Go Back   iRV2 Forums > MOTORHOME FORUMS > Class C Motorhome Discussions
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 06-19-2012, 01:08 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
wa8yxm's Avatar
 
Damon Owners Club
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 22,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sequim Guy View Post
Buy the one with the floor plan you like best, you will spend a lot more
time living in the coach than you will driving it.....

.
Joning the chorus.

Now about the engines

The two I know (8.1L Chevy Vortec and the ford Triton V-10) are so close to each other in ratings to be identical, The Ford engine is rated 15HP higher than the chevy (And in a 300+ HP engine this is less than 5%, in short, nothign) but to get it they run the engine at a higher RPM, TORQUE ratings are identical, but again Ford's peak torque is at a higher RPM.

I'm real happy with my Chevy and personally prefer Chevy to Ford, but I'd not turn my nose up at the Ford either. It is a very good engine,
__________________

__________________
Home is where I park it!
wa8yxm 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 06-19-2012, 09:40 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
LVJ58's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 2,148
GM 8.1L peak torque 455 lb ft. @3,200rpm
Ford (3valve) 6.8 peak torque 457 lb ft @ 3,250rpm.

GM 8.1 peak HP 340 @ 4200rpm,
Ford (3 valve) peak HP 362 @ 4750rpm

GM push rods/rocker arms
Ford Overhead cam

GM 4 coils on each bank with High voltage leads to plugs.
Ford Coil over Plug low voltage leads to coil over plug.

GM 5/6 speed Allison automatic transmission
Ford Torqueshift 5 speed automatic transmission

Wouldn't have a problem owing either chassis & drive train.

My priority would be focused more on a comfortable livable floor plan.

Good luck with your choice..
__________________

__________________
Jim & SherrySeward

2000 Residency 3790 v10 w/tags 5 Star tune & Banks system Suzuki XL7 toad
LVJ58 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 10:38 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdeloughry View Post
Hi,

A major difference in the two Class C's we're considering is that the Four Winds Chateau 21 has a Ford V10 and the Freelander QB21 has a Chevy V8.

We're heard that the V10 gets about 2 mpg less and that it heats up the cab.

Please comment on your experience with v8s and v10s - such as the benefits and drawbacks of each. Thanks!!!
It looks like these are both assumed to be new rigs.. Is that correct?
__________________
cb1000rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 10:53 PM   #18
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by milasman View Post
Gas mileage-Chevy
Torque-Ford
Horse power-Ford
Engine specs-Ford
Noise-Ford (louder)
Cargo-Ford
Towing-Ford
Ride-Chevy
Leg room -Chevy
Cab body length-Chevy
Braking problems-Chevy
Front end alignments -Ford
Long term commitment to RV chassis-Ford
My 27 ft chevy with a 454 has plenty of power and torque and gets 11mpg. I haven't have any of those problems you list with it and it's an 86.
__________________
jimbo16720 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 11:26 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
milasman's Avatar
 
Fleetwood Owners Club
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 883
I was not listing problems, but strengths and weakness and comparing what others have said about the two chassis. Generally, Ford need front end alignments as to Chevy having poorer brakes. The law of averages will eventually catch up to someone and they will get a crap ass chassis, doesn't mean they are all bad. You may have gotten a good one for all you or anyone else knows. I got a pretty decent Ford this time, had some crap ass ones too. I bought my coach for the floor plan, happened to be on a Ford, most coaches at this dealer were.
__________________
milasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2012, 11:28 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
mfire1339's Avatar


 
Monaco Owners Club
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Glendora Ca.
Posts: 1,344
You mean 5 up hill and 6 down?





Mike
__________________
2004 Monaco Monarch
Blueox, SMI, 1990 Wrangler YJ
mfire1339 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2012, 11:15 AM   #21
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 92
I own a 32' E450 with the V-10 pull a V-8 Toyota 4Runner 4 down. Got the 5 Star 87 octane tune and a K&N cold air intake. Pulls like a beast 6.5 to 8.5 mpg depending on foot and wind. Floor is warm near dog house but not an issue seats are not that great.

I am real happy with the Ford on balance and the only option for a 22.5k CGVW Setup in an entry level class C

Enjoy
__________________
csdavis62 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2012, 12:32 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
milasman's Avatar
 
Fleetwood Owners Club
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 883
I must agree on the seats, not all that comfortable. I have a 32ft and pull a Corolla on a dolly, does quite well and about 7.5mpg highway.
__________________
milasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2012, 09:09 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: North East Indiana
Posts: 1,995
If you are talking an older Chevy V-8, be prepared to replace several starters from heat exhaustion. I have owned them both and I don't think for dependability, you can beat the Ford V-10. I have never experienced excessing heat or noise in the cab.
__________________
Izzyblueye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2012, 04:29 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Jon Mopar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 596
Ford V10 hands down. More power, better-ish fuel mileage, very reliable and they the most popular choice. Many used RV dealers will agree. GM 7.4 and Vortec 8.1s have their share of problems (the 8.1 less to than the 7.4 vortec/454). I get awesome gas mileage out of mine.

