EarthRoamer XV Finished... Pics Inside

[jingram]

http://www.earthroamer.com/jp/img_9414_master_std.jpg

http://www.earthroamer.com/jp/img_0321_letter%20size_std.jpg

http://www.earthroamer.com/jp/img_9636%20cropped_std.jpg

http://www.earthroamer.com/jp/img_0076_std.jpg

More on their site. (http://www.earthroamer.com/jp/) Now if only the cost wasn't so high!

Jack

:26_7_2:

[pskhaat]

Total drool.

[j_nigrelli]

what type of mounting holds the tent without legs?

or was the shot just for the "wow" factor?



$$$ = wow!

nice looking rig, though

[jingram]

Hopefully I didn't insinuate that it was mine. I stumbled across the pics in one of the Jeep blogs I keep an eye on. The tent picture is a bit peculiar for sure. I honestly didn't think they would have a production vehicle completed already, after all those sketches only came out a few months ago. Certainly will make a very capable setup for those who can afford it or that want a turnkey solution.

[jingram]

More specs:

Highlights:
• Electric motor-powered Loftop™ opens to provide nine feet of interior stand-up height, a kevlar rope-supported, cantilevered queen size bed, and a combination tent/screen room under the rear of the Loftop™.
• Interchangeable “skins” for the Loftop™ let you customize your rig for different weather conditions and are available in all-season, extreme cold weather, and high temperature radiant barrier designs.
• Composite sandwich construction body provides a high strength-to-weight ratio.
• 6100 btu forced air furnace, electric fan ventilation and large windows with built in screens and sunshades keep you comfortable year round.
• Engine-heated 4 gallon hot water tank and a 25 gallon fresh water supply provide plenty of hot and cold water to the indoor galley and shower. Inside cassette toilet with 4.5 gallon externally accessible cassette provides
an elegant solution to waste management – no more dragging a porta-potti through your camper!
• Ultra efficient 4 cubic foot chest refrigerator/freezer utilizes cold plate technology to keep your food and beverages cold.
• 80 watt solar panel and 210 amp-hour AGM battery bank provides power to spare.
• In-dash GPS navigation/AV system with upgraded amplifier and speakers keeps you informed and entertained.
• HID off road lights, 8 cfm air compressor, 9000 pound winch, winch bumper and upgraded suspension equips you for any adventure

[66Landy]

Not that I have the $100,000 or so to plunk down on this oh so desirable machine, but even if I did, where would I put the kids? Camping just not camping without your little ones!

[kodiak1232003]

kinda lame in my opinion...

i think 99% of the home built rigs :safari-rig: on this site are more functional, better looking and about $75-95,000 cheaper...

[j_nigrelli]

ditto

[LUISJG]

I like the front bumper

[jingram]

Looks like an AEV bumper without the stock fogs in it.

[Dmarchand]

I'm astounded they didn't hide the solenoid pack for the winch. Truck looks great and is innovative, but that is grade school.

[cshontz]

I'm astounded they didn't hide the solenoid pack for the winch. Truck looks great and is innovative, but that is grade school.

From what I've heard, the exterior is over 90% finished, and the interior is "a long way off". I'm sure alot of what we see inside isn't final.

[toyrunner95]

i like the idea, but the camper could be changed alot, espically the fold out tent, i would much rather see a pop up tent that came streight up instead of fold out, it seems finiky and unreliable.

the idea is sound. and if they would make a detachable camper bed for like a toyota or a mini pickup i would buy one. kinda like the super camper.

[Diesel Joe]

Ah 100,000 grand... Ya sure buddy.

If im going to spend that Ill double it and get the REAL Earth Roamer.

[pwc]

Pictures of the inside can be found on their site
http://www.earthroamer.com/galleries/xv-jp_interior/

http://www.earthroamer.com/galleries/xv-jp_interior/img_0682_std.jpg

Hmmm....those lights look familiar....

http://www.earthroamer.com/galleries/xv-jp_interior/img_0654_std.jpg

http://www.expeditionswest.com/arctic_ocean/planning.html

[SOAZ]

Its beautiful frankly. Too bad there isn't a decent stock motor. If you are spending that kind of money I hope it has one of the V8's that AEV puts in their wrangler packages?

I can see into the future 10 years: Myself and other do-it-your-selfers are cutting on our trucks to copy and turn our suvs or trucks into something similar!

[ujoint]

More power would be great, like a 6.1 HEMI!! But then you'd just HAVE to get some D60's under it, right?

