Ford Boosts Chassis, Engine Production Capacity to Meet Rising Demand for Motorhomes

[NLPRacing]

Ford Press Release

 

If people are buying motorhomes again, that's a good sign for the economy.

 

Edited February 18, 2013 by NLPRacing

[NickF1011]

Ford Press Release

 

If people are buying motorhomes again, that's a good sign for the economy.

 

 

Or they are buying them because they can't afford homes with foundations anymore.

[NLPRacing]

Or they are buying them because they can't afford homes with foundations anymore.

 

You haven't priced out Class A motorhomes lately, have you?

[NickF1011]

You haven't priced out Class A motorhomes lately, have you?

 

Unless you're talking uber-premium ones, you're paying a lot less than you will for an average house.

[NLPRacing]

Unless you're talking uber-premium ones, you're paying a lot less than you will for an average house.

 

While there are some lesser expensive Ford F53 based Class A's out there, most are going to be $80K and up and many are over $100K. Things might be different in Maryland, but $100K can buy you a lot of house in Texas.

 

Here's a Class A on sale for a $125K. LINK

[theoldwizard]

Here's a Class A on sale for a $125K. LINK

 

That is a diesel pusher, nothing like the F-53 chassis with its tired old 6.8L V10. The only good thing about it, is you can get it converted to CNG which is way cheaper to operate.

 

Ford needs a new BIG BLOCK gasoline engine (probably > 8.0L) if they want to be competitive in Class A RV market, school bus and commercial truck market. I they want to be bold, they would make a CNG only version with the compression ratio and camshaft optimized for that fuel.

[NickF1011]

While there are some lesser expensive Ford F53 based Class A's out there, most are going to be $80K and up and many are over $100K. Things might be different in Maryland, but $100K can buy you a lot of house in Texas.

 

Here's a Class A on sale for a $125K. LINK

 

Median home price in the U.S. is 2010 was $221,000.

[NLPRacing]

That is a diesel pusher, nothing like the F-53 chassis with its tired old 6.8L V10. The only good thing about it, is you can get it converted to CNG which is way cheaper to operate.

 

Ford needs a new BIG BLOCK gasoline engine (probably > 8.0L) if they want to be competitive in Class A RV market, school bus and commercial truck market. I they want to be bold, they would make a CNG only version with the compression ratio and camshaft optimized for that fuel.

 

Nope, it's on a Ford F53 front engined gas chassis with the 3V 6.8L (362 horsepower and 457 lb.-ft. of torque) and a GCWR of 26,000 lbs. Other than being a little thirsty, there's nothing wrong with the 6.8L. It has big block torque, revs like a small block, smooth as silk and goes forever. One thing that would make it a little better would a 6 speed auto. Also, 4V heads and the GT500's bore stroke giving it about 7.3L of displacement wouldn't hurt either.

[silvrsvt]

Or they are buying them because they can't afford homes with foundations anymore.

 

 

Well the difference in paying for gas for it might not make it cheaper

[7Mary3]

What really happened was the only other manufacturer of gas engined 'low end' class A chassis went out of business, and Ford has inherited the market. The other manufacturrer was Workhorse Custom Chassis. They were owned by Navistar, and they were a victim of low sales and Navistar's financial problems. Funny they mentioned Detroit Chassis, aren't they supposed to be kicked to the curb when the move to Avon Lake happens?

Edited February 18, 2013 by 7Mary3

[Arizona Mike]

That's good news for Ford and may make them speed up the introduction of the Transit cutaway to put in class C motorhomes. The old E cutaways are really getting long in the tooth, with the old 2 valve V10 and 2 valve 5.4 V8. When Ford finally does release a Transit cutaway, it will be a Sprinter kicker.

[jcthorne]

Ford is the only produceer of Gas engine motorhome chassis and had models up to 26,000lbs GVWR. The one linked to is a Thor Outlaw with a rear garage section for toys. The 6.8L V10 may be a little long on the tooth but there are no other current options for this chassis in Ford or any other lineup. CNG would be useless in the MH market and diesel options price the chassis out of the market. That is what killed Workhorse. They lost the Big Block Chevy gas engine and tried to make a run with front engine diesels but there was no market. Ford took the market share and Workhorse folded.

 

While there are low end coaches sold on this chassis, it is also under many higher end motorhomes such as Winnebago Adventurer, Thor Challenger and several Newmar models. There is roughly a 30k jump for the same class coach on a diesel pusher chassis and with the current diesel pricing and similar mileage between the two today....the gas engine coaches are taking a larger share of the market than ever before.

 

There are prototype Ecoboost 5.0 engines making the rounds. Rumors abound that it is the replacement for the GT500 5.8SC and the 6.8V10 in medium duty trucks.

 

Much like the MH chassis market, Ford has increased share in the MD truck market because of its gas engine offering.

