RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Search

RV Blog


RV Sales




RV Parks


RV Club


RV Buyers Guide


Roadside Assistance


Extended Service Plan


RV Travel Assistance


RV Credit Card


RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Open Roads Forum  >  Search the Forums

 > Your search for posts made by 'thestoloffs' found 5 matches.

Sort by:    Search within results:
  Subject Author Date Posted Forum
RE: Taking B+/C Offroad Experiences

We had a 26' custom Born Free for 10 years, and traveled all over the CONUS. Frankly, unless you can find one of the few built on an F-series 4x4 chassis, I wouldn't recommend this design for intensive off-roading. The E-series chassis is a van, not a truck, and not designed for that sort of rough handling. Its springs & shocks would likely have to be replaced. Although the solid metal box frame is strong, the internal cabinetry is all wood (light plywood with veneers) and didn't handle torsion stress well. Exterior doors & windows held up well; internal cabinet doors warped and misaligned. Plumbing & electrical would probably hold up but I'd recommend changing out the convertor with a commercial version (e.g., IOTA); I'm rather suspicious of their "standard" Progressive Dynamics convertor. (Since our mobility unit was built by the commercial side - Dodgen Industries - rather than Born Free, our AC & DC wiring was heavier duty with all external wiring blocks & fuses.) Also, in the final few years of construction, they'd shifted over from convertors to invertors. In a past life, I spent many years in Class C-equivalent ambulances & fire trucks. Even these rigs had the same interior & suspension problems with rough driving, and they were designed for all but the most severe off-road driving. Based on that, IMNSHO {not so humble}, even though John Dodgen & his team built higher quality motorhomes than the industry average, off-roading in a Born Free isn't something I'd recommend -- either keep your Bigfoot TC or find something like a used Tiger Adventure Vehicle.
thestoloffs 10/31/21 05:35pm Class C Motorhomes
RE: LOCAST Receives Unfavorable Court Rulling

This is the provision of 17 USC 111 (Limitations on exclusive rights: Secondary transmissions of broadcast programming by cable) that Locast believes they fall under as an IRS recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit {snip} But, even though they are organized as a 501(c)(3), the LOCAST user is directed on their sign-up page to indicate their level of "monthly contribution". If you don't select one of those levels, you're directed to see if you qualify for a low-income discount in order to view. To me, it might be netting out as a Non-Profit LLC, but to be one of its viewers, you're still paying LOCAST. That constitutes paying for programming, which is what appears to be the justification for this court ruling.
thestoloffs 09/01/21 01:15pm Technology Corner
RE: Samsung Phone

Also, you might have received a system update from Samsung; my A20e's just got an "Android 11 - One UI 3 upgrade" which updated my Google app as well as many others.
thestoloffs 08/30/21 09:23am Technology Corner
RE: GPS / CB Choices

I guess I confused the issue with GMRS. The radio I'm talking about is a Dual-Band Two-Way Ham Radio Transceiver UHF/VHF 136-174/400-520MHz. I understand that GMRS covers 462 to 467 Mhz, which is regulated by the FCC and requires a license and I see nothing about commercial use. The FMS also has frequencies in this range and a license is not required if the preset freq's FMS channels are used. On the other hand, 136-174 Mhz also requires no license and truckers shouldn't have any issues using the particular channels in the freq range provided they are approved channels. A few editorial comments on these statements: Family Radio Service (FRS) also restricts the power output lower than GMRS. 136-174 MHz covers a variety of frequency bands that certainly DO require license & Type Acceptance of the equipment, such as Marine Radio, Public Service, Business Radio, Military & Federal Government radio services. If it's truly a "Dual Band Ham Radio" transceiver, then it's covered under FCC Part 97 and cannot legally be programmed to transmit outside 144-148 MHz or 420-450 MHz. If it's potentially programmable to transmit and not just receive on other frequencies in 136-174 MHz, then it would have to be Type Accepted for that purpose -- and cannot be simultaneously approved under Part 97 Amateur Radio Service. Better check the specs for this radio carefully. It's probably saying Receive Only for 136-174 MHz. (I won't even discuss why most Chinese-produced radios can't get Type Acceptance but why the Japanese-produced units scrupulously qualify.)
thestoloffs 02/01/21 01:50pm Technology Corner
RE: Remembrances of vacuum tube days

There are tubes, and then there are tubes! Back in the "dark ages" (60's & 70's - my HS & college days), I used my 1st Class Radiotelephone license to work as an engineer for several 50KW clear channel AM stations in the Philadelphia area. Their transmitters were so big in the pre-solid state days that we actually walked inside the room-sized cabinets and took off all our jewelry before entering (to prevent RF burns). We had to wear white linen gloves to touch any of the tube glass parts, because a broken tube could explode violently. (No OSHA in those days?!)
thestoloffs 12/12/20 11:30am Technology Corner
Sort by:    Search within results:

New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:

© 2021 CWI, Inc. © 2021 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved.