 |
|
07-20-2015, 01:07 PM
|
#21
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Sacramento area, California
Trailer: 2015 Escape 21
Posts: 363
|
Is there a downside of having all that encased? In other words, if something has to be changed with the tanks or wiring, is it a big deal to get through the spray foam? Or maybe it's unlikely you would ever have a problem in those areas?
__________________
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 02:06 PM
|
#22
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Travis County, Texas
Trailer: 2015 Esc 21. Formerly, Casita LD (16 & 17)
Posts: 709
|
We had the same question, Jill. And so we didn't get the foam underneath, although I am concerned about the holding tanks being exposed to cold weather. (We'll have to do a better job at winterizing. With the Casita we just plug in an electric heater - but its plumbing is all inside the living area.)
__________________
__________________
Mary F Onward, through the fog!
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 03:43 PM
|
#23
|
Site Team
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southwick, Massachusetts
Trailer: 5.0 TA #6, 2012 F150 EB
Posts: 4,968
|
I would think insulation is good for retaining both heat and cold and would help those who need air conditioning.
You are right, access to the underside is limited with spray foam. If you want those aftermarket sensors, do it during the build.
__________________
Happy Motoring
Bob
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 04:28 PM
|
#24
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North Van., British Columbia
Trailer: 2014 Escape 19
Posts: 4,261
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill
It sounds like the spray foam is good for cold weather insulation but what about hot weather insulation too? And sound insulation? If you don't plan to camp in really cold weather, is the $700 cost justified?
|
I'm not sure that the little bit extra Reflectix insulation is worth too much but the double glazed windows are worth it; one, because they cut down on condensation in cold weather and, two, they work surprisingly well at reducing noise from the exterior.
Ron
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 04:48 PM
|
#25
|
Site Team
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southwick, Massachusetts
Trailer: 5.0 TA #6, 2012 F150 EB
Posts: 4,968
|
Missed the key question Jill, is it worth $700 if you're staying in warm country? probably not.
And yes it'll be a hassle to get through the foam to get to the tanks, or anything else under there. By the same token it hopefully minimizes the need to get to anything under there. Provides a decent measure of protection.
__________________
Happy Motoring
Bob
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 05:02 PM
|
#26
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Weare, New Hampshire
Trailer: 2015 Escape 17A
Posts: 434
|
I didn't get the foam under the trailer but really wanted too. The reason I didn't was because in the event I needed to do some kind of work or repair I would have had to dig all that foam off. It will keep your camper warmer in cold and I'm sure colder inside during high heat, insulation works both ways especially with an AC unit. I think insulating the underside of the plywood(if possible) would be a better alternative.
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 05:27 PM
|
#27
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North Van., British Columbia
Trailer: 2014 Escape 19
Posts: 4,261
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slickheadhunter
I think insulating the underside of the plywood(if possible) would be a better alternative.
|
You can kind of split the difference with the under trailer insulation. If you look under there you can see large areas of smooth fiberglass. It would be fairly easy to attach slabs of foam insulation in those areas. Wouldn't do much for the tanks but would insulate the area underfoot.
Haven't don that to mine yet but will do it if we decide to take it to a ski area next winter. Won't worry about the tanks, will just dry camp.
Ron
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 05:50 PM
|
#28
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Weare, New Hampshire
Trailer: 2015 Escape 17A
Posts: 434
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron in BC
You can kind of split the difference with the under trailer insulation. If you look under there you can see large areas of smooth fiberglass. It would be fairly easy to attach slabs of foam insulation in those areas. Wouldn't do much for the tanks but would insulate the area underfoot.
Haven't don that to mine yet but will do it if we decide to take it to a ski area next winter. Won't worry about the tanks, will just dry camp.
Ron
|
That's a good idea! You can get that stuff in 2.5 or maybe even 3 inches thick, I wonder if silicone would be enough to hold it there without coming off?
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 06:12 PM
|
#29
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North Van., British Columbia
Trailer: 2014 Escape 19
Posts: 4,261
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slickheadhunter
That's a good idea! You can get that stuff in 2.5 or maybe even 3 inches thick, I wonder if silicone would be enough to hold it there without coming off?
|
There are foam adhesives that are plenty strong enough. Light weight to hold and a huge surface area. But my middle name is "Redundant"  I plan to run two straps from the frame under the foam to the other frame, front to back. If the adhesive ever failed the insulating value would drop but the foam wouldn't.
Ron
|
|
|
07-20-2015, 08:58 PM
|
#30
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Weare, New Hampshire
Trailer: 2015 Escape 17A
Posts: 434
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron in BC
There are foam adhesives that are plenty strong enough. Light weight to hold and a huge surface area. But my middle name is "Redundant"  I plan to run two straps from the frame under the foam to the other frame, front to back. If the adhesive ever failed the insulating value would drop but the foam wouldn't.
Ron
|
I like the way you think
__________________
|
|
|
 |
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|