Detailed Comparison - Sprinter and Chevy Camper Vans

Taking the keys on the roadtrek 210P

This post provides our impressions and a comparison of our experience gained using two vehicles for about a week each for long distance treks of over 1000 miles. The camper vans were:

• Sprinter 2500 diesel "High Roof" with all-electric coach. "19 feet long."
• Chevrolet Express 3500 gasoline with electric/propane coach. "21 feet long."

Both of these vehicles got the job done and we were comfortable in both. Yet these were two very different vehicles. This is not about what's better. That is a matter of individual opinion.

The 19 footer was about 19 feet 6 inches in length and the 21 footer was about 21 feet 6 inches in length. That two foot difference yielded a significant difference in interior space. However, the fundamental design of the vehicles and even the location, dimensions and placement of doors also played a part. The side door of the Sprinter devoured a lot of real estate, as can be seen in this photo, yet it provided a nice scenic view in comfortable weather. Also note the height of the floor.

Here's the side door of the Chevy

An Apples and Oranges Comparison

This is not a comparison of equivalent vehicles in similar circumstances. Why do I say that?

• The use was different as the treks were different (1200 miles versus 2500+ miles). 
• Weather conditions and altitudes were dissimilar, although the actual temperature range was equivalent. Sun with the Sprinter versus rain, sleet, snow and ice with the Chevy. 
• Because of larger length and width, larger fresh water tanks, amenities and so on, the Chevy vehicle weight was greater. That should have influenced driving impressions as well as living space.
• The Sprinter did not have the range of features of the Chevy and so a comfort comparison is difficult.

To summarize major differences we encountered on our treks:

• The Sprinter provided something closer to a "camping" experience while the Chevy provided more of a "motor home" experience. This was the consequence of differences in the interior space and storage, but also the different coach energy sources and environmental treatments. 
• The Sprinter if "off the grid" was limited because of the lack of a generator and the reliance on electric as the single source of coach energy. The Chevy had a generator and propane and so it had significant off the grid flexibility.
• The core coach features of both vehicles were similar, but the Chevy had more features overall. 
• We used these vehicles in cold to warm temperatures, about 25F to 85F. However, the weather conditions were dissimilar. The Sprinter was used in dry weather. The Chevy was used in rain, sleet, snow and ice. 
• The Sprinter was driven on clean roads. The Chevy was also driven on wet, icy and snow covered roads.
• I have more photos of the Sprinter trek (Trek 1) than I do of the Chevy trek (Trek 2). We had more time to take photos with the Sprinter because we covered fewer miles during a trek of similar duration. The Sprinter trek was about 1200 miles. The Chevy was about 2500 miles. In addition, a lot of the weather encountered in the Chevy was rain, sleet and snow. As part of the trek we also took time to prep the Chevy for very cold weather, something we did not have to do with the Sprinter because conditions were different. This combination of circumstances afforded less time in the Chevy for interior photography and videotaping our experience. 

Here are a few observations:

1. Dimensions. The Sprinter was about 19 feet 5 inches in length, bumper to bumper with 144 inch wheelbase. The Chevy was over 21 feet long with 155 inch wheelbase. The Sprinter was 6 feet 8 inches wide excluding rear view mirrors. The Chevy was about 7 feet 4 inches at the widest point, excluding mirrors. The Chevy interior coach height was 6 feet 2 inches. The Sprinter was similar, but the rooftop AC projected into the coach space and lowered the height in that area. The outside height of the Sprinter was about 10 feet including AC. The Chevy was 8 feet 9 inches. The Chevy had a wider interior aisle, at 30 inches. 
2. Parking. The Sprinter was a bit narrower and two feet shorter in length. That gave it an edge when parking. 
   
3. Vehicle modifications. The Sprinter was a "high roof" cargo van with no exterior modifications, other than openings for AC, roof fan and plumbing for fresh water and gray and black tanks below the floor. The Chevy body was seriously modified with a steel-caged fiberglass body which flared out toward the rear, included outside storage, skylights, etc. 
   
