Insurance with roof raise?

[Ozbozz57]

As someone who's dealt with various codes over my working life, I can say that learning to read and interpret codes is a skill that's worth mastering. "DIY noobs" become less "nooby" in the effort. Learning is generally cumulative.
Trying to rewrite the standards so they're less technical would be an awful job.
Noobs, put on your thinking caps!

 

[TaliaDPerkins]

Trying to rewrite the standards so they're less technical would be an awful job.

Yet it is needful to the extent that videos/white papers demonstrating meeting the standards and their application to skoolies is what is needed for someone filling out AlphaHare's PDF to have reliable meaning.
Noobs do already have on their thinking caps . . . where they are not the sort that have helped produce the insurance industry's skepticism of our efforts generally.

 

[Mr P]

"If you cut and splice in more metal it is no longer an engineered structure."

And that's the kind of FUD which should be ignored.

After all, insurance companies ignore that every time they ensure a vehicle which is modded or has a custom fabricated body or section.

For a variety of reasons a welded join will rarely be stronger than the original material, but will frequently fail in the heat affected zone near the weld . . .

Under the inside skin of my bus, there are welds and spot welds all over the ribs. Clearly, Thomas is not that concerned.

Skoolie.com sells inserts up to 24", and the vertical extent of a rib above the chair rail is about 4' (or more, 4' is a minimum). Raising the roof by 2' reduces the overall factor of safety by about a factor of 1.5, make it 1.65 for good measure) . . .
. . . and that neglects the strength added by reskinning window deleted sections. The cumulative strength of the skin in tension resists the rib's deformation in bending (the skin itself resists bending in no way at all, but the ribs can't bend without the rivets pulling on the stretching skin). So it's not really as bad as 1.65.

The thing is full custom fabricated bodies go on the road every day, they are not "engineered" and insurance doesn't bat an eye.

Which is why your comment may sound correct to the uneducated but is FUD.

Well, I had to look up "FUD". "Fear, uncertainty, doubt" is what I found. FUD is the accusation in reply to "If you cut and splice in more metal it is no longer an engineered structure.". I find that the quote is...true. It is NOT "FUD", it's fact. Facts don't care about our feelings, hopes, or opinions.


There was also much discussion about wood stoves and the ways to secure them for safety in a crash. That is very important, yet, a homeowner policy will also frown on a wood stove. As of yet, nobody has mentioned that, or how that affects schoolie insurance. Is that because "we" don't fully understand the reasons insurance frowns on our "mods"?

 

[TaliaDPerkins]

Well, I had to look up "FUD". "Fear, uncertainty, doubt" is what I found. FUD is the accusation in reply to "If you cut and splice in more metal it is no longer an engineered structure.". I find that the quote is...true. It is NOT "FUD", it's fact. Facts don't care about feelings and dreams.

It does not matter, it is not relevant, that it is not an "engineered system" because most large vehicles with custom bodies are not engineered systems -- and they are on the road insured. That is a fact. Your "fact" is not relevant.

So drop it or stay a jackass.

Building a skoolie is about feelings and dreams, and those are the only reasons anyone does anything.

 

[TaliaDPerkins]

There was also much discussion about wood stoves and the ways to secure them for safety in a crash. That is very important, yet, a homeowner policy will also frown on a wood stove. As of yet, nobody has mentioned that, or how that affects schoolie insurance. Is that because "we" don't fully understand the reasons insurance frowns on our "mods"?

And yet, my home has exactly that combustion heating, and is insured. You have no point, drop it.

 

[Mr P]

My "point" is that stationary dwellings face "wood heat" scrutiny. That's from a perceived risk of fire damage.

We might shortsightedly think that a liability insurance policy would not have to cover that, however, as someone on this site pointed out weeks ago, if our bus burns and sets fire to neighboring RVs, imagine the $$$$$$ claim.

Risks can be reasonably calculated. We need the information/logic that insurance companies use to calculate risk(s) in order to "play their game".

