Cruisers Forum
Main Forum => General Discussion => Topic started by: Michelle Dungan on October 02, 2016, 04:25:08 pm
-
The other day we looked at our first PC, a slightly used 2016 2350 at a dealer in nearby La Mesa, CA, just to get a feel for them beyond my online research. One thing that struck me was the low ground clearance of that long rear overhang, and I wonder at the durability of those castors mounted to the hitch receiver, and whether the sewer drain outlet in corner is vulnerable to driveways, etc. Has this been a problem for anyone? Has anyone had their leaf springs re-arched a little bit to restore ride height back to about what a lightly loaded E-Series van would have been?
Also, how much ground clearance is lost with hydraulic leveling jacks?
-
There is a couple good discussion threads on both your questions.
I have a 2100. Have added a lot including air bags to lift up back end.
Have given up on Sani-Con which is even closer to rear and lower on the 2100. This is something PC needs to work on in the design on all the shorter units. Replaced one that was cracked on a bad dip even though we were exiting oh so slowly on the diagonal. Second broke when backing to a cement parking block that was probably a 1/4 inch to high. Now we use the BSH (big stinky hose) and have removed the Sani-Con hose and store the BSH in that cabinet. The pluses of the BSH is that we now have a clear cuff to get a visual of the process. (I had tried to get one for Sani-Con which they don't make. Tried to use a piece of clear hose and it was more work than it was worth.) And no worries about clogging the Sani-Con pump.
-
The other day we looked at our first PC, a slightly used 2016 2350 at a dealer in nearby La Mesa, CA, just to get a feel for them beyond my online research. One thing that struck me was the low ground clearance of that long rear overhang, and I wonder at the durability of those castors mounted to the hitch receiver, and whether the sewer drain outlet in corner is vulnerable to driveways, etc. Has this been a problem for anyone? Has anyone had their leaf springs re-arched a little bit to restore ride height back to about what a lightly loaded E-Series van would have been?
Also, how much ground clearance is lost with hydraulic leveling jacks?
My 2551 with the Sanicon Turbo just clears on some steep dips, but the rollers on the hitch have prevented damage to the Sanicon.
Ground Clearance is distance between botton of differential and the ground.. That won't change with anything except larger tires. If you mean to raise the frame (chassis) above the axles lift kit style, you have to be careful about the drive shaft angle. I would definately get Kermit's thoughts on that before making a decision.
-
I probably should have said "departure angle" re. the rear end of these units scraping driveways rather than saying "ground clearance". I haven't calculated based on specs shown, but it looks like the short to medium length PCs all have similar lengths from rear axle to rear of vehicle; hence, the 2100 with its short wheelbase having more of a problem than a 2350, and it more so than a 2351. But, if a 2551 with its longer wheelbase is having "near misses", then these rear ends are too long and/or too low. No lift kits for me, though; I'd probably just get springs re-arched enough to raise ride height at axle only an inch or two, the height of it if built as a van as mentioned before (in other words, not looking "jacked up"), and it should eliminate drive line concerns. A one inch increase over axle would be several inches at the rear end. Various air bags as many folks use would be an option, though their potential excessively firm, rapidly progressive spring rate when inflated enough to provide adequate lift would be a concern. That said, besides research, my last experience was with Air-Lift Poly-Air stuffed into the rear coils of a Buick Electra in the '70s. And it sounds like elimination of the Sanicon would help, and one thing less to go wrong.
-
Here is our experience:
Our first PC was a 2013 2350 built on a Ford E350. We would often have some drag on the rear end when going over some dips in the roadway (such as the gutter area at the corner near our home), at gas stations, etc. I was always worried about damage to the Sanicon system.
For other reasons, we traded our 2350 for a new 2014 2552 built on a Ford E450.
The rear end of the 2552 is about 2” higher off the ground than was the 2350 and we’ve never had the rear end drag during the 3 years we’ve been using it.
I would never want to give up the Sanicon system.
We've never had a drag problem with the leveling jacks.
--Bruce
-
We have owned our 2100 for a year and a half and have taken 5 trips and stayed in 9 different campgrounds. So far we have not encountered any drag issues.
Bruce, we are with you in regards to the Sanicon System. Love the ease and cleanliness of that method. Prior to the PC we used the gravity system for 11 years. Hope those days are over but we do carry the slinky hose. As we all know anything in an RV can fail.
Gail
-
Gail,
I agree with you that carrying a slinky hose is a good idea.
Having an emergency backup is important to us.
Also, when staying in a campground for an extended time (like our recent three week stay near Ashland, OR) we connect the slinky to the park sewer system to let the gray water run out constantly. Once a week we pull out the Sanicon to clean out the black tank. That way the slinky hose never gets nasty and it can be stored easily.
--Bruce
-
Bruce we are with you. Sani con is the way to go. We had one installed in the class A we just traded in with Earl. It is the clean way to go.
We had one deep exit at a fuel stop. so far good exits and slow. patricia
-
I probably should have said "departure angle" re. the rear end of these units scraping driveways rather than saying "ground clearance". I haven't calculated based on specs shown, but it looks like the short to medium length PCs all have similar lengths from rear axle to rear of vehicle; hence, the 2100 with its short wheelbase having more of a problem than a 2350, and it more so than a 2351. But, if a 2551 with its longer wheelbase is having "near misses", then these rear ends are too long and/or too low. No lift kits for me, though; I'd probably just get springs re-arched enough to raise ride height at axle only an inch or two, the height of it if built as a van as mentioned before (in other words, not looking "jacked up"), and it should eliminate drive line concerns. A one inch increase over axle would be several inches at the rear end. Various air bags as many folks use would be an option, though their potential excessively firm, rapidly progressive spring rate when inflated enough to provide adequate lift would be a concern. That said, besides research, my last experience was with Air-Lift Poly-Air stuffed into the rear coils of a Buick Electra in the '70s. And it sounds like elimination of the Sanicon would help, and one thing less to go wrong.
Well.. Like I said, we have near misses.. Meaning... No drag to the Sanicon. There have been a few times when the skid wheels on the back have come into play.. But that's why they are there.. to prevent near misses from becoming hits.
Zero damage to anything "underside."
-
' good to hear that most of you seem to at least be getting by, save some with 2100s and their long tail to wheelbase ratios. As I'll likely find more used 2350s than 2351s out there, it does appear they would benefit even more from the small 1-2 inch leaf spring re-arch, along with other usual track-bar, etc. additions discussed in numerous posts. The issue isn't unique to PC; I've seen some Born Frees with long rear tails that would swing outward or downward like an alligator. Hmmmm... Too bad they don't fit RVs with small, solid rubber-tired landing gear in the rear to make up for failure to engineer adequate departure angles. That's be less jarring than those metal rollers.
-
Everything in a rv is a compromise. We have never had any problems with the Sanicom or the clearance....and we most often boondock in the National Forests. When in doubt about a clearance, I just stop and get out and look. I think the compromise is that by design and desire a Phoenix Cruiser is lower, more narrow and more sleek than a conventional Class C. The design element that attracts most of us to the product is therefore inherently compromised on several aspects, including clearance.
As to the "slinky hose", I carry a new one that has never been used just for safety. Incidentally, you can buy a piece of 4" plastic pipe and cut it to an appropriate length and use it to store and protect the slinky. It will just fit in the storage area at the rear of the coach where we store hoses and the electrical cable.
Yesterday, I went out to the Oklahoma City Fall RV clearance sale which has area dealers showing units to try and close out before winter. I went through several conventional Cs and man, they are like boxes on six wheels. Compared to my PC, it would be like driving a big box of crackers down the road. But their clearance was no problem because it took an additional step on the entry door to get up into them. Personal choice, I guess. By the way, I continue to be shocked at the quality build of new units of various popular brands compared to the fit and finish of our Phoenix Cruisers.
Paul
-
Re. the compromises with any RV, I recall an acquaintance who got around that issue based on his travel needs (or desires, really): He owned a pickup and had both a self-contained slide-in camper AND a 5th wheel, and a Jeep that he either flat towed behind the slide-in camper OR towed on a flatbed trailer. For me, jumping from a Roadtrek to a big box, especially if at that 8 1/2 foot width many now use, would be barely tolerable. I'd feel like a house mover or at least like I do when driving a large U-Haul. Pity there aren't more low, narrow choices out there to choose from.
-
We've seen several Lexington RV's by Forest River that look a lot like our Phoenix. It appears they don't make them any more if their website shows all models but I see used ones on the different RV sale sites. We had several Lexington owners checking out our rig and commenting that they wished they'd known about Phoenix Cruisers before they bought the Lexington. One couple had just bought their unit and were having issues with "tail wag" as well as being disappointed in the build, especially after seeing ours. They had downsized from a DP and liked the sleek "easy to handle" style... except they apparently didn't get "easy to handle". I gave them a brochure and the look in the man's eye said he was considering ditching the Lexington and buying Phoenix.
I guess what I'm saying is while there may not be many choices like the Phoenix, it seems a lot of the people that checked out all the choices then buy or covet the Phoenix so so it doesn't matter if you got to check out the competition if you've already bought the best.