Casita vs Bigfoot MPG - Page 2 - Fiberglass RV


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-23-2013, 01:07 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Francesca Knowles's Avatar
 
Name: Francesca Knowles
Trailer: '78 Trillium 4500
Jefferson County, Washington State, U.S.A.
Posts: 4,543
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by David and Nancy View Post
I have had a Scamp 16, Casita 17, 2 Bigfoot 21's and now a Bigfoot 25. I towed them all with a Ford F-150 with 5.4 liter engine. Mileage was identical between the Scamp and heavier Casita. I lost between 4-5 miles per gallon when going from the Casita to the Bigfoot 21. But when I went to the Bigfoot 25, there was no further change. The 25 and 21 have identical frontal configurations. This must be a greater factor than weight. As for the 4-season capability, only you can decide if you need it. I know I love it where I live. I can be in elk camp in single digits in November and still make full use of the plumbing.
If this isn't a perfect demonstration that trailer front surface area is the most critical factor, I don't know what is.

Bookmarking this page for future reference...thanks, David!

Francesca
__________________

__________________
.................................
Propane Facts vs. Fiction:. Click here
Tow Limit Calculator: Click here
Francesca Knowles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 09:02 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
David and Nancy's Avatar
 
Name: David
Trailer: Bigfoot 25 ft (25B25RQ)
Colorado
Posts: 288
You are welcome, Francesca. We love our Bigfoot, but aerodynamic it is not. Too many flat surfaces. I can feel the wind grabbing it. Egg-shaped trailers just fly better. Bigfoots are basically square with slightly rounded corners.
__________________

__________________
David and Nancy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 12:45 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Trailer: Bigfoot
Manitoba
Posts: 604
On your 4th rainy day, when you can stand with your arms outstretched and twirl without hitting anything; when you are admiring the view out of all those large windows; its just worth the mileage.
__________________
Cam A is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 10:26 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Name: Kathy
Trailer: 2017 Escape 19
Washington
Posts: 594
Registry
I second what David and Nancy and Cam A say! It may not be the sleekest egg out there, but oh, those windows and oh, all that room! For us, that's worth the slight loss in MPG.
__________________
Evergreengirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 11:37 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Francesca Knowles's Avatar
 
Name: Francesca Knowles
Trailer: '78 Trillium 4500
Jefferson County, Washington State, U.S.A.
Posts: 4,543
Registry
The Bigfoot's plenty sleek- not that much "squarer" than many of our rigs. It just has more frontal surface area than most fiberglass trailers, which is likely what causes the extra drag.

And I totally agree with those that appreciate the extra area- A space that two people can actually stand side by side in sounds like heaven to me!

Francesca
__________________
.................................
Propane Facts vs. Fiction:. Click here
Tow Limit Calculator: Click here
Francesca Knowles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 11:57 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
deryk's Avatar
 
Name: deryk
Trailer: 2012 Parkliner 2010 V6 Nissan Frontier 4x4
New Jersey
Posts: 2,086
Registry
we all have to decide what we want in a trailer (sometimes its why people have more then 1) If your worried about the cost in fuel then get the casita, if your not concerned about lesser gas mileage then buy the bigfoot. I like that Im getting a little better gas mileage then my vardo so Im happy...but Im also single. If I was traipsing around with a few others I would want a little more room so I could have some privacy lol.
__________________
deryk

All that is gold does not glitter, Not all those who wander are lost; The old that is strong does not wither, Deep roots are not reached by the frost.... J.R.R. Tolkien
deryk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 01:10 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
LeonardS's Avatar
 
Name: Leonard
Trailer: not yet
California
Posts: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by David and Nancy View Post
You are welcome, Francesca. We love our Bigfoot, but aerodynamic it is not. Too many flat surfaces. I can feel the wind grabbing it. Egg-shaped trailers just fly better. Bigfoots are basically square with slightly rounded corners.
I've been looking at Escape 15's and Trillium 4500's. Both look a little boxy compared to Eggcampers and Casitas and Scamps. But...are they really boxy enough to effect mpg like the Bigfoot?
__________________
LeonardS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 04:16 AM   #22
GPJ
Senior Member
 
Name: GP
Trailer: Looking
British Columbia
Posts: 163
You really don't need that much rounding to obtain a real aerodynamic advantage - some of the aerodynamic studies I have looked at indicate that rounding (front sides and top) with a radius of 6-8 inches gives much of the available aerodynamic benefit. Beyond that there is a rapidly diminishing return. As has been pointed out above, if all else is equal, frontal area is a big factor in total drag. If your trailer is taller and wider - you get lots of room inside, but pay the piper at the gas pump.

In your example, I'd say the Escape 15 and the Trillium 4500 would have mpgs very similar to the Scamps and Casitas due to aerodynamics, frontal area and also weight. The Bigfoots really are another class of trailer - bigger inside with heavier double wall construction. Remember, Nancy and David's Bigfoot is a 25' model according to their info - you can't really compare it to a 15' egg.
__________________
GPJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 12:46 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Francesca Knowles's Avatar
 
Name: Francesca Knowles
Trailer: '78 Trillium 4500
Jefferson County, Washington State, U.S.A.
Posts: 4,543
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeonardS View Post
I've been looking at Escape 15's and Trillium 4500's. Both look a little boxy compared to Eggcampers and Casitas and Scamps. But...are they really boxy enough to effect mpg like the Bigfoot?
Front surface area is the main difference between Bigfoot and the other brands you mention, especially since without exception all fiberglass trailer backsides are equally wrong for efficient aerodynamics.

