CPT (Composite Panel Technologies) Slide In Camper Shell Build, AKA "Yes, Dear, I think this will definitely be my last one...."

[klahanie]

CPT Camper Build - Part 3 and Final


Box Score

Camper Shell - $15K $CDN (insert favourite line here about CDN/US $ difference...)
Stuff – Roughly $9CDN
Rough estimate on dry weight of finished camper - 1100 - 1200 lbs
Time to build – About 6 months with lots of competition from “life in general”

You've done very well. Congrats and looking good !

I know that's a joke on the price but not sure which way it's meant to go... I've seen a low price or two mentioned on this forum for finished campers before but my research never matched them ... if only CPT had those sized shells readiy available.

Even for a basic built it would be easy to spend double your outlay. So, good on you.

I'm with you on hatches thru the walls. Only gotcha might be if ferries wants a visual on the LPG tank being shut off. Have seen it before with other travellers and have been asked myself (but not in BC iirc). I took to carrying an old BC Ferries "checked/shut off" sticker and applying it before hand across the factory LPG compartment door - even though that space had long been converted to shoe storage

Thanks for posting. Enjoy your travels !

 

[NOPEC]

You've done very well. Congrats and looking good !

I know that's a joke on the price but not sure which way it's meant to go... I've seen a low price or two mentioned on this forum for finished campers before but my research never matched them ... if only CPT had those sized shells readiy available.

Even for a basic built it would be easy to spend double your outlay. So, good on you.

I'm with you on hatches thru the walls. Only gotcha might be if ferries wants a visual on the LPG tank being shut off. Have seen it before with other travellers and have been asked myself (but not in BC iirc). I took to carrying an old BC Ferries "checked/shut off" sticker and applying it before hand across the factory LPG compartment door - even though that space had long been converted to shoe storage

Thanks for posting. Enjoy your travels !

Klahanie

Ah yes, another failed attempt at humour. The story of my life.......... The "joke" was about our Canadian dollar being referred to as a Peso or worse, by many of my American friends and a few folks here as well. The costs cited on the post were in Canadian dollars, very rough estimates aside from the actual shell. I actually did a little shopping in the "It seemed like a good idea at the time" departments of FBMPlace and Kijiji and bought a few things there for this project so that took a bit of the edge off the total cost.

Funny about BC inland ferries and propane. Many here on ExPo will have driven on BC Highway #23 south from Revelstoke (highly recommended if you haven't ). Anyway, I happened to be on that road while I was planning this last build. During the busy summer season, the Galena Bay Ferry has a very outgoing and quite fiesty woman who is in charge of the pre-boarding area where one of her duties is checking on propane shutoff valve compliance. During the ferry wait while chatting with her, I brought up the topic of normally closed solenoids in a propane system as at the time, I was planning to install one in my new system. She listened quite respectfully as I blabbed on about the advantages, safety, propane shut off by a remote switch, etc., quite riveting stuff I thought. At the end I asked her if she thought that would work for compliance. Her reply was basically, "sure that will work, just as long you turn off the shutoff valve on the tank"....

I didn't end up doing the solenoid for a variety of reasons but I did put an easy access marine screw hatch in the lid of the propane locker for both a quick shutdown if need be and for anyone else who might need to confirm that I am following the rules. BTW, I have also used the old "red sticker" trick but I would never have a problem with someone physically checking the valve, regardless of where it is located.

Here is a pic of the current set up. Cheers

 

[Trail Talk]

If you’re OK with this digression I can add a warning about carrying exterior fuel when boarding BC ferries. We too got pulled out of the line by a very dedicated woman while waiting for the Nanaimo to Departure Bay sailing. Not satisfied that our two jerry cans in the rack were empty, she supervised me filling them with water from a spout across the parking lot before letting us back in the queue. First time that had happened in many crossings, and the last since the empties now go out of sight at BC ferry terminals.

 

[NOPEC]

If you’re OK with this digression I can add a warning about carrying exterior fuel when boarding BC ferries. We too got pulled out of the line by a very dedicated woman while waiting for the Nanaimo to Departure Bay sailing. Not satisfied that our two jerry cans in the rack were empty, she supervised me filling them with water from a spout across the parking lot before letting us back in the queue. First time that had happened in many crossings, and the last since the empties now go out of sight at BC ferry terminals.

Wow, Dean, that is pretty over the top! Sounds like she had a burr. Like Klahanie mention earlier, I also have never seen our inland ferry folks double check anyone's assurance of compliance.

Out here in the Kootenays, we are what I think you call "chill". Our Ferry Lady generally wears a pair of Dame Edna/Lady Gaga/early Elton John sunglasses (depending on the desired look for the day), has flower boxes on her brightly painted shelter and spends most of her time chatting with aging goateed bikers living the dream with their oversize Harleys. She is vigliant and efficent in her own way though.

 

[ITTOG]

The camper looks good. I like what you are doing. Didn't you have one of the fiberglass campers, bigfoot I think?

 

[NOPEC]

The camper looks good. I like what you are doing. Didn't you have one of the fiberglass campers, bigfoot I think?

