Second, is flooring. Several companies have tried composite flooring. Most (all?) have switched back to the tried and true 3/4" plywood. My assessment of the failure of composite flooring is that there was not enough aluminum tubing used in the floor PLUS the same fiberglass panels used for wall construction were used for the floor. My research has shown that no fiberglass skin manufacturer recommends their product to be used as a subfloor. Has this changed ?
2015 Backpack SS1500
1997 Ford 7.3 OBS 4x4 CC LB
Its bad enough that there are seams which present possible water intrusion along all the edges, and around the door and window openings on an azdel unit, I dont need an additional one every few inches the length of the unit.
And wood, even a hardwood with screw in fasteners will still wear and have fasteners loosen on any unit which flexes and shifts from wind, snow loads and the hurricane force winds thrown at it by towing to travelling. Aluminum with tight fasteners will hold better. They can loosen as well as experiencing electrolysis issues, but overall I have more trust.
On my house that I built in 2005, I used an OSB tongue and groove flooring product on the two upper floors, and want that in my new TT if not marine plywood.
I just visited a dealer to look at Grand Designs last week and was happy with the walls in general, but the dealer touting composite , laminate flooring wasn't impressive. Composite just means "made of multiple products or materials", and laminate means only that "they glued them together". He could not tell me what they consisted of.
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
I dont know if I stated anything of interest to your question, but Those are my preferences and why.
theoldwizard1 wrote:
It seems that the industry is slowly moving away from wood stud, fiberglass insulation and aluminum siding to the fiberglass skin, aluminum tubing, solid foam for wall construction.
It seems that the industry is slowly moving away from wood stud, fiberglass insulation and aluminum siding to the fiberglass skin, aluminum tubing, solid foam for wall construction.
Curious as to how you came to this conclusion when pretty well every major manufacturer still offers stick 'n tin models.
![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/scratchead.gif "scratchead")
As an example, my own Freedom Express is aluminum framed with Filon (and Azdel in the sidewalls) but Coachmen still offers the stick 'n tin Catalina series simply because that's what some people prefer. ![[emoticon]](http://www.coastresorts.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/wink.gif "wink")
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
Almost every MFG offers entry level TT's with corrugated siding. some with aluminum framing, others with wood.
Even if the foam laminate is heavier, I strongly prefer it.
2012 Fun Finder X-139 "Boondock Style" (axle-flipped and extra insulation)
2013 Toyota Tacoma Off-Road (semi-beefy tires and components)
Our trips -- pix and text
About our trailer
"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single list."
kerrlakeRoo wrote:
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
It might be slightly lower than standard aluminum framed composite RVs, but I think the sticks and tin is still lighter.
2015 Ram 1500
2022 Grand Design Imagine XLS 22RBE
SidecarFlip wrote:
Longevity all distills down to how an owner maintains either. No maintenance equals a short life with either construction method. Water son't discriminate.
Longevity all distills down to how an owner maintains either. No maintenance equals a short life with either construction method. Water son't discriminate.
Actually. water does discriminate, or more to the point AZDEL walls do. AZDEL will not rot.
Terry & Shay
Coachman Apex 288BH.
2013 F150 XLT Off Road
5.0, 3.73
Lazy Campers
TurnThePage wrote:
It might be slightly lower than standard aluminum framed composite RVs, but I think the sticks and tin is still lighter.
kerrlakeRoo wrote:
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
It might be slightly lower than standard aluminum framed composite RVs, but I think the sticks and tin is still lighter.
In truth. AZDL is 50 percent lighter, and has 50 percent higher R value than luan backed walls. And if you check. you will see that Stick, and tin TT are much heavier than AZDEL built TTs.
Example. My 31 foot Apex is only 4811lb dry (yellow sticker) My past 27' no slide stick, and Tin TT came in at 4975LB. Only a little over 100lb difference, but remember their is a 4 foot difference, and a 15' slide difference, and slides are very heavy.
SidecarFlip wrote:
Longevity all distills down to how an owner maintains either. No maintenance equals a short life with either construction method. Water won't discriminate.
Longevity all distills down to how an owner maintains either. No maintenance equals a short life with either construction method. Water won't discriminate.
I understand this completely !
There is a CHANCE that an Azdel aluminum tubing MIGHT survive a roof leak, but they are still subject to delamination.
Sadly, roof leaks, left unchecked, frequently result in rotted floor and the end of many a TT !
kerrlakeRoo wrote:
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
TurnThePage wrote:
It might be slightly lower than standard aluminum framed composite RVs, but I think the sticks and tin is still lighter.
It might be slightly lower than standard aluminum framed composite RVs, but I think the sticks and tin is still lighter.
I am trying to find the truth about this !
kerrlakeRoo wrote:
FWIW, I know I wont buy tin (aluminum) over wood on wood studs. At least for the walls. Roofs are hard to avoid, but for walls I dont want the movement that exist between layers in aluminum sided units.
FWIW, I know I wont buy tin (aluminum) over wood on wood studs. At least for the walls. Roofs are hard to avoid, but for walls I dont want the movement that exist between layers in aluminum sided units.
I don't understand this statement.
The outer and inner fiberglass coverings are bonded (glued) to the aluminum frames and solid foam. There should be no movement.
Terryallan wrote:
In truth. AZDL is 50 percent lighter, and has 50 percent higher R value than luan backed walls. And if you check. you will see that Stick, and tin TT are much heavier than AZDEL built TTs.
Example. My 31 foot Apex is only 4811lb dry (yellow sticker) My past 27' no slide stick, and Tin TT came in at 4975LB. Only a little over 100lb difference, but remember their is a 4 foot difference, and a 15' slide difference, and slides are very heavy.
AZDL is 50% lighter than, and has 50% higher R value than... Azdel is definitely a step in the right direction, but c'mon, how much of your trailer is made of Azdel? NOT ENOUGH to make those claims. Over recent years, you could go to a manufacturer website and build a travel trailer, then switch between wood framed aluminum sided, or composite (fiberglass on luan) on aluminum frame. The composite was ALWAYS hundreds of pounds heavier. As far as the original question is concerned, wood framed is lighter. With that said, my next RV will likely be one of the aluminum framed variety, for reasons not related to weight.
TurnThePage wrote:
It might be slightly lower than standard aluminum framed composite RVs, but I think the sticks and tin is still lighter.
kerrlakeRoo wrote:
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
Yes the weight is lower on the aluminum and azdel units if everything else remains static.
It might be slightly lower than standard aluminum framed composite RVs, but I think the sticks and tin is still lighter.
In truth. AZDL is 50 percent lighter, and has 50 percent higher R value than luan backed walls. And if you check. you will see that Stick, and tin TT are much heavier than AZDEL built TTs.
Example. My 31 foot Apex is only 4811lb dry (yellow sticker) My past 27' no slide stick, and Tin TT came in at 4975LB. Only a little over 100lb difference, but remember their is a 4 foot difference, and a 15' slide difference, and slides are very heavy.
TurnThePage wrote:
With that said, my next RV will likely be one of the aluminum framed variety, for reasons not related to weight.
With that said, my next RV will likely be one of the aluminum framed variety, for reasons not related to weight.
I'll bite ! For what reasons ?
2017 Jayflight 26BH Elite
theoldwizard1 wrote:
I don't understand this statement.
The outer and inner fiberglass coverings are bonded (glued) to the aluminum frames and solid foam. There should be no movement.
kerrlakeRoo wrote:
FWIW, I know I wont buy tin (aluminum) over wood on wood studs. At least for the walls. Roofs are hard to avoid, but for walls I dont want the movement that exist between layers in aluminum sided units.
FWIW, I know I wont buy tin (aluminum) over wood on wood studs. At least for the walls. Roofs are hard to avoid, but for walls I dont want the movement that exist between layers in aluminum sided units.
I don't understand this statement.
The outer and inner fiberglass coverings are bonded (glued) to the aluminum frames and solid foam. There should be no movement.
He was referring to the wood framed with aluminum siding (stick and tin), not aluminum framed.
Terryallan wrote:
Actually. water does discriminate, or more to the point AZDEL walls do. AZDEL will not rot.
SidecarFlip wrote:
Longevity all distills down to how an owner maintains either. No maintenance equals a short life with either construction method. Water son't discriminate.
