David M.
George
In Article<34b5b3cb....@news.ns.net>, <ww...@ns.net>
writes:
> . . one of the worst things you can do to a piece of
>machinery is to let it sit. A low mileage MH may be a bunch of
>problems waiting to happen. Plan on replacing almost anything
>that has rubber connected with it; Hoses, belts, ignition
>wires, and of course tires.
As usual, George is correct. A word to the wise frugal buyer:
complain all you want about the "high mileage" when bargaining
for a used coach, but go for the one that has been used AND (of
course) maintained. (We are not full-time travelers but put
12,000 miles on last year and hope to do the same this year.)
This is one of those times where the "practically new"
10-year-old coach may be far less of a bargain than one of
the same age with 90,000 miles and some visible wear on the
furnishings.
Will KD3XR
The pricing guides are set up on these numbers and my experience has been that
it is accurate on this account.
If 3,000 miles per year was accurate then the dealers lots wouild be full of 7
year old coaches with 21,000 miles. While it is not unheard of to find those
coaches it is unusual.
Regards
Rick
By the way, I agree that sometimes extremely low miles can sometimes be as much
of a problem as too many miles.
Will is correct, but a GOOD machanic should be able to look over the
"low mileage" unit and give you a good assessment of how much $$
rotted rubber there is. The problem is finding a machanic that will
spent the time. I feel that a motor with low miles is not as close to
a $rebuild$ as a high mileage one. If you consider that most motor
homes have a 4:10 ratio in the rear that motor is running 2800 ? rpm
going down the highway which should shorten the life expectancy from
the same motor is a car.
Will Rosenberry
In Article<34b945f7...@news.chesco.com>,
<rosen...@chesco.nospam.com> writes in part:
> I feel that a motor with low miles is not as close to
> a $rebuild$ as a high mileage one. If you consider that most
> motor homes have a 4:10 ratio in the rear that motor is
> running 2800 ? rpm going down the highway which should shorten
> the life expectancy from the same motor is a car.
Yes, that's also correct. Motorhome miles tend to be "hard
miles" compared to cars and that should be taken into account.
Still, if a coach is otherwise decent and there is adequate
evidence of proper maintenance, I've always found the rigs that
have been in regular use to be more troublefree than the "like
new" 15-year-old rig that has been to FL & back three times and
otherwise just sat around getting old! Rebuilt engines and
transmissions can be had at fairly decent prices, and if you buy
right (regardless of mileage) you can afford to fix what breaks.
Will KD3XR
I just purchased my RV last April and used it all summer, traveling from
coast to coast, and then another trip down to Florida during the Christmas
and New Years holiday. So, not having had mind for even a full year yet, I
have put 15,000 miles on mine already. And to me that seems rather
conservative, because there are a heck of a lot more places I plan to yet
visit during the next summer.
Anyhow, I can't imagine someone actually going through the work and expense
of purchasing, maintaining, and operating an RV and then not using it for no
more than a couple of weeks a year. Even when I am tethered to my home area
and can't take a few weeks or more to get away, I still make short weekend
camping trips every other weekend or so. That is what I bought it for, and
that is what I use it for. I've always like to "get away" for a while, or
for even a weekend. The logic behind getting an RV, at least to me, was
simple and logical. Since I liked to take frequent trips, yet hated to keep
packing and unpacking, and couldn't always take all of "my stuff" with me,
the RV solution was perfect. I've always got clothing in there, there's
always food and other supplies in the cupboards, the tanks always full of
gas, and it's always ready to hit the road at a moments notice.
Why on earth would someone spend all that money on an RV, and yes - all that
time maintaining it, just for something to keep parked in their driveway
except for two weeks a year is beyond comprehension - unless of course they
rent it during the remaining 50 weeks a year - in which case it makes
perfect economical sense.
George Lowry wrote in message <34b5b3cb....@news.ns.net>...
>The 2-3,000 mile/year figure is about average because most people only
>use them for about two weeks out of the year. However, one of the
>worst things you can do to a piece of machinery is to let it sit. A
>low mileage MH may be a bunch of problems waiting to happen. Plan on
>replacing almost anything that has rubber connected with it; Hoses,
>belts, ignition wires, and of course tires.
>
Dale
Will Rosenberry wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Jan 98 09:29:12 edt, wi...@epix.net wrote:
>
> >
> >In Article<34b5b3cb....@news.ns.net>, <ww...@ns.net>
> >writes:
> >
> >> . . one of the worst things you can do to a piece of
> >>machinery is to let it sit. A low mileage MH may be a bunch of
> >>problems waiting to happen. Plan on replacing almost anything
> >>that has rubber connected with it; Hoses, belts, ignition
> >>wires, and of course tires.
> >
> >As usual, George is correct. A word to the wise frugal buyer:
> >complain all you want about the "high mileage" when bargaining
> >for a used coach, but go for the one that has been used AND (of
> >course) maintained. (We are not full-time travelers but put
> >12,000 miles on last year and hope to do the same this year.)
> >
> >This is one of those times where the "practically new"
> >10-year-old coach may be far less of a bargain than one of
> >the same age with 90,000 miles and some visible wear on the
> >furnishings.
> >
> >Will KD3XR
> Will is correct, but a GOOD machanic should be able to look over the
> "low mileage" unit and give you a good assessment of how much $$
> rotted rubber there is. The problem is finding a machanic that will
> spent the time. I feel that a motor with low miles is not as close to
> a $rebuild$ as a high mileage one. If you consider that most motor
> homes have a 4:10 ratio in the rear that motor is running 2800 ? rpm
> going down the highway which should shorten the life expectancy from
> the same motor is a car.
> Will Rosenberry
You're all correct, and there is more than just the rotted rubber:
Bearings can be deformed if not moved.
Grease, oil, etc can drip off, washed out by water, etc.
Especially corrosion of brake cylinders (pistons can freeze to cylinder,
etc.)
Power brake booster diaphrams harden / break
Condensation can cause rust corrision in lots of places -- especially
electrical connectors.
Water-damage inside panels, etc that hasn't been noticed because it wasn't
driven.
Water pump, alternator, starter bearings fail.
Wheel bearings, Ujoints, Seals on most anything, water faucets, .......
A lot of stuff isn't obvious--the RV will work fine for a couple of weeks
or maybe a month--than many of the above problems may be encountered.
I tend to buy old motorhomes, because they all break and I don't trust
most mechanics--if I have to do my own work I might as well get an older
unit. In general, I would trust a motorhome with 90K miles that has been
used frequently long before I would a 40K or one with a rebuilt engine
that has been sitting for 5 or more years.
Mike N.
4,000 miles per year is about average.
Dan
Bill Snell wrote:
>
> "Michael Evenmo" <mev...@isd.net> wrote:
>
> snip
> >I just purchased my RV last April and used it all summer, traveling from
> >coast to coast, and then another trip down to Florida during the Christmas
> >and New Years holiday. So, not having had mind for even a full year yet, I
> >have put 15,000 miles on mine already. And to me that seems rather
> >conservative, because there are a heck of a lot more places I plan to yet
> >visit during the next summer.
> >
> >
> snip again.
>
> How can you put that many miles on in that length of time and have
> stopped in any one place long enough to see anything?
>
> --
> Bill & Jo Snell
> SKP Lifetime #39003 FMCA F209981
> Boondocking at Hi Jolly, Quartzsite, AZ
> N33 42.39 W114 12.912
> -- Support bacteria -they're the only culture some
> people have --
click for jimmy buffett
the beach boys:
the beatles: