Drivablity of Class C?

E450 31 foot basement model wide body here. Handles great like a good solid 'truck' should.

I've gone on trips with my friends in Class A's and in my opinion the C handles better hands down. I took over the driving once and couldn't wait to get back home and into my C.

Any type of a small breeze sends those A's all of the road. It's a constant battle to keep them between the lines. Just watch them go down the road sometime. Only exception would be the buss types like the Prevost etc.

Handbasket wrote:
From reading this forum almost daily for a decade plus, the Ford C's are a dice roll. Some apparently handle OK, according to their owners. Others, to a vastly varying degree, respond mildly to wildly to road irregularities, cross winds, and /or passing trucks.

IMO, your best bet if you must insist on Ford is to find a floor plan you really like on a dealer's lot, verify tire pressures, and take it for a long test drive including rough roads & passing trucks. Note cab comfort on both sides. If you like the results, buy it on the spot.

Chevys seem to give a much better chance of driving well right out of the box, but generally are the shorter & lighter units. Cab comfort is better.

Jim, "Mo' coffee!"

From my personal experience, reading, and discussing issues with owners I think the biggest difference is the driver...period. Some have no problem and some complain and complain.

As for me, I had a Jayco on an E450 and put 65,000 miles on it. I did an alignment when it was new and replaced the shocks at 50,000 miles, never had a problem with handling.

I'm looking to improve the sway bars and those skinny rods. I noticed the rear passenger side rods is bent, will beef it up with a 3/4" heavy wall pipe to keep from too much deflction. currently 23U on a 350 chassis. but other then that it drive good. So far

I have a '12 Camry LE 4 cyl. A car often panned by enthusiasts for being a transportation appliance. Ordinary modern car? Yep.

Well it and almost everything else car wise these days handles like a million bucks. I can locate that Camry on the road within an inch or two at 80 MPH. Effortlessly drive mountain roads at advisory speeds and beyond. Fly along like all the other car traffic.

One thing when it comes to RVs, I think we need to be more accepting of the fact we're slow vehicles. That we can't keep up with even average passenger cars. That a mellow slow drive isn't bad. Maybe that helps put the handling issues in better perspective.

I fall in the stock is good camp. We have a 2007 26.5 Laze Daze on a E450. Others might find the ride a little tight but my every day car for the last 12 years has been either a 03 or 06 MINI Cooper with the upgraded suspension - a car that rides very tight.
I think the E450 handling could be improved with mods, but I am mostly happy and I am not willing to spend the money for the small increase in performance. If I lived in the mountains I might be of a different mind. When the current Bilstein Shocks ware out I may make the change Koni Shocks. I am intrigued by the FSD technology but have not done enough reading to be sold yet.

The Chevy might have a better ride but it is not offered with the RV that fit my style of camping.
John

My point #4 in action. Aspect/Chalet 31C should drive well. It's long enough to have enough wheelbase to shift weight forward. 220" wheelbase. Do you happen to have weights? Our 31A has 218" WB and 4500 on front axle. That keeps the rear axle, 9000, below its max rating. Much less WB and the front would lighten at expense of overloaded rear.

If handling is important, I'd strongly suggest finding a way of renting a similar unit, or taking a long test drive.

There are many variables. The weight loadings of various class Cs. Alignment settings. And (importantly) our individual response to various handling cues and feedback.

I've invested in heavy sway bars front and rear, and the rear Roadmaster track bar. I've basically come to peace with the handling-understand the limits. I simply drive within my limits -speed and total miles per day. Essentially I enjoy the overall package and accept the handling.

If handling is a very high priority, I'd surely suggest driving various chassis and picking the one you feel handles best. In my case there were other overriding priorities.

FWIW at times I can take corners at 5-10 MPH over advisory speed, particularly lower speed corners with good visibility. The handling is quite precise up to about 45 or 50 MPH. I would not, however, attempt to take a 60 MPH advisory at 70 MPH as the handling precision drops with speeds over 55 MPH. Wind, slope of road, and other factors contribute to less handling accuracy at high speeds. In general I do not keep up with most car traffic on mountain roads, and I try to accommodate their passing, or use pullouts.

There is a difference between handles well as stock, and having a performance suspension that can comfortably and safely take curves at 10 MPH over their rated speed. Much as the difference between a stock auto and one with performance suspension modifications.

Our tall, basement model 'C' handles much better than it did with stock factory suspension components. This allows us to keep up with traffic on curving roads.

never had a handling problem with our Winnie. It drives just fine straight from the factory.

Handbasket wrote:
... the Ford C's are a DICE ROLL. Some apparently handle OK, according to their owners. Others, to a vastly varying degree, respond mildly to wildly to road irregularities, cross winds, and /or passing trucks...

IMO, your best bet if you must insist on Ford is to find a FLOOR PLAN you really like on a dealer's lot, verify TIRE PRESSURES, and take it for a long TEST DRIVE including rough roads & passing trucks. Note cab comfort on both sides. If you like the results, buy it on the spot.

x99! It's really hard to figure why some drive so much better than others. I've read and experienced enough that I can offer a few comments.

1. Alignment Matters! High Positive CASTER (at least 5-degrees) and Zero to slight Toe In. Camber relates to Caster and doesn't seem as critical.

2. Tire Pressures are a bigger matter than you might think. I can testify to that from recent experience. Bought new tires and the shop "sidewalled" them. Says MAX 80? Inflate 80! WRONG!!! Get actual weights! Our actual should be 60 front and 75 rear. 80 rear didn't matter but we could barely control the coach with 80 front!

3. Weight Distribution! If it's Tail Heavy it's usually Front Light. Again, you need Actual Weights! Ford wants at least 32% on the front axle. Some say 75% of its rating, probably works out about the same.

4. Wheelbase determines Weight Distribution! Look at a C from the side. NOT counting the Cabover portion, If the House appears "Balanced" on the Rear Axle, there will not be adequate weight on the Front Axle. And sadly, Rear Axle may be overloaded right out of the factory. Put stuff in cabinets and basement storage, it's worse.

5. (Drum Roll Please)FLOORPLAN (call it Style if you like) and NOT weight distribution sets the WHEELBASE. I've seen enough and read enough to boldly make this statement and I'll stick to it. Walkaround Rear Queen Bed, Wheel Wells. Wheel wells require the whole Bedroom to be behind the Axle so the Wheel Wells won't impinge. Then they put an Appliance, or a Shower (which is the WHY for the Dome!) over the Wheel Well. This works OK if the coach is 30-31-feet. But the RV companies want to sell 26-ft with Walkaround Queen Bed and it has to be aft of the axle. Now the Wheelbase is TOO SHORT, the House appears BALANCED on the Axle, and it Handles Poorly.

I'm confident in all this to offer it as points for consideration. That said, the Chevrolet's Double Wishbone Front Suspension is less affected by body roll than Ford's Swing Axle setup is. For that reason, adding heavy duty Sway Bars to a Ford is more likely to improve handling and tracking. Rear Track Bar will improve tracking with any Live Axle Leaf Spring vehicle.