TerraLiner:12 m Globally Mobile Beach House/Class-A Crossover w 6x6 Hybrid Drivetrain

[egn]

While the MAN KAT and Tatra's are very capable for their size, they are non-the-less huge and heavy. Narrow bridges and roads, low overpasses, and roads/bridges that can't support much weight (most of the 3rd world) are going to stop larger vehicles from going very far off the beaten path. Basically you are limited to roads used by commercial vehicles which can be pretty extreme in places like Russia or Mongolia but you can't go much beyond that.

Have you ever been to Russia or Mongolia?

My experience and that of other people with large truck campers is totally different. There is plenty of space in both countries and the rest of the world for larger expedition campers. It all depends what kind of environment with what comfort you personally want to enjoy. Nobody with a large expedition camper has to go to the same places were someone with a small camper wants to go, and vice-versa. It is pretty useless to argue in the style mine is better is yours.

So let get us back to topic and just assume that there is a market for large expedition campers, whether they are useless in our personal opinion or not. Companies like Action Mobil, Unicat and a lot of others live not bad from selling such useless toys.

 

[Lynn]

If you need that much room, why not just get two vehicles? Two Unimogs U1300L will go more places than any single 6x6 or 8x8 MAN, Zetros or Tatra could ever dream of going. With two Unimogs, you might even have a chance of pulling a 8x8 truck out of the mud

I thought briefly about two trucks. Specifically for recovery advantages. However, besides more fuel, more shipping expenses, more carnet expenses, more insurance, more... my issue is mostly that our family of four would not enjoy traveling 'together' nearly as much if we were separated into two vehicles. I think a better bet would be to hook up with other families with similar size rigs.

However, I have zero expedition rigs, so bow to those with more experience.

egn, do you have a family of four? For some reason I thought the MAN cab only sat three?

 

[unirover]

Don't get me wrong, I drive a Unimog and people who drive Land Rovers, Land Cruisers etc always tell me my vehicle is too big. When I drove Land Rovers people on motorcycles always told me my vehicle was too big. I totally agree with you that everybody has different priorities and if it works for you that is all that matters.

However, there is a point where a vehicle gets so big that it is really not an expedition vehicle anymore - it is more like a RV with big tires. Again, if that is what you want fine but I just wouldn't call it an expedition vehicle and to me the 8x8 drivetrain is sort of pointless if you can't practically use it. It's nothing personal and I'm not trying to judge anybody but you can not take these bigger 8x8 vehicles many places. I'm sorry but an 8x8 MAN is very limited in where it can really go.

If you are just talking about selling them, that is a whole different story. For that you just need good marketing, a demo vehicle to take to treffen, some photo shoots in the desert and a representative in Dubai, Moscow and Ulan Bator I was talking about actually using them not about selling them.

 

[unirover]

I thought briefly about two trucks. Specifically for recovery advantages. However, besides more fuel, more shipping expenses, more carnet expenses, more insurance, more... my issue is mostly that our family of four would not enjoy traveling 'together' nearly as much if we were separated into two vehicles. I think a better bet would be to hook up with other families with similar size rigs.

However, I have zero expedition rigs, so bow to those with more experience.

egn, do you have a family of four? For some reason I thought the MAN cab only sat three?

I'd say once you get into the really big vehicles like some of the 8x8 on this thread, two U1300L use less fuel, are cheaper and easier to ship, insure and get a carnet. An 8x8 MAN is not going to fit in a container or on a flat rack so transporting it won't be cheap or easy. Two U1300L ambulances fit in a container.

Driving in two vehicles definitely takes away the “togetherness” and I doubt a family of four would need two Unimogs or an 8x8 vehicle. Where do you want to go and for how long? What do you need in terms of creature comforts as opposed to what you want? How remote or adventurous do you want to get?

Comfort almost always comes at the price of capability. For the most part, the bigger and heavier the vehicle, the less you can do with it in terms of access. For some people, comfort and security is a priority hence the big vehicles. For others accessibility is the priority hence motorcycles and short wheelbase Land Rovers. Most people fall somewhere in between. If you want to do things like explore the African bush or the Western USA then size is going to matter and you will have to prioritize. If you want to go to Russia you can probably get away with something bigger since they use commercial vehicles almost everywhere.

I've seen families of four in 4x4 VW Westy's who felt they had plenty of room and I know of many families who have no problems in Unimog Dokas and found them too big when the kids left the nest. Ironically most of the really huge vehicles I've encountered on the road or in treffen tend to just be couples. It all really depends on how much comfort you want but it will come at a price of where you can go.

