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

Go Back   Montana Owners Club - Keystone Montana 5th Wheel Forum > GENERAL DISCUSSIONS > General Discussions about our Montanas
Click Here to Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-18-2005, 08:33 PM   #1
Dave e Victoria
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Glendale
Posts: 1,219
M.O.C. #635
Cambridge review and report

I just posted a rather long report on our experiences to date with our Cambridge. I evaluated the coach in 14 different subject areas. You can find the report at the following address.

http://www.brickner.com/db/activitie...%20Report.html

I apologize for the length of the report. Also, due to its length, there is ample room for mistakes so I would appreciate hearing about any corrections I need to make.
Thanks in advance
Dave
 
Dave e Victoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2005, 09:03 PM   #2
Montana Sky
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Down the Road
Posts: 5,627
M.O.C. #889
Dave,
Thanks for such a great report. I have been looking forward to reading it...
Montana Sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2005, 11:53 PM   #3
Bill and Ann
Montana Master
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Napanee
Posts: 3,440
M.O.C. #1493

Dave: Interesting read. But, I will stay with our Big Sky.
Bill and Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2005, 03:59 AM   #4
Dave e Victoria
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Glendale
Posts: 1,219
M.O.C. #635
Bill and Ann,
It was not meant to be a sales pitch. I hope it didn't come off that way. And, BTW, we loved our BigSky.
Dave
Dave e Victoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2005, 04:52 AM   #5
richfaa
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 20,229
M.O.C. #2839
Excellent engineering report and I've read a few of them in my day.We have looked at the Cambridge but it is way over our budget.I would hope that our new 3670 Montana will come close to the quality of the Cambridge.
richfaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2005, 05:48 AM   #6
CountryGuy
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tipton
Posts: 3,646
M.O.C. #191
Dave,

Echo the sentiments, great report. Do have a question, could you expound some on the low points on the frame (under the pin box) and how much trouble you have getting on a spot so that you can get level, etc.? That low spot sure is kinda scary looking!
CountryGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2005, 07:03 AM   #7
Dave e Victoria
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Glendale
Posts: 1,219
M.O.C. #635
Thanks for the kind comments.
Al& Carol,
So far, the low clearance has not been a problem. In fact, I used to carry my jacks partially extended at just about the same height as these are.

If there is a problem, I would think it would be "high centering" about half way back toward the main axles. Of the campgrounds we frequent, the front one at Conley Bottom on Lake Cumberland in Kentucky might be a challange. I won't know until we get back there next year. That campground has some pretty good ditches on the approaches t some of the sites. Having said that, the claearnace is about a foot so either the truck or trailer axel would have to be a foot or more below grade for this to happen. I am becoming more comfortable wwith thie clearance each time we go out.
Dave
Dave e Victoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2005, 07:21 AM   #8
CountryGuy
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tipton
Posts: 3,646
M.O.C. #191
Dave,

No problems getting in and out of fueling stations with those steep driveways??

Amazing! I guess it is a case of looks being deceaving.
CountryGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2005, 01:43 PM   #9
sreigle
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oceanside
Posts: 20,028
M.O.C. #20
Good report, Dave. I read some but want to take more time to read the rest so I saved the page onto my system for later reading offline. Hope you don't mind. You asked for corrections... 3296RK early on.. (Darn fingers!)
sreigle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2005, 01:58 PM   #10
Dave e Victoria
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Glendale
Posts: 1,219
M.O.C. #635
Steve,
Thanks. I admit to being the world's worst proofreader.
Dave
Dave e Victoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2005, 02:25 PM   #11
mazeeff
Montana Fan
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location:
Posts: 304
M.O.C. #2055
Great report Dave. One of the best I have ever read. I must say that I am shocked at the pin weight of 3,840 lbs. This is almost twice the max on your 2500, and way more than the max allowed on a dually. This weight would require a F550 or better as a tow vehicle. Are you concerned about the safety/insurability of this combo? I love the Cambridge, but can not afford a $75K+ tow vehicle!
mazeeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2005, 04:10 PM   #12
Dave e Victoria
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Glendale
Posts: 1,219
M.O.C. #635
Mike, I am concerned about the pin weight. I had airbags prior to the Cambridge so the truck rides level and has plenty of reserve spring/shock response. But, I am over the tire rating and I am investigating going to a stronger tire. Goodyear makes "F" and "G" rated tires that fit the rim. I am also looking at alternative Tow Vehicles and have zeroed in on a Topkick 4500. It can carry the pin weight with no problem. A tricked out 4500 can be obtained for around $63,000. A 450 or 550 Ford is in a similar price bracket.

