F53 Horsepower rating

My bad, went to the Ford site and it still shows the F53 with the 3 valve engine, just the lower HP rating. Too many people pushing the 362 HP engine too hard?

Same engine, they just changed the HP measurement from 4750 RPM to 4000 RPM. I don't know if that was an SAE mandated spec change or not, but 4000 is probably a more real world measurement versus the peak 4750 measure.

Also many times a manufacture will request a lower HP engine, for their entry to mid entry RV's. Saving the higher HP for their higher end RV's. (Much more so in the DP side of things...). The F53 comes in different weights, as well as different levels of suspension components. Look at some of the entry Class A's on the F53 on shorter wheel bases... Easy to spot with the large 'Tail wagging the dawg.' overhang:)!. Some Entry level coaches with the F52 will not have rear pan hard bars, and or smaller, or even no, sway bars. It's all about marketing, and hitting price points.

Can't say if the lower HP is part of this or not, as I was not even aware that the V10 came in different HP levels within the same engine year:)!

Best,
Smitty

Dutch_12078 wrote:
Same engine, they just changed the HP measurement from 4750 RPM to 4000 RPM. I don't know if that was an SAE mandated spec change or not, but 4000 is probably a more real world measurement versus the peak 4750 measure.

Correct.

And a GOOD move-- re-specing the engine for a more reasonable RPM range makes it better for our/RV needs.

Smitty77 wrote:
Also many times a manufacture will request a lower HP engine, for their entry to mid entry RV's. Saving the higher HP for their higher end RV's. (Much more so in the DP side of things...). The F53 comes in different weights, as well as different levels of suspension components. Look at some of the entry Class A's on the F53 on shorter wheel bases... Easy to spot with the large 'Tail wagging the dawg.' overhang:)!. Some Entry level coaches with the F52 will not have rear pan hard bars, and or smaller, or even no, sway bars. It's all about marketing, and hitting price points.

Can't say if the lower HP is part of this or not, as I was not even aware that the V10 came in different HP levels within the same engine year:)!

Best,
Smitty

Not sure where to start.

1. Ford does not offer the F53 chassis with different V10 rated engines to the house builders. All, within a model year, have the same power specifications.
2. Regardless of wheel base or weight capacity Ford supplies ALL F53's with the same rear overhang length, 105.8". The house builder will add extensions of various lengths as needed for house design. The perceived value of the coach has no relation to overhang. Easy enough to compare a Thor Ace 27.2 to a Fleetwood Bounder 36H to a Tiffin 36UA with regard to rear overhang and it is pretty apparent the Ace has the smallest overhang ratio, smallest wheelbase and the lowest price.
3. Since 1999 Ford has NEVER supplied a rear trac or pan head bar on the F53 chassis and ALL have been supplied with front AND rear sway bars.
4. There are no engine model years only chassis and not every calendar year has a new chassis.
5. Since Ford has never published a torque or a horsepower curve for the V10 engine comparing the different published performance capabilities is difficult.

The latest numbers are the fourth revision since 1999 when the V10 showed up in the F53. Why the change? Who knows. CAFE standards, EPA, lower top gear ratio of six speed transmission along with the rev limiter settings, and the list goes on.

Regardless, the chassis will get the house built on it and all its occupants anywhere in North America on improved roads as long as it is operated within the limits Ford provides. You want to take a logging trail or fire road to "The Spot", you're on your own.

I've read a theory that the spec was restated because some emissions standards (maybe noise emissions standards?) were tested at the rated "maximum" horsepower.

The engine itself hasn't changed much if any physically, though there may be some software changes to the control computer, besides those obviously required to work with a different transmission. The reports I've heard have not been that the new variant feels less powerful in use; rather, that it works just fine and the new transmission is a definite improvement, which it would also appear to be on paper. The gaps between the upper gears are not so large, so downshifts at highway speeds are not quite such a big production.

Don't know about the HP ratings change referenced on the V10, but it's interesting to note the perception that higher horsepower is always better. I suspect that Ford published the power ratings in response to the stiffer CAFE standards that came out a few years ago.

It SOUNDS right to equate HP to the overall strength of the engine, and in many ways it is a good gauge. However, torque is what gets you up the hill and keeps pulling. When you accelerate from a dead stop, or start pulling an incline.... torque is what you feel in the seat of your pants. The horsepower rating, as has been stated, is measured at an engine's maximum RPM typically. How often does anyone rev an engine to max RPM?

