Ursa Minor Shell for Tacoma

I talked to the Ursa Minor Vehicle rep at an outdoor expo a few months back. He told me their company is coming out with a shell for the 5 ft. Tacoma bed that is similar to their jeep wrangler model. The shell weighs about 250 lbs. and will have a bit of a cab over, but you access the top sleeping area through the bed of the truck.....so that gives a covered area to stand up in inside the truck bed.

Anyone have any experience, good or bad, with a similar rooftop sleeping system?

 

Other than the standard RTT over the camper shell combo, I don't.

But Iggy does...

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/iggys-1-taco.368214/

I have not heard about the Ursa topper. This should be interesting. It's cool to see the market answer the demand for a Flippac/Wildernest-style camper top. AT's Habitat is awesome, but the price is a bit steep IMO.

 

The Ursa topper will be pricey, as well. The rep said it should start around 6k and go up from there, but it's a cool design.

 

In that case, I would go with the Habitat. I think the design is better; it offers an integrated awning and more useable interior space.

 

there's talk that someone bought FRP's assets and might be restarting the whole manufacturing for flippacs. so might be another option that's a little more affordable. The topper industry is going to be interesting in the next 18 months.

 

That's a promising bit of information. If the Flippac could be reproduced - and the hardened torsion bar integrated into the upfit - then I think it would be a real winner with the current "overland" camper market.

$4k is about the maximum I would pay for one of these camper canopies. I'm sure I speak for most people out there on that price point. Any higher than that and a used FWC Finch or Fleet would be more appealing IMO.

Hopefully the new owner of the Flippac patent will undercut what's out there right now. I think if an affordable option were to hit the market it would really take off.

 

I think the designs are different enough that if indeed the rumor holds true, they don't need really need to try to undercut. I'd say the flippac is definitely a lot more for the fair weather camper. Folks who've had a flippac or still have one complain consistently about use in the rain because the original tent was made from canvas. The newer tents were a definite improvement but still not 100%. @Overlanerd will tell you. Also the the flippac flips forward precluding any storage on the cab or the top of the topper. But yea man, different strokes for different folks. Keep in mind the new owners will have to figure out the manufacturing process as well and that will be an investment in time and money. Wouldn't be surprised if the resurrected flippacs would make it into the 6k range because there's literally nothing out there at that level.

The really great part is the tent which is made by nemo.

And beside the flippac and habitat, there are other solutions in the works.

@Iggy @Overlanerd

 

Ursa minor built the j180 for the jeep JK, dubbed the jeep habitat and sold by adventure trailers. Basically where the tacoma habitat comes from.

From what I said above I doubt ursa minor will make something for the tacoma as a direct competitor to the AT habitat since ursa minor used to make the habitat in the beginning for AT. Unless they are going to different direction, but seeing their design is mostly pop up it would have to be one hell of a pop up to stand upright in

 

I should have explained it better. There is an access panel that separates the bed of the truck and the sleep area. The standing room is when the person is standing in the bed of the truck with their upper body standing through the access panel. You'd climb up into the sleeping area through that opening and then install the panel. The sleep area is actually only a couple feet tall. Hope that's a better explanation.

 

Thats how I figured they would make one if they did. But from bottom of the bed to the top of the cab is just over 3ft thats why I say it would have to be one hell of a pop up. But no matter what you would have to crawl into the bed of the truck, sub 3ft with the access panel, oddly configure your body to get the panel up and out of the way while you try to play twister just to stand up right.

I just can't see them making one that way imo

 

I'm not really sure what you mean by that. Any integrated camper topper for the Tacoma that is introduced to the market will be in competition with the AT Habitat. The details of the design do not really matter (pop top vs. flip top), the concept and targeted customer base is the same.

All I am saying is the Habitat is, to me, a superior product from what I am assuming the Ursa Minor top will be - i.e. an adaptation of the Jeep / Honda Element camper. The Habitat offers more interior room and an integrated awning, which the Ursa Minor cannot match. I just think that once the $4k price point is exceeded, a bare bones FWC shell camper seems like a better option.

Unless Ursa Minor holds a patent and is licensing the Habitat design to AT, then they're going to be competitors in this niche market.

 

It was just an argument against you saying the habitat is a superior product when ursa minor first built the habitat for the jeep, nothing more.