[cshontz]

Underhood is stock to retain as much of the factory warranty as possible.

[SOAZ]

Thats true, its a jeep gonna want that warranty!! Har Har Har!!!:jump:
Just kidding!

[18seeds]

I am not a big fan of it but you have to give ER credit for their fit and finish is amazing.

[viter]

I think the thing looks great - very functional, innovative, stylish, and built with quality!
I especially like the bed with a view - looks very inviting... ;)
http://www.earthroamer.com/galleries/xv-jp_interior/img_0672_std.jpg

but yeah, if only it was more affordable... but as always, what else can one expect for a custom very time intensive handmade product built in small quantities. now, if they were to get together with Jeep and talk them into offering this as a factory option... perhaps at a run of say 5000 or so a limited edition Jeep Earth Roamer could cost more around $50000...

it is nice to dream.....

[peanut'sdad]

I emailed the guy a few months back about this thing...
I asked him if he ever considered the possibility of making a Camper/canopy type hard top to mount onto a tj. Kinda like the canopy of a pickup...
He came back with a "snooty" remark saying that they didn't build "lessor" type equipment. For a hundred thousand bucks... I'll keep My Jeep and maybe run the idea to some other canopy company.

[calamaridog]

Underhood is stock to retain as much of the factory warranty as possible.

I think what he meant was why did Jeep go with the minivan v6 in the first place.

I was betting on the 3.7 v6 and 4.7 v8 family of engines myself, and was disappointed they were not used. Those are good motors.

[panzer]

It looks like a plastic model in a train set...might not be but it kinda looks like one.

[VikingVince]

kinda lame in my opinion...

i think 99% of the home built rigs :safari-rig: on this site are more functional, better looking and about $75-95,000 cheaper...

Your point is well taken...maybe not quite that much cheaper, but certainly ALOT cheaper. I could redesign the interior of my truckbed/flippac to include all the same amenities and it would essentially be the same thing. In fact, I've thought about doing it. I have about $8K in mods and equipment. (got the flippac used) But if you bought a new Tacoma TRD ($25K) and purchased everything else new, you could create a similar rig for around $40K. Hmmmmm...but then if you start considering that ER's Jeep probably costs $10K more, LABOR, productions costs, overhead, marketing, etc, one can start to see why their rig costs what it does...oh, and plus they have to make a profit!:ylsmoke:

[Bongo Boy]

It's got to be tough to mix an off-road capable rig with a fully-integrated mobile home; I'd have to give the designers a lot of credit for trying it. This looks like it would be as successful as any such attempt could be. No question from the photos, at least--they did a beautiful job in the interior.

But, the concept itself just doesn't make any sense for me, and man do I find it butt-ugly (from the outside). Anyway, I guess I'm just not 'getting it' when it comes to marrying 'base camp' and 'extreme mobility' into one vehicle. It's just not something I'd want to do in the first place. The show-stopper, though, is the overall deployed height--besides not wanting to climb up (and down) to get into my sleeping quarters, it just seems too limiting in terms of where it can be deployed--especially accounting for the even greater (even if only slightly) clearance needed to swing that cover open.

Anyway, I guess my view is that it's a small, self-propelled Winnebago with the added cost of a Rubicon platform that I now can't practically use for my intended purpose of a jeep, and the added inconvenience of a tent in a tree-house. I can see how this is exactly what some folks would want, but I can't imagine why--the Rubicon is no longer going to go on many of the (easy) trails I like to drive, yet I still have a tent and not a 'real' camper. The paisto resisto though is that I now have to take my campsite with me wherever I go--those exploratory day excursions. Absolutely not going to do that.

...and for $100k, I could get over 10 years of holiday time camping at Ritz-Carltons. :)

[VikingVince]

The show-stopper, though, is the overall deployed height--besides not wanting to climb up (and down) to get into my sleeping quarters, it just seems too limiting in terms of where it can be deployed--especially accounting for the even greater (even if only slightly) clearance needed to swing that cover open.

the Rubicon is no longer going to go on many of the (easy) trails I like to drive, yet I still have a tent and not a 'real' camper.
. :)

FWIW, I have never had any issues deploying my Flippac anywhere. Granted, their design needs a larger footprint because the flippac opens to the back but I can't think of any situations I've been in where that would be a problem either...and I've been in lot of different type of places.
As far as climbing up and down...well, I guess different strokes for different folks...but, for me, the flippac easily creates an interior space with standing room as well as a very comfortable and dry place to sleep off the ground....and, because of all the zip windows, it's wonderfully open in nice weather with great air flow.

