What's the best RV/motorhome aerodynamically?

[JacobAziza]

Originally Posted by Otto

My interest would be a self-contained motor home (not trailer) with 2 axles, best suited for highway efficiency rather than rugged conditions, that would comfortably sleep 2-4 people. This primarily for business use, where I may be sent to spend weeks at some small town, so could live in the motorhome rather than pay motel and restaurant bills. 2-4 person capacity would presumably have enough room for me to live in and use for office space.

For your purposes, I think you will be comfortable in something much smaller than you seem to think. I say this having lived in RVs since I was 18, from a 15ft camper van to a 35ft trailer. For one person, a week or so at a time, a regular sized van (like the old VW westfalia) is totally adequate. (I only upgraded when my girlfriend moved in with me.)

Diesel would be a plus, if conversion to biodiesel oil from restaurants were readily an option. Otherwise, diesels tend to run more expense, i.e., it would take many highway miles before the extra cost of the diesel were offset.

Diesels are more exspensive upfront, but they last longer, have fewer problems, and don't need as much (no tune-ups, no spark plugs or coils or distributors or carburetors.) They don't need to be smog-checked (at least in CA). They get better mileage. And, as you mentioned, you have the option of using waste oil. You may not use it all the time, but if you get a gasser, you won't ever be able to at all.

I just wrote a blog specifically for first time RV buyers. There is nothing in it about ecomodding (the most efficient RV is the one that stays parked!) but you will likely find some useful information in it:
Minor celebrity - Bakari's Personal Blog - Powered by Doteasy.com

[slowmover]

Gonna get off-track here a moment: JacobAziza,

I read the blog and watched the videos. There are assumptions about living in an RV that pertain only to a mild climate. In ones where summer temps do not fall below 85F for months, or winter where temps do not rise above 50F, an RV is hard pressed to maintain a comfortable indoor climate. RV appliances, second, are not built to (nor do they have to meet) the standards for housing. They are considered temporary use.

The electric use and rates charged are low, as is the park monthly fee. I've seen higher in most places AND higher electrical rates. Many would never allow the water collection system shown, for example.

You're luckier than you realize: mild climate, high income/education metro area, low ground rental, low electrical, wow! Many, many RV'ers would have to commute a great long distance to have such a low "housing expense" near a metro area. And suffer higher living expenses at least half the year due to energy consumption AND commuting expense.

And are the tires less than 5-years old? Brakes/bearings serviced yearly (trailer used on-road or not, it's a requirement), etc. Most states require annual inspections. How is insurance coverage. Etc (you needn't answer, your strategy speaks for itself, the rhetorical questions here are for others to consider).

Yes, they are cheap to get into. But on a square foot basis they are actually energy hogs compared to a house. There is no thermal mass, for instance. And while my gas-powered tank-style home water heater may be "inefficient" in the eyes of some, a tankless heater does not make for any savings were I to install one in my home. I've crunched the numbers more than once. In RV's I've only seen a few, approved, tankless installations. What Code was followed for non-standard installations? Etc.

Back to topic: A Westfalia (and similar) is good for a camping trip. For someone who needs, say, business clothing and samples or tools/equipment, it's pretty small, and quite limited in all fashions.

Especially if those four people have to stay indoors due to weather. What about A/C? If remote, what about electrical? "Boondocking" is do-able for about 1-2-3 days before inputs are needed (water, electrical, propane) (or output: sewer tanks). Yes, one can do much to extend remote camping, but not without a generator. And one that can run A/C will be well above $1k and need constant fuel replenishment plus oil/filter changes every day or every few days depending on use. For those interested the RV specific sites have a lot more information.

There is a point where an RV of a certain size is more livable than others. And it has to do with capacities of fresh water, sewer water storage, kitchen amenities (refrigerator/freezer size), etc. That there is a point that is too small. A CASITA trailer is recommended as a default choice for study in re space available for about two people.

For four or more, something larger is required where climate is not ideal, and the purpose of the trip is income related. Avoiding hotels is not as easy as it appears, for on a night-by-night basis they come out ahead. Catch a train or plane or bus, and get a room. No RV can match that, in general.

