Ford V10 Power, effectivity

[wredman]

Since this seems to be the primary gas engine for motorhomes, and all applications are the same engine and power. Is there a general consensus on coach weigh where the engine no longer seems acceptable, and most people would wish they went with the diesel engine coach?

I know its subjective, and depends on the hills typically driven and we can all learn to accept the slow lane :). It just surprised me that all of these different weight coaches have the same engine.

[usersmanual]

Hudsoner wrote:

rgatijnet1 wrote:

Mile High wrote:
Let's not give the guy illusions! There is simply nothing true about that last statement.

I pass so many diesel coaches that I have lost count. I can cruise all day at 75 and most diesels camp in the right lane doing 55 to 65. I know my gas coach will top at 84 when the ECM prevents it from going any faster. The Ford V-10 has plenty of power for any roads that you may travel on as long as you keep the gross combined weight within specs.

I am like you! I have yet to see a diesel coach of the same or similar size as mine is (31') that can keep up with me, be it on the flats or in the western mountains.

don't see many diesel pusher 31 ft MH if any? most of the ones u see are 40-45 ft.Anyhow iam trying to compare apples to apples
so no if u had a 38-39 ft gasser,loaded, pulling a toad you would be under powered compared to a 400HP ISL 40 ft loaded pusher towing a toad.Iam sure a light weight 31 ft MH ford V10 will be sufficient power but as said two different worlds when talking space-ride-engine noise-overall quality of build -handling etc
Like the "OP" asked

Is there a general consensus on coach weigh where the engine no longer seems acceptable, and most people would wish they went with the diesel engine coach?

and so this is my consensus on this matter

[usersmanual]

rgatijnet1 wrote:

Mile High wrote:
Let's not give the guy illusions! There is simply nothing true about that last statement.

I pass so many diesel coaches that I have lost count. I can cruise all day at 75 and most diesels camp in the right lane doing 55 to 65. I know my gas coach will top at 84 when the ECM prevents it from going any faster. The Ford V-10 has plenty of power for any roads that you may travel on as long as you keep the gross combined weight within specs.

I think maybe your a legend in your own mind. Yes most likely on flat freeway u can go 75.We all can- but few choose to travel over 60-65 because that is a safe reasonable speed.75 in that MH is a danger to all other travellers around you.Try travel through the siskiyou or mammoth mt areas or the 8 from Yuma to san diego
to name a few and you will be down to 35-45 and I will now pass
you. oh and I will be reving a quite 2100 and you 5000 screaming noisy nauseating rpm

[Hudsoner]

rgatijnet1 wrote:

Mile High wrote:
Let's not give the guy illusions! There is simply nothing true about that last statement.

I pass so many diesel coaches that I have lost count. I can cruise all day at 75 and most diesels camp in the right lane doing 55 to 65. I know my gas coach will top at 84 when the ECM prevents it from going any faster. The Ford V-10 has plenty of power for any roads that you may travel on as long as you keep the gross combined weight within specs.

I am like you! I have yet to see a diesel coach of the same or similar size as mine is (31') that can keep up with me, be it on the flats or in the western mountains.

[rgatijnet1]

Mile High wrote:
Let's not give the guy illusions! There is simply nothing true about that last statement.

I pass so many diesel coaches that I have lost count. I can cruise all day at 75 and most diesels camp in the right lane doing 55 to 65. I know my gas coach will top at 84 when the ECM prevents it from going any faster. The Ford V-10 has plenty of power for any roads that you may travel on as long as you keep the gross combined weight within specs.

[Mile_High]

Let's not give the guy illusions! There is simply nothing true about that last statement.

[rgatijnet1]

We travel every year to the Western mountains and I would guess that less than 5% of the time are we on a climb that might slow us down. We are always towing another vehicle. The facts are that for 95%+ of the time, the gas engine will pull the coach as fast, or faster than most diesels out there.

[stvdman]

jlud wrote:
Plus maintenance is cheaper for now...I can get a full new engine put in later if I need it for much less than an upgrade.

you can get a new engine for what a high pressure fuel pump costs on some newer diesels...

[jlud]

2016 Georgetown 37.5 footer 364TS with new trans. Works great, pulls my F-150 aluminum truck and stops it no problem with tow haul mode. Haven't done Rockies but smokies and other smaller ones and no problem.

I had a diesel truck and loved it, but I could not see paying the additional money right now for a diesel. Plus maintenance is cheaper for now...I can get a full new engine put in later if I need it for much less than an upgrade.

[pslocum]

fortytwo wrote:
I have owned 4 v-10's.

2000 35' Rexhall with full BANKS. Went over every pass in the Rockies pulling a Jeep Cherokee, CGVW 25,500 and always at that or over. Down to 20mph at 11,000 feet in 1st gear, but no problems pulling the load anywhere. Averaged 7.75 mpg over 130,000 miles.

2004 24' BT Cruiser pulling same Cherokee. Drove like a sports car, but the house part was a POS that defied fixing. Drove it a month and went back to the Rexhall, which I fortunately hadn't disposed of.

2010 28- Coachmen Freelander on 14,000 chassis with 2008 V-10 towing an Odyssey van. Plenty of power, but handling marginal. Average mpg 7.1. DW didn't like the layout and traded after 2 years.



