Speaking of cars...
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...


Is yours the same as the one in the 360 virtual tour? It looks as though
the electric sofa bed comes with seat belts, so would provide seating for
a
few more people.

Mercedes is making a Sprinter with a higher roof this year. I wonder if
PleasureWay will use it for future motor homes. I'm not wild about the 72"
interior standing room, being 75.5" inches tall.

Ours looks identical to the 360 tour except it does not have the third chair
up front.
The counter top extends further (where the chair is) and there are
additional storage compartments below it. The house battery is located in
the bottom section. Other than that ... it's the same, including the
colors.

The couch *does* have seat belts .... either for two or three people, I
can't remember.
That's why I wouldn't bother with the third chair up forward. The passenger
seat swivels completely around to face the rear of the rig. The driver's
seat does not.

You would have a height problem. I am just under 6' and my head clears
everything except the air conditioning system that sticks down a couple of
inches below the roof. If you are the long legged type, you need to make
sure the driver's seat goes back far enough for you. On ours I am
comfortable, leg wise, only with the seat adjusted back as far as it will
go.

I noticed they now mount the TV on a swivel so you can see it from the
front. Ours is permanently mounted in an angled enclosure, viewable from
the rear couch only.
I also understand they are introducing a couple of new engine options ... a
V6 gasser and a larger, V6 diesel. So far, the little 2.6L, 5 cylinder
Mercedes diesel in ours has been very adequate for the job, even towing the
trailer and gets great mileage.

Eisboch

Speaking of cars...
 

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 09:43:29 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .


Is yours the same as the one in the 360 virtual tour? It looks as though
the electric sofa bed comes with seat belts, so would provide seating for
a
few more people.

Mercedes is making a Sprinter with a higher roof this year. I wonder if
PleasureWay will use it for future motor homes. I'm not wild about the 72"
interior standing room, being 75.5" inches tall.

Ours looks identical to the 360 tour except it does not have the third chair
up front.
The counter top extends further (where the chair is) and there are
additional storage compartments below it. The house battery is located in
the bottom section. Other than that ... it's the same, including the
colors.

The couch *does* have seat belts .... either for two or three people, I
can't remember.
That's why I wouldn't bother with the third chair up forward. The passenger
seat swivels completely around to face the rear of the rig. The driver's
seat does not.

You would have a height problem. I am just under 6' and my head clears
everything except the air conditioning system that sticks down a couple of
inches below the roof. If you are the long legged type, you need to make
sure the driver's seat goes back far enough for you. On ours I am
comfortable, leg wise, only with the seat adjusted back as far as it will
go.

I noticed they now mount the TV on a swivel so you can see it from the
front. Ours is permanently mounted in an angled enclosure, viewable from
the rear couch only.
I also understand they are introducing a couple of new engine options ... a
V6 gasser and a larger, V6 diesel. So far, the little 2.6L, 5 cylinder
Mercedes diesel in ours has been very adequate for the job, even towing the
trailer and gets great mileage.

Eisboch


We'll see if they import the high roof model.

Thanks much for the time taken to answer questions. I appreciate it.

Speaking of cars...
 

James Sweet wrote:

Of course domestic cars tend to kinda self destruct around 10 years or
100K miles anyway so as long as you plan on replacing it before then you
probably won't run into big problems with the major systems.


You mean like my Jeep Cherokee, with well over a quarter million miles?



Tend to, not 100% do. A friend of mine has one of those and it seems to
be holding up alright, it's a real bitch to work on under the hood and I
don't like the way it drives (but hey it's a truck afterall) but the
inline 6 seems to be a robust motor and the body and trim has held
together so far.

I know of about 10 Cherokees around here, all with about the same
amount of mileage, and all are still going strong. It does ride and
drive like a truck, for sure. As far as under the hood, it's one of the
simplest to work on that I've seen since cars were huge. Everything is
right there in front of you.... I had to replace the water pump once,
took about an hour.

Speaking of cars...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:IDTXg.24$cQ5.14@trndny06...


Thanks. I haven't been able to find a "review" with the v6 engine.


I haven't encountered many good V6 engines, I'm not really sure why but
they seem to be much less robust than inline 6's, perhaps it's the compact
shape?



There's a good reason for it.
I just wish I knew what it was.

An inline six has inherent balance & even firing.

