Pro's and Con's SP to PT

[erniecarpet@...]

John, I guess it was big eyes, or wanting something larger then my 35 FC with us. Sure we have more storage room, which equals more stuff you can cram into the coach. I'd like to have a WB with good looking paint, but come right down to it, with over 300,000 miles, I'm thankful for what we have and the reliability of my old coach.

Ernie Ekberg
83PT40
Weatherford, Texas

---

New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination. Dining, Movies, Events, News more. Try it out!

[bubblerboy64]

I know this could be a blondes to brunettes question but I am
considering a move up from my FC 31 to a little larger Bluebird. Don't
want to start a debate but I would appreciate it if some of you would e-
mail me off list or post a private message as to what your opinions are
one to the other. I understand completely that I will have to make my
own decision but I would like the thoughts of others. Why did you
select the PT or SP and would you do the same next time around? Any
known weak points or particular disadvantages.

John Heckman
central Pa
1973 FC
By the way the Napper is for sale and I intend to be reasonable about
it. jehdds@...

[Fred Bellows]

We just bought our SP (first RV ever) after considering all the
Wanderlodge models and we love it. I really like the single rear axle
because it makes for more bay space, less toll-road charges and less
restrictions on certain roads, and fewer tires to buy. I like the 36'
length (it's actually 37), because some parks restrict coaches any
longer, some charge more for a 40', and it's a little more
maneuverable. Also, I added a motorcycle lift to the rear bumper,
which made it 41' anyway! It's also a little lighter, at just 35,000
pounds, which, from what I understand, can sometimes help out in
certain circumstances. We love the floorplan, including the mid-door,
kitchen sink facing the "porch" side, and, of course, the wonderful
"swing-wall" bathroom which has many benefits including the ability
for either the bedroom users or the front couch-bed guests to
discreetly use the bathroom at night, without waking the others. By
the way, the convertible couch is quite comfy compared to any other
couch-bed. The shower is plenty roomy, but you have to re-mount the
showerhead higher than the stock location. The 8k Onan gennie is
plenty big, and very quiet. The tank sizes are perfect: 200 gal fuel,
100 fresh water, 90 grey, 90 waste, and 45 propane. The 3208 with the
turbo (300hp) is just enough power to climb mountains ok. The 6-7 mpg
could be better, but at least it's not a Detroit that slobbers oil all
over. The ZF tranny is great, and it's retarder is smooth and quiet. I
wish it had a little bigger alternator (I think it's just 150 amp).
I'm swapping out the stock 45 amp Onan "battery boiler" and the PACS
modified sine wave inverter for a Xantrex 2000, to treat my batteries
to a nicer charge. I'd like to find out more about the
alternator/regulator, and get them to be nicer as well. Mine has a
nice solar system which does a kind job while stored. Well, that's all
I know. I'm sure the PT has it's advantages as well, but when we
looked at the differences 9 months ago, the SP seemed to have
everything we wanted, and we can't imagine wanting anything more!
`Good luck deciding/buying.

Fred & Wendy Bellows
90 SP36
Phx, AZ

[brad barton]

Congratulations Fred and Wendy,



Wanderlodge is not perfect but someone was hitting doubles and triples with the FC, SP and PT's in the 80's. I wouldn't mind having a lighter coach myself. I know my brother would appreciate it as Iembossed a couple permanent jack-marks in thestreet in frontof hishouse in Mesa earlier this year. At least Diesel is still coming down.


BradBarton00LXiDFW bbartonwx@...

---

Store, manage and share up to 5GB with Windows Live SkyDrive. Start uploading now

[Ryan Wright]

I bought as large as I could afford, PT-40. If you already want more
space, I highly recommend you do the same so you never have to yearn
for space again. If I'd have gone with a PT-36 I'd be
second-guessing myself every time I saw a PT-40 for sale. I'd have
loved a 43' LXI for even more space, but it wasn't in my budget so I
can't second-guess there. I know I made the right decision with my
coach, for my needs.

The main reasons I went big:

1. I have a wife and two children whom I love, but I don't like being
cooped up with others in small spaces. I'm not claustrophobic, small
spaces are fine if it's just me, but when I have other people around I
need room to breathe. The PT-40 gives all of us plenty of room when
traveling without feeling too crowded.

