Journey with Confidence RV GPS App RV Trip Planner RV LIFE Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Take a Speed Test Free 7 Day Trial ×
 

Click Here to Login
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search Log in
View Single Post
Old 04-21-2021, 04:37 PM   #39
lwmcguire
Senior Member
 
Brand: Thor Motor Coach
State: Missouri
Posts: 2,326
THOR #6903
Exactly my thoughts and why the Trojan T105 AGM in the compartment

Getting away from the cable corrosion and subsequent cleaning was reason enough

We typically stay in dry camping like the Tetons often with generator time 7 to 7

With the Trojan T105 AGM we run heat, fridge, misc all over night and have battery left for coffee prior to 7

Everything I own has AGM including the stair chair
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkoldman View Post
Turner, I had to think about this... but a little perspective or context as to why I spent more for AGMs.

At $110k miles that is $35,936 worth of gas over a 6 year span. (assume 8 mpg & $2.59/gal) So that is $6,000/year. By comparison as a part timer; I have 13,000 miles in 1.5 years; so I am on pace to hit 78,000 miles over 6 years and a whopping $25,252 worth of gas. Given those numbers the $500 I just spent on pure deep cycle AGM not only makes sense; but it is a fraction of a impact to my overall financial experience; but actually a benefit in other aspects.

For example.
1. I get rid of the task to monitor / add water monthly once and for all. IMO - Maintenance free floods or AGMs ought to be the minimum standard on any new RV. There is enough to worry about with the RV as it is.
2. Capacity or Amp Hours reigns king. I don't have the luxury of any Solar system and have zero plans to get one. My factory Inverter is only 1000 watts, So I simply found the most cost effective way to get the most additional AHs in my existing battery compartment. It happened to be the VMax Tanks AGM SLR 125 (new net total of 250 ah). VMax advised me that the batteries I bought had more AHs than their own 6vdc Golf Batteries, and surprising; they had another model ($349) that featured 135AHs; but as I understood it; it would not be any more effective capacity over the SLR 125s I bought for how I would use in RV. The $349 model battery was designed for trolling and Vmax advised me against it for RV House application.
3. Once a month on some RV forum; I read where someone blew a fuse or shorted something out while working with their batteries. A true Deep Cycle battery will not have the dual terminal posts; so I saw the elimination of the automotive SAE post as a safety feature. My House batteries will never be for cranking; so the pure deep cycles can actually cycle almost twice as long as other dual purpose RV/Marine batteries.
4. When all is said and done, and you factor core charges, tax that I did not have to pay, and the discount I got from VMax directly, I may have spent $240 more than the floods that I replaced. That equates to $40/yr over a 6 year life, but these batteries are rated 8 - 10 years. I don't figure to have this RV 8 - 10 years from now, but the point is I don't see as "so much money " as it is inferred. Now in my mind Gas is !!!, but every time I complain about gas; I get hit with you shouldn't buy an RV if you can't pay for the gas.
__________________
lwmcguire is offline   Reply With Quote
 
» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by Thor Industries or any of its affiliates. This is an independent, unofficial site.


Thor Motor Coach Forum - Crossroads RV Forum - Redwood RV Forum - Dutchmen Forum - Heartland RV Forum - Keystone RV Forum - Airstream Trailer Forum


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.