mountainkowboy
Socal/NE Oregon
Senior Member
Joined: 09/20/2004
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
 Offline
|
Bols2DawaLL wrote:mountainkowboy wrote:the 192 seems to be the winner. Today we looked at a 2018 Lance 1995...an impressive unit and a possibility.
Ha , those are our 2 finalists too although if I go with Lance i'll be buying a gently used one
You and me both, there pretty proud of them, and I didn't see 20K worth of difference.
Chuck & Ruth with 4-legged Molly
2007 Tiffin Allegro 30DA
2011 Ford Ranger
1987 HD FLHTP
|
mountainkowboy
Socal/NE Oregon
Senior Member
Joined: 09/20/2004
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
TheHound wrote:SoundGuy wrote:TheHound wrote:Curious, where would the changes from 2017 to 2018 be posted or would you need to contact a dealer? Wondering if they made some tweaks on those items you highlighted.
I suspect any changes between '17 and '18 models are cosmetic - interior colours but more notably the use of white skirting & trim on the exterior rather than the traditional dark brown / black. Personally I'd rather see manufacturers put more effort into improvements that actually matter, such as proper tank support or upgrading the tires to Goodyear Endurance such as Jayco is now doing, and not just window dressing that they believe will increase sales. In any case, I'll be tossing a cover on mine on Sat so I'll try to remember to ask about any differences.
OK, if you find out please let me know. And I completely agree about making changes that will improve safety and reliability vs adding some pretty colours.
BTW... looked over your many pictures and you have some serious skills! If I end up with one of these I may resort to bribery to get some assistance ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/wink.gif "wink")
From what I can tell the nose cap was changed in 2018 and they added LED lights to it. As for the fresh tank, there is a "C" channel brace that is bolted to the frame under it and over the now enclosed under belly. I don't know if it's the same on the 2017, they didn't show the underbelly, and the video I mentioned was changes from 2016 to 2017.
|
TheHound
Toronto
Full Member
Joined: 08/31/2017
View Profile
Offline
|
mountainkowboy wrote:
From what I can tell the nose cap was changed in 2018 and they added LED lights to it. As for the fresh tank, there is a "C" channel brace that is bolted to the frame under it and over the now enclosed under belly. I don't know if it's the same on the 2017, they didn't show the underbelly, and the video I mentioned was changes from 2016 to 2017.
I appreciate the update. You know this stuff better than me... does that c channel bracing resolve the problem or would you be adding additional support?
Look forward to your thoughts after you check one out on the weekend.
|
Last Train
Texas
Full Member
Joined: 04/21/2016
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
babock wrote:You are using an equilizing hitch right?
Sorry babcock for not answering earlier but have been a little under the weather.
And not to hijack the OP's thread . . . To your question, no we do not. The Ridgeline's design specs for towing these kinds of weights (our camping configuration at a local CAT Scale regularly show us 4600-4700 lbs; our tongue weights come in 480-520 lbs) do not require a WDH. We do use a friction sway bar. The entire rig handles very well in this arrangement.
![[image]](https://i.imgur.com/5Lcqomol.jpg)
2016 Coachmen Freedom Express 192RBS
2018 RAM 1500 Ecodiesel
|
Last Train
Texas
Full Member
Joined: 04/21/2016
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
babock wrote:I agree...wheel base is WAY to short. I have towed with short wheel base vehicles like that in the past and it was not fun going down mountains in California.
The wheelbase of the ridgeline is 125". Wheel base of my Silverado is 143".
Which is why we would probably not tow in the Rockies or Sierras, etc.. We've managed some fairly steep grades in the Ozarks in Arkansas and also in the Quachitas/Winding Stair Mountains in SE Oklahoma (I "think" I recall Flattestroute.com showing me somewhere along the way 13-14% grades), but none of those lasted for miles like we would see in our western mountains. That V6 just doesn't provide significant engine braking and yes, a longer wheelbase is always better.
I'm a long time mariner, and I sort of approach towing (with any configuration) like I do heading out in our boat to one of our bays or out into the Gulf. An abundance of caution is always the watchword along with understanding the specifications of your equipment and then having the discipline to stay within that performance envelope. Not much margin for error if you are miles from shore and things go sideways! I take that same approach in towing.
|
|
|
mountainkowboy
Socal/NE Oregon
Senior Member
Joined: 09/20/2004
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
TheHound wrote:mountainkowboy wrote:
From what I can tell the nose cap was changed in 2018 and they added LED lights to it. As for the fresh tank, there is a "C" channel brace that is bolted to the frame under it and over the now enclosed under belly. I don't know if it's the same on the 2017, they didn't show the underbelly, and the video I mentioned was changes from 2016 to 2017.
