MrTravelDecal wrote: Plus, 99 out of every 100 Ambulance drivers can't be wrong.
Virtually every Ford ambulance produced in the last 15 years has had a diesel engine. You will not see an ambulance with a V10, unless the builder and buyer were willing to forego the factory warranty. The Ford Ambulance Prep Package is not available with a V10.
1998 Gulfstream Ultra B/H Ford E450 V10
2005 Chevy 2500HD 6.0 w/ Maxidump insert
6x12 Interstate enclosed trailer
7x16 Bulldog flatbed hauling a 2006 Kioti CK20 TLB
2003 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer
1998 Saturn SL2 toad
I have no intention of telling anyont which is better, just that I have a Four Winds 5000 28A with the Chevy 6.0 and have no complaints. Recently took a 1,700 mile trip around the southwest (Colorado, Utah and Arizona) fully loaded with four people and got a solid 10 MPG and never went below 55 climbing some long steep grades.
Quiet, comfortable and no ovetheating problems. Did not tow anything.
I am a GM guy, not a Ford guy. But I think Ford is the better choice for an RV chassis for these reasons.
- Recent improvements for 2008 has been done on the Ford chassis for improved handling, weight capability, and braking power. They exceed the GM chassis. This increases additional stuff you can haul, and also what you can tow.
- The Ford chassis is shorter by 9 inches which is significant. If you compare identical RV's one on a Ford and one on a GM, the Ford is either 9" shorter, or it has 9" more living space.
Though I love GM products more over-all, I have to say.....not for an RV. The GM chassis is not bad for an RV, it's only that Ford is a bit better. It is also the most popular chassis used for class-C's, which says something too.
Bought new in June 2007, Phoenix Cruiser-2350
Fits inside our garage.
Dingy towing a red Toyota MR2 Spyder
See The Inside by clicking on "View Profile" and scroll down
We used to have a 2004 BT Cruiser on an E350SD chassis. It was a great powertrain. We recently got a 2009 Freelander on the Chevy Chassis. We haven't really used it yet but are about to head out to test it on the same SW Wisconsin hills that the Ford just laughed at. If it is as good as the Ford was we will be very happy with it.
There are some things posted here about the Chevy that are not true of ours. The Ford had a 55 gallon tank, the Chevy is 35. Is 35 gallons two gallons more than 55??? According to Coachmen some of the Chevys come with 57 gallons but not all. The Chevy is 12,300 pounds, the Ford was 11,500. The Ford does not have much more GVWR than the Chevy, not in all the size ranges anyway. The maximum for the Ford is 14,500, the maximum for the Chevy is 14,050. Ford wins at the top end, by less than 5%. Chevy wins on power at 323 Hp versus 305, Ford wins on torque at 420 ft-lbs versus 373.
The Chevy has nicer coach access for the passenger although the latest Fords are much closer. The Ford had power mirrors and remote keyless entry, the Chevy has neither. The Ford had a weatherband radio, the Chevy does not. The Chevy chassis is available with a compass built into the dashboard driver information center, Workhorse chose not to put it in the cutaway chassis for motorhomes. The hand holes in the Ford wheels were impossibly small and I had to add the Tireman extended valves to get access to the valves for filling the tires. The original Ford valves were rubber and were impossible to get a truck air chuck on. The Chevy valves are steel and the hand holes are huge giving you excellent access to them. But wait, Workhorse puts on these wheel simulators that have tiny hand holes that block your access to the tire valves. You have to pry the simulators off to check/fill the tires!! Workhorse claims that as of Jan 2008 the Chevy/Workhorse class C chassis has a 30% market share and climbing which is a big improvement for them.
Corporately Ford treated me like a long lost brother even though I bought my Ford used. We bought the Chevy brand new at a time when Chevy and big fuel hogs are both a tough sell and Chevy could care less about us. I can't get an answer about anything from Chevy, Ford answered every question I asked and promptly (although Workhorse does respond about the things that they know). I'm neither a Ford guy nor a Chevy guy but if I had to chose one right now I would go with the blue oval. The chassis differences are a mixed bag, Ford just treated us better. I don't like being ignored and Chevy is blowing big time what is probably GM's one and only chance to impress me as a consumer.
klhutch wrote: Ford answered every question I asked and promptly
My experience has been the same. Even though I only own one van with over 200,000 miles Ford has always been quick to respond to any question I've asked, no matter how obscure or technical (like "Can I use the CTO wire on the Power Take Off wire harness for an aftermarket tachometer?"... BTW the answer is yes but the tach will have to set for 2-cyl operation).
Also, Ford has engineering documents publicly available, so its easy to learn what is okay and not okay to do to the chassis. Frame stretching is one document that applies to most RV owners (especially those who want to tow more than typical). These documents are not available for Chevy/workhorse.
Bryan
2000 Ford E350 DRW Wagon (14-pass all captains chairs)
V10 w/ Banks PowerPack, Diablo Predator, 4.56 LS, 230,000+ miles
Had: Weekend Warrior 41' FSW (still looking for its replacement)
Locally, the only new ambulances they're buying for 'public' service are 1-ton Chevys based on the DRW pickup with the Duramax / Allison combo. From a published rumor, they had 'way too much drivetrain trouble with their fleet of E-350 & 450 diesel Fords, even while still in warranty. I know I got that rumor from the paper or TV news, just don't recall which, since it was 6 months or more ago. But the Chevy's are showing up now, and sure look fine. I'm sure the jury's still out on the question of reliability relative to the Fords.
The major hospital is running big MDT truck chassis, Freightliners IIRC.
Jim, "Mo' coffee!"
'06 Tiger CX 'C Minus' on a Silverado 2500HD 4x4, 8.1 & Allison ('Loafer's Glory'); '07 Forester 2.5 ( the 'HANDBSKT'); '95 Toyota SR5 V-6 4x4 pickup, ARB locker, Bilsteins, Warn hubs & M8000, etc;
'94 968, M030 swaybars ('DOPPLER')
crawford wrote: Just wanted to add my 2 cents I was out and about found 12 Ambulances not one had a desiel or V10 all had V8's triton 5.4,s
Just wondering if were confusing Ambulances with fire rescue vehicles ?
All the fire rescue vehicles in my area are Diesel powered and are built on a much larger platform than the Ambulances. Here is what seems to be most common for RESCUE VEHICLE
Just wanted to add my 2 cents I was out and about found 12 Ambulances not one had a desiel or V10 all had V8's triton 5.4,s
Guess we've gotten a little off topic, but oh well. That's interesting how an ambulance builder would build and sell a vehicle with no factory warranty on the chassis. In order for the Ford warranty to be valid on an ambulance, the chassis must be equipped with the Ford ambulance prep package. The only available engine with this package is the diesel.
I'm sure it varies by region, but at least 90% of fire departments (including mine) and ambulance companies around here use Fords. A few departments use the larger medium duties, but a least one has switched back to the E450. The guys there say the medium duties cost more to buy, operate and maintain, and the bigger chassis is overkill in an aid car or ambulance application.
Offline
