Hello All, been thinking of becoming a podder
Printed From: R-pod Owners Forum
Category: R-pod Discussion Forums
Forum Name: Introduce Yourself
Forum Discription: New Members - tell us about yourself and your r-pod
URL: http://www.rpod-owners.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=3833
Printed Date: 21 May 2024 at 2:34am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.64 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Hello All, been thinking of becoming a podder
Posted By: ahefner
Subject: Hello All, been thinking of becoming a podder
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2013 at 9:35pm
|
After a pretty lousy tent camping trip one weekend full of rain my wife and I have started looking at campers. We wanted something with a bathroom with a shower, a full time bed, kitchen and a dining table. The sales person showed us the rPod first. At first glance I wasn't sure, after stepping inside I was convinced. We went ahead and looked at some other trailers but kept coming back to the rPod. The others didn't seem to have what we wanted. Being 6'4" I wanted some head room and didn't want to remember to duck down every time I moved inside the camper. The rPod had the head room and the features we wanted. With that said we started looking at different floor plans. Got it narrowed to two and wanted some input from others that may have each of the models. The choices are a new 177 or a 2010 used 171. Both have the same floor plan, however the 177 has the slide out. Is the slide out really worth the extra cost? Also, has anyone here tried to tow with a 2nd gen Nissan Xterra with the 4.0 motor? The Xterra shows that it is rated for 5000 pounds and 500 tongue weight. I would get the e2 hitch to help with sway and sag.
|
Replies:
Posted By: CharlieM
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2013 at 10:09pm
|
Welcome to the RPod group, probably the best and most informative RV group on the Web (no bias here!). Either the 171 or the 177 would be a good choice, but I would suggest the 177. It's newer and the slide is probably worth it. The separate and permanent bed, dinette, and bath areas are a real plus and a definite upgrade from a tent. I stayed away from the slide for weight considerations, but you should be OK with the Xterra. I tow my RP-172 with a 3.5L Honda and only notice the pod behind me when I glance at the gas gauge. That said, all my towing to date has been in the mountains of Florida and Alabama. Next month we give it the real test at altitude in Colorado. ------------- Charlie Northern Colorado OLD: 2013 RP-172, 2010 Honda Pilot 3.5L 4WD PRESENT: 2014 Camplite 21RBS, 2013 Supercharged Tacoma 4L V6 4WD |
Posted By: furpod
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2013 at 10:11pm
|
Having been parked next to a 171 on more than one occasion, the slide makes so much difference it really is two different trailers entirely. You couldn't give me a 171.
------------- |
Posted By: David and Danette
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2013 at 10:18pm
|
Welcome! The engine you have I think is strong enough to pull the rpods but I think the 171 being lighter would make towing a little easier. The 171 has a little more storage space but the slides will give you extra floor space . Its a matter of which you prefer. We recently considered buying a new larger trailer but decided against it because it had a slide. There is always that possibility of problems with a slide. By the reviews I have read people love the extra space but the slides do have there problems at times. Both the 171 and 177 are very popular they are both good its just a matter of which you prefer. David and Danette ------------- 2018 Vista Cruiser 19BFD (2018- 2012 Vibe 6503 (2014-2019) 2009 r-pod 171 (2009-2014) Middle Tn 2014 Ram 1500 Quad cab |
Posted By: ahefner
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2013 at 10:24pm
Thanks for the info. I found the "other" forum and steered clear of that. I have been lurking here for a while, reading and researching, I want my information in an unmodified and unmoderated format. I like to over research stuff when making my purchases. Seems like everyone here is very friendly and helpful in anyway that they can be. Good to see such comradeship amongst people.