To be pure about it, one would have to go with the Ford 550 to stay within te GCWR as the 4500 GMC is limited to 26,000 pounds. The F450 has an option that gets it to 30,000 and the F550 can reach 33,000. My reason for staying with GM is the Duramax and Allison combination. I've had good experience (as well as being a GMI graduate Class of '62). If we do some weight reduction we are going to be real close to the GCWR on the GMC.

Insurance has not been a problem.
Dave e Victoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2005, 07:53 PM   #13
HamRad
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 5,316
M.O.C. #15
Dave and Victoria,
You might want to look at a class 8 TV. Not a new one but a good used one. There would be no problem with weight with one of those. They can be had for under the $$$$ for a 4500 or 450 series. I know it sounds weird but you can get more than enough rig to pull your trailer and have it cost less. They do sit a little taller than a PU but they do have a tighter turning radius.... that is nice.... my 450 turns like a battleship!

I really tried talking my wife into getting one of the class 8 rigs but she says she won't ride in a TRUCK like that. Don't know I'll ever change her mind but I keep trying.

I really would like to NOT have to worry about the pulling and more importantly stopping power of my tow vehicle. If you're not aware of it there is a great link to all you'd ever want to know about the Heavy Duty pullers! Go to the Escapees Forum and then down to the section on the Heavy Duty Trucks. It's broken into several sections.

One couple coming to the Reno Rally has a class 8. You may have seen pictures of his truck here on MOC. Firetrucker and FireTruckerWife are the ones with the BIG rig. It looks great. I am going to try to get him to take us for a ride. Maybe that will change her mind! :-)

Good luck,

HamRad
HamRad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2005, 05:14 AM   #14
Dave e Victoria
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Glendale
Posts: 1,219
M.O.C. #635
HamRad,
Thanks for the link. I have not frequented that forum. will check it out. Victoria has a similar resistance but it is to the height of the rig. I think I'd have to dream up some kind of escalator. Hmm, I wonder if I could sell the plans?? Also, thanks for mentioning turn radious. I have to add that to th decision matrix.
Dave
Dave e Victoria is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2005, 09:10 AM   #15
sreigle
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oceanside
Posts: 20,028
M.O.C. #20
Dennis, if you don't go with a MDT, the new superdutys with 4x4 have the new front suspension with turn radius 5.1 feet less than prior years. That's probably diameter and not radius but it's far better than my 2003 was. Come on over from next door and I'll show you. I know that's true on the F250/F350 and think it's true on the F450/F550 but am not positive.

Also, you could go F350 dually with the Tow Boss package and get tow ratings to 19,200 and GCWR to 26,000. That's maybe not enough for Dave but is plenty for you and me. If you want to buy me one I'll let you know how it works so you could then go get yourself one.

Dave, please keep us posted as this progresses.

Thanks.
sreigle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Cambridge!!!!!! Delaine and Lindy Montana Problems, Problem Solving & Technical Help 8 06-13-2007 10:08 PM
Cambridge Montana Sky General Discussions about our Montanas 0 01-02-2007 07:26 PM
Maybe the last Cambridge bsmeaton General Discussions about our Montanas 24 10-29-2006 05:36 PM
Cambridge Going Away wa4bmg General Discussions about our Montanas 27 05-11-2006 04:10 PM
Cambridge tow wt----wow!! patodonn Tow Vehicles & Towing 4 07-04-2005 07:52 AM

» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by Montana RV, Keystone RV Company or any of its affiliates. This is an independent, unofficial site.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.