RE: Anybody ever seen one of these? (Shadow Cruiser)

[SactoCampers]

 I know, they don t have any canvas, but for somebody with a low tow capacity and really doesn t want to deal with a long setup time of a popup, this might be an option:
 
 http://www.shadowcruiser.com/traveltrailers.htm
 
 Of course there are drawbacks, the water storage tanks are small and it s a wet bath (but at least it s fully enclosed), and there s only a two burner stove. But it s a pretty creative idea. I especially like the T-160 with the double bunks, queen dinette conversion, and overhead bunk...all for about 2500 lbs loaded. Large fridge, lots of storage space.....
 
 Anybody ever seen one of these in person?

[Cadeuses]

 SactoCampers
SactoCampers ...  YOU BIN HANGIN  WIT THE DARK SIDE!!!![:@][: (]

[Y-Guy]

 SactoCampers
whispering coming from the darkness... " Luke give in to the dark side... you know it is your destiny" .
 
 Wow Brian you always fine a way to find the most shall I say unique things.  I can t say I ve ever seen one of those campers.  As for the wetbath its not my thing, but knowing you won t ever give up on your Town & Country SuperDuper MiniMaxi Van you d probably need one. Just the idea of " boys"  and the words " wet bath"  sends chills down my spine, but with a daughter that probably won t have the same result for you.
 
 So when are upgrading? [8D]

[Gone-Camping]

 SactoCampers
One of our local dealers (Dodd RV) has them, but the price on those little things are about the same as what I paid for a 24  Hybrid... But they are small and can be towed with just about anything!

[SactoCampers]

 Gone-Camping

ORIGINAL:  Gone-Camping
 
 One of our local dealers (Dodd RV) has them, but the price on those little things are about the same as what I paid for a 24  Hybrid... But they are small and can be towed with just about anything!
 

 I m not sure what you were able to get your hybrid for, but the 16-foot Shadow Cruiser MSRPs around 11.5k. But they re different camping niches since the Shadow Cruiser is much lighter and smaller.
 
 I know Cadeuses, it s like blasphemy! Worry not, it s a non-starter issue with Mrs. Sacto. I can t even get her to look at the pictures on the webpage!  [&:] So my Tracker will be tracking a few thousand more miles.
 
 And Steve no, I m not upgrading or looking at buying one []. And yes, we re holding onto our superdupermaximinivan for a while. I really kinda like these little Shadow Cruisers though. I don t know why. I like gadgety things. The whole bunk bed and overhead bunk configuration just interests me. I bet if I saw one in person I d think it s too small. But the pictures make it see SOOOO big! [][8D]. But you know, every now and then somebody new (or a regular) will ask about what type of trailer is right for them, and most everybody (me included) directed them to the Casita/Burro type of trailer, which is really really small.  These are real trailers but without a real bed (the 18-foot models have a dedicated queen bed). The dinette converts to a queen. So I imagine it s a bit of a hassle....hardly anything compared to the rigors of setting up a popup.

[mike4947]

 SactoCampers
Sac, another point on those TT s...the frontal area. Believe it or not the large frontal area ups the ante on tow vehicles. Slope or no slope it s like towing a barn door behind you. Most 3500 pound rated vehicles would have a very hard time maintaining highway speeds with even the 13 foot 2300 pound gross weight one.
 I ve been there going down the highway with my foot flat to the floor on level ground doing 40 mph and I m not going to mention what happens on hills.

[SactoCampers]

 mike4947
Yeah, I noticed your comments on IRV2 or PUX regarding hybrids and minivans.
 
 Yikes, I can t say I disagree since I ve never towed anything with a frontal area like that. I guess I d have to take a test tow myself to see if it meets my comfort level and doesn t exceed the frontal area parameters in my manual. Though IIRC, I didn t notice any restrictions.
 
 I ve seen many posts regarding folks towing small hybrids with V6s without serious complaints. But if I have to floor it to maintain 40 on a highway, that wouldn t cut it. I would never consider buying a trailer like this without a test tow, nor would I advocate somebody do that. Nothing beats a test tow.
 
 With this kind of trailer, the weight would be a little more than what I m currently towing. I have plenty of reserve power towing in 3rd gear, so the wind resistance is what I would be adding. I imagine it s substantial but sometimes you have to be smacked in the head personally for it to resonate. I do demand decent performance so if it struggles (low horsepower [180hp] decent torque [240lb-ft]) torque then it would be a no-go.
 
