Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-15-2013, 07:49 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 17
opinions on 8282ws fifth wheel

newbie to this forum and looking for opinions of the 8282wd rockwood fifth wheel. We are looking to order one very soon and looking for any good or bad. Appreciate any info
__________________

__________________
mijones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 07:52 PM   #2
Phat Phrog Stunt Team
 
TURBS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Iowa
Posts: 34,337
Wish I could help on the rockwood but I cant.

But what I can offer is Welcome to the forum and good luck in your search.

TURBS
__________________

__________________
TURBS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 08:39 PM   #3
Moderator Emeritus
 
Dave_Monica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,329
Welcome to the forum!

We have had our 8280WS for 3 years and haven't had any issues. The 8282WS is a new floorplan and there may not be many owners on here yet. I feel that the build quality and features are good for the price in the Rockwood line.

I'd point out that this floorplan is unusual in that it has only one gray tank...no galley tank. That'd be a deal breaker for us as we almost never camp with full hook-ups.

Dave
__________________


Nights camped in 2013 - 55, 2014 - 105, 2015 - 63
Dave_Monica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 08:41 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,258
That is an all-new floorplan by the looks of it. Interesting!
We have the same size, but different model in a Flagstaff.

The positives;
-lightweight for the size
-fit and finish are second-to-none in the price range, and very good regardless of price
-relatively easy to pull, rubber torsion axles seem to ride nice and smooth
-seem to be well-built. We have had no problems related to the construction. Actually, we have had very few problems of any kind.

The negatives;
-it is a lightweight, so all construction reflects that
-the frame is very light, adequate for the job, but cannot be used to pull a boat behind
-no roof rafters, but still seems strong enough
-no regular plywood on the floor. It is a bonded "sandwich", thin plywood/aluminum frame insulation/thin plywood. They used to have an issue because the "plywood" they used was too thin and cheap, and the floors failed. But I believe they are now using a reasonable thickness. Still not like the heavier campers that have 5/8ths plywood on the floor, but seems ok.
-Exterior walls are thin to save on weight, but the insulation value is lower because of it. So it does take more to heat and cool. We live in moderate climate, so haven't been too bothered by that.

So overall, if it is a lightweight camper that you are shopping for, the Rockwood/Flagstaff line is a good one. We are very happy with ours, and would have a hard time finding any reason to look for something different.
Good hunting, and welcome to the forum!
__________________
bakken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 09:20 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_Monica View Post
Welcome to the forum!

We have had our 8280WS for 3 years and haven't had any issue. The 8282WS is a new floorplan and there may not be many owners on here yet. I feel that the build quality and features are good for the price in the Rockwood line.

I'd point out that this floorplan is unusual in that it has only one gray tank...no galley tank. That'd be a deal breaker for us as we almost never camp with full hook-ups.

Dave
thanks for the info most of the time we camp with full hook ups so that should no problem. glad to heart you are happy with the build quality
__________________
mijones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 09:23 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakken View Post
That is an all-new floorplan by the looks of it. Interesting!
We have the same size, but different model in a Flagstaff.

The positives;
-lightweight for the size
-fit and finish are second-to-none in the price range, and very good regardless of price
-relatively easy to pull, rubber torsion axles seem to ride nice and smooth
-seem to be well-built. We have had no problems related to the construction. Actually, we have had very few problems of any kind.

The negatives;
-it is a lightweight, so all construction reflects that
-the frame is very light, adequate for the job, but cannot be used to pull a boat behind
-no roof rafters, but still seems strong enough
-no regular plywood on the floor. It is a bonded "sandwich", thin plywood/aluminum frame insulation/thin plywood. They used to have an issue because the "plywood" they used was too thin and cheap, and the floors failed. But I believe they are now using a reasonable thickness. Still not like the heavier campers that have 5/8ths plywood on the floor, but seems ok.
-Exterior walls are thin to save on weight, but the insulation value is lower because of it. So it does take more to heat and cool. We live in moderate climate, so haven't been too bothered by that.

So overall, if it is a lightweight camper that you are shopping for, the Rockwood/Flagstaff line is a good one. We are very happy with ours, and would have a hard time finding any reason to look for something different.
Good hunting, and welcome to the forum!
thanks for the info. glad to hear that you feel rockwood/flagstaff are good units appreciate the input
__________________
mijones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 11:30 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
tomjsas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 508
We looked at that floorplan and decided to go with the 8289WS (just ordered on Monday) instead. Loved the big couch and room in the living area. But decided that we would get tired of moving the island around and having to put the folding chairs up and down depending on if we were using it or not. The one gray tank was the other deciding factor. Many times we just have electric hookups and it is nice to not have to worry as much about the gray tank filling up. We've been happy with our previous two Rockwoods. As has been stated. They are lightweight and therefore there are things that are compromised slightly, but overall, the quality and value for the money is great. If I were full timing or camping more than we currently do, I would probably look at something a bit more stout but for now it is good.
__________________
Tom
Pull-Rite 16K Super 5th
2014 Rockwood Signature Ultra-Lite 8289WS
2011 Chevy 2500HD - DuraMax (Just over 5000 miles now!)
Nights camped in 2014 - 21
tomjsas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 12:15 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 17
thanks Tom. The table and chairs are our major concern also, but we really like the rest of the layout and the weight is good for my truck. Good to hear you are happy with the build quality for a lightweight. After looking around for months and two rv shows we too agree the value for the money is there. We also looked at your model but it is too heavy for my TV we have a 2012 dodge ram with the hemi and towing package but my payload is only 1475 lbs and the pin weight on your model was above that empty, so we could not even look at it Too bad because we really liked the layout in your model. Thanks for your reply
__________________
mijones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 01:19 PM   #9
Moderator Emeritus
 
Dave_Monica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijones View Post
We also looked at your model but it is too heavy for my TV we have a 2012 dodge ram with the hemi and towing package but my payload is only 1475 lbs and the pin weight on your model was above that empty
The truck's payload of 1475 lb is with full fuel and a 150 lb driver, nothing else. Once you add any dealer added equipment like tonneau cover and step bars, a real person as a driver, passengers and hitch, your real payload will be less than 1000 lb. The only true way to determine the payload is to weigh the truck loaded and ready to camp adding for the 5W hitch (about 150 lb) and deduct that number from the truck's GVWR and RAWR.

Dave
__________________


Nights camped in 2013 - 55, 2014 - 105, 2015 - 63
Dave_Monica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 08:16 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 17
thanks Dave it looks like i should be sticking to a tt
__________________

__________________
mijones 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



» 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 06:04 PM.