I have owned a couple of camper vans on Ford and GMC van bodies from the 80's and early 90's that were roughly the same size as the 2004 Pleasure Way Excel TD you now have (about 20 ft bumper to bumper), one of which I used as a daily driver for a few months back in the late 1990's. After more than a decade without an RV I bought a small class A last year, specifically a 28 ft (29'5" bumper to bumper) 2002 Safari Trek 2830 like the one in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqDAGm4LEJ0 (note there are several wrong statements by the salesman, including the length). While I love the amount of living space and cargo / tankage capacity the Trek has, as well as the fact that it can fit into many places where one can not go in a larger coach, it is in no way nearly as manoeuvrable as the camper vans I have owned in the past, and in no way would I ever consider using it as a daily driver.
I say this not to talk you out of getting something in the 30 ft range, I just want you to be aware that the travel experience even in something on the lower end of your size range will be far more limiting in places that you can go, ability to find parking, etc. The average big box store parking space is 9x22 ft, many places have parking spaces that are smaller than this often in the 8.5 x 19 ft range. In the case of my Trek, I can still sometimes almost squeeze into a single space if I back in and overhang the curb, but this is sort of like a 400 pound man squeezing into a coach airline seat, there is a certain amount of overflow around the edges given the total width including mirrors stretches out to just over 10 ft, (98.5 inches exterior wall to wall) and even backed in like this the front bumper sticks out past the end of the parking space stripes. Then of course there are the issues of turning radius, wheel cut and tail swing getting in and out of such a position if pulling straight forward in not allowed due to spacing to the next aisle.
To give you a visual idea here is a photo I took in a museum parking lot in central Kansas on my return trip home from Wyoming last month.
http://www.rvforum.net/SMF_forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=108732.0;attach=116369
p.s. regardless if B+ is some ones accepted term or not, I think we all know what someone is talking about when they say B+ vs saying C without an overhead bunk, so I see nothing wrong with the term. Though I feel that C without an bunk, does describe something a bit different than what I picture when I hear B+, as there are many C's with a bunk space over the cab that has been converted to be used as an entertainment center, storage, etc. and in my mind does not make them a B+ as they still have that over cab bunk like space, just without a bed there.