Longevity all distills down to how an owner maintains either. No maintenance equals a short life with either construction method. Water son't discriminate.
Actually. water does discriminate, or more to the point AZDEL walls do. AZDEL will not rot.
Actually it doesn't. Azdel is not a miracle product. Most manufacturers using Azdel, Coachmen included, only use it in select areas. Its used for the outer substrate layer of only the sidewall lamination between the Filon and foam/aluminum framed core. The inner layer substrate (with vinyl wall covering) remains luan plywood. As does the floor assembly, the roof assembly etc, along with the front and rear wall panels. Add to that all of it is assembled with low VOC adhesives that are not very resilient to H2O, thank the EPA. If you want a sidewall panel which uses Azdel as opposed to luan plywood completely, look at Lance.
Granted the Azdel will not rot, swell up, or fall apart like luan plywood. However if you get water in the mix the Azdel is not doing you much if its delaminated from the core, or the Filon releases from the Azdel, or the inner luan layer swells up, delaminates, or falls apart. Same if the water gets to the floor assembly, the roof assembly etc. You will still have pristine virgin Azdel in the sideall that will not rot, but huge issues elsewhere not easily repaired. IMO its nothing but marketing, sure looks good on the brochures and websites.
Is Azdel better than luan plywood....yes it is, that's a no brainer. Is it worth basing a purchase on or believing you can never have delam? Not so much.
aluminum studs with Wood inserted for added support for the fasteners...
**Why doesn't NuWa use an all aluminum structure like popular Indiana manufacturers?**
NuWa made the decision to begin the use of aluminum structure based on marketing and the fact that many people were concluding that an "aluminum caged" product was superior in construction technology, weight and strength. Our 40+ years of experience as a leader in 5th wheel design suggests that may be "flawed" information. We have proven that wood construction need be no heavier or less strong than aluminum construction, that is built properly. We now build both materials, and are comfortable doing either, however our opinion is still that wood construction provides a superior product, and today we use both in the construction of our trailers.**
Having owned three truck campers and three fifth wheel trailers with both types of construction I prefer the wood frame over aluminum frame with foam core. Our wood framed units were much quieter/warmer in the winter/less sweating issues and didn't have the dreaded drumming aluminum framed units are noted for.
"good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment" ............ Will Rogers
'03 2500 QC Dodge/Cummins HO 3.73 6 speed manual Jacobs Westach
'97 Park Avanue 28' 5er 11200 two slides
Ralph Cramden wrote:
Actually it doesn't. Azdel is not a miracle product. Most manufacturers using Azdel, Coachmen included, only use it in select areas. Its used for the outer substrate layer of only the sidewall lamination between the Filon and foam/aluminum framed core. The inner layer substrate (with vinyl wall covering) remains luan plywood. As does the floor assembly, the roof assembly etc, along with the front and rear wall panels. Add to that all of it is assembled with low VOC adhesives that are not very resilient to H2O, thank the EPA. If you want a sidewall panel which uses Azdel as opposed to luan plywood completely, look at Lance.
Granted the Azdel will not rot, swell up, or fall apart like luan plywood. However if you get water in the mix the Azdel is not doing you much if its delaminated from the core, or the Filon releases from the Azdel, or the inner luan layer swells up, delaminates, or falls apart. Same if the water gets to the floor assembly, the roof assembly etc. You will still have pristine virgin Azdel in the sideall that will not rot, but huge issues elsewhere not easily repaired. IMO its nothing but marketing, sure looks good on the brochures and websites.
Is Azdel better than luan plywood....yes it is, that's a no brainer. Is it worth basing a purchase on or believing you can never have delam? Not so much.
Terryallan wrote:
Actually. water does discriminate, or more to the point AZDEL walls do. AZDEL will not rot.
SidecarFlip wrote:
Longevity all distills down to how an owner maintains either. No maintenance equals a short life with either construction method. Water son't discriminate.
Longevity all distills down to how an owner maintains either. No maintenance equals a short life with either construction method. Water son't discriminate.
Actually. water does discriminate, or more to the point AZDEL walls do. AZDEL will not rot.
Actually it doesn't. Azdel is not a miracle product. Most manufacturers using Azdel, Coachmen included, only use it in select areas. Its used for the outer substrate layer of only the sidewall lamination between the Filon and foam/aluminum framed core. The inner layer substrate (with vinyl wall covering) remains luan plywood. As does the floor assembly, the roof assembly etc, along with the front and rear wall panels. Add to that all of it is assembled with low VOC adhesives that are not very resilient to H2O, thank the EPA. If you want a sidewall panel which uses Azdel as opposed to luan plywood completely, look at Lance.
Granted the Azdel will not rot, swell up, or fall apart like luan plywood. However if you get water in the mix the Azdel is not doing you much if its delaminated from the core, or the Filon releases from the Azdel, or the inner luan layer swells up, delaminates, or falls apart. Same if the water gets to the floor assembly, the roof assembly etc. You will still have pristine virgin Azdel in the sideall that will not rot, but huge issues elsewhere not easily repaired. IMO its nothing but marketing, sure looks good on the brochures and websites.
Is Azdel better than luan plywood....yes it is, that's a no brainer. Is it worth basing a purchase on or believing you can never have delam? Not so much.
Said it wouldn't rot. Didn't say it wouldn't delam. there are too many variables to say that.
And to answer another poster. Only the walls in my TT have AZDEL. And yes it is 50 percent lighter, and makes a much lighter TT than luan sided TTs. How many 31' stick, and tin, or luan, bunkhouse TTs with a 15' slide do you know of that weigh less than 5000lbs. Look in my sig at one.
Chuck_thehammer wrote:
a few manufacturers proudly state...
aluminum studs with Wood inserted for added support for the fasteners...
a few manufacturers proudly state...
aluminum studs with Wood inserted for added support for the fasteners...
Yeah, I found that out a few tears ago !
In particular, the bottom piece of square aluminum has a wood insert in it to facilitate connection to the floor.
1) Yes there is a huge weight difference between "old fashioned" construction (wood and luan and house insulation) and modern construction. Azdel as has been mentioned, block foam insulation and aluminum will "weigh lighter" (pun intended)
2) Builders like Lance use 2 layers of Azdel (one below the Lamilux 4000 fiberglass) and one inside as the wallboard. Not everyone advertising Azdel does this. They'll either use it in a few places or only use 1 layer which is kinda dumb.
Azdel, being a composite material is more expensive. A entry level Lance will set you back somewhere around $40,000.
Luan is evil, and OSB is evil. Any wood ih a trailer, save for the cabinetry is susceptible to problems.
2014 F-250
2014 Minnie Winnie 2351DKS (Traded In-Burnout-Use A Surge Protector!)
2015 Arctic Fox 22G (Great Trailer But Heavy - Traded In)
2018 Lance 1685 w/ Solar & 4 Seasons Package
1999 Beneteau 461 Oceanis Yacht
En Norski i en Fransk båt - Dette må jeg se!
Lance Factory Tour Video
I cannot see that the selling points of “2X the insulation value and 1/2 the weight of luaun” have any real value in themselves, especially since luaun is pretty light and has an R-value of about 0.3.
The rot resistance of Azdel may have merit, except that if there is enough water intrusion to rot luaun, the Azdel will probably have come loose from the fiberglass and/or the foam.
As has been said over and over, it’s the maintenance that makes the difference.
To find which is actually lighter, you would have to find the exact same camper with both types of construction.
Kip
2015 Skyline Dart 214RB
2018 Silverado Double Cab 4x4
Andersen Hitch
GrandpaKip wrote:
After doing a bit of math, if my camper had Azdel in the side walls, it would be roughly 100 pounds lighter and have an R-value about 0.6 higher. That higher insulation value is only in the side wall where the least amount of heat transfer takes place.
I cannot see that the selling points of “2X the insulation value and 1/2 the weight of luaun” have any real value in themselves, especially since luaun is pretty light and has an R-value of about 0.3.
The rot resistance of Azdel may have merit, except that if there is enough water intrusion to rot luaun, the Azdel will probably have come loose from the fiberglass and/or the foam.
As has been said over and over, it’s the maintenance that makes the difference.
