Could someone tell me the wheel base for the 28 ft & 30 ft Breakaways. Thanks

28': 146"

30': 172"

what was the wheelbase of the 33' Breakaway?
were they XL's? and larger optioned Cummins by chance (8.3 vs 5.9)

Thanks Rusty, that is a pretty big difference, thus the 2 units would probably handle very diffently, probably the 30 ft er would be easier on the hwy but the 28 would maneover better in tight situations?

My 28' tracks like it's on rails. There's a nudge when a semi passes, but I've dealt with 35-40 mph crosswinds in NE, and I'd describe it as "having to drive it, but not having to fight it."

The maneuverability is excellent, better than my large van (144" WB)

quote:

The maneuverability is excellent, better than my large van (144" WB)

Must be a Ford. My Chevy van has a much better turning radius than my 89 Ford. Not sure that 157" WB Class C. doesn't have a better turn radius.

My Breakaway is 172 inch as the brochure states. Mine however does not drive like it is on rails. The 30 footer has a 10 foot overhang and the 5.9L Cummins + Allison 6 speed and the radiator assembly at the far back constitutes a "tail wagging the dog" feature. Things are OK until 55 + MPH, the momentum goes up and I have to watch not to over correct it.

Tires and tire pressure make a big difference. Increasing the caster makes a big improvement. Most Breakaways have the Dana 80 rear diff and with that there is a longer panhard bar. If bushing on the bar are worm, it will wonder. On mine, I have the Eaton 15040S diff which is much larger and has a very short panhard bar.

I have replaced this bar twice and because the bar is so short, the force it requires to keep the diff in place cracked the frame. I have rebuilt and re-enforced the attachment point of the bar but now it is very hard on the bushings. Tracks better.

33 foot had both the 5.9L and 8.3L Cummins. The overhang vs wheel base ratio on the 33 foot is much better than the 30 foot and the 33 foot coach should track a lot better.

The effects of wind on mine is good but mine is a low profile design.

I do like the short wheel base for maneuverability!

Ed (MWrench) and I have discussed the differences in our coaches' tracking several times. His tracking got bad due to the panhard rod's stresses on the frame, cracking it.

One major difference (besides the C5.9L vs. my 6.5L) is the mounting of the panhard rod; his goes to the frame from the diffy; mine goes to the frame from the rear axle, close to the wheel itself. The geometry on mine seems to be better.

While Ed's seems to get squirrely over 55, I've had mine to 85 mph, and it stays in the groove. Why this is is, a mystery to us both.

no too much of a mystery, a short panhard will move the chassis further in relationship to the rear axle during vertical movement, and a heavier engine hanging out back will cause more vertical movement. And increased polar inertia due to the added weight will accentuate the effect. Best answer would be a "watts linkage" or some variation like a munford link. BTW I have a Breakaway with full air suspension that is governed at 55 due to handling quirks. but the ride sure is nice. john

This makes me even more happy to have a tag axle. I have not driven a non tag GM but my 33 tracks really well beyond 80 mph. The inflation of the tag air bags has an effect on stability but when set right it tracks on rails. Are there other Barth models with handling issues?

Our 31' non tag handles fine. The extended 195" WB probably helps. I have to plan turns. Can get in trouble when pulling trailer if I'm not paying attention. With air bags inflated to 80 lb. it rides a little more harsh but handles well even in side winds. Still have to anticipate the 18 wheeler. I think the 195" WB and 31' is about max for Barth on a non tag P3x.

quote:

Originally posted by Doorman:
Our 31' non tag handles fine. The extended 195" WB probably helps.

Not only 23 inch longer wheel base helps but you have a front engine and very little extended weight past the rear axle.

Mine wth all the work handles OK, MUCH better than when I first bought it. I have had it to 85 + MPH and it tracks well just not on "rails".

quote:

Originally posted by john canning:
no too much of a mystery, a short panhard will move the chassis further in relationship to the rear axle during vertical movement, and a heavier engine hanging out back will cause more vertical movement. john

The panhard rod on mine is only 19 inches long and the resultant side movement of the radius of the rod is +/- 3/16 inch. That along with the mounting of the panhard rod to the chassis "C" channel is between lateral braces, "C" channel is strong vertically but NOT horizontally.

I made a cross brace to restrict frame side movement. here is a link to the work I did.

Cracked frame repair

I totally agree a watts link would be better. I have been trying to design a "Z" bar (which is another name for watts link) but haven't had the time to follow thru with it. Not a lot of room around or above the big diff I have.