Round vs Squarish Eggs - Page 2 - Fiberglass RV


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-06-2011, 06:00 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Jane P.'s Avatar
 
Trailer: Bigfoot 19 ft
Posts: 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by David and Nancy View Post
I am currently towing a 21' Bigfoot after previously having a Scamp 16 and a Casita 17. I am down 5-6 miles per gallon with the Bigfoot. The flat frontal area on the Bigfoot is far less aerodynamic. I can feel it catching wind in conditions that didn't faze the Scamp and Casita. Of course, the Bigfoot is also bigger and heavier, so not really a fair comparison. We love the extra space and 4-season features, but it doesn't pull like a small egg.
I was originally looking at a Casita 17 because of gas milage (plus it's cute), but decided on the Bigfoot because of extra basement storage, and the fact that it would be more comfortable for my husband and dogs.

I try not to think about the additional gas milage.

I did consider a Egg Camper. It is round and wider than the Casita. It is designed and built by an ex-Airplane manufacturer who warrants that maximizing gas milage stood prominently his design decisions.

However, the Egg Camper lacked certain comfort features which were of interest to me (like a larger freezer, storage space & a LP System to accommodate dry camping).

But if you want to go round and have some room to "stretch out" in the cabin, and maximize gas milage, I'd definitely consider an Egg Camper.
__________________

__________________
'92 Bigfoot 19' | '07 Chevy Tahoe
Jane P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 09:50 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Bruce Thomas's Avatar
 
Name: Bruce T
Trailer: Compact jr
Indiana
Posts: 727
Registry
Things that need to be moved through the air efficiently are hardly ever "squarish"......jets or planes..cars..a bullet.....anything actually. There are no square birds either... Frontal area matters alot too and its shape. thats why you see the sloping roof style on top of big rig trucks, they're trying to direct that air up and over in a hurry......so streamlining.......over the life of that thing it must save alot, not sure yould be able to claim that kinda savings yanking an egg with a toyota etc but it's there i'm sure.
All that said I think alot of the squarer looking campers are really sharp looking and probably have much better interior usefulness without the rounded ends etc. I'd buy either
__________________

__________________
Bruce Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2011, 01:15 AM   #17
Moderator
 
Pam Garlow's Avatar
 
Name: Pam
Trailer: U-Haul 1985
Michigan
Posts: 3,220
Registry
I just had to google the 'have or has' question. It appears that either useage is correct, depending upon whether or not you are speaking in terms of singular or plural in reference to the word 'none'. Website and portion of explanation is below. http://www.grammarmudge.cityslide.co...26513/9903.htm
"When the sense is plural (as indicated by a plural noun or pronoun in the following prepositional phrase "none of [plural entity]"), none is plural; when the sense is singular (as indicated by a singular noun or pronoun in the following prepositional phrase "none of [singular entity]"), none is singular.
Futhermore, we may have some instances in which either is correct. The American Heritage Dictionary notes: "The choice between a singular or plural verb depends on the desired effect. Both options are acceptable in this sentence: None of the conspirators has (or have) been brought to trial." And that is true because the sense of none may be construed here as either "not one" or "not any."
__________________
Pam Garlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2011, 09:26 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Mike Magee's Avatar
 
Name: Michael
Trailer: Li'l Hauley
Oklahoma
Posts: 5,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pam Garlow View Post
I just had to google the 'have or has' question. It appears that either useage is correct, depending upon whether or not you are speaking in terms of singular or plural in reference to the word 'none'. Website and portion of explanation is below. http://www.grammarmudge.cityslide.co...26513/9903.htm
"When the sense is plural (as indicated by a plural noun or pronoun in the following prepositional phrase "none of [plural entity]"), none is plural; when the sense is singular (as indicated by a singular noun or pronoun in the following prepositional phrase "none of [singular entity]"), none is singular.
Futhermore, we may have some instances in which either is correct. The American Heritage Dictionary notes: "The choice between a singular or plural verb depends on the desired effect. Both options are acceptable in this sentence: None of the conspirators has (or have) been brought to trial." And that is true because the sense of none may be construed here as either "not one" or "not any."