|
Posted By: ahefner
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2013 at 10:36pm
Thanks for the information. I found a 171 within a days drive from me but none close enough to compare side by side. We looked at the 177 on the show room floor and was amazed by how much room it had on the inside. I guess that slide out really does make a difference. |
Posted By: Folornhope
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2013 at 11:05pm
|
The extra room that you get from the slide out is worth it in my opinion. I had been towing my 177 with a 4X4 Dodge Dakota with a 3.7 liter engine. Some hills were a little rough, but the truck could handle them. ------------- Eddy the Escape Pod...177 Ford F150 |
Posted By: Camper Bob
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2013 at 11:24pm
|
Welcome. I am a 171 owner and have been very happy. I think you have to consider what type of camper are you. Do you prefer to spend more of your time inside or do you want to commune with nature as much as possible and then go inside for sleeping and bathing? We cook outside as many of the cooking odors remain inside, even with bath fan on. We ever ordered ours without the TV antenna. Either hiking, reading or just hanging out are what our interests are. Others prefer to watch movies or tv in the evening. The additional weight is something to consider as well as the additional mechanical issues that possibly may be of concern. For us the 171 is perfect, for others the slideout is preferred. Your choice. Safe Travels. ------------- Camper Bob and Camper Sue Gracie the Wonder Dog (12 LB. Mini Dachshund) 2013 Rpod 171HRE(ORPod) 2016 Lance 1685 2015 Nissan Pathfinder |
Posted By: RPodWeGo
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 12:50am
|
We looked at both and chose the 177 as it provides a lot more interior space in an already small trailer and it provides a lot more room for 2 people to get in and out of bed. Speaking of which, I'm 6'1" and the bed is barely long enough. I suggest you spend some time laying side by side with your wife to insure the bed meets your needs. No where to dangle your feet! Other than that concern you will love the pod. ------------- RPodWeGo RPod 177 04 v8 Toyota 4Runner |
Posted By: David and Danette
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 8:02am
|
Little Sweet Pea I just noticed your tow vehicle I bought a 1988 Montero new with the 2.6 engine drove it for 14 years. It was near trouble free the time I had it except for at the very end the carb. had problems.Replaced the carb. and sold it to a friend who is still driving it. David
------------- 2018 Vista Cruiser 19BFD (2018- 2012 Vibe 6503 (2014-2019) 2009 r-pod 171 (2009-2014) Middle Tn 2014 Ram 1500 Quad cab |
Posted By: Keith-N-Dar
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 8:10am
|
We chose the 177 for the floor space. It seems that questions like yours raises the question of problems with slides, but I can only recall one person who had a slide problem in the time I have been here. We are in our third year and slide performance has been flawless.
After having a 177 I wouldn't even consider a 171. ------------- Keith-N-Dar Boris & Betty (Boston Terriers) 2011 R-Pod 177 2010 Ford F-150 |
Posted By: Paige
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 8:12am
|
We have a 177 and love it. Being able to move around in the trailer is made so much easier with the slide. We pull it with a Rav six cylinder, 3500 pulling capacity. Yes it decreases the gas mileage in half, but that was to be expected. An e2 hitch made the towing so much smoother. As for the bed and you being 6'4" , that might be a challenge. ------------- Paige and Pete 2010 177 - RPug 2012 Rav (six cylinder) New York & Florida residents 
|
Posted By: ahefner
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 8:27am
|
Thanks for all the input guys. Truly a helpful community. From my understanding about the slide out is as long as it gets maintained they seem to be trouble free. This is coming from my research and reading.
|
Posted By: P&M
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 8:44am
Your choice of Pod, or any other trailer for that matter, should really be a reflection and extension of the type of camping you like to do. Too little amenities and you won't like it for what it doesn't have that you wanted and you won't want to go out and use it as much as you possibly could ... too many amenities and the work/upkeep on it may may you think it is too much of a hassle and not worth the time & energy. That's why there are so many different floorplans, sizes and options available ... you can find the one that matches what you want to use it for. ------------- P & M ... and Comet too! 2012 171 -- The Monkey Pod 2018 Ram 2500 |
Posted By: techntrek
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 3:10pm
|
Welcome. We've had our 171 four years now and still love many things about it. There's another aspect of being an inside vs. outside camper. When we are camping we are outside most of the time, usually not coming inside until midnight and then going right outside to eat breakfast. When we are touring the pod is more like a portable hotel room and we tend to be inside more of the time - coming back from sightseeing or finishing up a full day on the road and climbing inside at 9. Eating a late dinner, catching up on emails and forum surfing. Then often spending the morning eating and showering inside (especially when staying at a truck stop or Wal-Mart) until we emerge at 8 or 9.
