workhorse vs new ford

[larry r]

Has anyone driven the new ford 362 hp with 5 speed? If so how does it compare to the w22 workhorse

[larry r]

Has anyone driven the new ford 362 hp with 5 speed? If so how does it compare to the w22 workhorse

[Rocky 2]

I drove both on the same platform and decided that the Ford sounded noisier and sounded like it was straining due to the rpm level. Aside from that, on my test drive of city and freeway but no hills, I preferred the Workhorse. The Ford also didn't turn as sharply as the WH, a big difference in hanging a U turn.

[Tom N]

I have to mention a big plus for the Ford chassis. And the Ford will handle a 30-35 foot coach with no problem. The Ford chassis come standard with nice Alcoa ALUMINUM wheels!! At least with the Ford equiped WInnebago's.

My last MH had a Ford 460. Had 81,000 miles on it when traded. I NEVER added a drop of oil between oil changes. Never. I changed oil every 3000 miles. Now I have a new Workhorse W24 and I drove it from Pittsburgh to FL and back and had to add 2 quarts on the way back to Pittsburgh.

But, I'm a GM man. Except my cars have mostly been Hondas since 1979.

Tom

["007"]

Tom, any idea why your loosing 2 qts with the w-24, haven't loss any on mine and change oil around 6000 miles, never lossed on Fords either. "007"

[Mahlon]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by "007":
Tom, any idea why your loosing 2 qts with the w-24, haven't loss any on mine and change oil around 6000 miles, never lossed on Fords either. "007" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ditto that. My oil consumption isn't measureable on my 2003 W22 with 18000 miles, and I'm wondering why your using / losing oil. Have you looked for any obvious / not-so-obvious leaks? Check the oil pressure switch at the top rear of the cylinder block (where it has always been on GM engines for the past 40-odd years).

[Mahlon]

OK, back on topic:

I test-drove RVs on both chassis last year when I made my buying decision (admittedly that was the old Ford chassis). I chose Workhorse for the following reasons (and keep in mind that this is based on the old chassis):

- Engine: The Ford Triton V10 is a fine engine, but compared to the GM Vortec 8.1L it has less displacement for the horsepower/torque it generates, meaning that something else has to give (I think the Ford runs higher RPMs to get to its speed/torque peaks compared to the Vortec). In addition, the GM Vortec is a built-for-bus/truck-service power plant based on the very nice Chevy 454 truck block (not the passenger car block), whereas the Ford V-10 is a scaled-up light-duty-truck V-8. Finally, for whatever reason parts for the Ford engine are more expensive than for the GM Vortec.

As an aside, the severest duty I know of for internal combustion engines is marine service. I know of no marine usage of Ford gasoline engines. On the other hand, the most respected marine power builder in that market (Crusader) has always used GM engines, a relationship that continues to this day. See Crusader Marine 8.1L for their application of the GM Vortec 8.1L.

- Transmission: The Ford E40D and, to a lesser extent, the 4R100 transmissions aren't up to the demanding task of long-term high-power operation such as you would find in a medium-duty truck or motor home. In addition, you would likely take a fuel economy hit with the Ford transmissions because they are four-speeds. The Allison T1000 five-speed is in a completely different league from the Ford products: it's designed from the start for medium-duty truck service. I realize that Ford now uses a brand-new TorqueShift 5-speed transmission, but I'd like to see some more time on that box before commenting.

- Running gear: The Workhorse chassis is stronger than the Ford.

- Service: I have two Workhorse Custom Chassis authorized service centers within twenty / thirty miles of where I live. Ford: Would have to drive at least forty miles to reach the first one; the second one was eighty miles or more away (no, not talking about car dealers here).

- What I saw: I saw lots of Ford chassis coaches on dealers' lots; finding Workhorse-equipped coaches was extremely difficult. Made me wonder why.

- Bottom line: I didn't consider the Ford chassis last year when I was in the market, and probably wouldn't this year unless I was thinking in the 16K - 20K gross weight range. Even then, I'd be leery of that new transmission.

The preceding is just my opinion, of course, and the outcome I reached was based on my family's needs. I would recommend that you think through the same process, balancing your decisions against your specific needs. You may reach a different conclusion.

[DriVer]

While participating at the Good Sam Florida Rally in Palatka, FL this past week a ferry driver (dealer name withheld) gave me his opinion regarding which chassis performs better.

In the new coach display at the rally there were 7 - 2006 362 HP Ford V-10s and one lone W22 Tiffin Allegro motorhome. The driver said unequivocally that the Workhorse drove better than any of the other Fords.