A V-6 needs extensive balancing & requires offset crank journals for
even firing, considerably weakening the crankshaft.

Rob

Speaking of cars...
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

I haven't encountered many good V6 engines, I'm not really sure why but
they seem to be much less robust than inline 6's, perhaps it's the
compact shape?

Depends on where in the power band. Inlines, because of the relatively
short stroke, and big bores, have a lot of low end torque. Modern V6's
on the other hand, because of the configuration, are longer stroke,
smaller bore. Top end torque. Nissan makes a bitchin' V6

Do you ever get sick of being wrong?

Speaking of cars...
 

"trainfan1" wrote in message
et...
Eisboch wrote:
"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:IDTXg.24$cQ5.14@trndny06...


Thanks. I haven't been able to find a "review" with the v6 engine.


I haven't encountered many good V6 engines, I'm not really sure why but
they seem to be much less robust than inline 6's, perhaps it's the
compact shape?



There's a good reason for it.
I just wish I knew what it was.

An inline six has inherent balance & even firing.

A V-6 needs extensive balancing & requires offset crank journals for even
firing, considerably weakening the crankshaft.

Rob

Plus I think ... as someone else pointed out ... the whole purpose of a V
configuration is to reduce the overall engine size to fit the engine in
smaller compartments, thus the stroke is typically shorter and resultant
torque is less.
The old Ford 300 ci straight six used in full sized cars and trucks was
every bit as strong or stronger as a small V8. And then there was the 225
ci slant six from Chrysler ...

Eisboch

Speaking of cars...
 

wrote in message
...

US cars are routinely getting over 100K miles now, many over 200K miles.
Keep up with the oil changes and you can almost run them forever.
Nothing
like the cars of the past...........


I still have a 1985 F150 straight 6 that runs fine at 170k miles

Those 300 ci Ford engines were excellent.

Eisboch

Speaking of cars...
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:06:38 GMT, Tom Francis penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 01:53:14 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:



I still have a 1985 F150 straight 6 that runs fine at 170k miles

Those 300 ci Ford engines were excellent.

There was nothing to compare to the old Chrysler/Dodge/Plymouth in
line 220 cui slant six.

It is my belief that certain engines are timeless. Whether it's
because of design, confluence of engineering ideas or just plain old
design luck, certain engines are always good, efficient and bullet
proof.

220 cui slant six
383 cui V8
283 cui V8
220 cui International straight six

etc., etc., etc.

The slant six was a 225 cu in...


don't forget the Chevy 250/292 engines.

Here's hoping that you, in time, will add the 5 cylinder GM's to this
discussion....


5 cylinder GM? What was that? BTW - the slant six started out as a 170
something ci.
When they increased it to the 225 ci it was called the "Super Six".

You can tell you're getting old when this stuff means anything to you ......

Eisboch

Speaking of cars...
 

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 11:06:38 GMT, Tom Francis wrote:


It is my belief that certain engines are timeless. Whether it's
because of design, confluence of engineering ideas or just plain old
design luck, certain engines are always good, efficient and bullet
proof.

220 cui slant six
383 cui V8
283 cui V8
220 cui International straight six


The Chrysler 318ci had quite a run. When they finally stopped production a
few years back it had set a record as being the oldest design production
engine still in production.
IIRC the first version was introduced in 1958. There were 3 or 4 versions
of it over the years and it was finally retired in or about 2002.

Eisboch

Speaking of cars...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"trainfan1" wrote in message
et...
Eisboch wrote:
"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:IDTXg.24$cQ5.14@trndny06...

Thanks. I haven't been able to find a "review" with the v6 engine.

I haven't encountered many good V6 engines, I'm not really sure why but
they seem to be much less robust than inline 6's, perhaps it's the
compact shape?


There's a good reason for it.
I just wish I knew what it was.
An inline six has inherent balance & even firing.

A V-6 needs extensive balancing & requires offset crank journals for even
firing, considerably weakening the crankshaft.

Rob

Plus I think ... as someone else pointed out ... the whole purpose of a V
configuration is to reduce the overall engine size to fit the engine in
smaller compartments, thus the stroke is typically shorter and resultant
torque is less.
The old Ford 300 ci straight six used in full sized cars and trucks was
every bit as strong or stronger as a small V8. And then there was the 225
ci slant six from Chrysler ...

First time I looked under the hood of a Dodge Dart I thought the motor
mounts had broken.