2008 DWR Bambi 16' Now Shipping

[Minnie's Mate]

Originally Posted by AgZep

Imagine a 34' Classic with a bright red awning. I think that would be "rather assertive."

Don't have to imagine. All 34' Classic Limited comes with bright burgundy awnings all around. They may not be red, but they aren't that far afield. Burgundy accents stripes, too. I think they look smashing.

I'm really not trying to pick on you, just defending my point of view here.

[craftsman]

Actually I think Airstream stopped using the Burgundy on the Limited's.All the Classics are now Limiteds and the Awnings are the Blue and Grey stripes.

[safari62]

I like AgZep's take on the DWR edition both in his opinion of the design ideas, the marketing of it and the measured temperment of his reply.
My first reaction to the DWR was Very cool, I want one, I know I can't afford one even before I found out what that msrp was.
I am surprized by so many strong opinions of "I hate it" from those that have not been inside a live one yet. There is always something to criticise on every model. Smokeless Joe had a good example with the controls layout with a question following that about following through on the total design and not just designer add-ons. Good point Sergei.
As for the "rich stupid people" comment, should people that live in little silver french palace's be calling others that. I thought that would be Nuevorich or something like that.
Give Airstream credit for there efforts to invite new ideas and ways to bring people to look at trailers in a different way. With the introduction of the CCD, the Winick Design, and now the DWR it shows that Airstream is still thinking ahead with it's roots in the past.
Gary

[Minnie's Mate]

Originally Posted by Craftsman2

Actually I think Airstream stopped using the Burgundy on the Limited's.All the Classics are now Limiteds and the Awnings are the Blue and Grey stripes.

I stand corrected on the new models. The newest Classic Limited I have had the pleasure of visiting was a 2005. If you go to nilesrob's photo gallery you can view photos of it. There is one image that shows the front and rear with all of the awnings deployed. They look quite nice through the myrtles and palm trees of Fort De Soto State Park, Fl. In the photos, the awnings appear to be red. And yes, there are a lot of them, but they don't look out of scale for the large trailer.

[Minnie's Mate]

I agree with pretty much every thing you said, Gary. I think we all agree that it isn't Airstream's progressive design alternative that is in question here. After all, no other RV manufacturer that I'm aware of is doing anything like this nor do they have a product that could support such an effort. I for one applaud Airstream's effort to be different and provide alternatives to the mundane, cookie cutter "every SOB RV looks like every other SOB RV."

I think we all agree that what is in question is the scale of the package it was wrapped up in. It takes what could have and should have been a bold, cutting edge design concept and makes it look like a shopping spree at Target. It all comes off looking cheap in the photos and these photos were taken by professional photographers whose business is to make products look their best and I'm sure these photos do make this design look its best. I think there lies the rub. Despite good photography, it still looks out of scale and poorly executed. Obviously, this is going to be one of those love it or hate it scenarios.

[AgZep]

Originally Posted by Minnie's Mate

Don't have to imagine. All 34' Classic Limited comes with bright burgundy awnings all around. They may not be red, but they aren't that far afield. Burgundy accents stripes, too. I think they look smashing.

I'm really not trying to pick on you, just defending my point of view here.

No, I agree, burgundy is a fine color for an awning. As is the blue and white. I was musing on there about really bright saturated colors. Think fire engine red, rather than burgundy. We have a lot of colors in our house, but they're all somewhat toned downed shades, rather than harsher, more saturated versions. I'm usually just more comfortable with those on large expanses.

But I love bold accents too. For example, check out this shot of the bedspread we have in our Airstream:

http://www.wesandcarol.com/images/Ai...cs/Bedroom.jpg

I expect there will be a bunch of wildly negative comments about that one, but that's what we like. And that's been my point all along. There's room for a lot of different tastes and styles here. I'm happy with one look, others are happy with another. Heck, there's no reason people shouldn't be staing their honest opinions about Airstream products here.

I just hope we can seperate our thoughts about taste from our thoughts about worth. Some people do a lot of reasearch on forums like this one before they buy (I know I did). It's ok if we make it clear to potential DWR buyers that some of us think it's really cool, while others don't. But I'd hate to see a potential buyer decide to avoid Airstream entirely because the forum gives them the impression that the DWR is some sort of evil scam the factory is perpetrating on foolish purchasers. Or, maybe they really like the rig, but decide not to buy because they think we're a lot of grumpy old guys that don't like anything new, and they'd rather not associate with us.