 

[biotect]

Hi Unirover,

Eloquent post, and much appreciated.

However, if you were reading the thread closely, you might have caught on to the development that, at present, egn and myself seem to be thinking mostly in terms of a 6x6 vehicle that's 8 – 10 m long. Yes, I read your post carefully, and I know that even a 6x6 is still too long for you. Your preference is for a 4x4, probably under 6 m long, and you seem to want to insist that only such a vehicle is truly “practical”......


******************************

1. What is "Practical"?


But is it? Whenever someone says that a bigger motorhome is not “practical”, I always want to ask, “For whom?” Because even seemingly obvious practical considerations, are almost never obvious at all. What is practical for you, may not be practical for others, because their calculus of preferences may be different from yours.

If you haven't already done so, please read carefully the description of the Tatra 6x6 conversion written by the owner, at http://www.theoverlander.org/my-wheels/trucks/tatra-815-2-6x6-expedition-truck.html . It's quite eloquent, and quite short. It's clear that he was fully aware of everything that you have written in this thread. It's also clear that he is quite practical, and that he did not have money to burn. But he still decided to go with a bigger 6x6 Tatra. And in his article he explicitly states why: because he has 3 young children.

When I read your first post, the suppressed premise seemed obvious. In that first post you seemed to assume that everyone wants to be able to get to as many remote, off-the-beaten-path spots as you do. For you, an overland or expedition vehicle seems to be primarily an off-road vehicle meant to serve that particular purpose. But many RV travelers find themselves perfectly happy spending 95 % of their time on major highways. For them, their motorhome is a “see lots of different countries RV”, or a “travel the Third World RV”. It is not a “see lots of remote places RV”, as might be your ideal motorhome. For them, RV-ing in the Third World is really just an extension of the rather sedate kinds of RV-ing they enjoy doing back home, using big Winnebagos and Hymers in the First World.

Furthermore, they will often spend 30 – 50 % of their time supplementing RV travel with hotel stays. Those who travel the Third World by Landrover or Landcruiser do so notoriously often, if only to get a decent shower. But even those who have larger motorhomes will do the same. So the purpose of an expedition RV, for them, may be quite different from the purpose of an expedition RV for you. As Stephen Stewart deftly puts things, what many people really want is just a “bad-road RV", and not an “off-road RV” – see http://www.xor.org.uk/silkroute/equipment/choosevan.htm . Indeed, at one point Stewart emphatically states that "overland campers are bad-road vehicles, not off-road vehicles".

So sure, maybe the guy with the Tatra 6x6 can't get to that remote spring past a maze of rock outcroppings in the middle of the Jordanian desert….. But that doesn't matter as much to him, as it might matter to you. For him a much more important, and thoroughly practical priority, is having a comfortable expedition motorhome for a family of five. If some off-road enthusiasts do not have a family of five to consider in their practical calculations, then more power to them. They can think like lone rangers, able to reach that remote spring in a smaller vehicle. They will have that experience, and the guy with the Tatra 6x6 won't. But conversely, they will not have his experiences, either. They will not be teaching their 3 young children how to roast marsh-mellows over an open fire. So who is to judge which experience is "better", or more authentic and true, or more worthwhile?

Usually when people claim that any given size is “impractical”, what they are really saying is that it would not be practical for them, personally, given their current life-station (married? single?), age (young? old?), employment status (working? retired? independently wealthy?), and above all, their preferences, the kind of travel they want to do. But then one wants to ask, "Who suddenly made them the yardstick of all human needs and desires?"

So if you ask me, “Will a bigger motorhome be able to get to all the same places that smaller ones can?”, surely you must know the answer beforehand? Surely you must know that my answer has to be, “No, it won't." So why then do some still persist in building bigger expedition motorhomes? Well, for the simple reason that they are not you. They have practical priorities that are different from yours, and when they total up their equations of preference, they arrive at different sums.


***********************************

2. The Ambit of this Thread


I should also probably point out that the title of this this thread is not, "Ideal off-road expedition RV of the sort that most people might want, and of which most people would approve".

