I was recently motorcycle camping a few weeks ago and noticed a ton of sprinters and transits that had been tricked out into european style motor homes. Im an american, and a master diesel tech by trade, so i had to ask how much one of these things goes for. I nearly dropped my Folgers when i learned a Winnebago Travato (basically a ford van) will run you more than $150,000 new.
most used three-axle full-size rv's start around 80k. these things seem like a grift to screw millennials out of what little cash they had in the first place.
My family was in the market for one of these a few years back, couldn't stomach the price, and ended up buying a baseline class C RV instead (about $90k vs double that for a decently equipped van). Now that we've lived in it a few years, I understand why RVs are so much cheaper. They're big and unwieldy, you can't just park them on the street or even take them up a lot of roads to backcountry campsites. And the level of finish on a basic RV is pretty terrible -- it's basically a $70k class C truck with the absolute cheapest finishings glued onto a box on top.
That being said, we've had so many amazing times in it already and I'd make the same decision again because spending almost $200k on a van is ridiculous.
I see people comparing the Sprinter class RVs to the class C frequently. The parent comment is absolutely the reason. a $90k RV is a great value for space, but it is built out of ticky tacky and will be begin rusting, breaking, and leaking probably before you even take possession from the dealer. That said, you can patch them (they make special tape), lose some of the bits that break off, and make do with the rest and have a great time then sell them on when you are done.
In contrast, if a buyer is forking over for a Sprinter chassis then the RV builder figures you want nicer construction and all the pieces are better and it doesn't disintegrate around you nearly as rapidly.
And just to put some concrete the class C quality… in no particular order… exterior latch screws which rust instantly, exterior locks with corrode to useless in a couple years, generator fuel pump lasts 30 hours, water tank did not have drill shavings removed when drilled (end up in strainer), water pump strainer installed backwards so it can't be emptied of said shavings, winterization drain valves are undocumented and inside a sealed compartment (found while replacing water pump which turned out to just be blocked by shavings), 120v electrical box with no cover because the wires were too bulky and it would not fit on (under the sink where you stick metal trays), roof membrane was slightly too short to overlap and engage front roof (manufacturer covered with copious sealant goo to hide, eventually failed and inflated roof while driving down road), mysterious current leak will drain starting battery if you park too long, battery combiner to use house batteries and generator to start main engine clicks relay but does not actually combine batteries, likewise circuit which chargers vehicle battery when plugged in does not function (there are no wiring diagrams available, not clear where it even should be), house fuse panel is so badly made that fuses bounce out while driving, furnace failed two ways in 5 years (once off, and once always on. Good variety at least), knobs snap off, anything screwed in might drop screws, black water tank outlet didn't fit so manufacturer kind of gooed it in place (it held for a couple years, sorry about that mess on your road, great state of California) . – In short (long) a class C is cheap for what you get, but is an ongoing project. Good news, you have room for plenty of tools and recovery equipment.
Van based vehicles have some advantages over the traditional RVs: Unibody construction, so better efficiency, drivability, easier to park, less obnoxious looking.
I have a Ford Transit with 600 watts of solar and a full sized computer workstation inside. I bought the vehicle used for 23k USD, and put another 10k in the build. If you DIY, it not that expensive.
I don't get how any of this is better than buying a decent truck and tow camper. Truck prices are likewise insane in the US but offer more utility if you decide you want to stop living out of a camper.
A lot of this seems dumb but it would be nice to be the one selling overpriced camping stuff to millennials.
Trucks are pretty mediocre cars though, shit efficiency, they don’t have a rain-proof trunk, and their « I can get shit from Home Depot I don’t have a trunk for » and « I can use a trailer with it » are 0.1% use cases kind of things. They’re mostly a cultural phenomenon, not a real practical vehicle, ask anyone in France who owns a normal car and a trailer.
Trucks have shit efficiency in part because of retarded federal standards like CAFE which make it effectively illegal to sell a compact efficient truck and partially because competition was killed by the chicken tax.
You can buy a 25 year old import control exempt tiny truck from Japan without issue in the US; If you want efficient truck you basically have to wait for it to age 25 years so it will be legal to import it into the US.
Or you can just buy like a 10 year old Ford Ranger for less than the cost of shipping a truck from Japan. They made them up until 2012. Parts availability and mechanics to work on them are everywhere. You don't want to wait weeks to fix your rig because it's Japanese-only, and the part you need isn't available here.
Also, you could even consider a new Ford Ranger. Sure they are bigger, but the gas mileage they get is really good. They can get 26 on the highway, and carry a lot more than a 25 year old Toyota. And it's brand new, so if that's your thing you have options.
Or consider an S10 or Colorado. The latest Colorados can get near 30mpg highway. The S10 was made up until 2012.
Exactly this. You quickly find that you want to be “nondescript” as much as possible, and a van works great where a truck/trailer wouldn’t - unless you want to be stuck with campgrounds and Walmart parking lots.
Or you can use a truck like the guy in this video and make something completely stealth and can park pretty much anywhere.
https://youtu.be/py4zetCEYzA
You keep assuming that the people buying these and living out of them are doing it for no reason. There are a whole slew of reasons why that form factor is growing in popularity.
It's hard to beat the ratio of fuel efficiency, to living space in a good van conversion.
A trailer, even a short one, is a massive problem to park in urban areas and to turn around on remote forest roads. That said, teardrop campers have also been skyrocketing in popularity, as have rooftop tents.
Actually these new Ford vans do no get great gas mileage at all. I've owned a 2016 (lived in for 2 years), a 2022 and soon a 2023. The AWD High roof model gets 14-16 mpg before you mess with tires. I'm guessing this Trail model with the 3.5" lift and 30+inch tires will be 12mpg or less. 12-15mpg is a really easy target to hit with lots of massive vehicle platforms...
You just can't get around the fact that it's a brick with wheels going down the highway. The brick shape is what makes it so versatile and useful for a lot of things... but they're not the most aerodynamic.
And let's be real, this thing isn't going to be THAT off-road worthy. 30 inch tires are basically nothing these days. The wheelbase is too long... And what's the 3.5 inches of lift going to get you over? I doubt this thing will have enough power without a low-range to climb up any steep obstacles anyways. Especially once all the batteries / solar panels / and the rest of the "camping" gear are loaded up, these things are going to be too heavy to do much more than hit up some random logging roads on a dry day.
Ford's marketing team is doing a great job selling them though.
Those tradeoffs don't seem worth paying thousands to tens of thousands extra to me though. If vans were more competitive in price with trucks/trailers, I'd be all for it, but right now it seems massively inflated. It seems like paying many thousands for conveniences that have work-arounds or solutions.
