Flippac's, why open forwards instead of sideways?

[Arya Ebrahimi]

Hey guys,

I'm wondering if anyone can provide any insight as to why Flippac's are designed to open forward over the hood of the truck, instead of sideways over the driver or passenger side? It seems like it would create a more useful floor plan and have essentially equal square footage.

I am contemplating building a roof top camper unit for my 80-series that would involve a roof cut. I like the campteq offering, but feel that it doesn't offer quite enough advantages to justify a roof cut. Whereas, if I could make a unit that folded open over the side(similar to a regular RTT) that would provide a bed the size of the 80's roof, while simultaneously allowing you to also use the 80's floor as the basis for a camper, I think it would be much easier to justify a roofectomy

Any words of wisdom or otherwise?

Thanks!

 

[DaveInDenver]

My assumption has always been that was the way around the patents held by WilderNest at the time, which is a bed mounted expandable camper that opened to the side. Other than this there aren't enough substantial features to make it different from a patent standpoint.

 

[mtnbike28]

I would "GUESS" it was design choice around foot print. I have been using mine each weekend at cyclocross races and love the fact I don't have to have a clear spot beside or behind me. Wherever I can fit my truck, I have a bathroom/changing room, rest spot. I also think the stabilizer bars were a concern, I will not get on my bed without them attached, I know they say I can, but it is a lot of bounce....

 

[DaveInDenver]

I have heard one of the reason WilderNests open to the side was because of not needing to take stuff off the roof before opening them. Boaters and cyclists know how nice that it is if you're just pulling in for a quick sleep. With a FlipPac you can't do that. Since the 'Nest pre-dates the FlipPac by about 10 years and they could have done it either way, there seemed logic behind this. Also WilderNest did prototype a design that tipped with the hinges in front like a FlipPac but it never was sold in any numbers. It was more of a Westfalia look, only opening about 30 degrees. I suspect because they could never figure out how to open it fully, there are no torsion bars or cranks on them and so it would be impossible to operate without walking on your hood.

 

[Arya Ebrahimi]

Hmm, patents had not crossed my mind. Will have to research that a bit more.

I suppose the added footprint is a concern, although not terribly troubling for me. It would seem to me that an over the side configuration would put a lot less leverage on the torsion bar(assuming you used one in your design) and would make for a stouter unit overall with less internal stresses. I also envisioned stabilizer legs running down to the rear bumper and slider/rocker panel.

 

[Jr_Explorer]

It seems like it would create a more useful floor plan and have essentially equal square footage.

I don't follow this logic. The cutout roof is the same size no matter what. The truck bed is the same size. The only difference is the location and orientation of the roof/bed.

Whereas, if I could make a unit that folded open over the side(similar to a regular RTT) that would provide a bed the size of the 80's roof, while simultaneously allowing you to also use the 80's floor as the basis for a camper, I think it would be much easier to justify a roofectomy

Again... If you cut the roof the bed size is the same regardless of which edge is hinged. The floor of your 80 is the same size also. I have a Flippac and love it. In the field the smaller deployed footprint makes it easier to find a camp site. The only benefit to a side opening scheme would be having a sheltered area to the side of the vehicle without deploying an awning.

I also think that the braces to hold the open roof are easier opening over the hood of your vehicle. The biggest issue for a home grown unit is devising the torsion hinge set-up that allows one person to open said roof.

Good luck in whatever you develop.

 

[brushogger]

I would think that the stresses imposed by the torsion bar to just one side would be too great. With it opening to the front, the load is born equally in both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Arya Ebrahimi]

I don't follow this logic. The cutout roof is the same size no matter what. The truck bed is the same size. The only difference is the location and orientation of the roof/bed.

Again... If you cut the roof the bed size is the same regardless of which edge is hinged. The floor of your 80 is the same size also. I have a Flippac and love it. In the field the smaller deployed footprint makes it easier to find a camp site. The only benefit to a side opening scheme would be having a sheltered area to the side of the vehicle without deploying an awning.