2. I wanted a coach big enough to live in, by myself, if I had to. I
lived in it for several months last year and may do so again some day.
It's quite comfortable living for one person. A bit tight coming from
a house, obviously, but still very comfortable with three well-defined
and sizable living spaces (bed/bath, kitchen, living room). Contrast
this to smaller coaches where the spaces blend together more. I could
full time in a PT-40 for the rest of my life (and probably would, if I
were single).

3. I overdo everything ("bigger, better"), and just wanted the best I
could afford. A personality trait, I guess.

-Ryan
'86 PT-40 8V92

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, bubblerboy64 wrote:
> I know this could be a blondes to brunettes question but I am
> considering a move up from my FC 31 to a little larger Bluebird. Don't
> want to start a debate but I would appreciate it if some of you would e-
> mail me off list or post a private message as to what your opinions are
> one to the other. I understand completely that I will have to make my
> own decision but I would like the thoughts of others. Why did you
> select the PT or SP and would you do the same next time around? Any
> known weak points or particular disadvantages.
>
> John Heckman
> central Pa
> 1973 FC
> By the way the Napper is for sale and I intend to be reasonable about
> it. jehdds@...

[bubblerboy64]

I've received some very insightful responses on this topic and I
really appreciate each and everyone of them. My conclusion is it's
very much like Ryan's post. Bigger is better once parked and smaller
is better while driving (lighter weight, better mileage) Problem is
you can't have it both ways. Interestingly some of the things that PT
owners give to reject the SP are things that the SP owners like best
about the coaches and the same for the SP owners toward the PT. I
have decided its going to come down to my pick and that I would not
go wrong either way. In my mind I may buy the coach that is the best
cared for and best maintained bus and factor in the driving
experienced. It's reminds me of the Corvette Porsche owners. They
see little good in the others pick when in truth a guy would be lucky
to be able to own either one. I consider myself very fortunate that
I can play in this pond at all.
John Heckman
central Pa
1973 FC SOON TO HIT THE BILL BOARD









>
> I bought as large as I could afford, PT-40. If you already want more
> space, I highly recommend you do the same so you never have to yearn
> for space again. If I'd have gone with a PT-36 I'd be
> second-guessing myself every time I saw a PT-40 for sale. I'd have
> loved a 43' LXI for even more space, but it wasn't in my budget so I
> can't second-guess there. I know I made the right decision with my
> coach, for my needs.
>
> The main reasons I went big:
>
> 1. I have a wife and two children whom I love, but I don't like
being
> cooped up with others in small spaces. I'm not claustrophobic, small
> spaces are fine if it's just me, but when I have other people
around I
> need room to breathe. The PT-40 gives all of us plenty of room when
> traveling without feeling too crowded.
>
> 2. I wanted a coach big enough to live in, by myself, if I had to. I
> lived in it for several months last year and may do so again some
day.
> It's quite comfortable living for one person. A bit tight coming
from
> a house, obviously, but still very comfortable with three well-
defined
> and sizable living spaces (bed/bath, kitchen, living room). Contrast
> this to smaller coaches where the spaces blend together more. I
could
> full time in a PT-40 for the rest of my life (and probably would,
if I
> were single).
>
> 3. I overdo everything ("bigger, better"), and just wanted the best
I
> could afford. A personality trait, I guess.
>
> -Ryan
> '86 PT-40 8V92
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, bubblerboy64 wrote:
> > I know this could be a blondes to brunettes question but I am
> > considering a move up from my FC 31 to a little larger Bluebird.
Don't
> > want to start a debate but I would appreciate it if some of you
would e-
> > mail me off list or post a private message as to what your
opinions are
> > one to the other. I understand completely that I will have to
make my
> > own decision but I would like the thoughts of others. Why did you
> > select the PT or SP and would you do the same next time around?
Any
> > known weak points or particular disadvantages.
> >
> > John Heckman
> > central Pa
> > 1973 FC
> > By the way the Napper is for sale and I intend to be reasonable
about
> > it. jehdds@...
>

[Alan Hetzel]

Agreed. I love my 77FC35, even though it has less interior space than my old 5th wheel, because:

1) the kids can go in the back and watch a movie while we drive
2) my mileage isn't really any worse than my F350 pulling the 5th wheel.

3) I think it's actually more maneuverable than the F350+trailer combo,
heck, it's only 12.5 feet longer than the F350 on it's own.
4) it's maneuverable enough we don't pull a toad, we just go wherever with the FC itself.


