Log In | Register
Skip to main content
Topic: Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir (Read 4 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir
Yahoo Message Number: 23772
Larry, in a post a while back you mentioned your MaxxAir covers had been "modified for much greater airflow".  Specifically, what modifications did you make?  I looked on your great enhancement site but did not find anything.

Chris Horst
Formerly: 2002 30' IB
Re: Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir
Reply #1 –
Yahoo Message Number: 23782
"in a post a while back you mentioned your MaxxAir covers had been "modified for much greater airflow".  Specifically, what modifications did you make?"

Chris
 The vents come with a removable bug screen. I threw this out and then used a utility knife to open the spaces between the fins.
The fan was still too restricted (you could hear it) and I mention this in a posting. Steve (aq433) suggested spacing the cover up to increase the inlet area by pulling air under the bottom edges of the cover. It was another "Duh" moment in my life.
There are 4, 1/4-20 bolts and nuts that hold the cover to the angle brackets which attached to the vent. I replace these bolts with ones about ½" longer and added ½" spacers. Lifting the vent half an inch added 25-30 square inches of inlet area and the difference was immediately noticeable.
The Maxxair vent covers were not intended to be used over Fantastic Fans but I did not have a choice. I had removed the stock bath fan and replaced it with a Fantastic Fan. The bath vent on my 23.5 FL is too close to the rear handrail to use a Maxxair Fanmate or a Turbomax Fan. I had to use the Maxxair on the bath fan because of the space restriction and it needed trimming to fit. I ended up buying two Maxxair covers when CW had a 2 for $25 sale.  The Maxxair Fanmate cost around $80, so I figured I would try the cheaper cover first.
After the modifications, they are acceptable. I have used them in wind driven rain without problems.

Larry
Larry
2003 23.5' Front Lounge, since new.  Previously 1983 22' Front Lounge.
Tow vehicles  2020 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, 2001 Jeep Cherokee
Photo Collection: Lazy Daze
Re: Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir
Reply #2 –
Yahoo Message Number: 23790
Quote
Larry, in a post a while back you mentioned your MaxxAir covers had been "modified for much greater airflow".  Specifically, what modifications did you make?  I looked on your great enhancement site but did not find anything.

Chris Horst
The inexpensive Maxxair covers have a pop-out screen which is redundant, and they can be mounted higher off the roof for more airflow underneath.

Steve
2004 FL
2013 Honda Fit
Re: Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir
Reply #3 –
Yahoo Message Number: 23817
"The inexpensive Maxxair covers have a pop-out screen which is redundant, and they can be mounted higher off the roof for more airflow underneath."

I don't consider the screen redundant except from the standpoint of having a screen on the vent itself. There is certainly a good reason for it being on the vent to begin with and there's also a good reason why they have you mount it low to the roof as suggested by MaxxAir.
Both keep wasps or other nest building insects from making nests inside the cover and mounting it low to the roof also keeps torrential and driving rain from splashing up into the vent, one of the main purposes for them in the first place. If you do modify them and mount them higher for increased airflow you need to keep these things in mind and decide if the pros of doing so out weigh the cons for your particular situation. It is always better to use the FanMate for any vent with a high performance fan. For the standard bathroom fan a standard MaxxAir cover is fine as is.

Mike R.
Re: Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir
Reply #4 –
Yahoo Message Number: 23820
"I don't consider the screen redundant except from the standpoint of having a screen on the vent itself. There is certainly a good reason for it being on the vent to begin with and there's also a good reason why they have you mount it low to the roof as suggested by MaxxAir.
Both keep wasps or other nest building insects from making nests inside the cover and mounting it low to the roof also keeps torrential and driving rain from splashing up into the vent"

Mike
 Raising the cover, a 1/2" has not caused leakage problems in driving rain in our experience. The lip of the vent is much higher than that.
If the wind if strong enough, it can blow water through any vent cover, flush mounted or not. For whatever reason, wasp and other insect nests do not seem to be an issue here in Southern California.
 The reason I installed the standard Maxxair was the lack of available space. The Fanmate is much longer and would not clear the rear roof handrail. The ridiculous price difference is enough of an incentive to try making the cheaper Maxxair work. CW charges $22 for the Maxxair and $72 for the Fanmate. I have looked at both and the Fanmate is not a complicated cover to manufacture, certainly not to make it cost over three times as much. There is a lot of profit in it.

