Request: Landmark Arlington - slide in slide
- Thread starter RB2012
- Start date
Jesstruckn/Jesstalkn
Well-known member
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
They need to make that 2nd slide a foot or so bigger and put 2 small night stands on each side of the Kig size bed.
It would make the head of the bed less claustrophobic.
It would make the bed a lot easier to make every morning.
It would give you a place for your alarm clock, cell phone, and CPAP machine on both sides without that horrible shelf sticking out in your way all the time.
They need to make that 2nd slide a foot or so bigger and put 2 small night stands on each side of the Kig size bed.
It would make the head of the bed less claustrophobic.
It would make the bed a lot easier to make every morning.
It would give you a place for your alarm clock, cell phone, and CPAP machine on both sides without that horrible shelf sticking out in your way all the time.
danemayer
Well-known member
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
It seems more likely the Arlington would have to go back to engineering for a major redesign to offer the slide in slide.
It seems more likely the Arlington would have to go back to engineering for a major redesign to offer the slide in slide.
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
Andy: From what I see the maximum square footage (total "... all parts of a ... fifth wheel trailer...that cause a shadow at 12:00 high noon with roof and eaves removed are to be calculated) has to be no more than 430 square feet for a 5th Wheel - http://www.rvia.org/?ESID=SquareFootageM. So, with the slide in a slide, that additional square footage would have to be taken from somewhere. As a thought, how about a foot from the bath and the remainder from the main living room. If my math is correct, and the exterior slide is two foot deep by 82 inches wide, you would need to recover 13.66 (14 square feet). As the coach is 8 ft wide (96 inches as I recall), taking one foot from both would exceed the square footage needed to pull this off. Of course, the engineering to keep centers of gravity, etc. would be involved but maybe this could be added to the pipeline at some point. That extra 2 feet of walk-around room would be nice. Just a thought
.
Andy: From what I see the maximum square footage (total "... all parts of a ... fifth wheel trailer...that cause a shadow at 12:00 high noon with roof and eaves removed are to be calculated) has to be no more than 430 square feet for a 5th Wheel - http://www.rvia.org/?ESID=SquareFootageM. So, with the slide in a slide, that additional square footage would have to be taken from somewhere. As a thought, how about a foot from the bath and the remainder from the main living room. If my math is correct, and the exterior slide is two foot deep by 82 inches wide, you would need to recover 13.66 (14 square feet). As the coach is 8 ft wide (96 inches as I recall), taking one foot from both would exceed the square footage needed to pull this off. Of course, the engineering to keep centers of gravity, etc. would be involved but maybe this could be added to the pipeline at some point. That extra 2 feet of walk-around room would be nice. Just a thought
.
Bones
Well-known member
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
I don't want to sound rude but what are you talking about? This is for RVIA show sponsored exibits.
Andy: From what I see the maximum square footage (total "... all parts of a ... fifth wheel trailer...that cause a shadow at 12:00 high noon with roof and eaves removed are to be calculated) has to be no more than 430 square feet for a 5th Wheel - http://www.rvia.org/?ESID=SquareFootageM. So, with the slide in a slide, that additional square footage would have to be taken from somewhere. As a thought, how about a foot from the bath and the remainder from the main living room. If my math is correct, and the exterior slide is two foot deep by 82 inches wide, you would need to recover 13.66 (14 square feet). As the coach is 8 ft wide (96 inches as I recall), taking one foot from both would exceed the square footage needed to pull this off. Of course, the engineering to keep centers of gravity, etc. would be involved but maybe this could be added to the pipeline at some point. That extra 2 feet of walk-around room would be nice. Just a thought
I don't want to sound rude but what are you talking about? This is for RVIA show sponsored exibits.
justafordguy
Well-known member
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
If you would add an outdoor kitchen/entertainment to the big slide left of the door I'd buy it for sure. I want a front bath, rear living, with an outdoor kitchen but no one seems to make one.