.

[JacobAziza]

I'm not making as many assumptions as you assume.
I've traveled in RVs.
I've lived in sub-freezing climates, had pipes freeze (before I learned about line heaters), shoveled snow off of the roof, surrounded my couch in foam insulation board, and run a small heater 24/7 (so cats wouldn't freeze while I was at work).
I've also lived places where its above 90 degrees for a week at a time, and run lots of A/C.
In both cases I still spent way less than a home does (in the same climate) on energy. By a factor of 10 or more, just like in the mild climate I finally settled in.

RV appliances meet the standards for RVs. "Temporary" or not, they have to be safe. And they are. Its not like a camping stove used indoors or something like that. And many of them ARE designed for long term use. They all have to meet the same minimum standards of safety (and a house appliance does not have to contend with being driven down the road everyday). And they FAR exceed the standards of a house appliance when it comes to efficiency.

I have lived in parks from CA to NJ (in New Jersey, about 15 miles outside of Manhattan). What I am paying now is the most expensive I've seen. Anything more expensive is probably either A) meant to be a temporary vacation spot, and charges by the day or B) a mobile home park (one which doesn't allow RVs anyway- some do, some don't)

Many parks would not allow my rain collection system. That is true. The fact that the owners aren't strict about cosmetic standards is one of the reasons I stay here and pay so much rent, when there are cheaper places not far away.

I have never heard of a requirement that tires need to be 5-years old or less. There are no annual inspections in CA, and you most certainly can register a vehicle as not currently driven over-the-road (such as when it is in storage) and then not pay insurance (or worry about inspections).

I have insurance anyway, because it covers not only crash damage and liability, but also storm damage, theft or damage to my possessions inside (or even in my shed), people getting hurt on my property, etc. Basically its comprehensive auto insurance + home owners insurance, built into one. It costs $300 per year.

I would believe that on a per square foot basis they are energy hogs. But that is irrelevant. The great advantage is that they are so small. Try to find a 250 square foot house or apartment. Average home size doubled over the past few decades, to about 10 times the size of my home, during which time average family size shrank. Most homes are like SUVs - few people actually need that much space, but it makes them feel better to have it, and who cares how wasteful it is?

I've done "boondocking" for a lot longer than 1-3 days without hookups (smaller RV than my current one, two people). Between 1 and 2 weeks, depending how careful we were. It does depend to some extent on the size of the RV (small ones usually have smaller tanks and batteries) - but the OP was talking about being in one solo, which means he could go twice as long.

A/C is really really nice when its hot. No doubt. But it is NOT a necessity. Realize that people actually lived in hot places before A/C was invented. Like, almost all of the 100,000 years humans existed, up until about 60 years ago. When we had it, and were off grid, we would run the generator to keep the A/C on for about 10 minutes, then leave it off for an hour and keep the doors closed. I never changed the filters, in 5 years. I always was planning to, never got around to it. My new rig has no generator, and I haven't missed it. In a motorhome that is used for travel, you can also use the engine A/C while in transit. If the climate is hot but dry, there are evaporation coolers that fit RV roof A/C cut-outs, that run on 12v.

For travel, you can stay in any WalMart parking lot, anywhere in the country, for free. Its store policy. You don't even have to be a customer. If it is a high enough MPG RV, gas cost can be comparable, or even lower than train or flight cost. Then, comparing the cost of $0 to a hotel, hmm...

Why, SlowMover, do you hate RVs so much?

[slowmover]

Why, SlowMover, do you hate RVs so much?


Pretty funny . . you read my other posts in this and other threads about RV's? Miss my point about "rhetorical"? I wasn't -- very specifically -- asking about your personal situation as it's none of my business. So accept my apologies, please.

RV's have limitations. Period. That many of us exceed them (abuse them) doesn't change that fact. I like them as well as you, probably. I'd be pleased to live full-time on the road. I have done so, and want to do so again. But I don't carry illusions about how cheap they are for those who are contemplating them for limited use. The initial cost plus financing, depreciation, repairs, maintenance, insurance and the rest involve more money than is at first apparent. The joke about square white boxes on wheels is that the finance note is longer in time than the RV will last.

