Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Topic: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches (Read 949 times) previous topic - next topic

Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

February 06, 2015, 04:18:07 pm

Hello all,
This is my first post though I joined the forum about a year ago to learn more about FTs.
We are looking to purchase one of several FT models ranging from the late 90s to the early 2000s. This would be our first motorhome. I'm fairly mechanical and should be able to handle some DIY repairs on the house & chassis.
My wife would prefer a coach with slide/slides since more than likely we will be full-timing for at least a year, but she is open to purchasing a non-slide coach with the right layout. We realize there are pros & cons of coaches with & without slides and tagged vs non-tagged models. We're hoping that some of the FT owners here will share their knowledge and experiences with the models mentioned below.
My main concerns regarding the late 90s non-slide coaches are the towing & loading characteristics of the 40' U320s with the heavier powertrains vs the 40' U295s with the smaller/lighter powertrains.
Late 90s 40' U320 GVWR range from 32,000 lbs to 34,880 lbs, and GCWR 38,000 lbs to 44,880 lbs
Late 90s 40' U295 GVWR range from 30,000 lbs to 33,000 lbs, and GCWR 36,000 lbs to 43,000 lbs
I believe the rated CCC for late 90s non-tag 40' U320s is approx. 5600 lbs, and CCC for the 40' U295s is approx. 5400 lbs.
I believe the rated CCC for a 2002 4020 is 3400 lbs. Unknown about the 2002 4010 or subsequent year 4010s & 4020s.
Questions:
-Are the CCC ratings shown above accurate?
-How capable are the U295s with the smaller engines when towing a 5,000 lb toad?
-Would the handling characteristics of the 40' non-tag coaches with the heavier vs. smaller powertrains be noticeably different when towing?
-Should the U295s with the lighter powertrains be able to handle more tongue weight than the U320s?
-Would the U295s with the lighter powertrains be less susceptible to bulkhead separation, particularly rear separation?
-The later production 2002 U320 4020s added a tag axle (not sure about 4010s) and subsequent year 4020s also came with tag axles. Should we take into consideration there is a possibility that the early non-tagged 4020s will depreciate more quickly, or be more difficult to sell in the future than the later ones with tag axles?
-Also, it would be nice to opinions from folks who own a 2000-2002 non-tag, 4010 or 4020, on how they feel it handles considering the added weight of the slide/slides.
-Would a 3400 lb CCC be adequate for a majority of full-timers?
-How difficult is it to change out the airbags and shocks and what is the approx. time it should take for each?
-How much of a safety concern is there when changing out airbags and shocks if an adequate amount of safety blocks and/or frame supports are used?
-I know a few of these questions are of the opinion type but any feedback would help us in determining which type coach may best fit our needs.
Thanks, Gary

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #1 – February 06, 2015, 05:16:28 pm

Gary,

First, welcome!!

Second, what is your comfortable budget, including 25% for first year repair/upgrades.
Narrow the search with your budget #'s and that will reduce the questions

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #2 – February 06, 2015, 05:55:39 pm

Hi Gary, Welcome. That is a list of questions for sure. Most of asked ourselves and anyone else we could the same ones.

Budget, floorplan, what you think you will do with the coach, where you think you will stay with the coach all start to box in the answers.

We went with a U320 for the bigger engine and transmission. Also for the AquaHot and other ammenities.
We went with a 36 ft because we thought we could get into more places we liked to go.
We went with one slide. The extra room is nice. We can use it easily without putting the slide out. The two slide models usually added a bedroom slide that was a closet. We didn't want to give up the window. There is some 42 ft floor plans where the second slide moves the bed out in an East West direction. That one would have been OK. A slide model is likely going to be be more desirable on the resale market. We have seen many non-slide coaches that seem roomy and perfectly workable. No slide means more CCC. Techs at FOT and MOT tell me the 2001 sile is easier to work on then the 2002 slide. Mechanism changed.

The 2001 U320 had an updated dash and ducted air all the way to the front. Works well, looks a bit more modern in my opinion.

I don't have a tag. A 40' with a tag will have the same or maybe less physical basement room as a 36'.

Almsot everyone with a tag says they handle better than the same length without.

If a 42' will go where you want it to go and a 2001 U320 tag with 2 slides fits your budget and floorplan desires and you can find one it would be a great coach.

I will try almost any service or upgrade but fuel lines and airbags are a job for Bernd in NAC.

Keep asking. Lots more folks here know more than I do.

Roger

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #3 – February 06, 2015, 08:19:59 pm

I love my two slide 42 foot with a tag. After having two coaches without one and one with, I would not get a coach without one again. They make a 99 42 foot no slide tag too.

I towed my jeep behind my 34 foot 270 and 36 foot and 42 foot 320. I like the bigger engine as it turns over slower and the transmission retarder works a bit stronger as well. The question you asked though is can it tow and the answer is yes all three tow fine.

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #4 – February 06, 2015, 10:57:20 pm

Welcome Gary,

Lots of great questions, especially for a full timer,

Quote from: olddigger – February 06, 2015, 04:18:07 pm

I believe the rated CCC for late 90s non-tag 40' U320s is approx. 5600 lbs, and CCC for the 40' U295s is approx. 5400 lbs.
I believe the rated CCC for a 2002 4020 is 3400 lbs. Unknown about the 2002 4010 or subsequent year 4010s & 4020s.
Questions:
-Are the CCC ratings shown above accurate?
-Would a 3400 lb CCC be adequate for a majority of full-timers?