Well, everyone has a different set of priorities and there is no perfect solution for everyone. It's all about what tradeoffs you want to make (even within the category of "van conversions").
Van conversions, in general, provide an pretty good balance between maneuverability, living space, gas mileage, amenities and price.
There are very expensive 6 figure conversion vans, but also simple ones for 4 figures. Again, it's all about what your priorities are and what tradeoffs you wanna make.
I would not discount the value of manueverability (even if you aren going to just be be moving between RV hookup locations )
It's worth noting that the people using these setups as actual living quarters are few and far between. Generally people who use them for something other than instagram fodder have a larger RV or tow-behind setup because they want something livable, or they have a cheap DIY setup because they want something cheap. Generally the people paying 300k for these #Vanlife setups are not particularly interested in living in them exclusively.
I think people also underrate that you can then detach the camper and use it as a normal truck whereas with a van, you are bringing your whole house with you no matter what.
Yes, it is a grift through and through. Van living (and therefore tiny homes) are incredibly expensive. Storing things you need for later, having room for certain activities, actually has a cost savings that these people are unaware of.
Part of being born in America and not having a very intelligent parent to guide you through involves being an easy target for an ever growing and complex series of grifts.
Tiny homes didn’t start out expensive. I remember years ago when it was just something eccentric people did to get away from society which they talked about on very obscure forums. Those tiny homes were not luxurious, they were spartan and not the sort of thing the average person would have liked. The idea of having them on trailers wasn’t really a thing yet at that point.
Of course at some point someone saw dollar signs and the rest is history.
Overgeneralization detected! I live tiny, and spend less than I used to. I'm not in US though. But I think the general principle is the same everywhere: many of those who come to alternative homes do it not to save (especially from IT crowd), but for the fun of trying something different, and they happily spend a lot. But some do it to practice self-restraint. Others to keep themselves busy with DIY. Many different goals, many different compromises, all of that leading to different budgets.
huh? I lived in a subaru outback in the forest for some time. I bought the car for $1500. It lasted ~6 months, I spent a few hundred registering and bare-minimum insuring it and when it died I called a junkyard and they hauled it away and gave me $100. It's not like it cost anything to park it in national forest.
When I was homeless in North Dakota I met a guy with a Ford E350 ho bought for about the same price. He was handier than I was and as far as I can tell he could keep it running indefinitely from junkyard parts for almost nothing.
The grift is overselling what goes into the van, or a new and overbuilt van. The bigger issue is van-life dumps your externalities on everyone else -- you aren't paying property taxes but you probably still avail yourself of local public services and utilities as part of the cheap living. It doesn't scale.
You are an individualist, maybe even a trendsetter. We are talking about a trend that has reached the well-off yuppies (does that word still exist?). A friend of mine was just about to shell out 70,000€ for a small van, without really knowing what to do with it, because some of his neighbors bought one recently..
I’m not sure it’s a grift exactly, it’s a fairly new trend and I just don’t think the market has responded to the demand yet. Given enough time and consistent demand for livable vans, I think prices will come down. This is big business and it’s just starting to be tapped by big players who can bring the cost down.
IIRC I spent about US$6000 (not US$60k, US$6k) on a 24-year-old Volkswagen Vanagon with an aftermarket camper conversion kit. My wife and I lived in it for about three months as we traveled around the US visiting people. We had to rebuild the engine twice and are damn lucky it didn't catch on fire due to a copious fuel-line leak, so we spent about US$10000 on repairs, gas, renting an auto transport, renting an alternative car, etc., and I think we sold it for about US$4000. So in a sense we spent US$12000 on three months' rent, which is quite a bit more than we were spending on our apartment in San Francisco.
This was in 02006 so add 50% to all these numbers; the dollar has lost a third of its value since then.
But we also drove about 10000 km during that time, a quarter of the way around the world, and that was the expensive part; something new would break on it every day. And the auto transport was a big expense caused by needing to meet a deadline even though I still had the engine apart. (The first time I paid someone else to rebuild it; the second time I did it myself.)
There were three weeks we were parked in a campground with a cracked cylinder head when I think we spent about US$600. If we'd been driving 30 km once a week, or 3 km every day, instead of over 100 km a day, and if we hadn't abused and overheated the engine, it would have been a pretty cheap way to live. I don't know if we could have gotten below US$100 a month but I think US$300 would have been within easy reach.
And it was the most pleasant place I've ever lived, but it didn't have a toilet. There wasn't room. But it had a propane refrigerator, a stove, a sink, a bed, storage space, a pop top, and a propane space heater.
That was 16 years ago, I think cars are better quality now. Finicky air-cooled engines are few and far between nowadays — the guy who bought the van from us sent a rod through the crankcase a few years later after driving 100km down the highway in second gear — and cars generally have better metals, more sensors, and less risk of bursting into flames.
If you were just looking for something that would safely provide shelter you wouldn't need something that was the most pleasant place I've ever lived. One night I slept in a Wal-Mart parking lot on an airbed in the bed of a pickup truck with a hardtop. https://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/ctd/7553195670.html is a 23-year-old pickup with hardtop for US$8000, with a 2.5-meter-long bed, and it's a Toyota, so you wouldn't have to fix something new on it every day.
Oh, about toilets. Piss is easy enough to manage in Gatorade bottles but shit requires more care. An ecovillage I used to spend a lot of time at, years after the Vanagon, used 20-liter plastic paint buckets for the shit. After shitting in the bucket you would throw in enough wood ash to raise the shit pH into a sterile range and also increase its osmotic pressure into a sterile range, preventing fermentation either aerobic or anaerobic, similar to a chemical toilet. They didn't keep the shit buckets in the living shelters but there was so little smell that I think it wouldn't have been a problem as long as you never spilled one. Later they switched to composting the shit, replacing the ash with dry leaves, which are reasonably effective and easier to get. I have used this solution, with the addition of a black garbage bag, when housesitting for a friend whose toilet was broken; at least over a short period of time there is no smell. These buckets cost US$6 new with a totally airtight lid.
For hygiene, we had wet wipes, rubbing alcohol, and clean cotton clothes. It's surprising how far those can get you, even if you aren't stopping in at truck rest stops and the houses of friends and relatives.
Sewage is definitely the weak point of van life. Cassette toilets with dissolving toilet paper feel almost civilized though. With Odorlos there is basically no smell either.
The Thetford porta potti I have in my DIY campervan was $250. Chemicals cost about $10/mo. It has a 5 gallon capacity which lasts just a couple days with myself and my partner using it (I built a separate bathroom in my van) but we're often out in the woods where we do a lot of our business outside to make the tank last longer. Emptying usually just requires a quick stop at a vault toilet that are common at the mountain bike trailheads we frequent.
