Jump to content

Wade

Toyota Advanced Member
  • Posts

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Wade

Previous Fields

  • My Toyota Motorhome
    1985 Coachman
  • Location
    Minneapolis MN

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Try to make it all interesting

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Wade's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  1. Frankly I didn't like walking up there to put on the tarp. Snow is going to be a bugger but a small price to pay for living in such a wonderful place and having the toy home as well. Wade
  2. Ran out of time to make the Styrofoam rafters I had Planned. Like The bin idea - oh well. Leaf blower it will have to be.
  3. OK, so the billboard is actually more heavy duty than the most expensive tarps available at Menards. The one I got was 14 X 48'. I probably should have cut it down some. Unfortunately the grommet kit I purchased had a tough time punching the holes. I started really hitting hard with the hammer when on grommet #3, I connected with my finger. Can't believe I finished doing this by myself as my finger is still hurting like crazy many hours later! In any case I hope it will be OK for this winter as snow is supposed to come tomorrow. Thought you might want a look at what a billboard on a Toyota actually looks like when done alone at a dealine;-)
  4. Thank you for this thread! Red, I was just about to go out and buy a tarp and knew that it likely wouldn't last too long. Hope that the billboard will last longer. In any case I like the fact that it is recycling something instead of wasting a valuable resource. Thank you Linda for posting the link! Turns out that the place is just a couple of miles from my house. $48 including tax and I will pick it up this afternoon. Probably another $20 for grommets and bungees and my little Toy will be safely tucked in for the winter. Wade
  5. Hey guys. Thanks for making me feel better about my unfortunate beginning to the forum;-) My take on all of this is simply that more important than the differences in the side of the argument (50 - 65 psi), is simply to make sure that you know what pressure your tires actually are. Next for me is Temperature. As I was trying to find the PSI I want (frankly still not sure), I carried my infrared thermometer and checked my tire temps. As long as the tires aren't building heat it's likely not that big of deal what PSI you run at. I have always tended to go towards the higher end of the PSI range and don't mind the extra harshness and appreciate the extra MPG. However, currently I am running lower that I thought I would up front because I like the handling better. Before my next trip I will check all tires and make sure they are consistent. My current choice is about 60 in the rear and about 50 in the front. I say about because most likely my gauge is not going to be the same as your gauge. Also, if my testing shows the front to be equal at anywhere between about 48 and 55 I will likely leave them alone. Same thing in the rear only at 10psi. Wade
  6. My 11 year old grandson loves the ladder as well. My daughter is going to spend her 36th birthday with me working on a ladder as we shingle her garage roof. I like hanging out with her but would have to say I prefer the ladder on the Toyota and playing with my grandson rather than lugging shingles up on a roof;-) The ultimate answer for loose ladders appears to be rot. Thankfully mine is still in good shape. Just have to echo the other response; NICE JOB JD! I love what you did with the bumper and ladder! Wade
  7. RR, thanks for sharing the pictures! I wish mine were in that good of shape! I would like to do something like that with my rear bumper but will either have to make it removable or convince my wife to get rid of the arborvitae where it is parked. Wade
  8. I can't say that I have had a lot of "problems" with power steering. Before moving to the city quite frankly they really didn't bother me much. However I can't remember exactly how many cars I drove where, when I heard that specific noise, I got out the can of PS steering fluid I always had on and and topped it off. I know that it was more than a few cars I have owned. The Toyota sits on clean concrete in the city and I really don't want the drips. It is also one more belt to maintain and while that isn't a big deal it is nice not to have to worry about it. There is apparently one more maintenance issue with the Toyota power steering units -- also no big deal -- that I am sure JD could explain and I would like to learn about. When I was replacing all the rubber on my 22re, Jerry from 22re performance threw in a vacuum hose kit for a 22re with power steering. As I don't have a power steering unit I didn't need the hoses. However, it might just be a senior moment, but I can't remember having a vehicle where engine vacuum was tied to the power steering. What do those hoses do and does anyone want a set of new ones? Wade
  9. For the record, I wish I would have had a 64 Chevelle SS;-) Would have most likely preferred that car with power steering as well. I remember really liking the power steering on a 1971 Chrysler Newport. My only point was that I am plenty happy with the manual steering on my Toyota motor home. My guess is that the really long frame extensions and relatively light 22re make for an easy enough turn. Personally I'll take the added effort occasionally for the lack of maintenance given the age of the truck. As you say, to each their own. Wade
  10. Wow, that looks exactly like my rig. Almost exact anyway. Water heater on the other side and mine originally had a generator behind the drivers side cab. Mine is also a year older cab with a manual. Thankfully my wife hasn't left in it (she loves it) and went off to live at a Wal Mart;-) Wade
  11. My 1985 21' Coachmen is apparently a really rare bird then. Frankly I am very happy with the 22re 4sp manual with manual steering. Just back from a quick overnight traveling around Lake Pepin. To the best of my knowledge I would have to travel about 1000 miles to have hills much more significant than those we traversed through the bluffs of the Mississippi. Was always able to maintain at least 50 mph. The engine did a good job of holding it back going down hill. Never had to merge onto a freeway on a significant grade or have I been in true mountains with my rig. However, on normal upper great plains grades and traffic I am very satisfied with the performance of this setup. However, I have no problem holding the gas pedal to the floor when needed. I don't lug the engine. I use the engine to hold it back on grades. I use that gas pedal aggressively when merging or maintaining speed on grade but otherwise don't find it necessary. FWIW, if I had a different rig with power steering, at the first inevitable power steering leak, I would try to replace it with a manual steering setup rather that spend the time and money repairing the leak. I don't find 3 point turns etc that difficult. However, I am a young grandpa in good health. For me, it is just not that difficult to turn the wheel. Wade
  12. I bet the axle was a big part of it. I know that we got a fleet truck a couple of years newer than the lariat I was talking about. The fleet truck had EFI but it also had a higher ratio rear end. Don't know the numbers of either but the Ford I was talking about ran noticeably lower RPMs and got terrific mileage. (The whole reason we got such a fancy truck in the first place is that Ford was selling them cheap to get their CAFE numbers up.) The fleet truck with the same engine, EFI, and the taller gearing got much worse MPG. IIRC, I could get over 20 MPG on the Lariat and I don't think the fleet truck broke 17. I am not familiar with the Chrysler V6. Am kind of curious as to why the dakotas got such terrible gas mileage. Isn't that the engine they used? OTOH, my neighbor got a Dodge regular cab 4WD with the V6 new a couple of years ago and regularly broke 20 mpg and that was a full sized pickup.
  13. Unfortunately I am not so sure I can speak from my experience as my memory can be a little fuzzy when looking 30 years back;-) However, I don't think I'm comparing apples to oranges. I had about 1200 lbs or so in the back of the F150 making it in the ballpark of my lightly loaded 21' Toyota at just a bit under 3 tons total. I clearly remember the need to downshift on that hill because it was unusual to me with such a new and nice truck that up until that point I hadn't driven with such a load in the back. The math is pounds-feet per second equals horsepower. That is the part that kind of twists my brain (pardon the pun;-). So the Ford had a whole lot more snort but just couldn't keep it up for very long? At some point it must come down to the horsepower being the real number even though in general driving experience I prefer more torque. Perhaps I shifted much earlier in the Toy than what I remember in the Ford. I am sure of my memory in that both trucks moved about the same amount of weight (although much more wind resistance in the Toyota) up the same hill at roughly 55 mph. Both trucks could not do it in 4th but could in 3rd. The huge torque advantage of the Ford could not overcome the fact that it couldn't make the hill in 4th and the fact that they both made it at about the same speed seems to me that horsepower is the ultimate limit of what can be done. Back to the reliability, that is why I am happy enough with the 22re. I am not afraid to use all it has to offer when needed and from what I can tell the driveline can handle it. Pushed hard the Toyota Motor home goes as fast as I need it to. I am not familiar with the 4.3 but am a bit surprised to hear that it is economical. I thought is was just a short 350. The 350s I have driven did not impress me as economical. I wonder what a 4.3, or my personal favorite, a Buick 3800 would do in a Toyota with a good 4 or 5 speed manual? That would be a pretty neat rig in my opinion.
