What is the difference in a Regal, Regency and Breakaway?

I suppose it's discussed somewhere on barthmobile.com but I search and cannot find.

The Barth I inherited from my father is a Regal with cherry wood cabinets (which was apparently a big deal with Barth) and a bunch of amenities (but no hot tub).

Thanks much.

Short answer:

Gassers are Regals, heavy DPS are Regencies and lighter DPs with Cummins 5.9 engines are Breakaways.

The above is not totally accurate, as exceptions abound, but it will get you started, and covers most Barths.


Long answer:

A Barth is what Barth says it is. Barth is gone, so we must rely on factory publications.

Anything other than that is conjecture, however well-founded.

Given that, Barth started out making gassers, and called them Barths. The first diesel pusher was called MCC by Barth, and used an MCC chassis and body, modified for 35 ft length.

In 1980, Barth introduced the Euro, which was a gasser with a distinctively styled fiberglass front cap.

Around 84, some gassers were called Regals, if NADA is to be believed. The gassers with tag axles were called by their length with a T suffix, as is mine on its build tag. Many call them Regal SEs, but I have an 88 brochure that calls the non-tag gassers Regals and the tag gassers SE. Not Regal SE. However, I have a sheet from Barth calling one tag coach a Regal SE and Model 32T on the same page. Go figure. SE and
T seem to be parallel and inclusive terms that fit under the Regal umbrella, even though not always.

There was an upmarket gasser called a Royale. The Royale is reputed to have a heavier body with more rounded edges, like Regencies. I have a sheet from Barth showing a gasser with the more rounded side edges, at least to my eyes.

If my Barth were an 88, I would call it an SE, but can't be sure on my year, not knowing when the SE term appeared in the Barth literature. Nor do I know whether the build tag still said T or SE. To confuse things, OlRoy, 89 tag gasser says it is a 33C, neither SE or T. Perhaps Nick knows more from his tag data bank.

I have seen one Barth that was sold new in Canada and was not called a Barth. It was labeled Royale on the front instead of Barth. I think it had a tag saying it was made by Royale Coaches. I was inside it a number of times and even did a little work on it, and it was of the same quality level and construction detail as my 32T, although it was 34 ft long. I suspect there is a story somewhere about a Barth being rebadged for sale in Canada.

Never saw or even saw an ad for a Barth Royale, other than the sheet that came with mine. Barth called it a Royale 32T FG. So, apparently, there were two 32Ts, a Royale and a Regal. What fun.

Most Regals had gas engines up front, but some had GM diesels up front.

There were gas and diesel pushers made that seemed to be like Regals, but owners called them Breakaways. I never did see any official info on that, but I have an old Barth Rangers newsletter with an ad for a 28 ft Regal diesel pusher. I believe he was an original purchaser. None of the Ranger hierarchy had any problem with that designation, either at the time, or in subsequent issues. I have also seen some of the same coach described as a Breakaway.

Next up is the Breakaway, generally a Spartan chassis powered by a 5.9 Cummins pusher, although there are variations on that, as well.

Up from that is the Regency, a larger, heavier coach on an MCC, Spartan or Gillig chassis, with a Cummins 8.3, Cat 3208 or the big Detroit diesel in early years. The Regency name seems to coincide with the traditional aluminum body on the 35' MCC chassis in 82. The Regencies had the more rounded sides at the roof, while the Breakaways had a sharper edge, like the gassers.

Then, in the mid nineties, they made DPs, in addition to Regencies, named Sovereigns, Monarchs, Aristocrats, and who knows what else. Some of them were very cheaply made. I went to look at one DP, and never got past the entry area. It appeared to be of the same quality level as the Southwind gasser I owned at the time. It even had the rows of rivets way farther apart than a gasser Barth.

To make it even more confusing, there are some Barths out there that appear to be hybrids and perhaps prototypes. All Barths are not alike, nor do they offer decent clues to what model range they are.

There were also Barth Campers and Class Cs, and a Barth Iveco 26'diesel puller, sort of a Class C.

This is all from memory, so corrections are encouraged. Always believe what Barth printed over me or anyone else. I know KBB and NADA are woefully incomplete, and suspect some inaccuracies, owing to the custom nature of Barth's production.

Just to add to the models, In 1986 the Regency were still built on the MCC chassie. You could get a Regal SE (Special Edition) with a tag or as a rear engine non tag with either gas or diesel.
Barth's are custom coaches. Not sure any 2 are the same. Thats part of what make Barth unique.

