Hopefully this thread/discussion isn't already out here somewhere. If so, my apologies.
Have some of you compared the Four Wheel Eagle and the Northstar MC600?
Thanks,
Joanie
Four Wheel Eagle vs Northstar MC600
Started by
joanie4c
, May 04 2007 03:44 PM
22 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 04 May 2007 - 03:44 PM
#2
Posted 04 May 2007 - 03:49 PM
Unless the MC600 is a model I am unaware of, FWC and Northstar campers are really different products altogether. I looked at the Northstars. They have a lot more ammenities than the FWC campers and at a lower price. However, they are not ultralight and not aluminum framed. If you want a true ultralight, off road capable camper, that is what FWC is for. If not, something like a Northstar is going to be a better value.
#3
Posted 04 May 2007 - 05:08 PM
NCF is that picture from Alabama Hills area out of Lone Pine???
Patrick
2015 FWC Hawk Flatbed
#4
Posted 04 May 2007 - 07:39 PM
Pat
It sure looks like the exact spot that I had my little electrical fire. Up Whitney trail about 2 miles from Lone Pine.
Jay
It sure looks like the exact spot that I had my little electrical fire. Up Whitney trail about 2 miles from Lone Pine.
Jay
#6
Posted 05 May 2007 - 12:08 AM
The real problem with other campers other than FWC or ourselves is that most are a wood frame with particle board interior. Over time, these other campers tend to just fall apart. Look at some older campers and the shape that they are in. NCF is right on resale value also. FWC and ourselves carry a much better resale value than any other camper on the market besides the Alaskan.
Weight is probably the biggest difference that you will find. For lightweight and quality of construction, there are really only two choices out there, FWC and ourselves.
The choice is yours of course. It depends on what you are looking for in a camper and how you plan to use it. For a lot of people the additional features that Northstar offers is what they are looking for. Everyone has their own reasons for purchasing a camper. The main thing is to get one that will work for you the way that you camp and with what you want.
Weight is probably the biggest difference that you will find. For lightweight and quality of construction, there are really only two choices out there, FWC and ourselves.
The choice is yours of course. It depends on what you are looking for in a camper and how you plan to use it. For a lot of people the additional features that Northstar offers is what they are looking for. Everyone has their own reasons for purchasing a camper. The main thing is to get one that will work for you the way that you camp and with what you want.
#7
Posted 05 May 2007 - 02:19 AM
When the wife and I were looking to buy we gave a long hard look at Northstar. They build a very nice camper, well appointed and vary comfortable. The lift mechanism is a proven design and works well. They have plenty of storage and are a very good value.
But we thought we would look at FWC before we purchased anything. Well needless to say we went with the FWC. Some reasons why.
Comfort/convenience Northstar
Storage Northstar
Value Northstar
Versatility FWC
Weight FWC
Fun factor FWC
Maintenance FWC
Profile/Lowered height FWC
Regrets None
Hope this helps,
Cheers
Mike
But we thought we would look at FWC before we purchased anything. Well needless to say we went with the FWC. Some reasons why.
Comfort/convenience Northstar
Storage Northstar
Value Northstar
Versatility FWC
Weight FWC
Fun factor FWC
Maintenance FWC
Profile/Lowered height FWC
Regrets None
Hope this helps,
Cheers
Mike
#8
Posted 05 May 2007 - 06:55 AM
Maybe I only saw the high end models, but at the shows I attended, the northstars were much pricier than fwc.
#9
Posted 05 May 2007 - 02:25 PM
Base Dry Weight 1,170 pounds. Base Price including fridge and furnace is $10600. It is wood framed. It is 56" tall closed and 76" wide. Seems to be a little large for a compact truck as you are pushing the GVWR empty.
~Jim2000 Tundra AC- 2000 FWC Ranger
2017 Tundra DC - 2017 ATC Panther
#10
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users