30' LDs' Rating in RVCG January 18, 2005, 09:33:13 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49587QuoteLazydaze is one of only two Class C's that earned it in 2003 According to the December 2003 RVCG CD I have, there are 3 Class C's that earn the 5-star rating: Born Free, Lazy Daze, PlatinumQuoteIf these ratings have really changed that drastically between the 2001 Book, and the 2003 Book, I would want to know why. Does anyone have the current rating for the 30' LDs? I am not currently a member of RVCG, as we are not in the market for a new RV. Sharon, I don't really have an answer for you. According to my December 2003 RVCG CD, the 1998, 1999, and 2000 30' LD's all had 5-star ratings. The 2001 and 2002 had 4-1/2 stars, and the 2003 had 3-1/2 stars. I don't really know why the 30' LD's have gone down in the ratings -- that's a question that really needs to be asked of J.D. Gallant. I don't have the rating book that is a companion to the CD, so don't have ALL the information (for example, the CD doesn't include the wheelbase-to-length ratio that was always included in the book). I did note that the earlier 5-star rated 30' LD's showed the length as 30' while the later ones say 31' and the payload figures go down.Linda & Earl 2004 23.5' Red TK From Quartzsite, AZ
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #1 – January 18, 2005, 10:49:19 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49593[snip]Quote Sharon, I don't really have an answer for you. According to my December 2003 RVCG CD, the 1998, 1999, and 2000 30' LD's all had 5- star ratings. The 2001 and 2002 had 4-1/2 stars, and the 2003 had 3- 1/2 stars. I don't really know why the 30' LD's have gone down in the ratings -- that's a question that really needs to be asked of J.D. Gallant. I don't have the rating book that is a companion to the CD, so don't have ALL the information (for example, the CD doesn't include the wheelbase-to-length ratio that was always included in the book). I did note that the earlier 5-star rated 30' LD's showed the length as 30' while the later ones say 31' and the payload figures go down.Quote Linda & Earl 2004 23.5' Red TK From Quartzsite, AZ Linda & Earl, thanks for the information. Now I AM concerned! I definitely want to know why the 30'LDs have dropped in the RVCG ratings. I don't recall seeing this in any LD advertizing. The "30'"LDs are, actually, 368" long, bumper-to-bumper (30'9"), plus 2" for the rear spare tire cover and 2" for the ladder. RVCG measures bumper-to-bumper, as I recall. Even being this exact, the 368" vs 211" wheelbase come out to a 57% ratio, which would have been rated at the top of the "Good" range (54-57%).I still think LD would have a winner if they moved to a larger CC chassis for the 30' models. Perhaps they don't want more business than they currently have.Sharon N.
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #2 – January 19, 2005, 10:44:39 am Yahoo Message Number: 49614QuoteIf these ratings have really changed that drastically between the 2001 Book, and the 2003 Book, I would want to know why. Does anyone have the current rating for the 30' LDs? I am not currently a member of RVCG, as we are not in the market for a new RV. --------- The 4th quarter 2004 RVCG CD shows ratings for 30' LD: 2003-2005 as 3.5 stars, 1996 Ford & 2001-2 as 4.5 stars, 1997-2000 as 5 stars 1996 Chevy as 3 stars,The difference appears to be the highway control ratings which are 78, 87 and 91-94 for 3.5, 4.5 and 5 stars, respectively. These ratings are driven by wheelbase-to-length (W/L) and payload-to- capacity (P/C) ratios, which are 57/9, 59/9, 59/11 and the '96 Chevy with 53/13. Value and Reliability are all 93-95. Obviously, Hwy Control is major determinant in star rating, with W/L being very important. I've tried to tabulate this below, hope it works.Stars......Hwy Cntl............W/L...........P/C 5..............91+.............59.............11 4.5............88..............59..............9 3.5........... 78..............57..............9 3..............71..............53.............13
Re: [Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #3 – January 19, 2005, 11:48:31 am Yahoo Message Number: 49620Sharon, I think you shouldn't be overly concerned by a small change in the ratings. I would suggest that you try to talk or email with current 30 ft owners and query them as to how they feel about their units. There is a yahoo grouphttp://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/THE_LAZY_DAZE_30_FT_ISLAND_BED/with over 200 members.Jerry Thompson
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #4 – January 19, 2005, 02:17:21 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49625I may be wrong but based on my research EVERY 30 foot RV from EVERY manufacturer that is built on an extended Ford-45o cutaway chassis is overloaded the second you put almost anything into it.