I appreciate the update. You know this stuff better than me... does that c channel bracing resolve the problem or would you be adding additional support?
Look forward to your thoughts after you check one out on the weekend.
I believe it was a "factory fix" to the sagging issue, from what it looks like. As for me knowing more...this is just the stuff I could find on the interwebs, although I've been RVing for 40 years I've never owned a TT. Another interesting tid-bit is the frontal area has never been calculated by Coachmen, but they stated 56sq' if it was flat...which it's not. So I would say with the curve is has to be under 50sq'.
|
SoundGuy
S Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02/11/2015
View Profile
|
Last Train - while we're on the subject of towing a trailer like the 192RBS with a V6 Ridgeline as you do or a V8 Silverado as I do the question for those contemplating a trailer like this might be - is there an significant difference in fuel mileage between these two vehicles when not towing and when towing? I typically see ~ 15 miles to the US gallon around town, ~ 22 mpg highway when not towing, maybe a couple mpg less if the terrain is hilly and/or it's quite windy, and typically between 10.5 to 12.5 mpg when towing our 192RBS - rarely if ever below 10 mpg but not much greater if it's hilly and/or windy, well into the 12s if the roads are relatively flat and relatively calm, an overall average perhaps of ~ 11.5 mpg, which is pretty good relatively speaking. In comparison, how does your Ridgeline do? ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/huh.gif "huh")
Also curious - with my 192RBS averaging ~ 4800 lbs loaded & ready to camp I typically run ~ 625 lbs of gross tongue weight so I'm wondering if you're running ~ 4600 lbs GVW how (and why) you keep the tongue weight down so low, ~ 11%. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/scratchead.gif "scratchead")
2012 Silverado 1500 Crew Cab
2014 Coachmen Freedom Express 192RBS
2003 Fleetwood Yuma * 2008 K-Z Spree 240BH-LX
2007 TrailCruiser C21RBH * 2000 Fleetwood Santa Fe
1998 Jayco 10UD * 1969 Coleman CT380
|
Last Train
Texas
Full Member
Joined: 04/21/2016
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
SoundGuy wrote:Last Train - while we're on the subject of towing a trailer like the 192RBS with a V6 Ridgeline as you do or a V8 Silverado as I do the question for those contemplating a trailer like this might be - is there an significant difference in fuel mileage between these two vehicles when not towing and when towing? I typically see ~ 15 miles to the US gallon around town, ~ 22 mpg highway when not towing, maybe a couple mpg less if the terrain is hilly and/or it's quite windy, and typically between 10.5 to 12.5 mpg when towing our 192RBS - rarely if ever below 10 mpg but not much greater if it's hilly and/or windy, well into the 12s if the roads are relatively flat and relatively calm, an overall average perhaps of ~ 11.5 mpg, which is pretty good relatively speaking. In comparison, how does your Ridgeline do?
Also curious - with my 192RBS averaging ~ 4800 lbs loaded & ready to camp I typically run ~ 625 lbs of gross tongue weight so I'm wondering if you're running ~ 4600 lbs GVW how (and why) you keep the tongue weight down so low, ~ 11%.
Those are both great questions, SoundGuy. And maybe this will help a potential buyer of a TT like our 192RBS have some additional decision points.
Regarding mileage . . . First of all the Gen 1 (2006-2014 models) Ridgeline (ours is a 2011 model) never was known for its fuel efficiency - especially in its later years when competitive vehicles surpassed it in technology. With that background, in a non- towing regime around town we typically get 16-18mpg. On interstates - like our trip to the Appalachains for Thanksgiving - we get 19-22mpg varying with terrain, of course.
When towing it's roughly 1/2 that we get around town without towing. Specifically, (I just checked my mileage-trip log/spreadsheet), over the 12,203.3 miles we have towed our 192RBS (including since we pulled it off the dealer's lot), our Ridgeline has averaged 9.13mpg. Sometimes we have averaged over 10mpg but when the winds have hit us hard much lower. I just reviewed one hunting trip I had last year that showed 7.6mpg. My notes showed dead-on headwinds that afternoon of 18-20mph on that short, 63 mile run. All mpg figures were hand calculated.
So perhaps back to the general point of this thread, anyone towing a travel trailer should recognize that fuel cost is a necessary part of this recreational hobby. For some it's more and for others less so. Each person has to decide what is acceptable in their situation.
Regarding tongue weight . . . We have kept our tongue weights in that spectrum simply because it has unfailingly worked very well. We have never had a hint of sway or instability, despite the inevitable winds and maneuvers that come with towing. It appears that we have hit a sweet spot in weight and balance for our truck and TT. Honda's specs allow for two 150 lb passengers on board plus an allowance for additional personal gear for each. Max tongue weight in these conditions is 600 lbs. And, FWIW our truck's yellow sticker notes a maximum 1,470 lb payload. Throw in a standard heavy duty transmission cooler, a couple of radiator fans and a very efficient all-wheel drive . . . The system works.
