Comparing AS to Artic Fox

[FordTruck]

I was reading another RV Forum and all of the comparisons against AS identified Artic Fox as the closest in value for the $'s spent.

Curiosity leads me to ask: What is it about Artic Fox that makes it the one that most compare to AS?

[ArtStream]

Where have you read this comparison.

[dmac]

Airstreams look nice and tow well, but having had my Airstream clearcoat peal, the trailer totaled in a hailstorm, and experiencing the minimal insulation in hot or cold weather, I'd certainly be open to considering another brand.

I understand that Artic Fox has better insulation, and is well built... worth a look.

[FordTruck]

To Artstream:
www.rv.net

I did a search on the term Airstream and read through the threads. Arctic Fox came up as the most frequent name when discussing AS vs. SOBs

[PJohnson]

Many if not most trailer sales people refer to the fiberglass box trailers as 5 year throw-aways. On the other hand, 70% of the Airstreams manufacturered since 1937 are still on the road.

PS If you are still not convinced, try shopping for used fiberglass boxes (Make sure you ask how much they have been used.).

[handn]

My previous trailer was a Nash. Steve Nash who previously worked at Fleetwood builds Nashes and Arctic Foxes. Arctic Fox is a similar wook framed, live axle travel trailer upgraded insulation.
My experience was not positive and could not recomend another Nash product. Wood framed, leaf springed travel trailers just don't stand up to my r.v. lifestyle which includes Mexican travels.
In my opinion Sunnybrooks are better than Nashes because of their aluminum frames.
Arstreams are better built than both but poorly insulated.
My 2004 Safari is a veteran of thousands of miles of rough road Mexican travel. There is no better travel trailer for third world travel. The frame and body are sturdy and the torsion axles are much better than leaf springs. The only problems I have had with the AS in Mexico are cabinet problems due to particle board construction and crummy latches. I have been able to fix these problems with upgraded latches and adheisives.

[pilgrim]

When we were looking and looking and studying to buy our first TT, Arctic Fox was the name we ran into most often as the "highest rated" trailer. We tried to find one and couldn't. We kept and eye out every time we were on the road or visiting a camp ground and still found none. We were anxious to see what made them so good but there wasn't one to look at. We attended the Columbus, OH Travel Show and they didn't show any. Finally we purchased our present AS and couldn't be happier. I THINK the Arctic Fox comes only in a 'fiver but I could be wrong since we've never found one in our part of the country. I have not read or seen anything that makes me believe we were wrong in our purchase of an '07 25' Airstream International OB. THis is our third summer of traveling with it and we will end up with about 75-80 nights on it when we put it away for the winter come Nov. 29th after our next two week trip to southern Indiana.

[thecatsandi]

Originally Posted by FordTruck

I was reading another RV Forum and all of the comparisons against AS identified Artic Fox as the closest in value for the $'s spent.

Curiosity leads me to ask: What is it about Artic Fox that makes it the one that most compare to AS?

I almost bought an Artic fox. I used to work literally across the street from where they we made. I have met the owner. It is a private company.
It has good insulation and and aluminum frame. Heated tanks....

[Mike Leary]

I've seen more Artic Fox coaches in the high country than ASs, all the owners I've talked to rave about them....now if they just looked like our beauties!

[slowmover]

Originally Posted by Mike Leary

I've seen more Artic Fox coaches in the high country than ASs, all the owners I've talked to rave about them....now if they just looked like our beauties!

Comes down to how long they last. They obviously aren't as good on the highway, a serious deficiency: fuel economy, wind-shedding, sway resistance, etc. "Consensus" on RV.net is primarily echoing others . . . all too often it has nothing to do with investigations, then setting things out on paper to do a proper analysis. It is still a quickly-aging trailer with ever-increasing maintenance costs. It fits the disposable "I'm only a gunna R-vee for about 10-yars anyhow" mentality no matter how good it may be in some respects. (Which is more a commentary on the state of the ordinary square white box than about versus Airstream).

Handn nails it, above.

[aftermath]

It is really difficult to do a comparison between these two trailers. I believe that they have two different functions. My cousin has a new 26 ft Arctic Fox with a slide out and it is a very well made unit. It is well insulated, has thermal windows and is very solid. Perhaps the nicest box trailer I have ever been in. I could barely hear the water pump running. It is an upgraded version and has larger wheels and sits high off the ground. I think it takes three big steps to get into. He has it off road a lot and camps in far away places very early in the spring and late into the fall. It is perfect for him.

I believe most Airstreamers stick to the pavement and do a lot of traveling. I prefer the Arctic Fox in some categories but would not want to pull it around the U.S. My 25 FB moves down the road very nicely and it is great for the two of us. I am confident that it will hold its value over time. I also believe that it will out last any box trailer of the same vintage. My cousin takes great care of his equipment and I think his will still be in good shape in 10 years.

Different types of trailers for different lifestyles.

[slowmover]

Different types of trailers for different lifestyles.

Yes, the comparison doesn't really exist for a given use.