While a PT42 sure would be nice for the space, the fuel costs *are* at least some
consideration for us, since we tend to go on high-mileage short-duration trips with it
(Atlanta-Omaha r/t for turkey day, by example)

and 9ish mpg (220ish gals) is much less painful than 4ish (500ish gals)

Regards,

Dorn Hetzel
77FC35
Flat Creek Campground
Hogansville, GA

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 5:05 PM, bubblerboy64 <"jehdds@hotmail.com"> wrote:

I've received some very insightful responses on this topic and I

really appreciate each and everyone of them. My conclusion is it's

very much like Ryan's post. Bigger is better once parked and smaller

is better while driving (lighter weight, better mileage) Problem is

you can't have it both ways. Interestingly some of the things that PT

owners give to reject the SP are things that the SP owners like best

about the coaches and the same for the SP owners toward the PT. I

have decided its going to come down to my pick and that I would not

go wrong either way. In my mind I may buy the coach that is the best

cared for and best maintained bus and factor in the driving

experienced. It's reminds me of the Corvette Porsche owners. They

see little good in the others pick when in truth a guy would be lucky

to be able to own either one. I consider myself very fortunate that

I can play in this pond at all.

John Heckman

central Pa

1973 FC SOON TO HIT THE BILL BOARD

>

> I bought as large as I could afford, PT-40. If you already want more

> space, I highly recommend you do the same so you never have to yearn

> for space again. If I'd have gone with a PT-36 I'd be

> second-guessing myself every time I saw a PT-40 for sale. I'd have

> loved a 43' LXI for even more space, but it wasn't in my budget so I

> can't second-guess there. I know I made the right decision with my

> coach, for my needs.

>

> The main reasons I went big:

>

> 1. I have a wife and two children whom I love, but I don't like

being

> cooped up with others in small spaces. I'm not claustrophobic, small

> spaces are fine if it's just me, but when I have other people

around I

> need room to breathe. The PT-40 gives all of us plenty of room when

> traveling without feeling too crowded.

>

> 2. I wanted a coach big enough to live in, by myself, if I had to. I

> lived in it for several months last year and may do so again some

day.

> It's quite comfortable living for one person. A bit tight coming

from

> a house, obviously, but still very comfortable with three well-

defined

> and sizable living spaces (bed/bath, kitchen, living room). Contrast

> this to smaller coaches where the spaces blend together more. I

could

> full time in a PT-40 for the rest of my life (and probably would,

if I

> were single).

>

> 3. I overdo everything ("bigger, better"), and just wanted the best

I

> could afford. A personality trait, I guess.

>

> -Ryan

> '86 PT-40 8V92

>

> On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, bubblerboy64 wrote:

> > I know this could be a blondes to brunettes question but I am

> > considering a move up from my FC 31 to a little larger Bluebird.

Don't

> > want to start a debate but I would appreciate it if some of you

would e-

> > mail me off list or post a private message as to what your

opinions are

> > one to the other. I understand completely that I will have to

make my

> > own decision but I would like the thoughts of others. Why did you

> > select the PT or SP and would you do the same next time around?

Any

> > known weak points or particular disadvantages.

> >

> > John Heckman

> > central Pa

> > 1973 FC

> > By the way the Napper is for sale and I intend to be reasonable

about

> > it. jehdds@...

>

[Gregory OConnor]

I like the SP but it isnt a widebody the 6 inches is in the isles. a
big diff. I wouldnt put as much weight on mainteniance and repair. I
see alot of top maintained trucks blowing engines. get what you
want size, color, interior, retrofit updated components and build
it from there. find somthing you can live with and be truthful with
a realistic cost of utility. I used $6,000 per year after the cost
to repair and maintain.
Greg94pt

