Uncle Paul
Well-Known Member
Many RV parks are family owned. Each will have their own policy (or no policy) on charging your EV while staying with them.
Best to simply ask...
Best to simply ask...
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
steilkurve
Member
Wouldn't mind everyone's thoughts...
Our plan of record is to upgrade from our Airstream 22 FB (towed by our X) to a larger Airstream, ideally 27', towed by an electric truck.
We'd do this when Rivian's R1T (or as a fallback Cybertruck, but not warming up to the look) becomes available.
Now that Rivian's payload has been said to be about 1700# (unclear if that's for the long range version, could be lower), I'm questioning how feasible it'll be towing a 25' or 27' Airstream with it. Both of these risk being over 1000# of tongue weight loaded. With folks and cargo in the truck, there won't a lot of room to manoeuvre from a payload standpoint. Plus, the R1T I assume will fall in the '1/2' truck category that some RVers deem insufficient for anything over 23'.
Now wondering if we shouldn't just go for an Airstream International 23'. Tongue weight is around 439# and the unit base weight 4800#. This would get easily pulled by the R1T and likely result in much better range. While not as large as the 27' we're eying, we'd get the larger bed, double axle (for safety) and the better amenities we're looking for (like AC that's not a jet engine).
THE QUESTION! How would the X actually do with this 23' trailer you guys think? Base weight is higher than my Bambi's 3900# and would likely exceed the X's limit by a couple hundred fully loaded I imagine, but the tongue weight is actually lower by 70.
Thoughts?
Our plan of record is to upgrade from our Airstream 22 FB (towed by our X) to a larger Airstream, ideally 27', towed by an electric truck.
We'd do this when Rivian's R1T (or as a fallback Cybertruck, but not warming up to the look) becomes available.
Now that Rivian's payload has been said to be about 1700# (unclear if that's for the long range version, could be lower), I'm questioning how feasible it'll be towing a 25' or 27' Airstream with it. Both of these risk being over 1000# of tongue weight loaded. With folks and cargo in the truck, there won't a lot of room to manoeuvre from a payload standpoint. Plus, the R1T I assume will fall in the '1/2' truck category that some RVers deem insufficient for anything over 23'.
Now wondering if we shouldn't just go for an Airstream International 23'. Tongue weight is around 439# and the unit base weight 4800#. This would get easily pulled by the R1T and likely result in much better range. While not as large as the 27' we're eying, we'd get the larger bed, double axle (for safety) and the better amenities we're looking for (like AC that's not a jet engine).
THE QUESTION! How would the X actually do with this 23' trailer you guys think? Base weight is higher than my Bambi's 3900# and would likely exceed the X's limit by a couple hundred fully loaded I imagine, but the tongue weight is actually lower by 70.
Thoughts?
It will requiring switching to a traditional hitch at a minimum. Below are links to an article and discussion on towing at 27' AS with a Model 3. Note that the author has significant experience with custom towing fabrication.
The Tesla Experiment - RV Lifestyle Magazine
Our Tesla Experiment - Airstream Forums
The Tesla Experiment - RV Lifestyle Magazine
Our Tesla Experiment - Airstream Forums
steilkurve
Member
I swapped the OEM hitch receiver for a fixed Draw-Tite receiver when I started towing, on @ohmman wise advice. My specific questions:
1) What do folks think the extra range hit would be? The 23’ would be as wide as my 22’ so extra drag should be non existent. However, it’s a 1000# heavier. Likely not a huge hit on flat roads, bigger driving up mountains. Dual axle, so more rolling resistance.
2) Tongue will likely be lighter than my current 500 but I estimate I’ll be going over the max towing weight by 100 to 200#. How big a problem is this? I get you shouldn’t but this wouldn’t be by a 1000#.
All input appreciated.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
I worry about people towing large trailers (especially with 3 or Y). Not good to exceed max towing capacity or even come close to it. It's too easy to have everything go south in a hurry.
steilkurve
Member
Yes, of course. Security is paramount. That being said, I think there is a difference between towing a larger trailer with a Model 3 or Y and with a Model X. The latter is much heavier. Even if I towed the larger trailer described above, it would still be lighter than my Model X.
