| |
Subject |
Author |
Date Posted |
Forum
|
 |
RE: Leisure Travel Van
Think someone should tell them that it isn't a class B?
|
booster
|
11/25/09 04:37pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Interstate SC34DM as Batteries
I was just on the Lifeline site, reading the tech data. They say they are sensitive to charge voltage, but not as much as "other" AGMs. The spec they give is at 1 volt over recommended voltage the cycle life is reduced 23%. They also give the recommended absorbtion/float voltages as 14.15/13.13 at 100 degrees, and 14.41/13.39 at 70 degrees. Many of the chargers out there will be close to 1 volt higher than those numbers, and the voltage off the van will be that high a lot of the time, besides. If you have the old style, diode separator, you lose about a volt and will be OK, but the relay ones don't get any drop. I would think if you spend that much for the batteries, you would go for a good 3 step charger that is AGM voltage switchable, and consider adding a way of reducing the van charging voltage that the batteries see, if it is too high (some folks have used big diodes).
Another odd thing on their site is that they say that their AGMs can be equalized, which I have never seen for any other AGM. They state 8 hours at 15.5 volts. They don't state what kind of life issues that kind of charging create, but that is pretty high.
|
booster
|
11/25/09 03:16pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Ok one more HEAT question ?
The Consumer Safety article referenced above got pretty specific about what happens when the oxygen is reduced, with concerns about low oxygen causing hypoxia (sp),the generation of some ozone, and a concentration of flammable propane that got to 65% of the lower explosive limit (our industrial equipment at work is required to turn itself off at 45%). These are all serious issues, and back up the idea of never sleeping with one of them running. The instructions also say no sleeping. I would think that an O2 sensor would be an absolute necessity if you use a heater of this type in an enclosed area.
|
booster
|
11/23/09 08:19pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Need refrigerator fix
Landyacht, chasing vibrations and noise can really be a pain, especially on fragile things like a frig. We are on our (at least) 5th rendition of noise reduction on our bathroom door (07 190P).
Higher frequency vibrations, like the compressor makes, travel though very small paths very readily, so any solid path will do it. Even a very small screw will allow lots of vibration through if it is not totally isolated. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to totally isolate things at home, as it usually requires bonded rubber or special fasteners. I wish I had taken a picture of the compressor on our Isotherm before I put it in, it is mounted on isolation type mounts. It is also on the upper right, rear, of the frig, so it is quite a ways away from the mountings for the frig amd close to the outside openings to let the noise out. Since I did not use isolation mounts on the bottom of our mounting (screws through rubber) and the front is solid mounted, I am hoping the factory isolation is enough for us.
Like you said, the support of the compressor is critical, as copper tubing cracks very easily from repetive flexes, even very small ones. They setup ours so it has all the compressor, condenser, cooling fan, etc all on the flex mounting, so all you have are the two lines to the evaporator, which is in the freezer and fairly far away so the flex is less.
My favorite source for seeing what kind of things are available, for all kinds of projects, is McMaster-Carr. They have pretty much anything and everything. I use them for a lot of the things for my projects at work, as well as at home. They are a wholesale only industrial supplier, so you can't buy direct from them unless you have a home business, or seudo one, or you know someone with a business, but you can see what is available, what it is called, etc, so you can source it elsewhere. Their paper catalog is about 3" thick. Once I retire, I will probably set up an account with them for a minimal business, just so I can still buy from them.
Here is a link:
http://www.mcmaster.com
|
booster
|
11/22/09 08:44am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Chevy 4.8L V8 Engine-vs- Chevy 6.0L V8 Engine
Here is a link to the thread that includes the torque curves for the 3 engines.
Old engine thread
|
booster
|
11/19/09 06:00pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Chevy 4.8L V8 Engine-vs- Chevy 6.0L V8 Engine
Very interesting information, especially for those of us who know nothing about torque. I do know that when I went from a V-8 Ford Excel to a V-10 Ford Excel, the difference was felt immediately, when starting from a dead stop it was like having a high performance engine, and coupled with the 5 speed, the difference in mileage was only 1 mpg and the engine seemed to run effortlessly. I do have a question, now having my first Chevy chassis and being a 5.3 litre, why is there no option to have the 5.3 on the Roadtreks? Is it a torgue or power problem? Just curious.
Nick
10 Explorer X-ST
It is interesting that Chevy has chosen the 6.0 and 4.8 as the "heavier" truck engines, with the 5.3 only available in the lower rating trucks like 1/2 tons. I haven't seen the torque curves on the 5.3, so I can't speak to that part of it, but I would expect it to be somewhat of a cross between the 4.8 and 6.0, and definitely slanted toward the higher rpms, based on the vehicles they use it in.