Larry
Larry
2003 23.5' Front Lounge, since new.  Previously 1983 22' Front Lounge.
Tow vehicles  2020 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, 2001 Jeep Cherokee
Photo Collection: Lazy Daze
Re: Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir
Reply #5 –
Yahoo Message Number: 23826
Larry, First of all your situation is different than most and as I said everyone contemplating using a modified standard cover for a high performance fan needs to weigh the pros and cons for their particular situation. The Fan/Mate was not an option that would work for you due to location. In fact it looks like you did other modifications to allow even the standard MaxxAir vent to be installed from the photos I looked at. In Fl and many areas wasps and other nest building pests can be a problem to consider.

The standard covers used to cost a lot more also before they became as popular. Economies of scale have caused the price to come way down. They make and sell a lot more of them so the price to manufacture is lower. The cheaper MaxxAir cover price is also only on the white cover, the smoke color costs a lot more for the same reason the Fan/Mate does. Even the shell color is more but not as much as the smoke.
 Neither can really cost much to make but shipping and storage as well as not being as big a seller make the Fan/Mate more expensive for both MaxxAir and resellers. Look at the box size compared to the weight and compare it to the standard cover. UPS charges more for shipping because of that and so do most carriers. The Fan/Mate is also twice the size and the Model 800 CW sells has other things making it cost more to manufacture as well. For those that don't need the screen and louvers they have a cheaper Model 400, though CW doesn't sell it. Camper's Choice sells the Model 800 cheaper than CW also. The Model 400 is only about double the standard cover price; again it's double the size so you should expect double the price.
It's less than double the price of the smoke covers. Both cost extra to ship from any supplier due to size of the box; it's what UPS considers "oversize". MaxxAir makes a good profit on either of these covers when you think about it.

Let's not forget the extra time taken to modify the standard cover and possible extra parts some may need to do it. Time is money and takes away from time you can be doing other things. The Fan/Mate does cost a lot more but it is better suited for the Fantastic fan or other high performance fans as is out of the box. Fantastic doesn't even want people to use the Fan/Mate! However they do say if you are going to use a cover they are the type you SHOULD use. Of course only if you can in your particular situation!

Mike R.
Re: Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir
Reply #6 –
Yahoo Message Number: 23828
Quote
I don't consider the screen redundant except from the standpoint of having a screen on the vent itself. There is certainly a good
reason

I can testify that torrential rains are not a problem. Frequent winter trips along the soggy northern CA coast with the vent always open, water does not come in. That includes a Pineapple Express in Half Moon Bay with gusts to 60 mph which was driving rain past the sliding window frames, and the bath stayed dry and ventilated. Wasps seem to like the fridge area and have nosed around the water heater, but the fan-forced airflow above the FF has never attracted them to settle.
 Even in standard trim, the cover does not mount flush with the roof, so the screen won't keep out much. Perhaps if installed over a fanless vent, it will keep out the worst of the June bug hordes.
Redundant with a FF, though.

Steve
2004 FL
2013 Honda Fit
Re: Question for Larry (LW5315us) re MaxxAir
Reply #7 –
Yahoo Message Number: 23866
Quote
The vents come with a removable bug screen. I threw this out and then used a utility knife to open the spaces between the fins.
The fan was still too restricted (you could hear it) and I mention this in a posting. Steve (aq433) suggested spacing the cover up to increase the inlet area by pulling air under the bottom edges of the cover. > Larry
Larry and Steve, thanks for your reponses.  On our 2002 30', I have MaxxAirs on the two vents without fans.  I did these before putting fans on the two fanned vents (small fans) to see how they worked.
In recent heavy rainstorms they performed well, especially when I could crack the Fantastic vent just enough that it activated.  I have two more MaxxAir vents which I will put on the small fan vents and will probably use your suggestions of removing the screens and raising thee covers up a bit for better circulation.  One benefit of leaving the screens on the unfanned vents is that they prevent small bugs and maybe noseeums from getting the coach via the unscreened space around the crank.  However, using some innovation, I suppose those spaces could be plugged somehow.  Also, pretty sure I will eventually get a cover for the Fantasic fan.

Chris
Formerly: 2002 30' IB