If you would add an outdoor kitchen/entertainment to the big slide left of the door I'd buy it for sure. I want a front bath, rear living, with an outdoor kitchen but no one seems to make one.
Bones
Well-known member
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
I think that is possible. I would have to see what could be moved for it. The kitchen areas always seem to be in bunk houses because the space has to come from somewhere. Let me think but I have an idea that could satisfy both.
If you would add an outdoor kitchen/entertainment to the big slide left of the door I'd buy it for sure. I want a front bath, rear living, with an outdoor kitchen but no one seems to make one.
I think that is possible. I would have to see what could be moved for it. The kitchen areas always seem to be in bunk houses because the space has to come from somewhere. Let me think but I have an idea that could satisfy both.
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
Bones: Not being rude -- that just happened to be the most 'current' thing I found while doing a quick search during my break at work. First article I found was one dated March 1, 2007 ( http://www.rvbusiness.com/2007/03/rvia-eyes-expanding-towable-rv-square-footage/ ) where RVIA was looking at increasing 5th wheel trailers to exceed the then current 400 square feet. Travel trailers to move from 320 square feel to 400. Then found http://www.rvbusiness.com/2009/04/rvia-board-hikes-fifth-wheel-size-to-430-sq-ft/ which states that RVIA had authorized its members to increase the max size of 5th wheels to 430 square feet '...and still meet association standards.' So, given that 430 was the last posting that I saw, that is what I used. A foot here, less than a foot there and Landmark could do the slide in a slide.
Bones: Not being rude -- that just happened to be the most 'current' thing I found while doing a quick search during my break at work. First article I found was one dated March 1, 2007 ( http://www.rvbusiness.com/2007/03/rvia-eyes-expanding-towable-rv-square-footage/ ) where RVIA was looking at increasing 5th wheel trailers to exceed the then current 400 square feet. Travel trailers to move from 320 square feel to 400. Then found http://www.rvbusiness.com/2009/04/rvia-board-hikes-fifth-wheel-size-to-430-sq-ft/ which states that RVIA had authorized its members to increase the max size of 5th wheels to 430 square feet '...and still meet association standards.' So, given that 430 was the last posting that I saw, that is what I used. A foot here, less than a foot there and Landmark could do the slide in a slide.
Bones
Well-known member
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
I guess I'm still not understanding it quite yet but what I'm reading from you is that RVIA has a sq ft restrictions on campers. I would imagine that would kick out a lot of larger camper sizes.
Jesstruckn/Jesstalkn
Well-known member
That's what I've been hearing too.
430 square feet is maximum at this time.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
430 square feet is maximum at this time.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
The restrictions do hurt. When some of the campers went to 102 wide they had to shorten their length (I remember this being discussed on the Cedar Creek forum a couple of years ago). In my reading earlier I saw some mention of where RVIA was looking to allow Motor Vehicles (Class A) to go from 400 to 500 but I never did see anything about it being adopted. Again, this 'research' was being done on my short breaks at work.
Andy: If you have a moment to jump in - what are the current square footage restrictions?
Thanks.
The restrictions do hurt. When some of the campers went to 102 wide they had to shorten their length (I remember this being discussed on the Cedar Creek forum a couple of years ago). In my reading earlier I saw some mention of where RVIA was looking to allow Motor Vehicles (Class A) to go from 400 to 500 but I never did see anything about it being adopted. Again, this 'research' was being done on my short breaks at work.
Andy: If you have a moment to jump in - what are the current square footage restrictions?
Thanks.