To find which is actually lighter, you would have to find the exact same camper with both types of construction.
After doing a bit of math, if my camper had Azdel in the side walls, it would be roughly 100 pounds lighter and have an R-value about 0.6 higher. That higher insulation value is only in the side wall where the least amount of heat transfer takes place.
I cannot see that the selling points of “2X the insulation value and 1/2 the weight of luaun” have any real value in themselves, especially since luaun is pretty light and has an R-value of about 0.3.
The rot resistance of Azdel may have merit, except that if there is enough water intrusion to rot luaun, the Azdel will probably have come loose from the fiberglass and/or the foam.
As has been said over and over, it’s the maintenance that makes the difference.
To find which is actually lighter, you would have to find the exact same camper with both types of construction.
There is no shortage of suckers who buy into the brand website / glossy brochure glitz. .....Lightweight....literally oozing with quality.......Amish craftsmanship.....did I mention high quality?.......Azdel......Aluminum.....Revolutionary.......New and improved......Quality quality quality.......Quality control.
The best one is on every Forest River brochure they tout the dedicated QC facility as 20,000 sq ft of quality LOL........what percentage of total units produced do you think ever see the place? I know that little snippet of info told to me by a little Indiana Bird who migrated here. Less than 1%
....significantly less.
New Polymer RV Construction
Video
Promo Video
2017 Windjammer 3006WK
2011 Dodge Ram 2500 4X4 Crew Cab Cummins Turbo Diesel
They'll sell....but when 30' stick and tin jobs full of cheap frill can be had for $17K or less I don't think They'll reinvent the RV industry. I would surely consider one if they shy away from all things Lippert.
1) Regular corrugated aluminum over stick frame (Jayco)
2) Gelgoat fiberglass (Luan I think) over stick frame (Weekend Warrior)
3) Adzel over Aluminum framing (Northwoods)
1)The metal siding was very susceptible to damage when driving off-road. It dented and scratched easy ,and I had one branch punch a hole through. Also, with my driving, I could see where the trailer was flexing and leaving telltale signs of worn aluminum at every joint. No good for me, but acceptable for lighter use, especially if it stays on pavement.
2) This construction turned out great. A little on the heavy side, but the overall trailer weight was reasonable. Unfortunately the weight savings was in the frame. Which broke. Big benefit was no condensation at the framing like my current trailer.
3) This is my current trailer. The body is incredibly durable. I've drug this one though the msot adverse conditions so far, and even after leaning it over against a tree due to some loose soil, you can't tell. Yeah, lots of forest pin-striping but it buffs out very easy. Compared to the weekend warrior, the body is lighter, but the frame is twice as strong, at least. Only downside I've run into the condensation at the framing.
Overall, I'm happy with option 3. That said, the quality of the construction matters more. Many of the mass produced RV have questionable welding skills and processes, and I'm not sure I'd trust their aluminum framing. Also, ORV/Northwoods uses wood backing inside the aluminum framing for secure attachments. I'm not aware of the mass produced companies doing this, and eventually screws and what not will work loose.
2000 Ford E450 V10 VAN! 450,000+ miles
2014 ORV really big trailer
2015 Ford Focus ST
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
theoldwizard1 wrote:
I'll bite ! For what reasons ?
I question the quality of the fiberglass bat insulation in the sticks and tin units. It's just the batting with no backing, and I don't think the stuff I've seen is even R7. It's not attached to anything and is just kind of shoved in placed (in a hurry). I found a couple places in my current trailer that didn't even have the batting inserted (Now corrected, and luckily my trailer is small enough that the furnace or A/C have been able to easily keep up.) On top of that, sound travels through my current trailer very clearly. If you have a secret, don't whisper it near my trailer. TurnThePage wrote:
With that said, my next RV will likely be one of the aluminum framed variety, for reasons not related to weight.
With that said, my next RV will likely be one of the aluminum framed variety, for reasons not related to weight.
I'll bite ! For what reasons ?
I also poked a hole through the aluminum siding while dragging the trailer into a remote region. I just don't think it's strong enough.
Last but not least, ALL the models with the floor plans and features that appeal to me aren't even offered in sticks and tin anymore.
* This post was edited 12/23/17 02:13pm by TurnThePage *
11 lbs
If Adel is 50% lighter then it weighs 5.5 lbs per sheet.
If you TT sidewall is 31'x8'=248 sqft x 2 = 496 sqft.
496 sqft divide by 32 sqft = 15.5 panels.
15.5 x 11 lbs = 170lbs. 170 lbs divide by 2 = 85.5 lbs.
Not figuring in all the cutouts for doors, windows, fridge panels, vents, etc on the sidewalls, it looks like you would at max only save 85.5 lbs over Luan. Even less with cutouts. Big deal.
FrankShore wrote:
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
Did you read the article or watch the videos? Where are the similarities to anything built by Lance?
goducks10 wrote:
Weight of Luan, Philippine Red with sizes 1/8 inch × 48 inch × 96 inch is:
11 lbs
If Adel is 50% lighter then it weighs 5.5 lbs per sheet.
If you TT sidewall is 31'x8'=248 sqft x 2 = 496 sqft.
496 sqft divide by 32 sqft = 15.5 panels.
15.5 x 11 lbs = 170lbs. 170 lbs divide by 2 = 85.5 lbs.
Not figuring in all the cutouts for doors, windows, fridge panels, vents, etc on the sidewalls, it looks like you would at max only save 85.5 lbs over Luan. Even less with cutouts. Big deal.
Weight of Luan, Philippine Red with sizes 1/8 inch × 48 inch × 96 inch is:
11 lbs
If Adel is 50% lighter then it weighs 5.5 lbs per sheet.
If you TT sidewall is 31'x8'=248 sqft x 2 = 496 sqft.
496 sqft divide by 32 sqft = 15.5 panels.
15.5 x 11 lbs = 170lbs. 170 lbs divide by 2 = 85.5 lbs.
Not figuring in all the cutouts for doors, windows, fridge panels, vents, etc on the sidewalls, it looks like you would at max only save 85.5 lbs over Luan. Even less with cutouts. Big deal.
You're not figuring in the LitePly, the wood used in cabinetry!
Ralph Cramden wrote:
What do you mean Ralph? I don't understand your question!
Did you read the article or watch the videos? Where are the similarities to anything built by Lance?
FrankShore wrote:
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
What do you mean Ralph? I don't understand your question!
Did you read the article or watch the videos? Where are the similarities to anything built by Lance?
FrankShore wrote:
Ralph Cramden wrote:
What do you mean Ralph? I don't understand your question!
Did you read the article or watch the videos? Where are the similarities to anything built by Lance?
FrankShore wrote:
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
What do you mean Ralph? I don't understand your question!
Did you read the article or watch the videos? Where are the similarities to anything built by Lance?
To my knowledge lance is not building anything remotely close to what is in that link and video. That is essentially a unibody RV with no seperate frame. Its made from some type of cast panels.
I would love to see more details of the construction and materials used.
Lance Factory Tour by the Russo's
Ralph Cramden wrote:
To my knowledge lance is not building anything remotely close to what is in that link and video. That is essentially a unibody RV with no seperate frame. Its made from some type of cast panels.
I would love to see more details of the construction and materials used.
FrankShore wrote:
Ralph Cramden wrote:
What do you mean Ralph? I don't understand your question!
Did you read the article or watch the videos? Where are the similarities to anything built by Lance?
FrankShore wrote:
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
Lance and a huge number of European mfgs already build this way!
Azdel, LitePly, Beauflor, Lamilux 4000, CNC Routers, Solidworks Design = you can't beat Lance!
What do you mean Ralph? I don't understand your question!
Did you read the article or watch the videos? Where are the similarities to anything built by Lance?
To my knowledge lance is not building anything remotely close to what is in that link and video. That is essentially a unibody RV with no seperate frame. Its made from some type of cast panels.
I would love to see more details of the construction and materials used.
This is a complete departure from any construction method I've ever seen. Pricey, but looks like it would last forever.
2006 Silverado 1500HD Crew Cab 2WD 6.0L 3.73 8600 GVWR
2018 Coachmen Catalina Legacy Edition 223RBS
1991 Palomino Filly PUP
FrankShore wrote:
Ralph, have you looked at the 2 Lance construction videos I posted?