A friend of ours use to travel in high-end motorhomes. "Newells", I think they were called: The kind of rig that costs a whole lot more than any four or five of Airstream's best new trailers. They once stopped at an Airstream park, where they were of course directed to the "SOB" section. They got a big kick out of that, and she still laughs every time she tells the story. But a less good-natured soul might have taken that as evidence of Airstreamer snobbery. I guess I'm guilty of always trying to make sure we don't encourage such perceptions.

[AgZep]

Originally Posted by Minnie's Mate

I think we all agree that what is in question is the scale of the package it was wrapped up in. It takes what could have and should have been a bold, cutting edge design concept and makes it look like a shopping spree at Target. It all comes off looking cheap in the photos and these photos were taken by professional photographers whose business is to make products look their best and I'm sure these photos do make this design look its best. I think there lies the rub. Despite good photography, it still looks out of scale and poorly executed. Obviously, this is going to be one of those love it or hate it scenarios.

Funny you should mention that. I have a fair amount of photographic experience (though no great supply of talent), and I find it remarkably difficult to photograph RVs well. They always come off looking more cramped than they are, or bad in some other way. Architectural photography is always challenging, but there's something about RVs that just makes them really difficult to capture. I suppose it's due to the cylindrical nature of the space, combined with a lot of visual clutter arising from all the different systems and surfaces. I almost always find the actual unit to seem a lot better than I expected from pictures. Even when they're done by pros.

[Minnie's Mate]

Originally Posted by AgZep

We have a lot of colors in our house, but they're all somewhat toned downed shades, rather than harsher, more saturated versions. I'm usually just more comfortable with those on large expanses.

But I love bold accents too. For example, check out this shot of the bedspread we have in our Airstream:

http://www.wesandcarol.com/images/Ai...cs/Bedroom.jpg

Like you, my wife and I both like intense colors...there isn't a beige or off white wall in our house. The closest are the walls in our garage!

No problems with the colors in your bedspread...I will admit the yellow section might be a little intense for the size space.

As for photography, I find the opposite was true for our Airstream. The photos in the brochures and on the Airstream website made the bedroom in our 30' Safari look much larger than it is in person. Same with the rear bedroom. The photographers typically will use a wide angle lens and photoshop the distortions out before the photos go to print to make the spaces look larger. A lot of time and money is spent on those images to make them look their best.

[AgZep]

Originally Posted by Minnie's Mate

Like you, my wife and I both like intense colors...there isn't a beige or off white wall in our house. The closest are the walls in our garage!

No problems with the colors in your bedspread...I will admit the yellow section might be a little intense for the size space.

As for photography, I find the opposite was true for our Airstream. The photos in the brochures and on the Airstream website made the bedroom in our 30' Safari look much larger than it is in person. Same with the rear bedroom. The photographers typically will use a wide angle lens and photoshop the distortions out before the photos go to print to make the spaces look larger. A lot of time and money is spent on those images to make them look their best.

It's not actually yellow. It's a brighter shade of green. I think the redness of the halogens made it seem more yellow.

I shot that with a 10mm lens on a DSLR, equivalent to a 16mm in 35mm terms. And then there's a bunch of perspective correction done on it with software.

I normally shoot interiors with a 4X5 view camera to get better control of perspective. Not an easy thing to do inside a trailer though.

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

Originally Posted by ROBERTSUNRUS

Hi, what's next? Maybe paint a 16' Bambi bright red and put some yellowish looking leather seats in it and a black horse emblem on it and call it the "Ferrari Edition" for a mere $100,000.00 or more. Oh and while we're at it why don't we just put windows all the way around it. [like on a school bus]
I think Airstream should think more on the line of makeing something more practical and affordable instead of makeing something that only stupid, rich people like Pari$ Hilton would want. Let Inland Andy build the High dollar custom units for these people.
That's my opinion. I think it's just wrong when some fancied up 16'er is some day going to cost more than a 34' Classic.

