|
07-20-2017, 09:27 PM
|
#1
|
Junior Member
Name: Eric
Trailer: Boler
Michigan
Posts: 16
|
Old vs newer scamp
I have heard that older scamps from the 1970s had a significantly lighter dry weight than newer scamps (like 900-1000# 'vs 1200-1300#). I was wondering if there is any truth to this and if so what year did this change? I'm looking for something that will come in at 1500# or less it's seems like this is possible with light packing with burros, bolers and possibly old scamps and I'm wondering if anyone knows which years the scamps were lighter so I can limit my search.
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 07:13 AM
|
#2
|
Senior Member
Name: Jon
Trailer: 2008 Scamp 13 S1
Arizona
Posts: 11,912
|
Old vs newer scamp
There have been many changes over the years affecting dry weight, but for the most part the changes were gradual. The problem is the published dry weight was not updated regularly as changes were made, so it looks like there was a sudden increase. I question whether any of them ever really weighed 950 pounds as shown in some older brochures.
Some of the changes include a stronger frame (a good thing, in spite of the weight), OSB floor instead of plywood (not so good, but only accounts for about 15-20 pounds), sliding rear window instead of plexiglass (another good change), and a taller shell (2007).
Also, the options list has grown much longer over the years. Dry weight does not include any options. Newer units tend to include more options, and some are worth the weight penalty (like the screen door).
Last, as you look for a trailer, pay attention to any modifications and renovations, which also affect the weight. The older the trailer, the more likely changes have been made.
Bottom line is that there's no simple answer to your question. Your best bet is to look for a simple, basic unit in good condition without worrying too much about the year.
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 09:11 AM
|
#3
|
Senior Member
Trailer: Scamp 19 ft 5th Wheel
Posts: 1,861
|
Besides what Jon stated. The axles were 1200 lb rated (slightly lighter). The tires were smaller, 165. The rims may have been only 4" wide (not really sure). They came standard with ice boxes maybe a 50 lb saving over a gas frig. I just sold a 77 S-13 and it did not have front mounted brackets for the battery. Back then the battery may have been an option. Even the water tank was really thin and lighter than the mid 80's water tank. No big escape hatch or 14"x14" hatch. Only a 9"X9" light weight aluminum hatch. As today brakes were optional but rarely ordered. No converter just a two breaker AC panel and an in-line fuse for the DC distribution. I even think the fiberglass was thinner. The early Scamps were basic but you can still order one stripped down today if you like.
Big early changes. 1982 mid year 17 digit VIN. 1984 Black frame radius windows and OSB floors. 1986 Rat fur,
Eddie
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 09:15 AM
|
#4
|
Moderator
Name: RogerDat
Trailer: 2010 Scamp 16
Michigan
Posts: 3,744
|
Yep the options matter. I have a 77 Scamp. With 3 way fridge but the more common option would have been an ice box which weighs a whole lot less. There is also no provision for having a batter to run 12 volt on the trailer. Lot of weight right there. No holding tanks means no plumbing to speak of and no weight from flushing toilet or sink drain. No water pump, no AC to DC converter to run 12 volt and charge battery.
Guess you can figure out why we consider it more of a hard sided tent than an RV.
The front couch (goucho) models could be stripped to small propane tank, no battery or very small one, no water tank, no refrigerator, something light weight for floor covering and I think they would probably still go over 1,500 lbs. loaded with gear but maybe not. This list of trailer weights collected in real world at FGRV rallies might help.
http://www.fiberglassrv.com/forums/f...rld-43010.html
You can't remove the brace from lower cabinet to upper, or the closet next to door. These two are structural and keep the roof from sagging. Removing the couch might also reduce the structural integrity of the front. Proably not worth saving the 25# or so.
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 09:21 AM
|
#5
|
Moderator
Name: RogerDat
Trailer: 2010 Scamp 16
Michigan
Posts: 3,744
|
Oh and the early Scamps were not as wide or tall, They added some width, just a few inches but considering my 6'1" only fits on the bed flat with some Crisco on top of head and bottom of feet....
Not sure how much taller the newer ones are but they are taller. And may well have air conditioners. My roof wasn't designed to even take one. Another case of option not offered back in the day. Now even if AC not ordered all the models come with that bracing across roof.
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 10:17 AM
|
#6
|
Senior Member
Name: Jon
Trailer: 2008 Scamp 13 S1
Arizona
Posts: 11,912
|
Battery and fridge are still optional. Our has an icebox.
Roger, I've not heard before that the width changed, only the height. Curious about that. I suspect you'd find the same tight fit on my post-fire Scamp. In my experience all of Scamp's interior dimensions are a little optimistic, almost as if they measured the bare shell before installing rat fur and carpet.