And the modified Rubicon is still going to handle any 'easy' trail with no issues...In fact I would say that it could handle almost any trail that it could before the mods...all that's been done is slightly raise its COG...that's never been a problem for me with a similarly raised COG...although, admittedly, I've never done more than a 3.0 on a scale of 5.0...and maybe a few short portions of 3.5 (I have 31" tires and I don't have a locker)...but anything 3.0 and below is really no problem...and this Jeep is more capable than my Tacoma.

[Bongo Boy]

I think it's a beautiful implementation of the concept. But no, it's NOT going to handle any 'easy' trails. The stock vehicle can barely handle the easy trails I'm accustomed to driving, this unit won't even come close. But not to argue. There are many, many trails it will handle, I'm sure.

The bottom line is, it's not for me, I think it's brain dead ugly, and the idea makes no sense. That's just me. The concept has nothing to do with 'adventure' or 'expedition' as these ideas gel in my head, but I know that doesn't mean anything universal. Even if someone made a compelling case for why I needed this, I'd resist until my last breath.

That's how much I think it sucks, is unattractive, is brain-dead, ugly, and a dumb idea.

But, OTOH, I hope the guy makes a fortune selling them, because I absolutely love innovation and small business. The market he's targeting is not the market I'm in, but I love to see small business succeed. You go girl!

[VikingVince]

I think it's a beautiful implementation of the concept. But no, it's NOT going to handle any 'easy' trails. The stock vehicle can barely handle the easy trails I'm accustomed to driving, this unit won't even come close. But not to argue. There are many, many trails it will handle, I'm sure.


I'm confused...how can a stock Jeep Rubicon not handle easy trails?

[teotwaki]

I'm confused...how can a stock Jeep Rubicon not handle easy trails?

Try to define "easy".

easy = vehicle's capabilities + driver's experience+ terrain

[VikingVince]

Try to define "easy".

easy = vehicle's capabilities + driver's experience+ terrain

Because I referred to the 5 point scale (definitions are somewhere on this site), "easy" is generally understood to mean trails in the 1.0-2.0 range. The scale has specific criteria by which one can judge whether their vehicle and experience can handle the terrain, hopefully without accident or injury.

[teotwaki]

Such scaling systems are useful for those who mostly already have enough experience on trails and need to communicate with others who use the same rating system. Note what is said below "there is no standard", so how can we expect others who read your message to have read the Scotty System and have any idea what is being referred to?

http://www.expeditionswest.com/resources/expedition_handbook/trail_rating.htm

Notes on the "Scotty Scale", emphasis added by me:

Trail Rating Guide

When using the Expeditions West Guides it is important to understand our definition of a specific trail rating used in our web site, as there is no standard rating system available. In addition, the difficulty of trails, and the capabilities of vehicles in recent years has changed dramatically.

We use the 1-5 scale, with intermediary numbers (like 2.5) to classify a trail. It is also possible to use a 1-10 scale, which is fine, though not as common. It is easy to convert our ratings to the 1-10 scale by simply doubling the rating number we use.

The one factor that can never be rated is driver experience. All of my ratings assume a driver with a good knowledge of their vehicles capabilities and dimensions, line selection, and basic accident avoidance techniques like left foot braking, correcting for a skid, throttle control, and threshold braking.

Vehicle Selection: Choosing a vehicle that is appropriate to the terrain being driven is a critical component of succesfully negotiating a trail. We have provided a chart of vehicles considered adequate for traveling a specific rating.

I think that claiming something is "generally understood" is really lame and snooty and if you had instead linked us to the Scotty Scale we would have appreciated your effort to share and to educate.

After reading the Scotty Scale I go back to the basics:

easy = vehicle's capabilities + driver's experience + terrain

[Darren]

The market he's targeting is not the market I'm in

Exactly. Which is why you feel need to put down the company and the concept, just as a few others have done here. If it's not for you, move along. You would've been wiser not to comment at all. You are out to lunch if you don't think that can handle many "easy" trails. Being that you're in Colorado, I would challenge all day long that it would handle, by far, the majority of the trails we have here, but because this vehicle isn't catered to you, and you're so upset by the price, you elect to post with ego than with validity. Great post.

[kcowyo]

I think that claiming something is "generally understood" is really lame and snooty....

So is your post.

Vince is asking legitmate questions regarding Bongo Boy's comments. BB's comments regarding "easy trails" were confusing and misleading.

