Camping Trailer Selection for Model X

[BerTX]

Given the other constraints, I think Bonnie's 'Go' seems like the solution that allows good range. Anything else isn't practical for long trips due to range loss.

I agree, but be aware that many, many RV parks do not allow tent trailers in their RV spaces. The idea is to recharge overnight for explorations or moving on the next day, and if the park will not allow tent trailers in their 50A spaces, you will be less than happy.

 

[jerry33]

I agree, but be aware that many, many RV parks do not allow tent trailers in their RV spaces. The idea is to recharge overnight for explorations or moving on the next day, and if the park will not allow tent trailers in their 50A spaces, you will be less than happy.

Most will if you pay the RV fee. One run by the Kansas state parks charged for a car and for an RV because I was driving a car and charging in an RV space. (I suspect that if I had a tent trailer they would have charged for that too.) Most have just charged the RV fee, and a few just charged a nominal fee or even no fee.

 

[BajaSurBoy]

This looks totally cool.

BeauEr

Even Larger version

BeauEr

 

[Breezy]

Airstreams are a good choice. Other aerodynamic lightweights worth looking at include Evergreen Ascend and Gulfstream Vista Cruiser.

My range drops about 50% towing a low-profile fifth wheel (it's 9.5 feet high - not one of those 13-foot tall ones with the stand-up bedroom at the front).

 

[mikevbf]

During the Model X launch event an Airstream was towed on the stage as an example. We are looking for a camping trailer. Our requirements are as follows:

• 2 independent sleeping areas
• shower/toilet
• light weight and aerodynamic for good range
• ample space on the roof to put semi-flexibe solar (single-curvature roof line)

We like to camp in remote places, which makes for long distances between charging and slow charging too. If possible we avoid traditional camgrounds with full hookups.

Choices so far:
1 - Airstream FLying Cloud 19 - $US60k+, GVW 4500lbs, 19'2" by 8' - http://www.airstream.com/travel-trailers/flying-cloud/floor-plans-specifications/
Good quality, but heavy. Drag probably ok. limited space for semi-flexible solar panels.
View attachment 96616View attachment 96617


2 - Safari Condo R1723 - $CDN31k., Base Weight 1760 lbw, GVW estimated 2260lbs, - http://www.safaricondo.com/en/caravanes_R1723
Very aerodynamic due to lifting roof, very light, lots of space for solar, smaller, less convenience, new available earliest January 2017
View attachment 96619 View attachment 96618

Does anybody have experiences with these or any other suggestions to look at?

I like your safari condo. It has aerodynamic advantage of a tear drop camper without the space penalty. I would go for that over an airstream. Here is a good article on it:
Lessons from the Trailer Park: Alto teardrop popup packs a lot into a tiny, lightweight package : TreeHugger

 

[BerTX]

I like your safari condo. It has aerodynamic advantage of a tear drop camper without the space penalty. I would go for that over an airstream. Here is a good article on it:
Lessons from the Trailer Park: Alto teardrop popup packs a lot into a tiny, lightweight package : TreeHugger

I would conjecture that there isn't much difference between the fixed roof and lifting roof. The fixed roof has a better aerodynamic shape, and the retracting roof has less frontal area. They probably just about balance out. But that is just conjecture, looking at the diagrams. I doubt the manufacturer has any data they will share.

 

[fortytwo]

Thank you all for adding to the wealth of information.

I believe drag is the most important factor for good range. So any trailer that reduces the frontal area is a big help, since the drag coefficients are probably pretty much the same, even for the tear drop style ones. I definitly do not want to go at hyper miling speeds. I want to be able to go about 55mph (90km/h) and still have a 150mile (250km) range to make it between SCs.

I hope one of the signature series owners will post their range experinces as soon as one gets a chance to test it.

 

[jerry33]

I definitly do not want to go at hyper miling speeds. I want to be able to go about 55mph (90km/h) and still have a 150mile (250km) range to make it between SCs.

55 mph is an efficient speed. I dislike the term hypermiling because it implies dangerous practices. It's perfectly possible to get good numbers without being a danger to yourself and others.

 

[Breezy]

Another option to consider is ProLite.

http://www.roulottesprolite.com/indexenglish.htm

Most small trailers are equipped with ST tires, which are speed limited to 65 mph.

