40' Gasser Too Large For V-10?

steved28 wrote:

wanderingaimlessly wrote:
It also depends on the year.
1999=============305 hp, 4250 rpms Tor 420 @ 2650
2000-2004========310 hp, 4250 prms Tor 425 @ 3250
2005- present ===362 hp, 4750 rpms Tor 457 @ 3250

Tranny and gearing has also changed over the years.

This is not correct for the F-53 Motorhome chassis. The V10 is advertised as 320HP and 460ft/lbs. I beleive there is a 362HP version of the V10, but not for motorhome use.

Ford did used the V10 362HP 457ft/lbs. in motorhomes.

steved28 wrote:

wanderingaimlessly wrote:
It also depends on the year.
1999=============305 hp, 4250 rpms Tor 420 @ 2650
2000-2004========310 hp, 4250 prms Tor 425 @ 3250
2005- present ===362 hp, 4750 rpms Tor 457 @ 3250

Tranny and gearing has also changed over the years.

This is not correct for the F-53 Motorhome chassis. The V10 is advertised as 320HP and 460ft/lbs. I believe there is a 362HP version of the V10, but not for motorhome use.

A couple of years ago they restated the power output as 320 HP at 3900 rpm, rather than 362 at 4750 rpm, without any (significant) changes to the engine; it's still the three valve V10 that has been around for a long time and is available on the F series trucks as well. It's possible there are some changes to the engine computer's programming. I heard a rumor that this was in order to meet emissions requirements (possibly noise emissions requirements) which were measured at the stated power output. As a practical matter the power output has not diminished, from all I've read; it's just measured at a different RPM.

The E series chassis still uses the 2 valve V10 variant, which produces less power, because the three valve one doesn't fit.

With either of the two main variants of the V10, the power and torque ratings have changed slightly over the years (generally increasing) with ongoing refinements and minor upgrades.

wanderingaimlessly wrote:
It also depends on the year.
1999=============305 hp, 4250 rpms Tor 420 @ 2650
2000-2004========310 hp, 4250 prms Tor 425 @ 3250
2005- present ===362 hp, 4750 rpms Tor 457 @ 3250

Tranny and gearing has also changed over the years.

This is not correct for the F-53 Motorhome chassis. The V10 is advertised as 320HP and 460ft/lbs. I beleive there is a 362HP version of the V10, but not for motorhome use.

irishtom29 wrote:


My experience with a 2016 34’ Tiffin gasser is that it handles fine.

I took delivery of a 2019 Winnebago 35F last year and I have to agree. I was all ready to immedietly start the suspension upgrades, but the coach rides and handles like a dream. Well, at least compared to the 32ft class C I had previously. If it aint broke...

wa8yxm wrote:
One thing. well really 3. that people forget when talking about engines is the transmission. gear splitter (Optional) and Differential.

A flat four can get your RV up the hill.. VERY VERY SLOWLY given the proper gear ratios... It's not HP but torque at the rear axle that gets you up the hill

HP does it FASTER is all.

I drive a 37'7" clalss A with the Chevy V-8. HP and Torque wise so close to the Ford V-10 as to call 'em the same (Chevy had a bit more HP as I recall and a lower RPM for peak HP and Peak Torque giving it a slight advantage.

But I often pass semi's going up hill.. IT's all about the gear ratio not the HP.

Not sure where you learned this, but it could not be more wrong. Torque without horsepower is useless. The act of climbing a mountain is "work." Horsepower is a measure of "work" that can be done in a period of time. Torque without reference to time is meaningless because no matter how hard you push on a wall, if it doesn't move, no work has been performed despite the application of force. Perhaps "peak" horsepower isn't the most important because the gearing may not not be able to hold the engine there. But there can be zero doubt that the maximum rate of work an engine can perform is if kept at that number. Peak torque tells you nothing other than where the engine is most efficient at turning fuel into twisting force, without regard to what can be accomplished with that force.

To the OP: as long as you don't care about fuel mileage, 362 horsepower is plenty to move 30k pounds. As many have responded, it's not going to feel fast. The people who want fast are buying 500 and 600 horsepower pushers.

irishtom29 wrote:

mtofell1 wrote:


One thing I did learn from my research is an "out of the box" F53 chassis really rides and handles pretty poorly (especially compared to a DP, obviously). If/when I make the leap from my 5th wheel to a gasser I am budgeting a few thousand dollars for suspension upgrades and improvements.

My experience with a 2016 34’ Tiffin gasser is that it handles fine. This might be attributed to the 24,000 pound chassis (most coaches this size are on a 22,000 or less chassis) and the 228’ wheelbase, the longest in class. Anyway I’m skeptical not only of claims of poor handling but also with the improvements people say they get with aftermarket devices, which people so often claim make a “night and day” difference.

Well, be skeptical, but I put a Hellwig rear anti-sway bar on my 33 foot SeaBreeze LX gasser, and it really did make a night and day difference as far as being pushed around by semis in the freeway. I'm now not hanging on for dear life when a semi passes me. It, of course, did nothing for the ride, but the Hellwig is over twice the diameter of the stock bar. I improved my ride by lowering the tire pressure to match the true weight of the MH (had it weighed full with wife and I in it).

Al

mtofell1 wrote:


One thing I did learn from my research is an "out of the box" F53 chassis really rides and handles pretty poorly (especially compared to a DP, obviously). If/when I make the leap from my 5th wheel to a gasser I am budgeting a few thousand dollars for suspension upgrades and improvements.

My experience with a 2016 34’ Tiffin gasser is that it handles fine. This might be attributed to the 24,000 pound chassis (most coaches this size are on a 22,000 or less chassis) and the 228’ wheelbase, the longest in class. Anyway I’m skeptical not only of claims of poor handling but also with the improvements people say they get with aftermarket devices, which people so often claim make a “night and day” difference.

wanderingaimlessly wrote:

2005- present ===362 hp, 4750 rpms Tor 457 @ 3250

I can't remember the exact year but roughly 4-5 years ago the HP rating changed to 330HP but at a lower RPM. After researching it I found the actual engine output is the same but they started taking the reading a lower RPM for some reason.

So, OP if you find newer ones rated at 330HP don't worry, it's the same engine. I researched heavy gassers extensively a couple years ago and found a lot of good reviews with the 6spd tranny (I want to say 2016ish and newer). Aside from much better gear spacing allowing you to run at lower RPMs and tighter shift points, the sound deadening/insulation was much better which resulted in less noise in the cab while going up hills (a common complaint).

I was left thinking a large gasser would be okay if it otherwise worked out for you (floor plan, etc.).

One thing I did learn from my research is an "out of the box" F53 chassis really rides and handles pretty poorly (especially compared to a DP, obviously). If/when I make the leap from my 5th wheel to a gasser I am budgeting a few thousand dollars for suspension upgrades and improvements.

One thing. well really 3. that people forget when talking about engines is the transmission. gear splitter (Optional) and Differential.

A flat four can get your RV up the hill.. VERY VERY SLOWLY given the proper gear ratios... It's not HP but torque at the rear axle that gets you up the hill

HP does it FASTER is all.

I drive a 37'7" clalss A with the Chevy V-8. HP and Torque wise so close to the Ford V-10 as to call 'em the same (Chevy had a bit more HP as I recall and a lower RPM for peak HP and Peak Torque giving it a slight advantage.

But I often pass semi's going up hill.. IT's all about the gear ratio not the HP.

If it accelerates from 35 to 68 within the length of the on-ramp, it passes my test.