Your insults are neither necessary or welcome in this situation. It is as much a new member's responsibility to get familiar with a forums lingo and standards (ie: use the search feature), as it is a longtime member's responsibility to link to previously posted materiel for the benefit of people who want to make random, out of place, unresearched and negative comments.

Bongo Boy doesn't like the XV-JP because he doesn't go further than 100 miles from the nearest Starbucks, by his own admission (http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?p=64096#post64096). Fair enough. If one prefers to spend all of their time on the hardcore Holy Cross-type trails of CO, this may not be the best vehicle.

His comments added nothing to the thread in the form of sharing or educating. They only showed his disdain for the product and served to toot his own horn that he prefers the "harder stuff." We have a tradition and guidelines here about knocking other vehicle manufacturers. I find publicly crapping on a product you don't care for to be more offensive than not linking to an easily found trail rating scale.

Lighten up -

[teotwaki]

So is your post.

Vince is asking legitmate questions regarding Bongo Boy's comments. BB's comments regarding "easy trails" were confusing and misleading.

Your insults are neither necessary or welcome in this situation. It is as much a new member's responsibility to get familiar with a forums lingo and standards (ie: use the search feature), as it is a longtime member's responsibility to link to previously posted materiel for the benefit of people who want to make random, out of place, unresearched and negative comments.

Bongo Boy doesn't like the XV-JP because he doesn't go further than 100 miles from the nearest Starbucks, by his own admission (http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?p=64096#post64096). Fair enough. If one prefers to spend all of their time on the hardcore Holy Cross-type trails of CO, this may not be the best vehicle.

His comments added nothing to the thread in the form of sharing or educating. They only showed his disdain for the product and served to toot his own horn that he prefers the "harder stuff." We have a tradition and guidelines here about knocking other vehicle manufacturers. I find publicly crapping on a product you don't care for to be more offensive than not linking to an easily found trail rating scale.

Lighten up -

Maybe you are mixing up two different things? BB's dislike of the ER vehicle and my dislike of "generally understood" comments?


I never agreed with BB nor defended him and that can't be read into my post.

I never claimed that Vince could not question BB or that BB could not be publicly castigated for trashing a vendors product in public.

However, there is also nothing wrong with questioning the source of an unknown trail rating standard that it turns out is admitted as being unique to this forum.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying that the use of "generally understood" is unfriendly and also not in the spirit of the forum. To quote Vince's earlier post "..I've never done more than a 3.0 on a scale of 5.0...". Nowhere does he say that it was an obscure forum standard until I asked for a definition of "easy". Just how was I to search for this rating system until Vince at least said it was on the forum somewhere??

Once the source was clarified I did search out and post the "Scotty Scale" and the link to it. How is that unresearched, random and negative?

Before you admonish someone to "lighten up" you should "Preview Post" your own message before posting? Maybe delete insults such as "..doesn't go further than 100 miles from the nearest Starbucks"? And throw out ".. people who want to make random, out of place, unresearched and negative comments"? Since you are a member of the "Expedition Portal Team" your comments are "necessary and welcome"??? Is your behavior the official portal Forum approach?

Before you jump on my case again I would suggest that you look in a mirror.

[Kermit]

Teowaki's post didn't seem at all lame and snooty. In my eyes he was just stating that there isn't a standard trail rating system. (Hell, some people have a hard time driving down tarmac) What is easy for some is hard for others. How can you rate one's emtional stress on the trail?


As for Bongo Boy's statements, I see exactly where he is coming from. You really don't need all of the Gee Gaws some of these guys and girls have to enjoy the experience. I have seen some of the "expedition journey" pictures out there. Very pretty vehicles with nary a scratch...heck, you can take a car down some of the roads.

A ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND dollar Jeep with a Flip-Pac intergrated into it, yes, a little excessive and only for the elite citizens of the People's Rebublic of the United States. I wouldn't feel comfortable taken such a vehicle off road and into Third World countries. But hey, that is me....

If a person can afford such a luxury...go right ahead and do so.

[cshontz]

Which raises the question, is it even possible to form an entirely non-offensive post in a heated discussion such as this? I, for one, like to encourage e-drama - because without it, the Internet would be a very boring place.

:lurk:

[teotwaki]

Which raises the question, is it even possible to form an entirely non-offensive post in a heated discussion such as this? I, for one, like to encourage e-drama - because without it, the Internet would be a very boring place.

