# integrated lower MPG?



## nafricasurfer (Jan 22, 2014)

Hi all -

I just went to the local motorhome seller here in Heidelberg Germany. 

They had a fine looking integrated Burstner I model I 572 for sale.

The seller said that integrated campers get about 27mpg and alcove campers get 24mpg.. 

(ok he said 1.5L - 2L / 100km better)

Is this true?

Thanks-
Matt


----------



## teemyob (Nov 22, 2005)

Not from Experience.

You have to be low profile or van for better MPG


There are so many contributory factors. I have a 5 ton 3.0 V6 Sprinter motorhome. The 3.0 motorhome returns the same MPG as my Standard roof Short Wheelbase 2.2 litre Sprinter.

TM


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

Trevor is correct, no difference as far as I know, Alan.


----------



## bigtree (Feb 3, 2007)

Bank on 24 mpg and anything more is a bonus. Is it the one at Caravanium Reisemobile,if so looks tidy and a good spec.


----------



## TheNomad (Aug 12, 2013)

It doesn't really matter. Buy the mh you want.....a 3 mpg variance is in practice irrelevant when compared to layout condition extras features and all the other myriad variables.


----------



## nafricasurfer (Jan 22, 2014)

true true... 

I liked the look of the integrated camper. I like there is a little extra headroom on the bed. 

Another problem with an integrated camper is increased cost to service? Due to the engine being so deep inside?


Matt


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

> true true...
> 
> I liked the look of the integrated camper. I like there is a little extra headroom on the bed.
> 
> ...


Service prices are generally fixed and simply depend on the make and model of the base vehicle. So, at least at a main dealer, no extra cost.

Don't agonise over it, buy the one you like best, as already said MPG differences between similar sized vehicles are very small.

Integrated vans (called A class in the UK) are much more roomy in my opinion, less cramped and that matters a lot in a small space, Alan.


----------



## nafricasurfer (Jan 22, 2014)

yes that is the one. You are quite the sleuth!

http://suchen.mobile.de/wohnwagen-i...-tv-ahk-schnäppchen-heidelberg/190493447.html

nice & clean inside as well.

a class is tricky. I couldn't find a radiator cap! but the oil looked ok.

Matt


----------



## gavinskii (Dec 31, 2012)

Nice quality the Bursters and looks a fairprice too!


----------



## alhod (Nov 1, 2010)

If fuel consumption is a high importance for you the most effective economy is the right foot! I have driven A class and low profile and found little difference. Much more important to have layout you want and optimum space. Not many would buy a motorhome only because of its fuel economy.

Alan


----------



## NeilandDebs (Aug 28, 2008)

*MPG*

After 65900 miles my mpg averages out at 21.74mpg. That is for
a 5 ton 2.8 146bhp m/h. I do 110kms/64mph on the motorways and the speed limits the rest of the time.

Over this distance my best mpg was 25.8 and my worst 16.9(mile crunching back fro Italy).

Then again I did not get 'Ellie' for her fuel economy!


----------



## Brock (Jun 14, 2005)

In theory, the integrated should be more fuel efficient because it would be more aerodynamic.

In practice, having had 3 alcove vans [lutons] and I'm on my third integrated van [a-class], I can manage between 26 and 32 mpg in an integrated van but in an alcove 25mpg to 29mpg. However, my average mpg for each vehicle has always been around 27mpg no matter what shape or engine.

I suspect I adapt my driving style to each vehicle and road conditions and this evened out the figures. I do know what shoes I'm wearing and how close to the steering wheel I sit, determine my fuel consumption because they affect how leaden footed I am.


----------



## nafricasurfer (Jan 22, 2014)

Thanks all for the input on fuel efficiency.

Now I'm wondering about how hard it will be to service an integrated van. 

Can the same shops that repair an alcove's engine & powertrain also work on an integrated's?

We'll be in spots like Morocco, portugal, spain.

Thank you-
Matt


----------



## Brock (Jun 14, 2005)

I don't know about the countries you are visiting but in the UK we can have difficulty unless we use garages that are used to A-class motorhomes. For some work, we will have to pay a premium because access difficulties mean the job takes longer e.g. changing the timing belt. Normal servicing is the same price.

I have a feeling that the question you really need to ask is whether an integrated vehicle is better for you than a low profile [semi integrated] or alcove.

Personally, I have had 3 a-classes because I wanted the drop down bed which meant I got more internal van space in a shorter vehicle and a dedicated bed with comfortable mattress. My parking space was limited because of a house move. I didn't want an alcove, which is similarly space efficient to an integrated van. Some people like the wide cab element of an integrated van and the greater visibility. neither was an attraction to me. Some spend all their time worrying about screen replacement - might be an issue for you abroad and on unmade roads.

If space wasn't an issue, I'd go for a low profile/semi integrated. An alcove would be the bottom of my list simply because the overhang takes a lot of cleaning [bugs] and restricts upward vision.

Search the forum and internet and you will find widely different views on what shape is best.


----------



## nafricasurfer (Jan 22, 2014)

Thank you Brock -- I'm heading over to the dealer now to have another look. Hopefully it will still be around!


----------



## nafricasurfer (Jan 22, 2014)

Nope it was bought minutes before I arrived back. Doh!

Ah well.. getting back to that Merc camper. I had a fear that I would not be able to sell it for near what I paid. But no my only fear is that someone is gonna buy it first!

Better get over there!


----------



## jonegood (Nov 5, 2007)

nafricasurfer said:


> Thanks all for the input on fuel efficiency.
> 
> Now I'm wondering about how hard it will be to service an integrated van.
> 
> ...


dont worry about morocco there thousands of a classes - here big expensive stuff too plenty of concorde carthagos and NBs, and theres loads of moroccans offering to mend the corners that the french keep knocking

Jon


----------



## Rapide561 (Oct 1, 2005)

*MPG*

Hi

From my own experience, a Kontiki "alcove" did 24 mpg. The same engine in the low line model did 26-27. The low line was slightly less tall and obviously a bit more aerodynamic.

Most luton/alcove vans are taller than their A class counter part - look at the height of a Burstner Elegance compared to the alcove Argos 747.

Russell


----------

