Home » Why Buying A New Large Motorhome May Soon Be Impossible In These Six States

Why Buying A New Large Motorhome May Soon Be Impossible In These Six States

Rv Ts2
ADVERTISEMENT

The RV industry may soon be delivered a gut punch, and weirdly it’s not going to be from demand swings. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has amended its regulations and will require the manufacturers of motorhomes with a gross weight of over 8,500 pounds to sell an increasing number of EVs. There’s just one problem: No RV manufacturer currently sells a heavy electric motorhome. In effect, California and five other states may inadvertently ban the sale of new motorhomes in only a few weeks’ time.

This news comes to us from SFGate and paints a dark picture for the battered but recovering RV market. RV sales hit all-time records during the COVID-19 pandemic, then fell off a cliff after people stopped buying RVs for numerous reasons. The RV Industry Association expects America’s RV builders to ship 324,100 units this year, far down from 2021’s all-time record of 600,240 shipments. To illustrate the change in demand, RV sales have plummeted to a level not seen since 2013.

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

Thankfully, the RVIA says, sales are trending in an upward direction with this year closing out better than 2023 and with next year looking to be an even better year. That might not be the case if California, New York, New Jersey, Washington, Oregon, and Massachusetts move forward on stringent emissions requirements that would push motorhome diesel engines out of the market.

Mercedes Streeter

I will be clear right from the bat. You’re going to read a bunch of headlines saying that California may ban the sale of new motorhomes. This is not strictly true. California did not ban motorhomes and motorhome manufacturers do have a path to continue selling ICE vehicles in these six states. However, California’s changes would make selling large motorhomes substantially harder, essentially giving the effect of a ban.

This breaking story was originally reported on by RV Travel early this month, but now thanks to SFGate‘s reporting we know a little more. According to SFGate, CARB has amended its Advanced Clean Truck regulations in late October. You can view the meeting by clicking here, just be aware it’ll take hours of your time to get through the whole thing. The rule will require the manufacturers of trucks and motorhomes with a gross vehicle weight rating of over 8,500 pounds to produce a percentage of zero-emission vehicles.

ADVERTISEMENT

The new rules kick off in 2025 and the percentage of zero-emission vehicles that must be built by a manufacturer is set to increase gradually until 2035, the year when California hopes to completely phase out the sales of all other internal combustion vehicles. California plans that every truck sold in the state will be zero-emission by a later date.

The Advanced Clean Trucks rule was successfully adopted by CARB in 2020. According to the rule as originally adopted, makers of medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks were required to begin building a small percentage of zero-emission vehicles beginning in 2024 and gradually rising from there. Here’s a chart:

Sales Percentages.jpg
CARB

To help you read that a little better, I’ll give you a key. Class 2b-3 is for on-road trucks with a GVWR between 8,501 and 14,000 pounds. Class 4-8 is for on-road trucks with a GVWR greater than or equal to 14,001 pounds. Finally, Class 7-8 covers vehicles with a GVWR greater than or equal to 26,001 pounds.

SFGate says that the bulk of the RVs that would get caught up in this are primarily large Class A motorhomes and Super C motorhomes, the kinds of motorhomes rolling on specialized chassis. Technically, that 8,500-pound threshold would endanger far more RVs than just the biggest ones. Many Mercedes-Benz Sprinter camper vans have gross weight limits above 8,501 pounds. However, Mercedes-Benz should also sell enough EVs to offset selling vans, something the big RV chassis manufacturers currently cannot do.

There presently isn’t a single zero-emission Class A or Super C RV on the market, so if this regulation goes live in 2025, dealers will no longer be able to sell any brand-new Class A or Super C coaches. The market for zero-emission motorhomes is also remarkably tiny with startups like Grounded RV leading the way. As of publishing, no big brand sells a low-emission or zero-emission motorhome, though some are in development.

ADVERTISEMENT
Mercedes Streeter

CARB does offer a path for builders wanting to sell large diesel-powered coaches, from SFGate:

CARB told SFGATE via email that “there is no motorhome ban.” A system of credits allows manufacturers that can’t meet the requirements to buy credits from those that do, giving them “the flexibility needed to sell as many internal combustion engines as is needed to meet market demands,” said spokesperson Lys Mendez. According to the board, manufacturers can also focus ZEV production on other vehicle types where that technology is more viable to meet the requirements.

The Advanced Clean Trucks rule sent shockwaves through the trucking world when it was first adopted, with lobbyists and truckers urging the states to reconsider. Now, the RV industry’s lobbying groups are trying to stop what they think will be an apocalypse.

The impact is already being felt. According to RV Travel, Spartan and Freightliner, two major diesel RV chassis builders, are deciding to pull out of the six states as they do not have a platform that would be legal. Newmar RV, which uses the aforementioned platforms, said on November 4 that it would no longer sell diesel RVs on those non-compliant platforms.

Thankfully, some class A RVs should be able to be sold in California and those other five states. For example, the Ford F53 Class A motorhome chassis (below) uses the 7.3-liter Godzilla gasoline V8 engine and reportedly, Ford has enough credits from selling electric cars and trucks that it can keep producing motorhome chassis for sale in the six states.

ADVERTISEMENT
Jason Torchinsky – This Entegra uses a Ford F53 chassis.

Things still get worse from there. You might think this wouldn’t be a big deal because you could just buy an RV from a state that doesn’t follow CARB rules and drive it back home. California says this will not be a workaround because if you buy a new RV that doesn’t comply with the rule, you won’t be able to register it in California.

During the CARB meeting about the rule, Joe Snyder, who represented Freightliner Custom Chassis, told the board:

Some of the vehicles we build are electric school buses, electric walk-in vans. We’re doing our best to meet the regulations. Currently we have no electric solution for Class A RVs and there are no credits, therefore no credits to build class a RV chassis, uh, with ICE engines. Additionally, there’s no infrastructure at camping locations where these future vehicles would be going to.