From what I have heard about the current engine designs and applications, getting more hp out of the engines is just the beginning, especially as the vehicles get heavier. Getting rid of the execess heat in the engine seems to often be one of the limiting factors, as well as transmission capabilities, both from a torque/hp sense and from a heat point of view. The 5.3 just may not be able to generate adequate power levels for longer periods of time, Without issues, in the heavy vehicles.
If you look at the torque curve for the newer 6.0, it shows that they cut off the power rating at a point where the torque and hp are both still growing at good rate. This is very unusual, as they always want to advertise the biggest numbers, which the engine obviously can do, but they limit it. Most likely it has to do with the fact that the 9600# gross weight van is capable of actually using that much power on a contiuous basis (think mountain). The problem comes with the engine generating too much waste heat to dissipate for that long a time. In a lighter vehicle, it could never need that much power for that long, so it is not an issue. The engine gets a chance to cool down after a burst of power use. The tranmission could also be a problem for the same reason, too much heat generated for too long. The old 6.0 had a lower rpm torque curve, so it was on the downslide, power wise, by the time it got to the hp numbers that would generate too much heat, and was thus self-limiting. That is why I prefer the old 6.0 engine, as it uses more of its capabilities, without wasting any (more torque at the low end).
|
booster
|
11/19/09 04:50pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Chevy 4.8L V8 Engine-vs- Chevy 6.0L V8 Engine
There is some misinformation concerning hp and torque above, with bore and stroke having nothing to do with hp and torque per se. Electric engines don't have bore and stroke, but they do have hp and torque.
Very simply:
hp = torque times rpm divided by 5252
In actuallity the the bore and stoke of an engine (and the bore/stroke ratio) have a very large affect on the torque produced by an engine of any given displacement, and at what rpm that torque is produced.
In general, long stroke, small bore, (less than 1 bore to stroke ratio) will produce more torque, at lower rpm. Big bore, short stroke engines will produce less torque, but be able to spin much higher rpms, and thus make higher make hp numbers.
A good example from "back in the day" would be to compare Ford 300 cid 6 cylinder to the 302 cid V8. The 302 would make significantly more hp, and spin to a much higher rpm, but the 300 6 cylinder is what they put in their trucks, because it would pull like a much larger engine, because of its long stroke.
This is why you need to see a complete torque curve to evaluate whether an engine is good for a particular application. On the earlier thread about the 3 engines used (old 6.0, new 6.0, 4.8) I posted the torque curves, and it showed (at least to me) that for a class B, I would prefer the older, lower hp 6.0 because it has more torque at the lower rpms. In this case, the difference is not because of bore or stroke, as both 6.0 are the same, but is most likely an intake and cam change to move up the power curve (in this case moving it too far IMO). The 6.0 has a bigger bore than stroke, so you would expect it to react to higher rpm with more power, which it does very well, but at the expense of some low end power. The 4.8 is also bigger bore and gets its power up top. For comparison, the Ford V10 has a longer stroke than bore, and generates its torque at a much lower rpm than the Chevy engines. This is why so many of the builders of the bigger rigs use the V10. It just plain pulls better because of its design.
|
booster
|
11/19/09 03:55pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Road Salt Protection and Maintenance ?
Personally, I don't think I would want to drive a class B in the winter and expose it to the salt. There are many things hanging under our Roadtrek that are different from your normal commuter vehicle, and many of them look like they would be very susceptible to corrosion. We even have battery connection terminal points underneath with the connections open to the bottom of the vehicle. There are also many opening cut in the original van sheet metal that leave pockets and holes. I don't think the value gained by driving it all year would cover the potential damage from the salt.
|
booster
|
11/16/09 01:06pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Coleman ProCat Catalytic Propane Portable Space Heater
You have to test to see if the device will work off the van tank. Our Roadtrek runs at 15 psi out of the tank, which is not high, or low, pressure. Tank pressure is much higher, low pressure for appliances much lower.
Our Magma grill with regulator worked fine on the Roadtrek tank, but our Coleman Fold-n-go stove did not, and would barely give any flame, even though it is low pressure. It turns out it has a sintered filter/flow limiter in it, ahead of the regulator. It has enough resistance to it so you need the higher tank pressure to get enough flow. The Magma has no flow limiter.
There have been lots of posts by folks who have had problems with low pressure (regulated) grills and stoves that would not work on the Roadtrek tanks, but worked fine on bottles. I got our stove to work by drilling a very small hole through the flow restrictor, but this is certainly not something I would recommend, especially for an appliance that is inside the van. It would also void all warranties. My guess is that the flow restrictor is there to limit the flow should the regulator fail.
|
booster
|
11/16/09 10:10am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Chevy 4.8L V8 Engine-vs- Chevy 6.0L V8 Engine
I just looked at the Chevy and GMC sites. The Chevy one doesn't count as they are still only listing 2009 models. The GMC site was contradictory. In the specs section they said 4.8 only with AWD, but in the build it section, I built a two wheel drive 3500 with a 4.8.
