In my research for a new motor home, I looked for comments on the E350 Chassis. I found some disturbing comments concerning the stability and handling of the Chassis.I contacted Pleasureway and was advised that the Excel was built on the E350 Van Chassis and indeed did have some handling issues. It was corrected by adding spacers and with other modifications. I previously owned an Excel and that appears to be true. The only problem I had with it was scuffing on the front tires. I replaced the tires but never did find out what caused it in the first place.Pleasureway also said the Pursuit was built on the E350 Chassis and did not have any handling issues. However, from what I read, some Class C motor homes on that chassis did experience problems.I would like to know if anyone has first hand knowledge of the handling performance of the E350 Chassis and, if the problems were restricted to earlier years. Information from late model year owners would be very helpful.

We have had our 2012 Nexus Phantom 23P (24'), Class C for nearly 2 years and 23,000 miles. I have experienced Zero, Zip, Nada handling/ride issues. It is always smooth and steady and passing trucks are no problem. Yes, I feel their bow wave but so do other trucks. Driving in anything up to 35 mph winds is easy one handed steering (over 35 I just get off the road). Keep in mind that this is probably the largest (tallest - 11'4", widest - 101"), 24' C on the road today).Our 2011 chassis has GVWR of 11,500# (Ford increased the E-350 to 12,500# with the 2012 chassis), and we travel fully loaded at around 11,000# (as we keep adding "stuff" and I carry lots of tools and toys). :SSome day I will replace the original shocks, probably in another 20,000 miles or so and Bilsteins are at the top of my shopping list. I run Michelin LTX M/S 2's at 60 psi on the front and 65 on the rears. This gives me about a 20 - 25% cushion over and above the weights they are carrying/rated for and as noted the handling and ride are both excellent.Watch the ccc/occc ratings for any rig you are contemplating as some are woefully short on payload and will be subject to overloading. Anything on a Mercedes Sprinter chassis will be suspect. Our Nexus has 3,363# of payload and yes, we use most of it (without any problems).IMHO: Any new motorhome that has handling issues off the showroom floor is the wrong coach, period. Properly loaded and with the right tires/psi a new coach should perform flawlessly without any additional (costly), modifications. As always.... Opinions and YMMV.:C.

I thought the big difference between the E350 and E450 was that the E450 had stronger frame and was superior for towing. My E350 handles fine and I have never had any tire issues ... I did find that handling became much better when I upgraded the mediocre OEM shocks and gave it a proper alignment but those issues aren't unique to E350.

Thanks to both of you. It will give me more confidence in my choice of purchase knowing that others have no problems and especially on newer models of chassis. Appreciate your information.

We have a 24 foot Class C on the E450 chassis. Like Desert Captain, we have had zero problems ... solid as a rock and I can drive down the highway with one hand on the wheel. However I feel that our rig's handling and stability is due to the fact that the chassis is so underloaded by the coach, the coach has a fairly small rear overhang, and the coach has a small enough wall area to keep wind pressure low.We had an alignment done after owning it for a few years, but for no reason other than you're "supposed to" ... and they did install the shims. We had no problems before or after the alignment. We have almost 50K miles on it with the OEM shocks. Tire pressure is 80 lbs. rear, and 65 lbs. front ... and the tires are non-stock size Michelin LT M&S2. For our chassis year Ford installed both front and rear sway bars on the E450, but only a front sway bar on the E350. Now, I believe that both the E350 and E450 have front and rear sway bars.

Can't say we have had any handling or tire issues in over 100K. When the shocks were do we changed to Konis and at the same time we added a rear sway bar. It handles like a sport SUV now but really there were no issues before then. Just handled more like a motorhome then. :)

E350 Ford Chassis | Good Sam Community

31 Replies

nbking
Explorer
Jun 08, 2015
All very good information - most of which I didn't think of or know of. Thanks. I will give me a plan when I go to see the motor home within the next few weeks.
Desert_Captain
Explorer III
Jun 08, 2015
carringb wrote:
nbking wrote:
Now that is something that I never thought of - the fact that the RV manufacturer may have altered the vehicle to improve road handling. That is interesting. I will have to investigate that further with the vehicle I want to purchase. Thanks.

The biggest factor in stability is where the RV maker puts the weight. The way they built the coach, and where they put heavy items, can have a big affect on the moment of inertia, and if this is paired with a wheelbase that is too short, bad handling is guaranteed (but fixable by adding aids like sway bars, track bars, shocks etc). Overall length to wheelbase is only a guideline. The real issue is where all that mass rides in relation to wheelbase. A longer rear overhang isn't the end of the world, as long as all the tanks aren't stuck back there too!

You make my original point very well. There are manufacturers out there that will charge you $125,000+ for a 24' Class C/B+ {which is beyond ridiculous... but I digress}, that drives and rides poorly. This is absurd. If any new coach needs dime one, in ride enhancements to make it ride/drive safely and comfortably it is in my mind a piece of junk no matter how pretty it might be.

