I don't understand the difference between the monarchs, regencies, regals and breakaways. It seems that the regals and regencies were older units and the newer ones are breakaways and monarchs. The monarch is the deluxe version with airbag suspension and the breakaway is the lower end using spring suspension. The breakaway tends to be shorter, which is good, but the monarch is on air which is better for ride.

I don't know about the fit and finish of the two units, are the inside of both equal high quality or is the breakaway cheaper, but is cheaper still top quality. But then I just saw a 1990 Regency for sale for 80 large.

Anybody have a simple comparison sheet or grid? I am an engineer and need things I can chart or graph.

Thanks

Tom

Tom, from what I have seen when looking at the Barth's, the Regencies had diesel generators, corian couter tops and usually leather or leather like captian's seats. The Regencies also had higher storage bins and tile in most of the baths, and 3/4 inch hardwood in the living area. Most were built on a spartan or Gillig chassis. The spartans had cummins engines from about 190 hp to 250 hp or 300 hp and the gillig chasiss had 250 or 300 hp cat engines. I have not seen a breakaway or a monarch with a diesel generator. I have seen a monarch with tile and hardwood floors and corian tops. And all the regencies i have seen also had aluminum wheels. The lenght on regencies were from 32 ft. to 40 foot. I also have noticed that the gillig chassis had more than about 3,000 lbs more gvw than the spartan. And the gillg has eiher 100 or 150 gallon fuel tanks. sky

Tom, I agree with all Sky's comments and can only add what I have learned from working on the Data Tag Project.
Now before I list and say all these things, understand that with Barth there are exceptions to everyone of these examples. They would build whatever a customer with money in hand wanted.

One thing to remember is that all Barths were built using the same construction methods and materials for the coach body itself. I don't think there is any difference in the quality of the coach in any of the models. This also appears to be true regardless of year model from the early 70's until the mid 90's when Barth was sold to Barth RSV.

Regals were primarily front engine gas powered coaches. They also seem to be the first coaches Barth built that had a model name. Until the Regal they were just Barth coaches. Most of the earlier Regals were built on Chevrolet P30 series chassis and had the big block 454 engine. The later coaches were built on John Deere/Oshkosh chassis and had Ford 460 engines. We do have a rear gas engine Regal and a front diesel engine Regal just to confuse things.

Barth's first venture into the diesel pusher was the Regency. The first few (about 40) were actually built by MCC on a MCC chassis with Detroit Diesel engines. Barth took over the company and continued to build the Regency until 1996. They changed the chassis to Gillig or Spartan and the power to Caterpillar or Cummins. Regency coaches seemed to be fitted with only the top of the line products from the ground up. Big heavy duty air ride bus chassis. Big diesel engines, Diesel generators, Aluminum 22.5" wheels, Corian counters, real oak or cherry cabinets. You could even get a wide body Regency that was 102" wide instead of 96". That was a $5000.00 option. And the list goes on and on and on. Regency's came in lengths from 32 to 40 foot. They were big heavy coaches. My 32' has a GVWR of almost 30,000#. This was all very nice but it made the Regency a very expensive coach. In the early 90's a Regency had a list price of about $250,000 and up.

The Breakaway seems to be Barths attempt to expand their market to the customer that wanted all the Barth quality for a more reasonable price. For the most part they were smaller versions, ie 28 and 30 foot models were available. As pointed out earlier by Sky, spring mounted chassis, smaller diesel engines, LP generators, 19.5" wheels. All of this removed thousands of pounds from the coach. A very nice Breakaway had a list price that was $75,000 to $100,000 less than a comparable size and year model Regency, and only slightly more than a comparable gas powered Regal.

Monarchs seem to fit between the Regency and the Breakaway. They were not introduced until 1995 and seemed to replace the Breakaway but in an upscaled version with air ride suspension and longer lengths.

Think of Barths like you would Ford Motor Company. Take the nicest Ford you can buy add a few things and you have a Mercury. Take the nicest Mercury you can buy add a few things and you have a Lincoln.

As I began this dissertation, I say again, I think the coach work on a Regal, Breakaway and Regency are all equally great. I would would not turn down any of them.

Now just to sum this up, I looked at NADA values this morning for comparable values on 1994 coaches of comparable sizes.