Hi, I think some of you missed my point; I don't think this is a really bad designed trailer [actually pretty neat] although abviously not for me. I feel that someone at Airstream has been challenged to see just how far and how much money they can get for the smallest trailer of the fleet. I think the Ocean Breeze Bambi costs more, but you can really see the difference between it and say a basic Bambi. [still a lot of money for a 16'er] The Ocean Breeze 25'er is an example of what Airstream should be makeing. As for the "Stupid Rich people" that was for my ficticious "$100,000.00 Ferrari Edition." Not the DWR edition.

[wheel interested]

Rich Luhr mentions the new model from the RV Show and reflects on coming trends and posts a picture of the unit. Read his blog here: Tour of America

[sos10]

Originally Posted by wheel interested

Rich Luhr mentions the new model from the RV Show and reflects on coming trends and posts a picture of the unit. Read his blog here: Tour of America

Thanks for the link... VERY curious about this light(er) Safari Sport model!

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

Originally Posted by wheel interested

Rich Luhr mentions the new model from the RV Show and reflects on coming trends and posts a picture of the unit. Read his blog here: Tour of America

Hi, now we're talking. [AIRSTREAM] Smaller, lighter, and hopefully reasonably priced. "Safari Sport" 17' and 22' models. Some of these people [Safari Sport buyers] may already have a decent tow vehicle parked in their driveway.

[Minnie's Mate]

I think the Safari Sport is a great concept. It reaches out to the first time buyer that doesn't want or need a 3/4 ton truck as a daily driver. If it is reasonably priced (by Airstream standards) it should be a real winner. It should also be a stepping stone for future upgrades as the family dynamics change and the empty nesters want something geared more toward a couple and, thus, should lead to future sales of the more expensive "bedroom" models. Again, from the descriptions that Carole (wheelintrested) and Rich has given us, I think this should be a winner.

I think the DWR will have its place, but I think it will be more with the yuppie lableaholics more than the mainstream first time buyer.

[Colonial Airstream]

Hello,

I would like to mention that the DWR 16' International Bambi has a 4,300 lb GVWR and has 15" LRD tires. The regular 16' Bambi has a 3,500 lb. GVWR and 14" LRC tires.

[rickandsandi]

I don't know folks, $3,300 a foot is a lot of money!

[Minnie's Mate]

Originally Posted by NeatAirstream

Hello,

I would like to mention that the DWR 16' International Bambi has a 4,300 lb GVWR and has 15" LRD tires. The regular 16' Bambi has a 3,500 lb. GVWR and 14" LRC tires.

So what accounts for the extra 800#'s?

[ljmiii]

Originally Posted by NeatAirstream
Hello,

I would like to mention that the DWR 16' International Bambi has a 4,300 lb GVWR and has 15" LRD tires. The regular 16' Bambi has a 3,500 lb. GVWR and 14" LRC tires.

Originally Posted by Minnie's Mate

So what accounts for the extra 800#'s?

They used the 4300lb axle and 15" LRD tires. The Quiksilvers had a Net Cargo Capacity of about 50 lbs - either the DWR stuff weighted more than 50 lbs or Airstream decided that shipping trailers with no cargo capacity was wrong.

[Minnie's Mate]

Originally Posted by ljmiii

Originally Posted by NeatAirstream
Hello,

I would like to mention that the DWR 16' International Bambi has a 4,300 lb GVWR and has 15" LRD tires. The regular 16' Bambi has a 3,500 lb. GVWR and 14" LRC tires.


They used the 4300lb axle and 15" LRD tires. The Quiksilvers had a Net Cargo Capacity of about 50 lbs - either the DWR stuff weighted more than 50 lbs or Airstream decided that shipping trailers with no cargo capacity was wrong.

Wow, you think they could have figured that one out when they figured it out for the units they shipped to Canada and just shipped them all with the larger cargo capacity! I guess its a kilogram vs. pound thing.

[lovingtahoe]

Originally Posted by sos10

The "instrument panel" is a mess, the clock is out of proportion, not to mention how many times people will hurt themselves on those giant hooks near the kitchen... and I don't like the wheelcaps either, they don't suit the Bambi at all.

The red awning (not shown in pics) is nice though!

The crazy thing is that those hooks are $300 if you buy them from DWR! The clock is even more! I like the overall feel though.