PSI 8.8L Engine

[DriVer]

I think that you guys have been waiting for this .....

PSI Displays 8.8L Engine at RVIA Exposition.

Enjoy!

[JonBrazel]

Thanks Mike!

[Full-Timers]

Yeah-But…
What RV chassis manufacturer is going to use this engine? Ford uses their own and Workhorse no longer makes RV chassis.
Who will work on this engine since it is not a Ford or GM engine?

[UFO Pilot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full-Timers Workhorse no longer makes RV chassis.

Since when? I must have missed that announcement??

[Full-Timers]

Again...

Link

The last sentence in the second paragraph reads…

Workhorse was once a major player in the Class A gas motorhome chassis market, but no longer builds the platforms.

[UFO Pilot]

So the Workhorse Chassis that has the front engine diesel is not built by Workhorse? I know they no longer build a GAS chassis.

[DriVer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full-Timers Yeah-But… What RV chassis manufacturer is going to use this engine? Ford uses their own and Workhorse no longer makes RV chassis.

FT, That's not in evidence at the present time. The only thing that we know for sure is the plant in Union City is closed. The RV operation has been relocated to Wakarusa, IN. Thor has released a 2012 product brochures now featuring 2 - W20D and 2 - W22D models up to 34 feet in length with a bath and a half. These motorhomes are claimed in the marketing materials to be built on a Workhorse chassis.

Quote:

Who will work on this engine since it is not a Ford or GM engine?

As it is right now, Workhorse Service Centers work on 8.1L engines. I don't expect that there will be a steep learning curve IF it ever passes that the 8.8L PSI engine is used in Workhorse chassis.

The more significant question is whether or not Navistar wants to produce a gasoline powered RV motorhome chassis when they have a diesel powered chassis that seems to be a viable product.

That said; The coach manufacturers out there do like to have choices. If your Model T is only available in black, no matter how good it might be, there are always going to be customers ready to buy an alternative. It is too bad that Workhorse has gone from being the top dog in the conversation about gasoline powered motorhome chassis to being spoken from me as an alternative.

I would go as far as saying that many people bought a Workhorse because it was GM powered. That has now passed into history. Will there be a market for people to buy a non-GM Workhorse? Q: "Where's the glue that binds a buyer to a long-term manufacturer?" One might be more apt to buy a Ford strictly from the point of view that they've been here for 75 years or more.

Workhorse as an RV chassis manufacturer will leave a lot of buyers with more questions than answers, so it'll be an uphill battle under any stretch of the imagination. Now add a PSI power plant to the mix and the questions rack up exponentially.

If this does come down to a SKUed product, Navistar would buy PSI engines just like WCC bought GM engines. When WCC bought the engines, they were no longer GM engines but Workhorse engines. If Navistar buys PSI engines, they would be for all practical purposes Navistar engines. Navistar has enormous resources and if they want to do this, I would not want to take the points on that bet.

[pkmesser]

Look at that intake! There goes the low flat doghouse.

[DriVer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pkmesser Look at that intake! There goes the low flat doghouse.

You know something .... that's probably the least of an OEM's worry because all they would do is install a Ford doghouse.

I do love my near flat doghouse so does my DW. Our dog (Roxy) also loves the flat doghouse too because she can get a good running start on the ski jump like slope to get up on the dashboard.

[Lash]

So start building the UFO again on a smaller chassis and you can have the best of all worlds----LOL

Regards

[Davel]

Thanks for the post, Mike. The flexible fuel capacity of this engine may be the selling point. This might be the engine that gets RVing into alternate fuels. The power should be there no matter what fuel is used. Who knows....

Dave

[pkmesser]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DriVer You know something .... that's probably the least of an OEM's worry because all they would do is install a Ford doghouse. I do love my near flat doghouse so does my DW. Our dog (Roxy) also loves the flat doghouse too because she can get a good running start on the ski jump like slope to get up on the dashboard.

Good solution, the engineering for that part's already done! ( or should it be "that part is").

[pkmesser]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lash So start building the UFO again on a smaller chassis and you can have the best of all worlds----LOL Regards

With 400 HP and roughly 550 ft lbs of torque, why would it need to be smaller?

[DriVer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lash So start building the UFO again on a smaller chassis and you can have the best of all worlds ....

Lash, Did you know that Workhorse already has a smaller UFO as a SKU?

The R22 made its debut in 2008 at the Tampa Supershow as a 22,000 GVW, 228 inch WB, rear gas pusher. Missing from the product were the adjustable pedals, Quadraulic (Arvin Meritor 4 piston) brakes, the 100 gallon gas tank down to 75 gallons and finally the Allison transmission was downgraded to a 1000MH.

Absent the standard R26 features, this pushed the price down considerably on an already expensive gasoline powered chassis.

If the R22 were chosen to be developed with a PSI engine, I expect that there might be clearance issues however I cannot be 100% certain if the deck height is much different between the 8.1 and the 8.8. The BIG feature that was in the marketing plans was a UFO with a flat floor. I believe that an 8.8 would most likely just bolt right up.

When Winnebago Industries installed the Cummins 5.9L in the Destination, it featured a flat floor so it would appear that the deck height wasn't an insurmountable issue for that application.