Class B Market Share, Sales and Shipments

[ClassB4Me]

When the Winnebago dealer sent me pictures of the updated ERA for 2016 in production. One of them showed a Class C RV on the Transit cutaway chassis. I give WGO credit for reaching into every market segment.

[ClassB4Me]

Looks like the growth in the total market is slowing.

Prices have been steadily increasing in the RV market greater than consumer salaries. We are in for a market reset and keeping interest rates low have help delay the inevitable. This last run up has given many families the opportunity to de-leverage and use credit more cautionary.

I'm waiting for wincrasher to complete his NEW AND IMPROVED 2016 Travato video (with test drive segment), before I place my RV order.

[mojoman]

I have a simple formula to determine the value of the dollar. I monitor the price of a pack of "Little Debbies" at Walmart. Over the last 7 years they have gone up from 99c to 1.79 (smaller amount). The $5 footlong has just been raised to $6 this year. Funny the Government tells me inflation is flat base on their monitoring, but I guess the price of booze and hookers has stayed flat for them.

[bobojay]

Originally Posted by ClassB4Me

When the Winnebago dealer sent me pictures of the updated ERA for 2016 in production. One of them showed a Class C RV on the Transit cutaway chassis. I give WGO credit for reaching into every market segment.

Leisure Travel has also got them coming. Pictures were posted on Facebook the other day by some friends of ours that took them up at the plant when they did their pre-delivery plant tour. Diesel only. They said looks like the first model will be a Murphy bed model, (their speculation). No one at LT would confirm.

Looks like next spring will see a slew of class C Transits coming....

[markopolo]

September 2015 Class B Sales stats have been posted on RV Business:
SSI: ‘B’ Sales Keep Rolling; Grow 13.6% For Sept. | RV Business

Sales were up 13.6%

Year-over-year Class B motorhome retail registrations increased 13.6% in September and 19.7% year-to-date, according to the latest report from Statistical Surveys Inc. (SSI). The sector has posted sales gains during every month in 2015.

Here's the Class B market share breakdown:

July 2015
Winnebago Industries Inc. 33.8% market share.
Roadtrek Motorhomes Inc. 27.6% market share.
Thor Industries Inc. 24.1% market share.
Pleasure-Way 10.2% market share.

August 2015
Winnebago Industries Inc. 33.9% market share.
Roadtrek Motorhomes Inc. 28% market share.
Thor Industries Inc. 24% market share.

September 2015
Winnebago Industries Inc. 33.9% market share.
Roadtrek Motorhomes Inc. 28.6% market share.
Thor Industries Inc. 24.1% market share.

Winnebago looks set to claim the #1 spot for all of 2015. Roadtrek has held that spot for 25 years I think.

Being number 1 probably creates its own momentum as it likely makes a dealers job easier selling the brand that is currently #1 in sales.

[wincrasher]

I'd agree Marko. At this point I doubt they can do anything about it. You could force your dealers to take some inventory, but they don't have capacity to produce enough to skew those numbers.

I also don't think their recent troubles are the root problem of their sales. It's pricing. They could address that, but it seems to be they'd rather have margin than market share.

What I don't get is why Pleasureway isn't growing. Their pricing is just above Winnebago and their perceived quality is on par with Roadtrek & Airstream, if not better. Maybe they are just production limited.

[markopolo]

I think it is price also. Winnebago also includes some items that are extra cost on a Roadtrek. The generator and a television are stardard features on Winnebago B's but optional and at extra cost on Roadtrek the last time I checked.

[booster]

I totally agree with Marko and Windcrasher, price and value are speaking loudly, and the status of being #1 will help more and more the longer they hold on to it. Roadtrek used the #1 claim for years to tout themselves, and I am sure they still benefiting from the reputation of having it all those years.

Margin over market share is certainly happening with Roadtrek, and I think their customers are also changing. They seem to be aiming for, and finding, customers that don't ask many questions about stuff, and are happy to believe the promises of perfection, convenience, capability, etc. If you look at what Roadtrek claims their B's can do, compared to the other manufacturers, they do come out looking very good. If you are the type to just believe what is said, or promised, it is likely that is where you will wind up. RV salesman have been doing the same thing for years, so it is nothing new, promise anything to sell, deal with the consequences later. I don't know how it will all work out for them long term, though.

It will be interesting to see how all the manufacturers react once the year end numbers come in. Next year will get even more interesting with the new models and manufacturers thrown in.

