Ovrlnd/FWC Worth it?
- Thread starter armoured
- Start date
tacollie
Glamper
I can't comment on the on ovrlnd camper but we decided to step up to a full size when we decided to get a slide in FWC. We don't miss the midsize. We went from a Tacoma to a Tundra to a F250. The Tundra was our favorite. I'll never buy another Tacoma. We have 2 60lbs dogs and they fit great in the back seat of a double cab Tundra. The bigger truck takes some getting used to but you would be surprised where it can squeeze into. The power and comfort are much more enjoyable on road. 10 hours was a push for me in the Tacoma. It's a breeze in a full size. The room in the camper is amazing and worth the bigger truck. Especially with 120lbs of dogs. Look at the double cab Tundra. The backseat is a lot bigger than the Tacoma and you get a 6.5' bed.
ChasingOurTrunks
Well-known member
I think the answer will very much depend on your use case. I have both a midsize and a full-size truck, and I use both for overland travel though we have the midsize more "setup" as that is our primary tool. My wife and I travel with two dogs (60+lbs - German Shepherds) and more recently, a baby, and all of us can live out of our midsize truck basically indefinitely. But the reality is that for 95% of North America - highways, logging roads, etc. -- the full size trucks are likely a better choice than the mid-size trucks for most people.
What remains in that 5% are:
- The ability to go down very tight trails.
- Maneuverability in some cities, depending on where you are. This of course also applies off-road to tight trails.
The reason our mid-size is our "go-to" is pretty simple; we go down a lot of tight trails and are planning to travel internationally, where the size of our full sized truck would be a liability for us, so rather than get used to full size and then downsize, we are sticking with mid-size.
If you do not go down tight trails and instead you find most of your Overland travel is on logging roads or highways, the pros of the midsize are reduced dramatically as compared to the full size trucks. Most of North America has been built around "full size" vehicles -- even our logging roads are often wide and fast relative to how they are elsewhere in the world. Some of our mountain roads are a bit narrow on the switchbacks, but thats a relatively small and I daresay insignificant part of the places to see in North America -- the majority can be accessed in a full size truck. As you reflect on your adventures in your Taco, if you don't often find yourself thinking "Gee, a bigger truck would have a tough time here" , then you probably don't go to those places very much and won't likely notice that the fullsize is bigger day to day in a negative way. But you will notice the increase cabin space and comfort, if thats of value to you.
I would suggest a few things to keep in mind though to further complicate your decision:
1) There's a cost-benefit ratio between midsize and 1/2 ton full-size trucks, but they are often much closer together in terms of specifications that most people realize. A midsize will get you about 1500 payload. A full-size will get you 1900-ish (Edit: Unless you go for an uprated payload package from Ford). But, the full-size will weigh about a thousand pounds more than the midsize -- so off-road, it will not be nearly as nimble or "put-able". If however you look to even "bigger" trucks -- the 2500s from GM/Chev/Ram and the F-250s from Ford -- then you are getting basically the same footprint of the half-ton trucks, but with actual benefits to carrying capacity and total specs. If I were to do my buying again, I would stick with my midsize but I would go for an HD version of my pickup so that I would have more options.
2) Beware the goldfish effect - goldfish grow to the size of the bowl, as the story goes. A person can be happy living out of a backpack, but if they find they can fit 5,000 lbs in that backpack, they might find themselves bringing a lot of stuff they don't really need. This extra stuff is more to carry, more to maintain, more to pack and unpack, etc. but with extra space and capacity, it's easy to "might as well bring it". This adds up fast and every pound impacts performance. Plus, in day to day camp living, the more "simple" things can be, the nicer the experience usually is; the "might as well bring it" stuff will spend most of the time in the way.
3) Consider the "real world" implications of a bigger vehicle for you, and then consider that you might be able to mitigate them entirely. For example one of the big arguments against a full size in favour of a midsize -- one I've made here in this post -- is the ability to fit down trails. Realistically, whether a car will fit down a trail or not is usually more a function of how much damage a person will tolerate, and not a function of the track itself. For me, branches scraping up panels is normal. Totally par for the course, and I don't even consider a scratch to be "damage", so if I see a trail where I might get scratched I say "Let's do it". Other people might see the possibility of getting scratches as enough of a reason to say "the car won't fit there". So for you, what are you willing to tolerate? Do you care if you get a bit of "Rocky Mountain pin striping"? Because if you are really worried about scratches on your rig, the full size will put you in a position to have to worry about that more often than the midsize. If you aren't worried about cosmetic damage, you'll be in this position a lot less often. If you are somewhere in between, you can always consider mitigation steps -- like magnetic panel protectors or a vinyl wrap.