:lurk:

Dang!! You made me laugh so hard! Thanks!

[kcowyo]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying that the use of "generally understood" is unfriendly and also not in the spirit of the forum.

No there is not. It's a shame you didn't phrase it that way originally.


Before you admonish someone to "lighten up" you should "Preview Post" your own message before posting? Maybe delete insults such as "..doesn't go further than 100 miles from the nearest Starbucks"? And throw out ".. people who want to make random, out of place, unresearched and negative comments"?

I didn't realize directly quoting someone was insulting. I still don't.



Since you are a member of the "Expedition Portal Team" your comments are "necessary and welcome"??? Is your behavior the official portal Forum approach?

I didn't give myself that label of "team member." It was placed with my profile following my contributions here. I doubt many would consider it the "official approach", but it is my approach. Feel free to add me to your Ignore List if it bothers you.


Before you jump on my case again I would suggest that you look in a mirror.

The mirror loves me and I would suggest PM's would be a better place for any additional discussion on this matter.

[Kermit]

Which raises the question, is it even possible to form an entirely non-offensive post in a heated discussion such as this? I, for one, like to encourage e-drama - because without it, the Internet would be a very boring place.

:lurk:

X2.....:clapsmile

e-drama...that's a good one!

[teotwaki]

No there is not. It's a shame you didn't phrase it that way originally..

It is an unrated and undocumented phrasing system. As a newbie you need to go search for it somewhere..... :ylsmoke:


I didn't realize directly quoting someone was insulting. I still don't..

.....still don't realize that they were not quotes but your own phrasing?? :xxrotflma


I didn't give myself that label of "team member." It was placed with my profile following my contributions here. I doubt many would consider it the "official approach", but it is my approach. Feel free to add me to your Ignore List if it bothers you...

Oh, so your pronouncement about "forum spirit" is just your opinion based on a large quantity of attack messages here? OK. If you desire to be ignored then don't post your attacks publicly. :bigbossHL:


The mirror loves me and I would suggest PM's would be a better place for any additional discussion on this matter.

You should have been the first to send a PM rather than slinging your comments in public then.:exclaim:

[Ursidae69]

http://www.earthroamer.com/galleries/xv-jp_interior/img_0672_std.jpg


What a great view.

:arabia:

[teotwaki]

What a great view.

:arabia:


Even though this would not be the vehicle for me and realizing that the camera lens adds distortion, I was blown away by the view and how it all looks so factory-ish. Would be cool to get some place to buy some for rentals so that we could have the chance to play with one.

http://www.earthroamer.com/galleries/xv-jp_interior/img_0672_std.jpg

[bigreen505]

You are out to lunch if you don't think that can handle many "easy" trails. Being that you're in Colorado, I would challenge all day long that it would handle, by far, the majority of the trails we have here,

Darren brings up a couple interesting points. First being, who exactly is the target market? $100,000 puts this squarely in Sportsmobile territory, but the two are clearly targeting different buyers just based on the physical size of the vehicles. Could you imagine a couple living out the XV-JP for months or years at a time? So who is the target market? People who can afford to buy one, traveling solo or as a couple over trails up to about a 3.0 rating, primarily for relatively short trips, who don't bring much stuff with them and certainly not bikes or kayaks (I guess a hitch mount could work for bikes)?

Second, I'm less interested in what the vehicle is capable of, rather what is a reasonable level of capability for this type of vehicle. Most of the trails to get to beautiful places to (rather than day trip rock crawling) are not difficult or at least there is a bypass for less hardcore trucks and drivers. Clearly a Sportsmobile can be made to be very capable, but the size always will be an issue. While the Earthroamer may be a capable platform, what is the chance that the height will be an issue?

Thoughts?

[Kermit]

I would assume Eathroamer is trying to get the American version of this.

Does anyone know what one of these go for in Europe? I can't seem to find pricing.

I think there is pricing in here, but, I don't understand German...http://www.innovation-campers.de/d_main.html

http://www.innovation-campers.de/toyota/images/111.jpg

http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4795

[articulate]

...who exactly is the target market? $100,000 puts this squarely in Sportsmobile territory, but the two are clearly targeting different buyers just based on the physical size of the vehicles. Could you imagine a couple living out the XV-JP for months or years at a time? So who is the target market? People who can afford to buy one, traveling solo or as a couple over trails up to about a 3.0 rating, primarily for relatively short trips, who don't bring much stuff with them and certainly not bikes or kayaks (I guess a hitch mount could work for bikes)?