   
   
   
4. Mileage. The Sprinter with a Bluetec (tm) diesel engine got about 19.5 MPG with mostly highway driving. The Chevy with an 87 octane gasoline engine got slightly less than 16 MPG. Based on the actual price of fuel, the Sprinter achieved a fuel cost per mile advantage of about 5% to 10%. Both vehicles were driven more than 1,000 miles for this comparison, mostly at speeds at or above 45 MPH. However, the inclement weather we experienced in the Chevy resulted in long periods on the highway at speeds below 40 MPH.
5. Coach energy sources. The Sprinter was all electric with solar panels. The Chevy was an electric/propane combination with an onboard gasoline generator. Both were equipped for 30 amp. 120 VAC "shore power" electrical connection.                                                            
6.                                                                                                                                      Coach interior temperature comfort. Based on our experience with an ambient temperature range of 20F to 85F the Chevy provided better comfort at the lower temperatures. The Sprinter included fresh air ventilation, the air conditioner and a portable plug-in ceramic electric heater. The Chevy had fresh air, a heat pump, an air conditioner and a propane heater. At the lowest temperatures we used the ceramic electric heater in the Sprinter and the propane heater in the Chevy. During the Chevy trek (Trek 2) we experienced minimum outside temperature of 20F. In Trek 1 with the Sprinter the minimum was 25F. The Sprinter did provide an acceptable experience at the low temperatures. However, we were more comfortable in the Chevy at the lowest temperatures encountered. The Chevy propane fueled furnace (heater) had an output of 16000 BTU. The electric heater of the Sprinter was 1500 watts which provided an output of about 5100 BTU. To use the Sprinter electric heater it was a requirement to be on "shore power." The Chevy because of the generator and propane heater did provide these comforts while disconnected from "shore power." Chevy Thermostat and Comfort Selector:                                                                                      
7. Coach comfort aided by insulation. The Sprinter apparently had minimal insulation. I say that based on temperature of the floor and interior cabinets early in the morning and in the vicinity of the rear doors. The Chevy supposedly was equipped with R4.5 insulation. Both had windows of single pane glass. The Sprinter had lightweight privacy shades in the coach area, and the rear doors became cold at night. The Chevy had heavy fabric shades and the propane heater in the Chevy was mid-coach and at floor level. Our lowest temperature experience was 20-25F outside and running on whatever coach heating was available for that temperature. Under those conditions at night the Chevy was the more comfortable with the propane heater. Note: We have added Reflectix to the windows of the Chevy after our winter and summer experiences. I also have a sun-shade or "sun sail" as well as the awning. Such passive interior temperature control measures have proven to be very beneficial. 
8. Coach power sources. The Sprinter had a solar system (12 VDC), batteries, inverter and shore power electrical system. The coach batteries could be recharged by running the vehicle engine or solar or shore power.  The Chevy had no solar system. It did include a gasoline generator, two marine batteries and an inverter. It also had a propane system for the stove top, refrigerator, hot water heater, space heater and an outside BBQ connection. The Chevy coach batteries could be recharged by vehicle engine, shore power or the generator. In both vehicles we used the inverter systems at night for light electronics and for our nighttime sleeping use. Both performed equally well with light loads. 
9. Electric Power issues. The Sprinter tripped the inverter, even on shore power. When that occurred, the electric stove top, hot water heater and AC were shut down (we only used the AC once, as a trial). We discussed this problem with the outfitter who provided immediate guidance. I also decided to switch off the hot water heater using the circuit breaker when we were using the range top. The heater was an invisible load and I could not determine when the thermostat was closed and water heating. That seemed to eliminate the problem. The Chevy did not have this problem; it had energy sources distributed between electric and propane.
10. Coach cooking. The Sprinter included a refrigerator and two burner electric range. The Chevy had a larger refrigerator and propane stovetop and included a microwave/convection oven. The propane heated whatever we were cooking faster than the electric range. Compared to the electric range, we preferred the microwave oven of the Chevy for quickly heating water for tea or coffee. Chevy Microwave/Convection oven:
    