[Davydd]

Pleasure-way probably isn't gaining in market share as I suspect they will be shifting to small Class Cs similar to Leisure Travel Vans with the Plateau XL or probably wish to. They have also stayed pretty much with their one proven decade old TS design plan and incorporated it into their Promaster. Having had a Pleasure-way with that plan I eventually found it a tad wanting with the bathroom crammed tight to the driver's seat and not giving the driver's seat full range. They haven't dipped their toe into the extended body Sprinters where Roadtrek, Airstream, Winnebago and Advanced RV have found to be very popular because those bodies can offer maximum configurations in a van body the Promasters can't touch if you are going to ask premium prices.

They are far better quality than the Roadtreks, IMO. They have been rather conservative over the years with features and just this year have started loosening up and innovating but I think in a very conservative way. It could be they are simply constrained by facility and labor supply.

The small Class Cs are growing in popularity mainly because they do give a better sense of livable interior space and dry baths. However, the Promaster and Sprinter cutaways are limiting in load features thus their range and capability are not much of an improvement over the vans, i.e. what good is a dry bath if your tank capacities are not improved. They become tethers to traditional campgrounds with hookups.

So what can distinguish a B? Simple, they need to promote go anywhere, park anywhere, and somewhat stealthiness as not to blare out RVness. As much as Class C owners like to rationalize, they really can't do that. Class Bs have to parallel park street camp (I did so 9 times this year) camp in tight campgrounds inaccessible by larger RVs, park in a single parking stall in tight parking lots, and boondock more easily. Their other major advantage is drivability that allows them to be true tourers. They can also be sport vehicles, everyday drivers and family weekenders or yearly vacationers justified by everyday use of which Class Cs are not adaptable in any logical sense.

I think the Sprinter extended body has probably pushed the limit for a Class B at 24 feet. The only solace I find in it is I have the space inside not to require adding cargo carriers and such as so many of the shorter vans do. Doing so even with a Promaster can make them longer overall.

[avanti]

The issue of length is interesting. I agree that beyond 24', you are going to give up many of the advantages of the b-van concept. In fact, we opted to not even go with the extended length. It appeared that all you really get in a typical ext floor plan is a few extra inches of storage space (of which we already have more than we use), and a somewhat longer bed (which we dealt with in a different way in our semi-custom design). We don't regret our choice. If some of that space went into the bath, we might have felt differently, but nobody seems to do that-the ext designs seem more like an afterthought. How do others feel about this trade off?

[wincrasher]

Obviously there is still a robust market for a smaller van. The Promasters are all selling well, and the Ascent must be selling well enough to justify a refresh. Not to mention the Roadtrek 170-190's.

In my view, a short van with a cargo box on the back does not loose it's advantages over an XL Sprinter. Those may have ultimately more interior space, but the overall dimensions have their downside. At least with a cargo box, you can opt to leave that additional length at home if you need to. In my travels though, I see very few of them. Mostly I see bikes hanging off the back, so they've either edited what they carry, or have a place for it inside.

In my case, I've eliminated the box by careful editing of a few items. If I carry it again, it will be for some light, but bulky items. But for now, it's sitting in a corner of the shop.

[gerrym51]

I predict Roadtrek will buy Pleasure way

[Davydd]

Avanti, I had your exact plan and know the difference well. What did I achieve... I set out to design some articulating beds that could not be achieved without the extended length and at the same time create space in the front for both cab seats when turned around much more versatile. Also, I know for a fact I can store much more in our design. So much that I can carry two foldable bikes, two inflatable kayaks, two zero gravity lounger chairs, a screen tent plus everything I carried in my former Great West Van. Had I not pushed my beds back I could have carried two full size bikes inside. I do all that without disturbing or shifting around the inside living area or need for a cargo carrier. None of that was an afterthought.

The Winnebago ERAs achieve a lot of design improvement with extended designs. Airstream Grand Tour EXT has a very livable plan and versatile plan as well.

As I said it does push the limits of a Class B. I did have my hesitations about that but to say it is an afterthought is a little bit shortsighted. As I said too, anyone adding a cargo carrier and in some cases bikes on the back end are going to end up longer with more to worry about.

[avanti]

What I meant by "afterthought" is that when a design is available in both regular and extended versions, there is often very little difference between the two beyond two extra small cabinets, a longer bed, and a bit of floor (or rear storage) space. When I was shopping, this was true of GWV and it was true of ARV's default layout (yes, I know that I could have changed it). I did not look as carefully at WGO, so I don't know if they are an exception.

