Go Back   iRV2 Forums > MOTORHOME FORUMS > MH-General Discussions & Problems
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-11-2016, 09:24 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Jbuntin's Avatar
 
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Orangevale CA
Posts: 17
Question Engine technology for big RVs

It seems to me that the engines in the larger RVs are using the same technology as in 2000. My rig uses the GM 8.1 L engine, and I have friends using the Ford V10. Ford has EcoBoost technology now, and other manufacturers use direct gas injection and turbochargers. As a result, these engines make more horsepower and torque than our older engines having twice (or more) the displacement. In addition, the new engines get better mileage.

Surely the commercial users of these chassis are clamoring for better mileage and lower emissions, not to mention us RV pilots. Are the chassis guys or Ford working on improvements?
__________________

__________________
2005 Winnebago Voyage. UltraPower, Ultra Trac rear and Roadmaster front track bars, Koni shocks, EZ-Steer, Honda CRV toad.
Jbuntin is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 04-11-2016, 09:35 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2,796
The ecoboost system probably wouldn't really help a MH. Just read up on the F150, they get great gas mileage until you put a strain on the engine pulling a trailer/load. The gas mileage drops below 10 mpg, and the load isn't anything near what a large MH would be. I'm not sure what the older F53 V-10's get but ours averages around 8mpg, but more importantly the ride and handling is much better, and not as much engine noise.
__________________

__________________
Mike & Charlotte
2014 Newmar Canyon Star 3610
Orange County, California
Mike and Cha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 09:38 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
jfran304's Avatar
 
Tiffin Owners Club
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Posts: 2,489
It is my understanding that the Ford V10 makes more horsepower at higher RPM's than the Workhorse 8.1 which makes the Ford a lot noisier.

Workhorse says they are reentering the RV industry with a new 8.8L engine.

https://globenewswire.com/news-relea...is-Market.html

I don't know if this answers your question but they are always coming out with something new to keep us buying.

Jon
__________________
Jon & Sue Francis (Retired U.S.A.F.)
Lil Girl-Rescued, Abby Rescued, Peaches Rescued
06 Allegro 35TSA Workhorse Chassis
2013 Chevy Spark Dinghy
jfran304 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 02:30 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
skypilot_1's Avatar
 
Tiffin Owners Club
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Summer in The Ozarks
Posts: 772
Thats true for hi reving engine to make its HP curve at hi rpm's. But to move a load its torque thats king. And the smaller displacement hi reving turbo, non-turbo power plants can't move what a big block (think 572 GM crate motor) can. My Cummins makes 1250 ft lbs @ 1600 rpm
My Olds dual quad 455 dyno at 543 hp & 600+ ft lbs. just sayn
__________________
Ret. Military/Corporate Pilot
Key West Snowbirds
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter"
skypilot_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 02:48 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
aauummm's Avatar


 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Altoona, Iowa
Posts: 1,590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jbuntin View Post
It seems to me that the engines in the larger RVs are using the same technology as in 2000. My rig uses the GM 8.1 L engine, and I have friends using the Ford V10. Ford has EcoBoost technology now, and other manufacturers use direct gas injection and turbochargers. As a result, these engines make more horsepower and torque than our older engines having twice (or more) the displacement. In addition, the new engines get better mileage.

Surely the commercial users of these chassis are clamoring for better mileage and lower emissions, not to mention us RV pilots. Are the chassis guys or Ford working on improvements?
Ford has a new V-8 diesel for the F Series Super Duty that has 330 hp and 750 ft-lbs of torque. Sounds like it would be perfect to replace or be an option to the V-10 in the F-53 chassis.

New Generation Ford F-Series Super Duty Gets Most Diesel Power Ever - Ford-Trucks.com
__________________
2010 Itasca Sunova 33C, mucho mods
2011 Honda CRV, 2004 Rubicon (mucho mods)
aauummm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 06:37 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Elko, Nv
Posts: 492
Duty cycle, the ecoboost engines arent designed to run at full load for very long of which the motorhome engine and chassis are. Same reason the dsl in the bigger chassis have lower power than in a pickup.
__________________
NevadaNick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 07:10 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
George Schweikle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,199
Ecoboost is merely a Ford marketing phrase for a smaller engine with a turbocharger. As NevadaNick said, these are not intended to run at full load, rather, to provide higher horsepower for short periods. Other techniques like direct fuel injection, variable cam timing, cylinder deactivation, etc. would also increase power and economy if applied to the bigger displacement engines of the past. This already worked when the GM 454 engine changed from carburetor, to throttle body fuel injection, to port fuel injection.