Doorman

quote:

Originally posted by Doorman:
You could get a Regal SE (Special Edition) with a tag or as a rear engine non tag with either gas or diesel.

That's interesting. Never heard what they were called. Got any info on that? My 88 brochure does not list either a diesel or a rear engine option for the SE. Interestingly enough, they do list a Gillig as one of the chassis, along with GM and John Deere. There were a couple here with Ford engines, but no memory of a diesel. Were they GM 6.2s or what?

Not that it matters, apparently, mine is what Barth called a Regency, but may really be a Breakaway. I know they were all custom builds, like my Dad's, but you would have thought there would have been consistency in model names. I'm calling mine Apollo, for the spacecraft, and changing all the tags. It's still an Allison pusher, but Apollo sounds cool.

I'm not sure I agree that all this customization (now called confusion) made Barth all that unique. Newell, Prevost converters, MCI converters, Bluebird and perhaps others offered similar customization. Barth was probably most like Bluebird, where several chassis options were followed up with hundreds of accessory/interior options. Unfortunately, this had a negative affect on cost and didn't make up for a lack of "required" features in the latter days of Barth, namely the addition of slides.

What makes Barth unique IMHO is the all aluminum body, the very high quality woodwork, and the attention to detail across the models. Everything else is more ore less purchased components.

I've had a good opportunity to look at the Barth quality and construction from a number of angles. I built 3 of my own RVs including a MCI bus, I owned a late model DP Monarch and now I own a Wanderlodge. Of course, I've also looked over dozens of my Barth friend's coaches. High end Barths were a quality/feature/price equal to other high end coaches until the early 90s. In my view, they were quickly becoming dinosaurs after that, as the competition was moving away in both direction - value and features. It's easier to see in retrospect, of course.

What's interesting to me is the used price equation. Although the Barths of any era may have been twice as much as the lesser brands, as used units they are just about the same value. Making them a superior bargain.

The Bluebird Wanderlodge line is the closest cousin to Barth. Starting in 1963 and running into 2009, Wanderlodges were steel chassis vs aluminum. Bluebird had a huge advantage in initial cost as they manufactured the chassis (a bus early on). FC designated a front engine and DP a rear, but there were all sorts of gas and diesel power-plants along the way.

I would say Wanderlodge took a turn around the mid 80s and went higher end than Barth by offering nothing but diesels and up to 500HP Detroits in most models. From there to 2009 they stayed very high level on power-plants, finishing up with DD S60 (what's in mine) and the biggest CATs and Cummins. The single biggest cost driver is the drive-line as the chassis and suspension must all be matched. As one of the Wanderlodge guys puts it, "I bought the engine, the bus came with it".

quote:

In 1980, Barth introduced the Euro, which was a gasser with distinctively styled fiberglass front and back caps.

In fact, only the front is glass.

Hi Bill
About 5 or 6 years ago we inspected a Royale that was for sale on a lot up here in Ontario. From memory, it was as you describe.
The only place it said Barth was on the steering wheel centre. It was 34' and we found some original literature with it calling it a Royale. The data plate said it was made by Royale not Barth, but it was a Barth in every way but name.
Often wonder what ever happened to it.
Wish I had taken down the data plate info. I can't remember what engine but it was a gasser.
Don

quote:

Originally posted by bill h:

There was an upmarket gasser called a Royale. The Royale is reputed to have a heavier body with more rounded edges, like Regencies. I have a sheet from Barth showing a gasser with the more rounded side edges, at least to my eyes.

It was labeled Royale on the front instead of Barth. I think it had a tag saying it was made by Royale Coaches. I was inside it a number of times and even did a little work on it, and it was of the same quality level and construction detail as my 32T, although it was 34 ft long. I suspect there is a story somewhere about a Barth being rebadged for sale in Canada.

Never saw or even saw an ad for a Barth Royale, other than the sheet that came with mine. Barth called it a Royale 32T FG. So, apparently, there were two 32Ts, a Royale and a Regal. What fun.

Don, it may have been the same one. Did it have bare aluminum doors on the lower compartments? A lady named Linda from Ontario bought it and they ended up wintering in Yuma. Later, her husband died and the new owners blew the engine and were going to put in a 502. Lost contact with them.