Bones
Well-known member
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
Thanks but can some one explain a little bit to me as to why there is a restriction in the first place. I see campers that are 102 inches wide and 43 feet long that is 365.5 sq ft. no slides out and if you follow the letter from the last post instead of building out you build up and your shadow never cast more than 430 Sq ft
Thanks but can some one explain a little bit to me as to why there is a restriction in the first place. I see campers that are 102 inches wide and 43 feet long that is 365.5 sq ft. no slides out and if you follow the letter from the last post instead of building out you build up and your shadow never cast more than 430 Sq ft
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
Dave - the RVIA and the RPTIA are industry associations to RV manufacturers and Park Trailer manufacturers. As I understand it, there's been a long running matter between the two associations on behalf of their members with regard to square footage. I don't know all the details but I believe the RPTIA would prefer that RVIA member companies limit their total square footage. I believe there's a belief held by the RPTIA that if RVs get so large, they would compete with Park Trailers. And I can see that. Most of us know people that use their RV like a park trailer, keeping it setup on a lake or other vacation property similar to how one might do with a Park Trailer.
So there's your explanation Dave - as best as I understand it.
Dave - the RVIA and the RPTIA are industry associations to RV manufacturers and Park Trailer manufacturers. As I understand it, there's been a long running matter between the two associations on behalf of their members with regard to square footage. I don't know all the details but I believe the RPTIA would prefer that RVIA member companies limit their total square footage. I believe there's a belief held by the RPTIA that if RVs get so large, they would compete with Park Trailers. And I can see that. Most of us know people that use their RV like a park trailer, keeping it setup on a lake or other vacation property similar to how one might do with a Park Trailer.
So there's your explanation Dave - as best as I understand it.
Bones
Well-known member
Re: ATF: Landmark - slide in slide
Thanks Jim. In my opinion it sounds very political like a lot of things. I see no difference if some one chooses to have a large RV for parking vs having a park model. I had to go look that up to know what it was. ha. But I have to say if they only reason they are preventing the RV's on sq footage is plain BS. If they are truly concerned about the safety of the people on the road they will have length maximums and DOT already has that as well as width maximums already established.
- - - Updated - - -
Now I read another article about the two industries. Why are you guys making me read at 2130 hrs I'm gonna loose my mind here. It all sounds childish. ha ha. This company said this and this company did this but that company is not doing this. I feel like I'm in the drivers seat and the kids are fighting in the back seat and I'm yelling back there for everyone to keep quiet and play nicely in the sand box.
Thanks Jim. In my opinion it sounds very political like a lot of things. I see no difference if some one chooses to have a large RV for parking vs having a park model. I had to go look that up to know what it was. ha. But I have to say if they only reason they are preventing the RV's on sq footage is plain BS. If they are truly concerned about the safety of the people on the road they will have length maximums and DOT already has that as well as width maximums already established.
- - - Updated - - -
Now I read another article about the two industries. Why are you guys making me read at 2130 hrs I'm gonna loose my mind here. It all sounds childish. ha ha. This company said this and this company did this but that company is not doing this. I feel like I'm in the drivers seat and the kids are fighting in the back seat and I'm yelling back there for everyone to keep quiet and play nicely in the sand box.
Dave - I'm glad you looked this up and read it for yourself. It does seem a bit childish but I guess it's just two related industry associations lobbying for the benefit of their members.
Did we as consumers lose when the RVIA limit was raised to 430 square feet? I don't think so Do we really need 450, 480, 500 or more square feet in an RV? Some can use all of that, few actually want to haul it but some do and will. And there are companies out there (Space Craft, New Horizions, Forks RV, Anderson Mobile Estates and more) that will build whatever you want. These RVs will not be "RVIA sealed", but the buyer goes into those builds knowing that. My guess is those huge RVs, while not being RVIA sealed, are pretty well built and more than likely, closer to traditional household standards. Just my sense.
Did we as consumers lose when the RVIA limit was raised to 430 square feet? I don't think so
Do we really need 450, 480, 500 or more square feet in an RV? Some can use all of that, few actually want to haul it but some do and will. And there are companies out there (Space Craft, New Horizions, Forks RV, Anderson Mobile Estates and more) that will build whatever you want. These RVs will not be "RVIA sealed", but the buyer goes into those builds knowing that. My guess is those huge RVs, while not being RVIA sealed, are pretty well built and more than likely, closer to traditional household standards. Just my sense.Similar threads