Or, we can image that our welding mods to a carefully designed system will be stronger than initially designed, even though we might have zero training as a structural engineer or welder.

 

[Mr P]

.. is about feelings and dreams, and those are the only reasons anyone does anything.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that "feelings and dreams" are the only reasons anyone does anything?

(I asked that question out of logic, no dream or feeling was used.)

 

[TaliaDPerkins]

My "point" is that stationary dwellings face "wood heat" scrutiny. That's from a perceived risk of fire damage.

We might shortsightedly think that a liability insurance policy would not have to cover that, however, as someone on this site pointed out weeks ago, if our bus burns and sets fire to neighboring RVs, imagine the $$$$$$ claim.

Risks can be reasonably calculated. We need the information/logic that insurance companies use to calculate risk(s) in order to "play their game".

Or, we can image that our welding mods to a carefully designed system will be stronger than initially designed, even though we might have zero training as a structural engineer or welder.

And as I mentioned you have no point. Solid fuel heating in a vehicle does not face scrutiny -- but mindless exclusion. Knowing what insurance company's criteria are is needed but not sufficient, we need easy enough standards to follow that people can build to meet those criteria -- and if as I suspect those criteria do not meaningfully exist, we need to create them. For reasons already given, your fantasies about "engineered structures" have no relevance whatsoever, many, many vehicles in this weight class are not engineered structures.

We are back to, you should grow and drop it.

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”​

​

― George Bernard Shaw

You simply think anyone wanting to improve things is unreasonable. We get it, that is clear. Now drop it.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that "feelings and dreams" are the only reasons anyone does anything?

(I asked that question out of logic, no dream or feeling was used.)

Because facts and logic do nothing ever and have no intentions at all, they are tools towards the means and ends of feelings and dreams, of volition -- nothing more.

 

[Mr P]

The insurance industry uses "mindless exclusion"?
School buses are not engineered??

How did you arrive at those conclusions?? Acid trip???

 

[TaliaDPerkins]

The insurance industry uses "mindless exclusion"?

Yes, obviously so.

School buses are not engineered??

Liar, I never said that did I ?

You are now ignored, for being a lying ******* and troll. I guess that was your goal.

 

[TheHubbardBus]

Solid fuel heating in a vehicle does not face scrutiny -- but mindless exclusion. Knowing what insurance company's criteria are is needed but not sufficient, we need easy enough standards to follow that people can build to meet those criteria -- and if as I suspect those criteria do not meaningfully exist, we need to create them.

In what world do you live in where the insurance companies modify their policies to make it easier for you or others to follow? And mindless or not, when an insurance provider states "No <wood stoves, decks, roof raises, whatever>"... those limitations stand whether you agree with their justification or not. That's reality.

One thing I think you and select others are missing is that safety/risk is not likely the only factor here. Just as I might turn down business from a troublesome customer who still pays in green money, an insurance company might decide to exclude "X" based on it simply being more trouble that its worth to vet and deal with.

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

And for every unreasonable man who makes progress, how many more end up butting their head against the wall for nothing? If you wish to be 'unreasonable' and pursue your suggested course of action, by all means, do so. I have yet to see you actually do anything other than lament the way you think things should be, while hurling insults at those who disagree. Are you just waiting for someone else to do it for you, and chastening them until that happens? Because while this is entertaining, it isn't getting anything done. And the one person here who actually contributed something of significance received just as much cr*p from you as anyone else.

 

[TaliaDPerkins]

"In what world do you live in where the insurance companies modify their policies to make it easier for you or others to follow? "

Did I say they ever did?

"And for every unreasonable man who makes progress, how many more end up butting their head against the wall for nothing? "

That doesn't matter, does it? It's none of your concern -- except since you don't want things to get better you are concerned.

"And the one person here who actually contributed something of significance received just as much cr*p from you as anyone else"

Get bent, liar. Also ignored.

 

[Mr P]

Well Hubbard, attempts to reason with the unreasonable are futile.

