RV News RVBusiness 2021 Top 10 RVs of the Year, plus 56 additional debuts and must-see units → ×


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-07-2013, 04:57 PM   #141
Senior Member
 
edgewant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 593
I have crawled under and verified Freightliner placed a new sticker on the front axle. But I believe its Forest River duty to provide inside stickers. I had mine done back in May and still no new inside stickers.
__________________
edgewant

2013 Berkshire 390RB-60
toad - 2002 Jeep Wrangler Sport
edgewant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 05:19 PM   #142
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Michigan/Fort Myers
Posts: 3,927
FL put a new plate on my axel. I think the new stickers are going to be a issue. I don't see how FR could issue new stickers without having your empty MH at the factory to weigh. When I first talked to Randy about this he said he was working on it. I think it is more complicated than he or I first thought. We all know our GVW did not change right? I am not expecting new stickers and will just keep checking weights at the scales and keeping it as close to GVW as possible.
I have heard mixed reviews on the tires and air bag upgrade. I would love to hear what everyone's results are. Mine has been like a new MH. It made a huge huge difference. I know Boohoo said it was about the same as before but he liked it before.



Phil57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 08:28 PM   #143
Senior Member
 
edgewant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 593
Mine is a definite improvement. Better handling, better ride, improved response to steering input. A real noticeable difference.
__________________
edgewant

2013 Berkshire 390RB-60
toad - 2002 Jeep Wrangler Sport
edgewant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 08:35 PM   #144
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Michigan/Fort Myers
Posts: 3,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgewant View Post
Mine is a definite improvement. Better handling, better ride, improved response to steering input. A real noticeable difference.
Did you notice a change in shift points and a lower rpm at your normal cruse speed?



Phil57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 09:01 PM   #145
Senior Member
 
edgewant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 593
Yes I think so. I had only had the motorhome a few months when I went to Gaffney for Camp Freightliner and to have allignment checked. Also had it weighed and discovered the problem. My time behind the wheel was limited so I thought I had imagined the lower rpm and shift point changes. Thanks for asking.
__________________
edgewant

2013 Berkshire 390RB-60
toad - 2002 Jeep Wrangler Sport
edgewant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 09:45 PM   #146
2011 Berkshire 390BH
 
Superchief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Lancaster, NY
Posts: 1,063
Capu Tech,

My new front axle sticker that I received after the retrofit was for 12,000 lbs. Did you get the same weight sticker? Based upon that, if I don't tow anything, I would think my rear weight could be 21,000 lbs. When I looked at the tire chart for the new 275's, the max weight they can handle at max pressure of 110 lbs is 22,700. Prior to the retrofit, my rear weight was rated like yours at 17,500. I also have to believe that the rear air bags that were original equipment were of a higher rating than the front air bags which they replaced. With my limited engineering knowledge (none), I have to believe that the rear tires are still the "weakest" link in the rear system. With that, I now believe I would be save up to the 21,000 lbs in the rear (I am no where near that, but it does give me some confidence that I don't have a weight issue there).

Craig
__________________
Craig



Finally completed all State visits in August 2011 with a trip to North Dakota.
Superchief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 09:52 PM   #147
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Michigan/Fort Myers
Posts: 3,927
Craig
I agree with you. I don't worry about my tires like I did. I know that with FL the engineering is right and I feel I am able to carry what I need and be safe. Can't say enough about FR through this whole thing.



Phil57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 10:46 PM   #148
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 34
You do not get a free rear axle upgrade to 21,000. It is still rated at 17,500 no matter how much bigger the tires are. The 17,500 for the rear is due to the axle itself. I agree that it is nice to have the better tires back there, but anything over 17,500 (or 19,000 for some) is still overweight.

My front did go up to 12,000. But that is because the axle was rated for that anyway, but had been limited by the tires and air bags. The rear is not rated any higher.
CapuTech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 10:59 PM   #149
2011 Berkshire 390BH
 
Superchief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Lancaster, NY
Posts: 1,063
I don't know if I agree with that. My front axle was upgraded to 12,000 lbs from 10,410 lbs and all they did was replace the front airbags and the tires. Nothing was done actually to the front axle itself. Using that limited logic on my part, I have to believe that the replacement of the rear tires has to add to the weight limitation on the rear.
__________________
Craig



Finally completed all State visits in August 2011 with a trip to North Dakota.
Superchief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 11:02 PM   #150
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 34
Except that the original tires were already rated for over 19,000...
CapuTech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2013, 11:24 PM   #151
2011 Berkshire 390BH
 
Superchief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Lancaster, NY
Posts: 1,063
Point taken! Okay given that, what is the "weakest" link in the rear? The airbags, the axle itself, or something else that limits it to 17,500. I would not think it is the frame. When I was at the Freightliner Plant a couple of weeks ago, I didn't note that they were using different frame rails for the 60's versus the 40's and I believe that the 60's have a higher rear weight limitation.
__________________
Craig



Finally completed all State visits in August 2011 with a trip to North Dakota.
Superchief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2013, 12:12 AM   #152
2011 Berkshire 390BH
 
Superchief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Lancaster, NY
Posts: 1,063
Added information:: Rear actual weight for 60 versus 40 is 1500 lbs more (29,410 less 27,910), for what it is worth. The other thing that I find interesting is that I believe the 2014 Berkshires have the 275 tires, but the specification sheets still show the same weight limitations for the front and rear axles as the models prior to 2014, with the 255 tires.
__________________
Craig



