Open Roads Forum

Print  |  Close

Topic: Chevy 6 L engine in short Class C vs Ford V8 or V10

Posted By: stevekk on 05/01/12 08:30am

I am new to all this.
Been looking for my first RV ever and want a short Class C.

I see most New and not very old Class C have the Ford chassis with either the V8 or V10.

Anyway... I see a used 23 foot 2008 Fleetwood class C on ebay.

It has the Chevy 6 liter engine.

Is this engine OK? Coach has less than 4000 miles on it.
How does it compare to the Ford? should I stay with Ford?
Owner claims 14 to 19 mpg. Can this be true?
Someone told me the Chevy engines will get better gas mileage than Ford?

thanks again to everyone.


Posted By: Bob86ZZ4 on 05/01/12 09:06am

Ford vs. Chevy debate, no right answer there. I'm a Chevy man. I'd never buy a Ford. The 6.0 Chev motor is very solid. A great motor. That seller is a liar about 14-19 mpg. What else is he lying about? I'd question that. The 6.0 motor is not known as a thrifty gas sipper. I have a 6.0 in my conversion van. Van weighs 7000 lbs. Best mileage I've ever gotten is 16 on a highway trip. Regularly gets 12 mpg combined driving. Pulling my enclosed car trailer (about 8k total weight) gets 9-10 mpg. The other thing to consider is the Chev. trans and rear diff that comes with that 6.0. They are both heavy duty and top notch. Forget about what mileage you're going to get. That's not important. Keeping it on the road, not in the shop, is.


'03 United Specialties truck conversion built on Freightliner FL112 chassis, Cat C-12 motor, 10 speed autoshift, 430h/p, 1650 torque, love the truck conversion.



Posted By: rjstractor on 05/01/12 09:08am

The 6.0 should be a good match for that size rig. The Ford V10 has better low end and IMO is better for moving heavy loads. (I own rigs with both engines, so no irrational brand bias here)

I don't think I would want a 5.4 Ford in a motorhome. It has the same power rating as the 6.0 but must rev higher to produce the same power. However, it's a good, reliable engine.

14-19 mpg? Either the guy is a liar or can't do math. My 2500HD pickup with the 6.0 towing a light enclosed trailer doesn't do anywhere near that well. My best tank towing just 2,000 pounds was 14.7 mpg, and that was at 60 mph with a quartering tailwind. I do have a dump box insert which affects the aerodynamics quite a bit. With that motorhome, expect 10 mpg +/-, and be happy with it. I get 7-8.5 with my 30' Ford V10.

* This post was edited 05/01/12 01:51pm by rjstractor *


1998 Gulfstream Ultra B/H Ford E450 V10
2005 Chevy 2500HD 6.0 w/ Maxidump insert
2006 Ford Escape Hybrid
1998 Saturn SL2 toad
2012 VW Jetta S


Posted By: j-d on 05/01/12 09:13am

Yes, it seems the Chevy 6.0 gets a little better mileage than the Fords.

To me, it'd be a good choice in a smaller Class C. Along with its adequate performance, you get more cab room and better tracking on the road than with most of the unmodified Fords.


God Bless, jd
2003 Jayco Escapade 31A on 2002 Ford E450 V10 4R100


Posted By: Kamphiker on 05/01/12 09:34am

Which Transmission does the chevy have?

I would pick the Ford with The TorqShift Transmission over a 4l80E Chevy and if it has the 4L60E it would not even be a consideration.


2006 Winnebago Outlook WF324V
2009 Honda CR-V 2wd TOAD ......Campgrounds in the Smoky Mountains NP
Last Camping trip ->2011 SUMMER SMOKY MOUNTAINS NATIONAL PARK



Posted By: cybrfalcon on 05/01/12 09:35am

No way you are going to see 14-19 mpg. Best I could do with a 22' MH and the 5.4 engine was 12 mpg. And that was only one trip. Average was 10 mpg and we only got that by holding the speed t0 60mph.


Posted By: IAMICHABOD on 05/01/12 09:42am

j-d wrote:

Yes, it seems the Chevy 6.0 gets a little better mileage than the Fords.