Please consider the following, the current law may incentivize older RVs to be purchased and thus going backwards on the emissions Act as it sits will stop nearly all sales of new Class A and super cvs. RVs are low mileage, low fuel, and thus low emission vehicles due to the low usage. Not allowing sales of new RVs doesn’t stop consumer demand.

Eliminating RVs from ACT will ensure clean diesel engines are operating in California. Keeping ACT as it is will ensure older vehicles are sold in state for the near future. Eliminating RVs from ACT will also allow enforcement officials to focus on larger fuel users. Additionally, CARB could add a limit of in-state miles and generator hours to prevent emissions of these vehicles.

I welcome the comments of the board on this topic. I’m thankful for the Clean Air programs. I’ve personally told thousands of people all over the US how clean our air is and that I can see the mountains every day and my kids don’t know what a smog day is. Help California RVs go out into our national parks all over the United States with clean diesel RVs, not older polluting RVs.

These rules can clean the air and demo jobs at the same time, or we can go out and be clean together.

Thor

Trevor Gasper, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Thor Industries said:

I’m the Senior Vice President and general counsel of Thor Industries, the world’s largest producer of recreational vehicles. Thor owns a family of RV companies including Airstream, Tiffin, Jaco, Integra, and Thor Motor Coach, all of whom sell motor homes to dealers and consumers in the state of California so that they can better connect with nature in the outdoors as an industry.

We’ve spoken on several occasions about the concerns we have with the A CT and the amendments discussed today. Do not alleviate those concerns of the vehicles impacted by ACT. Motorhomes make up only one quarter of 1% of all miles driven on California, California roads. Unlike trucks at issue in the regulations, motor homes spend most of their functional life parked and not emitting GHGs.

Like all RV companies, we are a final stage manufacturer. We do not manufacture the chassis and engines that are utilized in our units because of this. We are currently beholden to the chassis produced for sale to us by our chassis OEMs.

We are being told by these major suppliers that due to the A CT and the unavailability of any electric or or zero emission or near zero emission, uh, product for the RV industry, that they simply will not sell us any products for resale into California or other states that have adopted the ACT beginning in 2025.

These chassis manufacturers are not interested in engaging in credit purchasing to our assist the RV industry. So even if we can buy credits, they don’t want to engage with us, they will not sell us chassis for sale in California. Period. I want carb to know that we are taking steps to develop zero emission and near zero emission solutions for the industry. Thor has a longstanding partnership with Harbinger Motors out of California to produce both near zero and zero emission options for the RV industry as we sit here today.

However, despite our best efforts over the last five years, these options are not available and will not be available in any meaningful number for at least 18… [mic cuts off].

In response to all of this, the RVIA SFGate: “While we are continuing to work with manufacturers, dealers, and CARB to find a solution, if nothing changes, motorhomes will not be able to be sold and registered in California beginning in 2025. The exact date is still to be determined.”

Lobbyists for the RV industry and dealers believe there is still time to change the rule. The goal is to get a waiver into the Advanced Clean Trucks rule for motorhomes, but if not, maybe convince lawmakers to kick the can down the road a little further. If the lobbyists are unsuccessful, at least buyers will still be able to get used motorhomes. There are also registration methods some RV owners may take that I will not discuss here.

ADVERTISEMENT

If CARB does not grant an exemption to new motorhome sales, we could be seeing a very different future for the RV industry. Practically overnight, six large RV markets could dramatically change for a long time. Thor’s Mr. Gasper is correct, the vast majority of the RV industry isn’t ready to go zero-emission yet and won’t be for a while. We’ll be watching as this situation unfolds.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
197 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David Nolan
David Nolan
1 month ago

So what if I can’t have my massive RV. I’ve still got my mansion, yaught and private jet so I’m good.

Rust Buckets
Rust Buckets
1 month ago
Reply to  David Nolan

Are you completely unaware of who the typical RV buyer is, or is making stuff up a hobby of yours?

David Nolan
David Nolan
27 days ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

My point is that rich people’s toys don’t get taken away. I agree with you

LastOpenRoad
LastOpenRoad
1 month ago
Reply to  David Nolan

Most RV owners are average, middle-class Americans, especially those who drive these the most as full-timers. Also, creating a wealthy boogieman won’t change your personal economic situation.

David Nolan
David Nolan
27 days ago
Reply to  LastOpenRoad

Relax, it was a light hearted comment about how rich people’s toys never seem to be affected by stuff like this. I know that many middle class people drive these.

Chris D
Chris D
27 days ago
Reply to  David Nolan

Yaught or yacht?

At least you don’t live in a manshin.

David Nolan
David Nolan
26 days ago
Reply to  Chris D

Lmao I am stupid

Saul Goodman
Saul Goodman
1 month ago

Shit, I don’t care for the reason. I hate the Class As, the van conversions I don’t mind. These barns-on-wheels are always seemingly captained by the least qualified, most geriatric monkey that the DMV gave a license to, taking up two lanes, going 30 mph below the speed limit, or riding your ass.

Besides, the build quality on these are atrocious. It’s a sort of low that not even 70s Chrysler could achieve. Why do people buy them? Whatever, it’s their money being wasted. I guess towing a normal sized caravan isn’t expensive enough.

Last edited 1 month ago by Saul Goodman
UnseenCat
UnseenCat
29 days ago
Reply to  Saul Goodman

There’s a big division in quality and capability of Class A’s between the gassers and the diesel pushers. The gas ones are often pushing their gross weight limit when loaded. The diesels have the torque and horsepower to keep up with grades and traffic while fully loaded. The problem is that the big diesel pushers are beyond the budget of a lot of Class A buyers, and the gas-powered ones are often built to a price point — with corresponding compromises on quality and power.

As for drivers, well, motorhome travel tends to be more popular with an older age bracket –not that younger families don’t enjoy them too, but the demographics are kind of undeniable. With age comes varying effects on driving capability, but I’d hate to paint all Class A drivers with too broad of a brush. Yes, some folks have no business behind the wheel of something the size of a bus. But some of those same drivers are behind the wheel of class C’s and class B vans, and they’re no better. Or worse, they’re towing a trailer or 5th-wheel with an overloaded pickup, and an un-skilled driver with a combination vehicle can be even more of a hazard.

Motorhome drivers do self-select for size, to some degree. There are some who absolutely won’t drive a class A of any sort; a big van cab is as far as they’re willing to go and so they’ll stick with C’s and B’s. Meanwhile, class A diesel pushers have a stronger following among former commercial drivers who are more likely to know how to handle them.

And don’t forget, fuel economy on class A’s is anywhere from “meh” to abysmal. In some cases, even an experienced driver will set the cruise control at an economical speed and stick to the right-hand lane. And that can mean sticking to the posted 55 or 65 for real, while all the traffic wants to go through at 75. Annoying? Maybe, but the big rigs may be doing the same thing for the same reason. There are also times and places where high-profile and heavy vehicles should slow down — even if it means dropping below the posted speed limit. Pass when it’s safe and let the slower vehicles have their space.

Saul Goodman
Saul Goodman
29 days ago
Reply to  UnseenCat

I keep my distance and I know that it’s safer that these things aren’t going at the same speed the rest of traffic is. However, anecdotally, the Class As seem to be always less capable than semis. (Yes I know anecdotes do not constitute everyone’s experience.) The topography can get a little tricky and hilly around here; they slow down and I’m fine with that. But going 50 in a posted 80, weaving between a lanes, on a perfectly straight highway? Come on. Let’s agree that if you want to drive a class A, you need a CDL.

Last edited 29 days ago by Saul Goodman
TDI in PNW
TDI in PNW
1 month ago

I am not a fan of just about anything with the RV experience nor being behind them…

…so, anyways.

Space
Space
1 month ago

This whole thing just seems so poorly thought out. Like a higher gas tax with subsidies could accomplish the same goal and more without all the economic friction.
And if california were really serious about greenhouse gasses they would allow trading between classes of vehicles or industries.
My guess is that a handful of container ships emit more than all of the slightly driven RV’s in the state.

I have no skin in the game but I really hate how it’s been drilled over and over there is no ICE ban, but it’s basically an ban in everything but name.

Mechjaz
Mechjaz
29 days ago
Reply to  Space

A gas tax is regressive and it’s disproportionately burdensome on the poor. I’m not sure what you mean by “tax with subsidies” though – raise the taxes, but then also provide a means to be excluded? If so, why not go directly after the issue, especially if it’s one that’s dependent on the discretionary income of those wealthy enough to buy into it?

Personally, I think gas should be way more expensive, but not without a UBI and some kind of public transportation. Too many people drive to work just to be able to afford the gas to drive to work

Space
Space
29 days ago
Reply to  Mechjaz

Honestly I’m not sure there is one easy right answer, I only proposed a gas tax because it’s easy to implement.

An easy subsidy for states to implement would be a credit to registration based on income. Back of the napkin math, this system could work up to about $0.3/gal That way it is no longer regressive and you still end up with less gasoline use.

I will say I used 90% less gas when I worked from home, that alone in the sectors it makes sense could make this whole point moot when it comes to CO2 reductions.

Chris D
Chris D
27 days ago
Reply to  Mechjaz

There is a gasoline tax on the rich, to a certain extent. Wealthy areas have higher gas prices than many others. San Diego’s prices, for example, are a buck and a half per gallon higher than other parts of the state.
Shell has a station a mile from its refinery that has the highest prices for miles around. It’s a strange economic phenomena, with greed and price gouging the most likely cause.

Crank Shaft
Crank Shaft
1 month ago

I have no sympathy. These manufacturers could have spent the last five years demanding a gasoline powered series hybrid. Who gives a flying fuck about the extra cost when these things cost so much money already?

Instead they maximized quarterly earnings without investing in R&D for the future. Thor can take Mjölnir’s handle and jamb it up their figurative butthole with this whining about only being a chassis buyer. They could have easily told the chassis builders what they will and won’t buy starting in 2025. Thor and others knew they would need a solution but just ignored that fact.

Bucko
Bucko
1 month ago

I am truly shocked to hear that on November 1, 2024 that RV manufacturers suddenly learned that they would no longer be able to sell RVs in 5 states because those states whimsically imposed EV mandates. It is crazy that no one saw this coming until now.

Jason Smith
Jason Smith
29 days ago
Reply to  Bucko

The Advanced Clean Trucks rule was successfully adopted by CARB in 2020. According to the rule as originally adopted, makers of medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks were required to begin building a small percentage of zero-emission vehicles beginning in 2024 and gradually rising from there. 

They’ve had 4 years which, while not a lot of time at all from a powertrain design standpoint, also is a long way from “in two months you won’t be able to sell vehicles”…

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
29 days ago
Reply to  Jason Smith

How much are they willing to bribe Trump for him to fix their problem.

Jason Smith
Jason Smith
29 days ago

I’m sure they’re already doing their best to see how much it will take.
Welcome to American democracy, the best government money can buy…

Greg
Greg
1 month ago

Until California and the rest of those states (I live in one) ban private jets, and boats over 30 feet that aren’t required for some sort of fishing industry, I don’t want to hear a damn thing.

Of course, they will continue restricting private citizens choices and lives, while letting the uber rich destroy everything and lecture us all the while.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
1 month ago
Reply to  Greg

Who do you think own these things?

Greg
Greg
29 days ago

Not the uber rich, just the middle old regular rich. Uber rich has mansions wherever they are flying to, or stay in a buddies, they aren’t in these pieces of shit. These are for the guy who “did well” and wants to retire with maybe 2-10 mil in the bank. Not Jeff Bezos making 10 mil a minute.

