Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: What would you recommend (Read 1352 times) previous topic - next topic

What would you recommend

Hi Everyone
  We're long time RV'rs using a custom built 1976 GMC.  It's time for some serious upgrades or time to move on. The only replacement MH I would consider is a Foretravel and I've never been in one. Is that bias or what?
  At any rate I'm not smart enough about Foretravels to choose a model that fits our needs and if there isn't one please tell me.
  We're mountain hikers, travel long distances, move often, and find ourselves
in very remote areas traveling down some awful roads.  A toad won't help us much
since we would often be too far from mother ship to return for the night and we would  find ourselves doing a lot of backtracking. 
  The early 90's narrow body models might work for us; not sure about the 102" wide body, but I've never been in one much less driven one.
  Any recommendations or are we crazy?  Thanks in advance, Bob & Bethe

One more thought, We've found a great 5th wheel which satisfies our remote area  driving needs, but long distance driving in a PU truck is not appealing. 
 
Bob & Bethe

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #1 –
Bob,
 
I can't answer many of your questions.  We've been on one or two of those roads you describe and did not like subjecting our Foretravel to that kind of abuse.  A guess on my part is that you want the shortest length possible for better maneuverability.
 
I look forward to seeing what others suggest.
 
George
George Stoltz.  Retired from full-time living in a great Foretravel and now are back to living in a traditional sticks and bricks in Florida.

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #2 –
Bob and Bethe. My first Foretravel was a 36 foot narrow body 1994 U 240 with a Caterpillar engine and I believe an Allison 6 speed transmission. It had the Firestone Torsilastic Suspension. I drove it from East Tennessee to Alaska, up the Alaska Highway and back down the Chessier Highway. I remember specifically maneuvering it thru one of the tight parks near Waterton Lakes. It handled beautifully. I had a Honda motorscooter mounted on the hitch. No problems getting on and off ferries, we came back by way of Vancouver Island. I remember going places that our companions in a 40 foot Newmar Kountry Star kept getting stuck. It was a fine piece of machinery.
No RV! Have hung up the keys.
In the past: 2016 Winnebago Era, 1994 Foretravel U240, 1995 Foretravel U240 (wide body), 1999 Foretravel 320, 36 Foot, 2003 Foretravel U320 38 foot,

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #3 –
Hey George, I understand your concern.  I should have been more specific.  I meant by "horrible" that the roads were/are very narrow with lots of hair pin turns and elevation changes.  Only a couple times did we get in to badly rutted surfaces and we backed off pretty quickly.  My concern is getting a "big" coach thru those kind of roads.

Thanks Horice, your input is what I'm looking for.
Bethe and I were at a dealership last week and the salesman got us in a big 102 wide monster.  We were both too intimidated to drive it so the salesman took us for a ride.  I was very impressed with the short turn radious and the way he whipped it around but that beast was more than we thought we could handle. Yep, we're chickens.  Actually I think we just need some experience.

So far I think the 36 foot long U-240 narrow body is only available in 1991,2,3&4 model years.  I could only find 102 wide 1995's.  Is this correct???

Thanks, Bob 
Bob & Bethe

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #4 –
Yes.  U240 went from narrow to wide body in 1995.

Best years:

1993 (stronger exhaust valve springs so effective exhaust brake) along with modern inline 6 cylinder turbo after-cooled Caterpillar engine and Allison 6 speed.

And 1994. Same drive train but a few had a transmission retarder-- nice, but not critical on this weight coach.

Brett Wolfe
Brett Wolfe
EX: 1993 U240
Moderator, ForeForum 2001-
Moderator Diesel RV Club 2002-
Moderator, FMCA Forum 2009-2020
Chairman FMCA Technical Advisory Committee 2011-2020

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #5 –
Thanks Brett, good info.  I would have thought the tranny retarder would be very desirable and I would have paid up to get a model with one. I think you saved me some $$$!!! I've had no problems with the GMC on many 6% grades, it's light weight and of course gas, not diesel. 
Thanks again, Bob
Bob & Bethe

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #6 –
Very little "feel" difference between a 96" and a 102" coach as far as driving goes... I would say a 36'. Easy to maneuver and level... Then if it were me a U280 (more storage and air suspension/leveling). U240 with it's Torsilastic suspension as a second choice.
The selected media item is not currently available. Dave Head & Megan Westbrook
Titusville, FL - The Great Outdoors
'98 270 buying this month
Toad is a 2018 F150 XLT

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #7 –
Bob's Quote:  "the salesman got us in a big 102 wide monster.  We were both too intimidated to drive it so the salesman took us for a ride.  I was very impressed with the short turn radious and the way he whipped it around but that beast was more than we thought we could handle."
 