 As I said, not in disagreement, just continuing the dialogue. It s a moot point, because we re not making any purchases for at least two years. All our vehicles are paid off, which is nice. Maybe at that time we ll move to a Starcraft 2409 with slideout; more room but still setup and breakdown delay. At that time we ll have two little ones plus a dog. Warranty on the minivan (has paid for itself four-fold)will expire around then and we ll probably be looking at the new Toyota Sienna. But by then the new Honda Odyssey will be out. I m a masochist, so I ll probably end up with another Town & Country, unless I can convince Mrs. Sacto to downsize and go with a GMC Envoy or something. I like the fuel economy of V6s and the Envoy/Trailblazer/Bravada have strong inline sixes with good fuel economy.

[mike4947]

 SactoCampers
Funny thing you should mention the Honda as that s one company that puts the frontal area issue right in their owners manual under towing. 40 square foot limit if I remember right.
  I ve had a couple of tries towing small <3500 pound TT s with ninvans, one a Mopar one with the bigger V6 and the second my father s Astro van (doing a favor for the friend with the Mopar van when his wouldn t cut it) neither would maintain highway speeds. I was really suprised at the Astro van as we ve used one of them to tow boats weighing well over 4500 pounds (with Air/Lifts) without a problem at highway speeds.
 Entering a highway on ramp it acted normal till you hit around 40 mph and then you d swear someone " dropped the anchor" . It was like the brakes came on. The Mopar wouldn t hit 45 mph and the Astro van made it to just over 50mph but the heat gauge started going up so I had to back off.

[birol]

 SactoCampers
These Shadow thingies are looking great , especially the one with the two bunk beds, ideal for us !
 
 
 By the way, what is a wet bath ? Is there something called a dry bath ? How do you guys manage to stay dry in a bath ? I mean, If that s all you do, I might not come to the rally after all [][][]

[SactoCampers]

 birol

 

ORIGINAL:  birol
 
 These Shadow thingies are looking great , especially the one with the two bunk beds, ideal for us !
 
 
 By the way, what is a wet bath ? Is there something called a dry bath ? How do you guys manage to stay dry in a bath ? I mean, If that s all you do, I might not come to the rally after all [][][]
 

 It works like this: A dry bath is where the shower and toilet are physically separated. A wet bath is where you take a shower in the same enclosure. For example, most popup trailer cassette potty/showers are considered wet baths (except I know Viking has a model where there separated and I think Forest River does too). If you look at the different floorplans on the Shadow Cruiser website, the 18-foot models have the toilet separated from the shower. Whereas on the 13 and 16-foot models, they re in the same enclosure, hence the term wet bath.
 
 I don t have a problem with the " wet bath"  in my popup, you just wipe it down with a towel after using it. So if I can save some space or get some extra storage space then it s a good tradeoff, IMO.

[birol]

 SactoCampers
Ohhh, Now I remember, I had asked this before and forgot it [&:].
 
 I don t like the 18  models, not 4 sleepers What am I going to do with one of the family ? Unless they take it and go without me

[SactoCampers]

 mike4947

ORIGINAL:  mike4947
 
 Funny thing you should mention the Honda as that s one company that puts the frontal area issue right in their owners manual under towing. 40 square foot limit if I remember right.
  I ve had a couple of tries towing small <3500 pound TT s with ninvans, one a Mopar one with the bigger V6 and the second my father s Astro van (doing a favor for the friend with the Mopar van when his wouldn t cut it) neither would maintain highway speeds. I was really suprised at the Astro van as we ve used one of them to tow boats weighing well over 4500 pounds (with Air/Lifts) without a problem at highway speeds.
 Entering a highway on ramp it acted normal till you hit around 40 mph and then you d swear someone " dropped the anchor" . It was like the brakes came on. The Mopar wouldn t hit 45 mph and the Astro van made it to just over 50mph but the heat gauge started going up so I had to back off.
 

 Good info. The Astro experience is really a surprise considering a couple months ago I was traveling down I-5 and saw an Astro Van pulling at least a 21-foot and it might have been a 23-foot Trail-Lite Travel Cruiser in the other direction. Cliff (Gone-Camping) just bought a 23-foot Trail-lite and is towing it with an old Grand Cherokee with the straight six without noting a problem maintaining highway speed.  
 
 What explains the difference? If it s power, that wouldn t make sense because all of them are similar displacement-wise (3.8-4.3 liters), all are six-cylinders and have similar power (180-190 hp, 235-250 lb-ft torque).
 