--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "bubblerboy64"
wrote:
>
> I've received some very insightful responses on this topic and I
> really appreciate each and everyone of them. My conclusion is
it's
> very much like Ryan's post. Bigger is better once parked and
smaller
> is better while driving (lighter weight, better mileage) Problem
is
> you can't have it both ways. Interestingly some of the things that
PT
> owners give to reject the SP are things that the SP owners like
best
> about the coaches and the same for the SP owners toward the PT. I
> have decided its going to come down to my pick and that I would
not
> go wrong either way. In my mind I may buy the coach that is the
best
> cared for and best maintained bus and factor in the driving
> experienced. It's reminds me of the Corvette Porsche owners.
They
> see little good in the others pick when in truth a guy would be
lucky
> to be able to own either one. I consider myself very fortunate
that
> I can play in this pond at all.
> John Heckman
> central Pa
> 1973 FC SOON TO HIT THE BILL BOARD
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I bought as large as I could afford, PT-40. If you already want
more
> > space, I highly recommend you do the same so you never have to
yearn
> > for space again. If I'd have gone with a PT-36 I'd be
> > second-guessing myself every time I saw a PT-40 for sale. I'd
have
> > loved a 43' LXI for even more space, but it wasn't in my budget
so I
> > can't second-guess there. I know I made the right decision with
my
> > coach, for my needs.
> >
> > The main reasons I went big:
> >
> > 1. I have a wife and two children whom I love, but I don't like
> being
> > cooped up with others in small spaces. I'm not claustrophobic,
small
> > spaces are fine if it's just me, but when I have other people
> around I
> > need room to breathe. The PT-40 gives all of us plenty of room
when
> > traveling without feeling too crowded.
> >
> > 2. I wanted a coach big enough to live in, by myself, if I had
to. I
> > lived in it for several months last year and may do so again
some
> day.
> > It's quite comfortable living for one person. A bit tight coming
> from
> > a house, obviously, but still very comfortable with three well-
> defined
> > and sizable living spaces (bed/bath, kitchen, living room).
Contrast
> > this to smaller coaches where the spaces blend together more. I
> could
> > full time in a PT-40 for the rest of my life (and probably
would,
> if I
> > were single).
> >
> > 3. I overdo everything ("bigger, better"), and just wanted the
best
> I
> > could afford. A personality trait, I guess.
> >
> > -Ryan
> > '86 PT-40 8V92
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, bubblerboy64 wrote:
> > > I know this could be a blondes to brunettes question but I am
> > > considering a move up from my FC 31 to a little larger
Bluebird.
> Don't
> > > want to start a debate but I would appreciate it if some of
you
> would e-
> > > mail me off list or post a private message as to what your
> opinions are
> > > one to the other. I understand completely that I will have to
> make my
> > > own decision but I would like the thoughts of others. Why did
you
> > > select the PT or SP and would you do the same next time
around?
> Any
> > > known weak points or particular disadvantages.
> > >
> > > John Heckman
> > > central Pa
> > > 1973 FC
> > > By the way the Napper is for sale and I intend to be
reasonable
> about
> > > it. jehdds@
> >
>

[Ryan Wright]

Fuel costs are definitely an issue. We were looking at a vacation 600
miles away. OK, not a bad drive, but 1200 miles round trip is 240
gallons of diesel in my PT-40. That's a thousand bucks. OK, still not
a huge deal, it's a vacation, right? Nope, family wanted to do it on a
3 day weekend. Now I have to put my foot down. I'm not spending a
thousand bucks on fuel for a 3 day mini-vacation when half of the time
will be spent on the road! I'll take a week off work and we can go on
a week long vacation and now it makes sense.

With the old 12mpg gas powered Travco it was no problem, let's go,
fuel costs don't even enter into the equation.

So, most of our trips are very short distance wise. We take weekend
trips ~150 miles away regularly and I don't even worry about the cost
of fuel for those. In fact I usually fuel up out of state on the way
home and save myself a few bucks, diesel was 30 cents cheaper per
gallon last weekend in Idaho. Can't remember the last time I bought
fuel locally. God bless my PT-40's 300 gallon tank...

-Ryan
'86 PT-40 8V92

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Alan Hetzel wrote:
> While a PT42 sure would be nice for the space, the fuel costs *are* at least
> some
> consideration for us, since we tend to go on high-mileage short-duration
> trips with it
> (Atlanta-Omaha r/t for turkey day, by example)
> and 9ish mpg (220ish gals) is much less painful than 4ish (500ish gals)

[bubblerboy64]

Yes the fuel consuption is a consideration. I get an honest 10 miles
per with The Napper and I really like the old girl. My problem is
that my wife is afraid to drive it and so I have to drive 100% of the
time and it is not comfortable enough for me to drive 8 to 10 hours
and then get up the next day and do it again. That is what MH life
is about. I want to be able to feel like if I want to take off for
Florida I am ready to go. And then when you get there the bus is
pretty limited for room. The idea of staying longer is a good one
and that again justifies the larger MH even at the expense of the
fuel useage. Its exactly like the cars. I've had all manor of autos
and you can't have the ride comfort and easy living of a Caddy or
Mercedes without paying the piper. My wife likes going to the
Rally's and she is interested in this. This is really about the only
thing we enjoy doing together. So I can make her happy and myself
and hopefully get to see a lot of this great country. I am 62 years
old on Wednesday. I kidda feel that nows the time. The money is
going to take some planning but I can handle it within reason. With
a larger MH perhaps we can take another couple along who might help
so with the costs ( now that's wishful thinking ). I have invested a
bunch of money in The Napper. If I can get a nice newer motor home
which needs less I will have more money for fuel. See how well I can
justify this? God bless my wife for puttin up with me all these
years.