Rather, the central purpose of this thread is much narrower than that. Its central purpose is to explore a very particular design & engineering possibility, as egn has emphasized a number of times. "6x6 or 8x8", after all, is right there in the title of the thread. The thread begins from a basic datum: ActionMobil and UniCat do exist, and they fabricate 3-axle and 4-axle motorhomes. You may not approve of their existence, or their fabrication of such large vehicles, but it is a basic datum nonetheless. The thread then asks, "Why are none of those 3-axle or 4-axle motorhomes fully integrated"? It's a rather specific question. And so again, this thread's purpose is not to sketch the "ideal off-road motorhome", whatever that might be.

You might then come back with the observation that an off-road, 4WD Sprinter-van conversion is the "ideal integrated motorhome, complete with swivel seats". But that would be irrelevant. egn and myself are perfectly aware of the existence of such van conversions. But we are interested in exploring the possibility of an integrated overland RV that is bigger than that. Sure, this may be a completely theoretical and "false" exercise, from your point of view. But as they say in America, it's a free country, and purely conceptual or theoretical exercises often have value in their own right.....


***********************************

3. Multiple "Ideal Motorhomes"


Finally, probably should suggest that universalizing from one's own, particular, limited, partial, provincial point of view is always a bit dangerous. And perhaps especially so when imagining what an “ideal overland/off-road/expedition motorhome” should look like. Because, let's face it, there simply cannot be one, single, Platonic ideal of such a thing. It simply does not exist. At best, there are 5, 10 or 20 different possible ideals. For some the ideal isn't even a 4-wheel vehicle at all, but rather, a motorbike, as you recognized in one of your posts above.

Yes, agreed, beyond a certain point, legal and practical barriers do kick in. And so an 8x8 format would be unwise, for the reasons you mentioned in your post. But many pages ago this thread had kinda moved beyond that, and agreed that a 6x6 vehicle, 8-10 m long, i.e. similar in format and length to egn's MAN KAT, would be worth investigating further.

But still, excellent post, and much appreciated.

All best wishes,



Biotect

 

[biotect]

Great post, egn.

I also wrote something in response, just above. Hope that what I wrote wasn't too polemical?


*****************************************

Getting back to design, just hoping you could answer some of the questions fielded on page 9, addressed specifically to you:


Summarizing:


1. Did you get a chance to read the post comparing the weights of a Tatra Phoenix 6x6 and a Zetros 6x6? What do you think?

grizzlyj admits that he found it surprising that the weight of the Tatra Phoenix 6x6 was so close to the Zetros 6x6. He wrote:

I'm surprised the weights appear close, but the Tatra weight above doesn't say which wheelbase that applies to, if that's just for the backbone then possibly you would add comparatively more weight mounting a rear flat bed, and the Zetros already comes on the wheel and tyre combo you would need to add to your Tatra which are not light. And in any case the Tatra is much worse due to its lack of flex so should not be further discussed

So are the weights of the Tatra and the Zetros in fact as close as they seem in the product brochures?


2. Did you see the photographs of the Tatra 6x6 build? What do you think? Is there a pivoting sub-frame, or not? Is it possible that there is a sub-frame, but we just can't see it in the photographs?


3. Does Kamaz also produce stiff, torsion-free frames comparable to the MAN SX-45 and Tatra? Is Kamaz also worth investigating further?


All best wishes,


Biotect

 

[unirover]

I'm not trying to judge what you guys are hypothesizing, to each is own. I was just stating the obvious, that size comes at a cost. I'm not judging people who decide to go big, as I stated, I have done so by many standards myself. I'm sorry if you thought that was polemic.

My point was the hypothetical frame and suspension concerns are sort of moot for an expedition vehicle as big as some of the vehicles listed on this thread. As you say, you are designing “a bad road vehicle” not an “off road vehicle” which was my point in the first place and why so many of the design parameters seem moot. I think the reason most 3 or 4 axle designed are not integrated is precisely because “they are not the ideal motorhome whatever that may be”. Anyway, I've obviously missed the point of this thread and don't seem to get it so I'll let you guys get back to theorizing.

 

[egn]

egn, do you have a family of four? For some reason I thought the MAN cab only sat three?

We are a family of four and my KAT is register with 4 seats in the cab and 4 seats in the cabin. But our oldest daughter doesn't go with us anymore. Of course, the 3 passenger seats in the front are more 2+1 for longer trips. And the 4 seats in the back are just there for emergency, i.e. when you have to help people with mogs sticking in deep mud.:coffeedrink:

BTW, this is the nice thing with such a large and capable vehicle, you are able to help other people with their stranded vehicles.