Thanks for clarifying that. Good grammar is important to me, but this is one that I have puzzled over. Nice to know that I'm safe either way.

At this stage in my life, this much I am sure of: I am not really sure of much.
__________________
How much time do we have left? 2 Chr. 7:14
Mike Magee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 09:22 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Trailer: 1980 Burro
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by melissab View Post
With e'body watching their MPG's, I was wondering if anybody has towed both a round egg and a squarer (is that a word??) egg and can report on the MPG differences? In particular I was thinking of the Scamp/Bolers compared to the Trilliums/Escapes. I'd think the squarer FG rigs would fare worse. So is there a difference between the 2 shapes and gas mileage? And if not, why not?
Round vs squarish may have less of a factor on MPG than all the things that some people rivet, bolt or glue on the outside. Awnings, air conditioners, solar panels, and large roof vent covers can really disrupt smooth airflow over the surface of a trailer. I would bet that a squarish egg without any of that stuff would have less drag than a round egg with all the exterior flow disrupters. The best would be round without the exterior stuff. Even things like protruding door handles, porch lights, vent panels and access hatches can have an effect although smaller than the big stuff.
__________________
Andy B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 09:27 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Name: Floyd
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
IllAnnoy
Posts: 6,046
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy B View Post
Round vs squarish may have less of a factor on MPG than all the things that some people rivet, bolt or glue on the outside. Awnings, air conditioners, solar panels, and large roof vent covers can really disrupt smooth airflow over the surface of a trailer. I would bet that a squarish egg without any of that stuff would have less drag than a round egg with all the exterior flow disrupters. The best would be round without the exterior stuff. Even things like protruding door handles, porch lights, vent panels and access hatches can have an effect although smaller than the big stuff.
Even more so above 160MPH!
__________________
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 10:11 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Bruce H's Avatar
 
Name: Bruce
Trailer: Bigfoot 25 ft RQ
Missouri
Posts: 398
I convinced myself that I want one of these for my truck. http://www.fibrobec.com/quattro-caps/index.html
It is the tallest camper shell that I can find. I was thinking it would divert some of the air over the top of my trailer when towing. Like the airfoil on a tractor trailer truck. Plus I take an ATV with me when I travel and this is the only one that has a large enough opening to accommodate one.

The problem for me is it is manufactured in Quebec and there is a very limited dealer network in the U S plus they are all in the Northeast. I have no immediate plans to travel in that direction. Last year I called two U S dealers and a Canadian dealer and got widely varying prices. It looks like I would be out well over a thousand dollars in transportation costs.
__________________
Bruce H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 10:48 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Greg H's Avatar
 
Name: Greg
Trailer: 72 Boler American
Indiana
Posts: 1,557
Have you checked some American manufacturers?
__________________
Greg H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 11:09 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Bruce H's Avatar
 
Name: Bruce
Trailer: Bigfoot 25 ft RQ
Missouri
Posts: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg H View Post
Have you checked some American manufacturers?
Yes. I did extensive searchs a couple of years ago. Some of them make one that looks similar but none of them had enough rear door clearance to load an ATV. Plus the taller that back end is the more airfoil effect it should provide for the trailer.
__________________
Bruce H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2011, 11:58 PM   #24
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 melissab View Post
With e'body watching their MPG's, I was wondering if anybody has towed both a round egg and a squarer (is that a word??) egg and can report on the MPG differences? In particular I was thinking of the Scamp/Bolers compared to the Trilliums/Escapes. I'd think the squarer FG rigs would fare worse. So is there a difference between the 2 shapes and gas mileage? And if not, why not?
Hi, Melissa

The differences in mileage are infinitesimally small compared to the differences in the workability of the inside space.
I've owned both shapes, and the extra few inches of the interior of the "squarer" trailer is huge in terms of usability.
You might want to check out the current thread on one of the rounder shapes at arrrgh! New fulltimer.
It's one thing to "get there", and another to be comfortable when you do!