Im a Dodge guy, so if I'm giving Ford credit, it must be for a reason.
__________________
36ft Damon Intruder Class A - 37ft National Sea Breeze LX Class A
-Past RVs: 19ft Sportsman, 24ft Jayco, 30ft Coachmen Mirada. We had some good times.
"Im a car guy...you've been warned" lol
Jon Mopar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2012, 05:03 PM   #25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfire1339 View Post
You mean 5 up hill and 6 down?





Mike
No I mean 11 miles to the gallon in the hills of western pennsylvania. Incase you don't know...Appalachian Mts. If you buy one thats areodynamic and don't drive like an idiot you'll get that too. And thats why I don't like posting on this site because you always have some ******* that doubts you....yes I said ******* and I now delete the site from my computer.
__________________
jimbo16720 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2012, 05:11 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
JayGee's Avatar
 
Fleetwood Owners Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 338
Unless you plan on driving or racing more than "camping" I would be more concerned with floorplan.
__________________
JayGee
Foothills of the Smokies
2005 Bounder 35E
JayGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2012, 10:22 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
The Shadow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Southern Ontario/Palmetto FL
Posts: 1,092
Of the five MHs we've owned two were DPs and one a Class A Ford, another a Class C Chev and now a Class C E450.

No real mention of service to date. Our experience with the Class A Ford and the Class C Ford was very good. When we had the Class A both Ford dealers in town wanted to service it. We've since moved and once again both Ford Dealers in town want to service the E450. With the 8.1 Kodiak neither GM dealer in town would touch it (and the Chev dealer was also a truck dealer and we bought a 2007 Tahoe LTZ and a 2006 Equinox from them and they still would not touch it). We had to locate a GM dealer that was also a WH dealer to have annual maintenance done. The next year we had it done at McCormack in Indiana (they supplied the units to Jayco) since we went to the Jayco factory for some fixes. McCormack was very good.

The engine comparisons above appear to me to be incorrect. The 8.1 in our C Class was NOT the same version of the 8.1 in Class MH's. Lower HP and torque and longer life expectancy. Same with the Ford - not the 3 valve and only 305 HP and 420 torque. The Ford gets about 1 mpg more than the Kodiak (likely all due to weight). Based on what we read on the forums we expected more noise from the Ford. DW says NO WAY - it is quieter. I say about the same but less drive train whine with the Ford.

Warm floor on passenger side - yes - but DW finds it is no problem and actually enjoys the E450 cab more than the Kodiak even though it is narrower. From my point of view as the driver the Kodiak was much higher and you felt you were with the big guys when they passed you. But other Chev C's are no higher than the Ford. Our E450 came with rear airbags and frankly, if I could turn the calendar back I'd put them on the Kodiak immediately. We are much happier with the Impulse 26QP than we ever imagined before our trade.

Starting in 2011 the GCWR for the E450 is 22,000 lbs - much higher than the Chev. Also the GVWR in 2011 when we switched was higher for the Ford than the Chev and we have highly adequate CCC - which may not alway be the case for the Chev and the E350 Ford. You will not find most C manufacturers using the E350 for longer units and I seem to recall the Chev is only used for short boxes as well.

Don
__________________
2011 Itasca Impulse 26QP Silver, 2014 Jeep Cherokee Limited V6 Active Drive II
The Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2012, 09:20 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
Jon Mopar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 596
we get 10+ MPG with a V10 Class C w/2 slides with the power upgrades. If I watch my driving habits, I've seen as much as 14mpg!! and by watching my driving habits, I don't mean driving like an 80yr old woman on her way to Church on Sunday....rather just knowing your RPM range, speeding up a little for hills, just the normal stuff.

My 460 V8 30ft was much the same. 10-12mpg if I drove it right.

Ppl complain about getting 5mpg....we've had a few MHs, and we never really had below around 9-10mpg
__________________

__________________
36ft Damon Intruder Class A - 37ft National Sea Breeze LX Class A
-Past RVs: 19ft Sportsman, 24ft Jayco, 30ft Coachmen Mirada. We had some good times.
"Im a car guy...you've been warned" lol
Jon Mopar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ford, v10



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


» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:32 PM.


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