| |
Subject |
Author |
Date Posted |
Forum
|
 |
New exhaust opinions
My 27' Tioga will need an exhaust this spring. It has the 460/C6 combo. I have replaced both manifold gaskets and been down that road. The rig does not have catalytic converters on it. I was thinking about replacing the entire exhaust from the manifolds back with 3" dual exhaust with two free flowing mufflers. My reasoning for this is to potentially decrease the the temperature under the doghouse and hopefully increasing the life of the manifolds and gaskets. I am also hoping this will allow the engine to breathe better and possibly increase fuel mileage / performance. Any thoughts? Any muffler recommendations? I DO NOT want my rig to be loud.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/23/13 11:52am |
Class C Motorhomes
|
 |
RE: Ford increases production
You cannot compensate for cubic inches. Ford Ecoboost is a joke. They are fine for soccer moms that take their trucks to the grocery store once a week but are not practical for longitivty or drivability in a heavy duty chassis. I have two friends that have this engine in their F150's and are not happy. Much lower than advertised fuel mileage as well as underpowered are their complaints. My 1/2 ton 11' Chevy with the 5.3 runs circles around their trucks and gets better fuel mileage.
This is bowtie loving nonsense
Its not a bowtie thing. Its common mechanical sense. You cannot decrease motor size and compensate with turbos in heavy applications. Ecco boost is a joke. Good luck getting any type longetivity out of an engine like that while doing any type of heavy hauling for an extended amount of time. I own a fleet of pick up trucks. The trucks with the smaller engines always have engine failures first. Small engines that are worked hard for an extended amount of time WILL NOT hold up. You cannot decrease cubic inches and add a turbo while trying to motor a 20,000 lb rv down the road. The results will be a tempermental, over engineered joke, which Ford is famous for.
Heavy hauling like my truck?
Turbos like my truck ?
longegivity like my truck ?
you are flailing at a new tech because the bow tie is behind
FYI the Ecoboost tech is a lot more then just turbos bolted to a engine.
cooled pistons
syphon cooled trubo
direct injection
ECM nanny watching your every move
But I doubt you will care until GM catches up
Catch up just like Ford did with the Navistar 6.0 that screwed me out over $100,000 from lost down time and repairs over multiple trucks? Or how about the 6.4 Navistar that also burned me for even MORE money than the 6.0 liter did? Ford would do nothing for me. Catch up? Also, the technology you described appears to be diesel which is NO comparison to my previous comment.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/23/13 11:44am |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Ford increases production
Chris...I have one of those gutless wonders producing 647 HP at the rear wheels and 475 lbft of torque. Come on down and I will show you what a gutless wonder can do. Oh and it also got 20mpg last time I checked it.Havent seen a bowtie anywhere but the rearview mirror since 2003.
Wow. Bone stock off the showroom floor? That's amazing. Even a lawn mower can be twisted and turned up with enough wrench time.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/23/13 11:35am |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Ford increases production
The level of idiocy on here is absolutely staggering.......
|
chrisjpr
|
02/23/13 11:30am |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: 19.5 vision wheels and Dyna trac 225/70/ 19.5
My whole interest in possibly owning a truck camper in the future is beach camping and dune camping. 19.5" wheels and tires aren't able to be aired down. Thus eliminating sand camping and the interest in a truck camper. It's not a necessity to change wheels to carry a TC. Heavy TCs maybe but not all TC/truck combinations. You can still consider a TC for sand trips.
My point was I don't want the 19.5s because I want to sand camp.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/21/13 06:07pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Ford increases production
If you are ever in Fla stop in and I will be happy to show you. I had a 2010 F-150 with 4.6 V8 that got 21 mpg highway consistently.
I don't doubt that. 4.6 was a guttless wonder though.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/21/13 06:02pm |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Ford increases production
You cannot compensate for cubic inches. Ford Ecoboost is a joke. They are fine for soccer moms that take their trucks to the grocery store once a week but are not practical for longitivty or drivability in a heavy duty chassis. I have two friends that have this engine in their F150's and are not happy. Much lower than advertised fuel mileage as well as underpowered are their complaints. My 1/2 ton 11' Chevy with the 5.3 runs circles around their trucks and gets better fuel mileage.