11. Food preparation and housekeeping. The Sprinter cooking/sink area had minimal counter space and no rear backsplash and so we tended to have things slide off of the rear of the small flat area behind the stove top and the sink. To the rear of the Sprinter stove top was the sliding door and window. We used the top of the two burner electric rangetop for storage when not cooking. We set up a drying area on the bench to the rear of the cooking area. The cooking and food preparation experience in the Sprinter was a camping experience. We used a pop-up outside table when the side door was open. The Chevy had a wide counter surface with backsplash, two burner stovetop and a large flat expanse to the right of the sink. It also had a large slideout surface above the drawers in the food preparation/kitchen area. Adjacent to the Chevy stovetop was a stainless steel wall and a large window behind the sink/food preparation area. The chevy included a larger food preparation area and more storage in the immediate area of the food preparation area. We used that counter space as can be seen in the photo. Sprinter Cooking and Same Area in Chevy:            
    
    
12. Another view of the interior of the Chevy from the passenger seat. The LED lighting strip is a modification I made. 
    
13. Coach Dining. The Sprinter included a small table with upright support which could be installed in the rear seating area for dining. The front seats did not swivel. The Chevy also included a small table which could be installed in the rear seating area for dining. The Chevy had three front seats; the drivers and navigator's could swivel to face the rear. The Chevy included a large slide-out surface which could serve as a dining table for those seated in the front. In the Chevy we had the option of eating in the rear or in the front. Chevy Rear Dining Area:
    
14. Front Seating of Chevy with front table extended:
    
15. Refrigerator and microwave. The Sprinter included a 3 cu. ft. refrigerator. The Chevy included a 5 cu. ft. refrigerator. At times the locking clasp of the 3 cu. ft. was annoying, and one had to bend over or get on one knee to see everything in the smaller refrigerator. The larger refrigerator in the Chevy could be powered from DC, AC or propane. We usually selected "Auto" and ignored it. The Chevy had a combination Microwave Oven/Convection Oven at eye level. The Sprinter had none. Sprinter Refrigerator:              
    
16. Hot water. In the Sprinter with electric tank the hot water was lukewarm; turning the circuit breaker off while cooking may have contributed to this. It's unclear if that was necessary, but I wanted to avoid problems with the inverter and reducing coach electrical load seemed the best way to do that. In the Chevy the hot water was "hot." The Sprinter used an electric hot water heater. The Chevy used a propane hot water heater. Chevy Hot Water Heater - exterior with Anode Removed and Sprinter Hot Water Tank:
    
    
17. Sleeping accommodations and nighttime changeover. The Sprinter included two bench seats which could be converted to a queen sized bed by moving cushions. The space between the benches was narrow but adequate for daytime use. In practice seating in the rear was alternate sides to fit one's legs into the space; for two this was spacious. We tried sleeping in the Sprinter setup as single beds and as queen bed. The queen arrangement was preferred. The Chevy included a rear couch with U-shaped side benches. The rear, upright position of the couch was adjusted electrically. One side bench had a closet above and so it was not useable for seating, but there was sufficient room for sleeping. At night the changeover to a king size bed was achieved with a button as the bench was motorized, and re-arranging cushions. The reverse occurred in the morning. We really liked this as the changeover was much faster than in the Sprinter. We slept in the rear arranged as a king bed and my spouse once napped on the side bench. The Chevy included a cushion for converting front seating to an additional single bed. We did not use this.
18. Environment temperature control options. The Sprinter included a roof top ventilator, a rooftop Air Conditioner and a portable plug-in 120V ceramic heater. The location of the AC directed noise throughout the camper van. The Chevy had a rooftop fan with thermostatic control. The AC was in the rear but directed toward the front of the vehicle; it seemed to be less noisy. The frontward direction of the AC in the Chevy yielded a quieter sleeping experience with most of the air and noise directed forward and away from the sleeping area; it included two vents directed downward into the sleeping area. 
19. Heating system. The Sprinter included a plug-in portable ceramic heater with three temperature settings. The Chevy had a "heat pump" for temperatures as low as 40F and a propane heater for temperatures below that. Sprinter: Low-Medium-High settings. Chevy: specific digital temperature setting for any temperature source selected; propane heater, heat pump or AC. 
20. Coach entertainment system. The Chevy included a flat screen TV and DVD. The Sprinter had none. 
21. Awning. The Sprinter had none, the Chevy included a manual awning.
22. Driving seating - Both vehicles include "bucket" style seats. Both were comfortable. The Chevy added  powered lumbar supports, GPS and rear camera.  
23. Driving experience - general. The conditions were dissimilar, so making a comparison is difficult. We drove the Sprinter on excellent surfaces with no ice or snow on the pavement. We drove the Sprinter at altitudes of 2100 to 9100 feet and in traffic and on the highway. It performed very well. We drove the Chevy during rain, sleet, ice, snow and clear. We drove the Chevy at lower altitudes. It performed very well. We cannot state what the Sprinter driving experience would be in the inclement weather we experienced in the Chevy. The difference in length of the vehicles made no appreciable difference in maneuvering. However, the narrower Sprinter provided more space to the left and right and therefor was more forgiving if there was any tendency to wander in the lane. 
24. Driving experience - in traffic. We drove the Sprinter in Las Vegas traffic which was moderate. Highway traffic in the Sprinter was generally modest to non-existent. We drove the Chevy in extreme traffic conditions; for example, bumper to bumper in rain at speed in Atlanta at night and bumper to bumper in Nashville. Nashville morning traffic:                     
    
25. Driving experience - maneuverability. The Sprinter was agile but did have limited rear visibility. It did not include a rear view camera. The Chevy was agile, but the gas pedal seemed "heavier." The Sprinter had less vehicle weight and seemed to accelerate faster than the Chevy. I drove the Sprinter on perfect highways and achieved 80 MPH for short periods. I drove the Chevy on less than perfect highways at speeds up to 70 MPH. Most of the time, the driving speed in either vehicle on the interstate highways was 55-65 MPH. This was determined by conditions, traffic and speed limits. My spouse preferred to drive about 5 MPH below the speed limits, and felt comfortable in either vehicle doing so. In both vehicles the 55-65 MPH highway speeds provided a good balance of fuel economy, ease of handling, interior sound levels and reserve for acceleration. G at the Wheel of the Chevy:
    
    
    
26. Driving  - Rear camera. The Sprinter did not have a camera. The Chevy did include a rear view camera, but it was limited to use with the vehicle in reverse. There were times when it would have been nice to have a rearward viewing camera at speed in both vehicles. Because of rear window placement, I discovered that a tailgater in a very small vehicle could ride directly behind me and was not visible through the rear windows or the side mirrors! This observation is directly related to my experience while driving through Atlanta. 
27. GPS. The Sprinter did no include one, but it was available as an option with the rental. The Chevy included a TomTom, which I renamed "DumbDumb:"                                     
    
    
    