Around $1000. Cassette toilets need more space, and they are permanently mounted, but they are proper flush toilets, unlike porta potties, paint buckets and other such chamber pots. The cassette is larger too, so you can use it longer.
Sorry, I re-read it with that perspective and I see how it could come off that way.
I am actually empathetic to children raised with dumb parents and yuppies who were grifted into selling their belongings to follow the tiny life trend.
Completely agree with you RE grift, but there is a realistic niche that converted work vans offer.
Transits, sprinters, e350 etc are all very common/shared platforms and parts are incredibly cheap, well understood. Tire sizes are standard/cheap, and manufacturer warranty for the drivetrain often still applies. Significantly less GVW combined with 87 octane fuel in an economic 6 cylinder is very attractive to people into van life (for some reason).
Also considering GVW, tripping in an RV allows for very little flexability (imagine getting into a campsite in the woods). So you likely need to tow a smaller vehicle, which at that point may require a CDL depending on area.
"Weight" and the gross vehicle weight rating are completely different things! The GVWR is how much weight the vehicle is designed (and in many cases legally allowed) to carry, including itself. People don't really think about it for regular passenger cars since you'd have to stuff them to the brim with lead to get it over GVWR, but it matters for cargo-hauling vehicles like vans and trucks, or when you tow; in those cases it's easy to go over.
When towing, there's a separate weight rating called the gross combined weight rating (GCWR), which is the GVWR of the tow vehicle plus the GVWR of the trailer.
This is why a lot of people buy empty Sprinters and install internals themselves, basically to save on paying premium for interior installation.
Now it will be possible also to buy quite capable Ford, which is a big plus for this market. After all, it's way easier to maintain Ford in US than Mercedes.
The reality of people that have parked on my block (hoarders, tweakers, general nuisances) are diametrically opposed to the people you see in #vanlife posts. I get why camper bans are growing, even if it's just handling a symptom of the COL crisis.
It is, but when we start talking about 'mobile homes' as some sort of 'luxury small living' thing, then the dollar signs come out. Traditionally mobile homes are on the low end of living, so the features and niceities coincide with that.
Honestly, it feels like a bit of a grift most of the time when I see prices like that for tiny houses or what are basically fancy mobile homes.
Not that I want to defend a $150k RV (my family loves the popup trailer I bought used for $3k) but there are reasons that small RVs can be more expensive than large RVs.
Large RVs are built up from a bare chassis. Much of the internal construction is done with the walls off. Small van-type RVs start with a fully assembled body. You have to build, plumb, wire in tight quarters.
Also, small custom fixtures are generally more expensive than standard fiberboard RV panels, drawers, etc.
There seems to be an excellent business opportunity for the typical HN looking-for-a-startup-idea person here: Import €50,000 European camper-vans to the US and sell them for $150,000 each. Even considering customs duty, paper work, etc. there should remain an excellent margin.
Can't, legally - now you can do 25yr old Japanese Kei-Vans but then you also need to support 25yr old Kei Vans, and that is far from a HN esqeue startup of an SAAS.
Most of the people importing Japanese cars are not supporting them. A lot of them are not even doing pre-purchase inspections IN Japan before bringing them over. That might cost about $200, but that's $200 that could be in their pocket. They'll bring in any broke, rusty, hunk of shit and someone will buy it, and that's it from them.
And that is a big deal, the other part is simple maintenance. I looked into this and spotted a huge market where, these dealerships do import these keivans, keicars, etc but have no idea about the unique parts for them for basic things like spark plugs, oil filters, belts and such.
Some lines like the Suzuki Carry are great, same tail light assembly for 1998-2020, same timing belt, same accessory belt, etc but that is a big thing that everyone seems to forget. Everyone "fetishizes" these cars, but most can't turn a wrench, or know how to order parts for them.
So it becomes a huge sunk cost. At the other hand, if you import them en massee, you also have a solid basis of guaranteed business. You can self guarantee a "warranty" on them for a huge premium with a "Swap out" guarantee, in case of disaster (for example, kei car is purchaed $500 at auction, shipping to USA is about $800-2000, and retail is $4500-$10,000).
That's where the marketing and service catch is at. 3 months warranty, free swap out, and then when that expires you have a customer for life, because most shops will not work on a car they can't order parts from a USA national supplier, or have access to interchange catalog.
But then it would be semi easier just to export/import whatever car was on Gran Turismo/Gran Turismo 2/Animes e.g. Initial D because those probably have minor interchange support and if there was a USA model, then parts are most likely 100% available, just that the car is in a RHD configuration vs LHD.
Some cars like a R32/R33 skyline, MK3 Supra are $$$$ priced out eternally though.
Not everything that doesn't make sense to you is a grift. Vans are tempting for a whole host of reasons and building one out as opposed to plopping a box on the back of a cut-off is going to be more expensive.
>most used three-axle full-size rv's start around 80k. these things seem like a grift to screw millennials out of what little cash they had in the first place.
This is an 80k van. You can buy a ready to go motorhome for that. Nobody trying to have fun on a budget is buying this. The target buyers are going to piss their money away on status-broadcasting experiences and goods whether they piss it into Ford's bucket or someone else's. Why does Ford have any less right to get in on the action than any other business?
For that amount of money one could buy a sailboat, have more space, travel to nice places and not pay road taxes. Boat maintenance is expensive though.
A retired friend who recently picked up a nice camper van for travel mentions something rarely seen in the vanlife social media stuff: that most folks he's met doing the vanlife thing will stay for a few days in their van, then a few in a hotel / short term rental. This latter part is often ignored or glossed over by folks advocating this sort of lifestyle.
The main reason for this is because showering and washing stuff (clothes/dishes) and generally keeping clean is a huge pain in just a van. Without a source of fresh water and easy way to store and heat it, you get dirty really fast. Especially if you're hiking / mountain biking / doing whatever beyond just sitting around.
The "Living in your car" youtubers I follow generally do not do this. Instead they go to truck rest stops like "Loves" which have properly maintained Shower + Laundry facilities and depending on how much gas you purchase, are either comped a free shower or typically pay ~10-15$ for it. (Or if you are a really attractive female, friendly truckers might walk up and offer a coupon for a free shower since they accumulate tons of extra coupons due to buying so much fuel)
These showers from what I seen are a large private room with a code lock so you can peacefully freshen up.
The youtubers I follow stress that you have to be extra strict to maintain cleanliness especially if you live in your car. They develop daily routines for cleaning and it seems to work from what I can see.
It might be more cost effective to drive a fuel-efficient vehicle and stay in Airbnb's on a dollars per night basis, not to mention vastly more comfortable. What is the non-recoverable cost of a van (depreciation, maintenance, gas++) per night?
