA 70C comes with a 5.7 cu ft 3 way fridge. Our Dometic 3 way is close to our sleeping area, and it hardly makes a peep all night when on propane. I thought we had guessed that the extra door in the back (of the shower) was an emergency egress point, possibly required by law or the NHTSA or both? Maybe I dreamed it.

[Davydd]

I'm confused by the door. It kind of impedes any storage ideas like shelves and if any storage is used then it is not an unimpeded exit. The other thing is the LTV Free Spirit SS is essentially the same floor plan and does not have a door. I have no idea what kind of rules govern motorhomes but in houses and apartments only a bedroom has to have a second legal exit which can be a window of a minimum size. Bathrooms and auxiliary spaces do not. Maybe a good idea but maybe not required.

[Fastpaddler1]

Sure looks like the same sort of interior setup as the LTV Freespirit SS s/o. Actually the photos of the 70C here show more colourful interior. Material quality looks good. My wife is really interested as she likes the LTV with s/o. If Winnebago price is a lot cheaper would seem to be preferable. Don't know about a Canadian model though. LTV is from my home province of Manitoba. Anybody know? I did own a Winnebago Aspect which was great but too big for us. I wonder if GWV will come out with a slideout version. I really like GWV products due to high quality of interior materials.

Looking forward also to a video,
Greetings to all
AL

[Davydd]

I was hoping to see a Winnebago 70C and an LTV Free Spirit SS at the Minneapolis RV show to compare. Sadly neither was there. I've seen the Free Spirit SS and the quality is up there with LTV standards. If the 70C is similar in quality to the other Era models then the LTV will be the better B in both finish quality and "under the hood" quality. No doubt there will be a price difference and I guess one would have to decide if the price difference is worth it or not. LTV most likely will not be competitive in price, but I imagine one could use the 70C as some leverage to make an LTV dealer sharpen his pencil more so than in the past if you want the LTV.