John Heckman
central Pa 1973 FC
>
> I like the SP but it isnt a widebody the 6 inches is in the isles.
a
> big diff. I wouldnt put as much weight on mainteniance and repair.
I
> see alot of top maintained trucks blowing engines. get what you
> want size, color, interior, retrofit updated components and build
> it from there. find somthing you can live with and be truthful
with
> a realistic cost of utility. I used $6,000 per year after the cost
> to repair and maintain.
> Greg94pt
>
> --- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "bubblerboy64"
> wrote:
> >
> > I've received some very insightful responses on this topic and I
> > really appreciate each and everyone of them. My conclusion is
> it's
> > very much like Ryan's post. Bigger is better once parked and
> smaller
> > is better while driving (lighter weight, better mileage) Problem
> is
> > you can't have it both ways. Interestingly some of the things
that
> PT
> > owners give to reject the SP are things that the SP owners like
> best
> > about the coaches and the same for the SP owners toward the PT. I
> > have decided its going to come down to my pick and that I would
> not
> > go wrong either way. In my mind I may buy the coach that is the
> best
> > cared for and best maintained bus and factor in the driving
> > experienced. It's reminds me of the Corvette Porsche owners.
> They
> > see little good in the others pick when in truth a guy would be
> lucky
> > to be able to own either one. I consider myself very fortunate
> that
> > I can play in this pond at all.
> > John Heckman
> > central Pa
> > 1973 FC SOON TO HIT THE BILL BOARD
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I bought as large as I could afford, PT-40. If you already want
> more
> > > space, I highly recommend you do the same so you never have to
> yearn
> > > for space again. If I'd have gone with a PT-36 I'd be
> > > second-guessing myself every time I saw a PT-40 for sale. I'd
> have
> > > loved a 43' LXI for even more space, but it wasn't in my budget
> so I
> > > can't second-guess there. I know I made the right decision with
> my
> > > coach, for my needs.
> > >
> > > The main reasons I went big:
> > >
> > > 1. I have a wife and two children whom I love, but I don't like
> > being
> > > cooped up with others in small spaces. I'm not claustrophobic,
> small
> > > spaces are fine if it's just me, but when I have other people
> > around I
> > > need room to breathe. The PT-40 gives all of us plenty of room
> when
> > > traveling without feeling too crowded.
> > >
> > > 2. I wanted a coach big enough to live in, by myself, if I had
> to. I
> > > lived in it for several months last year and may do so again
> some
> > day.
> > > It's quite comfortable living for one person. A bit tight
coming
> > from
> > > a house, obviously, but still very comfortable with three well-
> > defined
> > > and sizable living spaces (bed/bath, kitchen, living room).
> Contrast
> > > this to smaller coaches where the spaces blend together more. I
> > could
> > > full time in a PT-40 for the rest of my life (and probably
> would,
> > if I
> > > were single).
> > >
> > > 3. I overdo everything ("bigger, better"), and just wanted the
> best
> > I
> > > could afford. A personality trait, I guess.
> > >
> > > -Ryan
> > > '86 PT-40 8V92
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 4:51 PM, bubblerboy64 wrote:
> > > > I know this could be a blondes to brunettes question but I am
> > > > considering a move up from my FC 31 to a little larger
> Bluebird.
> > Don't
> > > > want to start a debate but I would appreciate it if some of
> you
> > would e-
> > > > mail me off list or post a private message as to what your
> > opinions are
> > > > one to the other. I understand completely that I will have to
> > make my
> > > > own decision but I would like the thoughts of others. Why did
> you
> > > > select the PT or SP and would you do the same next time
> around?
> > Any
> > > > known weak points or particular disadvantages.
> > > >
> > > > John Heckman
> > > > central Pa
> > > > 1973 FC
> > > > By the way the Napper is for sale and I intend to be
> reasonable
> > about
> > > > it. jehdds@
> > >
> >
>