I definitely know one guy like you mention. He has a $60k used van build but stays in motels when it's cold. Has to do a bunch of cold prep work (put up insulation, turn on a heater) in the van at night before he goes to bed in the motel. We were ribbing him for doing all this shit with his van with terrible MPG and scary driving on windy, icy roads in Montana (2WD very tall vehicle), while we were zipping around in a small SUV, but he likes the van because it's a trendy conversation piece / fantasy fulfillment.
Said friend of mine uses his van more like folks would tent camping; just for a day or three at a time. Or he'll sleep it in and shower at truck stops while driving cross country, but then have a destination where he stays at a rental place.
It works out quite well and he can afford it, so it's a great solution for comfort while traveling (no single night motel hassles) and is still fine once he gets there.
I feel like it would be more enjoyable to drive a comfortable fuel efficient car. Camp for a bit, stay in hotels for a bit. Just to give yourself that flexibility.
It’s easy to find parking in the city if you’re in any of the areas outside of downtown, like the sunset, you just have to move every week for street cleaning
I've just returned to Australia yesterday after 10 weeks living with my family of five (kids 4-10) in my shuttle bus in the US. Following vanlife communities, some people routinely raise this sort of thing like it's a gotcha, which I find strange. Advocating! Realistically, if you're on a roadtrip and broadcasting it publicly, the laundry stops and the like just aren't very novel or exciting. You photograph the hikes and the food and so on. I don't document doing laundry at home either!
Some people handwash clothes. Others use laundromats.
For the most part, I renovated our bus in a few days so it's nothing slick. We didn't bother with a bathroom because it's a lot of extra effort for something you rarely need. Maybe it disgusts some people, but when camping I can go 10+ days without a shower and don't feel horrible. People sponge-bath or use wipes. People with van showers often just use them as wet storage areas.
RV parks in the US right now are US$40-100. If you're not boondocking, state/national park campgrounds are often $35-40 range - you can get a mid-week basic motel in a little town for $40-50 and chew through someone else's internet, hot water, etc.
Many people forgo a sink, but washing dishes isn't too painful, even with unheated water or water heated on a gas cooktop if you don't have a hot water system.
We typically travelled with a few gallons of drinking water and then 10 gallons of water for washing up. People with better setups would have a lot more. Expedition vehicles have even more (water, grey, black and fuel, etc).
TL;DR: some of these things are glossed over because they're boring. Washing up isn't difficult in a van/bus. People use laundromats for clothes. Showers/bathrooms use up more space and are a hassle to build.
This is ridiculous, I have met several people living full time in them and not any of them do this and spend time in hotels. If anything at all they have a home base and will do domestic things at home between trips, but they all use laundromats and public showers, etc in between.
So, wait. This is just a nearly $70,000+ base (and significantly higher optioned) Transit... that you still have to build all of the actual camper systems into?
Seems like a significant price for an empty van. I can only imagine the upfit costs post-van would run you up into the "why didn't I buy a class B from the start" territory.
I've seen a lot of pretty nice builds that were in the low to mid 5 figures, but those are generally conversions done by an owner rather than a shop and aren't starting with a brand new vehicle.
Yeah if the car manufacturers are gonna start selling trims that do all the really scary stuff for you (like cutting a hole in the roof), and basically include that work as part of the car financing, it should lower the difficulty of a DIY conversion and make it a more reasonable option.
Actually a good number of us DIY folks do buy these new. We can do a conversion, live in it a couple years and then flip it when we're ready to do another build for nice profit. I bought a brand new AWD transit two years back and cut two 14" vent holes in the roof on day 2 of ownership. The used market is just wild enough to make buying new make sense, and clean ownership history makes resale easier. There are lots of people doing what I do.
Are they really using stronger parts? I haven't seen what is beefed up in any brochures, articles or press releases.
They mention a 3.5 inch lift, and some 30 inch tires. That's all I can find. Can't find a single other thing that makes this "off road" worthy other than a bunch of useless black cladding.
This is probably as beefed up as an AWD Rav4 is vs a FWD Rav4.
I think the pricing varies. I have a friend who bought a used RAM van for around $15k and put $25k into converting it into a home—and a pretty nice one. $40k is a lot of money, but she left her apartment and started living in the van full-time. So I think there are always trade-offs.
I am skeptical at how many people are investing a house down payment into a Sprinter van. There are plenty of people out there doing it for a fraction of the cost.
There would be people spending almost $100k and they can probably justify it. A gap year trip would be $x0k. Doing it in your 30s, you can probably justify spending more. Travel around for 6-24 months, and every night you're boondocking and cooking cheap in the vehicle saves you $100-200.
But you're right that there are definitely people doing it cheaper. We're an Australian family who bought an old bus in the US for $3500 and then spent $5-7k on fitting it out across two trips. We sold a half-share to another Australian and recouped some of the money. Car hire alone would be thousands per month and motels right now are not cheap, so it's worked for us. Gas costs remain the enduring issue, however, especially if you're moving around a lot to see things and not just living in a localised area.
Whoever makes an EV-based van chassis to build upon will sell loads.
Yeah, but for $115k you can get an entry model Winnebago Class B[1] and not have to sink the time and labor into something that will still have resale value once you get bored of it.
I would never, ever want to buy someone else's "project" RV when they decide to get rid of it. You don't know what corners were cut there. (I know I'm hypocritical here, I know RVs aren't always the best built think in Elkheart (or Forest City), but at least an RV has an expected standard of things you get.)
RV interiors are not built for full-time living and will quickly fall apart if you use them that way. They are built for being used a few times a year.
Vans are usually a lot better equipped than traditional motorhomes. Before vanlife, a motorhome (in Europe; I don't know about the US) was basically just for driving from home to a campsite, without the hassle of towing a caravan (travel trailer). The batteries were maybe enough to power the lights while you cook dinner and the only way to charge them was by hooking up to mains. The water tank was tiny, barely enough water to wash up, and the toilet needed to be emptied every other day.
Today an off-grid van will have two or three ways of charging the batteries, enough water to last a week, a toilet that needs emptying once every few months, and a heater and enough insulation to comfortably camp in the next big freeze. Traditional manufacturers are starting to realise some of these things, but most are still primarily designed to be used on a campsite with a mains hookup.
I still can’t figure out why Tesla hasn’t released an all electric camper with solar panels and starlink built in specifically aimed at digital nomads. It’s a massive missed opportunity. They could literally release the vehicle that defines an entire generation and movement the same way the VW Campervan was the defining vehicle of the 60s.
Tesla can't even release two cars they promised and already designed - Cybertruck and Roadster. Semi, announced in 2017 just started shipping in limited quantities. They can't ramp up production fast enough for the cars they are already producing to satisfy demand. There is no way they have capacity to work on a van in addition to that.