28. Dimensions - interior height. Both the Sprinter and Chevy permitted one to stand up (equivalent headroom). However, the roof mounted air conditioner of the Sprinter projected into the living space and made it very close for a 6 foot tall person. Moving from the coach area to the front seats in the Sprinter required some care to avoid hitting one's head on the storage area which projected entirely to the rear of these seats. The AC/heat pump was at the rear of the Chevy and provided a clear ceiling. Only the very rear above the sleeping area was lowered. There was no issue with clearance when moving into the front seats. 
29. Dimensions - width. The Chevy had been modified with a "flair out" of the body, and this provided about 6 inches more interior width, with an aisle of about 30 inches in width. The Chevy was about 7 feet 4 inches wide. The Sprinter was about 6 feet 6 inches wide. These dimensions exclude the outside rear-view mirrors. The difference in width was apparent toward the inside rear of the vehicle. 
30. Dimensions - length. The Sprinter was about 19 ft. 5 inches in length. The Chevy was over 21 ft. in length. For comparison, a Chevy Suburban is about 18-1/2 feet in length. The Sprinter fit readily into a standard parking space. The Chevy would fit in some situations, but not all. 
31. Bathroom. Both vehicles included a bathroom which could be used with the doors closed. The bathroom in the Sprinter was wider at eye level and one could shower standing with the doors closed. However, some of that space was achieved because there was no sink. There was some storage at eye level above the toilet. The Chevy also had a bath area in which one could shower, but it was smaller and some space was occupied by a sink and cabinet. In the Chevy, a stand-up shower experience would be had with the doors swung 90 degrees and a curtain drawn. We did not use either shower. In the Sprinter to wash one's hands after using the toilet required using the kitchen sink. The Chevy had a bathroom vent fan. The Sprinter did not. The Chevy included an aisle shower option with floor drain, the Sprinter did not. The Chevy included an outside shower facility, the Sprinter did not. 
32. Black and Grey Tanks. The Chevy had larger tanks. The Chevy included a built-in hose system with macerator pump. The tanks could be dumped by pulling out a drawer built into the side of the vehicle and then removing the hose from an integral bin. The dump valves were accessed while standing. In other words, there was no need to do more than bend over for this.  The Sprinter used two hoses; one for the blackwater tank and a smaller for the grey tank, but I found the greywater hose would airlock, so I held the blackwater hose under the fitting and grey dump valve; it had a different fitting. The dump valves were under the vehicle. The blackwater hose was stored in a PVC pipe which required one to get on their side on the ground in order to access. The grey hose was stored inside the vehicle when not in use. We did not have to dump the tanks every day with either vehicle. The Sprinter had no tank gages, but the fresh water tank was readily viewed by lifting a cushion. The Chevy included tank gages for the freshwater, grey and black tanks as well as the propane. These gages were simplistic (empty - 1/3, 2/3 or full). 
33. Ventilation. The Sprinter included a variable speed roof fan in the coach area. The Chevy had a thermostatically controlled variable speed fan and a second fan in the bathroom. The Chevy included a screened side window. None of the Sprinter windows included screens. 
34. Spare Tire. The spare for the Sprinter was under the vehicle. The spare for the Chevy could be inside and under the couch/bed, or could be at the rear of the vehicle in a "continental" tire kit. The Chevy included a continental carrier so location was tbe decision of the user. 
35. Side entry door. The Sprinter incorporated a very large sliding side door and the step up is about 22 inches an intermediate step. This door is heavy and requires a substantial "pull" to get it to glide. When open, this door also has the potential to admit a lot of rain or other "inclement" weather. The Chevrolet had a smaller, lighter swing-out door and a built-in step. The Chevy included an insect screen in the window and a separate full-area zip-in screen. We didn't need the zip-in screen in December. We used the Sprinter in cold, dry weather and warm, dry weather. We did have to shoo some bugs. We used the Chevy in rain, sleet, snow and ice. We preferred the smaller swinging side door of the Chevy and the easier step-up with a seat on the left, rather than the kitchen cabinet which can be seen in the photo. We used the side door under all weather conditions encountered in the Chevy, and the interior remained dry but for the snow on our shoes. Sprinter side entry door:                      
    
36. Rear doors. The Sprinter had nifty doors that could open 180 degrees if there was sufficient space to swing them. The Chevy had doors that would open 90 degrees. There was no rear bug screen provided with the Sprinter; the Chevy included a bug screen. 
37. Storage. The Sprinter storage was comprised of the interior cabinets and beneath the bench seats/beds along the sides. Some cabinet space was occupied by the hot water heater and some bench space was occupied by the rear wheel wells, inverter, coach batteries and fresh water tank. The Sprinter had a space over the driving seating area with a flip-up door. However, several times we each bumped our heads on this. The Chevy had about 2-1/2 feet of additional length. This resulted in more interior storage area including a closet, which the Sprinter did not have; We discussed using the Sprinter bath area to hang coats. The Chevy also had outside storage including a large outside tray and a second space behind a flip door.  The Chevy included a covered deep well space under the floor in the rear. The coach batteries in the Chevy were in an exterior compartment and one of two fresh water tanks was also exterior to the coach. In the Sprinter, we used a cooler for dry goods storage and moved it when we were seated in the rear area. At night it fit under the relocated cushions that made the bed. In the Chevy, we brought a small cooler but never used it, in part because of the much larger refrigerator and additional storage. We filled every nook and cranny in the Sprinter. In the Chevy we had unused interior and exterior space. In the Sprinter we found ourselves hunting for a place for hiking boots and moving things in order to use a specific area. This did not occur in the Chevy.
38. Exterior slide tray storage - Chevy. The Chevy based unit included a large, covered slide tray storage compartment of about 150 pound capacity. Really handy for grill, chairs, etc. This photo shows a portion as I was preparing to clean and lubricate the slides. Note the dump valves and the macerator dump hose. A portion of the exterior fresh water tank is also visible:
    