What remains in that 5% are:
- The ability to go down very tight trails.
- Maneuverability in some cities, depending on where you are. This of course also applies off-road to tight trails.
The reason our mid-size is our "go-to" is pretty simple; we go down a lot of tight trails and are planning to travel internationally, where the size of our full sized truck would be a liability for us, so rather than get used to full size and then downsize, we are sticking with mid-size.
If you do not go down tight trails and instead you find most of your Overland travel is on logging roads or highways, the pros of the midsize are reduced dramatically as compared to the full size trucks. Most of North America has been built around "full size" vehicles -- even our logging roads are often wide and fast relative to how they are elsewhere in the world. Some of our mountain roads are a bit narrow on the switchbacks, but thats a relatively small and I daresay insignificant part of the places to see in North America -- the majority can be accessed in a full size truck. As you reflect on your adventures in your Taco, if you don't often find yourself thinking "Gee, a bigger truck would have a tough time here" , then you probably don't go to those places very much and won't likely notice that the fullsize is bigger day to day in a negative way. But you will notice the increase cabin space and comfort, if thats of value to you.
I would suggest a few things to keep in mind though to further complicate your decision:
1) There's a cost-benefit ratio between midsize and 1/2 ton full-size trucks, but they are often much closer together in terms of specifications that most people realize. A midsize will get you about 1500 payload. A full-size will get you 1900-ish (Edit: Unless you go for an uprated payload package from Ford). But, the full-size will weigh about a thousand pounds more than the midsize -- so off-road, it will not be nearly as nimble or "put-able". If however you look to even "bigger" trucks -- the 2500s from GM/Chev/Ram and the F-250s from Ford -- then you are getting basically the same footprint of the half-ton trucks, but with actual benefits to carrying capacity and total specs. If I were to do my buying again, I would stick with my midsize but I would go for an HD version of my pickup so that I would have more options.
2) Beware the goldfish effect - goldfish grow to the size of the bowl, as the story goes. A person can be happy living out of a backpack, but if they find they can fit 5,000 lbs in that backpack, they might find themselves bringing a lot of stuff they don't really need. This extra stuff is more to carry, more to maintain, more to pack and unpack, etc. but with extra space and capacity, it's easy to "might as well bring it". This adds up fast and every pound impacts performance. Plus, in day to day camp living, the more "simple" things can be, the nicer the experience usually is; the "might as well bring it" stuff will spend most of the time in the way.
3) Consider the "real world" implications of a bigger vehicle for you, and then consider that you might be able to mitigate them entirely. For example one of the big arguments against a full size in favour of a midsize -- one I've made here in this post -- is the ability to fit down trails. Realistically, whether a car will fit down a trail or not is usually more a function of how much damage a person will tolerate, and not a function of the track itself. For me, branches scraping up panels is normal. Totally par for the course, and I don't even consider a scratch to be "damage", so if I see a trail where I might get scratched I say "Let's do it". Other people might see the possibility of getting scratches as enough of a reason to say "the car won't fit there". So for you, what are you willing to tolerate? Do you care if you get a bit of "Rocky Mountain pin striping"? Because if you are really worried about scratches on your rig, the full size will put you in a position to have to worry about that more often than the midsize. If you aren't worried about cosmetic damage, you'll be in this position a lot less often. If you are somewhere in between, you can always consider mitigation steps -- like magnetic panel protectors or a vinyl wrap.
Last edited:
dstefan
Well-known member
I know your dilemma! I ordered my Ovrlnd from Jay in March 2019. I spent until the end of November 2020 dithering about whether to put it on my 2009 Tacoma or buy Full size (Tundra, F250/F150). it was an extremely hard decision, largely because my Tacoma (5’ ft bed) was very well and perfectly built for my needs. I did and still want to do more technical trails at times. I went with the Tundra for the reliability as well as the fit for me. I’m 6’3” and I have some back issues and I really need more comfort in both seating as well as to stretch out in the back. Except for those two issues, I probably would’ve kept the Tacoma since my wife and I are pretty used to minimalist tent camping up to this point. I nearly cried when I got rid of a Tacoma, because I loved that truck and it was in perfect shape with only 72,000 miles on it, but I’m extremely happy with the Tundra and the camper.