The most curious thing I saw in the dealer display area which did make me do a double take was that I saw a Tiffin Allegro Bay on a 2006 Ford 362 HP V-10. The MH did have aluminum wheels.

Now I have to admit, I haven't seen a "Bay" on a Ford. Could it be that at that dealership that "Somebody bet on the bay?"

In the past I've seen these motorhome typically on 22s if not 24s.

[max49]

Mahlon, what kind of parking brake does the Ford have? Does the new Ford 5 speed also have a parking pawl? You're not just a little bit biased too, are you?

[Mahlon]

Max, unfortunately I have no idea what sort of parking brake / pawl the new Ford chassis has.

Am I biased? No, I was simply relating my knowledge and experience in as objective a manner as I could to give the original poster some insight not only into my decisions, but the processes by which I reached them. As another aside, when it comes to passenger cars and SUVs I was, and still am, a Ford man (we own an F-150, after all). But that's not a fair comparison; Ford's products aren't in the same league as GM/Workhorse in the medium-duty truck/RV chassis markets.

If you still think I'm biased, let me also share with you that I wouldn't consider owning a Workhorse RV chassis equipped with a Navistar diesel engine of any sort.

Finally, I might add that it took me almost an hour to write that earlier post, including all of the re-reads/edits. I put a fair amount of thought into what I write.

[max49]

I was smiling when I asked you if you were biased. I don't think you gave the edge to the Ford in any category. I would have thought you would remember if it had a foot or hand operated pk brake. If it had a park pos.on the gearshift it probably had a parking pawl. I think only WH puts a fake park there.
I don't know what that last statement about the Navistar diesel was about but is'nt that like the Ford powerstroke engine? What's wrong with it. The engine or the chassis?
I've never owned a powerstroke but I know lots of people that do and they all love them like Driver loves Workhorse. Might be noisy in a class A .

[DriVer]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by max49:
I've never owned a Powerstroke but I know lots of people that do and they all love them like Driver loves Workhorse. Might be noisy in a class A . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Interesting turn of events. Power Stroke Diesel + Workhorse + International = same company.

Do I expect a front engined class A chassis with a 6.0L PSD .... the crystal ball says "no".

The 8.1L gas just has too much going for it right now and I don't see anything better on the horizon.

About "bias" any writing that I do here is not conjecture on my part. It's all based in fact and it's written down in publications. All one has to do is the research.

[Mahlon]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by max49:
I was smiling when I asked you if you were biased. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No offense taken, believe me.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't think you gave the edge to the Ford in any category. I would have thought you would remember if it had a foot or hand operated pk brake. If it had a park pos.on the gearshift it probably had a parking pawl. I think only WH puts a fake park there. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
For the Ford chassis, again I have no idea as I haven't driven the new one and can't recall what the old one had. For the WH chassis, I think that depends on the transmission variety more than anything else.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't know what that last statement about the Navistar diesel was about but is'nt that like the Ford powerstroke engine? What's wrong with it. The engine or the chassis? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It's really a business decision with me. Cummins and Caterpillar have large market share/brand acceptance in today's RV markets, which translates into parts/service availability for me, the consumer. Navistar would have to think twice before taking a sales risk in such a limited market by introducing a new engine, and I, the consumer, would want to see Navistar establish parts/service capabilities directed at me, the RV consumer. This is one area where Cummins has out-done Caterpillar, in my opinion. Cat's bread and butter market is construction/heavy equipment, and their dealer/service channels reflect that. Cummins, on the other hand, for years has been focused on over-the-road trucking, and again their dealer/service channels reflect that. Given that choice, I'll pick Cummins over Cat. (in a perfect world, I'd choose Detroit Diesel 2-cycle but I can't do that any more, RATS! But that's another story...).
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I've never owned a powerstroke but I know lots of people that do and they all love them like Driver loves Workhorse. Might be noisy in a class A . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I've had the same thought, but I don't think increased engine noise would be a deal-breaker for most people unless it's a front-engine chassis. But again, from a sales perspective, if you were Workhorse, why would you take the risk?

[Trek-Cyclist]

I was told by a Winnebago Moderator that when comparing Manufactures to Manufacturer, i.e., Vectra vs. Allegro Bus should be discussed on the MH-General Discussion thread, Because Winnebago is the Site Host. Now we have a Ford vs. Workhorse on a Workhorse Hosted site. People would get upset if the direction of the topic started leaning to Ford over Workhorse. I agree with the Moderator that the US Vs Them shouldn't be on the Hosting Forum. It should be directed to the MH General Discussion Thread.