New member looking for advice

[Will86]

Nick, I do hope you have noted the comments by Mickydripin, trust no one. Take a note pad and write down comments of offers from other traders.

 

Its a fact that if you are seen to be making notes a trader will be cautious with his statements. The same when eating out, have a note pad and be seen writing it works wonders I found.

[Guest JudgeMental]

Touring or visiting attractions easier in a van as its simply easier to park..if there is a car space reasonable chance of getting a van in. we were up at Guadalest Friday, a tourist hot spot in hills, its a bank holiday weekend here (all saints) and very busy generally..Nearly gave up but a spot appeared and we squeezed in using sliding door to get in and out.Touring Italy and Croatia when we first got the van in 2011 was a pleasure compared to past experience with CB......

 

[Derek Uzzell]

nickwwalker - 2013-11-01 2:48 PM

 

Hi Derek

 

You've helped enormously, I agree with much that you'd said. I had seen the Adria as Norm suggested it. As you say it is not a bad vehicle to use as a yardstick. I think front /rear wheel drive is something I'd like to be clearer on though. A lot of vans use the same Fiat FWD van and I don't know if it's just that one that vehicle that has problems, or if RWD is a generally a better option. I like the look of the new Adria 500 and 600 range, but that would be a year to two down the line, as I wouldn't want to get a new one for the reasons many folk have given.

 

Many thanks

 

Nick

 

RWD separates steering from propulsion.

 

In the Bad Old Days FWD meant heavier steering and/or a wider turning-circle, but not now. FWD can result in 'torque steer'. This can be very exciting with a powerful FWD car, but it won't much matter with a motorhome. A RWD motorhome usually has a high rear-axle weight limit and, because the weight distribution of a motorhome tends to be rearwards, a RWD motorhome can have superior traction to a FWD one on slippery surfaces. Conversely, a RWD motorhome often has to have a high living-area floor due the prop-shaft running beneath. With everything else equal, a FWD motorhome will be lighter than a RWD one, as its mechanical packaging will be more compact. Which end drives a motorhome becomes more important as the vehicle's size/weight increases, but, for a vehicle around 6metres long, I don't believe it's significant enough to worry about. Both my motorhomes have been around 6metres long; both have been Ford Transit-based. The 1st was RWD; the current one is FWD - I can't say I favour one over the other.

 

You can generalise from a vehicle's on-paper specification - like, the longer the wheelbase the wider the turning-circle, or the higher and/or longer the vehicle the more likely a ferry-operator will charge a supplement (weight or width don't seem to matter).

 

I get around 30mpg wih my Hobby, but if I got 28mpg it wouldn't concern me. If I worried about the odd one or two mpg I wouldn't own a motorhome.

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

Cliffy - 2013-11-02 8:37 PM............Hi Brian

 

I check mpg between each full tank which is usually every time I go to a filling station. then I check the overall at the end of a European trip usually around 1500 - 2000 miles. The worst the overall has been is 31.5 mpg and the best 34 mpg.

 

We don't use toll roads and normally drive at 55 to 60 mph on main roads. I never go over 70 mph except maybe briefly after I have pulled out to let someone in from a slip road and need to get back in the inside lane....................

Then I can only say, Respect, Man! :-)

 

I've never got over 30! Mind, I do go a bit quicker. About 105 kph on dual carriageways and 90 kph on single carriageways, 60 on single carriageways and 65 on dual carriageways in UK (where legal).

[candapack]

JudgeMental - 2013-11-03 7:10 AM

 

Touring or visiting attractions easier in a van as its simply easier to park..if there is a car space reasonable chance of getting a van in. we were up at Guadalest Friday, a tourist hot spot in hills, its a bank holiday weekend here (all saints) and very busy generally..Nearly gave up but a spot appeared and we squeezed in using sliding door to get in and out.Touring Italy and Croatia when we first got the van in 2011 was a pleasure compared to past experience with CB......

 

 

Bit early in my Forum career to be taking on the Judge, but while you can get out using your sliding door, what about the cars on either side of you? And I'm thinking more about damage to your van rather than inconvenience to others - honest!

[Guest JudgeMental]

candapack - 2013-11-03 8:08 PM

 

JudgeMental - 2013-11-03 7:10 AM

 

Touring or visiting attractions easier in a van as its simply easier to park..if there is a car space reasonable chance of getting a van in. we were up at Guadalest Friday, a tourist hot spot in hills, its a bank holiday weekend here (all saints) and very busy generally..Nearly gave up but a spot appeared and we squeezed in using sliding door to get in and out.Touring Italy and Croatia when we first got the van in 2011 was a pleasure compared to past experience with CB......

 

 

Bit early in my Forum career to be taking on the Judge, but while you can get out using your sliding door, what about the cars on either side of you? And I'm thinking more about damage to your van rather than inconvenience to others - honest!

 

tremble and prepare to weep... :D like I said a van allows you to visit attractions that you cant comfortably manage in a CB. you just have to be hopeful that others park considerately..maybe should have taken a full on shot, as plenty of room for adjacent cars. fingers crossed, no damage so far after 2.5 years.....

[Derek Uzzell]

JudgeMental - 2013-11-03 8:25 PM

 

candapack - 2013-11-03 8:08 PM

 

JudgeMental - 2013-11-03 7:10 AM

 

Touring or visiting attractions easier in a van as its simply easier to park..if there is a car space reasonable chance of getting a van in. we were up at Guadalest Friday, a tourist hot spot in hills, its a bank holiday weekend here (all saints) and very busy generally..Nearly gave up but a spot appeared and we squeezed in using sliding door to get in and out.Touring Italy and Croatia when we first got the van in 2011 was a pleasure compared to past experience with CB......

 

 

Bit early in my Forum career to be taking on the Judge, but while you can get out using your sliding door, what about the cars on either side of you? And I'm thinking more about damage to your van rather than inconvenience to others - honest!

 

tremble and prepare to weep... :D like I said a van allows you to visit attractions that you cant comfortably manage in a CB. you just have to be hopeful that others park considerately..maybe should have taken a full on shot, as plenty of room for adjacent cars. fingers crossed, no damage so far after 2.5 years.....

 

It's a reasonable generalisation that a PVC should be simpler to park than a coachbuilt design because PVCs are generally narrower.

 

As far as nickwalker (the original poster) is concerned, his stated requirements point to a PVC being the best on-paper choice, but the relative lack of interior volume may prove off-putting.

 

I'm sure he's taking the right approach by using an Adria PVC as a 'yardstick' and going from there.

[Guest JudgeMental]

even if he goes for a bigger CB the generic layout (large rear transverse bed/front lounge) is a sound one . I choose the Adria as the good spec included a proper sprung mattress whereas most others foam. the way I prioritise it is this: I sleep for approx 8 hrs so bed a non negotiable...lounge for a few hours, and cook for probably less then one hour. drive for about 5/10 p/d depending.

 

If I did not step out of the UK and enjoyed winter camping I doubt I would have a panel van, in fact if i was lumbered with staying in the UK doubt I would bother with a van at all...its all about the outside life that attracted us to camping in the first place....

[Derek Uzzell]

This October thread also discussed choosing a first motorhome

 

http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/Impossible-combination-/32800/

[nickwwalker]

Thanks so much to everyone that has contributed so far. You've all been helpful in suggesting vehicles to consider along with pointing out the benefits and pitfalls of various approaches. I'm learning more about this all the time and have several vehicles in mind that I need to see. Fortunately time is not a problem for me, I'm not going to rush into an expensive mistake. I want to get a thorough grounding through the research.

 

Then when I'm clearer of what to aim for I'll go to look at some actual vehicles at dealers to narrow it down. I also intend to try a few trips in a hire van to check out the the theory in practice. I see there's a show in Feb at the NEC, is that worth a visit?

 

My current thinking is that I'll start with a PVC spec for all the good reasons of parking, size etc that people have pointed out, and hope that fits the bill. But if the lack of space and facilities possible inside prove to be too off-putting then I guess I can look for something a bit wider and also possibly longer.

 

But as I'm not downsizing and I am starting from little experience, my expectations are somewhat different to those of you that have lived the dream in a roving luxury hotel. I think that we'll mainly using it for shorter trips of 1-2 weeks, rather than several months overseas as some of seem to manage. So with shorter trips and use of onsite facilities, I think we'll be able to live in something more compact.

 

Also the aforementioned grand kids would be mainly passengers as they live in the lakes, so we'll need seat belts and table seating for 2+2 but will be be less likely to need a 4 berth unless it's something that doesn't impact too excessively on the floor space or cost.

 

So the Adria, Auto Trail V-Line, Tribute 669 and are on the list for for closer inspection and to narrow down our preferences about interior layout and relative sizes of bathrooms and cooking facilities. As someone said, you spend a considerable of the time in bed, and being tall folk (me 6ft / her 5' 10") that will be a prime factor in the decision making process. Headroom too is important, but oddly not often stated in specifications. I don't intend to get more of a crick in my neck that I have already from throwing myself off of motorcycles in the past, so a minimum 6' 2" headroom is on the list!

 

I must admit that when driving my fathers new Autosleeper Topaz 10 years ago I was aware of the kitchen utensils and fittings rattling when on the road. So I'm favouring having the kitchen and bathroom at the far end of the van, as in the Autotrail V line. But then I see other designs with the beds and seating at the rear adjacent to the opening doors and I think that's better. So that where the hire will narrow things down I guess. Any thoughts on that out there?

 

Anyway must go home from work after another busy day in the office. But thanks again for all your contributions. I do read and consider all the input, sorry I'm not able to respond to everybody. I'm sure this thread will prove useful to other on the same path as me.

 

Cheers

 

Nick

[bolero boy]

Re your specific point on layout, bearing in mind that you are considering starting with a relatively compact van PVC?) then you will only get any decent storage if you go for a rear bed design. Having the kitchen and bathroom in the rear may move noise further back, and might open up the front space into a nice lounge diner but you will forego storage space.

Remember, also, that fixed bed designs (as well as maximising storage) don't require specific storage for bedding (the Bain of motorhome life) whereas, perversely, layouts with less storage (non fixed bed) will require large storage space for the bedding leaving little or none for anything else.

[PJay]

Nick

You learn to eliminate noise's as you go. Wrap things in cheap non slip , from the cheap shops. I put it between the saucepans and lids, any thing in the oven that rattles, etc, you will soon get to know what is making the noise

PJay

[nickwwalker]

bolero boy - 2013-11-04 10:51 PM

 

Re your specific point on layout, bearing in mind that you are considering starting with a relatively compact van PVC?) then you will only get any decent storage if you go for a rear bed design. Having the kitchen and bathroom in the rear may move noise further back, and might open up the front space into a nice lounge diner but you will forego storage space.

Remember, also, that fixed bed designs (as well as maximising storage) don't require specific storage for bedding (the Bain of motorhome life) whereas, perversely, layouts with less storage (non fixed bed) will require large storage space for the bedding leaving little or none for anything else.

 

Good points raised there Chris! I particularly like the point about loads of storage. If I consider the rear bed approach do you have any thoughts on the benefits of the French Bed layout, as I think your van is FB? I'm seeing in several vans of this type such as the Adria, but the adjacent toilet / sink looks very compact, compared to those with the bed across the width? Are the beds in FB designs generally narrower than those the other way around?

 

Of course its all a compromise, unless you own a tardis I can see you'll always be trading more space in one place against less space somewhere else. But understanding the pros and cons helps the decision making process.