Case and point. Most German high end SUVs can tow over 7000 pounds, including the X5 and the Cayenne. Yet, they are lighter and have less torque than the Model X. I would argue that the Model X is a better tow vehicle then they are. It’s heavier, has a lower centre of gravity and again, is more powerful.
I wonder if the Model X’s limitations from a towing standpoint are not simply dictated by the removable OEM hitch (which they annoyingly retained in the refresh) versus the vehicles’ actual capacity to tow a higher load safely based on all other specs.
Last edited:
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Given the torque and stability of the MX my guess is hitch was the limiting component. But that's strictly an opinion...FWIW.
If you really wanted to test your aftermarket hitch on the MX you could always try to do your own SAE J2807 tests
http://www.trucktrend.com/how-to/towing/1502-sae-j2807-tow-tests-the-standard/
j2807_202002
With the X, it's pretty similar to about 700 lbs of cargo/passenger weight allowed when you subtract the 500# tongue weight of a camper, FYI. Not to say we wouldn't all want more, especially with an upgrade, but it's worth considering that. Also, with a 25' or 27', you'll have a lot more capacity in the coach for storing all those goodies.
My plan is similar to yours. I've reserved an R1T and plan to tow our 22' Sport with it to feel out the feasibility of towing without the Supercharger network, and if things look good, it'll become our primary tow vehicle and we'll upgrade to a 25' Airstream.
What year is your 22' Sport? I thought you got yours before they widened the model. If it's 2019 or prior, the 22' Sport would be 9" narrower than the 23'. If the coach does indeed have the same frontal area as your 22' Sport, I think you've got it right. Towing an extra 1000# uphill 1000', in pure terms in a vacuum, etc., requires about 0.38kWh, which doesn't sound like much. But obviously there are other inefficiencies that will impact that number.
I'm curious how tongue weight will be less than your existing rig. I know the published number for the 23' FB is under 500#, but with a trailer weighing 1000# more than your existing one, you still want to put 10-15% of the total trailer weight on the tongue for balance. You'd have to travel empty to get close to that number. Maybe I'm missing something without having the full specs of the coach.
Overall, I believe it's probably doable. I'm with @idoco on this one - the X seems to be a surprisingly capable tow vehicle with a lot of stability and plenty of power. I towed our Airstream up Hurricane Ridge (pic somewhere back in this thread) and our 90D X handled it fine. That's a pretty stout climb.
Without having pulled anything but a pop up thus far, I have zero concerns about anything in the rated envelope. I wonder if the reason it’s rated for “only” 5000lbs is:
- Bosal rating
- Aluminum body concerns
- Motor/heat concerns.
- Lack of testing
- Marketing (pulling 8k lbs and get 50 miles on a charge is a marketing nightmare)
- A combination of all 5
I’m guessing the latter answer.
steilkurve
Member
My 22FB is actually a 2020 so it is the widened model. That means my 22’ and a new 23’ would be as wide. 0.38kWh does sound small. What about the dual axle, how much a range hit would that add you think?
I meant on paper. It’s 430/4800. We travel light. Say TT loaded is at 5100, TW could be 510 on the low end. I realize that’s theoretical and slightly above the published max but with the Draw-Tite, it wouldn’t overly worry me. I’d also go lithium on batteries and potentially travel with only one full propane in most circumstances to lower the tongue. Frankly, with my Bambi right at the 500 limit, I’ve gone over a few times. Never noticed a thing. Car didn’t squat and handling was as good. Note I do have WD.
Water tanks and propane alone will put you at 5100 pounds. Reading the experiences on Airforums figure that your weight will be empty weight plus 50%-150% of the trailer carry capacity.
If you are going to push the limit of the aftermarket setup you might consider renting an enclosed trailer or larger camper or car on a trailer dolly to see how it handles.
steilkurve
Member
Yes, I realize there’s much fuss around the discrepancy between published and real world weights. They were pretty precise close on my Bambi though. Perhaps the discrepancy is larger on bigger units.