I should note that our truck now has over 152,000 miles on the odometer, and there will come a day when we will need to move on to another truck, but our Ridgeline still doesn't have a squeak or rattle and is extremely comfortable as a daily driver, so for now we're fine with it. That said, I'm a great admirer of the great 1/2 tons out there, and one of those may be ours one day. But if we do,we lose AWD, our dual action tailgate, our in-bed trunk that holds a ton of stuff, easily fitting in our garage and probably my wife's ability to see over the hood (we're talkin' really short!)!
|
SoundGuy
S Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02/11/2015
View Profile
|
SoundGuy wrote:I typically see ~ 15 miles to the US gallon around town, ~ 22 mpg highway when not towing, maybe a couple mpg less if the terrain is hilly and/or it's quite windy, and typically between 10.5 to 12.5 mpg when towing our 192RBS - rarely if ever below 10 mpg but not much greater if it's hilly and/or windy, well into the 12s if the roads are relatively flat and relatively calm, an overall average perhaps of ~ 11.5 mpg, which is pretty good relatively speaking. In comparison, how does your Ridgeline do?
Last Train wrote:Regarding mileage . . . First of all the Gen 1 (2006-2014 models) Ridgeline (ours is a 2011 model) never was known for its fuel efficiency - especially in its later years when competitive vehicles surpassed it in technology. With that background, in a non- towing regime around town we typically get 16-18mpg. On interstates - like our trip to the Appalachains for Thanksgiving - we get 19-22mpg varying with terrain, of course.
When towing it's roughly 1/2 that we get around town without towing.
Thanks for your detailed reply. Now that there's just 2 of us I do from time to time give some thought as to whether I really need my Silverado vs a somewhat smaller, more fuel efficient vehicle like the Honda Ridgeline. My wife has an '06 Civic and with the usual regular maintenance required for any vehicle all we do is put gas in it (not much) and drive it - dead reliable. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/biggrin.gif "biggrin") However, the question remains - what would I gain? Honda claims 26/19 mpg for the current generation of Ridgeline and if I could actually believe it that 25% improvement over my Silverado might in itself be sufficient justification, especially here in Canada where our fuel costs average 30% higher than in the US. Fuel cost when towing isn't my concern but rather the significant annual cost for fuel when not towing - thousands $$$$$ every year. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/eek.gif "eek") I really like driving a 1/2 ton, the interior space it provides, and of course how easily it tows our 192RBS. However, your fuel mileage numbers tell me what I've always believed - your V6 Ridgeline is working a lot harder than my V8 Silverado pulling a 192RBS, despite the fact that some of that extra 5.3L GM engine grunt is being used to push along a much heavier vehicle. EPA numbers for the Ridgeline (not towing) are to me the main attraction but in the real world I question whether it really comes anywhere near close to those numbers.
SoundGuy wrote:Also curious - with my 192RBS averaging ~ 4800 lbs loaded & ready to camp I typically run ~ 625 lbs of gross tongue weight so I'm wondering if you're running ~ 4600 lbs GVW how (and why) you keep the tongue weight down so low, ~ 11%.
Last Train wrote:We have kept our tongue weights in that spectrum simply because it has unfailingly worked very well.
The fact you're able to tow without weight distribution has me mystified as there's no way I could with my Silverado ... 625 lbs of gross tongue weight just unloads the truck's front steer axle far too much. I typically average ~ 13% gross tongue weight but in fact have tried everything I can to increase that just a bit more, the problem being that fully loaded fridge at the far rear of the trailer really counters my efforts. A full black tank on the way home also exacerbates the situation, 'though by that time the fridge contains far less so that does help. In your case, running just 10 to 11% gross tongue weight is awfully low, especially without the use of weight distribution. So - we have essentially the same trailer, typically averaging about the same gross weight (4600 to 4800 lbs) yet you're running significantly less gross tongue weight. Loading as I do I don't see any way I could run that little even if I wanted to and 2) if I did I have little doubt I'd be all over the road when towing at highway speed. I'm mystified. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/awink.gif "awink")
|
Bols2DawaLL
SW. Ontario
Full Member
Joined: 08/24/2016
View Profile
|
Soundguy , just following along here but you've mentioned to me in the past that my 2011 6 cyl. (290 h.p V6 ) Grand Cherokee would not be a good tow vehicle for this TT . Just curious but what would make the Ridgeline a better choice ? Thanks
|
|
|
|
