I don't think a RV inspection checklist would be much different for a used TT vs. any other type of RV. I know we had a suggested list that we copied out of a book we had from www.rv.org/

We paid the subscription fee that allowed us to read ratings and reviews on pre-owned models, gave us ideas on what to look for, etc.

Obviously you want to make sure all the mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems are working, you want to look for any signs of water leaking or previous water damage, etc. I know a search on Google produced several different checklists if you don't have one.

I'd suggest you take your time, get the dealer or owner out of the rig for a while so you have uninterrupted time to look and inspect.

I would buy at least a 3/4 ton. I always buy 4WD because they help in slippery (gravel) situations when on steeper grades or backing in up hill. 4WD is not necessary but I prefer it. And if your towing forget about mileage, Mobil becomes one your best friends, you see him often.

Red

 Thank you very much.  I do have a checklist that I got from Buying an RV book.  I do plant to use that.  Great suggestion about the mirrors.  I did not think of that.

Alie and Jims Carrilite wrote:

---

As you look at different brands that you're interested in, find the owners forum for that brand and see what the quirks are with the particular model. Most owners will point out the negative points pretty quick.
As far as towing, the 4wheel drive will lower the tow rating, but gives you more places to visit. Not that I'd go wheeling a Tahoe down some Jeep trails, but on wet or slippery sites, backing uphill, it's nice to have.
Find the vehicle you want first, then find the RV that's 20% under the tow ratings for that vehicle. In other words stay within 80% of your gross combined weight rating for safety.

---

 Great suggestion.  Thank you.

Agreed, 6,500-7,500 lbs is indeed too light for planning purposes. I purchased a 3/4 ton diesel for towing a similar TT. If you're planning on full-timing then look for at least 3,000 lbs. CCC, more if you plan on adding a large solar system for boondocking. Because they are "entry level" most TTs are rather cheaply made with very low carrying capacities. Even the better ones, like Jayco, often have unsuitable carrying capacity, making them a poor choice for carrying all your worldly goods. Don't forget the vehicle's carrying ability too. I don't know of any SUVs that I would be comfortable pulling one with. Even the top rated Chevrolet Suburban 2500/GMC Yukon XL 2500 top out at 9,600 pounds. Even 3/4 and 1 ton full sized cargo vans top out around 10,000 lbs. of towing capacity.

Instead I would look at a 3/4 ton pick-up (or larger) with a topper over the bed. My 2008 3/4 ton F-250 is rated to tow a max of 12,500 lbs., so if I follow the 80% rule that means I have about 10,000 lbs. of real world capacity. Subtract 3,000-3,500 lbs. for cargo (it's amazing how fast it adds up) and that means that my camper's dry weight should not exceed 6,500 - 7,000 lbs. Something like this would be a good choice for me: A Wildcat 28 RFX www.forestriverinc.com/TravelTrailers/WildcatWest/default.aspx

As far as 4wd goes, large diesel vehicles are front heavy, and 2wd ones like mine usually have poor traction, especially on sand, grass and wet clay surfaces. Sometimes I wish I would have held out for a 4wd, in spite of the 1 mpg or so hit. What will 1 mpg cost you over the life of your vehicle? Let's say your mileage drops from an average of 12 mpg to 11 mpg towing with a 4wd vehicle. I plan on keeping my truck for at least 400,000k miles (I have 300,000 miles on my current 4 cyl. car.), so 12 mpg = 33,333 gallons/diesel x $4/gallon = $133,332 in fuel costs vs 36,363 gallons x $4/gallon = $145,452 or about $12,000 savings, spread over the life of the vehicle. Since my truck only cost me $11,000, this small difference in mpg is will end up costing me more than I initially paid for my TV! Of course, your mileage, usage, towing speed, etc. will certainly be different than mine. This is just one example to get you thinking how much fuel economy is really worth. Everything in life is a trade off. If you can afford a 4wd, I say go for it, as it sure is useful - just do so with both eyes open. I will have a very limited income, so I must make other choices. But look t it this way, that $12,000 can buy me a whole new (slightly used) truck, or even a new (slightly used TT) if I need to buy a replacement one day. You never know.

Chip

I plan on building an aerodynamic topper for my truck that will have lightweight Coroplast airstream diverters (flaps), possibly equipped with Air Tabs, to ease the air smoothly around the TT. These flaps will be movable about 30 degrees inward too to streamline the truck and improve mileage when I'm not towing. The trailer will also have a fixed Coroplast tail cone to help with streamlining too, improving handling in crosswinds, and reducing sway when trucks are passing too). I plan on towing at the slowest possible safe speed, around 50 mph when possible, (staying off of interstates when practical, as I'd much rather see the "real America" from secondary roads) but I realize that there will be times that I must exceed this ideal economic speed for safety sake. The streamlining will really come into its own then. I will also try to travel during low traffic times, especially when passing though cities and congested areas. I will also use some hypermiling techniques, anticipating stops far in advance to minimize braking, conserving momentum (coasting when possible, letting speed fall naturally on up-hills and letting momentum build naturally on down-hills.) I do this now when towing my Aliner with a 4cyl car. Not only is this fun and challenging, but it will save us money (both in fuel and wear and tear on the truck) for other fun things. This is the primary reason for deciding on a 3/4 ton diesel TV pulling a relatively light weight (low mass to accelerate) TT. Of course an Airstream or a HiLo would offer better aerodynamics, yielding a lower CdA drag coefficient), but they cost so much, even used (increasing the aerodynamic savings payback time) and require so many compromises (limited carrying capacity, storage space, slides, limited floorplans, etc.) that I no longer consider them viable FT options for us (though I'll concede they are for many).

Chip