Cheap Bastard
Cheap Bastard
1 month ago

Rather than sitting through that video (thanks for the warning) I found this regarding ACT:
What is ACT?To reduce emissions, ACT requires original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles to sell zero-emissions vehicles (ZEVs) or near-zero-emissions vehicles (NZEVs) such as plug-in electric hybrids as an increasing percentage of their annual sales from 2024 to 2035. The regulation uses a cap-and-trade system, capping the number of fossil fuel vehicles sold by stipulating annual sales percentage requirements. The rule allows manufacturers to comply with the regulation by generating compliance credits through the sale of ZEVs or NZEVs or through the trading of compliance credits. ACT defines ZEVs and NZEVs as follows:

Zero-emission vehicle: A vehicle that produces zero tail-pipe emissions, including battery-electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.Near-zero-emissions vehicle: A vehicle with an internal combustion engine and an electric energy storage system, including plug-in hybrid vehicles and hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicles.https://rmi.org/understanding-californias-advanced-clean-truck-regulation/

I understand that RV makers don’t think pure BERVs are possible but since there is already a carve out for near-zero-emissions vehicles what about ERRVs, PHRVs and HFCRVs? As we’ve (OK maybe just me) has pointed out before since RVs need a generator anyway, why not double duty it as a range extender and heater?

Last edited 1 month ago by Cheap Bastard
RhoadBlock
RhoadBlock
29 days ago
Reply to  Cheap Bastard

As much as I don’t care for Class A RVs, I do find this interesting because ACT is after the OEMs, the RV/coach builders are just caught in the mix. OEMs aren’t seeing all the profit from the RV sale, they’re just seeing the profit from the coach builders buying the chassis and/or engine, which I can’t imagine is a massive portion of their revenue. The OEMs just aren’t selling their chassis/engines to the coach builders – only for those 6 states. Maybe they’re willing to spend their credits on work trucks that they make way more of but not to the few RV builders?

That said, Class A RVs are basically just tarted up busses which I would’ve thought OEMs have ZEV/NZEV options since so many metro areas have started using electric or hybrid busses in their fleets so IDK why the coach builder couldn’t have started designing the 2025 coaches on one of those platform. They didn’t because they rode that COVID wave right into the suits & shareholders pockets, so I don’t pity them at all.

Cheap Bastard
Cheap Bastard
29 days ago
Reply to  RhoadBlock

I was at a national park recently that had just put into service a fleet of battery electric shuttle busses. I didn’t catch the make. The styling looked Chinese so maybe BYD. One broke down while I was on it. I asked the driver his thoughts on the fleet. He said such breakdowns were common.

On the bright side when they did work they were very quiet, especially when braking.

RhoadBlock
RhoadBlock
29 days ago
Reply to  Cheap Bastard

I never said they were quality, only that they existed lol.

I’m all for electrification and a cleaner future, but we’re just not there yet. The capability isn’t there for HD work yet. The infrastructure is nowhere near ready on a national scale. This push is premature imo. I get necessity breeds innovation. But rushing, perhaps to meet arbitrary governmental deadlines, also breeds sloppy work and cutting corners.

Cheap Bastard
Cheap Bastard
29 days ago
Reply to  RhoadBlock

Well to be fair “quality” is a flexible concept in the RV world.

Óscar Morales Vivó
Óscar Morales Vivó
1 month ago

I saw a picture of a van that said “Mercedes Streeter” right below and did a double take.

Thankfully the picture was of a Ford or I would have thought it was the latest Mercedes van model.

Haven’t had enough coffee today…

1978fiatspyderfan
1978fiatspyderfan
1 month ago

We must ask ourselves why do any car people support the party of cars must be banned? Second since according to all experts California will be underwater by August 2025 why are we worried about what laws they pass? Third when the Governor in the interest of lowering gas prices for the workers allows his hand picked henchmen to increase gas prices by 85 cents a gallon and in addition passing laws required to set up a reserve of gas that will cause even more shortages that will increase costs about another $1.50 a gallon you got to say WTF.
I DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER BUT THIS AIN’T IT.

Jon Winsley
Jon Winsley
1 month ago

No experts say California will be underwater by 2025. A lot Florida, portions of Texas, Newport News Naval base perhaps. A couple more beachfront home in California will erode into the water.

Anoos
Anoos
1 month ago
Reply to  Jon Winsley

Rancho Palos Verdes is my favorite monthly youtube binge.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
1 month ago

I like having ambient temperatures that humans can survive in. Why, it’s even more important to me than my ability to own overpriced toys.

Perhaps you feel differently. You’ll probably demand to be saved when the wet bulb temperature in your town becomes unbearable and you finally face the consequences of your actions.

Last edited 1 month ago by Jonathan Hendry
Rust Buckets
Rust Buckets
28 days ago

People currently live in the Sahara and Phoenix, AZ. There will never be ambient temperatures that people can’t survive in, because people can survive in ridiculously high ambient temperatures.

There are many effects of climate change that scientists are very afraid of. Being too hot to survive is not one of them.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
26 days ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

the study found that millions of Americans, particularly elderly and health-compromised individuals, could die at web-bulb temperatures much lower than 95 F, particularly as humidity increases and other human factors come into play. A healthy young adult, for example, could die after six hours of exposure to a 92 F temperature with 50 percent humidity, according to the study. A healthy elderly person could die at 91 F under the same humidity levels.

Theoretics
Theoretics
29 days ago

1. Because CARB quite literally fixed a huge portion of Californias air quality problems and directly lead to the creation of the EPA improving the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

2. Strawman.

3. Taxes are a method of changing or incentivizing behavior. We can argue about how regressive gas taxes are however I assume you’re not interested in that.

Chris D
Chris D
27 days ago

The California Air Resources Board is non-partisan.
Without them, there would be no improvement in air quality – it would be horrendous.

Vanillasludge
Vanillasludge
1 month ago

The fewer of these abominations on the road the safer for the rest of us. Old people can always flush away their life savings with better financial investments like casinos, time share condos and subscriptions to brain improvement vitamins.

That said, the mobile meth lab is going to get more expensive in the future.

1978fiatspyderfan
1978fiatspyderfan
1 month ago
Reply to  Vanillasludge

Hey I owned my own business that requires delivery vehicles. It needed a 20 foot box truck and 12,000 pound cargo capacity. I used a Ford E350SD. There is no EV vehicle in even experiment stage to handle this.