Lance Factory Tour by the Russo's
Ralph, have you looked at the 2 Lance construction videos I posted?
Lance Factory Tour by the Russo's
Yes. And referring to your previous post.
Lance laminated sidewalls are built the same as everything else. No matter how they weld it or assemble it, it's still an aluminum tube frame panel, inlaid with beaded foam. Lance uses Azdel for both substrate layers as opposed to Luan but the panel itself is no different in general than on my current Rockwood or previous Keystone and Aerolite.
Beaufloor is just a brand of flooring and Lamilux a brand of Filon. I have Beaufloor in my Rockwood. I think the fiberglass is Lamilux in it too, but in any case both are used by many of the RV manufacturers.
CNC router stations are common at least at the large manufacturers. The days of Jacob Yoder in his homemade jeans and suspenders, running around the plant like an executed chicken with a handheld router cutting out windows, are over at most manufacturers. I have been to Forest Rivers facility that fabricates all the wall panels for most of their brands, and they have lots of CNC equipment.
A Lance is built on an outsourced steel frame. It's not Lippert welded junk but either a BAL NORCO NXG or Ultraframe that's mostly bolted together. A frame none the less. Those are also used by others, not a Lance exclusive. Jayco uses them as do some others. Keystone currently uses BAL frames on some of their brands. The trailer in the OP's post has no steel frame and apparently gets it's stuctual strength through the cast polymer body itself.
The unit in the OP's post is unconventional over what Lance or most anyone else is doing in every sense of the word. A Lance has plywood for the floor and for roof sheathing. The one in the OP's link does not apparently have wood anywhere except maybe for interior cabinets and such.
I'm not knocking Lance, but it's not anything like the construction in the original post. Lance is built a little better than others according to some, which is debatable. The guy I ran into with a flooded Lance due to them not tightening the fill hose at the fill port will debate it all day long. But when you get right down to it, Lance is not generally different than the type of construction used by almost everyone else.
* This post was edited 12/24/17 04:22am by Ralph Cramden *
Quote:
Luan is evil, and OSB is evil. Any wood ih a trailer, save for the cabinetry is susceptible to problems.
True, susceptible to problems but it shouldn't be that way. OSB and Luan (or similar grade panels) are used in the housing industry and have some advantage. Since we move our little vacation homes down the road, that's where the susceptibility arises. Luan is evil, and OSB is evil. Any wood ih a trailer, save for the cabinetry is susceptible to problems.
I do think it's entirely possible to build a trailer or coach that doesn't leak from ordinary use. The roof system is mostly where a technological change has to be made.
If there was one "evil" material in an RV, I would call it -- the composite panel floor. The way they are currently used is scheduled for very thin and structurally lacking outer panels. The use of a bead board core should be avoided also, it has no strength when the modus is against the face of the board, it fractures. Extruded polystyrene doesn't have this issue. If the floor panel schedule involved the use of a 5/8" outer skin towards the cabin side, there would never have been a failure or complaint.
'03 F-250 4x4 CC
'71 Starcraft Wanderstar -- The Cowboy/Hilton
westend wrote:
If there was one "evil" material in an RV, I would call it -- the composite panel floor.
Too often I come across a trailer that I really like, only to find that danged "styrofoam" floor with 24" between the supports. Deal killer.
If there was one "evil" material in an RV, I would call it -- the composite panel floor.
You are not building the RV the manufacturer is building the RV. The consumer may know what materials were use but they have little control as to how they were installed or what went into the decision to use the material.
The choice of stick and tin or laminates will be around a long time. As will be the various types of flooring and roofs.
Floor plan lasts when all else is forgotten or accepted.
Twenty six foot 2010 Dutchmen Lite pulled with a 2011 EcoBoost F-150 4x4.
Just right for Grandpa, Grandma and the dog.
rbpru wrote:
One can argue the relative merits of any material but that assumes it is used as directed.
You are not building the RV the manufacturer is building the RV. The consumer may know what materials were use but they have little control as to how they were installed or what went into the decision to use the material.
The choice of stick and tin or laminates will be around a long time. As will be the various types of flooring and roofs.
Floor plan lasts when all else is forgotten or accepted.
One can argue the relative merits of any material but that assumes it is used as directed.
You are not building the RV the manufacturer is building the RV. The consumer may know what materials were use but they have little control as to how they were installed or what went into the decision to use the material.
The choice of stick and tin or laminates will be around a long time. As will be the various types of flooring and roofs.
Floor plan lasts when all else is forgotten or accepted.
Sorry, I have to respectfully disagree with that premise. Suppose I found a trailer with a flooplan I love, sturdy walls and an awesome frame. ......but a roof made out of cardboard. I'd reject it in a heartbeat.
A "cheap floor" is what I consider a styro-laminate. Others are fine with it, I like plain old 3/4" tongue groove exterior plywood. Which is one of the reasons I chose this trailer. Along with flooplan.
gmw photos wrote:
A "cheap floor" is what I consider a styro-laminate. Others are fine with it, I like plain old 3/4" tongue groove exterior plywood. Which is one of the reasons I chose this trailer. Along with flooplan.
A "cheap floor" is what I consider a styro-laminate. Others are fine with it, I like plain old 3/4" tongue groove exterior plywood. Which is one of the reasons I chose this trailer. Along with flooplan.
I had a couple problem areas with my floor, (1) the area underneath the water heater where I'd assume a previous owner drained the heater and allowed the drain water to sit and (2) underneath one wall where a major leak had rotted the whole wall frame.
The rest of the subfloor (which I removed in pieces to insulate better) showed that the flooring system was intact and built as original. I have 5/8" exterior grade plywood over 2"x2" floor joists , 16" OC. The trailer is 46 yrs old.
V-465
2013 GMC 2500HD Duramax Denali. 2015 CreekSide 20fq w/450 watts solar and 465 amp/hour of batteries. Retired and living the dream!
Most of the complaints we see are not related to the materials but rather the poor job of installing those materials.
rbpru wrote:
While there are some production short cuts or materials we my not like. You have to weigh your personal opinions against price and options.
Most of the complaints we see are not related to the materials but rather the poor job of installing those materials.
While there are some production short cuts or materials we my not like. You have to weigh your personal opinions against price and options.
Most of the complaints we see are not related to the materials but rather the poor job of installing those materials.
Exactly. The commonly used construction methods and materials are all acceptable and reasonably durable, IF they are put together correctly. Quality control is the biggest issue with any RV.
I have repaired several stick and tin campers from water infections and come spring I will start on a wet aluminum framed, filon sided and wood roof truss camper. A water infection seems to not discriminate between these styles of campers.
I left the composite floors out of this reply as what I have seen it is not good. That may just be a miss in the RV design OR it fits with the life they expected to get from it.
I do agree with the statement about shody assembly work, that is down right wrong.
I have also found, many folks who have bought a new (or used) camper really do not know how a camper gets a water infection. Odds are high that group never had anyone explain it to them and as such many have not done anything to prevent a water leak. Come 5 to 10 years later with no roof maintenance at all, they have a full blown leak or leaks all over if the camper has lived outside all the time. They still may not see any water inside the camper, but a leak in the ceiling, walls and floor can be there. And there are also leaks that are not from the roof. Basically, any penetration into the roof material, siding or floor system is a leak potential. We will put punctures from other objects off to the side right now as they can cause leaks too.
Regardless of stick and tin or aluminum studs and filon siding, the death of a camper from water infects both. Once the leak starts, it's downhill from there on when the leak will stop or the camper fail. Here are 5 groups I have found common amongst many a brand or build of camper. I'm sure there are more items.
1. Part of this issue is a design problem in my opinion. The standard RV extruded gutter rail system still used today, is a design issue. To small to be effective and the screws are under water during average rains. Same concept but larger and a different placement of the screws and it will work.
1A. Also in the design group, again in my opinion are 90 degree corner moldings with only 1 side with screws. It only has screws on one side and the other side has no screws. Simple fix, put screws on both side. Yes it costs a little more and takes more time to install, but it lasts longer and seals better.
1B. If you have a slide camper, how the slide is built can greatly affect if it leaks or not. However slides have advanced for the most part to help stop those leaks. Slide floor rot is better and slide seals have advanced. Still some room for improvement.
