Journey with Confidence RV GPS App RV Trip Planner RV LIFE Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Take a Speed Test Free 7 Day Trial ×


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-24-2020, 11:26 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 37
Isata 3 rw ccc

Check the weight rating on our Brand New ISATA 3 RW. The sticker shows GVWR of 11,030 lbs, a dry weight of 10,340 lbs and CCC of 320 lbs. That means since my wife and I have a combined weight of 350 lbs, one of us cannot go on any trips.

We took it on our first-weekend trip to test out the systems and stopped by a CAT scale. We had only one change of clothes and no food. We did have water hoses and sewer hoses, a VI-Air air compressor. The scales showed 4180 lbs front axle and 7300 rear axle for a total of 11,480 lbs, which is over the 11,030 lbs for GVWR.

The sticker on the RV shows Front Axle rating of 4410 lbs and rear axle of 7720 lbs for a total of 12,130 lbs. So we are under the ratings for each axle but over for the GVWR. Are we safe or is my wife going to have to follow me in our tow? And how did they come up with the GVWR anyway?

We did have 3/4 tank of diesel, Fresh tanks were at 40%, gray at 15%, Black at 40%, and LP full at time of weighing as we were boondocking.
mitchhelms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2020, 12:09 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 4,295
Sorry, I can’t help but make an obvious observation here. As was pointed out by this owner, a manufacturer stated CCC of 320 pounds is not practical for a recreational vehicle, or in my opinion, nearly any vehicle for that matter. By comparison, I have a little 670cc motorcycle that can carry more, at 430 pounds. I realize the Ford E-450 and the MBS chassis are different animals with different qualities, but just to further put this low 320 pound stated ISATA 3 RW capacity into perspective, my Ford based 27 foot class C Sunseeker has the yellow door sticker, and it says Occupants and Cargo should not exceed 3,070 pounds. (Note, this is not a Ford vs MBS post. I only mentioned the Ford to show how much a usable CCC could be, before someone might say that all class C RVs have low CCC).

To put it bluntly, how can an RV manufacturer design, build, and sell an RV such as this ISATA 3 RW, that is not even fit for it’s intended purpose?

I still cannot understand the reasons why RV manufacturers won’t build on the Sprinter 4500 chassis, instead of the 3500, and raise the MBS based RV cargo capacity to more usable and safe limits.
__________________
2020 Sunseeker 2440DS on 2019 Ford E-450, Trekker cap, Topaz paint
BehindBars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2020, 04:00 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 33
I am in the market and am very concerned about CCC, so your post worries me. Some Questions:

- What options do you have that have made the CCC so low?

- Did you have an estimate of what CCC should be based on options when you placed the order?

- Was it a Canadian Sticker that includes full water, or a US sticker that does not? The sticker may be moot, however, since you are barely loaded and over GVWR.

I was told the Isata 3 had roughly 900-1000 lbs CCC before options, itemized below, although the Aluminum Wheels turned out to be about -71 lbs for a set of four.

http://www.forestriverforums.com/for...rs-194058.html

shabang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2020, 04:10 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 37
In speaking with Jared at Dynamax, my OCCC is 609 but the sticker is missing from my coach. THey are to send me one. But the main problem will exist that we were 350 overweight. We did not have full tank of water nor grey or black tanks. We did not have any extra things like grill, table, chairs, etc. It looks like we will only be able to carry very minimum fresh water, no grey or black and maybe 1/2 tank of diesel. We do have the diesel generator and 4-pt levelers. Cab over bunk, solar panels, power theater seats and that all added to the weight.
mitchhelms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2020, 04:33 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 33
I'm confused. Your original post said the sticker read OCCC at 320 lbs. But now you say you don't have a sticker and Dynamax claims it to be 609 lbs
(I guess by looking it up.) If it really is 609 as Dynamax claims it shouldn't be tipping the scales. Something's not adding up.

If I go Isata, which is my current leaning, I'm going to trim weight by forgoing the bunk, no diesel gen, solar, pedestal table or boosters. I will do the levelers in spite of the weight. I'll get weight back with aluminum wheels and possibly an aftermarket lithium upgrade. I which they'd add that option.

I think they should give a weight estimate upon order, and require it to be within a certain range of that upon delivery. That should be part of PDI.
shabang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2020, 04:38 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 37
The CCC one is Canadien and includes water. The OCCC that is missing does not include water. But either way, I was still overweight will little added personal items. Will have to get used to carrying very little water, no grey or black, no grill, no table or chairs, etc. Just the bare minimum.
mitchhelms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2020, 12:42 PM   #7
Commercial Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bristol, IN
Posts: 18,878
If I may clarify, since this seems to come up over and over again.