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #5 – January 21, 2005, 12:12:07 am Yahoo Message Number: 4971049614 From: biker06365 Date: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:43am Subject: [Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG[snip]biker06365,Thank you for taking the time to post the figures and table. I do appreciate it!Sharon N.
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #6 – January 21, 2005, 12:14:49 am Yahoo Message Number: 49711Jerry Thompson, in MSG #49620, wrote:"Sharon,I think you shouldn't be overly concerned by a small change in the ratings."[snip]Jerry, I think this is a significant change in the ratings. What concerns me is that the 30' LD models haven't changed THEIR specs, (except for the Chevy model, which is no longer being built.) The RVCG has either changed their method of rating, or the information they received that they based their calculations on was incorrect. Based on the current rating, I would not have even considered a 30' LD, which would have been unfortunate, as our '02 has proven to be an excellent over-the-road vehicle. It has great handling characteristics, and is a pleasure to drive.Sharon N.
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #7 – January 21, 2005, 12:18:31 am Yahoo Message Number: 49712bobsiegely, in MSG #49625, wrote: "I may be wrong but based on my research EVERY 30 foot RV from EVERY manufacturer that is built on an extended Ford-45o cutaway chassis is overloaded the second you put almost anything into it."I can't speak for ALL 30' RVs on the extended Ford chassis, but the LD certainly isn't. It doesn't have the payload I'd like to see, but I do think it is honestly represented by LD, unlike many other RV manufacturers. Before I ordered ours I sent for a Deal Data Report on it from RVCG. The report, dated 11/6/2001, said that with an UVW of approx. 12,150 lbs. (with options and full engine fuel) and an estimated curb weight (wet weight) of 12,698 lbs. (with LPG and fresh water full), it should have a payload capacity for persons and supplies of approx. 1,352 lbs. That has proven to be adequate for our needs.Of course, if a new chassis became available with a higher capacity (currently 14,050 pounds), and had an adequate wheelbase / total length ratio, LD could plunk the current 30' body on it and boast of a huge payload capacity. It would make a great fulltiming model. Other RV manufacturers could do the same, but they'd add on three or four slideouts, basement storage, and hot and cold running maid service, which would cut into their CC significantly.Sharon N.
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #8 – January 21, 2005, 06:37:27 am Yahoo Message Number: 49716Quote"....Of course, if a new chassis became available with a higher capacity.... LD could plunk the current 30' body on it and boast of Quotea huge payload capacity. It would make a great fulltiming model. Other RV manufacturers could do the same, but they'd add on three or our slideouts, basement storage, and hot and cold running maidQuoteservice, which would cut into their CC significantly!" Sharon: That was a good one... It's almost a joke, but right in the target !Eudoro "this basement storage is responsible for my 280lbs." Lemos, Jr. I need a re-design by the Newtons!
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #9 – January 21, 2005, 12:21:43 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49737I stand corrected. Your numbers look pretty good. LD's specs show 757 pounds of carrying capacity
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #10 – January 21, 2005, 01:23:15 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49744Quote If these ratings have really changed that drastically between the 2001 Book, and the 2003 Book, I would want to know why. Does anyone have the current rating for the 30' LDs? --------- The 4th quarter 2004 RVCG CD shows ratings for 30' LD: 2003-2005 as 3.5 stars, 1996 Ford & 2001-2 as 4.5 stars, 1997-2000 as 5 stars 1996 Chevy as 3 stars,The difference appears to be the highway control ratings which are 78, 87 and 91-94 for 3.5, 4.5 and 5 stars, respectively. These ratings are driven by wheelbase-to-length (W/L) and payload-to- capacity (P/C) ratios, which are 57/9, 59/9, 59/11 and the '96 Chevy with 53/13. Value and Reliability are all 93-95. Obviously, Hwy Control is major determinant in star rating, with W/L being very important. I've tried to tabulate this below, hope it works.Stars......Hwy Cntl............W/L...........P/C 5..............91+.............59.............11 4.5............88..............59..............9 3.5........... 78..............57..............9 3..............71..............53.............13 ---- Keep in mind that the way Gallant defines "Highway Control" it includes a LOT more than just how much you have to struggle to keep the coach between the lines and "green side up," or perhaps I should say, "white side up." The steering characteristics (what you and I normally consider to be what "Highway Control" means) are primarily a function of the W/L ratio. In this regard all 30's on the 14,050 lb Ford chassis rate from very good to excellent. They should not WANDER. (My current coach, a 28' Jayco, has a W/L of 54% and I view its lack of steering control as dangerous, due to frequently unexpected and unpredictable wandering. It took a SafetyPlus steering stabilizer, a Hellwig HD rear sway bar, and HD Bilsteins before I felt I was actually in control -- most of the time.) :-( "Highway Control" also means the ability to STOP. This is where that pesky 9% payload hurts the rating. Gallant feels it is