http://www.rv.org/p17809.htm

This link is an autopsy of a RV accident with detailed pictures of what failed.
Have a look at the 3 slide shows listed on the left side of the page.

It is pretty scary, specially since the RV involved was built in 1990, the same year as mine.
The story talks of non-existent bumpers, cabinets not screwed and glued to the wall, and structures that are flimsy and not welded very well.

When I look at my Barth, I feel confident that I would stand a better chance to walk away from such an accident than the poor driver who lost his life in this one.

Raymag, thank you for the sobering information that you shared with us. Certainly makes me proud to be an owner of a Barth, although one must be careful of the false sense of security that was mentioned in the article. I try to put everthing away that could become a flying object in case of an accident and take the necessary prudent safety measures.

My prayers go to the family.

This accident happened in the town just up the road from me. There is a previous thread here, from when I reported the matter, and a photo from our local newspaper which only hints at the amount of damage these subsequent photos show.

The people who put this display together, noted at the time that those in the accident were lucky they were in an older motor home more solidly built than those built today. Indeed.

It should be noted this hardly qualified as a
"normal" accident. One can only wonder at the speed they finally went off the road to drop nose first into a gully, after creaming two automobiles, & injuring their occupants. What is truly amazing is that six people in the coach survived.

I'm sure a Barth coach body would survive better than this one did, but I'm not sure you can use enough screws & glue to keep the cabinets intact under the "G" forces involved here. These people were going fast, & it was tantamount to hitting a brick wall. I doubt the Barth would do a significantly better job of protecting the driver.

Nonetheless, I'd rather be in a Barth than this coach which was a top line unit built better than most "stick & staple," units. If nothing else, this cautionary tale is a warning to be careful.

On last years trip to Talledega we encountered a slow moving pickup in Northern Florida on I75. This #!% was doing about 10, not even in the shoulder but in the right travel lane, no lights, totally dark pre-dawn, with flashers going, just barely. I had a semi behind, two beside, and nowhere to go. At the last second I knew we were going to hit this idiot and I just hoped to live through it so I could beat his stupid a&*. Well, we missed him somehow, and the pro truckers around us gave way and we all rolled down the road to tell the tale. I live that experience way too often, thinking about what would have happened if we just clipped the idiot, we would have rolled, and been creamed by at least a couple of semis. So maybe it wouldn't have mattered what we were driving, but I think having the extraordinary handling at the last second pulled us through that one.

I agree that structurally, a Barth would be in a better position to withstand an impact than MOST other RV's on the market.

Their aircraft construction *coupled with steel reiforcements over the driver's area are a big reason a barth-owning couple walked away from a crash a few years ago with relatively minor injuries. Their accident was (if I recall) an impact followed by a rollover at highway speed.

The Barth maintained its structure well, with compression to the drivers compartment limited. I believe that their accident (which had one photo posted on this site) would likely have been a fatal one if they had been in a lesser built coach.l

I am not a structural engineer, but as a medic for 23 years, I have cut a few cars apart and seen the laws of physics at work.

It is the construction of the barth and it's structural advantages over Winnies and Paces that made me invest (ha) about 5k more than I budgeted for when buying my coach.

Hell, one pace arrow I looked at prior to buying the Barth BOWED along the sidewall when I LEANED on it.

It was nothing but a fiberglass bubble on a p-30 chassis.

I walked inside for curiosities sake, but that whole "lean on the outside wall and watch it make a 4foot diameter dent' put it outside my consideration.

The accident photos (in my opinion) of the fatal crash are a study in shoddy engineering.

Yes, I would agree that this collision was an extreme one, but for welds to separate from the material neatly shows poor welding technique and obviously no quality control at a minimum.

I am not surprised to see the extent of delamination and the fact that cabinets pulled away from the wall. With a stick and staple construction, I would be surprised that a cabinet with #25 pounds of material inside it would remain ON the wall knowing it is held there by glue and perhaps a drywall screw or three set into luan board.

Quite honestly, what also killed those people is prevalent attitude *it seems* to be more thrilled with how many slide outs you can cram into a design, without regard to structural integrity.

This was no cheapie coach (if there truly is such an animal) it WAS a monaco.

Poor guy bought a $$$$ coach and probably believed (erroneously) that spending big bucks got you a commensurate level of engineering and safety.

Shame too. If consumers spent more time worrying about basic construction instead of color choices for their corian countertops, this guy might have lived.

Many unhappy events have multiple causes. Looking at this one, I have several thoughts.

The driver was from Missouri, and may not have a lot of mountain experience.

That is reportedly a very steep hill for a heavy large vehicle.

I am curious as to whether the accident investigators stuck a test strip in the brake fluid to test moisture content. I have nagged on that subject before here. Since we drive in mountains, I change our brake fluid yearly and use only the best. Even a flatland MH needs good fluid every other year. I used run of the mill fluid (Prestone, I think) and had boiling fluid before two years was up.

I don't know if the driver tried to scrub off speed by scraping, but that is one thing for us to keep in mind.

I am not trying to Monday morning quarterback the driver, just offering thoughts that might be helpful or thought-provoking.

And, short of an old 'Bird, a Barth is among the more survivable motor homes. Usually, all that remains of a MH crash is a bare chassis with a floor and a half mile of debris in its trail. Looks like someone just tipped over a moving dumpster. Andy's Regency went off the road a bad area and stayed in one piece.

quote:

The driver was from Missouri, and may not have a lot of mountain experience.

There are plenty of nasty hills in the Ozarks - not as long, but requiring prudence and planning. But as bill h implied, mountain driving requires certain techniques, familiarization with emergency procedures (and the accepatance thy might have to be employed...) and mechanical prep.

Things I noticed about the Monaco carcass is that the steel was rusting (anyone heard of VPI or VSI for the inside of closed stock) and there was no paint on the steel! And a lot of staples and 1/8" plywood (and the cabinets are also plywood veneer). Sad commentary on oe of the so-called "premier" builders.

BTW, the Good Sam Club has instituted an "RV Owners Advisory Council" to "work" with manufacturers. The text of an email I sent to the chairman follows:

"Howdy,

I read with interest Tom Gonser's "On the Road" in the 09/07 issue of Highways. It wasn't surprising to see that the three top survey issues all related to quality, quality control, or manufacturer accountability.

I don't qualify as a really seasoned RV owner, being on only my third (an old TT, a Class C, and currently a small Class A diesel pusher), but as a reformed marine engineer (and a few challenging years as a Navy IG), I can convey my disappointment in the construction of many RVs.

Frankly I think that's inexcusable, and I would suggest as a first step in protecting consumers, that manufacturers be tasked with providing erection diagrams for their RVs, showing the materials, methods, and framing diagrams for their products. An informed consumer can do much on his own to evaluate quality, having accurate information to review. At the very least, responses to a request for information about what's under the skin would differentiate which manufacturers actually embrace the goals of RVOAC, and those whose applause at RVIA was intended to politely dismiss RVOAC.

I'd further like to see the RVOAC develop:

1. A survey of Good Sam members about experiences with brands and models of RVs, and
2. An award for those manufacturers who reveal what their customers need to know about the products they market

My disappointment with the several dozen motorhomes I looked at prior is why I ended up with the coach I have.

Best regards,

Rusty Keeney
'94 28' Barth Breakaway ("StaRV II")"