|
Post by stracyznski on Apr 27, 2005 16:03:26 GMT
I've been pondering over this issue for a while now and was wondering what your views are....
Since first concidering the idea of converting a coach over into a motorhome, I've always concidered using a relativly new coach, such as a Volvo B10M, as a base vehicle. This choice was always based on the theory that it would be a better drive, quicker, more reliable, spares would be easier to obtain. However over the past couple of months I've been concidering whether there would be any benifit to useing an older vehicle such as a Bedford VAL. Apart from the obvious benifit of being cheaper to buy, there are also the additional savings of being TAX exempt and classic vehicle insurance. Would you think these savings would outway the additional costs of running and mantaining an older coach...?
|
|
|
Post by Jonathan Smith on Apr 27, 2005 19:15:34 GMT
I would go for a newish vehicle, the B10M is still extensively used by coach companies so spare parts are easy to obtain. Especially on the continent.
The VAL having two front axles is also adding extra cost for tyres. And these are both steering axles which means more to go wrong. There are benifits in having two front axles, you have more stability should you have a front tyre blow out.
I think it all comes down to your own personal choice, if you are attracted to the the VAL and they can be attractive coaches then that is probably a good reason to buy one. I have seen a few on ebay recently which have been converted into horse boxes and they look abit rough.
It may be cheaper to buy a really old bus, but if you have to rebuild it you may be cheaper in the long run to buy a more modern vehicle which is in better condition?
|
|
|
Post by stracyznski on May 20, 2005 12:15:39 GMT
What are spares availability like on the older vehicles?
|
|