If you needed the length for your beds, then you made a good choice. My "afterthought" comment was directed at the designers of stock layouts, not at you.

As for extra storage: of course bigger is bigger. As I said, though, we didn't need extra storage--we don't use what we have.

[booster]

Surprisingly, we don't use all the storage in our 190 Chevy, at least we haven't yet. If I have my folding bike inside it gets closer, but still not near capacity.

From my point of view, a 24' B is getting too big for a B, especially when on duals. At that point, I would rather have a small C, if they made one that was not so wide (some are now finally getting a bit narrower). A Roadtrek Chevy 210 sized vehicle, but on a cutaway with duals, would be something we would consider if we went bigger. The old Roadtrek 200 was really not a bad setup, and many folks still like them the best of all the models they ever made.

Put an extra 6-8" of width on a Transit cutaway, when compared to a full van body, at the same 24' on duals, but with all the possibilities of putting stuff wherever you want in your own body, and I think you could make a very useful, practical floorplan.

[Davydd]

I felt somewhat the regular body Sprinter was a tad too long as well after upgrading from the under 21 ft. T1N Sprinter. I bought a cargo carrier mainly to carry the inflatable kayaks but quickly abandoned that idea. However, I was on the road this year for 148 days and lots of miles coast to coast. What I wanted over my previous two Bs was more livability inside to endure long periods on the road. I wanted the versatility of carrying what I wanted all the time so the option of taking something or leaving something was out of the question. I also was trying to eliminate all double duty functions that required moving things around to accommodate livability. The idea of carrying outdoor things in the aisle was out as far as I was concerned.

The biggest problem with both the RB and EB Sprinter is straight in parking up to a curb. Both are too long. I'm thinking about those small strip centers where a coffee shop might be located or most stalls you find a fast food parking lots. Backing up over grass buffers both fit equally and do not stick out beyond the white lines.

[B Eventually]

Originally Posted by booster

Put an extra 6-8" of width on a Transit cutaway, when compared to a full van body, at the same 24' on duals, but with all the possibilities of putting stuff wherever you want in your own body, and I think you could make a very useful, practical floorplan.

They'd still ruin it with a slide.

[wincrasher]

Originally Posted by booster

Surprisingly, we don't use all the storage in our 190 Chevy, at least we haven't yet. If I have my folding bike inside it gets closer, but still not near capacity.

From my point of view, a 24' B is getting too big for a B, especially when on duals. At that point, I would rather have a small C, if they made one that was not so wide (some are now finally getting a bit narrower). A Roadtrek Chevy 210 sized vehicle, but on a cutaway with duals, would be something we would consider if we went bigger. The old Roadtrek 200 was really not a bad setup, and many folks still like them the best of all the models they ever made.

Put an extra 6-8" of width on a Transit cutaway, when compared to a full van body, at the same 24' on duals, but with all the possibilities of putting stuff wherever you want in your own body, and I think you could make a very useful, practical floorplan.

Periodically I'll post the european versions I find. They have several models that are basically on cut-aways, but the fiberglass body is no wider than the cab. But you get alittle more height and all the benefit of the slab sides. I think it would be a compelling segment if it was brought here to the states.

I'd really like to see Roadtrek update the 210 and build it on the Transit cutaway with the duals. Maybe a reinterpretation of this model to accomodate the shape of the Transit cab. But keep it to it's otherwise tidy dimensions.

[Davydd]

So far the Winnebago Fuse Transit is showing an 8 ft. wide floor plan but there specs say 7'-6" with footnote saying the 8 ft. floor plan was shown. I suspect the length is not correct either in saying it is 24 ft. long. That's kind of confusing. The only Class C that is 7'-6" wide seems to be the Promaster Trend. Leisure Travel Vans Unity is 7'-10" and the Libero and Serenity are listed as 8'-1". The Pleasure-way Plateau XL is 8'. Being basically boxes their awnings mounted on the side essentially add about 3-4" to the quoted width. They are also all over 10 ft. Those all are significantly larger dimensions than any Class B including the extended body Sprinter which I and Avanti have agreed pushes the limits.

[markopolo]

October 2015 Class B Shipment stats have been published on RVIA's site: The Recreation Vehicle Industry Association: RVIA Main Site Home

Shipments are down -0.4 (1 unit) compared to last October. They are up 7.2% year to date.

Oct 2015 Class B Shipments.JPG

185 more Class B vans have shipped this year compared to same time frame last year.