Such engines are in response to the increase in CAFE fuel economy regulations (Corporate Average Fuel Economy). A small engine generally provides better fuel economy (at least in the Federal EPA test cycle) so manufacturers are forced to small displacement turbocharged engines. The base Mini, and several others, have changed from 4 cylinder to 3 cylinder engines.

There are two schools of thought: Our government mandates increases in fuel economy for literally every vehicle, while the European model is to add very high tax to fuel and let the public decide what to buy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NevadaNick View Post
Duty cycle, the ecoboost engines arent designed to run at full load for very long of which the motorhome engine and chassis are. Same reason the dsl in the bigger chassis have lower power than in a pickup.
__________________
George Schweikle Lexington, KY
1999 Safari TREK 2830, FMCA 190830, Safari International chapter
1995 Safari TREK 2630, 1983 Winnebago Chieftain, 1976 Midas Mini
George Schweikle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 07:53 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
edgray's Avatar


 
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Entegra Owners Club
Spartan Chassis
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Madison, MS
Posts: 7,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfran304 View Post
It is my understanding that the Ford V10 makes more horsepower at higher RPM's than the Workhorse 8.1 which makes the Ford a lot noisier.



Workhorse says they are reentering the RV industry with a new 8.8L engine.



https://globenewswire.com/news-relea...is-Market.html



I don't know if this answers your question but they are always coming out with something new to keep us buying.



Jon

The PR you cited is almost a year old and has since been described as "premature" by the new Workhorse Company. RUMOR says they have decided to NOT re-enter the RV market. Currently I can find nothing on their website that indicates last year's PR is accurate. SAD.
__________________
2016 EC Aspire 42RBQ / 2014 CR-V
edgray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 09:01 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
aauummm's Avatar


 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Altoona, Iowa
Posts: 1,590
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgray View Post
The PR you cited is almost a year old and has since been described as "premature" by the new Workhorse Company. RUMOR says they have decided to NOT re-enter the RV market. Currently I can find nothing on their website that indicates last year's PR is accurate. SAD.
That's what I'm finding also. From their website and other news sources, it looks like Workhorse is concentrating on electric and gas delivery vehicles and has done nothing on an RV chassis.

I think that the RV consumers are just plain screwed. Ford does not make that much money off of selling the F-53 to the RV industry as the volume just isn't there. They make their money by selling the F-53/F-59 to the truck industry. So basically we are just an after-thought. Their upgrades to the chassis have been few and far between and have been very minor.
__________________
2010 Itasca Sunova 33C, mucho mods
2011 Honda CRV, 2004 Rubicon (mucho mods)
aauummm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 09:21 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Gdawgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Fayetteville, GA
Posts: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jbuntin View Post
It seems to me that the engines in the larger RVs are using the same technology as in 2000. My rig uses the GM 8.1 L engine, and I have friends using the Ford V10. Ford has EcoBoost technology now, and other manufacturers use direct gas injection and turbochargers. As a result, these engines make more horsepower and torque than our older engines having twice (or more) the displacement. In addition, the new engines get better mileage.

Surely the commercial users of these chassis are clamoring for better mileage and lower emissions, not to mention us RV pilots. Are the chassis guys or Ford working on improvements?

I really think it's just the opposite. I think it was Freightliner who developed the turbo to move heavy load over the Rocky Mountains in the 30's. Cummins, Detroit, Navistar etc. have all used variable geometry turbos for years along with sophisticated combustion bowl design and oil pressure driven injection. They did follow gas units with 4 valves per cylinder. Gas units still use electrically controlled injection. I'm at 40-42K pounds and average over 9 MPG and have gotten 10.4 MPG. The real strength of a diesel is the lower end. It's designed for heavy loads and many miles.
__________________

__________________
2013 HR 43DFT RR10R
All Electric FWS-Tag FMCA 451687
2017 Ford F150 4X4 Toad
Gdawgs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
engine, rvs



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tesla Battery Technology - Just a matter of time for RVs raineman iRV2.com General Discussion 17 11-20-2015 08:48 PM
Campgrounds and BIG RVs Rapta iRV2.com General Discussion 9 07-16-2013 09:31 AM
Navistar Announces Advanced Clean Engine Technology To Meet Emissions DriVer RV Industry Press 6 07-06-2012 11:06 AM
Is there Sunshades big enough for RVs? Winnabango Winnebago Industries Owner's Forum 14 04-27-2011 09:44 PM
A "technology Corner" for problems with technology related to the RV life style Dsouthw524 Forum 101 | Announcements | Member Concerns 2 03-08-2005 05:35 AM

» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.