As I posted earlier, we just weighed our 95 300. Anyhow, I was looking at Barry's weight chart and just comparing our current numbers with those from our 99 320. Pretty interesting. The 95 300 is a 40 footer and the 99 was a 36 (imagine it still is). We carry the same stuff in the 95 as we did in the 99 and both were full of fuel, water and propane with empty gray and blacks at the time of weighing.
The 99 320 36' unit had a GVWR of 34,880. Ours weighed 29,940.
The 95 300 40' unit has a GVWR of 30,000 and weighs 28,910.
I wonder how they figure these capacities. The engines are similar (ISM vs. M11); water, gray and black are the same; 40 gallons more fuel in the 99 but a much smaller LP tank.
Just another thing to ponder.
jor
Thicker sidewalls, dual pane windows, curved ducted roof.....sounds like a thousand pounds worth?
Bob
Bob,
So the sidewalls are actually thicker on a 99? Thanks for that info. But how about the really big difference in GVW? What accounts for that? Thanks.
jor
Sounds like a heavier front axle/tires as the rear is at the limit at 20k?
Rv limits have been raised? 22k now?
Bob
One would think the '99 would be lighter since it's 36 feet, but I can see the bus style front being heavier - it encloses more volume and cabinets.
It's funny how the weight of coaches seems to grow year after year - and across all manufactures too. Seems no mater what changes are made from one model year to the next it always adds a few pounds here and there.
I don't hold against them, I've been know to add a few pounds myself as the years pass.
The 99u320 also carries close to 200 gallons of fuel.