Thoughts?
Interesting. I'd gather that this XV-JP is aimed right retired folk (early?) with time and means to travel and who would likely buy an RV or bus to tow their 4x4 vehicle if this thing hadn't come along. I think there is a perfect market for this thing, and they want to spend their money. The original ER is enormous - I'd be confident to suspect that plenty of research went into developing this Jeep. And that research wasn't done on internet discussion forums for God's sake.

I like your approach to this topic, Bill. :beer:

[Bongo Boy]

Exactly. Which is why you feel need to put down the company and the concept, just as a few others have done here.Your interpretation, I guess, of what to me was a very clear compliment of the implementation, and the folks who made it happen. I believe I was explicitly complimentary in these areas.

I was also very clear that I was sharing my opinions, nothing more--since I used 'IMO' and 'for me' extensively. My opinions don't require any validation. As for the price, no where did I even hint I took issue with the pricing--I specifically used a little smiley to humorously-suggest how I could otherwise spend the money; I think that 'camping' and 'Ritz Carlton' should have made it clear this was a humorous comment, not a serious jab at the pricing. I have never had any issue with anyone or any company based on how they choose to price their offerings.

I thought folks were inviting themselves to share their opinions--I shared mine and am surprised anyone would find them offensive, unless glowingly-positive comments are the only sort that are welcome.

I DID mis-word the 'any easy trails' comment. My intended meaning was to counter the claim that the vehicle would negotiate ALL easy trails. The specific trails I have in mind are flat, level, no obstacles other than overhead clearance (rock and/or trees). I also was quick to admit there are likely many trails the unit wouldn't have problems with. I hardly think this is a big issue.

On a public forum where the riff-raff are allowed in, one might reasonably expect a broad spectrum of opinion (substantiated to your satisfaction, or not), expressed in a variety of ways. However, I will happily limit my opinions here to: none, those that are solicited by those who have been authorized to make such solicitations, or to more constructive comments.

I have only the best wishes for all business endeavors, especially small business. I sincerely hope this venture is as successful as those involved expect it to be.

[pete.wilson]

Hey

Has Earthroamer comes out with an approximate price for their XV-JP?
Figure a base Jeep 4 door at about 30K give or take. I haven't seen how much a rubicon version would be.

[viter]

here you go - http://www.earthroamer.com/tab_xpedition_vehicles/xvjp6_pricing.html

[offroadchef]

I would assume Eathroamer is trying to get the American version of this.

Does anyone know what one of these go for in Europe? I can't seem to find pricing.

I think there is pricing in here, but, I don't understand German...http://www.innovation-campers.de/d_main.html

http://www.innovation-campers.de/toyota/images/111.jpg

http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4795

I found the price list, do you want to know about the land rover or land cruiser,

They are on a trip to South America until October, so any specif question would have to wait until then. will look at the price list more closely/ What prices are of interest right now? Will try to do my best with the translation.

Markus:)

[ckkone]

Wow at that price they will sell a ton of those things.....

[pete.wilson]

Hey

At $77k for the base price seems a bit on the high side, I would think $60-65K would be a bit more realistics; but I must admit I haven't seen one ouside of these pictures. I agree with some of the other folks and Take the $77k and buy a new vehicle and build one up myself and then take the remaining money (+/- $25k) and have a great vacation or two. I'm sure it's a very capable rig, even if it's not a rockcrawler nor was it designed to be. If people like it, they will buy it no matter what the cost, and if it's outside your price range, you can't afford it so there's no use bad mouthing it. I like the looks of it but I will never purchase one; too expensive for my budget. Good work to Earthroamer just the same.

[ckkone]

That is $77K plus the cost of a Jeep $33K = $110K

[pete.wilson]

Hey

Obviously I read that wrong! Oh well, there is still one truth to the whole matter; It's out of my price range. Especially when my new 4 bedroom house was only about 35k more and after 10 years, if I sell it, I should be able to turn a profit. I don't think the roamer will!

[viter]

xv-jp made the big news round-up in truck trend magazine - http://www.trucktrend.com/features/news/2007/163_0708_max_payload_auto_news/sprinter_ford_flex.html

along with more rumors about land cruiser diesel being prepared by toyota for sale in us soon, but that's for another forum...

and to get even more off-topic ;) - looks like diesels in general are coming, the sprinter vans, cadillac cts diesel, the land cruiser, special bluetec v6 diesel for new touareq 2 that will be legal for CA, etc.... check out all 3 pages of the link above