Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-19-2015, 06:30 PM   #71
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 4
Well the hubby and I looked at the Retro and neither of us were impressed. One unit (a red one) had terrible trim work. The toilet wobbled when I sat on it and I saw the wall of the bathroom buckle as I shifted my weight. The silver tape trim was bubbled and wrinkled. Another red unit was missing molding in the storage area and still contained sawdust in those areas. The molding on the outside of this particular unit was kinked and jagged. The door did not open and close easily. The suspension inadequate. Poor tire clearance.

The yellow Retro 16 interior was complete although the stitch work on the seats were already stressed to the point of giving and the material was already stained. Somebody in the factory was staple happy and went ocd on several trim areas creating an eyesore on a portion of the wall.

Now to the Seafoam 16 foot. Now this camper was completely different. The interior was complete. All the trim was neat and well caulked. All molding was in place. No sagging ceiling or bulging walls. The bathroom was intact and the toilet was firmly seated. The suspension had been upgraded. This particular camper seemed to have been more carefully constructed. Even so, we passed on purchasing a Retro as the quality did not equal the price. We wanted a camper to camp in not park in the yard to allow people reminisce over.

Instead, the hubby purchased a 17 foot Coachman Clipper which, to me, was a unit more suitable for camping. The upholstery would be easier to maintain. You don't have to worry about mud on the floor. And it had a bed more suitable for old people to lay on.

The Retro, while pretty to look at, would simply not be able to handle the challenges of extreme camping. There is no way to keep a Retro clean with the material used on the seats and on the floor. If I ever considered a Retro I would have to make major changes to the upholstery and the floor. And at the price they are being offered, it's just not worth it.
__________________

__________________
TessieB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2015, 06:44 PM   #72
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 13
My AC fix on the Alaska Hwy #1347

Remounted fan to left of center. Sleeved the opening and divided into two equal parts about 9X7". Install a flange on AC unit to fasten duct with aluminum duct tape. Fabed a duct using that bubble insulation from hardware suppliers. Insulated compartment with same material using 3M spray glue to plug all the holes in cabinets.blocked off 1" gap above AC unit and bottom of cabinet floor with some sheet metal angle. Results forthcoming.No dealers in AK would even talk to me. As far as the springs are concerned mine is rubbing on the drivers side, but that's where all the weight is. Fresh water,AC unit,microwave,heater,battery. Purchasing dealer in OR is playing dumb but did order the shackles for me to install. Alaska Hwy is brutal on travel Trailers, actually held up pretty well considering. Return back to the USA in August might be another story. Stay tuned.#1347
__________________

__________________
Nahanni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2015, 08:49 AM   #73
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 51
Wow, I thought that maybe after screwing up the first 100 that they might of got it right.
__________________
pcmichelle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2015, 08:51 AM   #74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 138
No, pc, you're thinking of a "normal" company with a responsible President/GM.
__________________
DouglasLive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2015, 02:02 PM   #75
A Little Bit Crazy
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 3
DouglasLive - We purchased that same Maxxis for our spare tire but it isn't a a whitewall. They get great reviews. Do you know if they make ST whitewalls to fit our reissues? I did find Diamondbacks in WW but they got a thumbs down from one of our more knowledgeable members in another group.
__________________
Fancygirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2015, 02:43 PM   #76
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fancygirl View Post
I did find Diamondbacks in WW but they got a thumbs down from one of our more knowledgeable members in another group.
Thanks! Can you share the details of that review?
__________________
DouglasLive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2015, 03:08 PM   #77
A Little Bit Crazy
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 3
DB White Walls

Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasLive View Post
Thanks! Can you share the details of that review?
I can't until later as I am working and social media is blocked. If I recall it has something to do with the fact that they (DBTire) use other tires to 'make' their WW tires, rendering their tires' quality questionable. I did read on the DBTire site moments ago that they can legally only sell their tires for vehicles made prior to 1976 due to some labeling on the sidewalls that they remove during their bonding process. So I guess for us it really doesn't matter because our new 'vintage' trailers are 2015s.

Quote:
"...The Tread Act of 2000 requires tire manufacturers to
permanently mold certain information on both tire
sidewalls. This information is the same on both sidewalls.
Because of our process, this information is
removed from one sidewall only. This information
includes tire size, maximum pressure recommendations,
size, brand, the word “radial” and the manufacturers
DOT number.
The National Highway & Safety Administration
(NHTSA) has allowed us to continue to produce tires
for vehicles built prior to 1976. That Federal standard
is FMVSS 109. All tires for vehicles manufactured in
or after 1976 must comply with standard FMVSS139,
which requires different labeling. This standard is
more stringent on performance testing; meaning tires
are subjected to higher speeds to achieve certification.
Ironically, Diamond Back, because of its process,
uses only tires that are certified to the higher performance
standards of FMVSS139. The majority of tires
sold by the competition cannot make this claim. If
their product description specifies “for pre 1976 vehicles”,
those tires are labeled and tested under the less
strenuous standards of FMVSS109. Remember, all tires
that Diamond Back uses have been certified under the
new, more stringent performance and endurance standards.
*FMVSS139 (Tread Act of 2000). Our finished
products have been submitted and passed 100% for
endurance and speed testing for the latest standard.
Unfortunately, we can not knowingly accept orders for
vehicles built after 1976. Why? It’s a labeling issue.
Please specify the intended vehicle fitment, including
year manufactured, make and model when ordering."
__________________
Fancygirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2015, 07:04 PM   #78
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 13
That sounds about right. Looks Like they are getting cold feet on this over blown tire issue too.
__________________

__________________
Nahanni is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
shasta

Thread Tools
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



» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




ForestRiverForums.com is not in any way associated with Forest River, Inc. or its associated RV manufacturing divisions.


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:44 PM.