Finally completed all State visits in August 2011 with a trip to North Dakota.
Superchief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2013, 06:18 AM   #153
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 12
I,m going to have my weight tested again on Monday and send to Randy. I still say the inside sticker cannot and will not be changed due to the axle limits, so I feel this is still a problem. Has anyone looked at the upgrade on the 2014 bigger everything drivetrain and all for the 390RB.
T R Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2013, 07:12 AM   #154
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Michigan/Fort Myers
Posts: 3,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by T R Riley View Post
I,m going to have my weight tested again on Monday and send to Randy. I still say the inside sticker cannot and will not be changed due to the axle limits, so I feel this is still a problem. Has anyone looked at the upgrade on the 2014 bigger everything drivetrain and all for the 390RB.
What's bigger on the 2014 RB? I know they offer the 275/80 wheels and air bags but I thought the GVW where the same?



Phil57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2013, 07:28 AM   #155
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil57 View Post
What's bigger on the 2014 RB? I know they offer the 275/80 wheels and air bags but I thought the GVW where the same?
If you look like I said the bigger drivetrain ( motor/trans) this makes for more GVW on rear and front axle is 12000 this is on the 390RB you can not get it with the 340 engine. Like you said larger tires also.
T R Riley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2013, 08:30 AM   #156
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Michigan/Fort Myers
Posts: 3,927
So the 2014 must be ordered with the 360 HP ISB and the 3000 Allison transmission? That's smart of FR to do that if true. There are a lot of owners that already have the 360 and 3000 Trans in there RB. They offered that for years. I wish I had it for the 3000 transmission.



Phil57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2013, 06:46 PM   #157
Senior Member
 
I-RV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ
Posts: 1,024
What is difference between 390-40 & 390-60

I am hoping that some of you might help me in my quest to determine the difference between the Berkshire 390-40 and 390-60. I am aware of the obvious differences such as in the 390-60; the tweaked engine, the Allison 3000MH tranny , 140 lb-ft more torque, and 10,000 lbs hitch rating. What I am mainly interested in is what determines the difference in weight carrying capability between the two models.

I speculate that the 390-60 has the Allison 3000MH tranny for the 6,500 lbs greater GCWR over the 390-40 and the 10,000 lb hitch. But the difference in weight carrying capacity is only 1,500 lbs, since the 390-60 has a RA GAWR of 19,000 lbs, whereas the 390-40 is 17,500 lbs. Since they both have the same tires my interest in what exactly is the physical difference is magnified. Because the 390-60 has 140 lb-ft more torque, there may be a possibility that it also has a more beefy differential.

I have a 2012 390-40 and could surely use 1,000 lbs more capability in the rear.

To determine the differences, I first studied the Rear Suspension BOMís (Bill of Materials) and parts within them through the usage of the PartsPro access tool. For those not familiar with this; if you register with Daimler, you will be given access ability for Freightliner internet access tools. I was able to look up the Freightliner parts for my serial number chassis. I have attached a copy of the BOMís for the rear suspension of my 390-40 motorhome.

I however needed to know what the BOMís for the 390-60 looked like. To this end, I acquired a VIN for a 390-60, but then was denied by the PartsPro program, since I was not registered for that VIN. I then enlisted the aid of the Freightliner Parts Specialist at Daimler corporate, and after his examination, he assured me that the air bags, shocks and brakes were the same between the two units. He said the axle was different, but unfortunately would not detail the difference.

This is where some of you who have a 390-60 could help by researching your particular motorhomeís BOMís, so that a comparison can be made with the BOMís that I have attached. It would be outstanding for example if the only difference was a higher spec. cone bearing, wherein they could be changed out.

Please note to not get excited about a difference in the BOMís number. A BOM is a Bill of Material for an assembly. Two assemblies might have different BOM numbers, but only differ by one part. Thus we should be looking at ďPart NumbersĒ.

I wish you good researching and hope to hear some good things from you.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf 390BH-40 Rear Suspension BOMs.pdf (205.9 KB, 19 views)
I-RV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2013, 09:42 PM   #158
2011 Berkshire 390BH
 
Superchief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Lancaster, NY
Posts: 1,063
I-RV

Thanks for that information. I was trying to find out the same thing yesterday, but my log-in to the system had expired since I had not used it in sometime. I had to re-register this morning, but will not get access for about 2 to 3 weeks. I think you are on the right track with your analysis. I have not weight my unit since I recently got the retrofit, but I did go with aluminum rims in hopes that would reduce some of the weight in the rear. Before the retrofit, I was about 300 lbs over in the back fully loaded out.

Craig
__________________
Craig



Finally completed all State visits in August 2011 with a trip to North Dakota.
Superchief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2013, 10:58 PM   #159
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Michigan/Fort Myers
Posts: 3,927
Craig did you go with the four outside rims or with all 6. What do you think it saved on weight?



Phil57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2013, 01:36 AM   #160
2011 Berkshire 390BH
 
Superchief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Lancaster, NY
Posts: 1,063
Phil, Have not weigh it yet, but I am figuring about 30 lbs per wheel less weight. Others who have done this may have the exact figures. I got just the outside tires done, though I didn't know at the time that they only did the outside ones. I just told them I wanted to go with the aluminum wheels. I don't know if they do all 6. How would you keep the inside ones polished? Also the cost would have been another $1,500 total.

Craig
__________________
Craig



Finally completed all State visits in August 2011 with a trip to North Dakota.
Superchief 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 05:27 AM.