Front mounted diesels in class a and c

bluwtr49 wrote:
From my perspective, if someone was interested in buying a diesel Class A....forget the class C or B, why would you want the engine in the front??? I just don't see any advantage and several downsides including losing space (??? do they have a doghouse or is the engine below the floor?) and noise.

How is engine access on a FRED compared to a DP??

Depends how they are designed. FRED: On the same Length you loose some belly storage due to the fact that there is a drive-shaft from the engine to the rear axle. But you get huge storage in the back under the bed.

On better designed FREDs you don't have a Dog house, the Engine is mounted low, you have 3 steps in the inside instead of two.

Engine access is in both concepts PITA, in the rear you have to lift the bed. In FREDS you have to maybe pull the radiator to access everything.
The Nice thing about Diesel Engines is, you normally don't have to do a lot to them in a normal MH lifespan. Change the Oil and the belts. That should be all.

eXodusRV wrote:
Maybe it's about education of RV Buyers, when they buy a Diesel they expect to get a pusher, when they buy a Gas expect to get a Front Engine.

A Diesel at cruise speed is not louder then a Gas engine. Only at idle or full boost the diesel has is character.

Each time I drive my Mercedes diesel sedan to states where attendants fill up the cars, they want to put gasoline in it.
Even when I stop at diesel pump.

stvdman wrote:
I look at the new diesel 3/4 and 1 Ton trucks and think "WHY NOT IN A CLASS-A RV?"

I think I would SERIOUSLY consider a Ford F-53 chassis RV with a new 6.7 diesel truck motor for the $10,000 more the engine may cost.

For 2016 Dodge is reporting thier Cummins engines in the trucks will come with 800ft/lbs of TQ! Why cant that be brought into the RV segments.

I was even looking at the 2016 Thor "Super C's" with the FORD 6.7 and they are rated at 660ft/lbs of TQ, where they same engine for 2016 in the F250/F350 are rated at 860 ft/lbs!!

I would think those motors put into either the F53 or the F350 SUPER C models would be a GREAT fit!

AS far as costs... its about a $8000 option in a Truck and peopl opt for them A LOT. I would think offering it in a RV for $10000-$12000 more (need diesel Genseta and probably some suspension upgrades also) would be a worthwhile option. If you consider it a percentage of the overall cost its much more cost effective in a $150,000-$175,000 RV vice a $50,000 truck.

The difference between the F350 F450 Super Duty and the F550 "Super C" platform is that motorhomes tend to spend most of their time at WOT (Wide Open Throttle). You can generate a lot of power in short durations without damaging the engine / transmission however since F550 Super C motorhomes tend to be at or near their GVWR all the time a motor transmission combination would be at their limits from a heat and wear perspective. I have a friend that purchases F350 / F450 trucks for a business and pulls a large 5th wheel equipment trailer. He is constantly replacing trucks because they don't last. Most pickup truck manufacturers count on the fact that you won't use the truck at max GCWR / GVWR up and down hills all the time. The same is true with the engines in Class A motorhomes they de-rate them on purpose depending on the heat load that can be safely dissipated and to give the engines a long life. Most Class A motorhomes and some Super C motorhomes are on the "Heavy Medium Duty" classification with air brakes, air suspension, heavy duty rated engine (however with less HP & Torque), heavy duty cooling, heavy duty rated frame etc. To put this into perspective Ford rates their F550 Super Duty with a 35,000# GCWR with a 19,500 GVWR however Freightliner rates their lightest XC-S chassis at 26,000# / 30,000 but with 10,500 front axle and 17,500 rear axle and if you do the math you arrive at 28,000 not 26,000 because they don't use lighter duty components (Yes I know that some manufactures such as Thor de-rate the XC-S chassis to 26,000 / 30,000 to save cost on the engine / transmission combination so they can hit a price point). However the rule still applies MDT (Medium Duty Truck) systems are engineered for durability.

From my perspective, if someone was interested in buying a diesel Class A....forget the class C or B, why would you want the engine in the front??? I just don't see any advantage and several downsides including losing space (??? do they have a doghouse or is the engine below the floor?) and noise.

How is engine access on a FRED compared to a DP??

I have seen these, but my interest is lacking. A diesel pusher keeps the noise in the back. If the engine were up front, it would be a gasser!

Maybe it's about education of RV Buyers, when they buy a Diesel they expect to get a pusher, when they buy a Gas expect to get a Front Engine.

A Diesel at cruise speed is not louder then a Gas engine. Only at idle or full boost the diesel has is character.

I think somebody mention that, but that flew past ears, that diesel Sprinter motorhomes are widely available with no limits, but seems the takers are in small numbers.
Here goes the theory that buyers will be happy to pay more for diesel.
I saw Sprinter motorhome first time 16 years ago in Europe and fell in love with the design. For several reasons the design was not working for us, and pricing was main issue.
But I keep eye on Sprinters for long time. Those vans are famous in Europe for making 2,000,000 km without removing timing cover.
26 mpg for vans or close to 20 mpg on motorhome is hard to beat.
Sure US converters are "keeping the image" and don't provide those with basic options only, while fully loaded come with hefty price.
But I think if customers would demand lower priced Sprinters motorhomes, the manufacturers would adjust.
Also I spoke to salesman about technical issues Sprinters had in US market.
Sounds like for years Dodge was buying Sprinters manufactured by Fiat (!) and those, used by UPS and other companies had pretty bad service records.
That changed again few years ago and newer Sprinters are sold under Mercedes badge

I look at the new diesel 3/4 and 1 Ton trucks and think "WHY NOT IN A CLASS-A RV?"

I think I would SERIOUSLY consider a Ford F-53 chassis RV with a new 6.7 diesel truck motor for the $10,000 more the engine may cost.

For 2016 Dodge is reporting thier Cummins engines in the trucks will come with 800ft/lbs of TQ! Why cant that be brought into the RV segments.

I was even looking at the 2016 Thor "Super C's" with the FORD 6.7 and they are rated at 660ft/lbs of TQ, where they same engine for 2016 in the F250/F350 are rated at 860 ft/lbs!!

I would think those motors put into either the F53 or the F350 SUPER C models would be a GREAT fit!

AS far as costs... its about a $8000 option in a Truck and peopl opt for them A LOT. I would think offering it in a RV for $10000-$12000 more (need diesel Genseta and probably some suspension upgrades also) would be a worthwhile option. If you consider it a percentage of the overall cost its much more cost effective in a $150,000-$175,000 RV vice a $50,000 truck.

A Ford V10 has about 640lbs and a Powerstroke 1100lbs.

Yes there is quite some difference, but it's not the engine which makes the weight problem. It's all the additional stuff which goes into a modern Motorhome, Tiles, Granite countertops, full wood cabinets.

Comparision:
30 feet Class A Gas from 1994 dry weight 11,000 lbs Max weight 15000lbs
30 Feet Class A from 2014 dry weight 21,000lbs Max weight 23000lbs

That's why there is no Diesel anymore. The house on the chassis is too fat.