UFO Chassis

[Tom N]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DriVer:
Aside from delivering "hot" coolant to a forward mounted, manufacturer installed heater core via in frame hoses, I see no appreciable difference between front or rear engine placement. Just more heater hose in the UFO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll make one comment. Some DP have weak front heating and defrosting and diesels run hotter than a gas engine.

Much remains to be seen. It'll be very interesting when the UFO actually hits the highway.

[DriVer]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tom N:
I'll make one comment. Some DP have weak front heating and defrosting and diesels run hotter than a gas engine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Tom, That may very well be however the coolant doesn't run hotter. The gasoline engine as you know is thermostatically controlled and at some 180 or 190 degrees UFO coolant gets hot enough to make the coldest interiors toasty.

I see no reason why WGO should not continue with their motoraid and 2 speed coach heat features in a UFO when the time comes. Sometimes the weak defrosting is due in part to blower speed as well. I will usually augment the defroster function with my over head fans and I don't have trouble getting my windshield clear but it does take a few minutes before it gets dried out.

The UFO RGP has large capacity heater hoses and if I recall they appeared to be insulated however I do recall they were rubber from stem to stern. The question arose as to why the pipes couldn't be made from metallic conduit as they would be less prone to failure long term and the most logical answer there was that the OEMs in building the coach might have different needs that would be counter productive if rigid conduit was used.

[YosemiteBobR]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tom N:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DriVer:
Aside from delivering "hot" coolant to a forward mounted, manufacturer installed heater core via in frame hoses, I see no appreciable difference between front or rear engine placement. Just more heater hose in the UFO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll make one comment. Some DP have weak front heating and defrosting and diesels run hotter than a gas engine.

Much remains to be seen. It'll be very interesting when the UFO actually hits the highway. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tom, when I had my DP years ago, mine had a ID 2x2 metal container that the hoses were run in and on the outside was fully insulated. I never had a problem. But I have noticed now-a-days, that all you see under there is the hoses just attached to the frame. I forgot to look at this in the new UFO. If I get back to Pomona this week, I'll take a look.

[Tom N]

My 1994 Vectra had metal piping running to the rear under bed heater. But the 90 degree bends were moulded heater hose.

I don't know what is used on my Suncruiser. The run on the Suncruiser is short because the water heater and heat exchanger for heat is located in the front of the coach. My Suncruiser routes the air heated by the engine through the floor ducting system as opposed to the completely separate system that was under the bed in my old Vectra.

The motoraid is a great Winnebago feature. I know some other manufacturers heat the water and have an auxillary heater but not all of them.

-Tom

[Daysu47]

As RV 42 stated, I was the test driver from, National City, along with Duner, last Saturday at Pomona. Being very mechanically inclined, (ex ASE mechanic), the UFO will be the chassis of the future. BUT, on the right coach and the right adjustments.

My opinions:
Steering, excellent!
Side to side handling, excellent!
New type brakes, strange, don't like.
Ride, rough; tires too hard and Bilstens too stiff.
Of coarse, drivetrain, engine, excellent!

Was told by Workhorse rep. that the 37 foot GeorgieBoy used for the test drive on the UFO chassis was originally a front engine coach "modified" to fit the rear engine chassis. And personally, I think it was a poor rush job.
Actually, at crusing speed on freeway it wasn't any quieter than my Chieftain. But I have to admit it did not have any sound dampening features yet in place. I think when some manufacture gets serious with this chassis and builds a "what to impress the public" RV, it will be a seller!!
One other note, when test driving this coach I, had to compare it to my Winnebago Chieftain 39T, so they had a very skeptical RV'er to sell.
Overall I would give the chassis a 8 and the test coach a 3. I thought the TV over the dash was going to fall out!!

If ya get a chance test drive it and YOU be the judge!

Later,
David

[DriVer]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daysu47: </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Thanks for posting your review about the UFO. The brake system is new and takes a little time to get acclimated to it. It's a hydraulic over hydraulic system. When you step on the brake you are pushing a small amount of fluid from a feeder cylinder to the main braking computer. The computer interprets the pressure and applies the brakes accordingly.

It would seem that there's a bit of time delay involved but it's not much more delay time than one would encounter or normally expect using an air brake system. You can always make adjustments as to how you interact with the brakes as you accumulate seat time since the brake system will react the same each time.

The quadraulic 4 piston calipers are the best brakes in the business and it's one of the strong suits on the UFO.