400 gallon grey/black tank!?!

[TrevorH]

Where on earth would you put a 400 gallon grey/black tank?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1955-GMC-Bus-Motorhome_W0QQitemZ150220090719QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item150220090719

[HighTechRedneck]

 
In the photos, it looks like actually two tanks. 

If run up to full, that is a lot of weight.

Looks like the poor bus has a number of issues.

[Tenor]

This is an old FEMA bus (NOT FMCA).  It was built so an entire city could use the potty....

[Lin]

Must be a mistake.  Those tanks are not that big.

[buddydawg]

400 Gallons!  I don't even know if there are any busnuts THAT full of it!   

[HighTechRedneck]

Must be a mistake.  Those tanks are not that big.

You're right. I don't know what the bay height is in a 4104 but they don't appear to be more than 2' wide and 3' long.  Based on that, they look to me to be about 2' tall. Using dimensions in that range would make them somewhere around 80-100 gallons each.

[Jerry Liebler]

And I thought my 220 gallon waste tank was big!  But I too distrust the size given, it doesn't look as big as big as my tank.
regards
Jerry 4107 1120

[cody]

I agree, I've seen the tank that Jerry has, it's huge, there is no way the tank listed on the ebay bus is twice as big.  Jerry's tank is so big he was contacted in regards to renting his bus for the democratic convention, luckily he is busy that week lol.

[Sean]

Hmm,  I calculated it based on eye-balling the dimensions (about 7' long for the two of them, and perhaps 2.5' square on the ends, maybe a bit larger) and camp up with 329 gallons.  So 400 may be a bit of a stretch, but not by all that much.

That being said, the four girls and one boy are just waaay more maintenance than I want to do on a bus.

-Sean
http://ourodyssey.blogspot.com

[Len Silva]

For those like us who like to camp in Florida State Parks where they have water and electric at each site but only a dump station for waste, I think it's a good idea.  The larger the waste tank, the better.  Weight should not be an issue, you are not going to be driving down the highway with full waste tanks.

Len

[HB of CJ]

Wow...all you people would make great police detectives....just by looking at all the neat pictures all sorts of capacities and things were figured out.  Serious!  Maybe the coach was intended to be parked before all the tanks were to be...hugh....employeed to absolute full by "distressed" people you don't even know, then totally emptyed (sp?) before driving?  Seems like a lot of weight to me. 

[HighTechRedneck]

Len, I know what you mean. We generally stay at state/county parks that only have centralized dump locations.  A very large waste tank would be nice.  HB, I'm not proclaiming to know the intentions of the one who did it, nor their engineering knowledge.  It doesn't take detective skills,  just a little math is all it takes to figure out capacities.

I would be afraid of potentially 6000 pounds slung underneath.  Maybe it would not be a problem.  I am certainly not an expert on the engineering of the 4104.  I am much more familiar with an RTS, but I'm not even an engineering expert on that.  But just for example, let's consider Harrison Bay State Park, one that I am familiar with.  The roads within it involve a lot of slopes, both in-line and side to side, that certainly flex things, within design limits before you even get to the sewer dump.

What I don't know is this:  Let's say that a non "expert" filled the fresh tank before leaving (maybe they would be boondocking next).  Let's say that they had a full waste tank until they get to the sewer dump on the way out of the campground.  And just for kicks let's say their fuel tank was nearly full.  That would be around 6000 pounds underneath.  Now they pull out of their campsite and start the twisting and turning around the various turns and slopes getting out of the camping area.  Was it built to handle that much weight in that area?  I don't know.  My first guess would be that it wasn't.

[TrevorH]

I too am not an engineer but logic would say they were definitely not designed for that.  Reason being they were designed to haul people around with their personal baggage and built accordingly.  There would be no reason to build anything that had much more capability than this as it just wasted metal, money and weight to move around.  Makes sense to me but I could be off, it happens

[Busted Knuckle]

That would be around 6000 pounds underneath.  Was it built to handle that much weight in that area?  I don't know.  My first guess would be that it wasn't.

I too am not an engineer but logic would say they were definitely not designed for that.  Reason being they were designed to haul people around with their personal baggage and built accordingly.  There would be no reason to build anything that had much more capability than this as it just wasted metal, money and weight to move around.  Makes sense to me but I could be off, it happens

Ahah finally a question about conversions I can shed a little bit of light on! OK well let's just say that from my understanding it is generally figured that the average passanger will have 2 bags @ 50 #'s each X the normal seated capacity of your coach. So let's say a 35'er is what 35-38 X 50 = 3500-3900#'s , 40'er = 4700-4900#'s, 45'er = 5500-5900#'s ! Ok that being said ours always have those superduper trunk sized & an "small" 45-60# extra bag too! So the way I see the engineers surley allowed plenty of "human nature" extra capacities, didn't they? LOL! OK so any way ya look at it, I'd say way to much CRAP! LOL!
FWIW   BK 

[Busted Knuckle]

One more question. Where did you get the figure of 6000#'s? Just curious 400 X 10#'s (probably high)= 4000#'s & 100 gal of fresh would be 800#'s FWIW   BK