I would question that CCC for a late 90s U320. When we took delievery of ours, it was actually at a public scale. While not highly accurate, it weighted 30,000#s with 5/8s tank of diesel, and 1/2 fresh water, empty grey/black. We have been weighted twice since loading all of our crap in, and we do carry alot of stuff. But both times we have been weighted, we have been just a couple of hundred shy of the GVWR of 32,350. Now, those two weighing have been with full fuel and full water, which is an unlikely scenario, but I would guess 2000#s of stuff, not including fuel and water would be about it, for a 32,xxx GVWR U320. Even for full timers, a ton of stuff is a lot of stuff.

Our coach has a GCWR of 38,000. We tow a 2007 Ford Explorer V8 4x4 Eddie Bauer. We keep a fair amount of stuff in it, and it's no where near the 6,000 pounds we are rated to tow.

If you really need to carry a lot of stuff, a tag axle really seem to increase the CCC. But unless you are carrying Scuba Gear, it takes a lot of stuff to weight 2000#s.

Quote from: olddigger – February 06, 2015, 04:18:07 pm

-How difficult is it to change out the airbags and shocks and what is the approx. time it should take for each?
-How much of a safety concern is there when changing out airbags and shocks if an adequate amount of safety blocks and/or frame supports are used?
-I know a few of these questions are of the opinion type but any feedback would help us in determining which type coach may best fit

I'm certainly not the most mechanical person on the board, but to me there seems to be better places to save money. If I'm not mistaken, you supply the air bags and Bernd only charges 6 or 7 hundred to replace 8 air bags. It would probably take me DAYS to figure out how to remove, much less replace all eight air bags. Even if I could do the job in a week (which I doubt), it only makes sense to pay Bernd to replaced the airbags. You just have to figure out, how long does it take to make a coach buck vs spend one. This is not an area I plan to try to save money.

**** Amanda and I just happen to have lunch with Bernd today, he is a very very impressive guy. He know his stuff and has the respect of a lot of people in NAC. He does the job right, because that's the way to do it.

194 Gallons of diesel weighs approx ~ 1350#s
110 Gallons of fresh water weights approx ~ 917
So a 97 U320 hold 2267# worth of fuel and water.
If you subtract that that from 32,350 - 2267 = ~ 29,983.

29,983 - 2000#s of crap would be 27,983.

Hope this helps, more than confuses the situation.

As far as adding a slide goes, we love Roger and Susan's as well as John and Linda's coaches, but adding the slide does add a whole new level of complication, that we just don't need at this time.

All that said, bottom line, going with a Foretavel, you will be way ahead of going with SOB.

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #5 – February 07, 2015, 12:16:26 am

The GVRW of a 97' U320 vs a 99 U320 seems to be about 2500#s. FWIW.

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #6 – February 07, 2015, 07:13:41 am

Gary,
I posted costs for my bag replacements
Air Bag Replacement Cost (maybe)

At that time I said ~$150 parts and ~$100 labor per bag
Make sure you get new air fittings
HTH

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #7 – February 07, 2015, 02:41:16 pm

Thanks guys, lots of great info. The airbag replacement labor cost seems very reasonable and definitely worth paying to have done.
Any input and advice would be greatly appreciated.

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #8 – February 07, 2015, 03:42:21 pm

We have a 40 foot, no slide, 1995 U320. It has a Cummins M11 engine (400 HP; 1350 lb-ft torque). It has an Aqua-Hot and doesn't have ducted air or a tag axle. We don't full-time but carry plenty of "stuff" when we travel. As far as I know we have never exceeded the 32,000 GVWR. Our tow car is roughly 3,500 lb.

Our coach seems to be perfect for us. It handles quite well and I haven't felt the need for a tag axle (and would not want to lose the storage space). I really appreciate performance of the M11 engine and would not want to have a smaller engine with less torque.

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #9 – February 08, 2015, 07:43:37 pm

The tag gives you lots of CCC. I am 38K fully loaded for travel. That is full of fuel and water and totally loaded for the heaviest trip with scooters and even a spare tire. I have to say that the tag makes it so that I am nowhere close to the GVW as it adds about 7K to the standard setup.

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #10 – February 08, 2015, 08:11:14 pm

Thanks John. When we began researching motorhomes a year ago, I was sold on getting one with a tag axle for a few reasons but mainly for the added GVWR and supposedly, better handling. Having never owned a motorhome, most of the info gleamed was from the internet which mainly consisted of various coach owners opinions. One of the reasons why I've gravitated to FTs is what I've read about the drivability and handling characteristics of the non-tag models, plus I love the bus style compartment doors. Whether we end getting a coach with or w/o a tag will more than likely come down to other considerations.

Foretravel Owners' Forum For owners and Fans of Foretravel Motorcoaches September 20, 2025 ...

Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

February 06, 2015, 04:18:07 pm

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #1 – February 06, 2015, 05:16:28 pm

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #2 – February 06, 2015, 05:55:39 pm

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #3 – February 06, 2015, 08:19:59 pm

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #4 – February 06, 2015, 10:57:20 pm

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #5 – February 07, 2015, 12:16:26 am

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #6 – February 07, 2015, 07:13:41 am

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #7 – February 07, 2015, 02:41:16 pm

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #8 – February 07, 2015, 03:42:21 pm

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #9 – February 08, 2015, 07:43:37 pm

Re: Questions concerning late 90s - early 2000s model coaches

Reply #10 – February 08, 2015, 08:11:14 pm

Affiliate Notice