Per comparison of Trillium with Escape:

The Escape 15 and the Trillium 4500 shells have a common progenitor and one of the things they share are identical frontal profiles/areas.

Francesca
__________________
.................................
Propane Facts vs. Fiction:. Click here
Tow Limit Calculator: Click here
Francesca Knowles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 08:35 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Brian B-P's Avatar
 
Name: Brian
Trailer: Boler (B1700RGH) 1979
Alberta
Posts: 5,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francesca Knowles View Post
The Bigfoot's plenty sleek- not that much "squarer" than many of our rigs. It just has more frontal surface area than most fiberglass trailers, which is likely what causes the extra drag.
I agree that the frontal area is a - or the - big issue, but there is a substantial difference in front corner rounding, and...
Quote:
Originally Posted by GPJ View Post
You really don't need that much rounding to obtain a real aerodynamic advantage - some of the aerodynamic studies I have looked at indicate that rounding (front sides and top) with a radius of 6-8 inches gives much of the available aerodynamic benefit.
__________________
1979 Boler B1700RGH, pulled by 2004 Toyota Sienna LE 2WD
Information is good. Lack of information is not so good, but misinformation is much worse. Check facts, and apply common sense liberally.
STATUS: No longer active in forum.
Brian B-P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 08:38 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Brian B-P's Avatar
 
Name: Brian
Trailer: Boler (B1700RGH) 1979
Alberta
Posts: 5,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francesca Knowles View Post
Front surface area is the main difference between Bigfoot and the other brands you mention, especially since without exception all fiberglass trailer backsides are equally wrong for efficient aerodynamics.
I agree that the typical egg is all wrong in the back, but again the current Bigfoot shape is more squared, which is actually the better design for the back end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Francesca Knowles View Post
Per comparison of Trillium with Escape:

The Escape 15 and the Trillium 4500 shells have a common progenitor and one of the things they share are identical frontal profiles/areas.
I agree. As for the rest...

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeonardS View Post
I've been looking at Escape 15's and Trillium 4500's. Both look a little boxy compared to Eggcampers and Casitas and Scamps.
Sure. In rough order of most round (egg shaped) to most square:
  1. Oxygen
  2. Boler(1300/1500/1700)/Scamp/Casita
  3. U-Haul/Burro
  4. Trillium/Surfside/Escape
  5. Compact, Bigfoot, Biggar, Boler 1650/etc
... and of course I have left many out. Within the models of a brand (and of the same approximate vintage, for those few that have actually evolved their shape with time), they are usually all similarly shaped.

The Snoozy doesn't fit in this list, because it has a rounded front (even though not a great approach to rounding for aerodynamics) and relatively sharply cut off back, as I believe they all should. It is annoying to me that essentially all of the designers - other than the Smoaks - shape the front and back similarly, almost as if there is no regard to which way the trailer is going. Just a pet peeve...
__________________
1979 Boler B1700RGH, pulled by 2004 Toyota Sienna LE 2WD
Information is good. Lack of information is not so good, but misinformation is much worse. Check facts, and apply common sense liberally.
STATUS: No longer active in forum.
Brian B-P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 08:40 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Glenn Baglo's Avatar
 
Name: Glenn ( second 'n' is silent )
Trailer: 2009 Escape 17B '08 RAV4 SPORT V6
British Columbia
Posts: 4,369
I'm waiting for somebody to tow the Lil' Snoozy backwards for a 1,000 miles and compare fuel consumption with towing it forwards. Then we will have the definitive answer.
__________________
Glenn Baglo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2013, 10:45 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
LeonardS's Avatar
 
Name: Leonard
Trailer: not yet
California
Posts: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo View Post
I'm waiting for somebody to tow the Lil' Snoozy backwards for a 1,000 miles and compare fuel consumption with towing it forwards. Then we will have the definitive answer.
Now THAT made me laugh out loud!
__________________
LeonardS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2013, 08:59 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Thomas G.'s Avatar
 
Name: Kinga DeRode
Trailer: For Sale Or Rent
Rooms to Let 50 Cents
Posts: 5,103
Interesting article on motorcycle aerodynamics including discussion of Kamm tail (squared off back). Tony Foale Designs, article on motorcycle aerodynamics.


This discussion of the effect of side winds is interesting, too.

__________________

__________________
UHaul and Burro owners, join the UHaul Campers on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/groups/529276933859491/
Thomas G. is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bigfoot, casita


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How many MPG Kevin K General Chat 56 11-27-2013 01:48 PM
MPG Adrian W Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 17 08-28-2009 10:06 AM
MPG Phill Roehrs Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 27 03-17-2009 07:45 PM
MPG Adrian W General Chat 0 12-31-1969 07:00 PM

» Upcoming Events
No events scheduled in
the next 465 days.
» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.