Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-09-2010, 08:21 PM   #57
Registered User
1998 34' Excella 1000
1995 36' Classic 36
Spencerville , Maryland
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 257
Images: 14
Blog Entries: 1
I am the proud owner of a '95 Classic Pusher and know that they really were the last of "true" AS mohos.... that being said I would be extremely interested if they were to consider coming out with a new Classic moho but they won't.... economics are simply against it for the big corporate bottom line. So, I also have a few investment buddies that are considering picking up where THOR left off about a decade or so ago with a lot of the advances since then incorporated. We'll see!

GREENovaters is offline  
Old 11-09-2010, 09:39 PM   #58
Rivet Master

2005 25' Safari
Salem , Oregon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,377
Images: 18
Blog Entries: 55
Re-badging is pretty common.

Originally Posted by zigzagguzzi View Post
AS has little to say, THOR is the real mother ship and has all the power. If they choose to rebadge another Thor product as an AS we can like it or not. zz
Originally Posted by doug&maggie View Post
Yes, you're right on this, but it still seems rather unfathomable to me that they would do this. It wouldn't be an Airstream.

Originally Posted by wkerfoot View Post
Not necessarily, each Thor division is run independently. Rebadging one division's product to another division also creates warranty issues.

Hi, I agree with you, but there are and have been many motor vehicles that have been re-badged. Isuzu, re-badged as a Honda. Nissan, re-badged as a Mercury Villager. Ford Ranger re-badged as a Mazda B-2000. And the latest re-badge is a Chrysler mini-van, re-badged as a VW. [many more, I'm sure]


2005 Safari 25-B
"Le Petit Chateau Argent"
[ Small Silver Castle ]
2000 Navigator / 2014 F-150 Eco-Boost / Equal-i-zer / P-3
YAMAHA 2400 / AIR #12144
ROBERTSUNRUS is offline  
Old 11-10-2010, 09:00 AM   #59
kmpro's Avatar
Currently Looking...
1984 31' Airstream310
Lubbock , Texas
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 301
Blog Entries: 2
Cool WBCCI MOHO issue

OK folks I have read with some interest this issue. I as you know, own a classic AS MOHO. In my MOHO escuderia the 310 is #13 RV. I have not owned an AS fiberglass unit, so am not that familiar with them. AS elected to stop making MOHOs in 2006 and I don't think the current economic climate will encourage them to start making motorized units again. Don't think the issue is something AS is considering seriously because of cost to manufacture and price point to market a unit.
Having served in the industry as a factory rep for several MOHO manufacturers, I know that the engineering necessary is very expensive and changes in the industry have been unreal since 2006. AS needs to carefully consider the demographics of the market, and if they do, the price of the unit alone will halt any move in that direction.
I do appreciate that we all love the AS look and the prestige that comes with owning an AS, but honestly, my 1984 310 is lacking compared to other units I owned of the same era. I have spent considerable time and money getting my 84 closer to a real MOHO. Given time, I will get it up to speed except for the tin can construction and poor insulation. Its OK for a 3 season camper but I expect a MOHO to be an all year round unit.
A Man has got know his limitations-Dirty Harry
That's Some Bad Hat Harry-Jaws 1978
kmpro is offline  
Old 11-10-2010, 11:29 AM   #60
Rivet Master
Currently Looking...
Gainesville , Florida
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,798
Blog Entries: 2
I think this year AS has introduced a Chevy based class B MH, but still produces the MB based class B. zz
xrvr is offline  
Old 11-10-2010, 11:53 AM   #61
Rivet Master

Southwestern , Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,669
Hi, KMP,

Originally Posted by kmpro View Post
AS elected to stop making MOHOs in 2006 and I don't think the current economic climate will encourage them to start making motorized units again. Don't think the issue is something AS is considering seriously because of cost to manufacture and price point to market a unit.
I agree with you, but I'm wondering if you read the first page of this thread.

Originally Posted by wkerfoot View Post
Based on comments attributed to Larry Huttle at a recent WBCCI special event rally, they are trying to determine the demand for an Airstream motorhome. If they determine that there is sufficient demand, then, I believe, that they will take a bare Thor Motor Coach (new Thor division) unit, finish it in Jackson Center, assign it an Airstream VIN and present this new motorhome to the public and WBCCI.
The reason for renewed discussion of this topic is that the president of Airstream is widely quoted as having said at the Swiss Festival Rally that Airstream would offer an Airstream Class A motor home again if they could get an advance commitment from enough customers who want them. They would be built on some-other-Thor-brand chassis and shells, finished at Jackson Center, and badged, VIN’ed, warranted, sold, and serviced by Airstream. (As several have pointed out, there was no mention of how many commitments would be necessary for Airstream to start the process.)