[FordFanForEver]

if you have noticed, more Class C motorhome manufactueres use the Ford E-series for their 32 foot RVs. http://coachmenrv.com/products/freelander.aspx?page=floorplans

 

Notice how the larger 32 footers are on the Ford Chassis while the Chevrolet are not. That is because the Ford produces 305 hp and 420 lbs or torque while the Chevrolet produces 324 hp and only 373 lbs or torque. When climbing a steep grade, torque is what you need and the V10 handles the job better. While the Vortec does a good job, the V10 produces more torque for the job needed.

 

Another reason is the Ford chassis is stronger than the Chevrolet.

Edited February 19, 2013 by FordFanForEver

[FordFanForEver]

While there are some lesser expensive Ford F53 based Class A's out there, most are going to be $80K and up and many are over $100K. Things might be different in Maryland, but $100K can buy you a lot of house in Texas.

 

Here's a Class A on sale for a $125K. LINK

 

I would buy from MHSRV. I watch their youtube vids quite frequently and they seem friendly and willing to work. I would consider a Monaco LaPalma 30SBD or the Newmar BayStar 2901 floorplans. They don't have those models in stock but when I someday get in the RV market, I would most likely go for either floor plan as they are similar.

Edited February 19, 2013 by FordFanForEver

[92merc]

I'm sure the 5.0 will put out the torque. But the F150 EB guys are stating the 3.5EB consumes more fuel than the 5.0 under load. I would hope the fuel consumption on the 5.0EB wouldn't be worse the the V10. Otherwise, that isn't a "better" solution. Not that MH users are usually that concerned with mileage. It would still be a factor.

 

There are prototype Ecoboost 5.0 engines making the rounds. Rumors abound that it is the replacement for the GT500 5.8SC and the 6.8V10 in medium duty trucks.

[FordFanForEver]

I'm sure the 5.0 will put out the torque. But the F150 EB guys are stating the 3.5EB consumes more fuel than the 5.0 under load. I would hope the fuel consumption on the 5.0EB wouldn't be worse the the V10. Otherwise, that isn't a "better" solution. Not that MH users are usually that concerned with mileage. It would still be a factor.

 

Well, realistically speaking, if you are in the market for a motorhome, fuel economy is the least of your worries. However, one thing that scares me about the ecoboost motors is that Ford says they are good for up to 10 years or 150,000 miles. Many gas coaches are well over 10-20 years old and some of them have 150,000+ on them. Is Ford only saying that dwindle any law suits if the engine underperforms and dies out at 175,000 miles?

 

The 5.0 is a good motor and would benefit the Class A gas motorhome segment.

[bzcat]

If the F53 chassis based on the F650/750?

 

The E-van chassis is also very popular as taco truck. Makes you wonder if Ford will just keep making the chassis forever after the van is completely replaced by Transit.

Edited February 19, 2013 by bzcat

[NLPRacing]

If the F53 chassis based on the F650/750?

 

The E-van chassis is also very popular as taco truck. Makes you wonder if Ford will just keep making the chassis forever after the van is completely replaced by Transit.

 

The F53 is kind of unique, but it has more in common with the F550 than the F650/750.

[7Mary3]

There are prototype Ecoboost 5.0 engines making the rounds. Rumors abound that it is the replacement for the GT500 5.8SC and the 6.8V10 in medium duty trucks.

 

Much like the MH chassis market, Ford has increased share in the MD truck market because of its gas engine offering.

 

Ford has wanted to drop the V-10's for quite some time. Primary reason is the engine is expensive to manufacture. There are packaging issues as well, the outside dimensions are quite large. The 6.2L was supposed to replace the 5.4L and the V-10's in all the trucks, but that has not happened and it doesn't look like it ever will.

 

Wasn't there here was supposed to be a 7.0L heavy duty 'Boss'? Is the 6.2L Boss engine going to be an orphan? That could not have been Ford's original intent.

 

So, now the rumor is an Ecoboost 5,0L? Forgive me, but I am not too optimistic about that. Sounds like durability issues in a medium truck duty cycle. Big time.

 

Yes, Ford picked up some much needed market share in medium trucks on the account of the gas engine option. I heard some of the big rental fleets are going for it. Not too sure that combination will sell much outside of rental and municipal fleets. I hear it's quite underpowered, but I'll reserve judgement until I actually drive one. Good move, no question.

 

Once again, 'theoldwizard' is right.

[Edstock]

Ford says they are good for up to 10 years or 150,000 miles.

 

Please give us the source of this.

[Bob Rosadini]

Please give us the source of this.

I'll say! 150,000 miles is nothing today-30 years ago perhaps-but if someone in Ford actually made that statement I think we are in trouble . Never mind with respect to giving the 5.0 the EB treatment for medium duty use, but for all the 3.5 EB's in user-be they SHO's. PI's or 150's.

 

My guess is BS -in particular when the statement is ..."150,000 miles or 10 years"

[Inselaffe]

I'll say! 150,000 miles is nothing today-30 years ago perhaps-but if someone in Ford actually made that statement I think we are in trouble . Never mind with respect to giving the 5.0 the EB treatment for medium duty use, but for all the 3.5 EB's in user-be they SHO's. PI's or 150's.

