After my disaster with a '99 Trek with Chevy solid front axle, I became rather interested in suspension. Would like comments for the shorter/lighter Barths, I guess independent suspension vs twin I-beams. I've heard that it's difficult to keep tires on the twin I-beam design. And my current P30 with independent front coil springs does very well. I'm not looking for ideas on the air suspensions some of the larger Barths have because the max length we'll be looking at for the kids is about 30'/31'.

Jim

My diesel 1-Ton Ford van with twin I beams has held alignment for 9 years and 70,000 miles (After I overhauled the front end and steering) .

If you are talking class A motor homes, the Ford in not twin Ibeams. Class Cs used Twin Ibeams. The Ford class A is a single Ibeam, as is Dodge, John Deere, Oshkosh and Workhorse. Once there was something available in a heavier duty than the 30 series GM chassis all the heavier coaches moved quickly away from the GM.

However, on the short unit of 30' or less the GM makes a fine chassis, and if upgraded to the 8.1 liter engine with overdrive will get mileage to rivel the best the diesels have to offer.

Thanks for clearing up my misconception, Rusty. Now, the question is:
For a front engine,gas or diesel, type A motor home in the 30'/31' range, which is preferable, independent coil springs aka P30, or solid front axle, aka Ford, John Deere, Oskosh etc.?
Perhaps my problem with the '99 26' Trek was that while it was on a P chassis, it was a solid axle that none of the alignment shops I took it to,knew how to fix. Because of this site, I've come to know what to do with a P chassis and can essentially tell the alignment shop how to set it up. We did this on the 85 Regal, and the results were outstanding.
Jim

I think one of the reasons twin I-beam is thought to be problematic is that the locator rod (like reverse panhard rods) bushings wear and are ignored.