P.S. But, but they have time to work on "humanoid robot"?
I believe this is because most folks who fancy themselves as vanlifers want to fulfill the idea of going off the grid, of disconnecting from infrastructure for a while. Electric doesn't really allow that because solar won't allow for fast enough charging to compete with petrol. It's also very easy to bring along a couple jerry cans of gas to extend range, whereas with solar one would have to park and wait.
Anecdotally, all of the "trendy outdoors type" I see with expensive kitted-out vehicles are from California who blast into the wilderness as fast as possible to get back home before the weekend is over.
Haha fair enough then, my perception has probably been warped by the media into thinking the majority of digital nomads were relatively easy going hippie 2.0 types
I think a large electric RV would work well. Large ones are as spacious as an apartment, with dual bathrooms, washer/dryer, outside tv and more. Running a generator is a pain, and all-electric with decent batteries would make it silent.
That said, the market is very small/niche.
They could go the way that all the other companies go -- release a chassis for manufacturers to build on.
Yes they're not going to make as much money selling camper vans as the regular car models but, as I said, you have the opportunity to create the iconic vehicle of the decade. That does absolute wonders for your brand and would be a nice boost considering other vehicle manufacturers are now starting to catch up and even overtake them in certain areas (f150 lightning). People still think VW Campers are cool today and they still sell for silly amounts of money. You can't underestimate the value of this kind of thing; part of the reason Tesla has got the market cap it's got today is because Musk played the brand image card so well in the early days.
If Tesla could convince a few big name surfers and other extreme athletes to use them plus a few high profile digital nomads they'd be absolutely laughing to the bank. They could also use the same chassis for a panel van like the Transit and Sprinter which would be something that would make them a ton of money.
Thanks for elaborating. It is a compelling idea, but if the goal is to create an iconic vehicle, there are many different options. A campervan is one, I’d say cybertruck is another.
They're inching that way, especially with Starlink, but EVs don't do well driving off-road with a lot of weight, especially into remote areas without charging infrastructure nearby. I was hoping my next vehicle would be this concept, but there's a way to go to get there.
Electric Camper like a VW Buzz, I think that’s a niche market. Still profitable, but you can sell higher priced things like the Tesla Roadster 2 way faster.
Has anyone else noticed that Ford is secretly mastering quick turnaround (relatively speaking) on new models to catch certain trends?
Specifically, I'm thinking of two examples so far:
1. Ford Lightning electric pickup
2. This van
Neither of these are super unique in the market but that's not really the point. Maybe I'm out of touch but my impression of automakers is 10-year lead times and a fixed selection with maximum mainstream appeal, and a few trims and color choices. Conversely, Ford seems to be jumping on "niche trends" (again, relative to the industry) with only a year or two of lead time.
It's not even secret. Ford dropped sedans before everyone else. That decision had me scratching my head, but it turned out they were ahead of the curve on US market preferences. Im not a fan of trucks, but the Lightning is not half bad as a car replacement. If Ford were to announce an electric Lighting with Vehicle-to-Load - I'd sign up immediately.
I’m disappointed they didn’t leverage the expectations to have that van electric. There are now several prototypes that prove that vans have enough surface to charge with solar panels (and some extensions) and be fully off-grid.
So you can save something like $10 of gas per day off sitting in the sun? Sounds pretty good for the intended use.
That giant battery could potentially power your climate control and appliances etc when off grid. And if you run down the battery by accident, you won’t be stuck for long.
Sitting in the sun cooking to death. Mobile air conditioners running from solar don't tend to perform well. That 800W you can get from solar under ideal conditions is not going to keep everything running.
Fold-out array + extra ones on the ground next to it?
3 miles per hour is 40 miles per day. You stay in a place for three days off grid you can probably drive back. And bottomless power for cooking, heat, internet/starlink, etc.
My dream is an EV RV that has airline-level highway self driving and starlink+solar panels. I'd sell everything and live in that.
we come full circle, that's not who's after these vehicles. The person parked in a parking lot in walmart likely would have a RV or regular commuter car, not a fully decked out 150k conversion van.
To OP point, rich people pretending to play poor for vlogging and self-idealized virtuosity can't wait 5+ days to get 200m range out of solar panels, videos gotta go out daily!
You and every other anti-EV comedian is only acknowledging the 1 and 0 states of a battery - full and empty. Partially discharged, charging, and 'just need to get a couple of miles' are also very real possibilities fulfilled by having a small array on the roof.
If only. If you had 3, 100w solar panels on top of your ev van it would take about two months of charging to go 200 miles. That’s assuming clear skies and parking in full sun.
This is based on current Teslas reportedly getting 100m of range on 34kWh and your solar setup being 70% efficient.
Yeah, though this is probably after market upgrade department, along with all the living quarter conversions that come with the territory. I can't imagine many after market installers not having a solar panel option for these.
I'm not saying it's not good or that it lacks synergy, I'm just saying the EV part isn't important for the specific goal of an electric off-grid experience.
> And IF they solve highway self-driving to the point you can safely let the RV drive and self-recharge overnight... oh my god.
A moderately optimistic estimate for power production is about 1kWh per square meter of panels per day. With a 25 square meter roof, and saving 80% of the power, that's 20kWh and probably gives you 20-40 miles of range.
(If you meant driving and recharging overnight via plugging in, then sure that's cool, but self-driving with stops at stations isn't inherently an electric-exclusive experience.)
If that's true, 6 hours per day of sunlight gets you 30 km of driving distance per day. That's faster than walking, and more importantly, it's plenty of distance to find someplace new to park every day so you can avoid annoying sedentists who get suspicious of the new van in their neighborhood.
Yeah, at that level of expenditures it's an asset you're consuming, not an investment you expect to grow over time. If you have big repairs you may be better off buying a new one; I kind of wish I'd done that. You can read my sad story in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33457648.
BTW by "avoid annoying sedentists" upthread I meant "avoid annoying the sedentists", not "avoid the annoying sedentists".
> I’m disappointed they didn’t leverage the expectations to have that van electric.
Don't worry about it. Ford sells an electric version of the Transit van. Every single new piece of this ready-to-convert van will have a part number that you can order at every Ford dealer on earth. Once everything is available, someone with the cash to burn is going to figure out what works together and provide a list so you can make your own without wasting money.
The article says that this will cost $15k more than a base Transit passenger van. I'm not sure that is a good apples-to-apples comparison, but whatever. Again, once it's available, people are going to figure out whether it's a better deal to buy the whole van or just the parts that are useful to you.
Young middle class people without kids could, in principle, adopt the poor people solution and pocket the savings. But that's not how people work. Only the rich can differentiate themselves enough to escape the stigma.