That approach would require considerably less up-front investment than building a new motor home from scratch. As far as the “morality”, or “social acceptability” or whatever you want to call it, of doing that, here are two observations, just my personal opinion.

As far as I am concerned these new units would be perfectly acceptable as Airstreams. They are certainly no less Airstream products than B-vans, Interstates, and most of all Argosies, which were made at another plant (and initially not accepted into the WBCCI). Most of the labor content of an RV is in the interior joinerwork, plumbing, electrical, electronics, upholstery, etc., etc., and these would all be done in Jackson Center on the same line as the sliver bullets.

Secondly, the really high end Prevost and MCI-based motor homes are all built in "somebody else’s" shell and nobody seems to mind. To me, they all look like Greyhound buses, because, well, that’s what they are.

(Now there's a thought! Suppose Airstream offered to build new Airstream Class A’s in Prevost shells. Seriously interested buyers please remit a non-refundable deposit of $100 grand, balance of a million bucks payable on delivery. Wonder how many would show up on Gold Row?)
Nuvite-F is offline  
Old 11-10-2010, 12:03 PM   #62
Rivet Master
Aviator's Avatar

1997 34' Limited
1970 27' Overlander
South of Atlanta , Georgia
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,661
Images: 2
I notice that the reply above this one is #61 in this thread. I strongly encourage all of you to take a moment and contact your unit and region presidents to let them know how you feel on this issue. Often that will take less time than composing a post to this thread.

It is good to make our opinion known here, and to debate the issue, but if we don't let the immediate leadership in our units and regions know how we feel we may be wasting electrons. For those of you who's representatives aren't on-line, please telephone them.

That way none can say, "I didn't know" or "I wasn't aware" of how their membership felt on the issue when the IBT rolls around.
Craig and Carol
1997 34' Excella 1000
1970 27' Overlander, International
2009 Ford F150 5.4L
ProPride hitch with 1400# bars

AIR 41028
WBCCI 10199
Past President Southeastern Camping Unit (12)
Aviator is offline  
Old 11-10-2010, 12:42 PM   #63
Chief Chili Cook
newroswell's Avatar
2010 30' Flying Cloud
Bakersfield , California
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 738
Originally Posted by Nuvite-F View Post
Most of the labor content of an RV is in the interior joinerwork, plumbing, electrical, electronics, upholstery, etc., etc., and these would all be done in Jackson Center on the same line as the sliver bullets.
Why would they take a Class A going down another THOR plant assembly line, about to get plumbing, electrical, upholstery, BUT yank it off the line, ship it (across town, or the state?) to the Airstream assembly line to be finished? I'll bet it pops out the back end of the Astoria or Tuscany plant and gets an Airstream badge. If they only make 18, probably won't get a unique full body paint scheme.

The Airstream plant wouldn't even have some of the appliances that would go in these coaches. Why bother having a dozen, 4 door Norcold fridges, King Dome auto tracking satellite dishes, 32" LCD's delivered somewhere else, when you already have a huge inventory of these where the body & chassis are.

I've heard stories of the early days when the GMC and Chevy trucks moved to the same platform, assembly line, and a few made it to dealers with a GMC logo on the hood and a Chevy logo on the back...
newroswell is offline  
Old 11-10-2010, 02:46 PM   #64
Rivet Master
Currently Looking...
Gainesville , Florida
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,798
Blog Entries: 2
I worked at a Buick dealership and a new stationwagon came in as a Buick on one side and an Oldsmobile on the other. Wheel covers, trim, emblems all correct for each side . The interior was also messed up. Owner of the dealership wanted to keep it but GM took it back. zz
xrvr is offline  
Old 11-10-2010, 07:37 PM   #65
Rivet Master
mbmbstreamer's Avatar
2006 25' Safari SS SE
1969 27' Overlander
Martinez , Georgia
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 662
I'm afraid I missed the Rally at Sugar Creek, so I don't know what Larry Huttle said there. I did take careful notes in Gilette when he discussed this topic. I understood it to be limited to Badging. He used the same disclaimer that it would require a sufficient up front commitment from club members. At that time, it sounded like he was offering it after repeated pleas from WBCCI "VIPs".