Lifestyle is a term -- meaningless -- which only muddies analysis. An appeal to faith as a means of shortcutting thought where all choices are to be seen as "rational" . . and are not.

A square white box is a disposable, high-annual-cost, short-lived RV where lifestyle is just an emotional cover for throwing money out the window.

That someone wants it is one thing . . to say it is an equal choice is quite another. An more apt comparison would be between a mobile home and a typical stick built home. The latter lasts, on average, more than 75-years (nationally), where the former may be good 10-15. They only appear to offer the same function. Lifestyle sez they are equal, but economic lifespan gives it real meaning as intial costs DO NOT offset long-term cost for the "cheap" alternative under any realistic scenario.

And a used, quality trailer defeats either of these reckonings.

.

[Soyboy]

If I was going to purchase an SOB it likely would be an Arctic Fox. They seem to be well built, although, some folk to complain about them, as seen in handn's post above, which is interesting as Nash promotes their trailers (AF/Nash) for "off road" use. I think the AF and the Nash are the same, except the AF has smooth side fiberglass and the Nash is alum. plus, I think, the AF has more standard equip, and hence costs more. In any event, it's good to hear some "real world" experience with the brand. As to me, I liked their "4/season" capabilities and they seemed to be more substantial than other SOBs. They used to have a video on their website with about 6 or 8 workers on the roof jumping up and down.

At this point, I am just glad to have my AS. I would have a hard time going back to an SOB unless it was for more room (such as full timing, but even then I think the AS would work).

BTW, Pilgrim, Arctic Fox trailers are hard to find east of the Mississippi ever since they closed their plant in Winchester, VA. a few years ago. There are still a few dealers around (I saw one in PA. and I think there is one on Long Island). Of course the shipping from Oregon would raise the prices. I think their truck campers may be more widely available back east as they can be shipped in multiples more easily (vs towing 1 trailer).

[Jammer]

I have corresponded with people who have Artic Fox trailers. People who have them, like them. They are a heavier trailer than Airstream, and are marketed as being suitable for four-season use.

In considering the quality and lifespan of an Airstream, SOB, or stick house, I believe it is important to consider that any frequently-used space will require renewal after 20-30 years. For a stick house, people remodel. For an Airstream, people restore. For an SOB, in most cases, people replace. There are better and worse SOBs and the best of them will make it long past 10 years with care.

I think that the Arctic Fox trailers are probably the closest to the Airstream Classic in terms of the quality of internal buildout.

[Bluto]

A while ago, I briefly looked at various trailers and the Artic Fox is a nice trailer with some good features but, correct me if I'm wrong, aren't all the roofs on those made with wood ceiling joists? I believe even the ones that use aluminum studs in the sidewalls also have wooden roofs on them. That seems like a draw back to me as far as life of the trailer, although it would insulate a lot better than aluminum.

[garry]

The advantage of the AF is the 4 season insulation for winter campers they can't be beat.

We all know the advantages of the AS and cold weather camping is not one of them.

[lewster]

Originally Posted by Bluto

A while ago, I briefly looked at various trailers and the Artic Fox is a nice trailer with some good features but, correct me if I'm wrong, aren't all the roofs on those made with wood ceiling joists? I believe even the ones that use aluminum studs in the sidewalls also have wooden roofs on them. That seems like a draw back to me as far as life of the trailer, although it would insulate a lot better than aluminum.

The Holiday Rambler 'Alumalite' series and several of the larger, more expensive 5th wheels produced today use aluminum rafters in the roof structure, along with aluminum 'cages' for the wall and floor structure. All aluminum tubing is the construction standard on most larger diesel powered motor homes also, where the only wood you will find is in the cabinets.

[Gene]

I see more Arctic Foxes the further north I go—they like to migrate north. I met a guy in British Columbia who was trying to get his water heater working properly after 15+ years, so they last that long. The trailer looked fine on the outside and a month later we saw it parked at Denali NP.

I believe they make a full line of trailers—travel trailer and 5th wheel plus truck campers. I looked at their website a couple of years ago and some of the floor plans looked better than Airstream's.

Gene

[Ag&Au]

IF I were to get a trailer to take places where I can't take my 31 foot AS (which is a lot of places), I would definitely look hard at the Arctic Fox. Perhaps one of their truck campers would be great for that.

Ken

[Airslide]

I owned a 2001 Artic Fox Cabover. It was a beast! It also had alot of quality issues and I think I paid around 23k for it out the door. The slide was constantly problematic and a few leaks were discovered as well. I sold it after a couple years of ownership and took a bath on it.. I will stick with the airstream.

Arctic Fox Camper: 1150

Specifications:

Dry Weight Extended Cab:3953Dry Weight Extended Cab-kgs:1793Interior Height:79Floor Length:11'4Overall Length:19'Exterior Height (approx. w/ A/C):112Exterior Width (approx. w/o awning):96 1/2Fresh Water Capacity (approx. gal):55Gray Water Tank (approx. gallons):44Black Water Tank (approx. gallons):43LPG Capacity (approx. gallons):14