I wonder what the HP and TQ curves look like for the two separate ratings?

This new 2017 V10 in our F53 feels nice and strong down low in the RPM range. Much like my old Chevy 8.1 V-8 did.

My 2016 F-53 chassis with a 6 speed transmission shifts at a lower RPM than my 2005 5 speed transmission. My 5 speed would rev up to 5300 RPMs before it shifted. My 6 speed shifts at 4300 RPMs.

I believe, but don't know for a fact,that changing to a 6 speed transmission and the lowering of RPMs and the change in the way horsepower is measured was done to meet EPA requirements.

The result is a quieter ride. With the extra gear I don't feel like I've lost any horsepower.

If I had to choose between a 5 speed or 6 speed F-53 chassis I would pick the 6 speed.

Dale.Traveling wrote:

Smitty77 wrote:
Also many times a manufacture will request a lower HP engine, for their entry to mid entry RV's. Saving the higher HP for their higher end RV's. (Much more so in the DP side of things...). The F53 comes in different weights, as well as different levels of suspension components. Look at some of the entry Class A's on the F53 on shorter wheel bases... Easy to spot with the large 'Tail wagging the dawg.' overhang:)!. Some Entry level coaches with the F52 will not have rear pan hard bars, and or smaller, or even no, sway bars. It's all about marketing, and hitting price points.

Can't say if the lower HP is part of this or not, as I was not even aware that the V10 came in different HP levels within the same engine year:)!

Best,
Smitty

Not sure where to start.

1. Ford does not offer the F53 chassis with different V10 rated engines to the house builders. All, within a model year, have the same power specifications.
2. Regardless of wheel base or weight capacity Ford supplies ALL F53's with the same rear overhang length, 105.8". The house builder will add extensions of various lengths as needed for house design. The perceived value of the coach has no relation to overhang. Easy enough to compare a Thor Ace 27.2 to a Fleetwood Bounder 36H to a Tiffin 36UA with regard to rear overhang and it is pretty apparent the Ace has the smallest overhang ratio, smallest wheelbase and the lowest price.
3. Since 1999 Ford has NEVER supplied a rear trac or pan head bar on the F53 chassis and ALL have been supplied with front AND rear sway bars.
4. There are no engine model years only chassis and not every calendar year has a new chassis.
5. Since Ford has never published a torque or a horsepower curve for the V10 engine comparing the different published performance capabilities is difficult.

The latest numbers are the fourth revision since 1999 when the V10 showed up in the F53. Why the change? Who knows. CAFE standards, EPA, lower top gear ratio of six speed transmission along with the rev limiter settings, and the list goes on.

Regardless, the chassis will get the house built on it and all its occupants anywhere in North America on improved roads as long as it is operated within the limits Ford provides. You want to take a logging trail or fire road to "The Spot", you're on your own.

Thanks Dale! For sure I'm not up on F53 as much as I once was:)! And re-reading my post I was not clear on a few of my comments. Appreciate you updating with more accurate info.

Had a 99 Bounder, with the 98 F53 V10 2 Valve engine, so good example of each year not having a 'chassis model'.

On the tail wagging the dog. I was just trying to point out that say one entry level 32' Class A could be built on a shorter wheel base, and thus lower tail overhang (Of the coach, not chassis.). Vs a higher end 32' Class A may have ordered the longer and higher capacity F53 and thus less coach overhang.

My comment on the F53 Chassis being spec'd with different components, was based upon a conversation with a Mountain Aire owner. He said his coach came stock with beefier (His wording, not mine.) rear components. Perhaps Newmar added components, or perhaps this gent was wrong and was comparing older F53 or lighter weight capacity F53 Chassis, with his. Based upon that conversation 7-8 years ago. I've always thought that coach manufacturers could and did order chassis spec'd differently to meet a specific price points for their models. If Ford did not offer different levels of suspension options on the same year Chassis - then that was a bad assumption on my point.

I also made an assumption when reading the thread, that the same model year chassis were delivered with different HP level V10's. And since that is the norm for the DP's chassis/engines, did surprise me. Thanks for clarifying that this is not the case.

It is interesting that Ford has altered the V10 engine to meet different application needs.

Anyways, thanks again for your polite correction of unintended misinformation:)!

Best to you, and all,
Smitty