Bought GMC Cube Van Today!

[bagman]

So I picked up a new GMC cube van today with 17' NBC Supreme Body without an aerodynamic shape, equipped with 6.0 V-8, & 4:10 axle ratio. Drove it from Westland, Mich. to Wyandotte, Mich. and for the life of me, I cannot understand why RV manufacturers down't build more B+ & Class C's on this chassis. This commercial cube van was empty and so help me, it drove like a Cadillac. Furthermore, it had to be sent out for the body and various modifications, like running boards, backup camera, 12" steel scuff plate around the inside of the body and two sets of tracks on the walls to secure loads. By the time I got back to Wyandotte, the computer showed 11.3 MPG's over the last 365 miles and this truck is about as aerodynamic as a large barn door. So why the Ford dominate the vast majority of the B+ & Class C business? Personally, I would rather drive a Chevy of GMC RV Cut-Away chassis. Even when we used to rent cube vans from Penske Truck, we liked the GMC version over the Ford! What gives? Bagman.

[carringb]

bagman wrote:
Actually, both Forest City & Thor offer class C & B+ RV's on both the Ford & Chevy chassis.I did some research and the Chevy & GMC 4500 can be had with the 6.6 Duramax Diesel. Bags.

At the moment, the GM cutaway in on hiatus. TBD when it will resume.

The Duramax option is not available on the 4500 with the RV prep package, however it is/was on the 3500 with the RV prep package, as well as the non-RV 4500.

[carringb]

pnichols wrote:
Way back when I bought a new 1972 Dodge 3/4 ton van and the DW and myself converted it into a camper.

I could have sworn that it had a regular truck type frame under it - but I could be wrong. :h

You are right. The RV builder had to add their own frame!

[pnichols]

Way back when I bought a new 1972 Dodge 3/4 ton van and the DW and myself converted it into a camper.

I could have sworn that it had a regular truck type frame under it - but I could be wrong. :h

[Dusty_R]

In 1978 we bought an older 19' class C on a Dodge chassis, it had duels on the rear, and the front wheels did not fit the rear. It came with 1 spare, it fit the front.
Don't remember what it had for a frame.

Dusty

[j-d]

Dakzuki wrote:


So how did those early 70s Ford class Cs get built?

I don't know exactly, but all those Dodge-based were the same way.

I can only imagine that the unibody "boxes" that stiffen the floor area and support springs etc. were part of the cutaway "chassis" then the RV upfitter (or a third party like MorRyde now) added the needed reinforcement.

Design is part of a chassis manufacturer's dominance. Back in the early days of Class C, DODGE ruled the roost. Given that whether a 1971 was Chevy, Dodge, or Ford, every one would have been unit body and something needed to be done to reinforce the bare unit body components. So I think there was another factor, alluded to here: Pricing and/or its twin, Financing. In this thread, OP's have indicated that Ford's financing structure is more favorable than GM's. What I "heard" but cannot verify, is that Chrysler fronted their cutaway Dodges to the RV industry. Meaning, the Chassis didn't have to be paid for till the completed RV was shipped. Again, heard but not verified.

Thenallofasudden Dodge was out of the biz. There stood Ford in 1975 with a cutaway on a full truck chassis. That must have been a no-brainer for the RV (and cube van) industry. GM joined in later, but their history is different branding, lower capacities, spinning the product line off and then pulling it back in. To the best of my knowledge, Ford didn't go through all those gyrations, just provided chassis and over time developed very detailed stretching instructions. I'd rather marry a faithful ordinary woman than a cheatin' beauty. Just sayin'.

[Dakzuki]

j-d wrote:
Econoline'a were unibody through 1974. The 1975-91's with square styling were first with full truck frames. Then the 1992+ rounded style continued full frame.

Chevy/GMC's were unibody through 1996. The 1997+ "Express" have truck chassis.

This gave Ford a 22-year head start in full frame cutaway chassis like we have under our Class C's.

So how did those early 70s Ford class Cs get built?

[j-d]

Econoline'a were unibody through 1974. The 1975-91's with square styling were first with full truck frames. Then the 1992+ rounded style continued full frame.

Chevy/GMC's were unibody through 1996. The 1997+ "Express" have truck chassis.

This gave Ford a 22-year head start in full frame cutaway chassis like we have under our Class C's.

[Dakzuki]

tatest wrote:
Probably has to do with fleet pricing. Although the cab chassis and cutaway market is relatively small, Ford has dominated it since abandoning unibody for body on frame in the van construction in 1975.

GM going from unibody to body on frame 20 years later should have brought down the build cost of a cab chassis to be more competitive with Ford's, but the RV manufacturers still don't seem to be buying. GM does a lot better on the SRW cab-chassis uses for lighter box vans, and are now the only player in van chassis for ambulances.

Unibody Econolines? Huh?

[bagman]

wbwood, Mon. AM when I get to work, we'll take a few pictures and post them up! Right now I'm at home watching college football! Bags.

[wbwood]

Any pictures?

[bagman]

Actually, both Forest City & Thor offer class C & B+ RV's on both the Ford & Chevy chassis.I did some research and the Chevy & GMC 4500 can be had with the 6.6 Duramax Diesel. Bags.

[ron_dittmer]

Does GM allow their wheelbase stretched or reduced like Ford does? If not, maybe that is influential. I also seem to recall back in 2009 when GM dropped, Hummer, Saturn, and Pontiac, they also dropped the cut-away chassis motor home package, due to low production demand. I wonder if that is still the case.

The motor home package deletes some things like carpet and seats, and adds other things like power windows & door locks and chrome front grille work. There is a lot more to it but you get the idea.

I agree the GM/Chevy chassis is quite nice. I would prefer it over our Ford, but back in 2007 when we bought ours, the Ford was 9" shorter than the Chevy, and our RV outfitter didn't offer but only the Ford. The Ford E350 version of our Phoenix Cruiser fit in our garage, but not the E450 for it stands 3" taller. Our rig clears our garage door opening by 1 to 2 inches. It's dang close when our rig is empty.

[tatest]

Probably has to do with fleet pricing. Although the cab chassis and cutaway market is relatively small, Ford has dominated it since abandoning unibody for body on frame in the van construction in 1975.

GM going from unibody to body on frame 20 years later should have brought down the build cost of a cab chassis to be more competitive with Ford's, but the RV manufacturers still don't seem to be buying. GM does a lot better on the SRW cab-chassis uses for lighter box vans, and are now the only player in van chassis for ambulances.