2. Part of this is a materials issue. The roof sealants and putty tape sealants for walls and non roof opening sealants are not a long life product. While many of the roofs do use a good quality butyl sealing tape, the caulking concept used on the roof is a weak link. And the putty tape used on the walls joints is just not a lasting product. Why not Eternabond tape all seams from the factory or other long life sealing tape? Costs, yes it costs some more, so offer it.
2A. Also in the materials group are fasteners used on the outside of the camper. Steel screws that rust come 6 to 10 years when exposed to water. A better life screw is a need before it becomes a water wick to the inside. High quality steel coatings or stainless are options.
3. Part of this is an assembly issue. Caulking skips, stripped screws not holding, molding installed wrong etc. from the factory. This is all about management. Setting the right expectations is where it all starts.
4. Part of this is the knowledge problem of the owner. Since they do not know or some do not care, a camper living outside all the time is destined die a water death. A new camper owner needs to understand how to care for their new camper and the fallout if they do not do what is needed.
5. And then there is the big question, how long is the design life of an RV supposed to be? How many miles, years, highway, off road etc. We may be getting what the design life is? This is a post in itself.
Either stick and tin or stick and filon or aluminum and filon they all seem to have the same things that attack the construction of the camper against a water infection. If groups 1 to 4 above where addressed, the construction we have today would last a lot longer and not be all that much more expensive. As to item 5, that may be a post in itself.
Hope this helps
John
* This post was last edited 12/27/17 09:32am by JBarca *
John & Cindy
2005 Ford F350 Super Duty, 4x4; 6.8L V10 with 4.10
CC, SB, Lariat & FX4 package
21,000 GCWR, 11,000 GVWR
Ford Tow Command
1,700# Reese HP hitch & HP Dual Cam
2 1/2" Towbeast Receiver
2004 Sunline Solaris T310SR
(I wish we were camping!)
JBarca wrote:
Regardless of stick and tin or aluminum studs and filon siding, the death of a camper from water infects both. Once the leak starts, it's downhill from there on when the leak will stop or the camper fail. Here are 5 groups I have found common among many a brand or build of camper. I'm sure there are more items.
1. Part of this issue is a design problem in my opinion. The standard RV extruded gutter rail system still used today, is a design issue.
Regardless of stick and tin or aluminum studs and filon siding, the death of a camper from water infects both. Once the leak starts, it's downhill from there on when the leak will stop or the camper fail. Here are 5 groups I have found common among many a brand or build of camper. I'm sure there are more items.
1. Part of this issue is a design problem in my opinion. The standard RV extruded gutter rail system still used today, is a design issue.
I have always felt this way !
Look at cargo trailers. Most use a rounded piece of aluminum that joins the side wall on the vertical. Much less chance of it to allow water intrusion.
JBarca wrote:
2. Part of this is a materials issue. The roof sealants and putty tape sealants for walls and non roof opening sealants are not a long life product. While many of the roofs do use a good quality butyl sealing tape, the caulking concept used on the roof is a weak link. And the putty tape used on the walls joints is just not a lasting product.
2. Part of this is a materials issue. The roof sealants and putty tape sealants for walls and non roof opening sealants are not a long life product. While many of the roofs do use a good quality butyl sealing tape, the caulking concept used on the roof is a weak link. And the putty tape used on the walls joints is just not a lasting product.
Eggshell or RV with fiberglass roofs are likely a better solution. 1/4"-3/8" plywood with 6oz or 7.5oz fiberglass cloth over arched roof trusses. All vents/cutouts should be installed with a flange protruding up. 2 layer would be required for adequate strength. The problem with this is not the cost of the material, but the labor cost. It would take at least the same number of worker as it takes to install a rubber roof, but it would take a lot more time, especially if they have to do 2 layers. Cure time would be at least 8-12 hours, and then you would have to finish the edges.
JBarca wrote:
4. Part of this is the knowledge problem of the owner. Since they do not know or some do not care, a camper living outside all the time is destined die a water death. A new camper owner needs to understand how to care for their new camper and the fallout if they do not do what is needed.
5. And then there is the big question, how long is the design life of an RV supposed to be? How many miles, years, highway, off road etc. We may be getting what the design life is? This is a post in itself.
4. Part of this is the knowledge problem of the owner. Since they do not know or some do not care, a camper living outside all the time is destined die a water death. A new camper owner needs to understand how to care for their new camper and the fallout if they do not do what is needed.
5. And then there is the big question, how long is the design life of an RV supposed to be? How many miles, years, highway, off road etc. We may be getting what the design life is? This is a post in itself.
I know the best thing you can do is keep your RV under a cover. RV cover are expensive and short lived, so most sit exposed to the sun.
I think #3 & #4 combine to do in most RVs. And I TOTALLY agree that it would be so awesome if they gave us the option to pay for better construction techniques and materials. That, simply by being an option, would turn the whole industry on its head.
If you have the money the product is out there.
Good stuff and organized in the writing, as per usual! I agree with every talking point you made. I like theoldwizard1's take on roofing, too. The cost of an inverted boat hull may be a sticking point, I haven't done the math.
FWIW, I have a seamed aluminum roof that was coated along it's life with a fairly durable coating. Don't know what the coating is but I spent many a happy minute removing it along the seams and through holes to install Eternabond tapes. My overall observation about the aluminum roof is that, if the proper sealants would have been installed in 1971, the trailer would have remained intact and no "water infection" would have taken place.
Again, I haven't done the cost analysis of aluminum vs fiberglass vs EPDM but with the rising price of rubber and oil, metal may be the better choice, assuming fiberglass would be the most expensive. I could envision a single sheet aluminum roof with CNC manipulated cutouts, a designed wall flange, and a durable attachment system to excel. The single sheet could be hoisted onto the roof frame and may be less labor than the convention of EPDM over sheet goods.
Also, there may be a time when liquid coatings outperform anything else. I know the folks with the Roof Armor upgrade swear by them and durability seems to be good.
theoldwizard1 wrote:
I have always felt this way !
Look at cargo trailers. Most use a rounded piece of aluminum that joins the side wall on the vertical. Much less chance of it to allow water intrusion.
JBarca wrote:
1. Part of this issue is a design problem in my opinion. The standard RV extruded gutter rail system still used today, is a design issue.
1. Part of this issue is a design problem in my opinion. The standard RV extruded gutter rail system still used today, is a design issue.
I have always felt this way !
Look at cargo trailers. Most use a rounded piece of aluminum that joins the side wall on the vertical. Much less chance of it to allow water intrusion.
Yes, you are right! I never thought of that. Cargo trailers have a roof and siding joint that is much more robust. Same as a semi trailers. Many of these trailers live outside all the time and are towed many miles. Semi trailers are in millions of miles. Good point. I'm going to have to research this more.
theoldwizard1 wrote:
Eggshell or RV with fiberglass roofs are likely a better solution. 1/4"-3/8" plywood with 6oz or 7.5oz fiberglass cloth over arched roof trusses. All vents/cutouts should be installed with a flange protruding up. 2 layer would be required for adequate strength. The problem with this is not the cost of the material, but the labor cost. It would take at least the same number of worker as it takes to install a rubber roof, but it would take a lot more time, especially if they have to do 2 layers. Cure time would be at least 8-12 hours, and then you would have to finish the edges.
JBarca wrote:
2. Part of this is a materials issue. The roof sealants and putty tape sealants for walls and non roof opening sealants are not a long life product. While many of the roofs do use a good quality butyl sealing tape, the caulking concept used on the roof is a weak link. And the putty tape used on the walls joints is just not a lasting product.
2. Part of this is a materials issue. The roof sealants and putty tape sealants for walls and non roof opening sealants are not a long life product. While many of the roofs do use a good quality butyl sealing tape, the caulking concept used on the roof is a weak link. And the putty tape used on the walls joints is just not a lasting product.
Eggshell or RV with fiberglass roofs are likely a better solution. 1/4"-3/8" plywood with 6oz or 7.5oz fiberglass cloth over arched roof trusses. All vents/cutouts should be installed with a flange protruding up. 2 layer would be required for adequate strength. The problem with this is not the cost of the material, but the labor cost. It would take at least the same number of worker as it takes to install a rubber roof, but it would take a lot more time, especially if they have to do 2 layers. Cure time would be at least 8-12 hours, and then you would have to finish the edges.