So how often should I replace mine? 10 years? When it's 15-years old? And how much will I have spent over 30-years? Sure I've avoided the big fixed expenses of a house, but I also give up the opportunity to house more than a couple of people -- an extended family -- etc, etc. Even for a full-timer it's temporary unless one owns land in which case an RV is superfluous. I can build a tiny house and be better off.

So, yes, on a day-to-day basis the costs can be low with an RV. Can be. But aren't necessarily.

Sure, one can buy used (the only way I would do it), but at some point, say five years, it's going to be time to seal the roof, replace flooring and probably at least one appliance. Etc. They aren't well built for the most part, and whether on the road or sitting seems hardly to matter. One also needs experience in fixing automobiles and houses to be effective in keeping costs down. A desire to DIY. RV repair techs charge over $100/hour and are notoriously poor, as a group.

I don't know where you find your info on RV appliances. It's a monopoly market made up of two-three manufacturers. The cost of the item, the parts (and labor) are not cheap. Nor is the service life long in instances where use is constant. I've never had to pull apart a house-hold furnace to replace gaskets to insure an airtight seal, but I'd do it on any 5-year old RV furnace, used or not. Etc. Their "efficiency" is a function of their limited capacity (the refrigerator being an exception on life; but they're okay up to about 90F) and adequacy for a small space.

I think it would be an eye-opener to most folks of what it takes to keep an RV going in a cold winter. Condensation, alone, is a bear to deal with. Few RV's are built to deal with it. Very few. And the use is hard on them.

In further example I can order 5-tons worth of A/C off the Internet for my house for less than $2k. I can barely get [2] 15k roof A/C units for an RV for the same price. There isn't any question about which will perform better or last longer. And while you may have been able to run the A/C as you say, you certainly weren't on the Gulf Coast while doing it. (And any point about what people did prior to electricity is irrelevant. No one lived in the Old South in any great numbers prior to the advent of central A/C. Heat is more dangerous than cold; it's not just the greater prevalence of disease).

There's a trade-off with being mobile, here. And the trade-offs are acceptable for the most part. When understood.

I agree with most all your points, so why not you with mine? I would much rather be in an RV park (for the most part) than any apartment complex . . one is full of owners, the other with renters. That's a no-brainer. But there are plenty of "RV parks" that are also in lousy areas, far from public transportation or even a decent grocery store. There are fewer choices as to where to live in the first place.

So let's say I wander into a bargain "aerodynamic" motorhome for $10k that needs little or nothing beyond what I can DIY. At what point do I break even on the road versus train, plane, bus and low-dollar motel? It's a long way off. Very long way off.

For someone with a contract of X-months, one can apply some IRS deductions and cost projections to come to a reasonable number. Business depreciation schedules for the full time employed if purchased new. But for a vehicle that's only used a few weeks per year it's not viable on a purely numbers basis. It can be where the contemplated time frame is years, without other housing to pay for. That's the kicker.

And, hell, a single guy can sleep in the back of a van at the truck stop, if we want to talk cheap. Read my link above from Survivalblog?

The tire info is standard RV stuff: tires have a date code. You may wish to read up on the "5-year rule" for useful life per manufacturers (mileage is irrelevant).

The other big problem is in having a permanent address. One just doesn't, legally, for the most part. It's a grey area. One needs a congenial relative, somewhere.

And, in expecting an insurance company to pay proper compensation (I recommend photos of everything, and a tax program to chart/track) as RV's just don't get respect in the courts (no wonder, as most RV'ers not retired are not well-to-do folks . . and access to the courts in the USA for the poor is as bad as in Mexico or Albania). My point being that the homeowner -- the fabled "conventional" American -- can make assumptions about security of any sort that is not quite true for full-time RV dwellers. Policies of "stated" versus "actual" value should be investigated, as RV's are NOT homes for these important purposes.

I'm third generation as an owner of aerodynamic, all-aluminum travel trailers so I have some idea about this. I live on the hurricane-prone Gulf Coast, so I fully expect to pack up someday and skedaddle away with my "home", as the stick-built one will be gone on return.