If you'll do more touring you may want the extra room. We just finished up a 3 week trip and I would have preferred the 177 or 178 since we were inside more. For our camping trips the 171 is fine. The first slide-out models weren't announced until the week we picked our 171 up from the dealer and I'll admit I wondered many times if we would have gone for the 177 if we had the option, although not towing that extra 300 pounds was a plus. ------------- Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ http://www.rpod-owners.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=1723 - Pod instruction manual 
|
Posted By: Keith-N-Dar
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 5:35pm
|
While we never really considered the 171 if I were in the market now the choice would be 177 or 178. I think the 178 would win. ------------- Keith-N-Dar Boris & Betty (Boston Terriers) 2011 R-Pod 177 2010 Ford F-150 |
Posted By: francoisfrogpod
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 6:56pm
|
Techntrek, how was your extended vaca? DH and I are seriously considering one of those around Christmas. I'm a teacher at the college level so winter break is the only time I get more than a week off at a time. How was it in the pod for such a long time? We've stayed in our previous camper, a pop-up for 12 days and weren't ready to come home, so I know we could make it work in the pod.
------------- Denny and Linda 2013 Pod 177 '08 Santa Fe |
Posted By: ahefner
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 6:58pm
|
Im leaning towards the 177. My wife and mosquitos dont get along at all. She is allergic to them so she tries to spend her time inside during the evenings. We both love to go swimming, hiking, biking and exploring during the day light hours but evenings are another story. The 177 is sounding more and more like the better choice. I tend to take very good maintenance of my tools and vehicles and I dont expect the rPod to be an exception so I doubt I will have many if any problems with a slide out.
|
Posted By: CharlieM
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 7:17pm
|
It's my unscientific observation that the 177 is the most popular model, although I predict the new 178 will overtake it. However, it is longer and heavier. ------------- Charlie Northern Colorado OLD: 2013 RP-172, 2010 Honda Pilot 3.5L 4WD PRESENT: 2014 Camplite 21RBS, 2013 Supercharged Tacoma 4L V6 4WD |
Posted By: alan7170
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 8:23pm
|
We have a 177 and I would discourage you from it based on your height. I love the trailer, but the bed length from wall to wall is only 6'4" so your head and feet will be in contact with the trailer...not sure if other rpod models are wider or not? |
Posted By: Keith-N-Dar
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 9:39pm
|
I missed your height. Take a look at the T models. They may have a longer bed. ------------- Keith-N-Dar Boris & Betty (Boston Terriers) 2011 R-Pod 177 2010 Ford F-150 |
Posted By: techntrek
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 10:06pm
|
It went well. Our schedule worked as planned, allowing for 1.25 times the travel times Google shows for shorter legs (zero or one food stop), and 1.5 times for all-day legs. That took into account getting behind slow trucks, staying below the speed limit in areas where its above 65, meal and gas stops, etc. We enjoyed almost all of the stops we picked, some more, one a bit less. Had issues with the fridge not working after day 1, gas wouldn't work at all and DC only worked in camp (AC too). Used a small cooler with ice for our milk after that. I think I've fixed the gas problem by cleaning out the burner assembly. A/C leaked condensation almost non-stop which we've experienced before, I'm hopeful that I've figured that out as well. My generator box worked out well, as did the generator, but my TV's engine and tranny ran warm on the highway since it partially blocked air flow. They were ok on slower roads. I'm looking into an extra tranny cooler with fan to solve that problem. As I mentioned above the pod felt a bit tight with the extra time we spent inside at places like truck stops, but once we settled on to the beds to read/surf/watch tv it wasn't a big deal. For our non-campground stops we found we liked truck stops more than Wal-Marts. I always worry about the local "bad element" at Wal-Marts (three times now this worry has been proven over the last few years), but there's no way anyone is going to come to a truck stop to mess with truckers. Looking forward to three more weeks next summer! ------------- Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ http://www.rpod-owners.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=1723 - Pod instruction manual