The target audience is the RV crowd who don't want have an RV, or the camping crowd who don't want to always camp. RVs are expensive and a pain to drive, and camping is tough in bad weather. Lots of retired or close to retired people go on weekend camping trips to the mountains. Of course, Alex Honnold also made living in a van cool.
You don't have to be a high earner to make it work, just a remote job and the desire to do it. I meet lot's of people who definitely aren't high earners but are living this life by choice.
Money talks. The average Burning Man attendee: "Burning Man census reveals the average burner has a household income of up to $100,000 is 35, male, white and will spend nearly $2,500."
Burning Man requires a lot of work in advance, it is not people going down to live by a river.
eh, I turned my Jeep into a house on wheels on the cheap (DIY), then drove it all the way around Africa over three years, living in it full time. 54,000 miles through 35 countries. [1]
The cost of the vehicle AND the entire trip (ALL expenses) was only a touch more than the barebones van in the article.
I'm in Australia, a great many people retire to a few years in some kind of camping rig - single body or vehicle plus trailer or ... (bus plus trailer with boat plus small car and motor bikes, all ingeneouly towed | stacked).
Outside of the main cities many rural people work across a big area, I grew up in the Kimberley and spent a decade or so in global geophysical exploration across all the continents and many countries - I can get by with a swag but I do like a good minimal fit out :-)
Your jeep looks pretty tidy - clearly did the job!.
and then there's always the bike option (a fellow W.Australian):
Damn - I would've dropped in had I known, I left at sparrowfart this morning and am having first tea break on the inland road up toward the Murchison quiet zone for a bit of field instrument checks.
I SMS'd my father who's heading in to town (Perth) later today, he might drop in over the weekend to look at the toys, he'll be just another 87 yr old with a critical and curious eye.
Our products are popular with the vanlife crowd. We’ve sold to dozens of conversion companies at this point (we sell wire that can be used to hook up all the low voltage devices that get installed in them). So I’ve tried to figure out who is buying these, since as many people have noted, they’re so danged expensive. The best I’ve come up with is: people enjoy recreation. Some people like to go to the lake and might buy themselves a $100k boat. Other people like camping and might buy themselves a $100k van conversion. As for why a van vs an RV, I think there are arguments about size and maneuverability, but really I think it’s just that the Mercedes vans are cool, RVs are not, and people with disposable income like cool things more than uncool things.
I agree, seems to me like a lot of their popularity was tied to pandemic lockdowns coupled with people's balance sheets going up because of stock, real estate, etc. Basically, a microcosm of the huge increase in home improvement and durable goods spending in the last 2 years.
A new Mercedes Sprinter is around EUR 40K. If you are handy you can outfit it for living with another EUR 15K. Put in a wood stove and you have yourself a home.
No one ever adds VAT. Consumer goods mostly come from China. You would expect them to be 23% more expensive across the board than the US where sales tax is always lower and added at time of purchase.
Things produced within the EU can be a better deal if it’s not too labor intensive. Camper bands are a good example of something being built within the EU and able to have a price advantage, even after factoring in taxes.
Take, for example, an iphone 14 pro, base model. Prices are from apple.com and apple.com/fr as of today. I choose this because it's the exact same model that's available from the same retailer, so easy to compare. But this happens with many other products.
US: 999 USD
FR: 1329 EUR
That's way more than 23% (999 * 1.03 * 1.2 = 1235).
Sure, add on a little extra for the depreciating currency and currency risk (euro has been losing value vs USD) and likely at the time Apple was setting the price it was close to parity with the dollar.
Sure, I can see Apple trying to set a price high enough to account for this, so they don't have to change it every other day. But boy did Apple (and others) see this situation coming since five years ago (when I started following this). Electronics (and related products) have always been more expensive here than in the US, even years ago, even accounting for VAT and other taxes.
Hell, when I was in college, (~2010, in France), I used to be really into photography. Bought a tripod and head. Italian brand, made in Italy. It was cheaper for me to order it from B&H in NY, pay for conversion charges, shipping, import duties, VAT, etc on top of the shipping, than it was to buy it local. Both Italy and France had the Euro at the time.
Huh? I was in California and food is not expensive at all in the supermarket there. And I'm not talking about Aldi quality food but organic.
Especially when you consider how much richer Californians are VS Europeans.
Maybe it's because California has got a performant agriculture.
Mostly housing, healthcare and education are more expensive in the US but consumer prices are generally significantly lower. Check numbeo.
Throwing in the "restaurant" part for a grocery product makes this logic hard to follow. That and the misspelling makes whatever joke you're doing completely incomprehensible to me.
I always imagined that in a world of self driving fuel efficient cars, you could just tell your car to make rounds around highways, effectively living in a pod for days at a time. Like those long train rides.
I think that’ll be the future soon enough, only caveat being the thing may broadside semis or run off cliffs from time to time because the manufacturer cheaped out on sensors and rigorous engineering.
But hey, that’s why we need an intermodal private pod transport system. Purchase and decorate your pod to taste, then live and work in it as poorly-paid drivers ferry you and several other pods (each lacking line of sight on the other) around the world.
I look forward to blog posts filled with live, detailed accounts of startups losing pods (with their indignant customers inside them) at various rail and shipping depots.
It’s not too far fetched. With remote work and effectively virtual avatars of your fake self via social media, we are all in a stationary pod now days, your little box somewhere that doesn’t move. In our own little spaceships. Whether the box moves around is kind of a logistical thing (is it cheaper and more sustainable than say, the absurd real estate/rent bonanza? Might be).
It sounds depressing, but, I don’t know. In a far enough future, I wouldn’t mind a flying spaceship to work from. Might land it from time to time at a beach.
It’s a little bit of a redefinition of property. Han Solos property wasn’t actual land. It was the Millennium Falcon and unobstructed Space. Luckily for Americans, we have a shit ton of highways. So we have the space part, just not the spaceships (those little pods that move around with auto pilot).
The self driving cars wouldn’t drive at speeds humans would drive at. If anything, the windows would probably be blinded out with some fake moving image to simulate speed.
1. Before Covid times and increasing demand, buying new at 40% off the list price was possible, you just had to time it right with new models coming out.
2. RVs lose something like 20-30% of their value in the first year, 50% in the first 4-6 years.
Buy used, it's better that way (all the warranty work has been dealt with; very few brands manage to build them well enough to not need warranty work).
Ford has a new vehicle? Okay, if Ford is interested in new vehicles, then here is one I'd like to see:
Cars are a big chunk of the US family budget. Here should be a good way to save a LOT of money:
Start with a Ford 2-door sedan from the 1940s, 1950s, or maybe 1960s.
