Visit our Popular Forums

bfred · 01-01-2007, 08:57 PM

The news around town is that Thor is going to put the Airstream nameplate on the Mandalay Bay motorhome for 2008. I say, if it isn't built in Jackson Center, Ohio. it isn,t an Airstream. I realize Thor owns Airstream, etc. but I don,t see them putting the airstream name on their dutchman travel trailers or vice versa.
I could be oversensitive about this, so what do you other motorhome owners think about it?

2airishuman · 01-01-2007, 09:17 PM

no disrepect to your land yacht bfred...

but the last real airstream mohos were built many moons ago...

we call'em classics.

given ALL of the recent a/s mohos lacked rivets or bauxite skin...

who cares...

the mandalay bay is a very very nice sob moho...

and nicer than any moho made in j/c in recent years...

it is amazing that thor...

a 3 BILLION dollar per year company...

hasn't breached the a/s name sooner...

a/s only does 100 million in sales yearly...

yet that itty bit is still the halo brand name...

sort of like having corvette in the fold...

imagine if g'em branded an su-vette...

cheers
2air'

wheel interested · 01-01-2007, 09:20 PM

Hi Buck,

Do you happen to know how that motorhome compares to your new one?

I wondered myself if Thor was not going to do that after AS decided to stop production of the motorhomes. I also thought that may have been a motivation to change WBCCI to Airstream Owners Association.

I bet you are glad you have a "real"Airstream before they stopped making them!

**moosetags** · 01-01-2007, 09:28 PM

I also think that if it not made at the Airstream Factory, it is not an Airstream.

bfred · 01-01-2007, 09:38 PM

Hi Carol,
The Mandalay is a nice MH, but it isn't an Airstream.
It doesn't have hickory cabinets,etc. I also don't think you are going to get the service from Mandalay like you do at Airstream.

bfred · 01-01-2007, 09:45 PM

2airishuman,
I agree with you about the classics, but my MH was built in Jackson Center using the same manufacturing process and craftmanship. The only difference is yours is aluminum and mine is fiberglass. I know I belong to the same club as the trailers and the classics.

Silvertwinkie · 01-02-2007, 06:52 AM

I think that an Airstream, if it is an Airstream, is a riveted alum monoc body. If it doesn't have that, it's just a box and I mean no disrespect to any moho onwner that has an Airstream that is a boxy one.

I think it's a bad idea for Airstream to do this, but I can understand why. To build a moho takes time, materials and floorspace. You have to sell a certain number to make it worthwhile. Which goes back to the first line in this post. If they brought back the Classic moho, and re-designed it to be competitive with the market, there are some BIG risks and costs to do so. From the sound of it, only a select few could afford it, so this news of putting and Airstream name on another product and calling it an Airstream isn't a shocker. But again, they can put the name on 20 different box mohos and the bottom line IMHO is that unless it has the same characteristics of the trailer line, it's not really an Airstream, it's a box with the name Airstream on it, regardless of build location.

steelbird312 · 01-02-2007, 07:36 AM

Guess I need to jump in here...as you can see from the signature, I have an Airstream MH and a 'real' Airstream as well. I have bought and sold more Airstreams than most, as I fell in love with the trailers many, many moons ago.
When we want, we use the trailer, and love it as well.
I do not have a classic MH as they are extremely unreliable! The chassis they were built on and the lack of attention to detail would not stand up to the 50000 miles I have put on the diesel fiberglass model in the last 3 years.
Now, if the new managers of the Airstream company had continued on with the production of the new classic MH, I would have seriously looked at them for my use.
The aluminitus is hard to overcome, and I, for one, do not intend to try, however, every single last one of us who have torn them apart to 'fix' the handwork (or lack of) the skilled craftsmen in Jackson Center can almost laugh at the adamant stance of those who say 'it isn't an Airstream.' Except for the beautiful skin of the Airstream, there is a lot to be disdainful of.
That begs the question, why do I own an Airstream MH? Well, at age 55, my wife and I have been very involved in the non factory WBCCI club, traveling many many miles, making many many friends, and seeing so much stuff with others that just does not happen while traveling alone. We do travel alone as well, but have enjoyed the club. We have spent up to 7 consecutive months running in our unit, and have enjoyed the convenience of our MH. We also have enjoyed the reliability of the Freightliner chassis along with the Caterpiller engine and the Allison transmission. So, that is MY reason for owning an AIRSTREAM fiberglass MH.
The whole premise, I thought, of owning these units was to travel, instead of fixing them up just to sit and look at! I will not be haughty as I give you my reason for not owning a classic, yet I feel you have no premise to denegrate my choice either.
Anyone could put an Airstream moniker on anything and it would not be an Airstream. If the Airstream company makes, and then installs the Airstream moniker on it, then no one has the ability to say it isn't an Airstream....and make it so.
just my thoughts

CanoeStream · 01-02-2007, 07:40 AM

Not to see how many of us can dance on the head of a pin.... If faced with a problem a dealer can't or won't deal with, we can take an Airstream back to Jackson Center. bfred is in good company.

**jcanavera** · 01-02-2007, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silvertwinkie

I so this news of putting and Airstream name on another product and calling it an Airstream isn't a shocker. But again, they can put the name on 20 different box mohos and the bottom line IMHO is that unless it has the same characteristics of the trailer line, it's not really an Airstream, it's a box with the name Airstream on it, regardless of build location.

But....it does answer the anxious worries from many of the higher ups within WBCCI regarding a successor motorhome. Keep in mind that if the bylaws stay as they are now, eventually those existing members having to replace their motorhomes would have to move back to the trailer side of life, or find a used unit.