• 32 FT Regency $51,000
• 33 FT Breakaway $39,000
• 33 FT Regal $24,000

I welcome comments to this analysis by other members.

Good luck,
Nick

I'll tell you about our Regency. It was custom ordered by a couple in New Mexico in Dec. 89. It came with a very high grade carpeting front to back. There is no tile or hardwood flooring anywhere. It has a laminate countertop in the galley and corion in the bath. It has an ether cold start kit. The seats are all Steelcase in grey vinyl including the recliner. The wood is bookmatched cherry throughout. It came with a cb radio, marine radio, and 2 Panasonic TVs, Nobi alarm system on all outside compatments and the entry door. Panasonic vcr, and Panasonic radio with cassette tape. It is still 99.9% original with about 35k miles on it.
I think that because they were so expensive when new that Barth mostly only built them when ordered and so every one was different. This still applys to the Breakaways and Regals but to a lesser extent and so they are more of a"standard" build.
The Regency will always have air suspension and air brakes and an air shifter. And a diesel generator. All chassis parts seem to be still available from Spartan. Don't know about Gillig.
Same for Cummins parts but I don't think they make the Cat 3208 any more.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
The little Cummins 5.9 will not be found in a Regency and they don't come shorter than 32'.
The Monarch seems to be similar to a Regency except it has a later Spartan Mountainmaster chassis and a propane genny. Never heard of a Gillig or Cat Monarch, not that they wouldn't have tried to buid one for a customer I bet.
So, we sometimes find Barths built to a different order. The 34' gas pusher is one. Front engined diesel Regals and even a Regency with a huge Cummins up front.
We took 4 years to find our Barth. The hunt is fun too.
Don

....And if you go further back to Barth's Jurassic Period of the late '60's thru '70's, you won't find model names like Regal, etc. In those days, Barths were defined just by length, although the word "Classic" was plated on some of them, followed by the length number.

The preponderance of them seemed to have been built on the P-32 series GM chassis. You could also find several other chassis makers involved...I even seem to recall one that was built on an IH cornbinder.

Conspicuous by its absence was the Dodge chassis -haven't heard of a Barth on a Dodge....
Yet, in the heyday of the '60's-'70's, Fleetwood, Winnie and a ton of orphans were almost exclusively built on the Dodge. Since the Dodge was a pretty-much off-the-rack truck chassis, and the P-32 was a modest attempt to fine-tune a chassis for motorhome use, perhaps Barth thought the P-32 was the upscale choice....Then again, it could have been a financial decision - it usually is......

Construction methods & QC of this era were identical to their newer heavy-iron bretheran of the '80's & '90's, so model-year alone shouldn't scare anyone away from the right deal.......

And my Chev-powered Regal SE had high class carpet, hardwood floor in the galley-dinette area, & Corian counters in galley & bathroom. Cabinets were oak, not cherry. Furniture was Flex-steel, cloth on the couch & chairs, cloth-vinyl on the driver & passenger seats.

Another difference is the Regency has a side radiator vs. the Breakaway with a rear radiator. This is a big deal when it comes to ease of maintenance--advantage to the side radiator.

quote:

Originally posted by Lee:
..... You could also find several other chassis makers involved...I even seem to recall one that was built on an IH cornbinder.

And even a Hendricks bus chassis or a Pierce fire truck chassis.

quote:

Conspicuous by its absence was the Dodge chassis -haven't heard of a Barth on a Dodge....

Yup. A few Class As and Cs in the 70s.

quote:

Yet, in the heyday of the '60's-'70's, Fleetwood, Winnie and a ton of orphans were almost exclusively built on the Dodge. Since the Dodge was a pretty-much off-the-rack truck chassis, and the P-32 was a modest attempt to fine-tune a chassis for motorhome use, perhaps Barth thought the P-32 was the upscale choice

My memory is that Dodge chassis had heating problems and had poorer brakes. I think the Chevy was a little more expensive, at least in the quantity Barth bought them. Some of the other higher quality builders, such as Superior, used the Chevy chassis, too, or at least offered it.

quote:

Originally posted by Nick Cagle:
One thing to remember is that all Barths were built using the same construction methods and materials for the coach body itself. I don't think there is any difference in the quality of the coach in any of the models.

