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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 01-31-2006, 04:59 PM   #81
rickfox
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Royse City
Posts: 520
M.O.C. #2959
Good Evening All,

I repeat, and I have the CAT scale documents to prove it!!! These scales are regularly inspected and are accurate!

My 2006 3400RL delivered on 11/12/05 weighed in at 11860#. It did not have hi-gloss, nor dual pane glass, nor the 2nd AC.

No way do I believe I could add these options and still weigh in at 11,900# !!!

Apparently, somebody at Montana thinks (or thought at one time) that hi-gloss weighed 600# more. Now someone else thinks its 300#, and also apparently thinks that 650# of additional stuff can be added to my 3400 and it will magically increase the weight by only 40#.

HA! I choose to believe the scales.
rickfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2006, 05:35 PM   #82
Montana Sky
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Down the Road
Posts: 5,627
M.O.C. #889
Rick,
I think for the most part we have the same options, and our weights are comparable. I will be very curious to see what Rich's new 3400RL will come in weighing.
Montana Sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2006, 06:14 PM   #83
Rudi and Ellen
Seasoned Camper
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mount Joy
Posts: 88
M.O.C. #4441
Send a message via AIM to Rudi and Ellen
CountryGuy - You seem to be on top of all the specs on the 3295 unit. Do you know why the 2004 and 2005 units have such a greater carrying capacity than all the other units?
Rudi and Ellen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2006, 09:23 PM   #84
Montana Sky
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Down the Road
Posts: 5,627
M.O.C. #889
Rudi & Ellen,
It is not just for 2004 & 2005, the 3295RK has the highest carrying capacity again for 2006. This floor plan is a really nice layout and I too am curious as to why it has the greatest Carrying Capacity.
Montana Sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2006, 02:01 AM   #85
CountryGuy
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tipton
Posts: 3,646
M.O.C. #191
Rudi and Ellen,

Not sure, but here is a bit of SPECULATION!!!!

3295 has highest pin weight of all, which may allow addiontional carrying capacity on axles??

Frame layout appears to be the same when we have gone on plant tours. We do NOT have any large windows?? That may make a difference in what is left of the pay load for gear.

Maybe axle placement, front to back?? something to do with the lay out of the coach inside, remember that large rear kitchen, we have so many cabinets it is unreal, maybe they did something with axle placement to compensate??

ALL SPEC on our part!
CountryGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2006, 02:41 AM   #86
Wrenchtraveller
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,568
M.O.C. #4890
I have the 05 and 06 brochures that claim the gel coat added 600 pounds and that always raised my eyebrows but look at another weight fairy tale in the brochure. They claim that the propane tanks are placed on opposite sides for weight balance. The two separate propane tank compartements are convenient and some of my RVs have had a narrow compartement with the second tank behind the first and that is a real pain but to pretend that 60 pounds of weight on opposite sides of the unit are a big deal is just advertising fluff. What balances out your fridge, or your hot water tank?

Keystone and other companies have to make brochures that help sell their product and they all are guilty of misinformation at times.

If we knew the thickness of the gel coat we could do a square footage calcuation like I did on the windows and come up with an accurate figure.

One thing I learned in my 32 years of owning RVs is how all the companies that make them have been keeping the true weight of their units a secret and it was only those of us that weighed them realized how much heavier they were.

Slide in campers are the biggest culprits in the weight scam and many companies give the weights without appliances and added the word "light" to their units.

My 03 Okanagan 9' camper, one of the smaller ones they make, all loaded up on my 05 F350 weighed in at just over 11000 pounds and just under the 05 GVWR of 11200.

This same camper on my 04 F350 was the same weight but the 04 only had a GVWR of 9900 LB so I was over a 1000 pounds in excess of my legal GVWR.

Both trucks handled the camper good but with the 04 I could have had my insurance voided if I was in an accident or if I broke down on a trip , Ford could have voided my warranty for overloading my pickup.

Yet all over the USA and Canada, people with single rear wheel pickups, 3/4 and 1 ton will be buying campers today, the majority of them will be overloaded and lawyers all over are rubbing their grubby little hands together in glee because they smell another cash cow ready for the slaughter. Take care, Don.

Wrenchtraveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2006, 02:57 AM   #87
richfaa
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 19,774
M.O.C. #2839
My original question that started this thread was did anybody know the weight of the Hi gloss gel coat and the dual pane windows. I made some phone calls and I am satisfied with the answers I got from Charles Wade on the ADDITIONAL WEIGHT of the HI GLOSS and DUAL PANE windows. My question is answered. Don't know about any other weights other than they are no doubt inaccurate.I will weigh my 3400 when I get it then I will know what MY 3400 weighs and we can load it accordingly. We were NOT planning on ordering the Hi gloss and Dual pane before and we are not ordering them now. I am out of this thread...
richfaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2006, 05:49 AM   #88
Rudi and Ellen
Seasoned Camper
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Mount Joy
Posts: 88
M.O.C. #4441
Send a message via AIM to Rudi and Ellen
Al - Your speculations about the higher carrying capacity of the 3295 makes sense. It might very well be a combination of all you mentioned. Thanks.
Rudi and Ellen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2006, 04:21 PM   #89
rickfox
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Royse City
Posts: 520
M.O.C. #2959
Rich,

I sincerely hope you are not upset.