Do note that Airstream published weights have batteries and propane calculated in. Water tanks are calculated empty though.
Or better yet on testing it, ask a dealer with the 23’ AS to allow me to try it. Not sure a big box trailer would be close enough to the aerodynamics of the AS to provide a comparable test.
That being said, given current AS delays, I'd likely wouldn't get a new AS 23' delivered to me before August at best. That means I'd towing with it for 2-3 months max before Winter. And then, if there are no more delays, I'd have my R1T come Spring and the car's specs would be more than sufficient.
Last edited:
Jumping on @idoco's recommendation, I just checked Outdoorsy and there's a 23' International for rent not far from me. Maybe you can find one, or a variant, close to you. Renting might make sense for a trip or two.
You must be really done with that 22' to be putting so much consideration into the extra 1'.
steilkurve
Member
'You must be really done with that 22' to be putting so much consideration into the extra 1'.
LOL.
It's actually 2.1' longer. That's a HUGE difference. ;-)
What I'm really after is 1) a larger bed, 2) ducted AC and 3) dual axle (for safety). We won't find all of these under 23.
Truthfully, I would have bought a larger trailer from the get go for all these features but the X was the limiting factor.
All this being said, we still love the 22', no to worry. We even named it in the official registry this winter. ;-)
While my usual impatience could lead us to the 23' experiment this summer, the wise thing to do would be to wait for the R1T or CBRTK (in the unlikely event I warm up to it) and really upgrade to the trailer we want. In the meantime, we'd still have great camping in the 22'.
Last edited:
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Have you folks considered going lightweight?
World's Lightest Teardrop Trailer Is Made of Chicken Feathers
For these reasons, the New Mexico-based startup Earth Traveler designed an ultralightweight, expandable, organic-inspired teardrop trailer that weighs less than 300 pounds. It’s the lightest RV available on the market. The secret behind keeping the vessel light is the material it’s made out of – chicken feathers!
The company collaborated with Los Alamos National Lab SBA to devise using the substitute material for all non-structural elements. The feathers are reinforced with fiberglass and resin, resulting in an ultra-lightweight, cost-effective, insulative, and weather-proof structure. It’s so light it can even be towed by motorcycles! The resin-reinforced feather-based material offers a strength similar to carbon fiber. The load-bearing structural elements are made of traditional composite and core cell.
https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.i...2021/01/Earth-Traveler.jpg?quality=100&f=auto
World's Lightest Teardrop Trailer Is Made of Chicken Feathers
For these reasons, the New Mexico-based startup Earth Traveler designed an ultralightweight, expandable, organic-inspired teardrop trailer that weighs less than 300 pounds. It’s the lightest RV available on the market. The secret behind keeping the vessel light is the material it’s made out of – chicken feathers!
The company collaborated with Los Alamos National Lab SBA to devise using the substitute material for all non-structural elements. The feathers are reinforced with fiberglass and resin, resulting in an ultra-lightweight, cost-effective, insulative, and weather-proof structure. It’s so light it can even be towed by motorcycles! The resin-reinforced feather-based material offers a strength similar to carbon fiber. The load-bearing structural elements are made of traditional composite and core cell.
https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.i...2021/01/Earth-Traveler.jpg?quality=100&f=auto
steilkurve
Member
Nice but my need for creature comforts is pushing me towards the other extreme of the weight spectrum, unfortunately.
@steilkurve What if I told you that you could pull a 31', double axle AS with an MX and essentially stay within MX specs?
The beginning of Another Airstream Adventure!
The beginning of Another Airstream Adventure!
steilkurve
Member
Ah yes, going the vintage route. That would certainly do it, albeit with a few missing bells and whistles.
Last edited:
If Airstream owners were to remove the AC and instead put in a mini split . thus making the roof more aerodynamic as well as making the AC silent to use. I think that might help. Also as you increase the length of the trailer such that 3X the width of 8' is reached don't they get a better CD/
Similar threads
- Article
