171 or 178

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

   Hi,
I just wanted to get some feedback on choosing an Ri-POD.  The 171 appeals to me because the cost is lower, less weight concerning my tow vehicle (06 Toyota Highlander 6 cyl.), and 35 gal black and grey tanks.

The 178 appeals because of more room, and slideout.  It's 30 gal black and grey are appealing, but not as much as 35 gal.  

Camping will consist of my wife and I only.  We are on the small side in body built (size does matter).  Our last camper was a Casita 17.  We decided this time we wanted a TT with a bed we could leave down and a good size dinette table, and a little more outside storage.

Thanks,
Terryg

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
Terryg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 25 Jul 2014 Location: Leesburg, GA Online Status: Offline Posts: 6	Topic: 171 or 178 Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 10:08am
	Hi, I just wanted to get some feedback on choosing an Ri-POD. The 171 appeals to me because the cost is lower, less weight concerning my tow vehicle (06 Toyota Highlander 6 cyl.), and 35 gal black and grey tanks. The 178 appeals because of more room, and slideout. It's 30 gal black and grey are appealing, but not as much as 35 gal. Camping will consist of my wife and I only. We are on the small side in body built (size does matter). Our last camper was a Casita 17. We decided this time we wanted a TT with a bed we could leave down and a good size dinette table, and a little more outside storage. Thanks, Terryg

furpod Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Moderator Group - pHp Joined: 25 Jul 2011 Location: Central KY Online Status: Offline Posts: 6128	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 11:57am
	178 is easily twice the trailer of a 171. If your tow vehicle can tow one, it can tow the other, they both have a 3500 pound weight limit. We have camped directly next to a 171, which is the same floor plan as ours, but without the slide. I seriously doubt we will ever have a TT without a slide again. The difference in feel and useability between the two is amazing, considering it only adds about 10sqft. 5-10% difference in holding tank size is not going to be noticeable in actual use I think.

Terryg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 25 Jul 2014 Location: Leesburg, GA Online Status: Offline Posts: 6	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 1:09pm
	Mark, Thanks for the feedback. My Highlander has a tow limit of 3500 lbs. I also had a transmission cooler installed around 8 months ago. We have owned 3 motor homes and 3 travel trailers in the past and have never experienced a slideout. This is what makes the 178 more attractive. I like what you have to say concerning slideouts. I am curious to know why FR designed the smaller 171 with larger holding tanks. Maybe something to do with the slideout. Thanks again!

furpod Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Moderator Group - pHp Joined: 25 Jul 2011 Location: Central KY Online Status: Offline Posts: 6128	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 1:42pm
	It has more to do with the layout UNDER the trailer than anything else. The 171 is an older design model, came out years before the 178, I can only guess that there is a difference, maybe based on the actual trailer length, that makes more room under the 171 vs 178 (in the area where the tanks go), even though the 178 is longer. A 178 is a 177 stretched about 16". If I remember right, there is a 100 or so pound dry weight difference from 177 to 178.

Terryg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 25 Jul 2014 Location: Leesburg, GA Online Status: Offline Posts: 6	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 3:04pm
	Mark, thanks for the info. My wife and I are travelling to a dealer in Macon, Ga. to look at a 178.

Leo B Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 13 Jan 2012 Location: Lyndonville, VT Online Status: Offline Posts: 4508	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 3:17pm
	My wife had a 171 for 5 years and traveled up and down the coast, we loved it! We would stay in it at Disney for 2 weeks at a time and at Cape Hatteras for a month at a time. It served us very well. We have now moved up to the 179 for even more room, with the slide out. Towed it with our Grand Caravan without any problems.I would lean towards the larger one
	Leo & Melissa Bachand 2017 Ford F150 2021 Vista Cruiser 19 csk Previously owned 2015 Rpod 179 2010 Rpod 171

Terryg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 25 Jul 2014 Location: Leesburg, GA Online Status: Offline Posts: 6	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 3:29pm
	Leo, the very fact that you made the decision to buy another R-POD is a ringing endorsement. That alone in a confidence builder as we ponder on our next small travel trailer. Thanks!

GlennZippy Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Groupie Joined: 19 Feb 2013 Location: Colorado Spring Online Status: Offline Posts: 44	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 3:46pm
	We're in a similar position, having looked at all of the models and at one time or another thinking each was the best bet. Right now, we're pretty set on the 171 after looking for quite a while. We like the extra storage that you get compared to some of the other models. Also, with the heater not under the bed, it makes it easy to store more stuff under the bed. Someone on here recently posted photos of their table modified to a fold down unit and it was cut down in length as well. It opened up that area a great deal. When we first settled on the 171, we happened to see a unit that had the table removed while it was being cleaned. With the table out of the way it really opened up the booth end! I hadn't noticed the difference in the holding tanks. I tend to think that a 16% difference would make for a longer time without connections...
	2010 R-Pod 152

Leo B Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 13 Jan 2012 Location: Lyndonville, VT Online Status: Offline Posts: 4508	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 4:10pm
	Thanks Terry. I recommend the Pods highly! They tow very well, we have towed through New York City and South Miami traffic and have never had a problem. We would pack carefully which seemed to give us a good amount of room. We also would make good use of the r-dome and would usually take the dinette table out and use that in the dome giving us more room inside the pod.(171)
	Leo & Melissa Bachand 2017 Ford F150 2021 Vista Cruiser 19 csk Previously owned 2015 Rpod 179 2010 Rpod 171

Terryg Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 25 Jul 2014 Location: Leesburg, GA Online Status: Offline Posts: 6	Posted: 25 Jul 2014 at 4:17pm
	I'm with you GlennZippy on the 171. I know it's smaller and no slideout, but all things considered it's still seems a good choice and certainly a vast improvement in what we are accustomed to. My Highlander should be fine to tow the 178, but even better with the 171 due to the weight difference of around 300 or more lbs. When you are pushing the envelope like we are with a not so huge tow vehicle, size does matter. Peace of mind anyway. And the 16%difference in tank size is important. Keep in mind that I am just talking things out. It's good to talk things out you know. The dealer we are visiting tomorrow has a 178 and a 171 in stock. I think we will know pretty quick which one will work for us and also if this is even the kind of TT we really want. We are sure hoping so. Thanks again guys for your feedback.