Just a few examples:





I have a lot of rescue equipment (for other vehicles) with me, even 40 t (metric) air cushions to lift heavy load:

 

[egn]

1. Did you get a chance to read the post comparing the weights of a Tatra Phoenix 6x6 and a Zetros 6x6? What do you think?

It is not sure whether vehicles of similar size and configuration/accessories are compared. But it may be true that the difference is not that large between this vehicles.

2. Did you see the photographs of the Tatra 6x6 build? What do you think? Is there a pivoting sub-frame, or not? Is it possible that there is a sub-frame, but we just can't see it in the photographs?

On one image it looks like that there is a sub-frame on top of a frame. The sub-frame may be just there to get extra height above the wheels.

3. Does Kamaz also produce stiff, torsion-free frames comparable to the MAN SX-45 and Tatra? Is Kamaz also worth investigating further?

I know of no stiff frame from Kamaz and I don't think it is worth to investigate further. But it may be worth to look for a bit smaller vehicles like the Mowag Duro as smaller alternative for a compact integrated expedition vehicle.

The frame doesn't seem to be totally stiff, but stiff enough for an integrated solution.


And the Pinzgauer is an even smaller solution:

There are also some camping conversions available.

 

[biotect]

.... I'm sorry if you thought that was polemic...... Anyway, I've obviously missed the point of this thread and don't seem to get it so I'll let you guys get back to theorizing.

Hi Unirover,

No need to apologize, and I did not think that your first post was polemic at all!

Again, your first post was very eloquent, and it nicely summarized your many years of experience spent offloading and overlanding. I was only worried that my response might have read as too polemic!

Furthermore, please know that my response was written with a more general audience in mind, too. Although ostensibly addressed to you, it was also written with a view to others reading it as well. My impression is that some in the overland community tend to universalize a bit too swiftly from their own particular needs, preferences, and experiences, to conclusions about what should be the the needs and preferences of everyone else. You summarized this tendency beautifully when you wrote:

......I drive a Unimog and people who drive Land Rovers, Land Cruisers etc always tell me my vehicle is too big. When I drove Land Rovers people on motorcycles always told me my vehicle was too big. I totally agree with you that everybody has different priorities and if it works for you that is all that matters.

For further discussion of the same theme, see "The Ethics of Third World Travel by Motorhome", at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...rd-World-Travel-by-Motorhome?highlight=ethics .

***************************************

On a more conciliatory note, I fully agree with you that some vehicles are so large, so overprotective, and so expensive, that one wonders why an owner who is so rich and paranoid, did not purchase a yacht instead.

Just watch Bran Ferren explain the ridiculously convoluted design-process that eventually produced the Kiravan, at http://fora.tv/2013/04/19/Bran_Ferr..._a_Family-Friendly_Extreme_Expedition_Vehicle . What really astonishes, is that Ferren seems to imagine that his Kiravan will function as a cocoon protecting his 4-year old daughter, as they travel the world together. This struck me as slightly insane; as the low-level lunacy of a late-in-life, over-protective father who has way too much money, and no close friends who are grounded enough to bring him back down to earth. Travelling the world in such a vehicle will generate more attention than might have otherwise been the case; and when one attracts attention, one might inadvertently turn oneself into a target. Especially if one is a rich, famous American.....:sombrero:

For more on the Kiravan, see http://www.wired.com/2014/04/worlds-biggest-rv/ , http://www.mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/bran-ferren-kiravan , http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/kiravan , and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...supertruck-for-four-year-old-daughter.html?fb .

For what it's worth, I don't think that most of the people who buy large UniCats or ActionMobils are looking for “security” or “protection”, as per Bran Ferren. Furthermore, if they could have the same amount of interior space, in a vehicle that was much smaller and much less noticeable externally, they would buy such a vehicle in a heartbeat. What many people really want, is Doctor Who's Tardis: small on the outside, and enormous on the inside -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TARDIS .

So their primary motivation for getting a big expedition RV is rather simple: comfort. It's really a hedonistic motivation, and no more sinister or insane than that.

As I wrote above, many of them are long-habituated to RV-ing around Europe in a big Hymer or Concorde, or RV-ing around North America in a big Winnebago or Newell. So when they start thinking about RV-ing in the Second World (e.g. Russia, eastern Europe), or RV-ing in the Third World, they want to do so in roughly the same size of vehicle. But they are not so deluded, as per Bran Ferren, to think that their vehicle will "protect" them from anything.