1. There are two stickers. ONE for the US and ONE for Canada. So, technically there is NOT a sticker that states 320 lbs of CCC. Located on the "chassis door jamb" could be the Canadian sticker that INCLUDES a full fresh water tank and will read in kilograms as I recall.

2. Then we normally put the US sticker on the coach entry door jamb as is required.

3. We used to "prevent customers" from selecting the cab-over on an RW or selecting the diesel gen with 4-point levelers. We got complaints all the time. That "we don't care about weight" or "we do not travel with fresh water" or "I want the levelers and gen but NOT the cab-over bunk". So as was discussed in previous threads, I opted to remove all the restrictions but at the same time, publish the weights of each option on the price sheets so that the customers can make educated decisions on their own. Knowing that each option selected would reduce their CCC.
__________________
If "Search this Forum" does not yield answers, please post questions as a "New Thread" (instead of asking privately) so others can benefit from the answers.

Subscribe for "How To" videos and updates https://www.youtube.com/c/DynamaxRVs/

Sales-Service-Parts https://dynamaxcorp.com/contact-us
bclemens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2020, 12:50 PM   #8
Commercial Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bristol, IN
Posts: 18,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by shabang View Post
I am in the market and am very concerned about CCC, so your post worries me. Some Questions:

- What options do you have that have made the CCC so low?

- Did you have an estimate of what CCC should be based on options when you placed the order?

- Was it a Canadian Sticker that includes full water, or a US sticker that does not? The sticker may be moot, however, since you are barely loaded and over GVWR.

I was told the Isata 3 had roughly 900-1000 lbs CCC before options, itemized below, although the Aluminum Wheels turned out to be about -71 lbs for a set of four.

http://www.forestriverforums.com/for...rs-194058.html

The unit in question had pretty much all the options that added weight (barring the aluminum wheels).
Aluminum wheels, Cab-Over bunk, 4-point levelers, cocktail table, theater seats, Diesel gen, solar.

You are correct...non-cab-overs, fully loaded are crossing at about 850 lbs. We were asked by one member here to get to 1000 lbs CCC and we were able to do that at this request, but properly balancing options and using a composite floor. We are still experimenting with composite floor, but also hope to present a factory lithium battery option that would save roughly 60lbs of CCC. We also just changed over to a composite underbelly...that may only save about 20lbs, but we're always looking for whatever we can get.
__________________
If "Search this Forum" does not yield answers, please post questions as a "New Thread" (instead of asking privately) so others can benefit from the answers.

Subscribe for "How To" videos and updates https://www.youtube.com/c/DynamaxRVs/

Sales-Service-Parts https://dynamaxcorp.com/contact-us
bclemens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2020, 02:13 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by bclemens View Post
If I may clarify, since this seems to come up over and over again.

1. There are two stickers. ONE for the US and ONE for Canada. So, technically there is NOT a sticker that states 320 lbs of CCC. Located on the "chassis door jamb" could be the Canadian sticker that INCLUDES a full fresh water tank and will read in kilograms as I recall.

2. Then we normally put the US sticker on the coach entry door jamb as is required.

3. We used to "prevent customers" from selecting the cab-over on an RW or selecting the diesel gen with 4-point levelers. We got complaints all the time. That "we don't care about weight" or "we do not travel with fresh water" or "I want the levelers and gen but NOT the cab-over bunk". So as was discussed in previous threads, I opted to remove all the restrictions but at the same time, publish the weights of each option on the price sheets so that the customers can make educated decisions on their own. Knowing that each option selected would reduce their CCC.
Thank you, Brian. I think you should train your dealers to be on the look-out for the CCC restrictions when helping a customer decide what they want. Looking back at the pricing/order sheet it does not give the UVW/dry weight of the unit. It did list the other weights for the options but not the base weight. There was no way to determine what the CCC or OCCC would be. There was no way to make an educated decision.
mitchhelms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2020, 03:04 PM   #10
Commercial Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bristol, IN
Posts: 18,878
We certainly try to educate...as for UVW, that is a tricky area. Do we post the max, with no options? With all available options? Average by floor plan? One of the reasons that the industry stopped...was due to federal law that we had to weigh and sticker each and every unit. That law came around because SO many manufacturers posted the CCC in SO many different ways. Finally the government stepped in and asked for ONE single standard and method...and that is of course the yellow sticker with actual and not estimated.

I was curious if maybe we were lacking in information...but I checked the other OEM's to see if anyone published an estimated UVW and did not see one (granted I did not look at 100% of the brochures...just the top 3 brands). Again, not saying it shouldn't be there...just that estimating was what prompted government involvement in the first place. That depending on how it is estimated can lead back to misleading information if it varies from OEM to OEM.
__________________
If "Search this Forum" does not yield answers, please post questions as a "New Thread" (instead of asking privately) so others can benefit from the answers.

