Safari beds - I'm annoyed

[Brian M]

For the first five years I slept in the left hand bed in my Safari, until I found that the right hand bed was two inches longer. I am 6ft tall and the extra 2 inches made it much more comfortable.

Last week I collected a very damp 12-2 for breaking, and found that under some horrible covers, the floral upholstery was in unmarked condition. It was also the rolled edge style which make more comfortable seats. The beds in my 14-2 are not as comfortable as they should be so I was planning a swap.

Then I found that the longer bed is on the opposite side - grrrr!!!

This means I have to unpick the back rests to change then over.

Why is Safari life so complicated!!!

[oliver1]

I hadn't realised that the sides are reversed between the 12 and 14-ft models, but you are right that the lengths are unequal. My parents always maintained that they are a "his" and "hers".

I recently posted a scan of the specifications (for all models) from the 1978 handbook in the thread "New Member living in France". Interestingly singles, across the full range of models, come in 6' 0" or 6' 2" or 6' 4" or 6' 6" sizes, depending on model; clearly no standardisation there! Most of the doubles seem to be 6' 6" though, with the exception of that on the 17-4 which surprisingly is only 6' 0".


Oliver

[Brian M]

Oliver, I noticed that on the spec sheet you attached and had not seen it published before. I think it was decided by the need for cupboard space in the remaining length available. In the 12-2 the toilet and wardrobe needed the extra two inches, whereas in the 14-2 the food cupboard was considered more important!

[oliver1]

I also wonder, without being dogmatic as to whether this has or has not happened within the timescale concerned, whether the average adult height of the primary age range targeted may have increased over the thirty-five years since these caravans were built.

We do know that the average adult height has increased noticeably since the Victorian era, even the latter part of that era, i.a. late 19th century. Going even further back, only has only to visit such preserved historic ships as S.S. Great Britain (dating from the 1840s) to notice the very low headroom below decks, and certainly when I visited the ship in her early days in Bristol Docks the guide pointed this out and explained the likely reason as malnutrition during that era. An increase of 6 to 8 inches since then seems about right.

I have the impression that even within my lifetime the proportion of men significantly over 6 foot in height has noticeably increased, and similarly the number of tall women.

Safaris have always been targeted at the more affluent buyer, which particularly during the seventies and early eighties would have been the successful businessman or professional. I think that many of these people would have been either in the latter part of their careers or recently retired (and with capital and a good pension pot), so their early adult life would have been during WW2 and the postwar years, when there was still considerable austerity. Their childhood might well have been during the thirties, when there was a major recession. It therefore seems possible that the target customer might perhaps have been slightly stunted by today's standards, and that we might perhaps have seen an increase in average height of between two and four inches over that period.

If Safaris were being built today I wonder whether their beds would have been made a few inches longer?



Oliver

[Brian M]

Oliver - as always a detailed and erudite proposition.

I have just checked the Bailey brochure for a modern caravan and find on their two berth the bed is only 5' 3" long but converts across the caravan to 6' 6" so you have to convert to a double even when travelling solo!

In their four berths there are two beds that are 6'6" in length so perhaps your suggestion of increased average height is correct.