We have three Insignia TV's. The 27" we bought a few years ago for the main unit in the RV is VERY much the best of the three. The 19" we got a little later for the RV bedroom is plenty good. Everybody looks at picture and viewing angle is very important. Our RV A/C is so LOUD we needed TV's with SOUND that played well at a high enough level to deal with the A/C. The 27" and the 16" both do.
Then we bought a 32" for home. Neither Picture (viewing angle, picture quality) Nor Sound is as good as the two older ones. We just looked at an Insignia 32" Smart/ROKU and were not happy with picture, including viewing angle.
Like so many other things, shop carefully...
Agree with Big Box. That's pretty much what the RV builders use.
What type of TV are you replacing? CRT Screen? Older Flat Screen? With or Without a Digital Tuner? Any can have challenges but they're all do-able.
Wanted to add, some of the new flat screens use an external power supply "brick" like a laptop PC. That can get in the way of a clean install job depending on where the outlet is, but there CAN be a big plus. Usually the ones with the "brick" are running 12-volts-DC, so it could be possible to use it when 120-AC isn't available. Otherwise, Inverter, Generator, Do Without.
That Smart is probably the only car short enough to carry sideways. Did that Allegro Bus with the Smart on a lift, have a tag axle?
A red semi tractor came into the campground towing a big fifth wheel. It had a frame long enough to haul the fiver AND a Smart. The Smart was crossways on the tractor right behind the cab. They had aluminum ramps tucked away someplace and backed the Smart down from the passenger side of the tractor. Pretty neat! I believe that particular Smart was a diesel.
Oh, Levelers. We've had HWH-brand semi-automatic Kick-Down jacks on two Class C's. It used to be possible to operate one jack at a time and the chassis would twist doing that. Newer systems always operate two jacks at a time. Options are Left, Right, Front, Rear. Both Lefts, Both Rights, Both Fronts, Both Rears operate at once to reduce racking the chassis.
All Right, OK, You Win. Safer is (always supposed to be) better. Operate two jacks at a time. That is not my beef with Class C levelers. It is this:
1. Most are Kick-Down. All too often, they extend in the stored position before kicking to the leveling position. This is a PAIN!!! All too often, I'm reaching under to pull one jack to vertical and the other side is already extended.
2. Class C jacks get installed too close together. The chassis is narrow, so lifting one side lifts the other before level is achieved. On a short Class C, the front jacks (toward the rear of the cockpit) raise the rear a lot before level is achieved.
We're camping right now and this time we used jacks. I had to pull one front jack down, and one of the rears is not extended. We also carry 2*8 blocks, and we usually drive up onto them and don't use the jacks.
I installed heavy duty Hellwig sway bars, front and rear, and they made the coach steadier on the campsite than deploying jacks did.
I wouldn't spend money on jacks for a Class C unless the coach was upper 20's long AND the jacks were "direct acting" meaning they store in the vertical position and come straight down to level the coach.
It helps to remember that every Class C Ford chassis has the "two valve" V10, derived from the original 1997-99 V10 that started the spitting spark plug issue. The F-Series (pickups and Class A chassis got a "three valve" V10 in the mid-2000's but it NEVER went into E-Series/Class C. The plug problems in two-valve were largely corrected in 2000 with heads called Performance Improved, with "PI" cast into them. The HP went from 275 to 305. There were some problems, albeit different, till around 2004. Around 2005 the 4R100 transmission was replaced with TorqShift, 5R110.
So... if the button on the Shift Lever says "Tow Haul" and not "OD Off" then the Class C has TorqShift AND Good Heads.
In 2008, E-Series got the new bolder grille. There were other changes, most notably an improved front axle and brakes. Rear brakes and parking brake were improved but the big jump came in front brakes. So if the Ford Class C has the "Dump Truck Nose" (for those who like it) or "Pig's Nose" (for those who don't) then it has pretty much all the improvements.
It's possible to upgrade the front axle and brakes to 2008+, but most of the other improvements Ford has made aren't within reason concerning expense and complexity.
Remember, much of a coach "year" production is on the prior year's CHASSIS. All of what I said above is by CHASSIS YEAR. I don't think it makes much difference say 2002-2003, or 2009-2010, but 1999-2000 is BIG (PI Heads) and 2007-2008 is BIG (Brakes, Axle, Styling).
If this pump pic on RockAuto is correct, notice it has three connections. Our Mitsu pump (mounted on the head, driven by the overhead camshaft) also had three. I messed them up on re-install, and it didn't run right. Luckily an on-line friend had the right info to get it connected properly again. So IF you have the pump off, tag the hoses and take a picture.http://www.rockauto.com/info/26/M60416_P04_ANG__ra_p.jpg
Picking up on what Tom_M said... We had an '88 Mitsubishi pickup with a Mikuni carburetor with a diaphragm that broke apart and caused us problems. It was long enough ago that there was still a shop with "Carburetor" in its name and a man there who knew something about...carburetors. Sold me the part and told me how to install it. I remember it was what I'll call "external to the carb itself." I didn't have to take the carb off or even that far apart, to install the new diaphragm.
That Mitsu had a clear plastic fuel filter. Easy to inspect for water and debris, Cheap to buy, Simple to replace.
