Only in Colorado

[Neal]

That moment when you decide to avoid the paved roads. If only there was smoke coming out of the vehicle like the good ole C-n-C movies.

 

[GypsyR]

Is he really trying to jack up the rear bumper?

 

[J&JD]

Man that’s a seriously long rear overhang. No wonder they had a problem.

 

[Neal]

I see this more commonly at rallies on grass fields and people trying to go over areas like this. At the Oshkosh Air Show I expected to see this as people had to cross terrain like this in various areas if they didn't find the gravel cross paths. This guy should have never been on the grass here, don't know what he was thinking. It's a typical campground with pavement to all loops and sites.

 

[sheridany]

I never take my bus on grass after I was told by Marathon it’s a very bad idea with the weight of them. I am surprised how many people do it and they are able to drive away without getting stuck. This owner went directly from delivery to the beach. Ouch.

 

[Jim]

This owner went directly from delivery to the beach. Ouch.

But why?

 

[Tnedator]

I never take my bus on grass after I was told by Marathon it’s a very bad idea with the weight of them. I am surprised how many people do it and they are able to drive away without getting stuck. This owner went directly from delivery to the beach. Ouch.

OK, note to self, "things not to do..."

 

[sheridany]

But why?

I wish I knew. Stupid is stupid does? New owner ignorance? Thought it had 4 wheel drive? Wanted to redefine glamping? All possible answers.

 

["EZ"]

Man that’s a seriously long rear overhang. No wonder they had a problem.

This is my main problem with Class C RV's. The rear axle is almost always way too far forward. I know they do this so it can have a better turning radius but it is not the proper way to spec out a chassis. They are probably also cheating the rear axle forward so it unloads the front axle some because it's probably too small for the application. If the rear axle was back where it was supposed to be the front axle would probably be overloaded. (I'm almost sure of it). In other words an E-350 chassis probably isn't the right chassis for an RV of this length. But they made it work. Sort of..............

 

[MemoriesByTheMile]

This is my main problem with Class C RV's. The rear axle is almost always way too far forward. I know they do this so it can have a better turning radius but it is not the proper way to spec out a chassis. They are probably also cheating the rear axle forward so it unloads the front axle some because it's probably too small for the application. If the rear axle was back where it was supposed to be the front axle would probably be overloaded. (I'm almost sure of it). In other words an E-350 chassis probably isn't the right chassis for an RV of this length. But they made it work. Sort of..............

In addition to these money saving reasons, if they use a standard chassis length they don’t have extra cost for extending the chassis nor the extra weight from the extra frame, which would reduce the CCC.