Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Soon to be owner questions


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#1 brett13

brett13

    Lovecock

  • Members
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 11 December 2006 - 03:59 AM

I'm new to the group, but have been lingering for a while and appreciate everyone's accumulated knowledge. Also, I'm not yet a FWC owner. My plan is to order one to go with a new truck this winter. I've been camping in tents or SUVs for years and decided its time to be more comfortable and get out more of the year. I've never had a truck camper, so I'm curious about payload and how the trucks handle it (I've settled on FWC because its the lightest and users seem to love them). Specifically, most smaller trucks like Tacomas, F150s, Tundra's etc have payloads around 1500lbs. An Eagle is almost 700, plus a few options brings it well over 900. Two people, dog, toys and gear and we're easily pushing 1500 (12 gal of water is over 100lbs alone). I am concerned because we do a lot of 4-wheeling and the last thing I want to do is bend a frame or bust an axle in the middle of nowhere. I also am not partial to larger, heavy duty trucks. Any thoughts/comments? Thanks.
  • 0

#2 DirtyDog

DirtyDog

    Captain Leisure

  • Site Team
  • 3,157 posts
  • LocationEugene, Oregon

Posted 11 December 2006 - 05:59 AM

My F150 FX4 model with the off road suspension handled some very heavy loads with no problems. I drove about 2000 miles on one trip with three big guys, FWC full of supplies, mountain bikes, rafting gear, and 500 pounds of beer and we had no problems.

I know my friend that has a Titan was a bit worried about the heavier loads and was looking into suspension modifications. I think trucks like the Tundra and the Titan will do fine, but the F150 is probably better equipped for the heavier loads. That may change when the heavier duty versions of Titan and Tundra are released over the next couple of years.

If you search for Tacoma here, I think you will find that while people have used FWC campers on Tacomas, most that have would prefer to have a larger truck.
  • 0

#3 DirtyDog

DirtyDog

    Captain Leisure

  • Site Team
  • 3,157 posts
  • LocationEugene, Oregon

Posted 11 December 2006 - 07:30 AM

Loaded! :D :eek:

Attached Thumbnails

  • loaded-camper.jpg

  • 0

#4 marty

marty

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 338 posts
  • LocationSacramento, California

Posted 11 December 2006 - 07:33 AM

you might look into the shell version for a smaller truck. they come with a large bed and room for almost anything. marty
  • 0

#5 marty

marty

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 338 posts
  • LocationSacramento, California

Posted 11 December 2006 - 02:17 PM

Ben here using Marty's stuff again.:):)

Just to help you out a bit. We have put campers on the smaller trucks without a problem for years. You actually end up maxing out around 1000 pounds on the FWC camper or ours. Your fuel milage will drop 2 to 3 miles per gallon with ours and I am not sure about FWC since they raised the height of thier campers. I believe it is about the same though from talking to customers with a newer FWC camper.

The only problems that I have seen on the smaller trucks over the years are the following.

1. 4 cyclinder motors tend to bog down in heavy winds and steep hills. I know a few customers that have these and they are happy. They have just learned that it takes more time to get where they are going if there are a lot of hills or wind.:):)

2. The drivers side of the campers tends to be a little heavier than the passenger side depending on how you load the camper. On the smaller trucks this may tend to cause the drivers side to drop a little more than the passenger side. This depends on the truck and how long you have the camper on the truck. I used to carry a camper on a Ford Ranger full time for shows and ended up putting a helwig helper spring on the drivers side to level the truck out. Since we carried the camper all the time that was the way we left the truck. Most customers who take the camper on and off regularly and have a similar problem will usually go with an adjustable solution such as air shocks or air bags. This way you can adjust the truck when the camper is on and readjust it when it is off so that is doesn't beat you do death when you take the camper off. I have always recommended though not to change the suspension of the truck until you get the camper and see how it rides and how the truck drives with it. Again it depends on the truck on how it handles the camper. The Tundra's that we have installed campers on seem fine so far. The four wheel drive Tundra's seem to take the camper fine without any modification and the standard ones seem to drop a little on the drivers side. I have also noticed that the standard Dodge Dakota drops a little too. The standard Dakota seems to have a very soft suspension under it. The Toyota Tacomas seem very similar to the Tundras in how the camper rides also.
On the full size trucks I have really not seen any problems at all with the campers. Over the years I know of some customers that have added shocks or air bags and others that have not. Just a personal preference on how they feel when driving the truck.