I have taken Aviator's advice and contacted my Region President. I recommend you all do the same.
WBCCI # 3518
mbmbstreamer is offline  
Old 11-10-2010, 08:17 PM   #66
Rivet Master
1977 31' Sovereign
1963 26' Overlander
1989 34' Excella
Johnsburg , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,941
Larry's comments to the public, and privately to me, at Gillette were far less encouraging than the statements made at Surgarcreek. At Gillette he said there might be another Divison of Thor who might be willing to make an WBCCI or Airstream badged edition (limited volume model) but it would not be sold by or serviced by Airstream Dealers and would not be considered an Airstream. The repeated plea from a couple of PIP's caused him to change the Corporate mind and his statement at SugarCreek said they would finish off some Thor shells at the Jackson Center Airstream factory and they would be sold and serviced by Airstream dealers, if he could get enough commitments.

At the same time, he announced his forthcoming retirement from the Airstream factory but said he would continue to be involved with Airstream in Arizona. He was not specific as to his role as a possible dealer.
dwightdi is offline  
Old 11-11-2010, 10:02 AM   #67
3 Rivet Member
pyanke's Avatar
1985 25' Sovereign
St Cloud , Minnesota
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 111
Images: 4
I also sent a note to the President and VPs of my Region stating my position on the MOHO issue. I would recommend that you all do the same. It only takes a minute.

Pete Yanke
WBCCI #7528
MN Unit
pyanke is offline  
Old 11-12-2010, 07:45 AM   #68
Rivet Master
Tarheel's Avatar
2001 34' Limited S/O
Moyock , North Carolina
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,010
Images: 21
Pete that is a wonderful idea and I can assure you that your officers would appreciate the effort. I would encourage you to take it one step furter. Bring it up at your unit business meeting, vote on your postion and send the results to your Region. This way instead of being the voice of one member the Region understands that it is the voice of a unit or units. Help us help you and the club by letting us know your feelings, that is why I took office, to do the will of the region.

Matt I don’t know why, especially since the last vote we had on the issue failed by such a large percentage, but one of the regions brought up the issue. They asked if the IBT would support studying the Motorhome issue. I stated in the meeting my feelings that the way I understood my region was that if it were an Airstream there was no issue but if it were anything else we were not if favor. The motion passed to see what if anything could be done to resolve the issue. It was not an endorsement to bring in a non-Airstream product, in fact it was not an endorsement of anything other than our willingness to agree that there was still an unresolved issue and to see if there was a reasonable way of addressing the issue. I will not vote in favor of any product that is not wearing the Airstream company name. I have no issue with the Base camp, the Mercedes van, or the new Chevy B van. These are all sold and serviced by Airstream. I personally would take my Interstate or B van back to its respective dealer for PM rather than back to Airstream, but I feel the same about my dodge pickup, dodge can do all the routine stuff but if I have an engine issue it will go back to Cummings. I hope this sheds more light on the subject. There is a limit as to how much I am willing to say on the Forums, some in part because I do not follow it that closely and the other is that many there only want an argument and I am for going forward not miring down in the mud.
Members can certainly get out of the club and go it alone. My closest friend in the club did that and has regretted selling his Airstream ever since. We have many benefits that too many of us don’t use. You cannot beat the deal on any of our caravans, special event rallies or unit activities, but if they don’t enjoy these things and the fellowship of the club then maybe it’s not for them. I hate to lose members but club membership isn’t for everyone. It’s a personal decision and for me I love the institutional knowledge that abounds in the club as well as the fellowship. I don’t think I would have the same experience if I did it alone. I should probably post this on the Airforums but I really don’t think most care. Rick
Keep the shiny side up.
WBCCI # 348
Past Region 3 President
Past President Tidewater Unit 111
Rick Bell in "Silverbell"
Tarheel is offline  
Old 11-16-2010, 04:54 AM   #69
3 Rivet Member
DFDureiko's Avatar
2004 34' Classic S/O
Brooksville , Florida
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 195
Images: 3
Please correct me if I'm wrong. The "MH" vote was to allow a non Airstream Class A into WBCCI, that being a Mandalay,,and I think a four winds gas model. If Airstream has shells sent to the factory for finishing, and VIN'd as Airstream. There will be no voting on the topic. they would be Airstreams just as the B Vans are right?.....We can't "outlaw" that class A without doing the same thing to the Fords, Chevy's and Benz's right?
DFDureiko is offline  
Old 11-16-2010, 05:18 AM   #70
Rivet Master
1977 31' Sovereign
1963 26' Overlander
1989 34' Excella
Johnsburg , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,941
The "if" has not been decided by Airstream. There has to be a "significant" number of people (members) that want them, before Airstream will consider starting the project. If it goes, no voting will be necessary. If it does not go, people can take the Jerry Collins route, if they wish to stay associated with the club.

dwightdi is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.