 

Thanks again

 

Nick

 

[pepe63xnotuse]

Nick..

We've got a French bed layout in our coachbuilt, but personally I'd think that in a PVC, they'd make both the bed and the shower room far to narrow(..the "knee room" is "snug" enough on our loo as it is! :$ )

 

For versatility, I would think that an Adria Twin style layout would be hard to beat...

..I like layouts that have elements that can function independently of each other(...I don't want to be having to dismantle the bed and stuff away sleeping bags/duvets etc,into overhead lockers every morning, just so that we'll have somewhere to sit and eat breakfast.. ;-) )

[PJay]

pepe63 - 2013-11-05 10:28 AM

 

Nick..

We've got a French bed layout in our coachbuilt, but personally I'd think that in a PVC, they'd make both the bed and the shower room far to narrow(..our shower room is a bit "snug enough" as it is!)..

 

 

Have to agree, especially as you are both tall people

PJay

[bolero boy]

PJay - 2013-11-05 10:36 AM

 

pepe63 - 2013-11-05 10:28 AM

 

Nick..

We've got a French bed layout in our coachbuilt, but personally I'd think that in a PVC, they'd make both the bed and the shower room far to narrow(..our shower room is a bit "snug enough" as it is!)..

 

 

Have to agree, especially as you are both tall people

PJay

Also agree with the above.

Our French bed is 6'3" x 4'3" so not massive but plenty large enough for us as we are both fairly slim and not overly tall.

Or bathroom works well as the loo is at the rear of the washroom giving loads of legroom etc. however, the downside is that the shower part is in the middle of the washroom and needs to be dried after use prior to the next use of the toilet, otherwise wet feet. But it works for us.

Despite some of my hankerings about an A class type van, i am also very aware of the progress made and advantages of smaller PVCs. With that in mind, and considering we already have a French bed layout, we went along to the AS stand at the NEC to have a good look at the Kingham. This had already had a good review from Dave Hurrell in MMM (but which vans dont) so thought we would give it the once over.

Well, what a disappointment. Yes the bed was fair size for a PVC but the bathroom was very slim, too slim even for us. But worse, was the appalling non-use of space under the bed. Loading from the rear meant a tiny flap about 15" square which was as much use as a chocolate teapot.

Also, the Combi was placed so far back that it ate any space at the rear which would have been the obvious place for outside chairs and bulkier stuff. Bringing the Combi forward and opening up the rear entrance to the storage would have made the world of difference, but the focus seemed to be on the way the bed tilted on a mechanism that again was space hungry.

Opportunity missed, i feel.

[Derek Uzzell]

A 'French' bed alongside a bathroom in a PVC will inevitably compromise the width of both. Possibly the most successful version of this type of design in a 5.99m vehicle-length is Rapido's V56 model.

 

http://www.rapido-motorhome.co.uk/prod.php?ref=v56&serie=vans

 

http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/userfiles/file/WMH%20historic%20road%20tests/french%20bed%20jul11.pdf

[pepe63xnotuse]

bolero boy - 2013-11-05 12:49 PM

 

...Our bathroom works well as the loo is at the rear of the washroom giving loads of legroom etc. however, the downside is that the shower part is in the middle of the washroom and needs to be dried after use prior to the next use of the toilet, otherwise wet feet. But it works for us.

 

I think I'd prefer it if ours was like that. As it is, we've got a "separate" shower cubicle at the rear, which leaves the loo portion, quite cramped...

Having said that, I suppose it does give somewhere to hang the odd damp jacket etc

(..and in the overall scheme of things, we don't spend that much time sitting on/standing at,the loo. (lol) )

[bolero boy]

pepe63 - 2013-11-05 2:44 PM

 

bolero boy - 2013-11-05 12:49 PM

 

...Our bathroom works well as the loo is at the rear of the washroom giving loads of legroom etc. however, the downside is that the shower part is in the middle of the washroom and needs to be dried after use prior to the next use of the toilet, otherwise wet feet. But it works for us.