Some of the issues that swayed me in the end:
1 – The Tacoma payload Is terrible, and with the further build out I didn’t have much weight to play with. Fully loaded for tent camping I felt that it was marginally too heavy, though we were still about 300 pounds below our GVWR. The Tacoma‘s gear train is also famously weak in the rear. There’s a well-known situation where someone bought a Tacoma that was very well built with a fully built out used Ovrlnd on it and had the rear axle blow up on the way home. that’s an extreme example because the whole rig as I recall weighed 6300 pounds, and it was a a high mileage truck, but still the weight takes its toll. I felt I would have to do significant further strengthening for the payload increase, and I would still have a vehicle that was too small.
2 – As mentioned I really need the room. One thing that sold me was a photograph that another Ovrlnd owner posted for me here on Expedition Portal. Look at Pshin’s build on his 5 foot bed Chevy Colorado. With the bed pulled out there’s very little room to stand in the back of the cabin. If it’s just you maybe not such a problem but for two of us in the mornings didn’t make sense. A 5.5 foot bed won’t be much better. With our 6.5 foot bed there’s good room with the bed fully pulled out, but it’s still not a whole lot more than 30 some inches.
3 – As you will learn if you build out your Ovrlnd much it’s a lot of work. I didn’t want to put it on an older less strong truck truck or one that I wasn’t sure it was going to give me enough room for my needs. I’m of the the “buy once, cry once, and build once mentality”
4 – I spent the eight months from order up to Jay starting the build in December obsessively researching trucks. At one point I was pretty interested in the new F250s, but it took too long, and I was convinced they were too unwieldy off-road. I also became convinced from numerous sources that the Tundras were pretty capable off road. I knew I was going to build out the suspension, and put lockers in and that I would be able to go nearly everywhere I want to go and have gone with my Tacoma. It helps I am in the Southwest (Phoenix) I don’t have a lot of tight treesy type trails.
5 – The Tundra is an extremely reliable platform. People gripe about the age of the platform and the architecture, but nearly every bug has been worked out. It’s also much heavier duty than the Tacoma. My opinion is any stock truck needs a modification for Offroad, but its a great platform. The beauty of the Tundra is it has a nearly three-quarter ton rear axle (an adaptation -not full float- from Toyotas true three-quarter ton Hino commercial trucks). I looked and looked for a late model used double cab so I could have a 6 1/2 foot bed, but to no avail. That was partly because I insisted on having a 38 gallon fuel tank and the upgraded SR5 seats. In the end I bought a new 21 with all of that using Costco‘s buying program. I got it cheap enough I can afford to do all the suspension upgrades and add lockers and 4.88s. Based on your use case, you won’t need to do all that stuff, but if you do you’ll have an extremely capable truck. They can easily carry all the weight of the camper (mine weighs 360lbs) and provide plenty a room for your crew.
So we love the tundra and the combination with Jay’s camper. We’ve put about 300 off-road miles on it and 5000 total miles so far. There has not been one single problem with either the truck or the camper. My build inside the camper is still fairly minimalist, partly because I want to keep the floor length open to some degree to stretch my back out. 6 1/2 foot bed is perfect. Given the size of your crew I can’t imagine you would be happy with a 5 1/2 foot bed. There’s a significant amount of room behind the rear seat with the jumpseat up. And if you take the seats out you have a huge amount of room. The Tundra has limitations design wise in terms of the floor flatness in the rear seat and little things that you will miss from the Tacoma, but it’s well worth it for the comfort an the room. Personally I would not buy the first year of any completely redesigned vehicle. I didn’t think Toyotas track record with the Tacoma’s was very good in their first couple of years of each generation. But you may choose differently and I think you’d love the 22s for mileage for sure. I will say that things like the adaptive cruise are very well thought out now and work perfectly.
If you need any more details, PM me and Id be happy to set up a phone conversation, if you‘d like.
Some of the issues that swayed me in the end:
1 – The Tacoma payload Is terrible, and with the further build out I didn’t have much weight to play with. Fully loaded for tent camping I felt that it was marginally too heavy, though we were still about 300 pounds below our GVWR. The Tacoma‘s gear train is also famously weak in the rear. There’s a well-known situation where someone bought a Tacoma that was very well built with a fully built out used Ovrlnd on it and had the rear axle blow up on the way home. that’s an extreme example because the whole rig as I recall weighed 6300 pounds, and it was a a high mileage truck, but still the weight takes its toll. I felt I would have to do significant further strengthening for the payload increase, and I would still have a vehicle that was too small.