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 11:20 AM
|
#7
|
Senior Member
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
Posts: 8,519
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDat
Oh and the early Scamps were not as wide or tall, They added some width, just a few inches but considering my 6'1" only fits on the bed flat with some Crisco on top of head and bottom of feet....
Not sure how much taller the newer ones are but they are taller. And may well have air conditioners. My roof wasn't designed to even take one. Another case of option not offered back in the day. Now even if AC not ordered all the models come with that bracing across roof.
|
Overall width was the same, but the trailer was more rounded and thus the bed was narrower as you approached the back wall. Later they flattened the back to allow for a slider window which improved the bed space. I think the front tapered back a little more at the top on the early models as well (at least it looks like it).
The fiberglass was thinner in early Scamps and the frame material was thinner as well.
With the 1200# leading arm axle the trailer also sat lower to the ground and allowed for it to fit more easily under a seven foot garage door.
This also made it difficult or practically impossible to add accessories underneath, such as gray water, drains, etc.
The added height inside was added post fire.
Like an angry Kirby (one tough cream puff), the Scamp just seemed to inflate and get tougher with the passage of time!
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 12:17 PM
|
#8
|
Senior Member
Name: Jon
Trailer: 2008 Scamp 13 S1
Arizona
Posts: 11,912
|
Old vs newer scamp
Floyd- or anyone else, do you know when the frame changed?
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 12:24 PM
|
#9
|
Senior Member
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
Posts: 8,519
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon in AZ
Floyd- or anyone else, do you know when the frame changed?
|
No, I really don't, but my guess is that the change to the 2200# axle on the the 13 and to 3500# axle on the 16 likely closely coincided with the frame change.
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 02:46 PM
|
#10
|
Senior Member
Trailer: 13 ft Scamp
Posts: 1,773
|
I have been told
But do not remember the year, but i believe the bed size was also increased to something like 54"
I m sure someone will correct me
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 03:35 PM
|
#11
|
Moderator
Name: RogerDat
Trailer: 2010 Scamp 16
Michigan
Posts: 3,744
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan H
I have been told
But do not remember the year, but i believe the bed size was also increased to something like 54"
I m sure someone will correct me
|
I think that dimension is what I'm thinking of for bed getting larger.
Is the 16 ft. a wider body and thus longer bed?
|
|
|
07-21-2017, 04:30 PM
|
#12
|
Senior Member
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
Posts: 8,519
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerDat
I think that dimension is what I'm thinking of for bed getting larger.
Is the 16 ft. a wider body and thus longer bed?
|
Same body width... all 80"OD. width (DOT standard)
Bed length is roughly 78" at the front and little less at the back wall on the new ones and a considerable amount less at the back wall on the older models without the boss for the sliding window.
44" bed is and has always been standard.
54" bed is optional on a 13 Standard, since April of 2008
54" bed is available on the 16 , but only on the Deluxe (wood interior).
54" bed has been available on deluxe 13 and 16 for decades.
|
|
|
11-12-2023, 09:57 AM
|
#13
|
Junior Member
Name: Dan
Trailer: Shopping
Colorado
Posts: 22
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon in AZ
There have been many changes over the years affecting dry weight, but for the most part the changes were gradual. The problem is the published dry weight was not updated regularly as changes were made, so it looks like there was a sudden increase. I question whether any of them ever really weighed 950 pounds as shown in some older brochures.
Some of the changes include a stronger frame (a good thing, in spite of the weight), OSB floor instead of plywood (not so good, but only accounts for about 15-20 pounds), sliding rear window instead of plexiglass (another good change), and a taller shell (2007).
Also, the options list has grown much longer over the years. Dry weight does not include any options. Newer units tend to include more options, and some are worth the weight penalty (like the screen door).
Last, as you look for a trailer, pay attention to any modifications and renovations, which also affect the weight. The older the trailer, the more likely changes have been made.
Bottom line is that there's no simple answer to your question. Your best bet is to look for a simple, basic unit in good condition without worrying too much about the year.
|
Jon / Eddie,
Great info! Any idea if there's a list of these changes by year? When was osb 84' and heavier frame incorporated, etc? It'd be helpful for those searching when buy8ng used.
Thx,
DC
|
|
|
11-12-2023, 11:12 PM
|
#14
|
Senior Member
Name: Mike
Trailer: 2012 Escape 19
Oklahoma
Posts: 6,018
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdcmgmt
Jon / Eddie,
Great info! Any idea if there's a list of these changes by year? When was osb 84' and heavier frame incorporated, etc? It'd be helpful for those searching when buy8ng used.
Thx,
DC
|
Well, there is no neat, tidy list as such that I know of. I guess you could take all the data listed by various people on this thread and put it into a single-page document or a little spreadsheet if you wanted to. Make a list yourself. For example, they said the switch from plywood to OSB was in 1984.
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
» Upcoming Events |
No events scheduled in the next 465 days.
|
|