Subscribe for "How To" videos and updates https://www.youtube.com/c/DynamaxRVs/

Sales-Service-Parts https://dynamaxcorp.com/contact-us
bclemens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2020, 05:09 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 4,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by bclemens View Post
We certainly try to educate...as for UVW, that is a tricky area. Do we post the max, with no options? With all available options? Average by floor plan? One of the reasons that the industry stopped...was due to federal law that we had to weigh and sticker each and every unit. That law came around because SO many manufacturers posted the CCC in SO many different ways. Finally the government stepped in and asked for ONE single standard and method...and that is of course the yellow sticker with actual and not estimated.

I was curious if maybe we were lacking in information...but I checked the other OEM's to see if anyone published an estimated UVW and did not see one (granted I did not look at 100% of the brochures...just the top 3 brands). Again, not saying it shouldn't be there...just that estimating was what prompted government involvement in the first place. That depending on how it is estimated can lead back to misleading information if it varies from OEM to OEM.
Looking in the 2019 Sunseeker brochure for the Sunseeker (standard series), it shows a UVW specification for each floorplan and chassis type (Ford vs Chevy). For example a 2500TS Ford Sunseeker is listed as UVW of 11,873 pounds. In the same way, UVW is listed for each of the MBS floorplans, down to the pound. For example a 2019 MBS 2400R UVW is shown as 9,944 pounds. Is that not what you're talking about? Granted, the specs don't specify the actual option configuration of the floorplan from which that UVW is derived, so I can only assume it's with a cabover bunk and no options. Does Dynamax publish those UVWs in the brochures in the same way as Forest River does for Sunseekers? I didn't see a UVW spec in the Dynamax brochure that I viewed.

As a side note, one of the reasons I liked Sunseeker and Forester while shopping was that they were much more complete, up front, and seemingly honest with their published specs than other makes, such as Tiffin, Winnebago, REV Group, etc.
__________________
2020 Sunseeker 2440DS on 2019 Ford E-450, Trekker cap, Topaz paint
BehindBars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2020, 08:44 PM   #12
Commercial Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bristol, IN
Posts: 18,878
Yes, as I mentioned, I did not look at all brochures and really just kept my search for the top Sprinter producers. I didn't look at any Ford or Chevy based motorhomes.
__________________
If "Search this Forum" does not yield answers, please post questions as a "New Thread" (instead of asking privately) so others can benefit from the answers.

Subscribe for "How To" videos and updates https://www.youtube.com/c/DynamaxRVs/

Sales-Service-Parts https://dynamaxcorp.com/contact-us
bclemens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 12:12 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 4,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by bclemens View Post
Yes, as I mentioned, I did not look at all brochures and really just kept my search for the top Sprinter producers. I didn't look at any Ford or Chevy based motorhomes.
I guessed you may have missed that I also said that the Sunseeker MBS brochure lists UVW. Forest River is listing UVW for Sprinter motorhomes, but I can’t find a UVW spec in the ISATA 3 brochure I found on line. Would it be helpful to buyers if Dynamax also listed UVW like Sunseeker MBS does?

Never mind the Fords and Chevys. For this thread topic, I should not have even mentioned them along with the Sprinters. The point I was trying to make by mentioning them is that the Sunseeker brochure’s UVW specs were very specific for the floor plan and chassis listed, which makes it look like some effort was made to make the data accurate.
__________________
2020 Sunseeker 2440DS on 2019 Ford E-450, Trekker cap, Topaz paint
BehindBars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 11:43 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Delco Bobby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Media, PA
Posts: 2,930
One thing many of us learned from these recurring conversations is to examine the weight stickers before taking delivery of any RV.

I take photos of them for reference when comparing units.
__________________
2017 Dynamax REV 24RB
2018 Ford F-150

Formerly a 2013 Sunseeker 2250 SLEC.
Delco Bobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 12:24 PM   #15
Kanadian Kamper
 
kenandterry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 8,113
MBS may be the wrong chassis!

Just an outside observation.....
Even though the “standard” as far as the MOTOR part of these styles of Class C units....Dynamax, Tiffin, Winnebago, Leisure Travel Vans......is based on the Mercedes chassis, it seems THAT is the crux of this entire CCC topic, the MBS chassis.

I see tons of MBS shuttle, service and delivery vehicles.....lots! I see them in single or dual rear wheel, tall, taller and tallest height versions. All of them would be in the shape of what we would call Class B motorhome units.....not Class C.
All the added weight of a Class C shape, features, furnishings, jacks, generators are the root cause of CCC limitations.