I also think that the braces to hold the open roof are easier opening over the hood of your vehicle. The biggest issue for a home grown unit is devising the torsion hinge set-up that allows one person to open said roof.

Good luck in whatever you develop.

My comparison with regards to square footage was relative to the Campteq unit, not the flippac. I agree that opening to the side versus the front would provide the same square footage as a Flippac unit.

With regards to the torsion spring(s), my current design scheme does not use them, but rather a combination of extension and retraction gas springs(struts). The motion will be a 2-stage motion, with the roof of the unit being vertical in the middle of the 2 stages. Part of what appeals to me about opening to the side, is that I can set it up so that I can open the unit halfway and have use of the camper without having to fully deploy the bed portion. This could also be accomplished with the Campteq unit, but I would have to contend with the platform/mattress/bedding every time I wanted to stand up in the camper.

I need to do some drawings, but the Wildernest(which I had never heard of before this thread) is very similar in external appearance to what I have in mind.

 

[Martyn]

If you look at a Wildernest you will see that the spring mechanism for the lid places huge amounts of stress on the upper wall. Many of the shells have either broken or cracked due to the forces involved. This may be preventable with carbon fiber but it is a major consideration for any side opening top.

 

[DaveInDenver]

The springs in the 'Nest are to prevent the lid from slamming shut. I have run without the rear one because the rear door opening does tend to experience a lot of stress since there isn't much bracing.

Also when the lid is closed there is a spreading force that causes the bed walls to spread. My '91 that's had a 'Nest on it for 14 years is cracked seams and has a large gap at the top. For the past couple of years the side latches are all that was preventing more spreading. The problem I found with running only a forward one is that it tends to twist the lid a little and it can leak at the front right corner with it closed.

Despite all that, the biggest issue with the springs in 'Nests is they tend to rust and bind a little, which leads to eventual failure. BANG! You think a tire blowing out scares the heck of ya...

 

[Arya Ebrahimi]

Good points all around. I'm thinking of going aluminum with struts instead of torsion springs. Now I'm wondering why fiberglass seems to be the material of choice for a lot of manufacturers. I'm going to guess cost of materials and the ability to make compound curves in the finished surfaces, but would love to hear other reasons I'm not considering.

 

[Doin_It]

Here just buy this 'ol one for $650..................http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/rvs/4156628768.html

 

[kpherzog]

Best reason for forward-flip vs. side flip:

We have found that entering the bed from the foot, rather than the side has a lot of advantages: the most being that either party can get up in the middle of the night without having to crawl over your partner. The fact that the bed is over the center of the truck is a big advantage in a couple of ways.. it is much easier to fit into crowded campsites. We tried a Wildernest at a trade show before we decided on the Flip-Pac, and with the two of us in the side-mount bed, it would sag enough that we both felt like we were about to roll over to the outer edge. Putting the props under it helps, but then the top sags because the canvas is not stretched tight. The biggest advantage to the Wildernest shape that I can see is the tent design.. it certainly would be better at shedding rain than the Flip-Pac.

. . . Kurt (Flip-Pac going on it's 17th season in 2014)

 

[Jr_Explorer]

. . . Kurt (Flip-Pac going on it's 17th season in 2014)

Sunny BEACH! You are the "Old Hand" about Flip-Pac's then! Good job!

 

[DaveInDenver]

I personally don't usually use the legs with the 'Nest. They are of marginal help in keeping the truck from swaying and if you make them too tight they end up being driven into the ground. Plus they end up making the space under the lid less useful, always in the way.

They are NOT weight bearing, this is a big misconception. The lid is self-supporting. Far and away the most effective way is to use your Hi-Lift under your sliders. Doing this makes your sleeping arrangement rock solid and perfectly level. You don't even need to level the truck very well and can even park with a slight right tilt.