ITTOG
Thanks. I have had a few of the moulded truck campers. A Bigfoot (8'2") and a couple of Kodiaks (8'3") to be exact. I liked them all for different reasons just that now, I really wanted to get away from the weight and size and with the Bigfoot especially, all the build-ins and "mass produced" RV stuff and dodads (does one really need window valances in a camper...) that I just am not interested in these days. In my opinion, what should be a pretty thermally efficent shell is quickly compromised once they start sawing into it at the factory. You can mitigate some of it by doing a major overhaul and lots of fiberglassing but with the CPT build, I wanted to start with a clean slate.

 

[ITTOG]

ITTOG
Thanks. I have had a few of the moulded truck campers. A Bigfoot (8'2") and a couple of Kodiaks (8'3") to be exact. I liked them all for different reasons just that now, I really wanted to get away from the weight and size and with the Bigfoot especially, all the build-ins and "mass produced" RV stuff and dodads (does one really need window valances in a camper...) that I just am not interested in these days. In my opinion, what should be a pretty thermally efficent shell is quickly comprimised once they start sawing into it at the factory. You can mitigate some of it by doing a major overhaul and lots of fiberglassing but with the CPT build, I wanted to start with a clean slate.

All that makes a lot of sense. I built my own for some of the same reasons. Enjoy the new camper.

 

[NOPEC]

Amazing build Bob, enjoy the summer! Less holes in the envelope is the way to go so you can enjoy the winter too.

Dean, when we "winter up", I'll be banging on your door for some advice! PS, just got "Barrow's Boys", it looks great.

 

[trackhead]

Simple design always wins in my book. Nice work, and probably 800+lbs less than your other camper it seems.

 

[NOPEC]

Simple design always wins in my book. Nice work, and probably 800+lbs less than your other camper it seems.

Agreed and thanks. I also borrowed a few ideas along that stratedgy from your past work. And, yes, about an 800 lb reduction from my Kodiak but I do miss a lot of what the moulded fiberglas shell had to offer , not the least of which was it's exterior toughness.

 

[rruff]

^^^ Can you describe what you noticed regarding exterior toughness differences between this and your Kodiak?

 

[NOPEC]

^^^ Can you describe what you noticed regarding exterior toughness differences between this and your Kodiak?

rruff

I know you know all of this stuff anyway but here are a few thoughts....

It is just my opinion based on nothing particularly scientific and I am probably splitting hairs and of course, there is the question of what is toughness. For me due to past terrain choices, toughness is generally about smucking into and/or deflecting tree branches.

After having rebuilt moulded fiberglas campers and now built out and fiddled with the composite panel CPT shell, I would give a slight nod to the moulded camper for a couple of reasons.

First, the moulded exterior fiberglas on my Kodiak is thicker than the outer layer of the composite panels, no surprise as they are differently engineered and built. Any worst case direct hit with a sharp branch under the same circumstances, I think would probably see the Kodiak's outer skin fare slightly better.

Secondly, are the smooth edges and generally more aerodynamic leading edge of the moulded campers which I think provides an advantage when it comes to deflecting branches (and bugs) . The prow of the Kodiak (and other brands of these type of campers) is angled on a couple of planes where as the CPT (and other Composite campers) tend to have more blunt leading edges along with the relief caused by the use of extrusions to build them all of which makes these campers slightly less able to gracefully shed branches.

Thirdly and I think I am really splitting hairs here but I am guessing that with a blunt force strike to the front or sides of these two types of campers, there would be a better chance of the moulded camper exterior flexing slightly prior to fracturing. With the composite camper's tight bond of the wall "sandwich", the outer skin can't flex into the underlying foam so I think it would potentially fracture more quickly than the moulded camper. My logic with this is that because with moulded campers, any hard insulation is simply glued to the outer skin from the inside with no serious inner layer except for panelling which is also just glued after the fact.

And lastly, the moulded, crowned roof vs. the flat roof may also be a tiny factor in favor of the moulded camper.

For me, it is all moot anyway. Having the wisdom and maturity that is supposed to come with being a senior citizen, I no longer bush crash my campers with the same gusto as days gone by so my new composite panel camper (which I really like by the way) is not going to be subjected to any ballistic destructive testing.......

 

[simple]

Your spot on with the comparisons. The other bit I'd point out is that a blunt impact or pressure to the skin of a sandwich panel could compromise the bond between the skin and foam. Repairable but if gone unnoticed or neglected could also lead to delamination, buckling and failure.

 

[rruff]

I think "branch deflection" is a good feature! You are probably correct, I just wondered if something happened to make you think that.

I guess the Kodiak is made like the Bigfoot and Northern Lite, with a self-supporting fiberglass shell made in a mold... then some foam and interior wall attached or glued to that. Without knowing the details of the wall sections, I think it would be a good guess that this would be better at taking a hit, especially since the CPT foam isn't very stiff or strong.

Big weight difference, though...

 

[trackhead]

Kodiak is foam sandwhich roof between heavy glass. Back wall is mostly thin insulation. Sides are similar to roof.

I know this because I gutted my Kodiak like NOPEC.

30 years on this shell and trips from Mexico to Arctic Ocean and everywhere in between. Still going. Weighs 1900 on the scales, so not light….