Don and Bill,

Can you tell us more about these Royales? Bill and I talked at length a couple of years ago and he thinks our coach is a Royale but cannot confirm that. Most of that is based on the fact that the only 35 ft gassers were Royales. It's a 1984 model. It is called and labeled a 35ft. It's 454 gas. It has the 8" raised floor throughout the coach. It doesn't say Royale anywhere but the vin indicates it's 35 feet in length (it only measures 34 feet bumper to bumper) It has some strange things on it such as a complete solid oak interior...no wallpaper except in the bathroom. Gear vendors, aftermarket fuel injection, just about all the gadgets you could order in 1984 (I have the original paid reciept and the original owner paid $107,000). Another oddity is, while I was changing the tires, I found that the entire wheels had been chromed...not just chrome covers but all eight of the 19.5 wheels had been chromed... the coach originally came out of Fair Oaks California and original owner was a Carl Hacker. He owned it until 1995 when the 2nd owners bought (I bought it from them.)

quote:

Originally posted by K&E:
Don and Bill,

Can you tell us more about these Royales? Bill and I talked at length a couple of years ago and he thinks our coach is a Royale but cannot confirm that.

Does yours have a gentle radius at the roof edge like a Regency, or is is a smaller radius like a Regal or Breakaway?

quote:

Most of that is based on the fact that the only 35 ft gassers were Royales.

I have seen some that were called 34 footers (never measured) that had the sharp radius roof edge and same interior as mine.

quote:

It's a 1984 model. It is called and labeled a 35ft.

What does the build plate call it" 35T, for example.

quote:

It has the 8" raised floor throughout the coach.

I believe all the tags did.

quote:

It doesn't say Royale anywhere

Linda's coach said Royale Coach across the front and on the rear of the sides.

quote:

but the vin indicates it's 35 feet in length (it only measures 34 feet bumper to bumper)

My VIN is for the chassis, and was issued by chevrolet before the coach was put on it.

quote:

It has some strange things on it such as a complete solid oak interior...no wallpaper except in the bathroom.

So does my 30T.

quote:

Gear vendors,

So did Linda's sharp radius coach.

quote:

aftermarket fuel injection

Never looked under the doghouse.

quote:

I have the original paid reciept and the original owner paid $107,000.

FWIW, NADA shows for 84 a 32 Royale at 117,500 list and a 35 Royale at 12600 list. 85 prices were lower, with the 32 Royale listed at 109600 and the 35 Royale at 117,120. The 83 35 foot gasser, just called a Barth was 94,700 and the 31 ft Barth listed at 88,000. Presumably they were both tags, since the prices really jumped for them.

None of this NADA can be taken as gospel, as they are neither accurate nor complete where limited production or custom stuff is concerned.

I think the real tell would be the roof edge radius. Later I will post my sales sheet for the Royale. The Royale was also reputed to be quite a bit heavier, using the Regency wall construction. Have you weighed yours? That might tell us something.

Here is page out of 1986 sales literature regarding SE's and rear engine models.

Doorman

Pre-'94 Breakaways had little basement storage. Mine is the prototype for the post-'93 28' Breakaway. The floor was raised ~10" increasing the basement storage significantly (even including a passthrough). The left front compartment has been converted to storage with the 12 VDC panels relocated to the interior.

The big change with the '94 28' was substituting the GM 6.5L TD (190 HP) for the Cummins 5.9L TD (160HP Std). The GM 4L80E replaced the Allison 4 spd. Both the GM engine and tranny needed significant upgrades to provide the economy, performance, and durability of the Cummins/Allison combo.

The chassis remained the Spartan 1000.

The 4 known '94 28' Breakaways seem to mark the end of the Breakaway line, or at least in the numbers produced. A couple of post '94 Breakaways continued the model, but they strayed away from the 28'-30'-33' series, with two known to be 34' on Spartan chasses, but sporting the Cummins 8.3L. Possibly Dana's Aristocrat marks Barth's move to rename the line more in line with the other models names suggesting royalty.

This page shows both tag and rear engine SE's.
Doorman

quote:

Originally posted by Doorman:
Here is page out of 1986 sales literature regarding SE's and rear engine models.

Doorman

Since they offered a choice of diesel pullers or pushers, I cannot imagine a 6.2 in such a heavy coach.

A 5.9 puller would really eat up some cockpit. An SE pusher with a 5.9 sounds a little like a prototype or predecessor Breakaway, years before that term was used.

What fun!