67 replies to this topic

[rich]

Yeah I'm a bit baffled by it myself, the process of taking the bedding and other **** from downstairs and throwing it up into the bunk every time we stop and then putting the dog's travel crate outside and pulling the stairs and the grey water bucket out already has me considering a fully hard sided camper so everything can stay in it's place. The cajita would be ridiculously small even for just me, my wife and our 50 lb border collie.

The one market I could see for it is in a shell model with just a bed and a furnace so you would be marketing to the standard camper shell crowd but they get a few upgrades over a standard shell like a pre-built bed and a furnace which are nice to have. However, they would have to charge a lot less for it and frankly pretty it up.

Now don't get me wrong, I like the look of my camper on the truck because it means I'm going somewhere but these things are not pretty and if I was only going to have the space of a standard camper shell I would do it with a color match innovation camper shell that has nice lines that match my truck and contour to the cab shape not a big white bread box. If you are going to bring a NCO to the market then you have to simplify the interior, drop the price and beet the competitors by finally bringing a good looking camper to the market. That's part of the appeal of the xp campers and the earth roamers, they have made them nice looking units. I for one would like to see a little more thought and style put into the exteriors of all the fwc and atc campers.

That's my 2 cents.

[natjwest]

... not a big white bread box. If you are going to bring a NCO to the market then you have to simplify the interior, drop the price and beet the competitors by finally bringing a good looking camper to the market. That's part of the appeal of the xp campers and the earth roamers, they have made them nice looking units.

I totally agree. That NCO Cajita is about the most ugly thing you could carry. I am definitely not one who cares about looks, but I'm also not one who would ever buy such a thing. If you want low-profile, you'd get something that the overland crowd uses like a flip-pac with a shell which costs about 1/3 as much.

[SunMan]

For me as with most of us it would be an absolute non starter. But, if you read who it is designed for (a single person) it fills a niche, there must be a market for it or they wouldn't have invested the time in creating it. The Cajita is a step down for all of us so obviously we aren't keen on it. One point I would agree on with DD is the price point... not much of a discount for such a small camper.

[brett13]

Like most of you, I just don't see the advantage of an NCO. Is it weight? Cost? It certainly isn't looks. The question remains, for a few extra pounds, why not get the CO? What would cause someone to choose the NCO? I see no disadvantage to the CO, so why get a NCO?

[rich]

Maybe it's a gas mileage argument but I finally got my camper on my new to me 2007 tundra and my gas mileage went down .2 miles to the gallon, it was negligible and my cab over is bad, it is an old camper on a new truck so I had to build a platform under it and to get my camper to clear the bed rails gave me 5 inches of gap between the cab and the cab over and it still isn't hurting my mileage any where near enough to consider an NCO.

I lived in the back of my truck as a single guy for the better part of a decade in a standard camper shell and that was fine so I get marketing to the single crowd but again I don't see a ton of advantage to it.

[pods8]

Definitely not for me. Really nice market for the single person that also wants to get it in the garage as far as I can tell, otherwise as a single person I'd still likely get the cabover.

I'm admittedly a teensy bit biased but here goes. After having a long bed camper on my short bed Ram. I would never go back. I see almost no downside if any. Escape angle isn't compromised and it's absolutely palatial inside. This was true when I had the Ranger on my short bed T-100 I just wasn't smart enough at the time to realize it.

I'm building my new camper at 7.5' long on my short bed. Since I'll get rid of the front portion of the bed I can get it closer to the cab and I think I'll end up only picking up 6" in length over my hawk.

[busboy66]

While I don't really see any advantage of this NCO (height difference is marginal, price point too high, makes sleeping and stowage difficult) I still give points to FWC for innovation. Who knows, this idea may spawn off into something better?

Putting the Eagle on my truck this weekend - Fantastic fan and new vinyl floor to be installed.

[DirtyDog]

While I don't really see any advantage of this NCO (height difference is marginal, price point too high, makes sleeping and stowage difficult) I still give points to FWC for innovation. Who knows, this idea may spawn off into something better?

Putting the Eagle on my truck this weekend - Fantastic fan and new vinyl floor to be installed.

I think the fact that its garage-able makes it a product with merit. However the price is out of line with the concept.

[UglyScout]

I voted 'YES' - as I do like the "idea of a NCO FWC". Why not, more options, more potential customers, whetever, doesn't cost me anything.

BUT, I do not like the actual product that came from that idea. The market I think they are after is going to want something WAY cheaper.

[Overland Hadley]

Wow, I am gone for the afternoon and look at the great discussion I am missing, on my own thread!

Yes, the Cajita is ugly, but all campers are more or less ugly.

I had thought of a couple pro's: it would weigh less, it costs a little less, no sliding a bed extension in and out, I could still have a heavy rack on the truck. Maybe there were others, but they escape me at the moment.