Bob & Bethe,
 
A 36' coach is a 36' coach.  It won't matter whether you are driving a 96" (narrow) or a 102" (wide- body) as far as getting it into places.  It is just six inches wider.  I too was intimitidated the first time I drove our wide-body (at first you don't think there is any room on either side of the coach when you are in a lane), but after 3-4 times, you get used to judging where to keep the coach to have it centered in the lane.
 
I agree with Dave Head; don't rule out the U-280's; from '92 on they were wide-bodied and had the HWH computerized 8 air bag suspension.  It gives you a very comfortable ride and no need for stabilizing jacks when you are parked.  According to my wife, that extra 6 inches inside is quite noticeable and appreciated for living space.
 
Keep on reading and gettng informed.
 
Good Luck!
Don Hay
'92 Grandvilla, U-280
The Hayfever Express
Build #4055
'97 GEO Tracker
Life is like licking honey off a thorn.

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #8 –
and don't think of it as being 6 inches wider.  It's only 3 inches wider, on each side.
1996 U270
Build #4846

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #9 –
That is correct, in 1995 the smaller, U 225 and U240 came in a wide body. I had one of those, too. A whole new story.
No RV! Have hung up the keys.
In the past: 2016 Winnebago Era, 1994 Foretravel U240, 1995 Foretravel U240 (wide body), 1999 Foretravel 320, 36 Foot, 2003 Foretravel U320 38 foot,

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #10 –
I would get a 36 foot u320. You can get it into anywhere and it has bigger fuel tank than the 34 foot U270. I have taken my 36foot all over and will take my 42 foot anywhere I can get under or through. I have well over 200k miles and I would put a small s liter on the rear and you can get anywhere with ease.  Orchange out the scooter for a hybrid bike.
2025 Wanderbox Outpost 32 on F600 Expedition Motorhome
2015 Born Free Royal Splendor on Ford 550 nonslide version  for sale
Former Coaches  covering. 360,000 miles
1999 34 U270
2000 36 U320
2001 42' double slide U320
2018 Jeep Rubicon

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #11 –
I don't know guys, I just went from the U225 narrow 36' to a U300 wide 40'. I sure noticed the difference, particularly when trying to get into COE camp sites. Frankly, I liked the hydraulic levelers better in uneven sites. They are more manageable and they are faster to level. The shorter wheel base allows a much wider variety of campsites to choose from. Based on what Bob said he was looking for, narrow roads and more rough camping sites, the narrow body and short wheel base is a better choice.
The selected media item is not currently available.Kent Speers
Locust Grove, OK
1993 U300 SSE 40' (Restored at FOT 2009) Build 4323
720 watts Solar
6V92TA DDEC Silver Engine
2014 Subaru Outback

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #12 –
Quote from: rstein –
We're mountain hikers, travel long distances, move often, and find ourselves
in very remote areas traveling down some awful roads.
Those awful roads, do you drive them or do you hike them?  If you are talking about driving them, I would be concerned when it comes to ground clearance in either the U225 or U240.  But I don't know that they are less clearance than a GMC coach, or not.  Think the air suspension coaches have more clearance.
1994 U225
build #4514

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #13 –
If ride height is set properly, the Torsilastic Suspension  (by B.F. Goodrich Aerospace Division) found on the  U225 and U240 are fine on ground clearance.  If you see one too low, it is likely that they need to adjust their ride height-- not difficult as long as you have shims left on the low wheel position.