I think your expectations of 4k price point is too low anyways, unless I am reading the pricing worksheet wrong the swift shell comes in at 12k

 

Ok, I gotcha. I wasn't trying to make an AT vs. UM argument - as in one shop being better than the other. I was referencing the pop-top vs. flip-top design difference and what I see being the advantages of the latter. I still do not think it matters if Ursa Minor made both of them in their factory right now. I'm not crazy about the confined interior of their pop-top design. I've seen a JK model in person and it was cool, but would be cramped with two people moving about. The Habitat seems to have a much more open floor plan, which makes it a better product IMO. Same with the Flippac, all things being equal (no finicky torsion bar), I would take a Flippac canopy over a pop-top canopy any day.

These shells really are not a vast improvement over a RTT + topper combo. Yeah, you can stand up in the Habitat / Flippac, and it's all relatively self-contained. But other than the novelty factor, I don't see the $8k+ price tag for a bare bones Habitat. I had the option of first refusal on a well built Flippac for $6k. After some thought I passed. It wasn't worth that to me, but to each their own. I was also not crazy about the torsion bar snapping whenever it felt like giving up the ghost. Which you know would happen in the backcountry miles from home.

What I'm saying is I've seen FWC shell models pop up for <$10k on the secondhand market. Not often, but they're out there. Most people take care of their FWCs, so buying one secondhand isn't a big deterrent for me. I like the enclosed design and protection from the elements that one of these campers offers. The ability to quickly detach it from the truck to maintain the utility of a truck bed is also appealing.

Anyway, I look forward to seeing what Ursa Minor conjures up. It will be interesting for sure.

 

about them 3rd gen threads..

 

Count me as a dissenting opinion on the Tacoma Habitat vs the Westy style. The Habitats are very nice and much better thought out and certainly better constructed than the Wildernest and Flipacs but they still have several distinct disadvantages in my opinion. The first three that come to mind are footprint, insulation and more importantly to me at least, roof rack/storage. Yeah, it’s not huge but the Habitat requires you to have room behind you to open it and room overhead to flip it. Next is the tent issue, it’s much easier to insulate a fiberglass hardtop and have an artic pack liner inside than it is to insulate an all fabric tent plus you can typically get them tauter which is nice in the wind. Lastly is that many of us carry boats, bikes or other crap on top which means removing it before flipping the top. The biggest downside I see is less room but honestly, if you design it with enough overcab area you should have plenty of room for two adults and still have a mostly open floor plan. I’ve had several Westys and they were all pretty nice up top although I very rarely slept in the top bunk myself.

So for me, a Westy style hard top makes a lot more sense, especially since I’m usually alone anyways.

 

Kind of curious, why is this an issue?

 

Pretty much only an issue in tight, overgrown areas but footprint can be an issue in some of the non-campsite camping areas in places like western NC where it's legal to pull off the side of the road but the pullouts are small. The roof rack issue is the biggest downside to me but every is different. Don't get me wrong, I really like them, but just think there is a better option for my particular use. I do like it better than the side flip design such as the Wildernest.

 

no what i mean is, why would there be anything over where I sleep in the first place?

Choosing a camping spot, I never sleep where sh*t can fall on me and kill me.

So this would never been an issue for me.

 

The short of it is sometimes you don't have a choice.

Campsites on the east coast, especially in Appalachia, seem to be confined a lot more than what one will see out West. I've camped at some primitive sites in the North Georgia mountains (not too far from Dahlonega and Helens) and my rooftop tent could barely flip open due to the low canopy. When I was last in that area, some of the trails were so tight with limbs and brush that I wouldn't attempt them with my RTT mounted for fear of puncturing the cover or bending it's frame. It's just the nature of the terrain.

@Bajatacoma 's point about the small despersed camp sites is also legit. I've seen plenty of those. You can barely get a vehicle in the plot, much less two.

 

Yep, if you haven't been on the east coast, we don't have much desert. I'd assume the PNW is similar, but I haven't been there yet. No BLM land, not many National monuments, very little dispersed/no fee camping areas, etc. on the east coast either. You take what you have and even in established campgrounds it's not uncommon to have overhead branches. As long as I don't see any dead branches or deadfalls I'm generally happier in the trees anyways since it provides a little privacy.

The falling branches issue is a real one though and we all know the Boy Scouts teach you to look up before setting up camp, or they used to anyways when they actually taught useful skills, but we also know that in real life we sometimes get into sites after dark or we have to take what's available. It's another reason the hard top is nice as it provides a bit of protection, especially in a storm.