39. Front seating. The Sprinter included stationary "captains chairs" while the Chevy had rotatable chairs. The Sprinter made moving from the coach area to the front seating area a head banger. The design of the Chevy eliminated this problem. The front seats of the Chevy included adjustable lumbar support. 
40. Driving and navigating seating positions. The front seats in the Sprinter were very comfortable for driving, and there was a lot of storage for maps, drinks, etc. The Chevy seats were also very comfortable, added powered lumbar support but less front storage than the Sprinter. The Sprinter front seats were stationary; the front seats of the Chevy swiveled to the rear. 
41. 19 feet versus 21 feet in length. There were significant interior space differences. The Sprinter had a very limited cooking and food preparation area. We actually did some prep outside on a flip-up table that was accessible when the side door was open. We found ourselves moving things around to make room for the task at hand. The Chevy simply had more interior space and that translated into a closet, a third seat in the front, a wider aisle, larger food prep area and a more spacious rear couch/sleeping area. For example, the Chevy included a king bed sleeping area while the Sprinter had a queen bed area.  These beds could be arranged as two singles.                                                        

Copyright (c) 2019 Norman Retzke "All Rights Reserved"

Additional Comments: 

1. Fuel cost for the treks. Cost of fuel was similar, on a cost per mile basis. It's unclear what the MPG figures would be for comparable treks. In the Sprinter we had mostly highway driving at 65 MPH under clear conditions, but elevation was more extreme with changes from 2100 to 9100 feet. In the Chevy we also had mostly highway driving, but with long periods below 45 MPH and inclement weather. Altitude was below 1500 feet. 
2. Cost of supplies. The cost per week including food supplies was about $100. Note that when renting there is a certain amount of waste. We purchased more paper products than we used, left behind surplus dishwashing liquid, hand soap and hand sanitizer, as well as some canned goods. Some things we left behind because of air travel restrictions. One only has so much space in the luggage. As a consequence our short term costs were higher than they should have been. 
3. I may post a more detailed cost analysis in the future.

Sprinter versus Chevy - Criteria

This post will look at some of the criteria we used for our camper van rental and comparison.

Deciding on Dimensions and Intended Use
Prior to renting we looked very closely at several camper vans over a period of months. I began my latest round of research earlier, in 2007. The vans in the current round of comparisons were approximately 17 feet, 19 feet, 21 feet, 23 feet and 25 feet in length. These were by several manufacturers and on several different van chassis. We went farther afield and looked at other alternatives. After looking and re-looking at various dealerships we decided that any camper less than 19 feet in length was too small for our intended use, and "21 feet" was the maximum acceptable length.We understood that in the range of 19 to 21 feet there would be compromises.

One of the primary requirements for the vehicle was the ability for both myself and my spouse to be comfortable in the drivers seat. Another was the ability to drive on normal roads just about anywhere, including crowded National Parks.  Cost was a factor. We were undecided if we would rent each year, or own. One of the questions we asked of each van we looked at was "Would I want to own this, and could it satisfy our requirements?" Renting was intended to provide a "hands on" experience.

One of the issues we discovered while doing research was finding suitable camper vans for rent. We wanted a camper van which could accommodate two adults for 5 days or more of continuous use during three seasons. 3-1/2 seasons would be better, with minimum useable temperature of 20F. Normal temperature range would be 25 to 95 F and below that we accepted the fact that we would have to give up some of the plumbing amenities. However, the majority of use would be above 32F.

It was my perspective that a camper van would be comfortable under a specific set of circumstances.  I also realized that different vehicles could "stretch" those circumstances and provide comfort at the extremes. For example, a smaller vehicle could be very comfortable for 2-3 days and a larger one for 3-5 days. An uninsulated vehicle could be comfortable in the temperature range 40-90F while a better insulated one could be comfortable over 30-90F. We considered heat to be more important than air conditioning.