Use a modern electronic controlled system for the fuel mixture and ignition.
Use modern, long lasting suspension ball joints and bushings.
Use disk brakes with dual master cylinders.
Use a modern automatic transmission.
Use modern rubber formulations in the tires.
Do what have to do for current laws on the exhaust system, and try to use modern materials that will do well resisting corrosion.
Otherwise, keep it as it was: No additional electronics or systems. Certainly no 'stability control' and hopefully no 'ABS'. Stability control steps on the brakes when I don't want to, and ABS releases the brakes when I step on them -- get rid of both of them.
No electric windows.
No power steering.
No power brakes.
No air conditioning.
Now, what might the price have to be????? One half current prices? One third? Only 20%???
Cheaper to buy and to maintain.
I'd especially like a stick shift transmission with very wide ratios, maybe 4:1 first gear, and a very low number rear axle ratio, maybe 2.5:1.
Apparently could still use some of the 6 or 8 cylinder engines used back then -- apparently are still using them with little change.
This vehicle will be illegal to sell in big parts of the world and get 0 stars in any crash test.
No ABS or ESP? Can't sell this car in USA, EU, India or China.
E: coming to think of it the only places you might be able to sell this is some low income countries in South America, Africa and maybe central asia?
Looks like you are correct: E.g., this ESP (ESC -- electronic stability thingy) is now required nearly everywhere.
Now I'm especially glad my car, used I bought recently, is too old to have ESP. It has ABS which doesn't work -- fine with me. The brakes, with dual master cylinders, work fine. A guess is that the problem with ABS is a corroded electrical ground connection back to the frame -- that illustrates one of my concerns for ABS, ESP, etc., maintenance problems.
To me some good news is likely most or all of these electronic systems can fail and the car will be more like one from the 1950s and still work fine. So, if ESP or ABS gets sick, just cut some wires and drive off just fine!
I've driven nearly 1 million miles with only one accident, not serious, and with no insurance claims! I have a squeaky clean driving record and am a total cream puff customer for the auto insurance industry. In all that driving, I never had, needed, or wanted either ABS or ESP.
I used to do a LOT of driving, and cost, time, botheration for maintenance of the car was always an issue. For so much driving the current cars with ABS, ESP, etc. look more expensive, both to buy and to maintain, by a factor of several.
All of this urgency to make cars more complicated looks like a big shot in the gut of the US family budget: US families are having a tough time paying for a house, schooling for the kids, groceries, medical care, and now the cost of driving is a factor of several more expensive than it was and could be.
Looks like there will be some ups/downs, I don't know which, of prices in the used car market. E.g., maybe some owner of a recent car gets a repair estimate of $15,000 to fix one of these super electronic systems and decides to sell the car. Then the price on the used car market might be nicely low! And the buyer of the used car just disables the electronic system!
Yes, I know, there was a big problem of smog from cars in NYC, LA, maybe another 10 large US cities, but I never lived in any of those places and now live in TN with no chance of any smog problems.
Besides, a lot of the US has, had, no smog problem: Some parts have very low population density and people can get winter heat from wood fires that put out smoke and still have no smog or smoke problems! Smoke from a wood fire? Ah, smells like home at Thanksgiving or Christmas! And a lot of the rest of the US is farming country where there are tractors, often Diesel, with little or nothing for smog reduction -- with, wonder of wonders, still no smog problem!
There's long been a big theme: Go after the cars!!! That's part of a bigger theme, really popular in some parts of Europe: We all need more government to do things for us!!!!
I like seat belts fine. Maybe air bags are worth the cost and botheration. ESP, modulating the power to the drive wheels, applying the brakes in tricky ways -- I can't believe that that would actually be good for anything.
> Spoken like a dude who's never lived in a place with air inversions.
Right: I have no idea just what that is!
Generally I like the NIH, but I would not be the least bit worried about the increased probability of cancer in actual, real life from an NIH study of common smoke from a fire used to cook some food or heat a house.
(1) That study would be too tough to do with much accuracy, e.g., too difficult to get good data.
(2) Maybe they got some smoke, let it condense, painted it on the skin of some mice, and checked for early signs of cancer. Gee, if I become a mouse, then I will be careful not to paint smoke goo on my bare skin and leave it there for weeks.
(3) Maybe they analyzed some of the chemicals in some smoke, just in a little glass dish in their lab tested the chemicals for being mutagenic, and then made the leap that this means carcinogenic.
I just noticed at Google that the WHO (World Health Organization) believes that "processed meats" are carcinogenic -- guess I should not put pepperoni sausage on my pizza and should throw away my hot dogs and my Italian sausage. Gee, what about BBQ cooked in a smoker? What about the old practice of preserving fresh meat in a "smoke house" -- assume the meat is sterile on the inside and with the smoke make it also sterile on the outside. If not smoke, then salt.
Instead of making up hypotheses based on 20th century urban legends, you could have spent thirty seconds reading the abstract which tells you what they actually did:
Methods Using questionnaire data, we classified subjects as predominant solid-fuel users (e.g., coal, wood) or nonsolid-fuel users (e.g., oil, gas, electricity). Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and to compute 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for age, sex, education, smoking status, race/ethnicity, and study center.
Results Compared with nonsolid-fuel users, predominant coal users (OR = 1.64; 95% CI, 1.49–1.81), particularly coal users in Asia (OR = 4.93; 95% CI, 3.73–6.52), and predominant wood users in North American and European countries (OR = 1.21; 95% CI, 1.06–1.38) experienced higher risk of lung cancer. The results were similar in never-smoking women and other subgroups.
> You don't really believe that NIH stuff??
I don't disbelieve it. We already know that long-term exposure to other kinds of smoke causes lung cancer and other health problems, what's special about wood smoke?
Good grief! Logistic regression! Back when I was studying such things and saw that it looked fishy and I tried to forget it and was fairly successful!
For just regression, there are some supporting arguments, even with minimal assumptions. For logistic regression?
Apparently they controlled on lots of variables -- commonly that is fishy and tends to need a lot, too much, data. For data they had
(5,105 cases and 6,535 controls)
Good grief!
From the NIH reference you gave,
"... Globally, lung cancer is estimated to account for almost 1.4 million incident cases of cancer each year and has been the most common cancer in the world for more than two decades (Parkin et al. 2005). "
Good grief.
All of this is only because I typed in
"Smoke from a wood fire? Ah, smells like home at Thanksgiving or Christmas!"
It still does! Hmm, maybe there will be a movement to outlaw new fireplaces and to brick up old ones!
of a guy posting video clips of his work on building post frame building, there is a picture of his huge living room with his little wood burning furnace and its tall smokestack rising to the outside. Such furnaces tend to try to be nearly air tight, but likely there will be enough smoke in the house to smell like Thanksgiving or Christmas! Then the main smoke does go outside -- hmm, maybe all of Iowa will be afraid???
