Sportsmobile ProMaster prices are out...

I was reading the Mexican site (fiat.com.mx) for the Ducatos. I am wrong. Promasters are just not rebadged; they have completely new drivetrains here in the US. The Mexican vans use a Multijet diesel engine coupled with a standard manual transmission, which is completely different from the V6 gasser and auto transmission and the four-banger diesel with the "manumatic" (functionally identical to an auto transmission as far as what I've read.)

The difference between now and when VW tried to get into the market is that gas prices are high and staying high since 2008, which is one reason the US economy has taken so long to recover. Any signs of growth mean that gas prices go up by 20-50%, stalling any meaningful recovery attempts.

Because of that, a gas-thrifty van is going to sell here. Plus, compared to the current Chevy Express and Ford Econoline, any of the Eurovans (Transit/Sprinter/Ducato) will have a lot more usable space inside which is important for fleets as well as RV upfitters.

The fact that gas is high and staying high is shifting US tastes towards European styles and sizes.

I am not surprised that an equivalent size Ram ProMaster is only 10-20% under a Sprinter, and most of that may be gas vs diesel price increment. The marketing guys will use competitors to set price points. It also puts the biggest gas ProMaster slightly over the MSRP of an extended Express 3500 or Econoline 3500. Without any collusion that can be documented, these companies do know each others' price books and nobody is going to get too far out of line.

SkiMore wrote:
What is the consensus of opinion on FWD? Is that what they are using on the European motorhomes that use this chassis? I know it makes the floor lower. Are there any issues with FWD pulling that much weight?

Winnebago is already showing their floorplan
http://winnebagotouring.com/products/2014/travato/floorplans/

European motorhome manufacturers (making models we would call C or B+, and even Ducato-based integrals, our A but much smaller) are all FWD, but except for some of the A's they keep GVWR down to 3500 kg. Similarly, all MH on Renault Master and most on last two generations of Transit have been FWD. To some extent, the light FWD chassis is a market preference, i.e. there are MHs built on heaver RWD chassis like Sprinter, Iveco, and MB 500 series, but not many sold.

B's in Europe are something else. While the VW T-series, last seen as T-4 Eurovan here is popular, and Transit used to be, I haven't seen many Ducato or Master B's in the places I've been (France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Czech Republic, Hungary). There is a tendency to build a "camping conversion" that is less like a motorhome, into what we would consider a minivan, or even smaller, a compact high-roof wagon (only one we get currently is Transit Connect, but Renault, FIAT, Citroen-Peugeot all have equivalents). What is most like our B conversion van in size and luxury of fittings is the class of C they call a "profile." And yes, whatever the size, what fills our B niche in Europe is FWD, but under 3500 kg, sometimes well under 3500, like 1800 or less on the compacts.

How are market accepts a FWD light truck, or a RV based on FWD light truck, remains to be seen. VW tried, failed, we weren't ready and oil prices went back down. Ford is betting with the U.S. version Transit that we will not accept FWD in this size, but can likely come up with a drivetrain should the ProMaster prove them wrong. Starting from the Ducato, I don't think FIAT has a choice, technically, so they've stretched the specs on their FWD platform. If that doesn't work in the market, and they want to keep the Ram brand in the market, they have alterative platforms to Ducato.

I have no problem with FWD trucks at this weight. In other market segments, a brand that was actually named FWD did quite well using front drive up to at least 40,000 pounds GVW.

Never mind, FWD was 4x4, not front only.

Davydd wrote:
The floor may be lower on the Promaster but the interior heights are listed the same for Promaster and Sprinter at 75". The Promaster will have an overall lower roof height because of the lower floor. What are the trade offs? Obviously with a lower floor there will be less underfloor height for tanks, generator, etc. or a lower ground clearance. The other major debit in my mind is the variable floor where the cab appears to be a 3-4" higher floor requiring a step down at some point. In looking at the Winnebago design and several European designs it appears to be an awkward transition in many instances. The overall height of the van with a high roof is still not going to get you into a parking garage or any standard garage door height different than the Sprinter which would be 10 feet. Bottom line the only advantage of a lower floor would be the stepping in and out of the van at the sliding door being lower.

Getting back to interior width. The published exterior widths are 82.7" for the Promaster and 79.7" for the Sprinter. The width is variable but it appears to be about a 3" difference. How it is finished inside will determine a final width. I measured my Sprinter Legend at the bed height and it measures 69.7". So assuming similar, the interior width of the Promaster might be about 72.7". 3" does help in this case if a cross bed design is chosen. Also, the 3" can make a major difference in aisle width and/or bathroom in a B.

The Promaster in length measures closer to the older Sprinters and the current 144" WB Sprinters (RT Agile and P-W Ascent). Their longest Promaster gives up 3'-1" to the EB Sprinter (my GWVan Legend) and 4'-5" to the LB Sprinter (WinneBago ERAs) and is only 4" longer than the RB Sprinters (Agile). They are giving up a lot of real estate along with that floor transition design problem.

I haven't seen any Ford Transit specs yet, but the Promaster might be in trouble out the door with design constraints and limitations and the Ford may take away their North American thunder and dealership advantages.

Davydd,

funny the things you dislike are the things i like. lower floor means lower height with same stand up height. front wheel drive, gas engine.

sportsmobile would be great. winnebego travato atrocious floorplan-we agree about that.

I think there is some space used between the walls for insulation, wiring, etc.

The lower floor clearance does explain why Winnebago had to start at square one with floorplan design and making grey/fresh/black water tanks fit. The fact that European rigs use cassette toilets (which don't require the plumbing for a black tank including making sure the commode is directly underneath) made it impossible to just copy a floorplan from across the pond and make it work.

I'm hoping Winnebago improves their floor plans... the Travato plan right now might be OK for a single person who is using the van as a secondary trip vehicle, but the rear bed that shares width with the bathroom is marginal at best for a couple. I do like the relatively big fridge, the push in latches for the cabinets, and SMEV stove/sink tops, so it isn't all bad, but I'm sure there are better floor plans that can be done.

wsfurrie & Davydd: The Winnebago site says interior width is 6' 2". Which is close to the 75" you read. I bet the difference is due to raw space vs. finished space. Or maybe it's a rounding thing.
[url]http://winnebagotouring.com/products/2014/travato/floorplans/ [\url]

I don't think a lower floor necessarily means lower ground clearance. There are many things under the floor that hit long before the floor does. The FWD means it doesn't have a big drive shaft getting in the way down there.

I hear what you are saying about there being less room under the floor for tanks. I didn't think of that.

Davydd, you are right, must have been wishful thinking on my part.
Wayne

The floor may be lower on the Promaster but the interior heights are listed the same for Promaster and Sprinter at 75". The Promaster will have an overall lower roof height because of the lower floor. What are the trade offs? Obviously with a lower floor there will be less underfloor height for tanks, generator, etc. or a lower ground clearance. The other major debit in my mind is the variable floor where the cab appears to be a 3-4" higher floor requiring a step down at some point. In looking at the Winnebago design and several European designs it appears to be an awkward transition in many instances. The overall height of the van with a high roof is still not going to get you into a parking garage or any standard garage door height different than the Sprinter which would be 10 feet. Bottom line the only advantage of a lower floor would be the stepping in and out of the van at the sliding door being lower.

Getting back to interior width. The published exterior widths are 82.7" for the Promaster and 79.7" for the Sprinter. The width is variable but it appears to be about a 3" difference. How it is finished inside will determine a final width. I measured my Sprinter Legend at the bed height and it measures 69.7". So assuming similar, the interior width of the Promaster might be about 72.7". 3" does help in this case if a cross bed design is chosen. Also, the 3" can make a major difference in aisle width and/or bathroom in a B.

The Promaster in length measures closer to the older Sprinters and the current 144" WB Sprinters (RT Agile and P-W Ascent). Their longest Promaster gives up 3'-1" to the EB Sprinter (my GWVan Legend) and 4'-5" to the LB Sprinter (WinneBago ERAs) and is only 4" longer than the RB Sprinters (Agile). They are giving up a lot of real estate along with that floor transition design problem.

I haven't seen any Ford Transit specs yet, but the Promaster might be in trouble out the door with design constraints and limitations and the Ford may take away their North American thunder and dealership advantages.

wsfurrie wrote:
I find the width on the Promaster interesting. It is listed as 75" for the interior. That means that it would allow for sleeping across and would not be as claustrophobic as the Sprinter. I would expect more variety in floorplans.
Wayne

I'm not sure where you saw this. I can't find it on the Allpar.com website or Sportsmobile. Sportsmobile stated it would be some time before they had inside dimensions.

The 75" figure referred to interior height which is identical to the Sprinter.

What is the consensus of opinion on FWD? Is that what they are using on the European motorhomes that use this chassis? I know it makes the floor lower. Are there any issues with FWD pulling that much weight?

Winnebago is already showing their floorplan
http://winnebagotouring.com/products/2014/travato/floorplans/