Why no rear gas motorhomes?

[Crasher]

Originally Posted by ga traveler

Talking to the designers at the dealer show in Louisville, The answer is cooling. There was a company that made a gas pusher in the seventies. Food manufacturing Company. (they made C rations in world war 2.) FMC made a great looking coach. They had a lot of engine failures due to heat. When the engine is at the front, there is a lot of air ramming through the radiator and accross the engine. this helps with cooling. At the rear there is a lot less flow and pressure.

Why would a gas engine in the rear be any different the a diesel. Any wet engine cooling is a dependant on a sufficient amount of coolant flowing through it with enough radiator capacity to dissipate the heat from the fluid. Seems like an overheating design can easily be corrected.

[edgray]

Originally Posted by PJStough

As a side note to the UFO chassis. After they quit making the Latitude, Winnebago had some UFO chassis left over, and eventually used then, and I believe it was called some kind of Journey. I saw one a few months ago and ask the owner, and that is what he told me.

WBGO used the last of their UFO chassis inventory under a coach called the Adventurer LTD. It has a more "traditional" looking interior rather than the Destination and Latitude interiors they said were more "Nautical" because of the rounded cabinets. The 37G and 39W floor plans are identical regardless of which name they were called.

[edgray]

Originally Posted by Crasher

Why would a gas engine in the rear be any different the a diesel. Any wet engine cooling is a dependant on a sufficient amount of coolant flowing through it with enough radiator capacity to dissipate the heat from the fluid. Seems like an overheating design can easily be corrected.

EXACTLY. The UFO did not suffer any engine cooling issues, once they issued the TSB to correct the water pump shaft problem which was said to have been caused by the stress of the oversized fan blades.

[ga traveler]

Originally Posted by Crasher

Why would a gas engine in the rear be any different the a diesel. Any wet engine cooling is a dependant on a sufficient amount of coolant flowing through it with enough radiator capacity to dissipate the heat from the fluid. Seems like an overheating design can easily be corrected.

You are correct. But, and there is always a but, by the time you add the extra cost of the cooling system you would be too close to the price of a diesel. Not many buyers would pay a almost diesel price for a gas engine.

[-Gramps-]

Originally Posted by ga traveler

You are correct. But, and there is always a but, by the time you add the extra cost of the cooling system you would be too close to the price of a diesel. Not many buyers would pay a almost diesel price for a gas engine.

There was no extra manufacturing (not including the initial R&D cost) cost associated with cooling the UFO engine, quite the opposite actually. Same size radiator as the front, reversed fan (rear facing fan) .When the prototype was built, which happened to be a Monaco LaPalma, the coach was tested in Death Valley, and it ran too cool. The engine temp was not warm enough and cut efficiency. Not being an engineer I don't know what they did to remedy this. I can tell you that my FCA does not turn on unless the engine is under a lot of high rpm stress, like climbing a 6 percent grade at 30 mph in second gear thru a small mountain town in Va, then I can hear it running without my rear mike turned up.

Having owned mine now for eleven years, I think the UFO chassis was one of smartest and best chassis ever built.

[MoMule]

Another factor is that a diesel engine breathes a lot more air than a gas engine.

[PJStough]

Originally Posted by edgray

WBGO used the last of their UFO chassis inventory under a coach called the Adventurer LTD. It has a more "traditional" looking interior rather than the Destination and Latitude interiors they said were more "Nautical" because of the rounded cabinets. The 37G and 39W floor plans are identical regardless of which name they were called.

Thank you for the clarification.

[Hikerdogs]

Originally Posted by ga traveler

You are correct. But, and there is always a but, by the time you add the extra cost of the cooling system you would be too close to the price of a diesel. Not many buyers would pay a almost diesel price for a gas engine.

Another "but" to add to the mix is that some of the earlier FMC motorhomes did have overheating problems. I'm not sure if it was the majority of them or only a few.

In any case they weren't popular enough to continue in production. By the time the next generation of rear engine gassers came around all that most people could remember of the previous generation is the problems they had either heard of or had encountered.

While the newer generation claimed all the problems had been resolved many people were willing to wait and let other customers take the chance that all was well. In the end there were more people willing to wait than take a chance and shell out a pile of money. Once again lack of market share for whatever reason stopped production.

[BigEvi]

I would buy a gass pusher if I found the right 1. I would want it to have air suspension like my DP though.

As far as cooling goes I couldn't imagine there being a problem...standing behind my rear radiator DP at idle the air flow almost blows me over. And there is little chance that feature would cost so much more on a gasser as to make the total cost so close to diesel it would sway many gas purchasers into diesels.

The air suspension and quiet cockpit are the main reasons I went with diesel. The power is nice to have, but I could live without it. The towing capacity is also nice to have available to me, but I dont use it as of yet. Might in the future. And I dont seem to have the hot bedroom issues other DPs seem to have.

So to have slightly lower annual maintenance costs and slightly less exposure to catastrophic/atmospherically high maintenance costs, and a lot less capital expenditure I guess I would be a good market target for a gas pusher.

-E

[LargeMarge]

1982...

We acquired a thirty-foot pusher bus with no engine.
Then, we acquired a GM 366ci 'tall-block' gasoline engine.
We married them while converting to a full-time live-aboard.

Although touted as a 'commercial powerhouse', that configuration was significantly under-powered for the a) frontal windage, and b) weight.

[TomAndPeg]

I don’t have a better answer to the original question, but once on a trip in Texas I saw an older Alpha See Ya DP that had been converted to gas. And I’d wager you could actually see the gas gauge move as you drove.

[UFO Pilot]

My UFO gas pusher doesn't overheat. I now have 80,000 miles on it and wouldn't have any other gas chassis. I believe the biggest problem was the financial crisis that happened just as the UFO chassis game out. I haven't heard of any UFO owner who is unhappy with the chassis.

[DonOinIdaho]

My introduction to Monaco was my first coach, 1987 Monaco Crown Royal 36' on a Roadmaster chassis. It came to me with a Chevy 454 gas pusher with a and 2 speed rear end.

It would run with the big dogs (frequently crossing Wyoming at 80+mph) and climb grades better than my 18 wheel counterparts. My mileage was 6-8 mpg (if I could keep my foot out of it), comparable to my Current Monaco DP. I never had any overheating issues even while pulling a car hauler up grades like Wolf Creek Pass or Grape Vine, in the summertime.

Oil changes were much easier and cheaper! I also took comfort in that I could buy many replacement parts at the local auto parts store and have services at virtually any Chevrolet dealer across the country.

[Lash]

Now have 90K miles on my HR UFO and never had heat or loading issues. Bought new for $128K fully loaded in 2008. Best money ever spent on MH and we have had a few

As for FMC rear engine believe the airflow was opposite of how Workhorse designed coach.

If Ford does build one bet it will sell if done right

At least my DW gets some conversation from me now with cabin so quit. LOL

Regards