Francesca
__________________
Francesca Knowles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 06:41 AM   #25
Senior Member
 
honda03842's Avatar
 
Name: Norm and Ginny
Trailer: Scamp 16
Florida
Posts: 7,300
I wish comfortable was proportional to square footage. So many of my neighbors should be so much happier. So many people today have rooms in their homes that they do not enter once a week, yet stressfully work to make their mortgages, rarely stopping to enjoy the beauty of our world.

Last year we were in a campground talking with a couple of RVers. The wife was complaining about the size of her 5th wheel's kitchen. She invited us to see it.

Seriously her kitchen, with center island, was bigger than our trailer. We smiled and invited her to our trailer. Now she says she'll never complain again and yet we are totally happy with our kitchen area.

We are in the process of cleaning out our Motorhome, getting ready to sell it. Though we thought we had downsized when we moved into it some years ago, it's obvious that we had too much room and too much stuff.

You learn to operate in the space you have. My niece traveled Europe for a couple of months living out of her backpack and was joyful. We always feel so fortunate to be doing what we do, are happy to have a clean shirt and a fresh pair of jeans. It's enough.

It's interesting to me, and I've only learned this over the last ten years of RVing, how little the joyful soul needs to be satisfied. Square or round, interesting but not the critical component.

We are now working to maximize the space in our Scamp 16. It turns out there's really ton's of unused space in that volume and will easily meet our needs.

Safe and joyful travel to all,

Norm
__________________
honda03842 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 08:44 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Roy in TO's Avatar
 
Name: Roy
Trailer: 1972 boler American and 1979 Trillium 4500
Ontario
Posts: 4,954
I know that Thom from TrilliumRV delivers his trailers up to Canada and out east a few times a year. He usually travels back empty. Might be worth a try.
__________________
Roy in TO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 11:50 PM   #27
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 Tony Nowak View Post
We get about 3 less MPG with the Bigfoot versus the Scamp, of course the BF is 130% heavier, but as Dave comments the frontal area is a killer.
We lockout overdrive on the Ford 150 (4 speed auto) when using the BF.
Tony
Hi, Tony

I think this is BOTH a grammar and a math question!
By "130% heavier" do you mean that the Bigfoot is twice plus an extra 30% the Scamp's weight?
Or that it's the Scamp weight plus 30%?
If the first interpretation of your meaning is the correct one, I'm surprised that you're only getting 3 mpg less with the heavier trailer.

Francesca
__________________
Francesca Knowles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 09:35 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
honda03842's Avatar
 
Name: Norm and Ginny
Trailer: Scamp 16
Florida
Posts: 7,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francesca Knowles View Post
Hi, Tony

I think this is BOTH a grammar and a math question!
By "130% heavier" do you mean that the Bigfoot is twice plus an extra 30% the Scamp's weight?
Or that it's the Scamp weight plus 30%?
If the first interpretation of your meaning is the correct one, I'm surprised that you're only getting 3 mpg less with the heavier trailer.

Francesca
Francesca,

In towing a 25% heavier trailer this year, the Casita 16, I had better mileage than towing our Sunline 15.5. In mostly non stop and go driving on relatively flat roads I think the shape/frontal area is more important than the weight. I got 3 mpg better mileage (23 versus 20) towing the Casita.

In these discussions it helps if the actual mpg is listed versus the difference.

By the way what do you tow with?

Norm
__________________

__________________
honda03842 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Roddin' Round Doug Mager Hobbies & Passions 24 01-06-2013 06:58 PM
Casita Mods - Round Two Rob and Linda Modifications, Alterations and Updates 13 09-20-2010 11:24 PM
4 flat with 7 round?? Joan D Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 10 06-15-2008 10:05 PM
4 flat with 7 round?? Joan D Problem Solving | Owners Helping Owners 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 07:11 PM.


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