 

My guess is BS -in particular when the statement is ..."150,000 miles or 10 years"

 

150000 miles or 10 years refers to a typical B10 life for Light Duty engines. B10 life meaning that 10% of the population will have failed at 150000 miles or 10 years for a typical duty cycle. This is not the whole story because you can cheat somewhat by specifying 150000 miles at 50mph or 30mph which can be the difference of 5000 or 3000 hours of B10 life. Typical medium duty engines have B50 life is 500000 miles or 10000 hours and heavy duty engines 1200000 miles or 20000 hours.

 

Personally I think an EB 5.0 wouldn't make a very good MD engine unless they dropped the peak power engine speed to ~3000rpm and gave it a CGI block, gallery cooled pistons with gear-to-gear cam drive for a minimum. Would really want CI heads, full gear drive, shaft mounted roller rockers (mechanical lash adjusted), replacable cam bearings, etc, but then that would be a serious redesign. I would still have my doubts about the GDI fuel system as well.

[Bob Rosadini]

150000 miles or 10 years refers to a typical B10 life for Light Duty engines. B10 life meaning that 10% of the population will have failed at 150000 miles or 10 years for a typical duty cycle. This is not the whole story because you can cheat somewhat by specifying 150000 miles at 50mph or 30mph which can be the difference of 5000 or 3000 hours of B10 life. Typical medium duty engines have B50 life is 500000 miles or 10000 hours and heavy duty engines 1200000 miles or 20000 hours.

 

Personally I think an EB 5.0 wouldn't make a very good MD engine unless they dropped the peak power engine speed to ~3000rpm and gave it a CGI block, gallery cooled pistons with gear-to-gear cam drive for a minimum. Would really want CI heads, full gear drive, shaft mounted roller rockers (mechanical lash adjusted), replacable cam bearings, etc, but then that would be a serious redesign. I would still have my doubts about the GDI fuel system as well.

Thx for the B10 explanation. I guess my concern is the blanket statement that "150,000" was "life". Would agree in any case on your RPM statement. I'll show my age and go back to the old Super Duty engines (401,477, 534 CI.) These things put out big torque numbers at like 1600-1800 RPM if my memory serves me right. And they would give a heavy truck diesel such as a Cummins NH 220 a run for the money.- all at about 4 mpg!

 

I recognize however that mod motors with their overhead cams offer new capabilities that you would not get out of a pushrod engine. Perhaps the RPM issue isnot as critical as it was? In any case no doubt the need exists for a capable gasoline/propane/cng option for medium duty-and even class 8 in select applications. If you don't run the miles, hard to justify the premium cost associated with a diesel.

[theoldwizard]

Ford has wanted to drop the V-10's for quite some time. Primary reason is the engine is expensive to manufacture. There are packaging issues as well, the outside dimensions are quite large. The 6.2L was supposed to replace the 5.4L and the V-10's in all the trucks, but that has not happened and it doesn't look like it ever will.

 

Wasn't there here was supposed to be a 7.0L heavy duty 'Boss'? Is the 6.2L Boss engine going to be an orphan? That could not have been Ford's original intent.

Yes ! I chatted with an engineering supervisor about this about 2-3 years ago. He did not know the specifics but said the 'Boss' engine (not certain what displacement) failed the Ford internal medium duty truck engine durability test. Nothing more specific, except that the test requires a lot of extended WOT.

So, now the rumor is an Ecoboost 5,0L? Forgive me, but I am not too optimistic about that. Sounds like durability issues in a medium truck duty cycle. Big time.

Not just durability, but also initial cost. An EB 5.0L (16 valves, 4 camshaft, 2 turbos) would cost a lot more than a 2V or 3V NA V8.

Yes, Ford picked up some much needed market share in medium trucks on the account of the gas engine option. I heard some of the big rental fleets are going for it. Not too sure that combination will sell much outside of rental and municipal fleets. I hear it's quite underpowered, but I'll reserve judgement until I actually drive one.

My opinion also. I expect that the "gaseous fuel" option will get them some more market share (although it does reduce power even more).

 

Please give us a review if and when you get an opportunity to drive one.

[goinbroke2]

We got a fleet of v-10's here and I find them fine but just the other day a couple guys were laughing about "that big v-10, when you step on the gas it just makes more noise" but they also commented that at 65mph it was at 1800rpm with the 6spd tranny. They're serious anti-ford guys but do offer "everyday persons" comments.

 

A few years ago we swapped out a 460 4 door dually with a new v-10 4 door dually and the milage was better and power seemed better. (13km's on the odomenter and while bringing it to the shop I roasted the dually's 30ft at a stop light, not torquing up against the brakes or anything, just mashing the pedal)

 

I might have to go for a cruise in one now just to check out a new one. (we just received 91 new trucks, 77 of them Ford...hehe, yes I do influence the fleet manager hehehe)