Bucko
Bucko
1 month ago

Show me an E-350 “SD” that has a 12,000 pound cargo capacity. I think you are talking about a gross vehicle weight rating. There are electric Transit and Sprinter vans that exceed the cargo capacity that I think you are talking about. Again, maybe there is an “E350SD” that can carry 12,000 pounds and I am ignornant.

Saul Goodman
Saul Goodman
1 month ago
Reply to  Vanillasludge

As a mobile meth lab market analyst, this news may bring market inflation to mobile meth labs’ biggest markets; New Mexico and California. For those on the fence as to whether they should purchase a mobile meth lab, I highly recommend buying one soon.

Older mobile meth labs may become too expensive for the common cook to afford. Expect a mobile meth lab shortage and high prices.

Vanillasludge
Vanillasludge
1 month ago
Reply to  Saul Goodman

Plus the mold issues. Really screws up the brew.

V10omous
V10omous
1 month ago

Apologies if I missed it in there, but every 3/4 and 1 ton consumer truck is over 8500 GVWR and a lot of people rely on them for work, besides those who just like driving them. And there aren’t any electrified HD trucks either.

Unless the percentages in the table are for a manufacturer’s entire line of vehicles and not just their 8500+ trucks? Can Ford sell 100% gas/diesel F350s because it sells Mach Es?

This would seem to me to be a bigger deal than toys like Class A RVs.

Space
Space
1 month ago
Reply to  V10omous

I know that some Ford lightnings can be up to 8550 GVWR. If the Machee doesn’t count maybe that will be enough.

Usernametaken
Usernametaken
1 month ago
Reply to  V10omous

It’s ok, all of California’s state owned trucks will be registered in Montana via a holding company going forward, thus solving the problem for government procurement and operations

Last edited 1 month ago by Usernametaken
RhoadBlock
RhoadBlock
29 days ago
Reply to  V10omous

It’s an OEM issue but the RV builders’ problem. I’m pretty sure the OEMs have a handful of electric and hydrogen semis and public busses out there so they’ve got the credits to spend on the medium class trucks. They just don’t want to waste the credits just so they can sell a non-conforming chassis/engine to a relatively small market of Class A RV/coach builders.

As mentioned in the article, Ford does have a compliant chassis AND credits to boot (iirc at least). If the RV builders would have paid attention instead of themselves thru the lucrative COVID era, they would have had the foresight to work out contracts to use Ford exclusively and designed their RV on that platform. This wasn’t sprung on them. They had 5 years to react and they didn’t try hard enough.

Again, no pity from me for stupid corporations.

Last edited 29 days ago by RhoadBlock
Fordlover1983
Fordlover1983
29 days ago
Reply to  V10omous

There ARE electric HD trucks (well, 26000 gross at least). I work for a body builder in KS. We have a large client that does nationwide business. Last year we put van and flatbed bodies on 10 each Peterbilt and Freightliner fully electric chassis destined for their CA branches.

They are definitely new tech (with the associated teething problems). They were constantly throwing codes. None of them showed more than 125 miles for a range estimate. I’m sure that will change as they are actually driven and the computer learns the actual power usage.

I do think that change is coming, whether we like it or not. But, government forcing it along isn’t helping with the quality of that change!

Urban Runabout
Urban Runabout
1 month ago

My parents purchased a rental property in Delaware to get residency there.
At the end of the 20 years driving around the country in their 40′ motorcoach they sold the Delaware house for a tidy profit – having using other people’s money to pay the mortgage.

That said – I doubt many San Franciscans, Angelinos, San Diegans or Bostonians will be much affected – as big RVs rolling across the Midwest aren’t something most strive for.

Last edited 1 month ago by Urban Runabout
1978fiatspyderfan
1978fiatspyderfan
1 month ago
Reply to  Urban Runabout

Yes but any middle income people in California need an RV or move to another state

Anoos
Anoos
1 month ago

Buy used?

I have to think the diesel pusher segment of the market is far from the majority of units sold, and the price is so gd high for those that they could come up with a propulsion system that is compliant and still allows for someone to sell it profitably.

Of course, RV manufacturers do not usually develop their own chassis. The companies that build their chassis should have more than just RV reasons to come up with a compliant chassis. If sales in those 6 states are not worth developing compliant RV’s, then they can just abandon them to whatever company springs up in their place.

If RV sales in those states are worth the effort, they’ll come up with an appropriate solution.

This is literally the free market people claim they want, where localities can determine their own destiny. You know, states’ rights and such. If you can live on your non-ca / non-New England sales then go right ahead.

I’m not trying to be an a-hole (no need to try, comes natural), but every company gets to decide where they choose to participate (or not). In general, I’d be opposed to these rerstrictions. Currently, let Indiana starve.

Ryanola
Ryanola
1 month ago

Montana LLC. Get your vacation bus registered and skip sales tax. Win win. Maybe refurbishing old motorhomes will be a big business so we can keep older RVs with less stringent emissions control on the street belching diesel fumes rather than replacing them with updated emission regulated rigs. Global warming is a hoax, but I really value clean air. Government stupid, business smart.

Mechjaz
Mechjaz
1 month ago
Reply to  Ryanola

> Global warming is a hoax

It really isn’t.

1978fiatspyderfan
1978fiatspyderfan
1 month ago
Reply to  Mechjaz

Yes it is. Temperatures were far higher than now during the dinosaur ???? age. And there were no people. In the 1970s they warned of the next ice age, did I miss it before are current global warming scare? Frankly ignore the weatherman that can’t predict tomorrow’s weather and embrace science that says for the last million years the earth has gone from molten surfaces to an entire iceball before us puny humans surfaced. We can’t control it and screwing ourselves is not a solution. Sure work towards better air but we are here for a brief period. Party while we can

Al Camino
Al Camino
1 month ago

Correct. 13,000 years ago, a mere blip in the Earth’s existence, Chicago was under 1 mile of ice. How did the ice melt? Native American campfires?