There is an old post by Dave where he quotes a former Barth employee as saying that the Royale used the Regency hull construction with the larger radius roof to wall curve. He said that design added too much weight to the coach. I don't know if that means thicker metal, closer rib spacing, or what.

So, the weight of the Regency might be more than just a heavier chassis and a china toilet.

quote:

Barth's first venture into the diesel pusher was the Regency. The first few (about 40) were actually built by MCC on a MCC chassis with Detroit Diesel engines.

FWIW, one of my NADAs lists the 82 DP as an MCC, while another lists the 82 DP as an MCC by Barth. And Motorhome magazine, in its jan 82 test article calls it a Barth MCC. It says MCC on the front. I ws not able to discern any Barth logo in the photos in the article. They reported it to be produced by Barth in cooperation with the Motor Coach Corporation of California. They go on to say that the chassis and fiberglass body components were provided by MCC to Barth, who assembled the shell, added an inner aluminum cage, sprayed the interior with foam, and then paneled the interior with aluminum sheet. In a 1982 ad, Barth called it the "MCC by Barth".

Again, my NADA lists the 83 DP as a Regency.

NADA is not always the final word, so I post this as information only. As far as I am concerned, the only Holy Scripture is a Barth publication, and all else is Apocrypha. We are like blind men describing an elephant.

To add to the mix, NADA also lists a Sovereign, Aristocrat and, in 98, they were all M models, with the length following the M, and an XL denoting diesel power and a china toilet. M34s were made in both gas and DP.

quote:

The Breakaway seems to be Barths attempt to expand their market to the customer that wanted all the Barth quality for a more reasonable price. For the most part they were smaller versions, ie 28 and 30 foot models were available. As pointed out earlier by Sky, spring mounted chassis, smaller diesel engines, LP generators, 19.5" wheels. All of this removed thousands of pounds from the coach. A very nice Breakaway had a list price that was $75,000 to $100,000 less than a comparable size and year model Regency, and only slightly more than a comparable gas powered Regal.

There were also 32, 33, 34 and 36 foot Breakaways, and some had 22.5 wheels. A few had big CAT or 8.3 Cummins engines. A few were on Gillig chassis, too. What fun.

Shoot! My Regal SE had a china toilet. Did I have a gas-powered 3/4 Regency?

quote:

Originally posted by olroy:
Shoot! My Regal SE had a china toilet.

I wuz robbed! My SE has neither Corian counters nor a china toilet.

quote:

Did I have a gas-powered 3/4 Regency?

Heck, lets call the SE a gas-powered 1/2 Regency, and the chimeric Royale a gas-powered 3/4 Regency.

Ed
Ours has a front radiator. The lit we have from Spartan indicates you could order it on the side too though.
Also, the Cummins is on a roll-out engine bed for major service work!
Don

quote:

Originally posted by Ed Chevalier:
Another difference is the Regency has a side radiator vs. the Breakaway with a rear radiator. This is a big deal when it comes to ease of maintenance--advantage to the side radiator.

Bill and Roy
I have often wondered what differentiated the Regal and Regal SE.
Do you know? Was it length? In that SEs designated coaches longer than 28 feet?
Don

quote:

Originally posted by bill h:

quote:

Originally posted by olroy:
Shoot! My Regal SE had a china toilet.

I wuz robbed! My SE has neither Corian counters nor a china toilet.

quote:

Did I have a gas-powered 3/4 Regency?

Heck, lets call the SE a gas-powered 1/2 Regency, and the chimeric Royale a gas-powered 3/4 Regency.

quote:

There were also 32, 33, 34 and 36 foot Breakaways, and some had 22.5 wheels. A few had big CAT or 8.3 Cummins engines. A few were on Gillig chassis, too. What fun.

Bill H., What I was trying to point out was that things that maybe available on other models as an extra cost option were standard on the Regency. I'm sure Barth would have built a Breakaway with every Regency feature but then they would have to have called it a Regencyaway!
Nick

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bill h:
To add to the mix, NADA also lists a Sovereign, Aristocrat


Has anyone ever seen one of these models? What were they?
Nick