I did appreciate the self contradiction of the "I'm ignoring you" announcement. lol

 

[TheHubbardBus]

Well Hubbard, attempts to reason with the unreasonable are futile.

I doubt either one of us expected any different considering the course this discussion has followed thus far .

One last word, @TaliaDPerkins...

I can only assume your anger is at least partly motivated by your own insurance struggles. If that's the case - to state what should be obvious (but apparently is not): it's not my fault! Nor is it the fault of anyone else who happens to differ in opinion. I have as much desire to deny you insurance as I have the power to change your ability to be insured. That is to say... not at all. I'd actually love to see y'all make something happen along these lines. I don't think you will, but if you did, I'd be cheering your success.

 

[Mr P]

......., we need easy enough standards to follow that people can build to meet those criteria -- and if as I suspect those criteria do not meaningfully exist, we need to create them.

This was close to reasonable. The unreasonable part is expecting "we" to create the standards, because standards (should be) the result of the study of facts. Opinions, dreams, hopes, ect, all take a back seat to facts.

 

[Jolly Roger bus 223]

i can set back and listen to yall bicker but can throw in my two pennies?
it would be great if someone with the time and knowledge and money would create a standards document for skoolie conversions and get it signed off on by insurance commission and maybe the FMVSA. my bus is old enough i dont have to be inspected but i do anyway just to have another set of eyes that are more experienced with suspension and things (my last inspection the mechanic said i took better care of it than my old lady? toss up?)
easy to access insurance would be great for those that do do roof raise, wood stove or whatever.
as a certified verified XRAYED govt. installation approved universal welder for structural and pipe.
without knowing what type of machine he used i would question the welds?
both of my stick machines will melt that thin mess and my little wire machine will do good with argon but he used flux core so some ugliness is to be expected and any wire machine penetration can be questionable at 16-18 guage its in the realm of good for a home owner machine.
once nikits bus was skinned it added the rigidity back in it. his welds might be questioned if he was hit by a tractor trailer or rolled over but almost any bus would be questioned in any of those conditions
there have been some decent opinions for this thread but alot of BS.
MR.P you have tried to call me BS quite a few times on mechanic stuff?
you can call me a side of the road or a shade tree mechanic without a shade tree but out of your fingers you sound like an experienced shop mechanic that only knows what a book tells you to do. correct me if i am wrong?
not trying to call BS only success if someone or groups can actually make this procedure happen.
i dont agree with a single person on everything but there are good ideas/intentions there.
someone just have the time, money and purpose to do it?

but i thought our purpose was to build our bus into what we want.
bus for personal use .
you do **** that causes problems in an accident thats on you.
you pull out in front of a tractor trailer your welds dont matter.
you run off a mountain road and roll down a hill then your welds might matter as a roller.
where the roof bows were figured into the rolling factor.
MR. P you are the BUTTHEAD that got me to respond?
forget me if i dont respond for a few days i actually still work for a living even though i think i am older than you and dont have as much free computer time

 

[AlphaHare]

Solid fuel heating in a vehicle does not face scrutiny

This is simply not true.

There is no solid fuel heating appliance UL listed for use in an RV. That is the reason you don't see them in factory RVs and why insurance companies won't touch them.

The Cubic Mini 'compliance version' is self-certified and not tested independently. It is not UL listed. Tiny Wood Stoves explicitly state they are not for residential use and they are not UL listed. Both companies show and/or discuss RVs - IMO this is fraudulent marketing.

 

[Jolly Roger bus 223]

why use anything that is not UL approved?
understand price but how cheap on a gas appliance.
co2 and many other monitoring devices.

 

[TaliaDPerkins]

This is simply not true.

Simmer down Alpha, they do not face scrutiny -- they are simply ignored as being even possibly worthy of being even looked at. That is not scrutiny.

Try to pay attention to the whole sentence and paragraph.

 

[TaliaDPerkins]

why use anything that is not UL approved?

Because it is all that exists that satisfies the functional requirements.