 

[BerTX]

Most will if you pay the RV fee. One run by the Kansas state parks charged for a car and for an RV because I was driving a car and charging in an RV space. (I suspect that if I had a tent trailer they would have charged for that too.) Most have just charged the RV fee, and a few just charged a nominal fee or even no fee.

I agree that they will let you charge if you pay for the RV spot. Many (not most, but a significant number) will not, however, allow you to set up a tent camper in an RV spot. I have not known a public park (state or national park) to do this, but private parks can and do.

I don't think it is a show-stopper for using a tent camper overnight and charging in private parks -- just something to be aware of.

- - - Updated - - -

55 mph is an efficient speed. I dislike the term hypermiling because it implies dangerous practices. It's perfectly possible to get good numbers without being a danger to yourself and others.

I agree. There are some roads that would not be safe at 55 mph, but even on those roads depending on the time of day or day of the week, it could be safe.

I had to drive to Florida from Texas on I-10, pick up a trailer-mounted piece of equipment and on the way back could not safely go faster than 55 mph. That was one of the most harrowing experiences of my driving life!

 

[Cottonwood]

Do do we know how range will be affected while towing.

Here is some real world experience with a small, aero trailer behind a Model S, that seems to show an approximate doubling in aero energy use when the trailer is added.

Take a look at this post and my reply after it: Pulling a trailer with a Model S - Energy Use

 

[jerry33]

Here is some real world experience with a small, aero trailer behind a Model S, that seems to show an approximate doubling in aero energy use when the trailer is added.

Take a look at this post and my reply after it: Pulling a trailer with a Model S - Energy Use

With that really flat back, I wonder just how aerodynamic the trailer actually is.

My thought is that the top of trailer should be lower, and the trailer should be narrower, than the towing vehicle to get the best aerodynamics.

 

[Xenoilphobe]

It doesn't make sense - check out the back of this camper - how they tapered the rear end like an aircraft fuselage

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-road-chief-is-the-ultimate-camper-1442433073

 

[beeeerock]

I had to drive to Florida from Texas on I-10, pick up a trailer-mounted piece of equipment and on the way back could not safely go faster than 55 mph. That was one of the most harrowing experiences of my driving life!

'Harrowing'....? Like this?

I can see how that would be an extremely 'harrowing' drive... need a few lanes for that baby! :biggrin:

 

[jhs_7645]

It doesn't make sense - check out the back of this camper - how they tapered the rear end like an aircraft fuselage

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-road-chief-is-the-ultimate-camper-1442433073

Wow... It takes a bit to get over the look of the trailer, but that thing is amazing... If ever there was a trailer that was going to work with the Model X.. that would be the one.

 

[Cottonwood]

Wow... It takes a bit to get over the look of the trailer, but that thing is amazing... If ever there was a trailer that was going to work with the Model X.. that would be the one.

If I were to get a Model X (canceled order), and were to get a camper trailer with it (I like motels, and could pay for a lot of nights with the price of this camper trailer), this is the one that I would get. Besides, I like the look!

Direct link: Specs: New Bowlus Road Chief

 

[ohmman]

Wow... It takes a bit to get over the look of the trailer, but that thing is amazing... If ever there was a trailer that was going to work with the Model X.. that would be the one.

Agree. I feel a bit of trailer desire right now.. and I've never been very interested before. Best I close that browser tab before the seed is too deep.

 

[AudubonB]

Drippingly gorgeous. Thank goodness it costs the same as a Tesla; otherwise I would be quite tempted. Enough so that I would have to go redact any prior thread regarding my distaste for bathrooms in trailers.

 

[ohmman]

It doesn't make sense - check out the back of this camper - how they tapered the rear end like an aircraft fuselage

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-road-chief-is-the-ultimate-camper-1442433073

Xenoilphobe, I just wanted to tell you that you can go to.. you know where. I haven't stopped looking at this trailer since you posted it. If I end up with one, I'm coming to find you.

 

[Tedkidd]

I had a Bigfoot Pickup Camper I took to Alaska, Nova Scotia, and down the East Coast a couple times. Things I liked in order of importance:

Bed
Fridge
Toilet
Dinette
AC
Outdoor Shower

Things I ended up not using:
Indoor Shower
Hot Water Tank
Oven
Furnace

If I were designing my retirement camper it would be light, have big batteries (I know, contradictory), be pure electric (no propane), and have a right side dinette with big windows, probably in the front or back corner. It was really fantastic to stop and eat wherever there was a great view.

Ideally it could feed power back to the car to cover it's added drag.