I have heard many places the std engine will be the 4.8 for the Express 3500.
|
booster
|
11/15/09 08:27pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Optional armoire for Roadtrek
Where we got ours for the other side.
|
booster
|
11/15/09 07:16pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: need pics of RT sewer hose replacement
The hose I used was a piece of truck heater hose that we use at work. We get do it at the auto parts store. Using a short length of RV drain hose (like Roadtrek uses, only a good one) would also work, and might actually put less load on the fittings, as it is more flexible. It also would be much cheaper, by the foot, at the RV dealer.
I haven't seen any problems with the PVC chafing. I do have it clamped tight into place.
Pretty sure it was 1", but not positive without looking.
|
booster
|
11/15/09 07:08pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Coleman ProCat Catalytic Propane Portable Space Heater
If I am understanding the way these heaters work, they all will have the same problems at high altitude. They mix a fixed amount of air and gas, based on the jet size, if there is less oxygen in the air because of altitude (density), they will not have enough oxygen to fully burn the gas, and could produce carbon monoxide. The fact that one heater will work at high altitude,(no O2 sensor) does not mean it should be used there. It just means the other one with the sensor is a safer design. The same thing happens if you don't supply enough fresh air, you deplete the oxygen in the space. I know a lot of folks use these heaters in vans, but I have never been a big fan of it. There are just too many things that could go wrong, and deadly. In addition, you have to deal with the moisture they add to the air inside the van, which can cause lots of condensation if it is cold out.
You must be talking about a free standing propane tank, or you would already have a line to the inside. If you do plumb it in, be sure to have a propane installer at least check it. A fractured line, or bad connection, from bouncing down the road would be a bad thing.
However you go, be sure to get propane and carbon monoxide detectors, they are cheap insurance.
|
booster
|
11/15/09 08:19am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: New beds in the "B"
At 18", you are a bunch higher, and lots more space, than we have. Wish we had that much height. We were at about 12" with the power couch, and will get to about 14 1/4 with the platform. Headroom isn't much of an issue for us, as it is pretty flat in the ceiling above the seating area. We will have about 4' wide by just under 5' of clear area underneath.
|
booster
|
11/14/09 06:26pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: New beds in the "B"
Very nice job! I am in the process of doing a similar thing to our 07 Roadtrek 190P. Our power couch made a "C" shaped bed, and wasn't all that uncomfortable, but it ate up way too much of the storage area. I am shooting for a totally clear area from the rear doors to the bolster cabinets (where the center of the bed will end). The bolster covers will hinge up, like the stock setup, and the front 1/2 of the bed will do the same, for access to the storage area under the bed.
It looks like your van is pretty straight across the back, by the doors, while our Chevy is quite curved. We want to use the doors for the backrest (looks like you did too), so it appears the back of the bed will also need to curve. Makes the reinforcing needed to go without a center leg a bit tougher. It looks like you used an angle iron and trim board? We have a pretty low clearance in that area, so I am going to try to move the support structure to above the platform, if possible. How much height do you have under the trim board in the rear?
I hope ours turns out as nice as yours did!
|
booster
|
11/14/09 05:33pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: need pics of RT sewer hose replacement
I did do that type of conversion last year, and posted pics here.
Perhaps this is the thread you are looking for:
Sewer hose thread
|
booster
|
11/14/09 03:36pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Isotherm frig install done
From what we have seen so far, the noise is about the same as the Snyder fan kit was on the old frig. If it is louder, it is not much. Our garage/shop is very quiet so you can tell pretty well. With the Snyder kit fan, we could hear it at night, but not enough to bother us. It ran continuously, however, so the on/off thing may be more noticeable to us. It is definitely louder outside than inside.
|
booster
|
11/13/09 06:44pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Isotherm frig install done
Landyacht- Ours doesn't have the "ASU" feature which does the overcool and storage when the extra power is available. It is a very expensive option and adds a lot of electronics to go bad. It also sets the frig temp at 41 to 43 degrees when in the power saving mode, which is a little high for my liking when we have things like dairy or uncooked poultry in the frig. Still would have been neat to have. We plan on doing a manual routine that is similar to the ASU, when we are going to be on batteries. With a couple of cold bags in the freezer and the temp turned down while we drive, we should be able to gain some on the duty cycle when we stop and go on batteries. We will see how well that works next summer.