(I should have previously said I admire -- I do -- your resourcefulness and ability to see beyond conventions. It's a game up to a point, and then it isn't, eh? )

To swing back around to the idea of "aerodynamic motorhome", it really is an oxymoron unless one is traveling 10-20,000 miles per year. Fuel cost is nearly irrelevant compared to all other costs. A trailer is superior in every respect on the issue of money, and some trailers are far better than others. One has a choice of tow vehicles when it is done properly. And that is, ultimately, where the fuel economy lays.

Since the idea is in this thread of making a living while being mobile some of you may recall this announcement last year:

IBM To Eliminate Permanent Employees

In evolutionary game theory, is my understanding, it is fated that other players will follow the successful lead of others. In Japan we already see a glut of temp workers who live in "coffin hotels":

Japanese Capsule Hotels

And here's a current American version:

American Temp Workers RV Life

I, for one, would rather be in an RV than in a hotel-coffin. The words I keep in mind are this:

"If it can be offshored, it will be. If it can be done online, so much the faster will it be sent away. If it can be outsourced, it will be. If it can be automated, it will be".

Even lawyers are losing their jobs to offshoring now. And read up on robotics and near-term projections for service industry automation.

As the middle class is now gone -- all the gains of the New Deal and later are now erased (fewer than 48% of homeowners now have equity in their homes, lower than in the Great Depression), it looks as though being able to be mobile has become paramount. Many, many Americans are trapped in houses they cannot sell. An RV -- properly chosen -- represents a back door. A way out, in some cases as "McJobs" come and go, since the other corporations -- large and small -- will divest themselves of any permanent employees.

One needs to be able to show up. Arbeit macht frei.

.

[Frank Lee]

I've been to several GMC (the cool fwd ones) ralleys at RV parks lately, because of an interest in potentially getting one, and to sample the RV lifestyle which I've not really ever done. I've found that RV parks are inevitably located on the worst pieces of real estate available. It is as if they seek to be close to
*interstate highways with convoys of semis streaking by all night and all day
*railroads, especially if there are crossings nearby that prompt the trains to sound their horns at all hours
*airports with lots and lots of traffic
Bonus points are awarded if any particular park does an excellent job of capturing the essence of all three of the above.

But I have some camping experience and I will say that RV appliances are crap, as well as all the extra cheap, flimsy, crappy, AND expensive plumbing fittings and... well, ANYTHING special to RVs.

[JacobAziza]

Originally Posted by slowmover

Why, SlowMover, do you hate RVs so much?

Pretty funny . . you read my other posts in this and other threads about RV's? Miss my point about "rhetorical"?

Yes, I know.
I didn't mean it literally.

...how cheap they are for those who are contemplating them for limited use. The initial cost plus financing, depreciation... the finance note is longer in time than the RV will last.

I would never suggest buying (any vehicle) new

So how often should I replace mine? 10 years? When it's 15-years old?

I have rarely seen a stationary full-timer with an RV less than 10 years old. Mine (at 14 years old) is the newest one in the park I live in. There are a few from the 60s here, at least

I also give up the opportunity to house more than a couple of people -- an extended family -- etc, etc.

Very true

Even for a full-timer it's temporary

Why?

unless one owns land in which case an RV is superfluous. I can build a tiny house and be better off.

Agreed

So, yes, on a day-to-day basis the costs can be low with an RV. Can be. But aren't necessarily.

Agreed

Sure, one can buy used (the only way I would do it), but at some point, say five years, it's going to be time to seal the roof, replace flooring and probably at least one appliance. Etc.

Roof, yes. Flooring, no. Appliance, not in 5 years, but maybe within 15.

They aren't well built for the most part, and whether on the road or sitting seems hardly to matter.

Sounds to me like you have had experience with particularly cheap and crappy RVs.

One also needs experience in fixing automobiles and houses to be effective in keeping costs down. A desire to DIY. RV repair techs charge over $100/hour and are notoriously poor, as a group.

Once again, agreed. But afterall, this is a website devoted to DIY auto modifications. So I take it for granted that we are all comfortable doing our own maintenance and repairs.