2 – As mentioned I really need the room. One thing that sold me was a photograph that another Ovrlnd owner posted for me here on Expedition Portal. Look at Pshin’s build on his 5 foot bed Chevy Colorado. With the bed pulled out there’s very little room to stand in the back of the cabin. If it’s just you maybe not such a problem but for two of us in the mornings didn’t make sense. A 5.5 foot bed won’t be much better. With our 6.5 foot bed there’s good room with the bed fully pulled out, but it’s still not a whole lot more than 30 some inches.
3 – As you will learn if you build out your Ovrlnd much it’s a lot of work. I didn’t want to put it on an older less strong truck truck or one that I wasn’t sure it was going to give me enough room for my needs. I’m of the the “buy once, cry once, and build once mentality”
4 – I spent the eight months from order up to Jay starting the build in December obsessively researching trucks. At one point I was pretty interested in the new F250s, but it took too long, and I was convinced they were too unwieldy off-road. I also became convinced from numerous sources that the Tundras were pretty capable off road. I knew I was going to build out the suspension, and put lockers in and that I would be able to go nearly everywhere I want to go and have gone with my Tacoma. It helps I am in the Southwest (Phoenix) I don’t have a lot of tight treesy type trails.
5 – The Tundra is an extremely reliable platform. People gripe about the age of the platform and the architecture, but nearly every bug has been worked out. It’s also much heavier duty than the Tacoma. My opinion is any stock truck needs a modification for Offroad, but its a great platform. The beauty of the Tundra is it has a nearly three-quarter ton rear axle (an adaptation -not full float- from Toyotas true three-quarter ton Hino commercial trucks). I looked and looked for a late model used double cab so I could have a 6 1/2 foot bed, but to no avail. That was partly because I insisted on having a 38 gallon fuel tank and the upgraded SR5 seats. In the end I bought a new 21 with all of that using Costco‘s buying program. I got it cheap enough I can afford to do all the suspension upgrades and add lockers and 4.88s. Based on your use case, you won’t need to do all that stuff, but if you do you’ll have an extremely capable truck. They can easily carry all the weight of the camper (mine weighs 360lbs) and provide plenty a room for your crew.
So we love the tundra and the combination with Jay’s camper. We’ve put about 300 off-road miles on it and 5000 total miles so far. There has not been one single problem with either the truck or the camper. My build inside the camper is still fairly minimalist, partly because I want to keep the floor length open to some degree to stretch my back out. 6 1/2 foot bed is perfect. Given the size of your crew I can’t imagine you would be happy with a 5 1/2 foot bed. There’s a significant amount of room behind the rear seat with the jumpseat up. And if you take the seats out you have a huge amount of room. The Tundra has limitations design wise in terms of the floor flatness in the rear seat and little things that you will miss from the Tacoma, but it’s well worth it for the comfort an the room. Personally I would not buy the first year of any completely redesigned vehicle. I didn’t think Toyotas track record with the Tacoma’s was very good in their first couple of years of each generation. But you may choose differently and I think you’d love the 22s for mileage for sure. I will say that things like the adaptive cruise are very well thought out now and work perfectly.
If you need any more details, PM me and Id be happy to set up a phone conversation, if you‘d like.
ramblinChet
Well-known member
Coming from decades of Jeeping my first focus was on the new Gladiator but the numbers were just not adding up and everything felt too small. And that's without a camper in the bed.
My next logical option was a full size crew cab short bed with a FWC camper in back. This seems to be the preferred combination for most part-time travelers for a long list of reasons.
Since my plans included full time solo travel I went with a full size regular cab long bed and FWC Grandby shell. I couldn't be happier. It's a rare combination but for my purposes it is perfect. Having choices is wonderful!
My next logical option was a full size crew cab short bed with a FWC camper in back. This seems to be the preferred combination for most part-time travelers for a long list of reasons.
Since my plans included full time solo travel I went with a full size regular cab long bed and FWC Grandby shell. I couldn't be happier. It's a rare combination but for my purposes it is perfect. Having choices is wonderful!
