Sprinters...good or bad??

FYI, I looked at the E-Series Caster Thread linked above. There seems to be a misunderstanding. From 1992 CHASSIS model year and forward, E-Series is still Swing Axle (Twin I Beam) but it uses Ball Joints. The Ingalls 594 bushings replace the upper ball joint collars. But 1991 and earlier Twin I Beams used Kingpins which means no ball joints to adjust.
We had a 1983 chassis that I felt had too short a wheelbase (158" on a 24-ft House). It still tracked and handled better than our 2002 with 218" WB!
I had a conversation with Eric Davis (RV Handling Specialty Shop ericsrv.com) and he confirmed that Ford took a step backward with the "newer" front end. He saw the late model front sway bar (poked into the axles instead of with End Links) as much of the problem.
All I ever did on our '83 E350 was:
1. Replace Steering Box - Was Loose then Leaked after Adjusting
2. Replace Axle-to-Cross Member "Swing Bushings"
3. Replace Axle-to-Frame Rail "Radius Bushings"
4. Set Toe to about 1/8" IN
Tracked well and Steering Wheel had a good Feel and Return to Center

Maybe I oversimplify. But I think a lot of Sprinter's better handling comes from MB's prohibition on stretching the chassis. Coupled with the relatively low GVWR, it forces builders to make a light "house" that stays within MB's chassis dimensions. Rear Overhang seems to be a big contributor to poor Ford chassis handling. I'm starting to think a lot of the cause is "house architecture." By that I mean the builder has a concept of what the rear walk-around queen bedroom should measure, then sets the wheelbase to the wheel wells don't interfere. On a 31-ft Class C, there's enough "mid-section" to get some wheelbase ahead of that bedroom. On a 27-ft, the "house" looks like it's balanced on the rear axle. That overloads the rear, underloads the front, and the coach wanders.

Very interested in this conversation - trying to decide on a Class C - Sprinter or other?

One thing seems more constant, or maybe it's just because I've been looking at Sprinter-based models: they seem to have better residual/resale value than other class C's - thoughts?

I was the starter of this conversation. I went with the Born Free which is a Ford 350. I am very excited! Thanks for all your thoughts! Marsha

Wayne Dohnal wrote:
Some of the Sprinters were delivered with Kumho tires which are prone to blowouts. Others have Continentals which are doing well. For replacements, Michelin is the overwhelming favorite.

Form what I have been gleaning from posts on the web, Fleetwood Sprinter Cs seemed to come with Kumhos and Winnebago Sprinter Cs have been coming with Contis for some time now.

The Contis do not seem to wear as well as Michelins and apparently are significantly louder (road noise). I can't see going much past 35K on mine at the current wear rate.

John & Angela wrote:

ron.dittmer wrote:

mlts22 wrote:
Sprinters.....reported to handle better than the Fords,

I have never driven a Sprinter chassis of any type. But I can say that I own a 2007 E350 chassis motor home that did not handle well when new. There are affordable solutions to the handling problems which would still save you $11,000 to $12,000 compared to the same rig built on a Sprinter. Then your E350 will handle quite beautifully, possibly much better than a stock Sprinter.

We love how our E350 handles today after our investment in handling improvements. We spent $3900 back in 2007 having a truck suspension shop take care of it, but today you can do it for a fraction of that, especially now that there is so much help on this forum to assist in doing most of it yourself.

Thanks for the input. I have an E350 22 foot hybrid B type motorhome and my brother has a triple E similar to yours. I would be interested to hear what you have done to improve your handling.

This is what we had done back in 2007 at a truck suspension shop, for the $3900 I mentioned

- Replaced the stock front stabilizer bar with a heavy duty Roadmaster
- Added a rear heavy duty Roadmaster stabilizer bar (none was there to begin with)
- Added a Henderson rear trac bar
- Replaced the four stock shocks with Koni-RVs
- Replaced the stock steering dampener with a head duty Safe-T-Plus
- Had a wheel alignment done with the rig loaded as if on a trip with fresh water, fuel, propane, gear, etc.

Each rig has it's own handling issues pending weight distribution, rear over-hang, height, width, aerodynamics, tire pressure, etc. What works for one may not be enough for another. We went all-out to assure we did all we could. We learned from our first rig we owned for 24 years that making improvements in steps was not good for us. Just do it all and fully benefit right from the start, not 12 years after we bought the rig.

With our rig today, the price we paid (the $3900) is small for the benefits we gain from safety to driver fatique to transit comfort to stability while parked. It's all good.

There are a whole lot of factors when comparing Sprinter against Ford/Chevy. These are the two that turned out to be the most important for me:

1) I couldn't stand the tiny leg space available in both front seats of the Ford, and the Chevy is only slightly better.

2) I could not find a single Ford/Chevy with a slideout where I could put the driver seat back far enough to drive comfortably. By comparison, in every Sprinter I looked at I can put the seat back further than I need.

The increased mpg is icing on the cake, and the Sprinter RVs tend to be 6 to 10 inches narrower, nice on narrow roads. The Sprinter AFAIK is the only Class C chassis where the sum of the GAWRs exceeds the GVWR, making the Sprinter the only one that you can load to GVWR without busting a GAWR.

Not having had any major mechanical problems yet, the cost of ownership has been pretty much the same as with the other brands. Some of the Sprinter owners have been plagued with recurring mechanical problems that turned into genuine nightmares. Some of the Sprinters were delivered with Kumho tires which are prone to blowouts. Others have Continentals which are doing well. For replacements, Michelin is the overwhelming favorite. I believe the greater percentage of the Sprinters have been reliable. Getting a bad Sprinter is probably more painful than getting a bad Ford/Chevy.

another possible issue is the DPF(diesel particulate filter).

the analogy is a fireplace where wood is burned but leaves unburnable ash. the dpf burns and uses regenerations to burn particulates. this eventually fills the DPF. MB does not clean this but replaces it only. It is about 3000 dollars. will need to be replaced between 100,00 and 150,000 miles.

overbrook wrote:

John & Angela wrote:

I have an E350 22 foot hybrid B type motorhome and my brother has a triple E similar to yours. I would be interested to hear what you have done to improve your handling.

The quickest way to get a huge handling improvement is to increase the caster to LH +5.3 Degrees, RH +5.5 Degrees.

To do this, the alignment shop will need to add INGALLS 594 Adjustable sleeves. After the Caster is adjusted properly, your e350 will handle much like a SUV.

For details see Adjust Caster in Ford E350/e450 for better handling

Bill

Thank you

John & Angela wrote:

I have an E350 22 foot hybrid B type motorhome and my brother has a triple E similar to yours. I would be interested to hear what you have done to improve your handling.

The quickest way to get a huge handling improvement is to increase the caster to LH +5.3 Degrees, RH +5.5 Degrees.

To do this, the alignment shop will need to add INGALLS 594 Adjustable sleeves. After the Caster is adjusted properly, your e350 will handle much like a SUV.

For details see Adjust Caster in Ford E350/e450 for better handling

Bill