Col Lingus
Col Lingus
1 month ago
Reply to  Al Camino

Moses and his Jewish Space Lasers melted that ice cap…
Read your Talmud you smuck…/s

sorry that joke seems to live forever to me.

Last edited 1 month ago by Col Lingus
Anoos
Anoos
1 month ago
Reply to  Col Lingus

I apologize for my cultural ignorance.

All hail Talmudic Space Lasers.

The only people worried don’t know about the Torah Freeze Ray.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
1 month ago
Reply to  Al Camino

Even if the climate is warming purely due to natural processes (it isn’t), why do you want to throw gasoline on a fire by adding CO2 to the atmosphere?

If you don’t believe man is causing climate change, you don’t believe in physics or chemistry, so you should stop driving cars and using computers, because you shouldn’t believe in those either.

Al Camino
Al Camino
1 month ago

I believe in science and have a sign to prove it.

Cheap Bastard
Cheap Bastard
1 month ago

we are here for a brief period.

So is that oil. Regardless of what happens to the climate fossil fuels are a finite resource anyway. And most of that oil is in OPEC countries:

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranking-the-countries-with-the-largest-proven-global-oil-reserves-in-the-world/

One benefit of moving to electricity, especially renewable electricity – less dependence on OPEC.

Something to keep in mind: When other people use less oil that leaves more oil AND cleaner air for you too.

Frank Carter
Frank Carter
29 days ago
Reply to  Cheap Bastard

Agree. The purchase of foreign oil has been the largest transfer of wealth the world has ever known. I prefer to source my energy locally via nukes, hydro, and solar.

Ryanola
Ryanola
29 days ago
Reply to  Mechjaz

Manmade climate chicken little sky is falling nonsense started in the late 1940s.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
29 days ago
Reply to  Ryanola

It actually started in the 1890s. And they were correct, it’s happening now.

86-GL
86-GL
1 month ago

Lmao good. These poverty traps are such a drain on society.

Last edited 1 month ago by 86-GL
Rust Buckets
Rust Buckets
1 month ago
Reply to  86-GL

“i don’t like a thing, so I’m happy that other people are indirectly prohibited from buying them by nonsensical legislation”

86-GL
86-GL
29 days ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

Damn right.

Rust Buckets
Rust Buckets
28 days ago
Reply to  86-GL

Will you be happy when more nonsensical legislation prohibits the thing you like? Or will you be wishing that we had intelligently written laws?

86-GL
86-GL
28 days ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

Eh, politicians have removed access to plenty of things I hold dear- Stuff that actually matters, like women’s health care. People find a way to move forward.

It’s refreshing to see something stupid and deserving banned for once.

Acid Tonic
Acid Tonic
1 month ago

What a joke, least people can vote.

Ryanola
Ryanola
1 month ago
Reply to  Acid Tonic

Name me one of these eco-nazis that was voted in by the public. Nope, CARB is headed by appointed nominees.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
1 month ago
Reply to  Ryanola

Then vote against the appointers. Nobody promised you the ability to micromanage the government.

Ryanola
Ryanola
29 days ago

I live in California, I have complete taxation without representation. Not only did I not vote for everyone in power, I voted for their opponent. We’re too far gone.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
29 days ago
Reply to  Ryanola

Like I said. Democracy means not getting what you want. You want different, convince enough of your fellow state citizens to agree. Preferably with truth, not lies.

Chronometric
Chronometric
1 month ago

I know there is a lot of pearl clutching about this but seriously what would be the fallout? Some people in a few states have to buy a smaller or used RV, rent one, or use AirBnB. Or move. And some RV companies will book lower profits. Maybe some people in Indiana get laid off. Of course this is only for a couple of years until alternatives arrive or the law is changed.

I know, I know, Freedom and all that which is important. However, they elected their representatives and collectively decided this was a good idea. Maybe they will elect better people. Maybe they will discover that no one really needs to travel in their own private bus. Let the system work it out.

Last edited 1 month ago by Chronometric
LastOpenRoad
LastOpenRoad
1 month ago
Reply to  Chronometric

Are you the self-appointed Tsar of What the People Need for Private Travel?

Chronometric
Chronometric
29 days ago
Reply to  LastOpenRoad

I neither wrote or supported this legislation. I didn’t vote for the politicians that did. That is why I can sit back and watch the shit show.

As I have stated elsewhere, mandated percentages of EVs is a bad idea. Many lawmakers have a God complex thinking their poorly crafted legislation will have exactly the intended effect. You can’t tell them anything so best just to watch it fail.

Last edited 29 days ago by Chronometric
Manwich Sandwich
Manwich Sandwich
26 days ago
Reply to  LastOpenRoad

He’s not, but I am.

And RV’s are not a necessity. So I declare it to be no big loss.

RV makers can get their asses in gear and procure some commercial BEV and hybrid trucks.

And they absolutely do exist.

Sincerely,
Manwich… the Tsar of What The People Need (vs what they want)

1978fiatspyderfan
1978fiatspyderfan
1 month ago
Reply to  Chronometric

Actually global warming flooding California is a benefit if we can keep the Californians in California when it happens. I don’t want them to perish but they are so friggin stupid we can’t let them infect smart people.

Widgetsltd
Widgetsltd
1 month ago

Hey Hey! You win the prize for the most wrong-headed statement I’ve read today!

Lardo
Lardo
1 month ago
Reply to  Widgetsltd

what do expect from 1978fiatspyderfan, one of the worst cars ever made. my 1974 Alfa Spyder was like a space ship compared to those rusting ox carts.

Last edited 1 month ago by Lardo
Widgetsltd
Widgetsltd
29 days ago
Reply to  Lardo

I am actually a 124 Spider fan too, but mostly just the early, chrome-bumper cars. The 1975-78 “big bumper” cars are pretty lame in stock form.

