Newbie Question Regarding Wheelbase To Length Ratio...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Bobzilla

Bobzilla

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2010
Posts
7
Location
Raleigh, NC
Hi, Everyone!

Looks like I've found the right place...finally.  Currently mulling over 2010 model year closeouts.  I like the Winnie Access/Itasca Impulse 29T, but the 190" wheelbase is now a concern.  I've read in various places about the wheelbase tradeoffs (shorter = less smooth ride, but easier cornering, albeit with more tail swingout, vs. longer = smoother highway ride, more j-hook type turns, wider turn radius).  Debating whether to jump up to the 31c which is only 15" longer in total length, but upgrades from the 29T's 190" wheelbase to 220" one.  So...29T has a 52% ratio, 31C has a 57.8% ratio.  Haven't yet test-driven either model, but my local Winnie dealer will have the 29T on the lot in a couple of days.

Would love to hear your experiences/opinions on this subject...
 
What I have read substantiates your findings and somewhere in the deep dark past I think I recall reading that not going below 58% was a good rule of thumb, however my Class A is a tad over 52% and I don't find it ill-handling.  It certainly DOESN'T handle/drive like a car, but it is no worse than a pickup pulling a 5th wheel trailer.  Semi's coming at you from the opposite direction on 2 lane highways and semi's passing  you on interstates will definitely "move you over" and this effect is likely more pronounced on a short wheelbase than a longer one.  I've also read that front-engined vehicles are a bit more ill-handling at highway speeds than the rear engine diesel pushers.  I suspect you'll find or hear several opinions on handling, etc. from this forum.  Your best bet is to sit behind the wheel and drive one at road speeds and decide if this is the RV for you.  There are a lot of handling horror stories out there and some of them come from diesel pusher owners as well.

One thing to consider is the rear overhang.  I'd guess, from your writing, that the 29T has a much larger rear overhang and those can present problems with dragging and a lot of folks that have them have installed metal wheels at the rear edge to prevent damage.  Occasionally, you just find yourself pulling into/out of a parking lot with an incline and that long overhang gets real low real quick.
 
I think your over analyzing the situation, pick the floor plan you can live with and learn to drive it, that simple.>>>Dan
 
I had a coach with a 13' overhang. I found it difficult to drive in wind and with lots of trucks passing close by. Another problem with an long overhang is loading the rear bays. Putting a lot of weight behind the rear axle will actually add more than the total items weigh plus it will remove a like amount from the front axle.

Which rig you end up with depends upon your planned use. I'd drive both of them to see how they handle. Obviously, once loaded the handling will change somewhat but at least you'll have an idea of how they perform under similar conditions.
 
Sounds like some spill over from a group that does all kinds of calculations which have little bearing on actual usage.  The bottom line is a longer wheelbase provides a better ride.  Long overhangs have a swing issue, IOW, when turning tight, be sure to watch your *ss. 

Between toe two you are looking at, get the floorplan.  Neither will drive badly, both will take getting used to. 

 
Thanks for the input, all.  Bought the Impulse 29T after test driving it.  Handled fine.  Maiden voyage upcoming on October 15th...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 826 (members: 3, guests: 823)

Forum statistics

Threads
132,001
Posts
1,388,888
Members
137,745
Latest member
GandalfTheGrey
Back
Top Bottom