I don't know where you find your info on RV appliances. It's a monopoly market made up of two-three manufacturers. The cost of the item, the parts (and labor) are not cheap.

Granted - not that home appliances are cheap either...

Nor is the service life long in instances where use is constant.

That hasn't been my experience, in 11 years and 3 used RVs, nor does it seem to be the experience of any of my neighbors that I've been aware of.

In further example I can order 5-tons worth of A/C off the Internet for my house for less than $2k. I can barely get [2] 15k roof A/C units for an RV for the same price.

? RV roof unit only costs about $500. Which is more per BTU, but you don't need as much in an RV. So even if it is less cost efficient, you spend less total.

I agree with most all your points, so why not you with mine?

I agree with many of your points. Just that particular post struck me as needlessly and unrealistically pessimistic and anti-RV. And I wanted to answer some of those specific questions, like the one about insurance cost.
It is definitely true that they won't work for everyone, or in every circumstance, but I do think it could work for the purpose stated in the original post.

I would much rather be in an RV park (for the most part) than any apartment complex . . one is full of owners, the other with renters. That's a no-brainer. But there are plenty of "RV parks" that are also in lousy areas, far from public transportation or even a decent grocery store. There are fewer choices as to where to live in the first place.

Yup. Which sucks. I'm really lucky to be where I am.

So let's say I wander into a bargain "aerodynamic" motorhome for $10k that needs little or nothing beyond what I can DIY. At what point do I break even on the road versus train, plane, bus and low-dollar motel? It's a long way off. Very long way off.

There's a lot of variables, but figuring $200 plane tickets and $50 a night motels, travel once a week and nightly hotel stays, about 6 months.

But for a vehicle that's only used a few weeks per year it's not viable on a purely numbers basis. It can be where the contemplated time frame is years, without other housing to pay for. That's the kicker.

Possibly. You'd have to crank the numbers for the specific situation.

And, hell, a single guy can sleep in the back of a van at the truck stop, if we want to talk cheap. Read my link above from Survivalblog?

Granted. I suggested he consider a Class 'B', which is a step above a glorified van.

The tire info is standard RV stuff: tires have a date code. You may wish to read up on the "5-year rule" for useful life per manufacturers (mileage is irrelevant).

That's not an RV thing, its a general rule of thumb for all tires - although most manufactures say twice that long. Its just more relevant to RVs because they are more likely to sit unused for much of the year, and pass the use-by date before the tread wears out.

The other big problem is in having a permanent address. One just doesn't, legally, for the most part. It's a grey area. One needs a congenial relative, somewhere.

Depends how you do it. I have (almost) always had a legitimate permanent address.

And, in expecting an insurance company to pay proper compensation...Policies of "stated" versus "actual" value should be investigated, as RV's are NOT homes for these important purposes.

I've never had to use a full replacement policy, but my insurance company has been very responsive to claims.

(I should have previously said I admire -- I do -- your resourcefulness and ability to see beyond conventions. It's a game up to a point, and then it isn't, eh? )

Thanks!

I also agree with all the other stuff you said at the end.

[slowmover]

What befits a single man, versus a family, or a couple with dependent, elderly relatives -- all the while needing an RV to produce income -- have a major bearing on the use and lifespan of an RV. A conventional one, sitting, with a single person, receives little wear. A family of four, on the road 20k annually, is quite different. A good choice will stand up. An ordinary choice means an early loss of capital investment. Etc.

I have rarely seen a stationary full-timer with an RV less than 10 years old. Mine (at 14 years old) is the newest one in the park I live in. There are a few from the 60s here, at least

Plenty of parks now with ten year rule. Not a huge number, but it will grow. And stationary is not an RV in a manner of speaking. An RV has to be roadworthy. Few conventionally-framed RV's are after a too-soon reached point in time or miles. The average life is expected to be 15-years, but this also assumes less than 60k miles in total. A good one will go in excess of 200k.



RVIA (Recreational Vehicle Industry Association) says, ”Statistics indicate that the average life of an RV tire is five to seven years.“


This also assumes 5k miles annually, not sitting. Tires not rotated (vehicle moving) deteriorate that much faster (beyond ozone, geography, climate, etc). After five years tires are a crapshoot. MICHELIN will tell you that after five years they need inspection by a qualified dealer (who should remove and inspect interior, not just exterior). A big mistake to treat this casually. One good blowout and it's bye-bye RV (in too many instances; being totaled by insurance). Etc.