One thing to take into consideration when you decide to purchase a camper is your options. They do add weight and some you will use and some you won't. If your not sure about an option, ask if it can be installed later for you. Our campers are prewired and plumbed for any option to be put on after a sale. This way you can use the camper and see what options you would really want with the type of camping that you tend to do.

I know it all seems over whelming at times but if you have any more questions, feel free to ask or give us a call and we will be happy to tell you the pro's and con's of the different trucks and what we have seen over the years.

Sincerely,
Ben
www.allterraincampers.com
  • 0

#6 oly884

oly884

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 11 December 2006 - 03:02 PM

Well, I've got an '04 taco and it seems to handle it just fine. I put airlift airbags on my truck (purchased them from summitracing.com) and it dealt with the sagging just fine. Here are some pics:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image
  • 0

#7 brett13

brett13

    Lovecock

  • Members
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 11 December 2006 - 07:05 PM

Thanks for all the info and opinions. For Oly884 with the Tacoma- did you ever weigh your gear? Did you decide to add air bags after trying it out or right off the bat? Ever do aggressive off-roading with it? We venture into canyon country in the southwest often, with slickrock and the banging around it brings.

Can anyone tell me why sometimes I see photos with the jacks on and sometimes with them off? Is it a preference or required with some installations? The jacks weigh about 100lbs that I'm guessing I won't need.

I am partial to Toyota (I know, you can boo/hiss me), but am wondering weather a good deal on an 06 tundra is better than waiting for the new 07s. Durability and capability under the weight are my priorities.
  • 0

#8 DirtyDog

DirtyDog

    Captain Leisure

  • Site Team
  • 3,157 posts
  • LocationEugene, Oregon

Posted 11 December 2006 - 07:08 PM

I think that usually when you see the jacks on, it's because the camper was just put on the truck. Everyone I have known removes the jacks when the camper will be on for any length of time. Other than the weight issue - they are kinda ugly and they rattle when the truck is in motion.
  • 0

#9 marty

marty

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 338 posts
  • LocationSacramento, California

Posted 11 December 2006 - 11:19 PM

Ben here again using Marty's login.:):)

The jacks can be removed from the camper. Each one is held on with 3 bolts that you would have to undo. You are correct in the weight. The set weighs about 100 pounds.

Pro's and con's of the jacks. They add weight, look ugly to some, might catch on something if out doing serious four wheeling and a bit of pain to take the jacks off and on if you want too.

I like them myself for the following reasons. Can stabilize the camper in windy conditions by dropping opposite corners. This takes any sway out of the camper due to wind or walking around. Makes it easier to take the camper on and off the truck even though the cable jacks work fine. Most people find the cable jacks a bit scary until they get used to them. The cable jacks also are faster to use than the camper mounted jacks. If you are just a little off level you can use the jacks to help level the camper. Not a whole lot but just a little and sometimes that is enough to help out.

Over the years I have only had two customers who have come in for a repair because they caught the jack on something while out driving. One was a short pole in some parking lot and the other caught a jack on something while four wheeling in some rough terrain.

Well those are pretty much the pros and cons of the camper mounted jacks. If you have any other questions, feel free to give me call if you would like at 800-446-1003 anytime.

Sincerely,

Ben
www.allterraincampers.com
  • 0

#10 marty

marty

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 338 posts
  • LocationSacramento, California

Posted 11 December 2006 - 11:24 PM

Ben here again.

One other thing that I forgot to mention is that you might want to consider the 06 truck vs. the 07. At least ask them if the Tundra has gone to the composite bed yet as some of their other trucks have. Composite is a fancy word for plastic. Some of the newer toyota trucks that we have looked at are now being made with the plastic beds.

We have come up with a solution to mount the camper to these beds though if you have to go with that type. Just my personal preference would be to have a metal bed on my truck instead of a composite one. Of course I would not be suprised to see most truck beds to go the same way over the next few years. Everything is being made of composite (shhhhh plastic) these days. Makes me wonder where all the metal has gone to at times.

Sincerely,

Ben
www.allterraincampers.com
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users