Impact of Camper Van Features and Trade-offs
Van coach features would have an impact. We wanted the ability to stand upright without a pop-top. We also wanted as wide an aisle as possible, and appliances which didn't require one to get on their knees to access. An all electric vehicle with solar would be a different experience from one with propane heat and a generator, particularly if "off the grid." Of course, solar is "free" and available in limited quantities based on battery capacity while propane is a fuel that must be replenished with a cost. In other words, there would be trade-offs.  Increasing aisle width resulted in a wider vehicle. Adding larger appliances, or more appliances and a generator increased the weight. And so on.

Compromise would be necessary. One of the compromises could be limiting the usefulness or duration or treks. One can always check into a motel, or stay at an RV resort and plug-in and use the showers. These are reasonable options when the weather turns against one, or camping is no longer fun. I've done ground camping at extremes of -25F and 110F. This was achieved while backpacking in the wild, and canoeing and portaging 90 miles in Quetico. That was not the experience we were striving for with the camper van. Nor were we going to take a camper van into the wild and in places where a 4x4 is the only safe means of travel. If that was the goal, we should have been evaluating extreme vehicles, such as a GXV. One of the trade-offs was that we would be limited to where we could go, and if "off the grid" we would have a finite and limited amount of fresh water, energy and food with us.

Idealistically we wanted a vehicle that would be fun and useable in sunshine, rain and intermittent snow with the greatest temperature range. We were looking for a vehicle or vehicles which could be used for a range of treks covering the U.S. and Canada, with round trip journeys of 1000 to 2000 miles, or more. Typical duration would be 5 to 15 days with stops at RV resorts or parks, motels and so on. A larger, better equipped vehicle would provide the opportunity for the longer treks of greater duration. A larger vehicle should reduce the need for supplemental motels, etc.

We wanted the ability to sleep in reasonable comfort with heat when necessary and assisted ventilation. If on "shore power" air conditioning should be available. We wanted the ability to carry refrigerated, fresh food as opposed to freeze dried meals, granola bars and PBJ sandwiches. We wanted fresh running water daily and we also required a bath area in which the door could be closed for privacy when in use. We wanted the bath to include marine toilet and shower; ideally it would also include a sink.

Sprinter
We were interested in the Sprinter based vans, which are currently in vogue but expensive. I was curious about the bluetec (tm) diesel and we both realized the straight sides and high roof provided an optimized interior as compared to exterior dimensions. However, we also wanted to try competitive camper vans. We decided to use and evaluate two camper vans on two different treks about 60 days apart. We found this approach to be fun and enlightening. It also provided a true 3-1/2 season experience in camper vans.

We decided to include Roadtrek in our comparison because we were impressed by the "fit and finish" and the many good things we had heard about them. We also decided to use a vehicle converted by a smaller company.

All-Electric versus Propane and Generator
We decided to compare a vehicle with all-electric coach to one which included propane and a generator. This would be somewhat reminiscent of my days as a sailor. My 25 foot sailboat used wind power as it's primary motive force and was inexpensive to operate. A solar-powered camper van appeared similar. However, my sailboat used a very small gasoline powered outboard to maneuver in harbor or under zero wind conditions. The solar electric van used a diesel engine as it's primary motive force. The solar was primarily for charging batteries and there were definite trade-offs and power rationing if "off the grid" as electricity was required for the stovetop, hot water heater, space heater, vent fan and air conditioner. The batteries could be recharged by running the diesel automotive engine, but that was spoiling the fun. In our experience this type of vehicle performed best when on "shore power."

Real World Comparison
We used and compared two very different vehicles. One was "19 feet" in length and the other "21 feet" in length. These approximate dimensions were within what we considered a useful range. We considered the 19 footer to be the smallest usable footprint; it could be driven every day and parked anywhere, but was too tall for a normal garage. The 21 footer was a larger footprint and could be driven everywhere we wanted to go, but was at the limit of parking dimensions and we considered it to be too large for daily use. However, after driving the 21 footer, I have decided if the "continental" tire kit is removed and the spare stored inside that this van could be used more extensively.