Lardo
Lardo
29 days ago
Reply to  Widgetsltd

in 1974 – mech. fuel injection 2.0 twin cam, 5 speed, 4 wheel disc brakes, indy suspension, limited slip, large oil capacity for engine cooling, and far more beautiful. it’s not a fair fight. but like what you like

Widgetsltd
Widgetsltd
29 days ago
Reply to  Lardo

My only sportscar these days is a 2000 Boxster S 6-speed, which would murder an Alfa Spider on a road course but that’s not the point of either car…

Bags
Bags
29 days ago
Reply to  Widgetsltd

Only the most wrong in this particular sub-thread. They have plenty of others that are even more wrong in other parts of this comment section.

Space
Space
1 month ago
Reply to  Chronometric

I guess it would really suck for RV dealers and their employees. Maybe they can survive off campers and Ford conversions, but some will probably go under.

JTilla
JTilla
1 month ago

It is dumb as hell you don’t need a special license for one of these monsters. My grandma bought one for 200k new back when she was 85. She thought she was going to drive the country with her friend. She was so scared of driving it that it never went anywhere and she wasted all that money. We all sighed with relief.

Ranwhenparked
Ranwhenparked
1 month ago
Reply to  JTilla

That’s the story of many of them. Older people buy them to see the country, use them a few times, but discover that they’re terrifying to drive, then park them in the side yard to rot for the next few decades until sold to some YouTuber for a “will it start” video and one final ride to a NASCAR race

Bucko
Bucko
1 month ago
Reply to  JTilla

Sold by an RV dealer that was happy to use the 30-year mortgage clause to finance it for her. They are now crying because they thought they could bluff California into rescinding the EV mandate. I am shedding so many tears for those poor RV dealers at the moment……

JTilla
JTilla
29 days ago
Reply to  Bucko

My uncle went down there and ripped them out because they clearly took advantage of her. They ended up buying it back eventually but it took some legal persuasion.

Rust Buckets
Rust Buckets
1 month ago
Reply to  JTilla

Even very large trucks are not especially difficult to drive, any competent driver should have no issue piloting an RV.

The real problem is that we give licenses to people who aren’t competent drivers. And then wonder why car crashes are a leading cause of death in the country.

JTilla
JTilla
29 days ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

I don’t agree at all. I used to work for a surplus and salvage place. They gave the keys to the truck to the office worker one day and he immediately backed it into a tree which stabbed the limb through the box truck. It is not that they are hard to drive. They are hard to drive safely and aware.

Rust Buckets
Rust Buckets
28 days ago
Reply to  JTilla

That office worker was an incompetent driver, and not able to safely drive even the vehicles that he is legally permitted to drive on his Class D license(which includes extremely large vehicles if you didn’t know).

I work on a potato farm. We have a fleet of ~25 ten wheelers. These are 50,000lb GVWR trucks which require a CDL driver unless they are operating under Idaho’s agricultural exemption. We have a lot of seasonal employees who drive the trucks, none of them have CDLs. It’s fine. The trucks are not highly difficult to drive safely. They are certainly more difficult than your Corolla, and they require a lot more attention and brainpower. But they do not require anything beyond good common sense. Special training is simply not necessary, which I know because none of the drivers have special training.

If you can’t drive a large RV, it is simply because you lack commons sense and attention to detail. And if you lack common sense and attention to detail, then I don’t trust you to drive ANY motor vehicle, of any size.

Manwich Sandwich
Manwich Sandwich
26 days ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

, it is simply because you lack commons sense”

Common sense isn’t as common as many think it is.

4jim
4jim
29 days ago
Reply to  JTilla

yep, I see so many huge rv driven by some white-knuckle old person who has never driven anything bigger than a camry in their lives. No training just typical upper middle class overconfidence.

AlterId
AlterId
1 month ago

…if California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Massachusetts move forward on stringent emissions requirements…

And Massachusetts too.

Andrew Pappas
Andrew Pappas
1 month ago
Reply to  AlterId

From Massachusetts, yes we are important enough to count double…

Canopysaurus
Canopysaurus
1 month ago

Ye all scoffed at hydrogen powered vehicles and now ye shall reap the whirlwind. Just not a Four Winds.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
1 month ago
Reply to  Canopysaurus

Hydrogen is made from fossil fuel.

Space
Space
1 month ago

Mostly, but it doesn’t have to be.

Lardo
Lardo
1 month ago
Reply to  Space

yeah, why would you want to use the most abundant substance in the universe? that can be made from water? what kind of logic is that? oh, right, actual logic

Rust Buckets
Rust Buckets
1 month ago
Reply to  Lardo

i really hope this is a joke and you’re not actually buying all of the “most abundant substance in the universe” and “can be made from water”

Kleinlowe
Kleinlowe
1 month ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

Hey, it’s technically true! You just need to make sure your RV has Bussard ramscoops and you’re home free!

Lardo
Lardo
29 days ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

uh yep. I am. not a joke. why?

Rust Buckets
Rust Buckets
28 days ago
Reply to  Lardo

Yes, hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, but that is quite irrelevant, because elemental hydrogen is not remotely abundant on Earth. So you started off strong with a pointless and irrelevant point, which is nice.

Yes, hydrogen can be made from water. Another thing which is technically true, yet very much not a point in favor of hydrogen. Because, hydrogen cannot be made from just water. Hydrogen can be made from water AND huge amounts of electricity. Considerably more electricity, in fact, than it takes to just drive an electric car. Making hydrogen cars rather stupid and pointless.

If what you’re really after is fuel made from water, good news! We can make fuel from water, without the ludicrous quantities of electricity! You will need sunlight and air, too, but I think that is reasonable. And then that fuel can even be carried in, like gas tanks! And jugs, and other containers that actually exist!

Lardo
Lardo
28 days ago
Reply to  Rust Buckets

you’ll love my answer. Nuclear energy to make the electricity to make the hydrogen. but you have all the answers.

Manwich Sandwich
Manwich Sandwich
26 days ago
Reply to  Lardo

Makes far more sense and is far more efficient to take that nuclear-generated electricity and put it into the grid and use it for everything including storing some of it in battery packs in BEVs.

Hydrogen only “makes sense” to those who don’t understand basic science and basic economics.

