R-pod 176 and 177 - R-pod Owners Forum

Author

Share Topic

Topic Search

Topic Options

techntrek

Admin Group - pHp

Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Location: MD
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9059

Topic: R-pod 176 and 177
Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 4:55pm

Too bad you aren't closer - I'd ask you buy the 177 and then trade ya (plus a case of beer or two).

Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ Pod instruction manual

Guests

Guest Group

Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 5:13pm

Everyone is making good points here on this thread...

I like the new 176 / 177's... they will be bringing even more people to the R-Pod nation. I think, however, that I'll be very happy with my 172. I got it not for the room inside the unit, but for the lack of room. If I wanted a TT for living "indoors", I wouldn't have purchased my R-Pod. So now, instead of being cramped up in my unit, I'm asking my wife and daughters to join me "outdoors"... lets do some hicking, some cycling, trail walking .. etc,etc,....

My 2 cents!

gmandual

Senior Member

Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 246

Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 6:22pm

Hmm, I wonder how they are routing the electrical, gas, water, and waste water lines for the sink and appliances on the tipout? I realize the tipouts don't go out alot, but anytime you deal with stuff like that which will flex overtime it could be a point of failure. Very cool, a very logical progression for the product line though.

Guests

Guest Group

Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 8:18pm

Hrmmmm... on the 171 vs 177, I say no. I'll stick with the 171. We haven't had space problems while cooking, and I don't do pirouettes in the aisle, so I can't really see an advantage to having a wider floor. The extra weight, and the extra step of dealing with the tip-out when setting up/packing are two big negatives to me.

Strange that FR would flip the toilet to face the back of the trailer... I wonder why.

techntrek

Admin Group - pHp

Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Location: MD
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9059

Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 8:44pm

It gets a bit tight when more than one person is trying to move around, and when the person at the back of the bed has to get up - and over - the one closer to the aisle for a midnight bathroom break. The extra room would help with both.

I bet since they flipped the sink and fridge the toilet had to be flipped to balance out the weight front-to-back.

Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ Pod instruction manual

yizit

podders Helping podders - pHp

Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Location: Wis. Dells, WI
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 663

Posted: 19 Aug 2009 at 1:12am

Gotta agree with all of you. We have the 172 and the 176 is similar. My first thought was...WOW that's nice...a little more room....then... who needs the extra weight and problems with slide outs, and the extra cost. We'll stick with our 172. I'm sure there will a lot of interest out there tho. They are nice floor plans.

Former owner of 2009 172
Darlene & Jim, Ewok our Lhasa
Roada our 2004 Roadtrek C190Popular

Guests

Guest Group

Posted: 19 Aug 2009 at 8:58am

RV manufactures have been doing slideouts with utilities in them for long enough that won't be a problem.

Terry

HuronSailor View Drop Down

Members Profile

Send Private Message

Find Members Posts

Visit Members Homepage

Add to Buddy List

podders Helping podders - pHp

Joined: 10 Jun 2009
Location: Owosso MI
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 704

Posted: 19 Aug 2009 at 9:27am

The two new Rpods are nice, but I'll stay with my 172. No sliding parts to maintain, or leak, and the extra room just isn't that big a deal to us. After spending so many years on boats we've learned to live small. I'm sure the new floor plans will have great appeal to some, though. Variety is the spice blah blah blah ...

.: Mark & Beth :: Silverado 5.3L :: 2018 rPod 180 :.

Guests

Guest Group

Posted: 19 Aug 2009 at 1:50pm

HuronSailor: Did you see windows for the bunks??? I didn't

we would still have to put those in too.

Lee

gmandual

Senior Member

Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 246

Posted: 20 Aug 2009 at 11:47am

The two things I would love to see on the new models would be porthole windows in the bunks and a window on the door. The one downside for the 172 design is the lack of natural lighting towards the front of the unit.

Author	Message Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic
techntrek Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Admin Group - pHp Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Location: MD Online Status: Offline Posts: 9059	Topic: R-pod 176 and 177 Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 4:55pm
	Too bad you aren't closer - I'd ask you buy the 177 and then trade ya (plus a case of beer or two).
	Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ Pod instruction manual

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 5:13pm
	Everyone is making good points here on this thread... I like the new 176 / 177's... they will be bringing even more people to the R-Pod nation. I think, however, that I'll be very happy with my 172. I got it not for the room inside the unit, but for the lack of room. If I wanted a TT for living "indoors", I wouldn't have purchased my R-Pod. So now, instead of being cramped up in my unit, I'm asking my wife and daughters to join me "outdoors"... lets do some hicking, some cycling, trail walking .. etc,etc,.... My 2 cents!

gmandual Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 246	Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 6:22pm
	Hmm, I wonder how they are routing the electrical, gas, water, and waste water lines for the sink and appliances on the tipout? I realize the tipouts don't go out alot, but anytime you deal with stuff like that which will flex overtime it could be a point of failure. Very cool, a very logical progression for the product line though.

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 8:18pm
	Hrmmmm... on the 171 vs 177, I say no. I'll stick with the 171. We haven't had space problems while cooking, and I don't do pirouettes in the aisle, so I can't really see an advantage to having a wider floor. The extra weight, and the extra step of dealing with the tip-out when setting up/packing are two big negatives to me. Strange that FR would flip the toilet to face the back of the trailer... I wonder why.

techntrek Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Admin Group - pHp Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Location: MD Online Status: Offline Posts: 9059	Posted: 18 Aug 2009 at 8:44pm
	It gets a bit tight when more than one person is trying to move around, and when the person at the back of the bed has to get up - and over - the one closer to the aisle for a midnight bathroom break. The extra room would help with both. I bet since they flipped the sink and fridge the toilet had to be flipped to balance out the weight front-to-back.
	Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ Pod instruction manual

yizit Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 25 Feb 2009 Location: Wis. Dells, WI Online Status: Offline Posts: 663	Posted: 19 Aug 2009 at 1:12am
	Gotta agree with all of you. We have the 172 and the 176 is similar. My first thought was...WOW that's nice...a little more room....then... who needs the extra weight and problems with slide outs, and the extra cost. We'll stick with our 172. I'm sure there will a lot of interest out there tho. They are nice floor plans.
	Former owner of 2009 172 Darlene & Jim, Ewok our Lhasa Roada our 2004 Roadtrek C190Popular

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Posted: 19 Aug 2009 at 8:58am
	RV manufactures have been doing slideouts with utilities in them for long enough that won't be a problem. Terry

HuronSailor Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 10 Jun 2009 Location: Owosso MI Online Status: Offline Posts: 704	Posted: 19 Aug 2009 at 9:27am
	The two new Rpods are nice, but I'll stay with my 172. No sliding parts to maintain, or leak, and the extra room just isn't that big a deal to us. After spending so many years on boats we've learned to live small. I'm sure the new floor plans will have great appeal to some, though. Variety is the spice blah blah blah ...
	.: Mark & Beth :: Silverado 5.3L :: 2018 rPod 180 :.

Guests Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Guest Group	Posted: 19 Aug 2009 at 1:50pm
	HuronSailor: Did you see windows for the bunks??? I didn't we would still have to put those in too. Lee

gmandual Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 246	Posted: 20 Aug 2009 at 11:47am
	The two things I would love to see on the new models would be porthole windows in the bunks and a window on the door. The one downside for the 172 design is the lack of natural lighting towards the front of the unit.