To me, it'd be a good choice in a smaller Class C. Along with its adequate performance, you get more cab room and better tracking on the road than with most of the unmodified Fords.

I have to agree mine is a 26Q and it has more room in the cab and drives much better than the un modified fords
as for the mileage I also think your seller is stretching the truth more than a bit. I have never got much more than the fords but it is more roomy,quieter and rides smoother.


2006 TIOGA 26Q CHEVY 6.0 WORKHORSE VORTEC
Recycled El Monte RV Rental

Buying A Rental Class C

Chevrolet Based Class C



Posted By: Turbo Diesel Dude on 05/01/12 04:20pm

My 2500 HD 6.0 ExtCab 2011 Chevy gave me almost 8 pulling our 30TT and 12 MAX empty. Years ago, I had a 26ft winnebago motorhome with the 350 and got may be 5mpg and would hardly pull a grade. Replaced it with a 454 roller and WOW!!! 12+ mpg and hills were never a problem. Did have a lot of exhaust heat from the doghouse.JMHO


charles weidman


Posted By: TyroneandGladys on 05/01/12 07:34pm

From the forums that I have seen two things that the Chevy has with out debate is more leg room and less dog house heat


Tyrone & Gladys
26' 1986 Coachmen


Posted By: tenbear on 05/01/12 07:49pm

My 28A, 31' overall, has the Chevy 6.0L engine. It does fine in the hills and has 9 MPG average towing a Subaru. To get 14-19 MPG you would need a tailwind and always drive downhill. Your smaller rig should do very well with the Chevy engine. As others have said, there is more room, less noise and less heat.


Class C, 2004/5 Four Winds Dutchman Express 28A, Chevy chassis
2010 Subaru Impreza Sedan
Camped in 45 states, 7 Provinces and 1 Territory



Posted By: dleslie125 on 05/01/12 08:17pm

What is the rating of the receiver on the 2008 Fleetwood? 3500 lbs or 5,000 lbs. That will have an impact on what you can tow. The Chev GVWR and GCWR have always been much lower than the E450's numbers.


2011 Itasca Impulse 26QP Silver Toad 2014 Jeep Cherokee Limited
New W-I Class C Yahoo Group
07 Jayco 32SS Kodiak 8.1 • 06 HR Amb 40PLQ ISC • 04 Winnie Jrny 39W CAT • 2000 Triple E Cder F53
Prev toads •11 Escape 07 Tahoe LTZ • 04 Colorado


Posted By: marvh on 05/02/12 03:08am

We have an 2012 4500 that has a 14200 gvwr and a 20000 gcwr.

The on board info center shows 9.6 towing an HHR. in Fl.

The motorhome is a 29QB Freelander with no slides.
We had a e450 Ford and the creature comforts and handling are not comparable to the Chevy.

Here is an interesting article.

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/Apr/0411_express


Marvh


Posted By: RvBill3 on 05/02/12 04:21am

We compared Ford and Chevy side by side at a dealer. Exact same model. One thing is certain. The legroom in the Chevy is much better (especially for passenger) and I could get out of driver's seat and exit to the coach in Chevy and could not in the Ford without raising leg up and over the seat.

So far we have averaged 11mpg at 60mph fully loaded but no toad. Got into a situation with a truck along side me and his lane was ending and had plenty of reserve power to accelerate my way out of trouble. Very happy with the Chevy.


2012 Forest River Sunseeker 2300 Chevy


Posted By: dleslie125 on 05/02/12 07:24am

RvBill3 wrote:

We compared Ford and Chevy side by side at a dealer. Exact same model. One thing is certain. The legroom in the Chevy is much better (especially for passenger) and I could get out of driver's seat and exit to the coach in Chevy and could not in the Ford without raising leg up and over the seat.

So far we have averaged 11mpg at 60mph fully loaded but no toad. Got into a situation with a truck along side me and his lane was ending and had plenty of reserve power to accelerate my way out of trouble. Very happy with the Chevy.