Jack

guy99 · 01-02-2007, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steelbird312

...

I do not have a classic MH as they are extremely unreliable! The chassis they were built on and the lack of attention to detail would not stand up to the 50000 miles I have put on the diesel fiberglass model in the last 3 years.
...
just my thoughts

I have to disagree with this. We have put 40,000 miles on our 1984 310 Limited which we acquired two and a half years ago. During this time it has failed once - within a mile of home - when the power to the fuel pump failed. I have also had some tune-up related issues (coil, ignition module, etc.) but have always made it to the shop under power.

I'm glad that you like your fiberglass rig but that's no reason to malign mine.

I wonder how your rig will be performing in 2023?

str8strm · 01-02-2007, 08:50 AM

We have had our just about 2 years. No engine or tranny problems, we have upgraded the suspension and done other mods that were our choice. We really enjoy the uniqueness of our coach and the smiles and thumbs up we get when travelling

. We plan on keeping ours until we can't use it any more and then passing it on to someone who will appreciate its beauty. Debbie

cooperhawk · 01-02-2007, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steelbird312

I do not have a classic MH as they are extremely unreliable! The chassis they were built on and the lack of attention to detail would not stand up to the 50000 miles I have put on the diesel fiberglass model in the last 3 years.
The whole premise, I thought, of owning these units was to travel, instead of fixing them up just to sit and look at! I will not be haughty as I give you my reason for not owning a classic, yet I feel you have no premise to denegrate my choice either.

One might note that Sears puts their name on tools they deem to be of high quality and sells them. Many other companies do the same. I wouldn't worry so much about where its made, as to the quality of it. Heck, I even have friends that own Fibre Glass units!
Out 345 has nearly one hundred forty thousand miles on it and is still totally realiable. We have driven it around a lot of North America with little trouble. I have redone the interior not because it was faulty, but because fashions change and we wanted a new look.
As to being haughty, don't worry about it, you fit right in with a lot of this group.

Minnie's Mate · 01-02-2007, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cooperhawk

...As to being haughty, don't worry about it, you fit right in with a lot of this group.

I thought that was part of what owning an Airstream was about!

ALANSD · 01-02-2007, 04:02 PM

anyone who says a Classic Airstream motorhome is highly unreliable, has just not owned one. I had mine for 5 years, and had one break down in that time. We cruised up and down the East Coast thru the mountains of NC and VA in 98 degree heat and the only failure was the starter motor. Replacing it with a heat resistant starter ended that problem.
A Chevrolet chassis with a 454 or Isuzu diesel. Easy to repair, and maintain for the most part. For twenty plus year old vehicles these are Reliable and sound. Owning one was enjoyable and satisfying, I almost hated to sell it, but lifestyle changes made a trailer more sensible for us.

Silvertwinkie · 01-02-2007, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcanavera

But....it does answer the anxious worries from many of the higher ups within WBCCI regarding a successor motorhome. Keep in mind that if the bylaws stay as they are now, eventually those existing members having to replace their motorhomes would have to move back to the trailer side of life, or find a used unit.

Jack

To be honest Jack, what WBCCI members have to do to stay in the club hasn't really been keeping me up at night!

I was bummed that the return of the classic motorhome never did come to be...even though I most likely could not afford one of the new ones they were thinking of building now, used, let alone new.

Silvertwinkie · 01-02-2007, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALANSD

anyone who says a Classic Airstream motorhome is highly unreliable, has just not owned one. I had mine for 5 years, and had one break down in that time.
A Chevrolet chassis with a 454 or Isuzu diesel. Easy to repair, and maintain for the most part. For twenty plus year old vehicles these are Reliable and sound. Owning one was enjoyable and satisfying, I almost hated to sell it, but lifestyle changes made a trailer more sensible for us.

I never owned one, but I've seen many 454s and Isuzu engines and the chassis that the said motorhomes were built on. Knowing anything can have problems, I'd have to agree, the Classic motorhome using either of these two engines, chassis, etc would be IMHO a good coach to own.

I'm not bashing the box mohos per se. They are neat coaches in their own right, but, if it's really an Airstream, it's got the alum body, with the mono shell. Airstream did it right when they finally came out with the long awaited Classic motorhome which uses the design and engineering that makes Airstreams what they are. Yes the box mohos are Airstreams, but they do not use the same engineering that makes an Airstream an Airstream. Makes them neither good nor bad, but what they are.

jimmickle · 01-02-2007, 05:20 PM

Has anybody considered the Airstream Westfalia? Airstream did little except add a generator and change the electrics to 110 v from 220, and install Airstream badges.

bobchevy89 · 01-02-2007, 05:30 PM

differant strokes for different folks.I've got a 77 Argosy with 100,000 miles on it . Just change oil every 3,000 miles change trany fluid every 40,000 miles. no problems.I'm happy with mine as well as others are with thiers.I don't knock other brands, if I see any brand moho or trailer I try to offer assisstance. that's the only way to fly.
Just my $.05 worth. Have a great new year and safe camping to all brands!!

Bob

Silvertwinkie · 01-02-2007, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmickle

Has anybody considered the Airstream Westfalia? Airstream did little except add a generator and change the electrics to 110 v from 220, and install Airstream badges.

Yup...IMHO that one too would fall under the umbrella of non monocot shell/Airstream. Even the Airstream only Skydeck too.

No knock intended toward the SOBs and I agree, campers are campers no matter what RV they have.

I thought I read somewhere that Airstream was reluctant to even offer a moho. I bet Wally would be rolling in his grave if he saw the boxsters coming out of the factory or any factory for that matter with the Airstream name on it....then again, maybe he'd have been angry abour Argosies too??!!