***************************************

grizzlyj: you mentioned Zetros vehicle recovery, and egn just posted some wonderful images of his omni-capable MAN KAT lending a helping hand worldwide ( ), so just thought I should ply you with a few videos that I know you'll love.

The first is a Zetros camper recovering a huge semi trailer in the coldest, snowiest reaches of Lappland –


Then there's this video of a 6x6 Zetros, all lovely in black:


An finally, a very odd concept-design, an unfortunate cross between a Zetros and an Airstream trailer, called the “Zetstream”:



All best wishes,


Biotect

 

[Haf-E]

Since Pinzgauers were mentioned again - here is a very impressive build gallery of a very custom 6x6 pinzgauer being built in Switzerland - not a camper quite but easily could be made into one with more height in back...

http://www.gut-automobile.ch/en/pinzgauer_news?menu=pinzgauers

 

[grizzlyj]

Anyone interested in putting their own requirements on to wheels would do well to read Tom Shepherd's Vehicle Dependant Expedition Guide, (recently re-published as a 3rd edition).
-
Although mainly aimed at expeditions, the premise of how many people, for how long and in what environment is valid to all, and he goes on as to how best implement that.
-
Many people start off with either what is already on their driveway (or in their dreams whether BMW GS, Landy or truck), rather than looking at what's needed. Not wanted.
-
If you were hoping to stay in a remote location for maybe a week with no potable water, miles from a town and possibly summer in Kenya or winter in Norway (same vehicle, different trips maybe) then one person on 2 wheels would be as unrealistic as a family in a Westie in that scenario. If you need water, supplies and shelter for more than a few days then teak floorboards, corian worktops and a leather sofa are a long way from the tick list but a truck may be the only solution. A bike or Landcruiser type vehicle would have unreasonable restrictions of their own for us, just different ones to our little truck

 

[egn]

If you were hoping to stay in a remote location for maybe a week with no potable water, miles from a town and possibly summer in Kenya or winter in Norway (same vehicle, different trips maybe) then one person on 2 wheels would be as unrealistic as a family in a Westie in that scenario. If you need water, supplies and shelter for more than a few days then teak floorboards, corian worktops and a leather sofa are a long way from the tick list but a truck may be the only solution. A bike or Landcruiser type vehicle would have unreasonable restrictions of their own for us, just different ones to our little truck

As we want to go in the not to far future on a long voyage through most climate zones, our truck is designed to go into environment for a temperature range of about -40 C to +50 with enough supplies to stay there for weeks. Alone for the supplies like water, food, fuel we can spend a few metric tons of payload, and we try to save supplies by using them efficiently, where it is practical.

And you shouldn't rate the comfort to low. On a long-term trip it has similar importance as the other ones. Because the vehicle is becoming your home only if you feel comfortably.

BTW, the intended use is also an important design factor. A expedition camper used only part-time for vacation for a few weeks during the year can be designed totally different as a expedition camper used as mobile home all over the earth.

 

[biotect]

Anyone interested in putting their own requirements on to wheels would do well to read Tom Shepherd's Vehicle Dependant Expedition Guide, (recently re-published as a 3rd edition).

Fully agreed. A sample from an older document, at https://www.rgs.org/NR/rdonlyres/7A814B01-5B83-4C27-A1F9-8B051E4294D6/0/HBETve.pdf .

Then see http://www.desertwinds.co.uk , http://www.desertwinds.co.uk/expedition_guide.html , ISBN 978-0-9575385-0-4 :



grizzlyj, on Amazon.co.uk I was able to find a newer version of the second edition, at http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vehicle-dependent-Expedition-Guide-Field-Manual/dp/0953232441 , and see http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tom-Sheppard/e/B0056B8L40/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_pop_1 . But on Amazon's American site, only the first edition seems listed – see http://www.amazon.com/Vehicle-Depen...L40_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1397650769&sr=1-1 and http://www.amazon.com/Tom-Sheppard/e/B0056B8L40/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_pop_1 .

I've been working my way through the first edition, but would like to purchase the third. Any ideas where I might find a copy on the web? Or is the third edition of Sheppard's classic available only direct from author (as it would seem), at http://www.desertwinds.co.uk/expedition_guide_06.html ?

egn, what would you consider to be the best German equivalent of Tom Sheppard's book?

Ja, auf Deutsch geschrieben.

All best wishes,


biotect

 

[grizzlyj]

If you buy direct from Desert Winds he can autograph it for you if you ask nicely