I agree this is one solution. And you are right, labor hours cost money. The materials are a lower part of the cost of a camper where labor is larger cost.
If the RV industry would at least address the shortfalls in the sealing joints, some design some materials, that in itself now could be make a camper to last much better. It could be an incremental lift in camper life with lower owner maintenance without a lot of added cost. The sad part is, a $15,000 starter camper and a $65,000 fifth wheel have the same inherent issues.
theoldwizard1 wrote:
I know the best thing you can do is keep your RV under a cover. RV cover are expensive and short lived, so most sit exposed to the sun.
JBarca wrote:
4. Part of this is the knowledge problem of the owner. Since they do not know or some do not care, a camper living outside all the time is destined die a water death. A new camper owner needs to understand how to care for their new camper and the fallout if they do not do what is needed.
5. And then there is the big question, how long is the design life of an RV supposed to be? How many miles, years, highway, off road etc. We may be getting what the design life is? This is a post in itself.
4. Part of this is the knowledge problem of the owner. Since they do not know or some do not care, a camper living outside all the time is destined die a water death. A new camper owner needs to understand how to care for their new camper and the fallout if they do not do what is needed.
5. And then there is the big question, how long is the design life of an RV supposed to be? How many miles, years, highway, off road etc. We may be getting what the design life is? This is a post in itself.
I know the best thing you can do is keep your RV under a cover. RV cover are expensive and short lived, so most sit exposed to the sun.
Yes, keeping the camper undercover is one of the best things one can do. Ours had to live outside all the time for the first 11 years of its life until the new barn came. The last 3 years it could sleep in side. I was fortunate, I realized early on and gave up on the roof caulk sealants back in 2009 and Eternabonded all edges and changed to stainless screws. Especially the gutter rail.
I have been each year now pulling several groups of moldings, windows and door flanges etc off, taking out the putty tape that is failing out and putting high quality butyl in place with a Dicor non sag caulk as a secondary seal. This year I should be closer to completing a complete redo. 14 years and no leaks in the roof or walls. It was work and constant attention but it has worked out. Did have slide floor rot long ago. A fabrication issue with holes in the floor from day 1.
I have used 303 UV protectant on the roof and all things plastic or vinyl including the Dicor caulking. This has made a significant difference in slowing down the sun deterioration. Even the Dicor survives longer.
TurnThePage wrote:
Mine is one that lives outside all year, and it's suffering some serious snow and ice build up right now. JBarca, I think it may have been you that influenced me toward the rainkap solution for the gutters. I installed it last summer, and am hopeful that it will help the old trailer live a little longer, not to mention the sides staying cleaner.
I think #3 & #4 combine to do in most RVs. And I TOTALLY agree that it would be so awesome if they gave us the option to pay for better construction techniques and materials. That, simply by being an option, would turn the whole industry on its head.
Mine is one that lives outside all year, and it's suffering some serious snow and ice build up right now. JBarca, I think it may have been you that influenced me toward the rainkap solution for the gutters. I installed it last summer, and am hopeful that it will help the old trailer live a little longer, not to mention the sides staying cleaner.
I think #3 & #4 combine to do in most RVs. And I TOTALLY agree that it would be so awesome if they gave us the option to pay for better construction techniques and materials. That, simply by being an option, would turn the whole industry on its head.
Hi TurnThePage,
The rain kap, that may have been LarryJ. I took his Eternabond advice to the next level back when he first came out with the Rainkap post.
Yes, I fully agree if the manufacturers would at least create an option to offer that would get longer life, that would be worth it. This does mean then they are somewhat admitting what they make now has a limited life. That will be a hurdle to overcome, but with the right marketing, it could work. While many first time buyers with not much money may not buy it, however second time buyers or anyone who dealt with a water or cheap build issue I would think consider it. I know I would.
And they really do not have to spend all that much to make a camper last longer. On a $25K to $35,000 camper, adding $2,000 to $3,000 of added cost to gain 10 years of camper life is a good investment. And they really do not have to change all that much depending on the brand and product line they are starting with.
And this applies to the runner gear, trailer frame, tires, roof, siding joints etc.
westend wrote:
J Barca,
Good stuff and organized in the writing, as per usual! I agree with every talking point you made. I like theoldwizard1's take on roofing, too. The cost of an inverted boat hull may be a sticking point, I haven't done the math.
FWIW, I have a seamed aluminum roof that was coated along it's life with a fairly durable coating. Don't know what the coating is but I spent many a happy minute removing it along the seams and through holes to install Eternabond tapes. My overall observation about the aluminum roof is that, if the proper sealants would have been installed in 1971, the trailer would have remained intact and no "water infection" would have taken place.
Again, I haven't done the cost analysis of aluminum vs fiberglass vs EPDM but with the rising price of rubber and oil, metal may be the better choice, assuming fiberglass would be the most expensive. I could envision a single sheet aluminum roof with CNC manipulated cutouts, a designed wall flange, and a durable attachment system to excel. The single sheet could be hoisted onto the roof frame and may be less labor than the convention of EPDM over sheet goods.
Also, there may be a time when liquid coatings outperform anything else. I know the folks with the Roof Armor upgrade swear by them and durability seems to be good.
J Barca,
Good stuff and organized in the writing, as per usual! I agree with every talking point you made. I like theoldwizard1's take on roofing, too. The cost of an inverted boat hull may be a sticking point, I haven't done the math.
FWIW, I have a seamed aluminum roof that was coated along it's life with a fairly durable coating. Don't know what the coating is but I spent many a happy minute removing it along the seams and through holes to install Eternabond tapes. My overall observation about the aluminum roof is that, if the proper sealants would have been installed in 1971, the trailer would have remained intact and no "water infection" would have taken place.
Again, I haven't done the cost analysis of aluminum vs fiberglass vs EPDM but with the rising price of rubber and oil, metal may be the better choice, assuming fiberglass would be the most expensive. I could envision a single sheet aluminum roof with CNC manipulated cutouts, a designed wall flange, and a durable attachment system to excel. The single sheet could be hoisted onto the roof frame and may be less labor than the convention of EPDM over sheet goods.
Also, there may be a time when liquid coatings outperform anything else. I know the folks with the Roof Armor upgrade swear by them and durability seems to be good.
Hi Westend,
Thanks for the good words. Much appreciated. Our 14 year old camper has EPDM and by E bonding all seams and 303 UV protectant, I'm good for several years before a rubber coating is needed. Keeping the UV in check is a bigger part of the roof longevity then I ever thought.
I just helped a neighbor with his year 2000 Coachmen TT. It had an all one piece aluminum roof. The actual aluminum was in perfect shape for a 17 year old camper and I could tell, there was no maintenance done to it. It even had the original year 2000 tires on it... He bought this camper used 3 years ago. The caulking was totally shot. But the roof membrane was outstanding. This is a very good roofing material but it had the same downfall of the EPDM roofs, the joints and caulking. We will be E bonding all joints come spring. For this winter, we peeled up all the old caulk and put new Dicor on. Next spring the E bond will come.
I agree, the aluminum is a good option. Better than the EPDM as it needs work to keep it OK, the aluminum much less.
I think EPDM took over from the all one piece aluminum due to labor cost and maybe some material cost at the time. I could tell this roof was hand done on the edge bends and hole cut outs. Now a days, yes with all this CNC cutting available they can create a one shot deal whole roof.
TurnThePage wrote:
JBarca, I think it may have been you that influenced me toward the Rainkap solution for the gutters. I installed it last summer, and am hopeful that it will help
JBarca, I think it may have been you that influenced me toward the Rainkap solution for the gutters. I installed it last summer, and am hopeful that it will help
This is the first I have heard of Rainkap product. Look interesting ! I am looking for step-by-step installation instructions with images or a video on how the Rainkap system is installed.
westend wrote:
My overall observation about the aluminum roof is that, if the proper sealants would have been installed in 1971, the trailer would have remained intact and no "water infection" would have taken place.