This is bowtie loving nonsense
Its not a bowtie thing. Its common mechanical sense. You cannot decrease motor size and compensate with turbos in heavy applications. Ecco boost is a joke. Good luck getting any type longetivity out of an engine like that while doing any type of heavy hauling for an extended amount of time. I own a fleet of pick up trucks. The trucks with the smaller engines always have engine failures first. Small engines that are worked hard for an extended amount of time WILL NOT hold up. You cannot decrease cubic inches and add a turbo while trying to motor a 20,000 lb rv down the road. The results will be a tempermental, over engineered joke, which Ford is famous for.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/21/13 06:01pm |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Ford increases production
chrisjpr tell your friends to take there F-150s out of first gear they will get better mileage and outrun the cheby everyday of the week. I have 3 friends who have ecoboost trucks all getting 22-23 mpg and they can keep up with my Lightning truck. I have considered a supercharger on my V-10 I wonder if it would improve fuel mileage if I could keep my foot out of it.LOL
22-23? I'm not buying it.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/21/13 07:35am |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Ford increases production
You cannot compensate for cubic inches. Ford Ecoboost is a joke. They are fine for soccer moms that take their trucks to the grocery store once a week but are not practical for longitivty or drivability in a heavy duty chassis. I have two friends that have this engine in their F150's and are not happy. Much lower than advertised fuel mileage as well as underpowered are their complaints. My 1/2 ton 11' Chevy with the 5.3 runs circles around their trucks and gets better fuel mileage.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/20/13 07:33pm |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: 19.5 vision wheels and Dyna trac 225/70/ 19.5
My whole interest in possibly owning a truck camper in the future is beach camping and dune camping. 19.5" wheels and tires aren't able to be aired down. Thus eliminating sand camping and the interest in a truck camper.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/18/13 04:55pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Wiring issues with my 2012 Lance 855S
I don't understand why you are choosing to repair all of these issues. You are MUCH more patient than I would EVER be. If this was my camper, the salesman would have a 855S shoved somewhere very uncomfortable as well as my size 13 boot. I try not to make habit of rebuilding a brand new camper that is under warranty and one I just paid $30,000 for.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/17/13 12:16pm |
Truck Campers
|
|
RE: Is your mileage better in your camp chair
There are two things all men tend to exaggerate on. One of them is fuel mileage.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/17/13 11:48am |
Class C Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Why is the load capacity on dualed tires lower?
The load rating is lower because of the potential for rubbing while they are loaded. Tires squat and bulge slightly at the bottom when loaded.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/11/13 03:19pm |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Need all Leaf Spring info on 2009 Fleetwood Bounder!
Measure well.
I expect if I drove it in there I would drive it the other 55 miles .
X2. It made it in their, it can make it to the next shop.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/10/13 05:50am |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Class A Front Window heat loss - need advice
Spray foam.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/09/13 02:14pm |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Red Max Pro #3
I can't keep a good shine with this product. Overtime it fades and results in me having to recoat after a few months. Any advice?Thats odd. I haven't had the same result at all. Perhaps the prep was different???
I'd suggest you completely strip the rear cap and re-prep and re-apply.
Don't get me wrong, it still looks better than it did but it looses it's luster after about three months. My rig is a dark tan with burgundy graphics. I'm guessing the darker color makes any change in sheen that much more noticeable.
How many coats did you initially apply?
Since ZEP does not hold up well on horizontal surfaces in full sun you may be on to the reason it does not stay shining long on your MH vertical surfaces if the color makes the skin get hotter. It would be interesting if anyone has had success on a black/really dark RV.
I initially applied 3 coats. I now have approximately 8 from recoating every few months.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/08/13 04:17pm |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Cost of driving a Class C
I budget for $5,000.00 a year. This covers maintenance, storage, fuel, insurance and so forth. Fortunately my rig is paid for so I'm able to keep that number down. Factor in the cost of the rig and you would have to divide it over th years you own it and add it to this figure of course. We travel about 5,000 miles a year.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/08/13 11:46am |
Class C Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Red Max Pro #3
I can't keep a good shine with this product. Overtime it fades and results in me having to recoat after a few months. Any advice?Thats odd. I haven't had the same result at all. Perhaps the prep was different???
I'd suggest you completely strip the rear cap and re-prep and re-apply.
Don't get me wrong, it still looks better than it did but it looses it's luster after about three months. My rig is a dark tan with burgundy graphics. I'm guessing the darker color makes any change in sheen that much more noticeable.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/08/13 11:39am |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Red Max Pro #3
I can't keep a good shine with this product. Overtime it fades and results in me having to recoat after a few months. Any advice?
|
chrisjpr
|
02/07/13 06:30pm |
Class A Motorhomes
|
|
RE: Chevrolet Based Class C
Sounds like you've explored the topic & already decided - so buy the Chevy.
I did!! And didn't have to rebuild the front end after 19000 miles :B
Amen to that. Our church bus is a 26 passenger body on a E450 chassis. Basically the same set up as a 28' class c. We bought it new and have maintained it vigorously. At about 20,000 miles all ball joints had to be replaced at our cost. The front end has always been out of alignment. We've taken it to several different shops and they all tell us it is as close as they can get it. So since it was new the steering wheel is slightly rotated counterclockwise. What a joke. Now this last week I noticed a howling or moaning sound in the front while traveling at low speeds. Yep, you guessed it, bad wheel bearing. The unit only has 32,000 pampered miles on it!! The dealership told me that this is a commonality on E450s and I am lucky I havent had more problems than what we've had. Unbelievable.
|
chrisjpr
|
02/06/13 08:17pm |
Class C Motorhomes
|