All great points in this thread. I'm having the same dilemma. We have a 2011 Tacoma DCSB and thinking about getting a camper. It's just me, the gf, and two 35lb dogs but they seem to eat up the entire backseat and one of them likes to wander up front sometimes. No kids yet but we plan to at some time and with 2 dogs the backseat might be a bit crowded. I think we can probably run the Tacoma for 3-5 years comfortably but I don't see us keeping the vehicle beyond 5 years.
My Pro's for keeping the Tacoma are below:
- Paid off
- Aftermarket support is huge
- Mine has the TRD supercharger
- It's older so mods and any associated cutting, trimming, alterations don't bother me as much
- Size. It's easy to maneuver and more nimble than a full size truck
Cons
- Size. Interior room won't allow for much comfort or additions down the line
- Seats are uncomfortable. I don't find the seats or seating position comfortable at all. I've tried running seat jackers and that doesn't help. No easy way to add Scheel Mann seats and retain airbag compatibility either. Even if I did those seats are another $3k.
- Payload is at 1,200lbs is okay, higher than a 3rd gen Taco but still could be better. Would like at least 1,500 -1,700 lbs of payload.
- MPG isn't that good, not even sure what it is with the blower but probably 14-16mpg. That being said it's paid off so I'm only paying for gas at this point.
The other option is upgrading to a newer full size truck. I'm keeping my eye out for the 2022 Tundra and seeing what it brings. It'll obviously be more luxurious, comfortable, roomy, better MPG, towing and hopefully better payload. I thought this current gen Tundra had pretty poor payload so I hope and expect the new gen to have much improved payload numbers. I could trade in the Tacoma and still get decent value on it but the new Tundra is still going to be a $60k truck that I'll have to make payments on. The one thing I don't want to do is make a mistake on the platform. I don't want to build up the Taco, spend $20-$30k on the camper setup along with truck upgrades and then have to sell it in 2 or 3 years because we outgrew it. I'd prefer to get the right platform from the start and build up from there.
Good points here. When you travel in the midsize truck, where do you put the dogs? In the backrow seat with the baby? Seems like that would be a very tight fit in the back with a childseat and TWO 60lb dogs.
My Pro's for keeping the Tacoma are below:
- Paid off
- Aftermarket support is huge
- Mine has the TRD supercharger
- It's older so mods and any associated cutting, trimming, alterations don't bother me as much
- Size. It's easy to maneuver and more nimble than a full size truck
Cons
- Size. Interior room won't allow for much comfort or additions down the line
- Seats are uncomfortable. I don't find the seats or seating position comfortable at all. I've tried running seat jackers and that doesn't help. No easy way to add Scheel Mann seats and retain airbag compatibility either. Even if I did those seats are another $3k.
- Payload is at 1,200lbs is okay, higher than a 3rd gen Taco but still could be better. Would like at least 1,500 -1,700 lbs of payload.
- MPG isn't that good, not even sure what it is with the blower but probably 14-16mpg. That being said it's paid off so I'm only paying for gas at this point.
The other option is upgrading to a newer full size truck. I'm keeping my eye out for the 2022 Tundra and seeing what it brings. It'll obviously be more luxurious, comfortable, roomy, better MPG, towing and hopefully better payload. I thought this current gen Tundra had pretty poor payload so I hope and expect the new gen to have much improved payload numbers. I could trade in the Tacoma and still get decent value on it but the new Tundra is still going to be a $60k truck that I'll have to make payments on. The one thing I don't want to do is make a mistake on the platform. I don't want to build up the Taco, spend $20-$30k on the camper setup along with truck upgrades and then have to sell it in 2 or 3 years because we outgrew it. I'd prefer to get the right platform from the start and build up from there.
Good points here. When you travel in the midsize truck, where do you put the dogs? In the backrow seat with the baby? Seems like that would be a very tight fit in the back with a childseat and TWO 60lb dogs.
ChasingOurTrunks
Well-known member
We have a split bench in the read of ours, so we did a seat delete for 2/3rds of the back. Our son gets his seat (behind the passenger) which has plenty of room for him and his carseat. I then built a dog box to replace the blank section of the 2/3ds seat delete - this was a pretty quick and simple build out of 80/20 extrusion, some plywood, and a bit of carpet. This dog box is fixed to the floor via the seatbelt bolts, so it's not going anywhere, and the floor is hinged to allow for a ton of extra interior storage. There's plenty of room for both dogs, but they are "cuddlers" -- even at home, where they have a thousand square feet to explore, they tend to lie close together. In transit, often one of them will lie on the centre console, which dramatically increases the space in the box for the other one. They have enough room to lie down and stand up easily though, which was the guidance for sizing a crate and so I used the same principle to size the dog box.
