IIRC, my other problem was getting it lined up and centered where I wanted it when putting it on the truck. 

It's been about 35 years since I had a slide in truck camper, and I recall it being a pain taking it on and off the truck, to the point that we just didn't use it, because I needed the truck to be a truck during the week.  Wound up selling it and getting a Toyota mini motorhome that we could just get in and go. 

Are the slide ins any easier to deal with these days? 

Yes.. that would be MY choice.. I have been to the Four Wheel Campers factory 3 times, and know exactly which model I want.. My parents live about 20 minutes from there, and as a kid, my uncle had one. We were overlanding in the high sierra and "rural" western Nevada long before it was cool.. LOL

But my co-pilot is not interested in such ruggedness. She wants a full bath, and full facilities and nothing smaller then our 177 was. So...

Research Overlanders and check the lifting roof models. Sized much better, low drive profile. You can get either a slide in or frame up. I built a frame up due to better floor area. 

https://earthroamer.com/hd/ 

Alas !  There is always the possibility of purchasing a used 177 or 178 as they haven't been out of production that long.  Of course if you are going to keep your Lance for another 5+ years before deciding to return to the R-Pod, it may be a bit more difficult to find one gently used and in mint condition.

[/QUOTE]

It will probably be 6 years.. while I continue to enjoy, and lounge about in retirement, she still has a ways to get to 62.. or even worse, 65. LOL

Hard to believe it's been almost 25 years since I hung up my spurs..

(we are actually, seriously, considering a slide in truck camper. Lance 1172 on a F450 4x4 is the current dream rig)

We found we could average 14mpg with our 2017 Tacoma, but I drove at 62mph max. Rpm's were kept low and typically the last one up the hills (unless there was a hiker nearby). 

Personally, I don't believe there's a difference between manufacture's when it comes to towing mpg. More like your driving style/habit.

 That said, we anticipate a change in our camper needs in a few more years, and intended to go back to a Pod, but the out of production status of both the 177 and 178, means we probably won't.

[/QUOTE]  Furpod

Alas !  There is always the possibility of purchasing a used 177 or 178 as they haven't been out of production that long.  Of course if you are going to keep your Lance for another 5+ years before deciding to return to the R-Pod, it may be a bit more difficult to find one gently used and in mint condition.

OTOH, I certainly would take one if someone gave it to me, Airstreams are now so ridiculously expensive I could sell it, buy two complete rpod rigs like what I have now, tow vehicles included, and have enough left over to buy gas for the life of both rigs. 

Why is that??

[/QUOTE]

Storage sucks, you know, all those square cookie, cracker, cereal, potato, etc etc boxes.. they won't go in the cabinets very well. you know, square box, round cabinet. You also LOSE tons of storage capability to the rounded profile. Since the main storage areas inside any RV are along the walls and periphery, when you round that, you give up 50% of possible space.

You worry about every possible scenario of what can scratch or dent it, constantly. I have personally leaned my bike against the Pod and the Lance, you can bet your bippy not the AS.

All the components are the same as what everybody else uses, and 95% of owner issues, regardless of brand, are components NOT manufactured by the builder.

AS continues to use a plywood floor, that is near impossible to repair when it gets wet, and it will.

EDIT: This was just sent to me in PM.. after 2 decades of owners asking, in the last couple weeks AS made this change. (thank you PilotPodder) So if you get a new build, you will probably have a composite floor.

They have a VERY narrow temperature comfort range. Between about 55F and 85F (maybe 90F if in full shade), the heat and a/c can keep up.. above or below.. not so much.

No slide means you have to go 6-12 feet longer to get the same floor space when set up..

Among many other issues I see with them.

I don't mean to tirade against them, or any other brand, but having owned one, like I said, won't ever again. For many people, all those are "not an issue" but they were to us. Our 18 foot RPod was way more "usable" or "functional" then our 31 foot AS. And the new camper, at 27 feet, beats them both in almost every category. That said, we anticipate a change in our camper needs in a few more years, and intended to go back to a Pod, but the out of production status of both the 177 and 178, means we probably won't.

That said.. you couldn't give me another Airstream, regardless of how well it tows.

Why is that??

So true.

Our 31 foot, 7,000lb Airstream got about 20% better mileage as our 3,500lb RPod, and Interestingly enough, our 6,000lb Lance gets +/- about 5% the same as the Pod.. We make several trips a year over pretty familiar ground, through the same mountains, etc. Repeatedly using the same fuel stops and comparing top off numbers, the variation between the Pod and Lance can almost totally be written off to weather or traffic.

That said.. you couldn't give me another Airstream, regardless of how well it tows.

At 60 mph on flat level ground with no head wind I get 12-13 mpg.  I tow in 7th gear at 2000 rpm.  I got the same mileage when towing my 179 which was 1,000# lighter.  One of these days I will tow at 55 mph to see what if any difference in mileage is. 

I find if I let the car select the gear it wants to tow in 6th gear or 400 rpm higher. I have paddle shifters so it is easy to select the gear I want.  By using the paddle shifters I pick up 2 mpg. 

Travel trailers generally come with ST tires which unless marked with a speed rating are rated for 65 mph. If you want to run at the speeds you're talking about you will need an M rated tire (81 mph) at least. 

Its also important to keep trailer tires inflated to their max pressure rating cold. Trailer tires have thicker sidewalls to handle the loads. Thicker sidewalls don't release heat as quickly so can overheat at high speeds or when underinflated due to the increased sidewall flexing. 

Trailer tires come in load ratings C, D, and E.  Run a tire with a load rating well above the axle rating of the trailer divided by 2. The OEM tires are typically pretty marginal in their load rating and are somewhat notorious for blowouts. 

Why blow outs?  I tow my boat to Florida from Wisconsin regularly at 70-80 mph and have never had issues.

I've thought about that and concluded that the differences in drag coefficient between the different TT shapes are probably going to be pretty small. 

Most of the drag on a TT is due to air flow separation on the rear. If you look at the rear deck shapes of cars with good aerodynamics they all have a very gentle taper to prevent airflow separation as long as possible. From what I read the taper/slope has to be no more than 15-20 degrees. The big teardrops taper faster than that. There aren't any TT's that do that other than maybe this one that I've seen. 

Not having a couple of hundred k to throw at a TT that one's kind out of the question. 

So, when I run that calculator I just leave the Cd at around 040- 0.45 for towing. That's also pretty similar to what a boxy pickup or SUV typically is. If you want to reduce drag there is one sure fire way, tow slow and enjoy the trip. 

Ya  I understand the drag thing.  I get 1 to 1.5 mpg better towing my boat with the cover than uncovered.

Just trying to figure out if one shape of TT is really better than another.  Rpod vs airstream vs large teardrop vs traditional box.

GlueGuy is correct.  if I run a rig towing a 4000 lb boat with a frontal area of 35 square feet at 70 mph I get  right at the 17 mpg on diesel. Change that to an rpod 192 with about 55 square feet frontal area, same weight and speed, I get 12 mpg. The combo of relatively high speed and dragging a big box around does it. 

Here's the fuel economy model I'm using in case you're interested.

Towing a boat there is not nearly as much wind resistance, so I would expect a bit worse than that with an Rpod.

Its not weight related, its frontal area and speed related. 

Sure, I can roughly estimate it for you, if you provide a bit more info. What speed do you plan to tow at? Which rPod are you looking at? 

If you are camping on a strict budget and fuel mileage will make or break your ability to afford this, then buy a tent and a small car. 

Seriously, there are so many variables when towing...but a good estimate will be in the low to mid teens like nearly everyone else towing r-pods.