My overall observation about the aluminum roof is that, if the proper sealants would have been installed in 1971, the trailer would have remained intact and no "water infection" would have taken place.
I am not sure about that ! 47 years is a long time !! Even boat windows/port eventually need to be removed and rebedded, typically with butyl tape.
westend wrote:
I could envision a single sheet aluminum roof with CNC manipulated cutouts, a designed wall flange, and a durable attachment system to excel. The single sheet could be hoisted onto the roof frame and may be less labor than the convention of EPDM over sheet goods.
I could envision a single sheet aluminum roof with CNC manipulated cutouts, a designed wall flange, and a durable attachment system to excel. The single sheet could be hoisted onto the roof frame and may be less labor than the convention of EPDM over sheet goods.
More likely, a large roll of aluminum on a spool mounted at roof level would be unwound over the underlayment that was coated with some type of adhesive. From a labor standpoint, the biggest problem would be getting it properly aligned before the adhesive "grabbed". Not sure what the best solution would be for finishing the edges or front or back.
JBarca wrote:
Yes, you are right! I never thought of that. Cargo trailers have a roof and siding joint that is much more robust. Same as a semi trailers. Many of these trailers live outside all the time and are towed many miles. Semi trailers are in millions of miles. Good point. I'm going to have to research this more.
theoldwizard1 wrote:
Look at cargo trailers. Most use a rounded piece of aluminum that joins the side wall on the vertical. Much less chance of it to allow water intrusion.
Look at cargo trailers. Most use a rounded piece of aluminum that joins the side wall on the vertical. Much less chance of it to allow water intrusion.
Yes, you are right! I never thought of that. Cargo trailers have a roof and siding joint that is much more robust. Same as a semi trailers. Many of these trailers live outside all the time and are towed many miles. Semi trailers are in millions of miles. Good point. I'm going to have to research this more.
Please do ! You sound like you have the knowledge/experience to understand what would be the best solution. If possible, I would also suggest looking at high end coaches, like Prevost. Rock stars aren't going to put up with water intrusion !
theoldwizard1 wrote:
The sad part is, a $15,000 starter camper and a $65,000 fifth wheel have the same inherent issues.
JBarca wrote:
2. Part of this is a materials issue. The roof sealants and putty tape sealants for walls and non roof opening sealants are not a long life product. While many of the roofs do use a good quality butyl sealing tape, the caulking concept used on the roof is a weak link. And the putty tape used on the walls joints is just not a lasting product.
2. Part of this is a materials issue. The roof sealants and putty tape sealants for walls and non roof opening sealants are not a long life product. While many of the roofs do use a good quality butyl sealing tape, the caulking concept used on the roof is a weak link. And the putty tape used on the walls joints is just not a lasting product.
The sad part is, a $15,000 starter camper and a $65,000 fifth wheel have the same inherent issues.
Scary but true !
JBarca wrote:
I was fortunate, I realized early on and gave up on the roof caulk sealants back in 2009 and Eternabonded all edges and changed to stainless screws. Especially the gutter rail.
I was fortunate, I realized early on and gave up on the roof caulk sealants back in 2009 and Eternabonded all edges and changed to stainless screws. Especially the gutter rail.
Many will think that going stainless is a large cost. It is not, if you source the screw on eBay/internet. Once you have determined the proper size screw, you can probably buy 100 of them for $20-$30. Imagine if Jayco bought them by the 100,000 how much the would cost (less than half of hat)
JBarca wrote:
I have been each year now pulling several groups of moldings, windows and door flanges etc off, taking out the putty tape that is failing out and putting high quality butyl in place with a Dicor non sag caulk as a secondary seal. This year I should be closer to completing a complete redo. 14 years and no leaks in the roof or walls. It was work and constant attention but it has worked out. Did have slide floor rot long ago. A fabrication issue with holes in the floor from day 1.
I have used 303 UV protectant on the roof and all things plastic or vinyl including the Dicor caulking. This has made a significant difference in slowing down the sun deterioration. Even the Dicor survives longer.
I have been each year now pulling several groups of moldings, windows and door flanges etc off, taking out the putty tape that is failing out and putting high quality butyl in place with a Dicor non sag caulk as a secondary seal. This year I should be closer to completing a complete redo. 14 years and no leaks in the roof or walls. It was work and constant attention but it has worked out. Did have slide floor rot long ago. A fabrication issue with holes in the floor from day 1.
I have used 303 UV protectant on the roof and all things plastic or vinyl including the Dicor caulking. This has made a significant difference in slowing down the sun deterioration. Even the Dicor survives longer.
A lot of work, but you see the reward.
I replaced most of the screws (over 600) on my trailer with stainless steel and they were only $3.50 per box of 100. A dab of silicone under each screw head. I think the manufacturers use hardened self drilling TEK screws to speed up installation. These are plated and start to corrode immediately when wet and in contact with aluminum. I don't know if stainless would work well as a self drilling screw.
theoldwizard1 wrote:
This is the first I have heard of Rainkap product. Look interesting ! I am looking for step-by-step installation instructions with images or a video on how the Rainkap system is installed.
TurnThePage wrote:
JBarca, I think it may have been you that influenced me toward the Rainkap solution for the gutters. I installed it last summer, and am hopeful that it will help
JBarca, I think it may have been you that influenced me toward the Rainkap solution for the gutters. I installed it last summer, and am hopeful that it will help
This is the first I have heard of Rainkap product. Look interesting ! I am looking for step-by-step installation instructions with images or a video on how the Rainkap system is installed.
Hi Wizard,
I'm not the RainKap guy. LarryJM is the man on this. With the pic hosting issues the older post of his I think is missing all the pics.
But he has a hot link in his signature of his install. See this post. In his sig is a pic link.
LarryJM's post on RainKap and E bond
theoldwizard1 wrote:
Many will think that going stainless is a large cost. It is not, if you source the screw on eBay/internet. Once you have determined the proper size screw, you can probably buy 100 of them for $20-$30. Imagine if Jayco bought them by the 100,000 how much the would cost (less than half of hat)
JBarca wrote:
I was fortunate, I realized early on and gave up on the roof caulk sealants back in 2009 and Eternabonded all edges and changed to stainless screws. Especially the gutter rail.
I was fortunate, I realized early on and gave up on the roof caulk sealants back in 2009 and Eternabonded all edges and changed to stainless screws. Especially the gutter rail.
Many will think that going stainless is a large cost. It is not, if you source the screw on eBay/internet. Once you have determined the proper size screw, you can probably buy 100 of them for $20-$30. Imagine if Jayco bought them by the 100,000 how much the would cost (less than half of hat)
You are right on!
Here is where I buy my stainless from. https://www.albanycountyfasteners.com/
For most of them on stick and tin campers, I use a screw slightly longer so it will bit into new wood (Original is #8 x 1"). I go with the #2 square drive heads where I can. The most common I use to replace the #8 x 1 hex heads is, No. 8 x 1 1/2 lg pan head with #2 square drive socket.
On qty of 100 is $8.00 or $0.08 each
On qty of 1,000 is $70.00 or $0.07 each
https://www.albanycountyfasteners.com/Sq........et-Metal-Screw-Stainless-8-p/3290000.htm
Free freight over $35. I buy some in qty of 1,000, others smaller depending on the need.
Durb wrote:
I replaced most of the screws (over 600) on my trailer with stainless steel and they were only $3.50 per box of 100. A dab of silicone under each screw head. I think the manufacturers use hardened self drilling TEK screws to speed up installation. These are plated and start to corrode immediately when wet and in contact with aluminum. I don't know if stainless would work well as a self drilling screw.
I replaced most of the screws (over 600) on my trailer with stainless steel and they were only $3.50 per box of 100. A dab of silicone under each screw head. I think the manufacturers use hardened self drilling TEK screws to speed up installation. These are plated and start to corrode immediately when wet and in contact with aluminum. I don't know if stainless would work well as a self drilling screw.
I have gone to the stainless too. I did get some self drillers where I needed that feature. They work well through aluminum and steel sheet metal.
These. https://www.albanycountyfasteners.com/Self-Drilling-Screws-s/1618.htm
They are made from 410 stainless which is harder than 304 stainless that I use all over where non self drilling is needed.
