Only in Colorado

[GypsyR]

You guys really don't see it? Maybe it's because I part time getting people out of such.

"Durn it, tires are spinnin cause I hung up the rear bumper on that there berm.
Aight, I'll jack that bumper on up offa that then.

OK, there now.

Gol'darnit, why my tires still spinnin'?"

At least that's what it looks like his plan of attack is/was.

 

[hellosarah]

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

I prefer "live and learn"
We don't have 4 wheel, tow a 17', and listened to a few locals when considering a mountain road.
Let's just say I improved my backup skills.

Hope there wasn't any damage!

 

["EZ"]

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.

I'd say an E-450 would be much better suited for this application but would increase the cost of the RV by $5000 or so. But why use the correct chassis with axles heavy enough to carry the load when you can create this dangerous mess you see in the picture?

Look at the picture. Imagine a see-saw from the playground you played on as a kid. Imagine the rear axle as the pivot point. See how loading too much of your camping gear in the rear of the RV would unload the front axle? Imagine if they had one of those hitch mounted cargo carriers loaded with fire wood hanging off the back, or were towing a 3500# vehicle, then imagine it was raining or snowing. Do you think the front tires would have enough weight on them to keep you from skidding when you steer?