Another 4-Season Off-Road Box On Wheels

[Chance]

As far as I know, Advanced RV started trend with “B-Box” built on Sprinter Cutaway. Basically a small motorhome with footprint similar to a van, but much roomier by virtue of a squared-off coach body (box). The Advance offering is undoubtedly expensive, particularly for those who closely relate cost to size.

Winnebago followed with the EKKO which is similar but built on Transit AWD 11,000-pound Cutaway. It’s not as off-road capable as Sprinter but much lower in price. EKKO interior seems much more traditional by motorhome standards.

A new company is now marketing their AEONrv motorhome which is a little smaller than the Winnebago EKKO and about the same price. The design, based on Transit AWD 9,500-pound Cutaway is very different in numerous areas, and nothing I would consider since I don’t plan to camp or travel way off-road.

Having said that, I like the 7-foot width, 10-foot height, and 22-foot length built on Single Rear Wheel chassis. The interior is 6’-8” wide and tall, making it much roomier than a van.

What do you guys think about these compact AWD/4X4 motorhomes? Are they small just so they can go off-road easier, or is there a trend towards Class C just larger than vans? And will this size class spread to on-road-only unit’s as well?
.

[chunker21]

Originally Posted by Chance

As far as I know, Advanced RV started trend with “B-Box” built on Sprinter Cutaway. Basically a small motorhome with footprint similar to a van, but much roomier by virtue of a squared-off coach body (box). The Advance offering is undoubtedly expensive, particularly for those who closely relate cost to size.

Winnebago followed with the EKKO which is similar but built on Transit AWD 11,000-pound Cutaway. It’s not as off-road capable as Sprinter but much lower in price. EKKO interior seems much more traditional by motorhome standards.

A new company is now marketing their AEONrv motorhome which is a little smaller than the Winnebago EKKO and about the same price. The design, based on Transit AWD 9,500-pound Cutaway is very different in numerous areas, and nothing I would consider since I don’t plan to camp or travel way off-road.

Having said that, I like the 7-foot width, 10-foot height, and 22-foot length built on Single Rear Wheel chassis. The interior is 6’-8” wide and tall, making it much roomier than a van.

What do you guys think about these compact AWD/4X4 motorhomes? Are they small just so they can go off-road easier, or is there a trend towards Class C just larger than vans? And will this size class spread to on-road-only unit’s as well?
.

Makes a rather expensive "hunting cabin". IMHO it's a niche vehicle that some will love and lust over most will not see the usefulness or value. Not for me at all but I don't speak for certain groups either.

[EA37TS]

Leave it to the one off builders. I see no value or market for the common RV customers.

[ducksface]

It's a lightweight ambulance with a cassette toilet.

That's not a bad thing.

[happy]

As a young man I worked and guided for a while in the Weminuche Wilderness of Colorado.
I love camping where we see no one. A box on wheels gets me further into seclusion than a Class A.

I like the concept and build. But, a Class A and towing a capable 4x4 suits us better.

[ducksface]

Originally Posted by happy

As a young man I worked and guided for a while in the Weminuche Wilderness of Colorado.
I love camping where we see no one. A box on wheels gets me further into seclusion than a Class A.

I like the concept and build. But, a Class A and towing a capable 4x4 suits us better.

Your rig suits anyone right minded better than these contraptions.
Too wide
Too heavy
Too tall
Too long
Too top heavy.
For just about any western US path/mine road/wagon trail/rock climb I've ever been on.

Extremely limited use outside of tundra and savannah and open Australia.

They're a pain in everyones ass whenever they try anything but open forestry roads.
There's a reason we have our blazer instead of one of these monsters.
Even the blazer is too tall and too top heavy for maybe 10% of readily used offroad paths and maybe 50% of real boondock/found trail stuff. We had to flatten the tires and remove our rack just for some trail obstacles in Calico. Just 7ft tall is a tough way to go in the tough parts. Full width truck is the same tough way to go.

(I don't find many pictures of these rigs parked at precarious angleoUSr deep into the deep. Lots of field shots...in fields.)

[Chance]

It seems their mission is to offer a compact (relatively) cheap entry-level option to the Earth Roamer concept by using the 80-20 rule as guidance. It’s a little of a stretch but I get their point.


“What we’re really bridging is the traditional, compact Class C or Class B market in the traditional overlanding market, which is really custom, with units starting at $350,000, going up to $750,000 for something like the Earth Romer. We like to say, kind of an inside joke, with us you get 80% of an Earth Roamer for 20% of the cost,” Ritchie said.

https://rvbusiness.com/video-startup...-grid-class-c/


I agree there is not much market demand (volume) for these types of off-road rigs. However, I expect a conventional motorhome in same size range at a significantly lower price could do quite well. Or maybe not?

This unit was built on 9,500-pound Transit, so similar-size RWD on 10,050-pound E-Series Cutaway should be viable for street/highway driving in my opinion.