And yes, the original steel ones are hardened. They are hard as heck to cut off, or even drill out. They will chip off a cobalt bit even in short order. But they do grind off if the area allows it. Once the head rusts out, that nub can be a bear to get out.
I only wish I would have done it years ago. It would have saved many hours of labor intensive black streak scrubbing.
theoldwizard1 wrote:
I am not sure about that ! 47 years is a long time !! Even boat windows/port eventually need to be removed and rebedded, typically with butyl tape.
More likely, a large roll of aluminum on a spool mounted at roof level would be unwound over the underlayment that was coated with some type of adhesive. From a labor standpoint, the biggest problem would be getting it properly aligned before the adhesive "grabbed". Not sure what the best solution would be for finishing the edges or front or back.
westend wrote:
My overall observation about the aluminum roof is that, if the proper sealants would have been installed in 1971, the trailer would have remained intact and no "water infection" would have taken place.
My overall observation about the aluminum roof is that, if the proper sealants would have been installed in 1971, the trailer would have remained intact and no "water infection" would have taken place.
I am not sure about that ! 47 years is a long time !! Even boat windows/port eventually need to be removed and rebedded, typically with butyl tape.
westend wrote:
I could envision a single sheet aluminum roof with CNC manipulated cutouts, a designed wall flange, and a durable attachment system to excel. The single sheet could be hoisted onto the roof frame and may be less labor than the convention of EPDM over sheet goods.
I could envision a single sheet aluminum roof with CNC manipulated cutouts, a designed wall flange, and a durable attachment system to excel. The single sheet could be hoisted onto the roof frame and may be less labor than the convention of EPDM over sheet goods.
More likely, a large roll of aluminum on a spool mounted at roof level would be unwound over the underlayment that was coated with some type of adhesive. From a labor standpoint, the biggest problem would be getting it properly aligned before the adhesive "grabbed". Not sure what the best solution would be for finishing the edges or front or back.
A coated aluminum sheet will last a long time. When I removed the ceiling of my '71 Starcraft, there was no sign of water in the center of the trusses. All water damage was at the wall plate, below the aluminum edge trim. If the edge of the aluminum roof sheet had been sealed to the siding (or over-hung), water couldn't enter the frame.
Don't know about the roll-out idea. I could equip that with forming rollers that flanged the edges but locating/cutting through holes would likely have to be done in place, from below. That interrupts certain building schedules, I'd think. With a few tweaks the roller might be a good deal, don't really know.
RainKap is advertises as preventing back streaks from water running off the roof and it does. But the Eternal bond tape and and the RainKap help by diverting that water away from the side of the RV. Much less chance of the water getting into the seam between the roof and the side wall. Plus, with less water running down the actual side, there is is less chance of intrusion around windows and doors.
Sadly, RainKap may gave gone out of business ! Their website does not exist any more and their 800-phone appears to be disconnected.
rbpru wrote:
I can't say that rusted screw heads have been a problem with my seven year old TT. But there are other things that have been.
I can't say that rusted screw heads have been a problem with my seven year old TT. But there are other things that have been.
Your 7 year old camper is about the time screw rust can be present or just starting.
Try looking here. Pull the vinyl strip that cover the screws in the gutter rail. This is what mine looked like at 7 years living outside all the time. The water floods the gutter rail, water gets behind the vinyl strip and stays wet. Mold starts and keeps on growing. In enough time the screws rust enough water start to wick in around the screw. As time goes on the water keeps wicking in and soon rot starts.
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/LeftGutter2.jpg)
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/LeftGutter1.jpg)
Here is the start of the problem.
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/LeftGutter3.jpg)
To solve the problem on a EPDM rubber roof, remove a few screws at a time, countersink for a flat head stainless screw. Do not over countersink.
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/Rightsideseam2.jpg)
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/Rightsideseam4a.jpg)
Totally clean well with a high flash cleaner the gutter and 3" of rubber edge on the roof.
Install 4" wide eternabond. Start at the bottom of the gutter and go up and over the top. No more caulking exposed as the primary seal.
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/Rearseam10.jpg)
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/LeftGutter10.jpg)
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/EB5.jpg)
![[image]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/JBarca/T310SR%20Camper%20Upgrades/Eternabond/Rearseam12.jpg)
After installing Ebond, on the roof exposed edge of E bond, put a thin film of Dicor smeared over that edge to stop dirt sticking. Clean roof and apply 303 UV protectant 3 to 4 times a year. I have not had to touch at sealants on the roof since 2010 when I applied the Ebond. A well worth upgrade. See here from this fall. This is a 14 year old rubber roof.
![[image]](https://www.sunlineclub.com/forums/members/89-albums687-picture5134.jpg)
Hope this helps
John
JBarca wrote:
Here is where I buy my stainless from. https://www.albanycountyfasteners.com/
For most of them on stick and tin campers, I use a screw slightly longer so it will bit into new wood (Original is #8 x 1"). I go with the #2 square drive heads where I can. The most common I use to replace the #8 x 1 hex heads is, No. 8 x 1 1/2 lg pan head with #2 square drive socket.
Here is where I buy my stainless from. https://www.albanycountyfasteners.com/
For most of them on stick and tin campers, I use a screw slightly longer so it will bit into new wood (Original is #8 x 1"). I go with the #2 square drive heads where I can. The most common I use to replace the #8 x 1 hex heads is, No. 8 x 1 1/2 lg pan head with #2 square drive socket.
I have bought from Albany Fasteners before for boat projects. They also sell on eBay.
You can also use truss head screws. Very similar to pan head, but the head is a bit bigger. Square drive is good for power screwing !
* This post was edited 12/28/17 10:15pm by theoldwizard1 *
JBarca wrote:
After installing Ebond, on the roof exposed edge of E bond, put a thin film of Dicor smeared over that edge to stop dirt sticking. Clean roof and apply 303 UV protectant 3 to 4 times a year. I have not had to touch at sealants on the roof since 2010 when I applied the Ebond. A well worth upgrade. See here from this fall. This is a 14 year old rubber roof.
After installing Ebond, on the roof exposed edge of E bond, put a thin film of Dicor smeared over that edge to stop dirt sticking. Clean roof and apply 303 UV protectant 3 to 4 times a year. I have not had to touch at sealants on the roof since 2010 when I applied the Ebond. A well worth upgrade. See here from this fall. This is a 14 year old rubber roof.
That roof looks like new !
3 or 4 times a year is a lot of work, but if all you do is a quick wash down and then spray, I'll bet you are done in under 1 hour !
theoldwizard1 wrote:
That roof looks like new !
3 or 4 times a year is a lot of work, but if all you do is a quick wash down and then spray, I'll bet you are done in under 1 hour !
That roof looks like new !
3 or 4 times a year is a lot of work, but if all you do is a quick wash down and then spray, I'll bet you are done in under 1 hour !
Thanks, Yes it is work but the end results pay off if you plan to keep a camper a good long time. It takes me a little over an hour to do the roof and that is only because I keep after it. A roof never cleaned at 10 years will take over 3.5 hours to get it cleaned.
I have found that using 303 UV protectant on a clean roof 3 to 4 times a year makes a significant difference in reducing the roof and Dicor deterioration if the camper lives outside all the time. This can be reduced to 2 times a year if stored inside while not camping.
Since I have started helping friends repair their wet campers they just bought, (they never knew what they were getting...) I was totally shocked at the difference that the 303 and the cleaning did. I'm on my 4th wet camper repair now. The sun damage on a 10 year old roof that has never been cleaned or 303'ed has millions of spider cracks in the white layer, some very wide and all the way down to the black layer requiring a recoating. And they have very little white layer left. You can measure the white layer loss when you lift up the roof cap moldings. The Dicor is totally gone, dried up, split and crumbling in 10 years.
See this pic. This is 14 year old Dicor on my roof tank vents. The layer on top I added a long time ago. The bottom layer is original. These are the only 2 areas I have not E bonded.
![[image]](https://www.sunlineclub.com/forums/members/89-albums687-picture5135.jpg)
The difference in life I feel comes from the 303 I use and the cleaning as Dicor has stated.
New roofing materials as your post started with, needs that extra level of UV protection. It is either part of the material itself or you have to add it after.
* This post was edited 12/29/17 03:18pm by JBarca *