so low that a "careless" owner could EASILY overload the braking system. (Don't argue with ME on this, I said this is how Gallant views the situation -- he similarily downgrades class A coaches where 9% is way over a TON of payload. Personally, I feel he needs to do a little better job in this area, but if you read his book and his ratings carefully -- no scanning allowed -- they contain a lot of EXTREMELY valuable information.) Also, keep in mind that the braking ability doesn't simply "fall off a cliff" when you exceed the GVWR. It gradually gets worse as the GVW increases, until, when the GVWR is finally exceeded, it has deteriorated to the point that the manufacturer says it is no longer safe because the vehicle will not stop within the manufacturer's test requirements. In this regard, the 9% payload is a problem, i.e., significantly less braking ability than if it weighed 1000 lb less (well, da!)."Highway Control" also means the ability to maneuver quickly at speed. The greater the weight, the less manueverable, other things remaining the same. Simply put, the 30' ain't gunna be no sports car. But it's significantly lower center of gravity than most 30' should make it about the best of the worst. :-)Another thing that causes the "Highway Control" rating to take a beating is stuff that Gallant views as dangerous to the passengers in the event of a serious highway crash -- stuff like that big TV in the overhead (he absolutely hates 'em.) (And it also raises the center of gravity, slightly.) He feels that when that big TV starts bouncing around inside the coach it can do more damage to the occupants than the actual crash, and I would add, especially in a coach as inherently safe as a LD. He has inspected a lot of crashes and draws his conclusions from what he has seen. Anyone care to argue with him? (When I get my 30' one of the first things I intend to do is see if I can find some way to tie that thing down solidly.)In closing, I would like to comment on someone's comment, somewhere in this thread, that if they had known the newer 30's were only rated 3.5 stars they never would have even considered one (or something like that.) In light of the above discussion, I hope you can see that that could have been a most unwise decision. Gallant makes a big deal out of NOT just looking at his "star" ratings, but instead, carefully looking at all the data/information he has presented. It is important to note that a lot of this information is found more or less burried in his book "How to Select, Inspect, and Buy an RV" and is nowhere to be found on the CDs. You have to dig to get it.So in summary, for the 30': 1- Steering control should not be a problem as long as it is sitting on the 14,050 Ford chassis. Steering control did NOT contribute to the lower "Highway Control" rating, in fact it is a major contributor to the rating being as high as it is. 2- Braking is not going to be as good as for a lighter motorhome (and the lightest motorhome won't brake as well as a car.) Most drivers will adjust to that automatically. Reduced braking hurt the "Highway Control" rating. 3- Manueverability at higher speeds is not going to be as good as for a lighter motorhome, but the low center of gravity helps offset some of this. Reduced high speed manueverability hurt the "Highway Control" rating. 4- That big overhead TV could be very dangerous if you are ever unfortunate enough to be involved in a high speed crash, especially if you roll over. The overhead TV hurt the "Highway Control" rating.
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #11 – January 21, 2005, 01:37:27 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49745I know there are skeptics on this ... but ... I found that adding a safe-t-plus steering damper and upgrading both front and rear sway bars produced a BIG improvement in handling and less driver fatigue. My total cost was about $1600. 2004 26.5 MB
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #12 – January 21, 2005, 01:43:41 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49746Quote "...and (presumably) taking on at least two humans..." BobIf I'm not mistaken, the factory's specifications call for "all sleeping positions" to be filled when the CCC is calculated. So, if your rig is designed to sleep four people but you normally transport only two, you can deduct the weight of two people to come up with an adjusted CCC. That also holds for less than a full tank of fresh water.Steve S. Lazy Bones
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #13 – January 21, 2005, 02:09:23 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49747Quote "...stuff like that big TV in the overhead (he absolutely hates 'em.)..." "...(When I get my 30' one of the first things I intend to do is see if I can find some way to tie that thing down solidly.)..." "...4- That big overhead TV could be very dangerous..."GharndenYou apparently have not had the opportunity to see the new LCD flat screen (Sharp Aquos) TVs that are in current usage. My 2004 30' IB has one and I for one do not know how it would be humanly possible to anchor it down any more securely than it is. And if I recall correctly, the specs say it only weighs 14 pounds. It's not your Grandfather's TV.Steve S. Lazy Bones
[Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #14 – January 21, 2005, 11:50:30 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49755[snip] "Eudoro "this basement storage is responsible for my 280lbs." Lemos, Jr. I need a re-design by the Newtons!"Unfortunately, Eudoro, I also have excess basement storage, and I don't think the Newtons can help me! ;^)Sharon N.