Take a serious, as in long, test drive before you put money down on anything. Drive it in traffic, on the interstate while playing with the truckers, in heavy winds if at all possible and up and down a 6% grade keeping in mind it is completely underloaded as you do so. Think about how it will handle/ride when you have added several thousand pounds of gear and fluids. If the dealer objects... run, do not walk, to the nearest exit without looking back.

Once you buy it... it is your problem.

:C
pnichols
Explorer II
Jun 07, 2015
Bryan,

Well put!!! The above was short, true, and right to the point.

Also, with regards to RV lateral stability on curves, on tipped road surfaces, and in cross-winds ... it matters how low in the vehicle all that weight is located and how wide the vehicle's track is (especially in the rear).
carringb
Explorer
Jun 07, 2015
nbking wrote:
Now that is something that I never thought of - the fact that the RV manufacturer may have altered the vehicle to improve road handling. That is interesting. I will have to investigate that further with the vehicle I want to purchase. Thanks.

The biggest factor in stability is where the RV maker puts the weight. The way they built the coach, and where they put heavy items, can have a big affect on the moment of inertia, and if this is paired with a wheelbase that is too short, bad handling is guaranteed (but fixable by adding aids like sway bars, track bars, shocks etc). Overall length to wheelbase is only a guideline. The real issue is where all that mass rides in relation to wheelbase. A longer rear overhang isn't the end of the world, as long as all the tanks aren't stuck back there too!
nbking
Explorer
Jun 07, 2015
Now that is something that I never thought of - the fact that the RV manufacturer may have altered the vehicle to improve road handling. That is interesting. I will have to investigate that further with the vehicle I want to purchase. Thanks.
Harvard
Explorer
Jun 07, 2015
PSW wrote:
Just got back yesterday from a 1500 mile trip in our 2013 Phoenix Cruiser on the 350 chassis. I truly think a lot of the handling issues were for earlier models. I don't tend to get hung up in all the mechanical stats about various years, ratios, etc. All I know is I was towing over 4000 pounds, driving 65+ in cross winds across the Texas Panhandle and never, ever had a handling problem. Everything on our unit is original, straight from the factory.

Maybe we are just lucky. A good alignment is absolutely necessary and proper tire inflation is extremely important for handling IMO.

Paul

Some RV mfgs take steps to prevent handling issues and some do not. IMO
pnichols
Explorer II
Jun 07, 2015
Paul,

We have about the same situation with respect to never having had a handling problem with our 2005 24 foot E450 Class C in stock configuration ... this includes a 7000 mile trip and a 9000 mile trip. One of the trips included a scorching Texas Panhandle in August and one of the trips included the mountains of Eastern Wyoming..

You might want to try a trip towing your Cherokee in Eastern Wyoming. On at least one major highway route there one can travel hours and hours up/down grades at continuous altitudes over 8000 feet at full highway speeds - if one's rig can handle it. We did it easily - however without towing - via the E450's aggressive rear differential ratio along with using sustained V10 RPMs above 4000.

FWIW we're planning another 7000+ mile trip starting late this summer, but probably will replace the stock Ford shocks before the trip.
PSW
Explorer
Jun 07, 2015
Just got back yesterday from a 1500 mile trip in our 2013 Phoenix Cruiser on the 350 chassis. I truly think a lot of the handling issues were for earlier models. I don't tend to get hung up in all the mechanical stats about various years, ratios, etc. All I know is I was towing over 4000 pounds, driving 65+ in cross winds across the Texas Panhandle and never, ever had a handling problem. Everything on our unit is original, straight from the factory.

Maybe we are just lucky. A good alignment is absolutely necessary and proper tire inflation is extremely important for handling IMO.

Paul
Desert_Captain
Explorer III
Jun 06, 2015
Here is the site I found for the 2011 E-350/E-450 Chassis Specifications (along with a lot of additional info). I tried to copy and post but it is much more readable in the side by side format at that site. Every year the numbers change albeit not much. As you can see they are far more alike than different and some of the options, like the 55 vs 40 gallon fuel tank allow for further customization between the two.

http://thormotorcoach.com/media/documents/2011_Ford_Class_C_Motorhome_Chassis_Literature.pdf

:C
j-d
Explorer II
Jun 06, 2015
Phil's right. Gathering all this is not easy. I looked awhile for another OP concerning later models, and the two "looked" more alike than now. Without going back to chase numbers, same front axle capacity, rear axle capacity in E350 increased but still notably less than E450, rear axle tracks much closer to equal. I didn't look at driveshaft etc, but the two basic FRAMES are different which Phil alluded to. As I recall, E450 is a "deeper" form factor of material that is both thicker and tougher (higher tensile rating). FYI and in the interest of accuracy/truth in advertising, the Ford frame specs are higher than Chevy.

Forum Discussion

E350 Ford Chassis

31 Replies

About Motorhome Group

Related Content

Ford f150 Payload

Ford Chassis

Starflyte ford v10 e350 chassis

E350 Caster Ford TSB

Ford E350 Handling