2 kids and a Jeep- 172 vs 176 vs 178 vs a-frame

Message Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic

   Welcome.  Personally I wouldn't buy a camper w/o a slide.  I've had campers with and w/o, and I've been in campers of all sizes with and w/o.  A little extra width makes a big difference.
You can handle the 178, but don't fill the water tank with more than a few gallons (for on-road bathroom use) since you'll be withing a few hundred pounds of your limit as it is.  Either pod will affect your mpg identically while towing, since frontal area (drag) is the same and is what dictates how much gas you burn on flat terrain.  Weight comes into play going up hills, with extra weight making you slower and slightly lowering your mpg compared to a lighter trailer.

That said, upgrading to a TV with a higher tow rating would ultimately be better.

Author	Message Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic
techntrek Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Admin Group - pHp Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Location: MD Online Status: Offline Posts: 9059	Topic: 2 kids and a Jeep- 172 vs 176 vs 178 vs a-frame Posted: 24 Aug 2016 at 10:15pm
	Welcome. Personally I wouldn't buy a camper w/o a slide. I've had campers with and w/o, and I've been in campers of all sizes with and w/o. A little extra width makes a big difference. You can handle the 178, but don't fill the water tank with more than a few gallons (for on-road bathroom use) since you'll be withing a few hundred pounds of your limit as it is. Either pod will affect your mpg identically while towing, since frontal area (drag) is the same and is what dictates how much gas you burn on flat terrain. Weight comes into play going up hills, with extra weight making you slower and slightly lowering your mpg compared to a lighter trailer. That said, upgrading to a TV with a higher tow rating would ultimately be better.
	Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ Pod instruction manual

Leo B Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 13 Jan 2012 Location: Lyndonville, VT Online Status: Offline Posts: 4508	Posted: 24 Aug 2016 at 6:38pm
	Welcome to the group!
	Leo & Melissa Bachand 2017 Ford F150 2021 Vista Cruiser 19 csk Previously owned 2015 Rpod 179 2010 Rpod 171

zimm Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 24 Aug 2016 Location: Virginia Online Status: Offline Posts: 2	Posted: 24 Aug 2016 at 4:42pm
	We're shopping for our first camper. I'm limited to 3500#max with my 2015 Jeep wrangler 4 door. I was heading the direction of a Rockwood A122SXR rigid pop up, but the lack of bathroom is really bugging me. The Rpod 172 is actually shorter, lighter, and has a bath and bunks for the boys (aged 4 and 6). I know it's small inside, but I'm really just looking for a rolling sleeping box with heat/ac/bath. Of course the 178 with slide is way nice inside, but is 2' longer and 400#'s more. So... is the slide worth it if you're on the verge of weight limit? With the lighter 172 I could load it up and not worry about a full water tank if going off the grid at a buddy's property. How are the bunks for two small kids and parents on the dinette vs the 178 layout with a real queen for us and a dinette for the boys in sleeping bags?