Re: [Life With A Lazy Daze RV] Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #15 – January 23, 2005, 08:06:12 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49795On Fri, 2005-01-21 at 18:21 +0000, bobsiegely wrote:Quote I stand corrected. Your numbers look pretty good. LD's specs show 757 pounds of carrying capacity in the 30 footer after filling all the tanks and (presumably) taking on at least two humans. That should be sufficient for most of us. I am certain that LD would not build and sell any coach unless it was safe and handled well. Bob, Actually, the LD Coach Specifications by the CCC say: "Allowable weight for food, personal items and supplies. Gas tank, fresh water tank and L.P. tank are full. All sleeping positions occupied. NOTE: Installed accessories and towed vehicle tongue weight will reduce C.C.C." Elsewhere in the Coach Specification it is mentioned that they allow 154 lbs/sleeping position. So, some of those passengers better be little kids. Anyway, if there are only two traveling, there's more CCC. Unless, of course, on the 30 footers with 4 sleeping positions, each of the two travelers weigh over 300 pounds.Alex '05MB GonnabeeP.S. Greetings from another retired IBMer!
Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #16 – January 24, 2005, 06:29:54 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49828Quote You apparently have not had the opportunity to see the new LCD flat screen (Sharp Aquos) TVs that are in current usage. My 2004 30' IB has one and I for one do not know how it would be humanly possible to anchor it down any more securely than it is. And if I recall correctly, the specs say it only weighs 14 pounds. It's not your Grandfather's TV. You're right, Steve, I haven't seen the new flat screen TV, so I don't know how well it is anchored down. IF it doesn't come loose, it obviously won't create a problem. But if it does come loose, please don't think, for even a fleeting moment, that 14 lbs of glass and relatively sharp corners, trying to occupy the same spot on the planet that you are in, isn't going to make you wish you were three other places (and when it gets done with you, you just may be.) True, given nothing but bad choices, I'd rather get hit by a 14 lb projectile than a 50 lb projectile, but that in no way deminishes the danger associated with 14 lbs. (Come to think of it, that coffee maker, which weighs a lot less than 14 lbs, probably didn't earn any points either, and for basically the same reason.) I hope my response doesn't make anyone think that the overhead TV is the ONLY reason the newer 30's have reduced a "Highway Control" rating. I personally believe the 9% payload is the major factor. Observation: One area where Gallant doesn't do a good job at all is in this payload area. He has defined what it is, and he rates the coaches based on that definition. He is very consistent, based on what I have seen, however, and here is the problem, he doesn't stress to his customers, that certain coaches, like LD, have a ton (literally) of standard equipment that is all figured into the payload, while many other coaches do not. (Payload is based on the weight of the coach with NO options.) Therefore, for example, the 29' Bigfoots show a much larger payload (12%-13%) than the 30'LD and earns a higher "Highway Control" rating (84-85 or 4 star). But if you add OPTIONS to the Bigfoot like A/C, generator, awning, electric step, etc., the payload goes to zero! (And so would their star rating, if it included optional equipment.) I had been seriously looking at the Bigfoot until I got the weights, from the factory, for all of the options I wanted. I ended up with a CCC of 21 lbs (honest injun!) I asked the factory guy to verify that I hadn't made a mistake in my calculations -- he said they were correct. Compare that to the 757 lb CCC of the LOWER rated 30' LD. It would be extremely helpful if Gallant would give a rating with some (hypothetical) list of standard equipment so folks didn't get fooled by this optional equipment game. (Easy for me to say -- I don't have to pay for all the extra man hours required to do that!) Despite this (major) problem, Gallant provides a very valuable service to us, and I will continue to support him completely.
Re: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG Reply #17 – January 24, 2005, 09:27:19 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49839Quote You apparently have not had the opportunity to see the new LCD flat screen (Sharp Aquos) TVs that are in current usage. My 2004 30' IB has one and I for one do not know how it would be humanly possible to anchor it down any more securely than it is. And if I recall correctly, the specs say it only weighs 14 pounds. It's not your Grandfather's TV.You're right, Steve, I haven't seen the new flat screen TV, so I don't know how well it is anchored down. IF it doesn't come loose,Quoteit obviously won't create a problem. Trust me, it won't come loose.bumper
Topic: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG (Read 11 times)
previous topic - next topic
Topic: 30' LDs' Rating in RVCG (Read 11 times)
previous topic - next topic