Ride height spec is 32-33" as measured from the "shelf" behind each wheel position to the ground (with coach on level ground, jacks stowed).  That shelf forms the top, back of the wheel well. You will see a stack of shims in front/behind each wheel position (hopefully!).  Removing one shim from in front of and behind a wheel position  (they are 1/4" thick and are slotted for easy removal) RAISES that wheel position 1/4".  If anyone needs instructions on checking or adjusting ride height, please start a separate thread. I  worked with the engineers at Goodrich on this suspension (more than a decade ago) and am fairly familiar with it.

And because we planned to do (and DID) a lot of back road driving, including trips all over Mexico, the rugged Torsilastic suspension was we we wanted.  BTW, there are thousands of Dina buses in Mexico with over a million rough miles on those Torsilastic suspensions.

Will an 8 outboard air bag suspension ride better-- sure, but it is a LOT more complex. Particularly an issue if you are in rougher conditions.

Brett
Brett Wolfe
EX: 1993 U240
Moderator, ForeForum 2001-
Moderator Diesel RV Club 2002-
Moderator, FMCA Forum 2009-2020
Chairman FMCA Technical Advisory Committee 2011-2020
 

Re: What would you recommend

Reply #14 –
Quote from: rstein –
  At any rate I'm not smart enough about Foretravels to choose a model that fits our needs and if there isn't one please tell me.
    The early 90's narrow body models might work for us; not sure about the 102" wide body, but I've never been in one much less driven one.
  Any recommendations or are we crazy?  Thanks in advance, Bob & Bethe

One more thought, We've found a great 5th wheel which satisfies our remote area  driving needs, but long distance driving in a PU truck is not appealing. 
 

Bob and Bethe,

I think only you can determine what you need.  I was looking for an early 90's Foretravel when I found the 96 U270 36' I have.  This was after googling "Foretravel" for a year.  There is one thing about the U270 that I do not like and that is ground clearance or the lack of.  It seems to be the low rider of motorhomes.  This isn't all bad as it helps regards handling on the highway and it looks cool.  A previous owner dinged a lower compartment door on the left side and I dinged one on the right side before I got it home. Both have been repaired, but would have been expensive to have it done.  Crossing ditches, potholes and such is not one of my U270's strong points.  I think, but I am not sure, the models with the torsilastic suspension have more ground clearance.  My wife and I like to camp in state and national parks.  We have not found the 102" width to be a problem, but some national parks do not have long enough spaces.  At Big Bend they advise against going up to the Chisos basin with anything longer than 25', but when I found out that tour buses do it, I drove up there (went in the toad first and found a campsite I could fit in, there are only 2) and stayed 3 days.  No electric, but we didn't need ac, and never ran the generator.  The  Foretravel is well equipped for dry camping with large batteries, large water tank, and holding tanks.  We also drove the 14 mile washboard road into Chaco Canyon with no problems.  The ride wasn't too bad as long as I kept the speed around 30 mph.  I am now constantly on the lookout for potholes, ditches, dips, and such, but usually it isn't a problem.  We do weigh a lot, so I watch the bridge weights, but have never had to turn around yet.  Although we would have picked a 34' (very few were made) over 36', we are very happy with what we have.  As someone else mentioned about Foretravels, they are very well made with quality components, but if something does need replacing, it will probably be expensive.  Expect maintenace with a diesel engine to be more expensive than gas, even if you do it.  Instead of 4 or 5 qts of oil, it will be 4 gal. of oil and likewise for coolant, and transmission fluid.  Oil and fluids have to be the proper type for a diesel too.  A plus though is that my Foretravel which weighs 10k lbs more than my gas SOB (some other brand) gets almost 3 more mpg.  Best wishes.
Jerry Whiteaker former owner 96 U270  36' #4831 Austin,TX-Owner Mods LCD TV w/front cabinet rebuild - LCD TV bedroom - Dual Central AC, either can cool coach w 30 amp - Skylights at roof AC openings - Drop ceiling for ducting of AC - Shower skylight white gelcoat/wood/epoxy frame - Air Springs/Shocks replaced - 2014 CRV - 8K Home Solar - Chevy Volt