FWC Shell or Habitat

[Graton]

I looked at both the FWC and AT habitat and asked myself the same questions as you did. I found truck campers to be too cramped for me and I like a more open style. I also think the Tacoma is too small and underpowered for a camper, and at 320 lbs, the Habitat doesn't change the handling much. Agree with others that a camper will be quicker to set-up and take-down, as well as better for cold conditions. I didn't opt for the heater in the Habitat, but may get one installed - we were Anza Borrego over Christmas and a few nights were very cold and we felt it. Overall, it came down to how it feels, and every time I climb into the Habitat bed I feel like I'm in a tree house, it never felt that way in a truck camper.

 

[tenebs]

I was planning on leaf springs if I choose the habitat.

I added Deaver u402 expedition leaf springs when I got my habitat. It fixed the droop and now when you are inside it is not bouncy. I would suggest going with leaf springs over air bags. With air bags you can tweak left & right level but I can always park level enough. Also with airbags you always have to make sure they are aired up or they will crack and leak.

With the habitat you can still use the bed any way you like.

We are tall so I needed some lift for our heads to clear the habitat. I did the whole suspension and the stage 3 leafs (which would require a suspension change as well since they add more height.get leafs based on how much weight you would normally carry. The stage 3 work great for me but for others with less weight in the back they might be too hard. I think the FWC s are too heavy for the Tacoma. with the habitat you have lots of space. It is way easier to open and put away than a std RTT.

 

[Martyn]

You can add a furnace to a Habitat or Summit build. The Propex HS2000 fits in very nicely, it has a small foot print, 12.6" long x 6.8" wide x 3.9" tall, and the exhaust and combustion air come in from the outside. Heat output is 6483 BTU at 60 C.F.M. and power consumption is 1.9 amp when the fan is on. The unit is controlled by a thermostat, and the air comes out super hot. It's a propane unit so you can work it off the same cylinder you run your stove on. When run continuously the HS2000 will run for 3.2 hours on 1 lb. of propane. I think it's a great option that can be fitted professionally or by a competent DIY'er. Propex heaters can be found here.

 

[tacollie]

We recently were debating on an AT summit or a FWC to replace it flippac. We wanted a hard top for to parcipation and snow We decided on FWC shell. Honestly a big part of it was having a door. She was tired of climbing over the trail gate and we were both tired if smacking our backs on the brake light. That being said if we kept the Tacoma we would have ordered the AT summit based on weight.

 

[Trkle]

Would check out All Terrain Campers too. Their shells are a little cheaper than FWC.

https://www.allterraincampers.com/

There is also the "Iggy" Camper....believe Tradesman is building them.

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/iggys-1-taco.368214/

http://tradesmantrucktops.com/


Another thing to think about is, the Tacoma beds are hard to seal from getting dust in....the Habitat will get a little more wind noise with having a higher profile than a FWC or ATC.

I agree with checking out the All Terrain Campers website as well. This is the choice we went with, and they were very easy to work with and have the lightweight shell customized exactly how we wanted it. Ultimately we went with the Bobcat shell model and we are really happy with the quality. We've since built out a fridge, solar, and dual battery setup.

 

[greenheadsmt]

We are in the same boat, debating a FWC front dinette, loaded vs Vagabond vs AT campers for our F150 (6.5 box). Love the FWC, but spendy and heavy. Seems like a wedge camper built out is just as expensive as a FWC. Looking for more feedback.....

 

[lzpup]

We went with a FWC Hawk Shell with a side dinette. Some Pros: quick setup and take down. Heating works fairly well, we use it for ice climbing or skiing (although it is not perfect, there is certainly some moister management). We find ourselves popping it up at trail heads to change and setup, so the quick popup is nice (get lifting struts to make this easier). We added a stove and heater which we really like for crappy days or alpine starts. We put a yakima rack on the top for kayaks (some day ) and use it for a platform for solar [up next] (easy to add with the prewire and racks). I think a pro on the habitat would be you can stay in the gas on the washboards . We liked the shell as it was reasonable for us to start with and customize as we needed things.

 

[coastalcop]

Habitat increases your footprint not only in length (the distance you must clear behind the truck if rear opening) but height (the arc of the opening) as well.

Between FWC shell and Summit, thats a closer comparison as a "Shell" .

You probably already have a cooler, stove, etc. Heater isnt really needed as most travel is summer (but is easy to do).

So ventilation, footprint, and weight become primary concerns.

If I were spending YOUR money, I would get an AT Summit as it fits closer to the contours of the truck in all dimensions, is lighter, and would make it easy to make a fast adapt system for cooler stove etc, at a slightly lower price point with similar delivery times.

I looked at both and did a +/- eval. When I get tired of my RTT/ diamondback setup I will likely go with a summit for those reasons (F-150 Screw)

 

[Wallygator]

An now the options of the AT Atlas and FWC Project M. Both have great potential for light weight builds that are very flexible.

 

[TommyArgh]

I too was in the same dilemma. The ability to have a "contained camping quarters" and the ability to remove that same camper in 30 minutes to have a usable pick up truck again won me over. I ended up with a FWC Finch Shell model.

 

[roving1]

For me I think the AT Atlas or Summit is where it is at. The Habitat opens in a stupid direction requiring a weird shaped site and ruins ability for a 270 awning. The long skinny shade cover area it provides is kind of useless IMHO.

FWC is expensive and heavy for what it is.