Maybe the MBS is the wrong choice for the Class C market.

Just sayin’.
__________________

Ken and Terry
2018 Sunseeker 2430S-CD, nicely modified and carried by a 2017 Ford E450 Sport
Former Georgetown 330TS owner for 10 years with more mods than I can count, pushed by our 2017 GMC Terrain
kenandterry is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 01:03 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 4,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenandterry View Post
Just an outside observation.....
Even though the “standard” as far as the MOTOR part of these styles of Class C units....Dynamax, Tiffin, Winnebago, Leisure Travel Vans......is based on the Mercedes chassis, it seems THAT is the crux of this entire CCC topic, the MBS chassis.

I see tons of MBS shuttle, service and delivery vehicles.....lots! I see them in single or dual rear wheel, tall, taller and tallest height versions. All of them would be in the shape of what we would call Class B motorhome units.....not Class C.
All the added weight of a Class C shape, features, furnishings, jacks, generators are the root cause of CCC limitations.

Maybe the MBS is the wrong choice for the Class C market.

Just sayin’.
Agreed. But customers drive the market. Some customers see an RV like the Sprinter class C, with SUV-like handing and comfort, good fuel efficiency, AND a good sized house on the back, and that’s what they want. CCC limitations then get overlooked or ignored. Some customers want to pretend they can have the best of both worlds, despite the gross vehicle weight ratings of the Sprinter 3500 that sometimes say they can’t or shouldn’t.

With the close watch Mercedes Benz seems to keep on modifications done during RV manufacturing, I’m surprised Mercedes lets some units get built with such low CCC that they’re almost guaranteed to be driven overweight by their owners.

I’ll ask it again. Now that the Sprinter 4500 is available with 1,095 pounds higher GVWR than the 3500, what is the reason RV builders don’t use it? I must be misunderstanding something about the 4500, because it seems to me like such a simple solution.
__________________
2020 Sunseeker 2440DS on 2019 Ford E-450, Trekker cap, Topaz paint
BehindBars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 01:33 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Delco Bobby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Media, PA
Posts: 2,930
I’ll ask it again. Now that the Sprinter 4500 is available with 1,095 pounds higher GVWR than the 3500, what is the reason RV builders don’t use it? I must be misunderstanding something about the 4500, because it seems to me like such a simple solution.[/QUOTE]


There are at least two threads in this forum that explain the above.
__________________
2017 Dynamax REV 24RB
2018 Ford F-150

Formerly a 2013 Sunseeker 2250 SLEC.
Delco Bobby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 01:48 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Barch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Colville, WA
Posts: 345
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenandterry View Post
Just an outside observation.....
Even though the “standard” as far as the MOTOR part of these styles of Class C units....Dynamax, Tiffin, Winnebago, Leisure Travel Vans......is based on the Mercedes chassis, it seems THAT is the crux of this entire CCC topic, the MBS chassis.

I see tons of MBS shuttle, service and delivery vehicles.....lots! I see them in single or dual rear wheel, tall, taller and tallest height versions. All of them would be in the shape of what we would call Class B motorhome units.....not Class C.
All the added weight of a Class C shape, features, furnishings, jacks, generators are the root cause of CCC limitations.

Maybe the MBS is the wrong choice for the Class C market.

Just sayin’.
Yes and no. The ISATA 3 is meant to be a compact camper for 2-4 people. If you stay away from the cab-over, opt for Lithium, and maybe get rid of the spare, you can be over 1,000 CCC even with the other bells and whistles. That is what I am doing - did, and I am a happy camper.
__________________
2019 ISATA 3 FW
LiFePO4 Upgrade
2013 Honda CRV Toad
Barch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 12:16 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 4,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delco Bobby View Post
There are at least two threads in this forum that explain the above.
Yes, two threads “explained” the reasoning why the higher capacity Sprinter 4500 is not being used, but the problem still remains. The original poster of this thread was delivered an MBS RV that apparently cannot be used in a normal fashion without exceeding the chassis manufacturer’s specified gross vehicle weight rating. If building the MBS RVs on the 4500 chassis is not the solution to prevent that from happening again, then what is the solution?
__________________
2020 Sunseeker 2440DS on 2019 Ford E-450, Trekker cap, Topaz paint
BehindBars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2020, 01:54 PM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 33
Can someone enlighten me? Just trying to understand. One of the other threads said that the Sprinter 4500 had 1000 lb more GVWR, but curb weight was less by about the same amount. Does that mean it's a wash? You can put more on the chassis, but the chassis must weigh less. So you end up back where you started? Potential OCCC is unchanged. Is that the gist?
shabang is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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


» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by Forest River, Inc. or any of its affiliates. This is an independent, unofficial site.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:55 AM.