I found the fuel filter and a part called "Choke Pull-Off" on rockauto.com looking at 1983 Toyota Pickup 2.4L-4cyl. Filter looked just like the one on the Mitsu. The Pull-Off that looked like a diaphragm with a rod coming out of it reminded me of what I put in the Mitsu. I know it says "Choke" and not "Pump." The carb specialist told me that a failed one causes a leak that causes problems by misdirecting either Fuel or Vacuum (and I forget which, this was 15-years ago).
At first I thought it was a Hongkongemeter with Amps Jaws. There have been several threads on those here. Still this UT55 is way more meter than the free HF stuff and those Capacitance and Frequency features make it very useful for an RV'er wanting to work on Genset and Air Conditioner.
I guess your plan to get another one and make the parts match is a good one. I'm not sure I still have the coordination to work on those little parts but if you do, go for it. Are you sure you still have ALL those little contacts?
We're supposed to "exercise" our gensets monthly by running half an hour or more under load. Everybody thinks of keeping the fuel system from gumming up. That's true and very important, but that long run, under load, is also to drive moisture out of the windings. You've replaced the rotating coil. What's the condition of the other coil, the stationary one? I wonder if it's "swollen" from moisture and once it warms up, drags on the rotating coil and damages it.
Looks like a similar compartment. The panel on the right supports only the phone and TV jacks, easy to re-locate those. I didn't think that side would be big enough for battery/batteries, but maybe it is, especially golf cart batts.
I got slides with a much higher rating than a battery weighs, concerned about bouncing on the road, let alone rust and dust. After all, it's open and separated from the rear wheels by only the mud flap.
We rented a Class C with Generac that we used a number of times over the short time we had the RV. It started easily, ran smoothly, and made electricity. We've had two ONAN gensets. The first was a "BFA", ancestor of the Emerald Series. Twin cylinder 1800-RPM MACHINES. Our Microlite 4KY starts, runs, produces too, but I wouldn't call it a "machine." Just something that works. Generac gave me the same impression. A bigger Generac like 5500 might be more like the comparable ONAN Emerald.
Based only on what I've read here, ONAN is the better choice. It may not be all that much better a machine, but offers much wider availability of parts and service. It seems there are more parts on line, more shops willing to work on ONAN but not Generac. Finally with ONAN you can fall back to the professional but expensive Cummins/ONAN truck shops.
Two coaches equal, I'd want the one with ONAN. Better coach with Generac? Probably better off with the better coach, Generac and all.
Something like this Boat Rail Clamp from the marine realm?
The ones I have don't look like that but they work in similar fashion, allowing you to put machine screws and nuts through them to attach things.
FMCA says they list only those vehicles whose manufacturer says are flat towable. In other words, you "Should" be able to find a page in the Owner's Manual that says flat towing is OK. Maybe with conditions, but OK.
That said, I'd want to see the factory owner's manual and satisfy myself that the manufacturer said flat towing was OK.
REMCO, purveyor of lube pumps, is another source that is usually correct. Still, Show Me the Manual!
That 460 has the grunt to tow your Jeep but you're right about steep grades, you'll still feel it.
You found a vehicle-mounted towbar, maybe a Roadmaster Stowmaster 5000. You'll still need a baseplate to mount the SM5000 to the Cherokee. I have one of those, different brand, same idea. Actually would like to sell it, went with a Roadmaster Falcon that stays on the motorhome when not towing. Either works just fine. The vehicle-mounted is quicker to connect, disconnect and fold, by a few seconds. I just didn't want that hardware on the front. We tow a Frontier that can easily handle the weight, but our Corolla feels the towbar out there on the front when it's folded. Cherokee shouldn't. I think some of the Wrangler crowd likes the look of a folded towbar.
You should be able to install a baseplate easily. You might find a used one.
Our first C, the one with the house same level as cab, was on the square-looking Ford chassis and had a swivel base on the passenger seat. Also a reclining backrest and a front-to-rear slide. I had to work all three to get it turned around, plus remove the shoulder harness anchor bolt from the door frame, to turn it around. I only did all that 2 or 3 times in the 8 years we had the coach.
Turning the seat in the one we have now, with a 6" or so step up to the house, wouldn't accomplish much IMO. And it'd take NASA to design the swivel!
Part of the draw to this coach is no doubt that it's a Lazy Daze. A shot at one of those is always something to consider carefully. Used to be the cheap RV's had wooden framing and better ones had aluminum. Exception was Lazy Daze with its very carefully crafted WOODEN framing. I take that as a warning that the damage to this particular coach might be more widespread than one with metal roof framing. Another reason to vote NO on this one.
Wonder if some would feel better if they called Class C's "Class A's" and vice versa.
Often thought the same thing. Then the RV's with a steel van cab would be Grade A, and those cardboard buses would be just Average.
I've been trying to follow all this. What I can actually add is that charging the battery in a fiver through the Seven-Wire from a V10 pickup takes all day, even at road speed.
What I wonder is this: Won't the truck's alternator bring the truck's battery up to charge quickly and probably first? If so, won't it then throttle down and offer decreased voltage to the Seven-Wire therefore the trailer's battery? I guess there are devices that would create a system that could recognize the truck was charged, trailer wasn't, and adjust alternator output to the trailer accordingly...?