I read alot more comments than I make because there are a lot of interesting things said - some very helpful.

I think - with respect to the weights - you made the right decision.

On the topic of pin boxes, I have spoken to Montana CS a couple of times this week. They have recommended that I install "taller equalizers" on the axle springs (not an option on the new mor/ryde suspension) that will raise the trailer about 1". Cost of the parts is $17.60 + tax.

I think I got what I wanted! But it would not have happened without the MOC and some discussions/complaining to Montana.

Once I get them installed, I will take some photos and make the info known on MOC.
rickfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2006, 01:42 AM   #90
richfaa
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 19,774
M.O.C. #2839
Rickfox..Information that provokes thought is always helpful. The Data you provided was very helpful to ME in choosing OUR options....Thanks.
richfaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2006, 05:33 AM   #91
genecurp
Montana Fan
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nashville
Posts: 290
M.O.C. #2535
Why does the 3295 have the largest cargo capacity? I understand that the 3295 is the smallest model that the higher capacity axles are used on. I understand Keystone only uses 2 differnt weight rated axles between all its Montana models. Since the 3295 is the smallest trailer with the bigger axle, it has extra cargo capacity compared to either the larger trailers on the same axle or the smaller trailers on the smaller axle.

Hope this helps.
genecurp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2006, 07:48 AM   #92
richfaa
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 19,774
M.O.C. #2839
I know that there are a couple of members that do or did transport Rv from the factory to the dealer..Do they weigh the RV's before you yake them away???
richfaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2006, 08:14 AM   #93
sreigle
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oceanside
Posts: 20,028
M.O.C. #20
The 3295RK has had the highest Carrying Capacity since day one, which was right around 2001 or 2002. For our 2003 it's 3940. I also have a lot of questions about how these numbers are figured. I understand the formula but not the source or reason for some of the base weights, like GVWR.

Rich, good info. Thanks. Those numbers make a lot more sense to me. We've had two Montanas. The first without high gloss and this one with high gloss. I like it a lot and would never let a few hundred pounds deter me, but then we had the ccc to handle it on this model. Our truck wouldn't know the difference between 14,060 and the 14,360 this Montana weighs.

Gene, the 3295RK used 6,000 lb axles on ours. It's not a very small model. Actual length on ours is 36' 4". Shorter than some but longer than the model number would lead one to think. Maybe the reason it has the higher capacity axles on the newer models is that the 3295RK has the highest GVWR. It has to be able to carry the full GVWR. Actual weight on the axles on ours is 11,060.

Rudi and Ellen, the dealer adds propane bottles and battery. They do not have those as they come from the factory. That adds around 200 lbs.

Rich, I was told by Coleman Davis the sticker is the weight of that model with "standard options". All of that run of that model get the same weight on the sticker. If "standard options" change, then so would the sticker. I take it from that statement from Coleman that they do not weigh each rig as it leaves the line.
sreigle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2006, 08:41 AM   #94
richfaa
Montana Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 19,774
M.O.C. #2839
Steve..We never saw any indication that they weighed them off the line and we have been to the factory 3 times.never saw any scales anywhere and we asked a transporter who was staying at the same motel as we were in Elkhart with a 3670 hooked to his Tv and he said, he never had one weighed as they pay by the mile no matter what it weighs. We never believed that the HI gloss weighed 600LBS or the Dual pane windows added 6 to 900lbs to the unit but had a heck of a time finding someone at Keystone who had the answers.You can Google Hi Gloss Gel coat and find out everything you ever wanted to know and more about hi gloss gel coat.When keystoe said the primary difference between the two was COST he was not fooling . Check out what that stuff cost per gal then figure the gallons per Montana.The weight not the issue..However cost???
richfaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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
Too much information!! Bill-N-Donna Sitting around the Campfire 11 01-04-2011 05:40 PM
Just some information. Trailer Trash 2 Member News 1 11-20-2006 05:31 PM
New information Montana_6029 General Discussions about our Montanas 6 09-17-2006 02:25 PM
Weight being carried versus weight being towed Bill Frisbee Tow Vehicles & Towing 19 04-07-2006 07:07 PM
Need some information Jim and Marcia New Member Introductions 19 11-16-2004 11:03 AM

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 02:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×