I find this difficult to believe based on our experience. I'm 225 lbs a have no problem moving from the driver's seat into the back. My wife is 180 and has no problem going from the co-pilot's seat to the back. In fact, while travelling she does it regularly.


Posted By: Kamphiker on 05/02/12 07:46am

dleslie125 wrote:

RvBill3 wrote:

We compared Ford and Chevy side by side at a dealer. Exact same model. One thing is certain. The legroom in the Chevy is much better (especially for passenger) and I could get out of driver's seat and exit to the coach in Chevy and could not in the Ford without raising leg up and over the seat.

So far we have averaged 11mpg at 60mph fully loaded but no toad. Got into a situation with a truck along side me and his lane was ending and had plenty of reserve power to accelerate my way out of trouble. Very happy with the Chevy.


I find this difficult to believe based on our experience. I'm 225 lbs a have no problem moving from the driver's seat into the back. My wife is 180 and has no problem going from the co-pilot's seat to the back. In fact, while travelling she does it regularly.


Depends on the House builder and changes to seating / doghouse.

I'm 6'1" and have no problem easily moving from drivers seat to house. But Winnebago has a different Accessory / Cup holder on the dog house and the seats are also slightly modified but on the factory Ford Base.

My son (almost 6'0) when sitting in passenger side has no problems getting to the house, but the leg room is a bit tight.


Posted By: dleslie125 on 05/02/12 12:25pm

Kamphiker wrote:

dleslie125 wrote:

RvBill3 wrote:

We compared Ford and Chevy side by side at a dealer. Exact same model. One thing is certain. The legroom in the Chevy is much better (especially for passenger) and I could get out of driver's seat and exit to the coach in Chevy and could not in the Ford without raising leg up and over the seat.

So far we have averaged 11mpg at 60mph fully loaded but no toad. Got into a situation with a truck along side me and his lane was ending and had plenty of reserve power to accelerate my way out of trouble. Very happy with the Chevy.


I find this difficult to believe based on our experience. I'm 225 lbs a have no problem moving from the driver's seat into the back. My wife is 180 and has no problem going from the co-pilot's seat to the back. In fact, while travelling she does it regularly.


Depends on the House builder and changes to seating / doghouse.

I'm 6'1" and have no problem easily moving from drivers seat to house. But Winnebago has a different Accessory / Cup holder on the dog house and the seats are also slightly modified but on the factory Ford Base.

My son (almost 6'0) when sitting in passenger side has no problems getting to the house, but the leg room is a bit tight.


We were dropping down in size from a Kodiak and heard so many comments about the space and heat and my DW finds both are total non-issues for us.

Only thing I want would be electrically operated seats. Ours swivel so they can face the rear but we never use them in that fashion.

Don


Posted By: Edosmar on 05/02/12 12:40pm

We have a Coachman 2130QB with the Chevy engine, it is 25 ft. bumper to bumper. Wife and I spent 5 months on the road this winter from Rockport Texas to Key West FL and back to MI. Our best tank of gas was 11.?, average was about 8.4 and that was towing a Chevy Tracker because it was under the 3500 lb towing option with the Chevy. We are happy with our unit but if you want to tow a Jeep you may need to get a Ford V10.


Posted By: mlts22 on 05/02/12 02:13pm

If MPG is a primary concern, you can go with a diesel Sprinter 3500 based chassis. The V6 gets 20+ MPG, although you likely will be limited to 5000 pounds or less for towing (if that).

Ford should be shipping their Transit (nothing to do with the ugly Transit Connect runabouts) vans here in the US in a year or two. They look and function similar to Sprinters, except they likely will have the EcoBoost V8, which should help with the gas numbers.

Were it me, I'd put the amount of gas almost last on the list. First thing is making sure the rig has the floor plan and usability you want, second thing is quality and resistance to leaks, and go from there.


Posted By: TippleUnduly on 05/05/12 01:57pm

You are very correct about this being an interesting article. If you believe the objectivity claimed for the Chevy vs. Ford tests, the results are conclusive. After testing identical coaches on the 2 chassis back-to-back, I know that I am very pleased with my Chevy choice and would do it again.

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/Apr/0411_express


Bill K


Print  |  Close