Ford has no trouble selling vehicles at their current prices, so I think they have nothing to gain by competing downward with themselves for a niche vehicle that appeals to people who want a utilitarian basic low-priced vehicle.
If you want something spartan you may have to look at a less regulated market like motorcycles.
Have Prius camped in the bay area for a few months. It is possible to do this gradually if you're not straight off-roading. Slowly building out the interior, taking things one step at a time. Pros and cons, of course, but the freedom of being on wheels, just driving, without pressure to go back to a particular spot at night has been immensely freeing.
If you are beginner in your journey, like I was initially, (no tinted windows, exiting vehicle before re-entering from the back to sleep), then I would recommend Walmarts. They always have car campers parked overnight, many people sleeping within earshot, round the clock security cruising around, easy to find privacy where you are surrounded by a tree or bush or something on front&side of vehicle.
If you are advanced (tinted windows, rainguards to crack open windows without being visible, internal supplementary window covers so you can have lights inside while blacked out from outside, and a way of getting to the sleeping area without exiting the vehicle), then the world is your oyster. You get very good at developing a sixth sense for safety, just based on how the people on the streets are behaving, the houses, the trashiness, etc, but you can also use my favorite method: fire up Zillow and find rich neighborhoods and/or find neighborhoods with artisanal French bakeries.
This is more nimble than traditional campervan, motorhome or RV, and it's also much cheaper to boot. You can also use the van as normal vehicle with the available five seats everyday if you are not on the road or camping, unlike the traditional ones.
This American Ford Transit van has a cousin that is currently being sold in the UK and Europe. It's official Ford's vehicle with collaboration with Westfalia that has more than 70 years designing campervan conversion vehicles [1]. The version with the toilet inside is called Ford Transit Nugget Plus and the waiting time is more than a year. It can cater for four adults sleeping inside and has the built-in toilet unlike the normal Nugget van.
> For a time, Ford CEO Jim Farley had a reference to the bit — and his late cousin — in his Twitter profile: “Mustang and racing fan. Happen to love white vans ... preferably down by the river.” The auto executive has paid other tributes to his cousin on the social media platform through the use of memes and other media.
Popping over to the Wikipedia page, the connections to SNL continue:
> James D. Farley Jr. (born June 10, 1962) is an American businessman who is the CEO of Ford and a board member of Harley-Davidson.[1] His career in automobiles was inspired by his grandfather, who began work at Henry Ford's River Rouge Plant in 1918.
Love the title and the tiny home on wheels trend. So much creativity and craftsmanship to learn from. It’s a wonderful video wormhole imho. Would do it in a heartbeat if just graduating uni.
Not sure how many under 35 will get the joke…like the fascination with the CD-Rom in the Jurassic Park Ford Explorer.
There's an old Saturday Night Live bit[0] about a motivational speaker who eventually admits that his life sucks and he lives in a van down by the river. Pretty funny, although I suppose I've spoiled it for you.
I'd love to see a follow up to that sketch playing on the subsequent three decades of financial destruction.
The motivational speaker is doing the same bit, trying to scare kids with the prospect of having to "live in a van, down by the river". The kids seem excited at the prospect. They ask the speaker if he really thinks they could ever afford such a thing, if he knows of anybody selling an affordable van, or if he knows anywhere they could even visit the river that hasn't been filled up with industrial trash.
The motivational speaker grows increasingly frustrated with the kids, seemingly unable to get across to them why living in a van down by the river is a bad thing. The kids just don't seem to understand. The motivational speaker gets so frustrated that he has a heart attack and dies on the spot.
Cut to the settling of the motivational speaker's estate. It turns out he owned an entire camp ground and trailer park, making a top-tier income off of the rent from many people living in various vehicles down by the river. The kids sign a 50 year mortgage to buy the speaker's rusty old van from the speaker's kids, getting implanted with subcutaneous microchips to help secure the loan. They smile as the sun sets on their new waterfront view, beyond the line of new/expensive vans closer to the water. They live happily ever after.
I was scrolling as fast as I could through all this talk about vans--which is really just byplay--looking for a reference to Matt Foley motivational speaker, and holy chipped collateral did this make my day.
I have a similar van, though a size class smaller (Mercedes-Benz Metris; the only one sold in the US in that size class) and we did SOME of the upfitting you see on these.
L-track the full length of the back that the bench seat is in and can slide along, swiveling front seats, standalone power system, insulated window covers for every window, and planning on the Westfalia style roof tent that is available.
It tows 5,000 lbs, has a 2,200 lb payload, and gets over 30mpg at 60mph on the highway (32.5 yesterday). Most practical vehicle I've owned, but as I said, we only did a partial upfitting as we don't need the "living" stuff, just the "camping" and flexible use stuff (my son is autistic and it's his space when he can't handle grocery shopping, etc.).
I never understood how can people sleep with that 178cm interior width as always pictured in photos [1]. Are all people living in these camper vans midgets or what?
I built a camper van from a Promaster and it’s 78 inches across in the back. So with a thin layer of insulation I can fit a full size mattress across the back. The Promaster is wider than the Transit or the Sprinter.
The same way people do it in tents. The Transit is plenty big for living. I like the Sprinter though, you can put a bathroom with a toilet in some of them. A wood stove is also useful.
I like the idea of vanlife a lot, and stealth vans even more. But being attached to a pricey, big, and gas guzzling van is not my definition of freedom. I opted to build a cheaper and more natural alternative for this. Go look at https://www.theredpanther.org if you want to see my bicycle cart/caravan. Pedal powered, only 42 kilograms (without luggage) and building the thing only costs me a couple of hundred euros.
Does this news story strike anyone else as native advertising, i.e. a product placement disguised as news? As always, it's hard to discern between the two, since the lines are blurred.
Still, there isn't a lot of novelty to this article-- no new technology, no real changes besides a slightly bolstered build for outdoor travel. The article just describes a new Ford vehicle and tells you the price and when it's available. How is this newsworthy?
You're looking for an 'overlander' conversion. Stick that term in your search engine of choice and you'll find companies happy to build you one, but hold on to your wallet because they're all $200k+ (seriously). They take a $100k offroader (new G wagon, Landcruiser, etc.) and go wild makinng it livable.
Why isn't anyone making center drive Van Life!? Van Life is a great vehicle for testing 'grounded space life' and the entire vehicle should exude that feeling.
Center drive vans are the future of Mobile Living Spaces.
most used three-axle full-size rv's start around 80k. these things seem like a grift to screw millennials out of what little cash they had in the first place.