While some people use their RVs to chase work while seeing America, others simply live in their RVs and commute to their regular job. Some travel from place to place trading their work for a free campsite. But how many there are is anyone’s guess. Anywhere from 25,000 to 250,000 working Americans travel around in RVs, motoring from state-to-state and job-to-job to earn a paycheck, according to Arkansas-based Workamper News, a website that caters to RV migrants.

“We definitely know that work camping is alive, well and growing in numbers,” Workamper News owner Steve Anderson said. “I know that because our subscriber base continues to grow.”

The biggest national RV trade organization, the Recreation Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) in Reston, Va., does not keep statistics on RV owners who travel from job-to-job. Spokesman Kevin Broom estimated that 400,000-800,000 people live full time on the road in an RV. “Many are also working,” he said.

Full Time in RV

Those are pre-crash numbers.

Temp jobs now a permanent part of economy; no family wage jobs created since 2000

There aren't many RV's worthy of the definition long-lasting, low operational cost, and good road performance. Even understanding limitations -- which are a result of being mobile -- one should be careful, and diligent, in searching out the right one. Start homework early. With structural economic changes, an RV may be a good choice. But the wrong one, or the wrong plan, can break you (if times are tight) and one has placed this bet.

.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Otto

Check this out:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...=rep1&type=pdf

Esp. see configurations G and H, with CD <0.25 and wheels/tires not optimized, plus sharp roof edges. Basic brick with wheels, streamlined.

Otto,a very late thanks for the link.I was at Edwards when NASA was doing this but only got glimpses.Didn't have access to their work until fairly recently.
My little home-made smoke tunnel came up with about the same solution in 1979 and was basis for the VW Transporter project my senior year.
I've had the boat-tail bug ever since.And I still own the Transporter and may re-visit the project,along with some extra whistles and bells.
The Beechcraft Bonanza fuselage might be the perfect travel companion for it as a 1-wheel trailer.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Otto

This thing is the working definition of what NOT to do, aerodynamically,

Modification of it would start with a trip to the crusher, a la Breaking Bad episode a couple of weeks ago.

Now, does anybody know of any RV or truck sorta like the Ultravan, i.e., designed with at least some aerodynamic efficiency in mind, of, say the past 20 years? I have in mind a search for a good used RV motorhome, with nice gentle curvature in its sheet metal sorta like a VW microbus, only bigger.

I can't bring much to the table ( and I do try to look for such things ),but haven't seen anything that stands out.
One member is driving a Daimler/Chrysler Sprinter - based motorhome,and if they'll do 25-mpg as a delivery van that might be a reasonable starting point.
I found literature for something like the 'Rayvette' motorhome,out of Phoenix,AR,but I think the company folded before it ever got going.The body was well conceived.Extremely good fore-body,flanks completely faired in.She would have matched or exceeded the Vixen aerodynamically except for frontal area.

[star_deceiver]

Originally Posted by JacobAziza

For travel, you can stay in any WalMart parking lot, anywhere in the country, for free. Its store policy. You don't even have to be a customer.

Not quite... For all wal-marts, overnight parking is a management decision. And there are some cities, counties where there's legislation in place prohibiting overnight parking!

Approved overnight parking: Walmart Locations - Wal-Mart Guide Click on the state/province in question

No overnight parking: Walmart No Overnight Parking Stores Locations Map - Wal-Mart Guide

Here's what I travel with. 1976 Parklane. Paid $200 for it.





The Vibe gets decent mileage towing it. Nothing spectacular but much better then any truck or SUV! It can be insulated to be warm in to -20C or opened up to survive 40C+. It has 2 space heaters, no A/C, propane stove. I use the beer fridge from my living room when on longer trips IF I'm stopping or staying somewhere that has electricity.

Security??? There's nothing of value in there and it can be lowered easily... and as they say, "One takes their chances when parking and camping at walmart".