Here's the box, empty:
And in use with the dogs; I chose this pic as they are both 100% in the box, and they still have room to lie down, face different directions, etc. It's not exactly palatial, but they are comfy enough; like I said above the room increases dramatically if one of them puts their front paws and head on the centre console, which they usually do.
The Canyon may have more rear seat space than the Tacoma (I seem to remember it being called "best in class" once upon a time but I can't find a source). This may be especially true since 2011model year was the previous gen of Taco; the new ones are supposed to be a bit more spacious inside. So the above solution may not be ideal for your application.
dstefan
Well-known member
Exactly the issues that tortured me. The Tundra seats and seating position are WAAAY better than my Tacoma’s. The Tundra gained me 400Lbs of payload over my Tacomas yellow (reduced payload for options) door sticker. For a good year I was convinced I wanted a FWC slide-in camper on an F250. Even went to the FWC factory for a day. Came close to buying a mostly turnkey flatbed FWC Hawk on a 50k miles 2012 Powerwagon (still leaf springs then).
In the end I realized the F250 or Powerwagons were, especially with the flatbed, too ponderous for me. 49 foot turning radius is too much, and 5 feet more than the Tundra. After trying the Powerwagon/Hawk combo in a mild offroad situation I can say the Tundra is much more nimble.
I also realized I didn’t want to deal with the solid axle harsh ride and the very expensive suspension upgrades. IFS is great for me, and I understand it. 90% of my driving is rocky or washboard roads where IFS shines when correctly set up and solid axles rattle your teeth unless you put $10k into them.
The rest of the equation was I didn't like the FWCs (heresy, I know!). The inside is cramped, I can’t sit up in the beds, storage is poor, and everybody seems to have problems with the different appliances (which are all warrantied by their respective manufacturers, not FWC). The hangover past the truck bedsides presents problems on tight brushy trails, and its tough to keep the weight under 1500 lbs wet, so you really should have and HD truck.
In the end, the Ovrlnd poptop on the Tundra checked all my boxes. I didn't have to wait for a new model and the potential downsides (first year or two bugs, lack of aftermarket support initially). The camper gives me all the room in the truckbed, and I can sit up in the bed. I”m also able to modify/outfit to might my needs, not FWCs. The weight is a third of an FWC, and the comined rig cost was reasonable enough to give me the latitude to do suspension mods, lockers and 4.88s (if Nitro gear will ever clear their shipping backlog!).
So far it was the right decision, but there are tradeoffs. The biggest is the work to outfit the camper, but worth it for me. YMMV!
We have a split bench in the read of ours, so we did a seat delete for 2/3rds of the back. Our son gets his seat (behind the passenger) which has plenty of room for him and his carseat. I then built a dog box to replace the blank section of the 2/3ds seat delete - this was a pretty quick and simple build out of 80/20 extrusion, some plywood, and a bit of carpet. This dog box is fixed to the floor via the seatbelt bolts, so it's not going anywhere, and the floor is hinged to allow for a ton of extra interior storage. There's plenty of room for both dogs, but they are "cuddlers" -- even at home, where they have a thousand square feet to explore, they tend to lie close together. In transit, often one of them will lie on the centre console, which dramatically increases the space in the box for the other one. They have enough room to lie down and stand up easily though, which was the guidance for sizing a crate and so I used the same principle to size the dog box.
Here's the box, empty:
And in use with the dogs; I chose this pic as they are both 100% in the box, and they still have room to lie down, face different directions, etc. It's not exactly palatial, but they are comfy enough; like I said above the room increases dramatically if one of them puts their front paws and head on the centre console, which they usually do.
The Canyon may have more rear seat space than the Tacoma (I seem to remember it being called "best in class" once upon a time but I can't find a source). This may be especially true since 2011model year was the previous gen of Taco; the new ones are supposed to be a bit more spacious inside. So the above solution may not be ideal for your application.
That looks like a good setup. If I end up keeping the Taco I'll probably do a full seat delete to give them a bigger flat space to sit and roam around. They can probably still make do with a 2/3 seat delete if I keep one seat in there for a 3rd passenger. My dogs are smaller at 35lbs each but they aren't cuddlers and the puppy usually stretches out as much as she can which annoys the older one. He often looks like he's being tortured when they have to share the same bed and ends up moving elsewhere.
