Turbo the Ford V-10 in my motorhome ?

I tend to agree with the statement above, going 1000 miles while getting better MPG, you will get there just as quickly, taking the hills at a reasonable speed, and one less fill up of the gas tank.

A tuner would make a lot more sense than a turbocharger. The V10 makes a LOT of power, and by downshifting, you get the same advantage to changing the rear axle ratio, but still get decent highway mileage when the cruise control is set to 65. At 70, you are pushing a lot more air out of the way, and mileage will drop a lot. The air pressure on the windshield increases by the square of airspeed increase, so going from 50 - 70 increases the air pressure on the windshield by about 2X.

Also horsepower takes square inches of radiator to displace all that heat. It is 8 square inches of radiator per HP. So a triple row radiator that is 24" square would be rated at 1800/8 or about 200 HP. You might have two rows, and probably a lot larger surface area than this example. Van radiators are much smaller, thus their 305 HP rating for the same V10 engine in a RV.

Running 91 octane would also really help with MPG and power. The engine management system can lean out a engine running on 91 octane without pinging. With lower octane gas, it will enrichen the fuel to prevent pinging (it has a anit-ping sensor) that kills MPG, and can change the timing to enhance HP. Changing to a turbocharger, you would need to run higher octane anyway, same with a tuner.

Good luck!

Fred.

midnightsadie wrote:
ITS A truck, it is what it is. not a race car.

I truly understand you need for speed, but, a big but, why the hurry?

My previous "A" was a 27' Bounder on a P30 w/a naturally aspirated 454 cid and it sucked. Now we have the Winnie and the original owner had the Banks intake and exhaust system installed and I'm quite happy with the power and MPG. A lot easier than turbo-ing your engine.

I would also bet in 1000 miles of driving, I get to my destination as fast as you and for far less cost.

You might look at the 5-star tuner HERE. I put it on my V-10 and it made a huge difference in performance. Changes torque and HP curves considerably. Probably a lot cheaper and less trouble than a turbo. This is on a 31' class C.

Dave

Tim,

As a guy that worked on several SI turbo programs, I can tell you that this is just not a great idea. The vehicles that have a turbocharger on a gas (SI - Spark Ignition) engines, did not just get a turbo and related plumbing bolted on. They are the result many manhours of dyno testing and calibration and most have some component modifications (like pistons) to survive the new cylinder pressures and heat.

If you want it to be reliable, leave it alone.

Matt

If your rig is an E series (like a class C ) there is very little room under the hood to fit the turbo. Plus every time you stop, you must let the engine idle for several minutes while the turbo winds down otherwise stopping the engine will deprive the turbo's shaft an oil supply & cause premature failure of said turbo bearings...

I would talk to these guys http://www.paxtonauto.com

So your most likely way over your GCWR towing a Stacker trailer behind an F53 based MH and you want more power? You need a decent DP....

timmac wrote:
I am also just thinking of a performance throttle body, spark plugs and performance coils, its a 2007 3 valve v-10 with the Banks system but just trying to see what I can do to increase the HP/Torque even more.

Tons of performance mods for the newer sport cars but the motorhome chassis seem to lack in those areas.

From what you are describing you probably have over 400 HP. I don't know how much your MH weighs as that will figure into your performance also. I don't know it you have tried advancing the timing yet but that is a free mod you can try. It increased the performance on my old 454. I don't know if you have tracked the previous performance mods but advancing the timing from 4 degrees BTDC to 9 brought my 40 -60 mph times from 14secs down to 12sec. That is a 15% improvement. Headers, FF muffler sans cat, and CAI together only made a difference of 27%.

Here is a link to the 2008 MH specs for the different F53 chassis. As mentioned, changing the rear axle ratio will probably get you what you need and cost a lot less. You probably have the 5.38 ratio and you could go to the 6.17 ratio rear axle. F53 specs

ITS A truck, it is what it is. not a race car.