 If it s tall gearing (3.43) with the Mopar minivan, then you d think the Astro would have done better than 50 since it might have had the 3.74 ratio, if not then it would have been the 3.42. The Jeep GC around 3.55 I believe. None of the vehicles have what would be considered low gearing.
 
 If it s weight, that doesn t make sense either since they re all in the same weight range (3900-4300 lbs).
 
 Those are the only variables I can think of except for trailer aerodynamics, which the Trail-lites have an advertised advantage. However, Cliff s 23-footer weighs in around 3500 lbs vs. 2500 lbs for the ShadowCruiser, so presumably the difference in weight would balance any superior aerodynamics of the Trail-lite.
 
 Your experience is definitely useful. If I can only do 45-50 mph on the highway with the pedal floored, that s not a situation I would want to be in.
 
 I m sensitive to the barn-door effects of hard-sided trailers having towed a >13,000 lb triple-slide 5th wheel with my minivan around the west up and over mountain passes (just kidding, it was a one-ton dually crewcab powerstroke), but I can t figure out what gives in this situation. [&:][] Considering the analysis above, how would Cliff be able to maintain highway speed without major problems, yet the Astro and Chrysler minivan with lighter hardsides cannot?
 
 Maybe Cliff can chime in.
 

[Gone-Camping]

 SactoCampers

I m not sure what you were able to get your hybrid for, but the 16-foot Shadow Cruiser MSRPs around 11.5k.

 I paid $12.5 for my 24  Trail Cruiser, and that s brand new. IMHO you d never get your money worth with one of those Shadow Cruisers.
 
 And Mike makes a good point, frontal mass does indeed make a huge difference! I learned all about that in the last couple of days!!! It s like pulling a huge drag chute around behind your T/V...

[SactoCampers]

 Gone-Camping
$12.5k is a good deal for a 24-foot hybrid, though I don t think you d find anything close to that here in CA. Prices are much higher here...and there s no RV Wholesalers out here. They re different RVs for different niches. The Shadow Cruiser retails for around $11.5 k, then subtract 20% for negotiations and you re under $10k. Granted, the Travel Cruiser is much larger, but it would be around 15 or 16k here in CA, IMO.
 So the difference is more like 5-6k. Not chump change, but I don t see a hybrid and Shadow Cruiser really competing against each other. I think the prospective buyers are looking for different things.
 
 
 Cliff, you seem to be able to do 60-65 without too much problem with your 6 cylinder Grand Cherokee and your trailer in at 3500 lbs. Have any insight on what Mike said. Your experience seems different from his and I m trying to figure out why, given a GC isn t that much different in terms of the performance specifications from a Grand Caravan or Chevy Astro.

[Gone-Camping]

 SactoCampers
I don t know why my Jeep can do it, except it s rated to do so. The Grand Cherokee is one of the vehicles that list the specific frontal mass limits, which is 64 sq ft, and my Trail Cruiser is just a hair under that dimension (I believe 58 Sq Ft but don t quote me on that)....
 
 Mike was also refering to vehicles with 3500# tow capacities, my JGC has a 5000# capacity, and has factory tow package which I have to assume would have the optimum gearing the rear end. Don t get me wrong, I know that trailer was back there the whole way out, but I had no problems keeping up speed. I could have run 70 mph as the limit was in WV but didn t like listening to the motor whine when the RPM s got that far up, I felt reasonably comfortable running 65. Big inclines I lost a lot of speed, but that didn t have anything to do with frontal mass, heck... I used to loose speed on those same inclines with the PU.
 
 Oh, let s not loose sight of the fact the Grand Caravan is front wheel drive, which probably looses a lot on the gearing, not to mention possible traction problems.
 
 The motor in the Jeep is a 4.0L " High Output"  motor, and it delivers more torque than most V6 s of similar size. This is a cast iron straight six, with cast iron heads, probably the best 6 cyl motor Chrysler makes, and they only available in Jeeps. A JGC equipped with the V8 has a 6500# tow rating, though the increase in displacement & HP is not all that much.
 
 The key to this was running with the O/D turned off, which I only did with the PU when encountered hills & mountains. With this trailer I could only use O/D on very level terrain, any hill at all and it would start to search. Yes, I did have to give it more gas pedal than I would normally do, even with the PU which is why I burnt up so much gas last weekend. But keeping up speed on normal terrain (even up moderate inclines) was not a problem.