  14. Sometimes I think I understand this and I know for a fact that I really like a flat torque curve! My current car is a Volvo XC70. The turbo 2.5 puts out it's peak of 230 pound-feet from 1500 rpm till near the red line. That seat of the pants punch played a huge role in getting me to make a purchase decision I normally would not have made;-) Here is what I don't really understand. I remember back in the day having a company F150 with the 300 six and a 4 speed. That 6 cyl put out about the same hp as the 4 cyl Toy, however the Ford put out about twice as much torque. At some point, in some way, the torque I know I like so much must really amount to not much of anything and that is what I don't understand. I remember taking that F150 up the very same hill loaded to roughly the same weight as my Toy. I know that at some point on the hill, just like with the Toy, I had to shift down to 3rd in order to maintain speed. Perhaps my memory is faulty but it seems to me like the ability to make that hill was near equal based on the near equal HP and not something where the Ford did nearly 2x as well to match its torque. Wade
  15. FWIW, I think other posters have covered this topic better than what I have to say. Consider this just another opinion. Handling, power, convenience, MPG, comfort, and durability, these seem to be the considerations. I have very limited experience in the specific category of motor homes. My prior coach was a class C 1976 Dodge El Dorodo with a 360, full floating dual axle set up as a single, 18 footer. The Dodge was a van cab and chassis vs a truck cab and chassis so the 18 foot was nearly equivalent to my current 21 foot Toy. Amenities are same although the space over the cab is bigger on the Toy and the Toy has rooftop air (so not quite the same;-). The weight was within a couple of hundred pounds. Handling: Cn't comment on the V6. From comparing the 4 Cyl Toy, hands down the dodge. Although, nothing I can't deal with and frankly I have driven equivalent Dodges in van trim that handled much worse than my Toy. Maintaining what is there is critical and if done I am OK with the 85 4 cyl Toy. Power: I did love the Dodge. 70 MPH, not even remotely a problem as long as you didn't mind 8 or perhaps even less MPG. Frankly I enjoyed that and frequently couldn't stop myself from doing so. Is that really a good thing? Why do I really want to take the people I Love so fast in what is such an inherently unsafe vehicle? The V6 appears to be a big improvement in power but having owned and enjoyed something way beyond that, for me, the increased power simply isn't worth the decrease in MPG. Convenience: Don't have an opinion on this as I haven't serviced a V6. The 22re is uncomfortable in that the valves need to be adjusted hot and the timing chain tensioner may need to be replaced. The V6 will need the timing belt changed and I don't know how inconvenient that is. From what I can see and after replacing nearly all engine rubber, the 22re is easy to work on and surprisingly the parts are readily available. Assume the availability of parts is the same on the V6 but I don't know how hard the V6 is to work on. (The Dodge, being a van, was no fun and parts are more sketchy.) MPG: Truth is on one level you could argue that the Doge wins because it is such a trivial cost in the whole cost of ownership for an RV so of course the V6 is a better choice than the 4. My take on that is that sometimes rational economics is anything but. I want better MPG even though it may be tough to make that argument economically. Oil is a finite resource and until there is a viable alternative why do I want to waste something so valuable when I don't have to? Durability: Seems to me that engines as durable as the 22Re are a rare breed and I just don't think that the V6 is quite at that level. Kind of like the Dodge -- a pretty good engine but I think the 22re is a great engine. Comfort. Frankly in anything this old all I have to say is make it what you want. Please forgive this rant or enjoy it for what it is -- someone new to this community expressing how amazing I think our little Toys are. Personally I really like the 4 but I am sure the V6 is still better than the overwhelming majority of competing RVs.
×
×
  • Create New...