I agree, HD trucks are more than what I need as well. I don't need 20-30k pounds of towing nor 3500 lbs of payload. The exterior size would just be excessive as well. I think 1500 trucks are just about right in dimension and interior space. From what it looks like the next gen Tundra's will have a Crewmax with short and long bed options and I'd definitely get a 6' or 6.5 bed if offered. The 5.5' bed of the Crewmax now is just a bit too limiting when it comes to the camper world. I'm probably going to wait until Toyota announces the Tundra before I made a hard decision on it which platform I proceed forward with, which should be soon. I don't have too much interest in other brands at this time.
skyfree
Active member
My question is: Where are the dogs going to sleep at night? In the back seat or in the truck bed?
We have an Ovrlnd on a Colorado ZR2 which is exactly the same sized bed as a Tacoma short bed. In fact the Ovrlnd can be put on a Tacoma if you get an extra 2" wall height (we didn't).
I have about 30 nights in my setup. A few have been with my 55 lb Husky and my wife, and a few with just the dog. I built a kitchen / storage unit on the passenger side which leaves plenty of space on the left. There is a build thread here.
The single dog works fine sleeping "downstairs" while we are upstairs in the bed. I think 2 would be a problem honestly, depending on how much they like to stretch out. It would be VERY hard to get the dog(s) up on the sleeping platform unless they are small or athletic, and/or don't mind being picked up. Once the sleeping platform is extended you don't have a lot of space to get upstairs. I use the fridge as a step because it's actually really high. A Tacoma will be an additional 2" higher.
If they are sleeping in the back seat of the truck then you are fine.
I don't think payload is a problem but you may need an add-a-leaf or airbags. Keep your build as light as possible and don't carry a lot of heavy stuff.
I wouldn't hesitate to go full-size or even heavy duty in your situation, but it's a cost/benefit calculation thing and you will have to decide if the cost is worth it!
We have an Ovrlnd on a Colorado ZR2 which is exactly the same sized bed as a Tacoma short bed. In fact the Ovrlnd can be put on a Tacoma if you get an extra 2" wall height (we didn't).
I have about 30 nights in my setup. A few have been with my 55 lb Husky and my wife, and a few with just the dog. I built a kitchen / storage unit on the passenger side which leaves plenty of space on the left. There is a build thread here.
The single dog works fine sleeping "downstairs" while we are upstairs in the bed. I think 2 would be a problem honestly, depending on how much they like to stretch out. It would be VERY hard to get the dog(s) up on the sleeping platform unless they are small or athletic, and/or don't mind being picked up. Once the sleeping platform is extended you don't have a lot of space to get upstairs. I use the fridge as a step because it's actually really high. A Tacoma will be an additional 2" higher.
If they are sleeping in the back seat of the truck then you are fine.
I don't think payload is a problem but you may need an add-a-leaf or airbags. Keep your build as light as possible and don't carry a lot of heavy stuff.
I wouldn't hesitate to go full-size or even heavy duty in your situation, but it's a cost/benefit calculation thing and you will have to decide if the cost is worth it!
Todd780
OverCamper
So you prefer the Tundra over the F250 with the camper on it?
I think most 3/4 or 1 tons would have similar dimensions to the Crewmax w/ 6.5" bed you mentioned you'd buy if it's offered.
The dogs would sleep with us on the platform. If I keep the Taco I'm going to go with the Alu-Cab Canopy Camper for a few reasons. One of them is that it has the main flip down bed but also a flip down at the foot. Essentially the entire length of the camper and cabover can be used as bed space. I forget what the exact number was but I think you have like 9' of sleeping platform once it's all flipped down. Plenty enough for two humans and two medium dogs. They don't mind being picked up and are light enough that it's not a problem.
Weight and payload is definitely a concern with the Tacoma but it'll definitely be a lighter build without heavy bumpers, swingouts, and such and use aluminum skids for protection. I have a 200 series that's probably going to be more of a full build.
Probably true. I'm open to a Ford and GMC but I've always been a Toyota guy first so I'll see what they bring to market.
Todd780
OverCamper
Yep. I'm interested to see how the new Tundra shapes up as well. I think I'm between Toyota, Ford and Ram for my next truck. (most likely a half ton for me as well)