 

I think I'd prefer it if ours was like that. As it is, we've got a "separate" shower cubicle at the rear, which leaves the loo portion, quite cramped...

(..having said that, I suppose it does give somewhere to hang the odd damp jacket etc..)

Pepe, different brands employ different designs... I see Swift are using 'your' layout on their Esprit range , i did ask on Swift Talk whether this was a trial to see if customers preferred it or the type like ours. No response im afraid.

Whilst French beds can seem cramped to some, it is a really efficient use of space. In the rear 2 mtrs of our van we have the bed, loo, shower, sink and wardrobe. This is not really,possible in other layouts due to the access being required for (say) a transverse bed......that is until the latest round of PVCs came along and allowed you to walk directly through the shower to the bed, a la Twin, Poessl et al.

[nickwwalker]

Derek Uzzell - 2013-11-05 2:11 PM

 

A 'French' bed alongside a bathroom in a PVC will inevitably compromise the width of both. Possibly the most successful version of this type of design in a 5.99m vehicle-length is Rapido's V56 model.

 

Hi Derek,

 

Yes that's a good example and it's also interesting to compare it with its stablemate the Rapido v53 built on the same base but with a transverse bed. Both have a lot to offer so I shall look at them in more detail. I've found a short description of the v53 features in the ultimate showdown link below, along with some other interesting PVCs.

http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/Motorhomes/Reviews/Motorhomes/Rapido-V53-ultimate-showdown-review/_ch1_rw1327_pg1

 

Thanks

Nick

[pepe63xnotuse]

I suppose if I had to "criticise" a transverse bed style of layout, I suppose would be the possible "pinch point", caused IF the likes of the shower room,wardrobe and/or fridge-freezer/grill tower are positioned opposite each other...

This can also make a van seem quite claustrophobic...

[nickwwalker]

pepe63 - 2013-11-05 4:15 PM

 

I suppose if I had to "criticise" a transverse bed style of layout, I suppose would be the possible "pinch point", caused IF the likes of the shower room,wardrobe and/or fridge-freezer/grill tower are positioned opposite each other...

This can also make a van seem quite claustrophobic...

 

Good thought, it must also make use of cooker and fridge a problem if it is in a narrow space and / or opposite the toilet / wardrobe etc.

 

Nick

[pepe63xnotuse]

Nick

Probably stating the obvious but Youtube can sometimes bring up some good little videos of vans....

 

It may be worth taping in a few names of possible contenders..and seeing what comes up...

 

eg :

[bolero boy]

pepe63 - 2013-11-05 4:15 PM

 

I suppose if I had to "criticise" a transverse bed style of layout, I suppose would be the possible "pinch point", caused IF the likes of the shower room,wardrobe and/or fridge-freezer/grill tower are positioned opposite each other...

This can also make a van seem quite claustrophobic...

Youre right, but your obsevation applies to all fixed rear bed designs (island, twin singles, transverse) as, unlike the French bed design, the washroom and wardrobe have to be positioned forward of the bed and, as these units are tall, they can forshorten the length of the van whereas ina FB design you can often see the rear wall from the front making it seem very roomy.

Our pals have a van 7.70 lomg (0.70 lomger than ours) with an island bed yet seems far more cramped due to the points Pepe made earlier.

[Derek Uzzell]

Nick

 

a) I believe you'll have to abandon your original rigid-canoe-carrying ambition, whatever you buy.

 

b) Given your wish for a <6m-long vehicle and your minimum 6' 2" headroom requirement (and a bed size to suit two tall people) you may also need to forget most PVCs.

 

You might want to look at short coachbuilt designs with a drop-down bed (like Chausson's Flash 10) or one with a large overcab bed. A short A-class design would be another option if your budget would allow it.