|
Posted By: techntrek
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 10:09pm
|
True, but the 171 and 177 will allow each of them a bed, where they can sleep diagonally for a lot more leg room. If they are ok sleeping apart. ------------- Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ http://www.rpod-owners.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=1723 - Pod instruction manual
|
Posted By: Thredbende
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2013 at 11:34pm
|
We enjoy our 171. As luck would have it, our dealer had the 171 parked to the slide model (number?), so we could easily compare. My structural engineer husband was most adverse to the idea of a heavy slide with additional maintenance issues, cost and gas requirements. After a year of camping in it, we are adept at being aware of the position of the other person or the dog (an 80 pound greyhound). A 171 is good at facilitating either your rekindled romance or divorce. I like the kitchen storage, ease of driving with our Honda Ridgeline, and flexible space. I like all Pods! You will enjoy yours whatever model fits you best. ------------- Thredbende |
Posted By: ahefner
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2013 at 8:42am
Being over 6 foot i have become accustom to awkward ducking, sitting, and even laying down arrangements. When we first met we shared a futon couch for the sleeping arrangements. Talk about not enough space. When out camping have a Eureka Apex 2 tent that is nice and cozy but only leaves room for sitting or laying down. Image found on Google Images. I will definitely lay down in the bed to make sure that there is enough room.
|
Posted By: Sleepless
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2013 at 10:04am
|
The sleeping areas of all the R-Pod models are 74" (6' 2") wide. So, the ultimate decision should be on layout preference and pod weight, if weight is a consideration. Some like the roominess created by a slide, but my wife and I (and 3 small dogs) get along fine without one. And, for us, weight was a major factor in our choice. Bob ------------- 2014 R-Pod 178 (OUR POD) 2009 Chevrolet Avalanche |
Posted By: rpodcamper.com
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2013 at 10:47am
| Sorry just catching up on this post. I'm 6'4" and have a 171 Rpod. We have found that I sleep diagonally in the queen bed. I get the area next to the outside wall. I have also slept on the table bed but not as roomy there. |
Posted By: Paige
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2013 at 10:59am
|
We own a 177, which we love. We bought it barely used in the spring of 2012. For the past year we have camped for long periods of time. We had two pugs and even though they were small, it was a little trying,,,but that could have been because they were deaf, blind, incontinent, snorers, and had dementia. Just sayin'. They let us know earlier this summer that it was time, so now we are dogless. We live on a lake in upstate New York so we have not taken our Pod out for camping,,,but we will be looking forward to using it again when we head to Florida for the winter. (We are Floridians for 5 months a year,,,we use our Pod for short outings into the Florida State Parks, which are wonderful!) It will be our first time ever, going camping, without dogs. ------------- Paige and Pete 2010 177 - RPug 2012 Rav (six cylinder) New York & Florida residents
|
Posted By: Thinker
Date Posted: 19 Aug 2013 at 3:54pm
|
I had a popup, two 5th weels, and a diesel pusher. All with slides, all leaked at one time or another. I am 6'4, and specifically did not want a unit with a slide or garage. There are only two of us, I am tall, wife is shorter, we sleep fine in the queen -- after I bought the new mattress in a box for it... factory mattress is lacking. We love our 171. Heading to Tickfaw, LA next month.... gonna hang out with the Tearjerkers crowd. ------------- Tow Vehicle: 2013 Pathfinder 4WD R-POD Model 171 
|
Posted By: Ivinest
Date Posted: 20 Aug 2013 at 5:26pm
|
Have the 177 and pull it with a 2007 4-cylinder Toyota Tacoma. Does a good job as long as you don't use the overdrive. The gas mileage drops from 25 mpg to 15 mpg but the nice part is the good mileage comes back when not towing. Had to install spring stiffeners (extended cab model) to stop the sag in the rear and for good measure added a transmission oil cooler in front of the AC condenser. Does moderate grades well but shifts down on steep grades. Haven't done the Rockies yet but sure it will grunt going through real mountains. Overall with your TV you shouldn't have any problems. And, yeah, you should go for the 177 over the 171. You are getting a whole lot more space for very little extra weight. Tom & Gloria
|