Lardo
Lardo
26 days ago

right. you know more about science and basic economics than Toyota and Hyundai. Why are you wasting your incredible brilliance here? maybe you should go back and teach where you studied? had to be either harvard or yale? don’t say stanford, they will be so dissapointed in you

Manwich Sandwich
Manwich Sandwich
25 days ago
Reply to  Lardo

Well based on the actual sales flop that the Mirai and Nexo has been, apparently I do know more abut basic science and economics.

Or maybe they know too… but carry on with hydrogen mostly for political reasons.

But understanding the basics is not brilliance.

Mechjaz
Mechjaz
1 month ago

I know these things aren’t related in any way, shape, or form, but I’d feel a lot worse if RV manufacturers had done anything more than sell cheap-shit luan and particle board trash-bins-on-wheels.

The common thread, I guess if you had to find one, is the complete lack of goodwill they’ve earned. I’m not exactly pouring one out for those poor RV manufacturers that have been ripping people off with dogshit dog houses.

Moonball96
Moonball96
1 month ago
Reply to  Mechjaz

Amen

Mr. Frick
Mr. Frick
1 month ago

“there is no motorhome ban.”  we’ll just make it impossible to buy one.

Lizardman in a human suit
Lizardman in a human suit
1 month ago

Buy one acre of land in Montana, register rv to that address. Rv is the house in Montana. Californians have been doing that forever.

Lizardman in a human suit
Lizardman in a human suit
1 month ago

Bingo. Register elsewhere, problem solved. Well, it is ruining CARB’s plan to reduce emissions, but CARB enforcement is a joke.

Lardo
Lardo
1 month ago

a little trickier. have to stay in the state one night. and you have to sign a statement that you don’t own any physical property/real estate. not an atty, but you could put you property in an LLC maybe that owns the property? SD program is designed for those who live and travel in the vehicle. program provides those people with a legal mailing address.

Nathan
Nathan
1 month ago

Pretty sure everybody at CARB is going to be looking for a new job by February 2025

Jnnythndrs
Jnnythndrs
1 month ago
Reply to  Nathan

State =/ Federal

Nathan
Nathan
1 month ago
Reply to  Jnnythndrs

Carb is only allowed to exist because the federal government gives the state a waiver. Anything that crosses state lines is federal jurisdiction, so the state has actually no power to regulate any of this without federal permission.

Al Camino
Al Camino
1 month ago
Reply to  Nathan

Plus the original EPA regulations that CARB has a waiver from were never passed by Congress, so they’re illegal. The CARB death watch began last week.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
1 month ago
Reply to  Al Camino

All regulations. So pretty soon automakers could be looking at a chaotic situation. Medical devices, RF spectrum, the works.

And it’s not like Congress is functional enough to write and pass bills to restore even the really criticial regulations by drafting them into law.

Really feeling good about not having kids at this point.

Last edited 1 month ago by Jonathan Hendry
Widgetsltd
Widgetsltd
1 month ago
Reply to  Al Camino

1970’s era, eye-watering smog, here we come! Woohoo!

Urban Runabout
Urban Runabout
29 days ago
Reply to  Widgetsltd

And you thought your kid’s asthma was bad now…
…oh well – removing fluoride from the water will fix that for sure.

Jnnythndrs
Jnnythndrs
29 days ago
Reply to  Nathan

CARB regulates a ton of in-state emissions, so I highly doubt they’re going away any time soon. As much as I think some of their decisions are boneheaded and mostly for show, I’m old and remember how fuckin’ awful the air quality was in the 70’s, so I don’t hate on CARB.

Nathan
Nathan
29 days ago
Reply to  Jnnythndrs

CARB can continue to regulate any engines produced in the state of California, just not those produced in another state

Bags
Bags
29 days ago
Reply to  Jnnythndrs

Increase states’ rights unless we disagree with that state’s decision, ammirite?

PresterJohn
PresterJohn
1 month ago
Reply to  Nathan

Man I hope so, but I think we’re going to need legislation to remove the waiver process or they’ll be back like a zombie at some point

Nathan
Nathan
1 month ago
Reply to  PresterJohn

I doubt that any legislation relating to CARB could be passed under budget reconciliation so it does not need 60 votes in the senate. I think it is much more likely that the supreme court confirms that states are not allowed to ban any product legally produced in another state.

Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
1 month ago

electric school buses, electric walk-in vans”

These are actually needed, whereas giant RVs for rich people… aren’t.

MrLM002
MrLM002
1 month ago

Sadly most traditional school busses I see are pretty awful. They’re super high up so much so you need stairs to get in them.

Busses with low floors and air suspension make a lot more sense as school buses, and for kids in wheelchairs you don’t need a heavy, bulky, and complex lift, you just have a fold out or slide out ramp that extends and retracts with one button.

Those should be what electric school busses are, instead most school busses are of the archaic design we’ve been using for longer than I’ve been alive, including the overwhelming majority of electric school bus designs I see.

Last edited 1 month ago by MrLM002
Jonathan Hendry
Jonathan Hendry
1 month ago
Reply to  MrLM002

Yeah, low-floor buses would be good, but I think schools typically don’t get the fancy stuff you see in public transit buses, like extendable ramps, kneeling, or low floors.

Kids in wheelchairs mostly get the small vans with lifts, don’t they?

I suppose for a school you know who needs accommodation and exactly where they are, so it’s more economical to get some special vans. Public transit you never know who’s going to be riding, and never know where they’ll get off and get on, so it’s more important to have the accommodations built in to the baseline vehicle.

Lardo
Lardo
1 month ago

they get the short bus

LastOpenRoad
LastOpenRoad
1 month ago

Welcome to the United States, where we don’t require anyone to demonstrate a need to own a particular type of vehicle. Living full-time in a motorhome, as many people do, is not limited to the wealthy either.

Nlpnt
Nlpnt
1 month ago

Multi-stop service over a fixed urban or suburban route is an ideal use case for electrification, too, where an RV isn’t.

197
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x