Ford 5.4 in some of the smaller rigs?

I have to agree with Ron and Mich, especially Ron's comments regarding the size of the fuel tank. You can get by with a 40 gallon tank but the 55 gallon gives far more options when it comes to fueling. While I prefer to drive on the top half of the tank at an average of 9.5 mpg we can easily go 450+ miles without uncovering the fuel pump.

I think 2012 was the year the E-350 6.8L V-10 jumped from a GVWR of 11,500 to 12,500 (my 2011 chassis is 11,500). Our 2012 24' Nexus C has a payload of 3,363# so we aren't giving up much though we do run fully loaded at right around 11,000# (yep, I carry a lot of tools and toys).

The ride and handling are outstanding and I have not made any modifications to the suspension, simply none needed. The Michelin LTX M/S 2's are awesome tires and certainly a large part of the quality ride we enjoy. I run with 65 psi in the rears and 60 -62 up front which gives me a large cushion well above the load they actually carry vs their rated max load capacity.

Works for me.

:C

mlts22 wrote:
While looking for a short "C" (The Majestic 19G or a 24 footer), I noticed that a number of these are not just E-350s, but don't even have the V-10... they have a 5.4L V-8. Not to say the engine is bad... but it seems like way too much for such a relatively small engine, especially with a trailer behind, at or near the rated load limit.

Is this a concern, or is this normal for short "C"s?

The new era of RVers forget the old power houses like the 454 and 460 engines.The 5.4(300/365) I had,had more hp than either my 460 or 454's had and the torque numbers were close.

My C has a 460 and has plenty of power but if my old 5.4 engine was in it instead,I wouldn't feel under powered at all.My C is a 21ft and the 5.4 would seem appropriate for that size,in my opinion.I hauled a 30 ft trailer at about 8K loaded and it did fine.

I find this interesting also,both my class C and my recent HD F-150 have 1700 lbs payload,if your one to focus only on GVWR and the total combined weight is also pretty much the same.

And like the truck campers,there is alot one can do to improve if one feels it necessary.

I was trying to point out that what you wrote in an earlier post, assuming you're saying a 5.4L has a lower GVWR in the same chassis as one with a 6.8L, is not correct. ;)

If you find a Ford chassis motor home with the 5.4L-V8, make sure the chassis is not rated less as they often are

Mich F wrote:
This chart for the 2016 E series cut away chassis shows the E 350s whether they have the 5.4L or 6.8L have the same GVWR. It also shows the differences in GCWRs. There is a difference in the GVWRs in the E450s.
2016 E Series cut away specs

According to that chart, the E350 Duel Rear Wheel chassis for both the 138" and 158" wheel base, is offered at 11,500 and 12,500 GVWR.

The 10050/138" and 10500/158" is a Single Rear Wheel chassis.

In all cases the GCWR (which considers towing) the V10 has higher numbers as it should.

So the point I was trying to make earlier is true, the 5.4L is offered with in both the 12,500 and the lesser 11,500 chassis. But emphasizing that even the V10 is offered with the lower rated chassis. I just don't see that one out there on the open market. Interesting.

Thanks for the chart Mich.

This chart for the 2016 E series cut away chassis shows the E 350s whether they have the 5.4L or 6.8L have the same GVWR. It also shows the differences in GCWRs. There is a difference in the GVWRs in the E450s.
2016 E Series cut away specs

Mich F wrote:
I believe the GVWR of an E350 with the 5.4L or the 6.8L are the same, but there is a big difference in the GCWR.

I believe there is a 10,000, and 11,500 rated E350 chassis available with the 5.4L-V8. The 10,000 pound chassis might be a single rear wheel. There is a current day E350 DRW chassis offered that is rated less than 12,500. It has been a few years since I seen the data so maybe my memory on this is inaccurate.

I believe the GVWR of an E350 with the 5.4L or the 6.8L are the same, but there is a big difference in the GCWR.

Using our PC-2350 for reference. If we never towed, then the 5.4L would have been adequate. Because we do tow most of the time, I am glad to have the V10.

The PC-2100 seems ideal for the 5.4L-V8 for it is such a small rig, no tow vehicle required.

If you find a Ford chassis motor home with the 5.4L-V8, make sure the chassis is not rated less as they often are, and it has the 55 gallon fuel tank, not the smaller 35-40 gallon. Usually the smaller tank is an indicator of the lower rated chassis. But with a tiny rig, that might be just fine, still plenty of load capability, and a softer ride to go with it. The 55 gallon tank is very handy for long distance travel between fill-ups along with much more available generator run time.

If I special ordered our 2007 rig today as I did back then, I would get the same E350 chassis V10 engine, 55 gallon fuel tank, but the same 11,500 GVWR rated chassis we have today. We already have plenty of CCC margin so the 12,500 chassis would just offer a rougher ride.

My 2002 Trailite C E350 had the 5.4 V8 Triton. My 2006 Winnebago Aspect E350 had the V10. Only differences were the V8 was thriftier and the V10 revved a lot more on the same highway route East of Vancouver. I actually preferred the V8 as it was generally quieter. My next RV will be the LTV Unity TB which is diesel. To be fair though the V10 had to haul a bigger RV as the Trailite was 23 ft and the Winnebago 28. In retrospect maybe the V10 has more pulling power for the bigger rigs as noted.

We had the 5.4 in our 2005 F150, towing a 26 foot JayFlight. OK in the flats, but would only do about 50 uphill in the mountains.

Now we have a 23 foot Jayco Class C with the E450 305 HP V10, and it drives and pulls like a dream. I drive by the tach (2,000 to 2,200 RPM - 59 t0 61 MPH), and we average about 10 MPG.

All in all, a great power-plant for a small Class C.