Duty cycle in the 60 degree garage, with the frig empty is only about 10-15%, but that will go up substantially in the heat, I presume.
The lower current as it got older is pretty common, as the compressor has a breakin just like a car or any other pump. Things get a little smoothed out and have less friction.
|
booster
|
11/10/09 11:23am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
Isotherm frig install done
I finished getting our new 3.0cf Isotherm frig put into our 07 Roadtrek 190P last weekend. Not a bad fit or terrible job, except for the extreme out of square and level of the Roadtrek itself. I had to either pick the dropped floor, van floor, counter top, bolster tops, or the frig cutout as a starting point, as they were no where near on the same plane of level. I chose the counter top, as it is the easiest to use for level when setting up, and DW doesn't really like all the kitchen stuff rolling onto the floor or into the sink. I put the van on jack stands setup to make the counter top level, so it didn't change as the weight inside moved around. Here is how it worked out.
Here is what it looked like with the old frig out. The only interference with the new frig would be the water lines.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/hosesorig.jpg
Here is where they come out in the storage next to the frig.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/hosesorigcabinet.jpg
Here they are moved, which turned out to be very easy with the stainless lines RT used.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/hoserelocation.jpg
Again inside the cabinet.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/hoserelocatecabinet.jpg
Here is a pic looking up into the top of the cabinet. The caulking is over two slots that hold wood tabs on a divider by the sink, above the frig. The slots were not caulked at all from the factory, and the hoses in the previous pics were not completely caulked so there was a gap into the cabinet. We had always had hot burner smell in the van when on propane, so this would surely show us why.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/opensinkslots.jpg
I used two pieces of aluminum angle 2 X 3 X 17 ($10 at the discount materials place) to support the frig. It would have been easier to block up from the floor, but I wanted to try to get some storage under the now smaller frig. The right side is bolted with 1/4" bolts and t-nuts to the cabinet wall, but the water heater was in the way ont the left side, so it got a bunch of #10 sheet metal screws into the two layers of plywood on that side. I spaced in the opening with 1 X 2's on each side and about 1 X 5 on the bottom, let into the side pieces.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/angles.jpg
The Isotherm I bought came with a "3 sided flange, flush mount" kit, but, unfortunately, it was way too wide to use on the left side, so I decided to mount it homemade style. I used a short piece of 1/2 X 1/2 ready angle on the front to hold it in and square. For the bottom, I removed the feet it came with (the mounting screws were stripped anyway), and set it on rubber pads of varying thicknesses, to get square and not rock. I drilled holes in the angles and screwed the frig down with #10 sheet metal screws until the rubber was just a bit compressed.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/rubberpads2.jpg
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/underside1.jpg
The squarness/level issued started to show pretty badly at this point. In these pics the frig is level to the counter top. the side gaps are very different, at the frig would bind going in and not sit flat on the pads. I decided to let the frig go a bit off level to get it to fit better in the opening (the original was way off level in turns out), as it doesn't matter any more (compressor).
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/outofsquare1.jpg
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/outofsquare2.jpg
I used silicone on the sides and bottom to seal it up, and packed fiberglass in the top, which was a bigger opening. The frig has been taken off level here so the gaps are much better and it isn't binding.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/sealed1.jpg
I made some trim out of some 1/4" poplar, that was around and cheap, to see how it would fit up. Color didn't match up very well, but neither does the other stuff RT used. If it bothers us much, I will order some 1/4" maple or birch and remake them, as they are pretty simple. This is the finished product.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/finished1.jpg
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/finished2.jpg
We did gain storage underneath that is big enough for the heavy, clumsy, Chevy jack plus a few rarely used extra leveling blocks. I still need to add a strap down for the jack and blocks, and a barrier to keep everything away from the gas lines if they were to move around. I also have to get a cap for the gas fitting.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m299/turbobooster/newstorageunifinished.jpg
All in all it was not a bad job, took about 16 hours total, not rushing, and about $25 beyond the frig cost. The frig is very quiet, cools down in minutes, not hours, and holds temp very well. Most of all, NO MORE WORRIES ABOUT LEVEL. I checked the amp draw, and it started at 4 went down to 3.5 and then back up to 3.7 in the 5 minutes I checked. The garage was pretty cool, so how it will do in the heat is still to be determined.
|
booster
|
11/10/09 09:02am |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
RE: Best price?
We bought our 07 190P at 25.7% off MSRP, but it was a new unit that was nearly two model years old. Had been on the lot for 15 months. That included a $2000 Roadtrek rebate. I doubt you would do that well on a current model year, but there a lot of 08's out there yet, and they have a $5000 rebate on them and sales tax rebate besides.
|
booster
|
11/09/09 08:52pm |
Class B - Camping Van Conversions
|
|
