 |
01-29-2023, 11:49 AM
|
#1
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2022
Posts: 13
|
Still shopping...
For a motor home. I have noticed that most of the MH I have seen have a large block 4xx cid in them. A 383 cid stoker has more horsepower and torque - even without maxing the 383 but weighs about half as much. Is there a reason for the big block? Dumping 400 pounds sounds really good.
Most of the MH I see for sale (1978-1985) are Fords. Does Ford have a durable 4 speed automatic transmission with overdrive that DOES NOT need a computer?
|
|
|
 |
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!
|
01-29-2023, 12:07 PM
|
#2
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Livingston, Texas
Posts: 70
|
It's all about torque, not cubic inches. The big block should be your choice.
__________________
Richard (& Nancy, too!)
Livingston, Texas
2009 43' Allegro Bus QRP
|
|
|
01-29-2023, 02:22 PM
|
#3
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: oregon
Posts: 626
|
Don't let pop culture advertising sway you from a big block. GM big factory BB's are grossly underrated as to hp/tq. To use modern measurement standards think 330 up and about 450 ft lbs of torque.
What 383 has that much torque...in a usable power band. In a rv 4000 rpm pretty much the end...
|
|
|
01-29-2023, 02:30 PM
|
#4
|
Senior Member
Fleetwood Owners Club Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: On the continental divide
Posts: 1,632
|
Old saying that still rings true.
"There's no substitute for cubic inches".
Applies to gas OR diesel.
JMHO
Mike in Colorado
__________________
2004 Fleetwood Pace Arrow 37c, 8.1 gasser, (Jezebel) Ultra RV ECM / TCM and rear track bar, PPE deep Tx pan, Bilstein's, Sailun's & Sumo's all round, pushed by a 2002 Grand Caravan, on a Master Tow Dolly.
|
|
|
01-29-2023, 06:35 PM
|
#5
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: Maine
Posts: 219
|
not to mention the durability of a big block Chevy for hauling a heavy load it's entire life.
__________________
1986 Itasca Sunflyer 22 ft P32 chassis with 454 engine
|
|
|
01-30-2023, 08:48 AM
|
#6
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 2,477
|
A Hotrod magazine type 383 stoker will be cammed up to put a fairly lightweight car through a quarter mile quickly. Useless in a big heavy RV. You want slow revving tractor type torque. First really steep hill you have to climb you'll get it. Consider an RV a very heavily loaded truck that never gets to unload, ever.
Years ago it was the "70's lesson". During the gas crunch back then people thought to order/build RV's with smaller engines, like small block Chevys. They found they weren't up to the task. To make similar power to a big block you have to rev one almost twice as high. Gas mileage was NOT better like that and engine durability was poor. Some folks went as far as to throw the small block setup out and swap in the biggest engine they could find. It's just how it works.
|
|
|
01-31-2023, 01:10 PM
|
#7
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2022
Posts: 13
|
Thank you! Now...has anyone ever used a Chevy bb to replace a Ford bb? I like the selection of transmissions that Chevy has to offer for muscle.
|
|
|
02-01-2023, 06:05 AM
|
#8
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Livingston, Texas
Posts: 70
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desertprep
Thank you! Now...has anyone ever used a Chevy bb to replace a Ford bb? I like the selection of transmissions that Chevy has to offer for muscle.
|
Can it be done? Yes, of course!
Would a swap like that be practical? No. Motor mounts, transmission mounts, exhaust, and wiring harness(s) are all different and would require extensive time and labor to exchange. It would be a monumental task at best.
__________________
Richard (& Nancy, too!)
Livingston, Texas
2009 43' Allegro Bus QRP
|
|
|
02-01-2023, 11:58 AM
|
#9
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: oregon
Posts: 626
|
As above...big wallet and or a skilled fabricator along with a very nice shop. 460 Ford's are a very good engines and there transmissions. Point in fact Ford literally dominated heavy trucks during that time frame. Fleet mgrs don't buy based on emotions, reliability and performance and the overall cost of ownership.
|
|
|
02-01-2023, 01:10 PM
|
#10
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Canyon Lake, Texas
Posts: 2,468
|
Still shopping...
The Ford transmissions are plenty tough. They’re not used in drag racing because they have heavier internals than the GM counterparts and therefore more parasitic loss.
But I don’t think a Ford 4-speed w OD transmission (suitable for a big block) exists that doesn’t require a computer to run it.
The main benefit to running GM powertrain over Ford in racing applications is the aftermarket support.
Are you positive there’s 400# difference between a SBC and BBC? Maybe 200 which in a MH means nothing.
__________________
2002 American Tradition 40'
Cummins 8.3, Banks 431hp, 1260 tq
Canyon Lake, TX
|
|
|
02-15-2023, 06:18 PM
|
#11
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Wyoming, Michigan
Posts: 16
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desertprep
For a motor home. I have noticed that most of the MH I have seen have a large block 4xx cid in them. A 383 cid stoker has more horsepower and torque - even without maxing the 383 but weighs about half as much. Is there a reason for the big block? Dumping 400 pounds sounds really good.
|
Should we assume the "383 stroker" you refer to is a Chevrolet engine, and not a Chrysler?
If so, please tell me what "big block" V8 weighs 400 pounds than a "383 stroker"?
|
|
|
02-16-2023, 12:22 PM
|
#12
|
Senior Member
Fleetwood Owners Club Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: On the continental divide
Posts: 1,632
|
I'm very happy with our 8.1 Chevy gasser and the Allison 1000 Tx with the UltraRV ECM /TCM mod's, and we work her pretty hard pulling an 8K# car hauler all over Colorado.
I have read that the limiting factor of the 8.1 are the small ports in the head, but there are aluminum heads available with much bigger ports, that supposedly set this engine free. This might be the easiest way to go if you want to hop this motor up and maintain reliability. Drop a better intake and throttle body in there to really make it breath better, and you might have a winner. Then of course long tube headers would also be required.
Just a thought.
Mike in Colorado
__________________
2004 Fleetwood Pace Arrow 37c, 8.1 gasser, (Jezebel) Ultra RV ECM / TCM and rear track bar, PPE deep Tx pan, Bilstein's, Sailun's & Sumo's all round, pushed by a 2002 Grand Caravan, on a Master Tow Dolly.
|
|
|
 |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|