E-450 would offer such a more usable payload to play with. No limit on soundproofing materials, storage box, e-Bikes, full tanks, fat people, and still plenty leeway. Plus greater chance of finding mechanical service, locations and possibly speed too. Also they could make a longer version like say 27 ft, giving that little bit extra usability while still being compact for near universal access. A Transit chassis would still suffer from payload limitation as applies with the Sprinter chassis. Its unlikely however that an upper end manufacturer like PW would go back to E-450 ( and E-350 ) use. I think its a pity.
Pleasureway fail to offer likeable cabinet and upholstery options. White or washed out "Champagne" is not a choice. For the money you'd be paying, people need a proper choice of several. Its an amazing product but its let down in this way. A fundamental problem with the Mercedes chassis and other modern equivalents like Transit, is the limited payload. They don't make it easy to find it out ! Maybe with one of an occupant its okay but with two and all their stuff, plus tanks full, plus hitch for e-bikes and a storage box, the weight soon mounts up. Using something like an E-450 significantly opens up the load carrying possibilities. But of course its not modern, fashionable, fuel efficient. The bathroom looks awesome, but I didn't see an extractor fan above. How well does the venting system control the steam and heat in the air ? How well soundproofed is this rig really driving down the road ? Given the tight payload to play with, how much heavy soundproofing material do they use ? Remember its a diesel too and nowadays its a four cylinder only, no longer the V6.
So everything you talked about in your statement is basically a class C. There are plenty of Ford F4 50s out there that fit all of those criteria as far as options on a pleasure way standard equipped one way. The only option you get is the color of the couch.much better way than to try to be nickel and dime in options from other class B manufacturers.
@@michaelburt1946 Yes I spoke of Class C's, of which the XLTS is an example. And ? My point about lack of options was the lack of choice with regard to woods and seat coverings. I made no reference to options of equipment. What you say is true about equipment options and its true PW bundle almost everything you can get on the standard product. But its expensive and my point was about styling options or lack of, i.e. when you're paying that much money it would be nice to get a real choice of how it looks inside. Outside too for that matter ( contrast to say Leisure Travel's wide range of exterior colours on their's ). I'm sure there are potential buyers who would stop short of a purchase, because they can't get one that looks good to live with. The other point I made was to do with the limited carrying capacity of a Merc chassis for a C compared to one based on an E450. It can get really silly, the best example of that being Merc based rigs from the manufacturer Tiffin.
@@Fat_Cat_747 XLTS at best, is a B+. Using the same logic that on a freightliner chassis a C is a C+. I agree it should’ve been put on a Ford transit chassis versus a Mercedes. As far as choices, both interior and exterior. I think pleasure ways approach to marketing and skewing their RVs the way they do clearly is a better way to sell them than to be nickel and dimmed by every single option on a coachman B+ for example. In my case, I do have a pleasure way on tour 2.2 that’s after trading in a 42 foot fifth wheel I’m not going back.
@@michaelburt1946 Again, I WASN'T talking about add on options and their cost. I was talking about the lack of choice in how your purchase looks and given the price of the PW's that's not acceptable. And again, my point about load bearing is a general one and remains true, that if you use the Merc chassis for a class C you may not have much payload capacity. Now given that the XLTS is a smaller, lighter example its not so bad for the PW as it is for my example of Tiffin. Use of an American old school type cutaway like an E450 affords far greater leeway. As for B+, that is only a descriptor, a marketing term. Its appropriate to use it as indeed in the case of the XLTS and the Leisure Van products for example, it aptly describes the neatness and relative lightness, compared to a cheaper, bigger, boxier, more traditional C. But they are C's, no matter how you cut it, they are C's. The Merc chassis and the Transit chassis are better suited to an actual B design, i.e. it starts life as a panel width van and remains a van and the payload remains good for its size. For many/most the small size is too much of a compromise so yes a B+ ( a small C ) does make sense. Then you are into having to be more careful with weight and in some cases the manufacturer has been down right stupid i.e. Tiffin example. So the customer gets their extra space but ironically can't take all their stuff ! Thus the use of something like an E450 instead solves the problem and you can have both space and relaxed payload considerations. The downside is the poor gas mileage, less sophisticated ride and the lower perceived status for some folks.