2014 Itasca Sunstar 30T on 18,000 chassis towing the Odyssey van, CGVW 23,000. The rear end ratio is a pathetically poor match with the 5 speed tranny and the programming of the engine computer. On the slightest rise in the road cruise control will shift from 5th down to 2nd in about 2 seconds going from 1850 rpm to 4400. Installed the 5 Star tuning. Some improvement, particularly in the 5 to 4 downshift with most small grades staying in 5th or 4th. On steeper grades the shift from 4th to 2nd has only a 1/2 second stop in 3rd. However this only happens at speeds of 64-65. At speeds of 58-62 the downshifts occur much earlier and the downshift to 3rd only creates an additional 200 rmp instead of the 500 it should (if I add additional fuel via the gas pedal rpm will increase by 500 and the tranny will stay in 3rd until the grade steepens substantially. Think this is a 5 Star programming problem and will be contacting them when I get the stick house under control. Just returned from 5 months, 9600 miles on the road. Mpg before 5 Star; 6.75 over 5,079 miles. After 5 Star; 6.82 over 4,555 miles. Power is good, but not as good as the 2000 V-10 with BANKS. Think most of that is the tranny/rear end ratio and engine tuning issue. The the gearing of the 18,000 chassis does not enable the V-10 to turn high enough to pull the load on even modest grades until the downshift to 2nd. Driving manually with the 5 Star package the shift points can be pretty well controlled.

Added the Safe-T-Steer to the 30T but handling was only slightly improved, and remains bordering on dangerous with winds/crosswinds of 25mph or more.

Our 35F has the new 6 speed and I'm very happy with the way it shifts I've been on some 8% and 9% grades and it handled them very well. IM sure at the high elevations in the Rockies it will loose hp but I can live with the occasional slow assent.

[fortytwo]

I have owned 4 v-10's.

2000 35' Rexhall with full BANKS. Went over every pass in the Rockies pulling a Jeep Cherokee, CGVW 25,500 and always at that or over. Down to 20mph at 11,000 feet in 1st gear, but no problems pulling the load anywhere. Averaged 7.75 mpg over 130,000 miles.

2004 24' BT Cruiser pulling same Cherokee. Drove like a sports car, but the house part was a POS that defied fixing. Drove it a month and went back to the Rexhall, which I fortunately hadn't disposed of.

2010 28- Coachmen Freelander on 14,000 chassis with 2008 V-10 towing an Odyssey van. Plenty of power, but handling marginal. Average mpg 7.1. DW didn't like the layout and traded after 2 years.

2014 Itasca Sunstar 30T on 18,000 chassis towing the Odyssey van, CGVW 23,000. The rear end ratio is a pathetically poor match with the 5 speed tranny and the programming of the engine computer. On the slightest rise in the road cruise control will shift from 5th down to 2nd in about 2 seconds going from 1850 rpm to 4400. Installed the 5 Star tuning. Some improvement, particularly in the 5 to 4 downshift with most small grades staying in 5th or 4th. On steeper grades the shift from 4th to 2nd has only a 1/2 second stop in 3rd. However this only happens at speeds of 64-65. At speeds of 58-62 the downshifts occur much earlier and the downshift to 3rd only creates an additional 200 rmp instead of the 500 it should (if I add additional fuel via the gas pedal rpm will increase by 500 and the tranny will stay in 3rd until the grade steepens substantially. Think this is a 5 Star programming problem and will be contacting them when I get the stick house under control. Just returned from 5 months, 9600 miles on the road. Mpg before 5 Star; 6.75 over 5,079 miles. After 5 Star; 6.82 over 4,555 miles. Power is good, but not as good as the 2000 V-10 with BANKS. Think most of that is the tranny/rear end ratio and engine tuning issue. The the gearing of the 18,000 chassis does not enable the V-10 to turn high enough to pull the load on even modest grades until the downshift to 2nd. Driving manually with the 5 Star package the shift points can be pretty well controlled.

Added the Safe-T-Steer to the 30T but handling was only slightly improved, and remains bordering on dangerous with winds/crosswinds of 25mph or more.

[Mile_High]

Gjac's explanation sounds good to me - The V10 is kind of a lone ranger out there for gas, so you get the same engine in a 24' as you do a 35', whereas DPs have more engine options. Even beyond engine size, the DPs are tuned different for the performance expectation.

I had an old 454 in the day with a 3 sp and it did like to run away a little in the Rockies where we live. I really appreciate the engine braking and exhaust brake on the large displacement diesel vs what we had before.

[Gjac]

wredman wrote:
Since this seems to be the primary gas engine for motorhomes, and all applications are the same engine and power. Is there a general consensus on coach weigh where the engine no longer seems acceptable, and most people would wish they went with the diesel engine coach?

I know its subjective, and depends on the hills typically driven and we can all learn to accept the slow lane :). It just surprised me that all of these different weight coaches have the same engine.

Performance when discussed on here is very subjective and what is acceptable to one is not acceptable to another. When I first joined the forum 11 years ago many would post times it would take to climb certain grades like the grapevine after various mods they made. Not being familiar with some of there grades I decided to use 40-60 mph tests on a flat road to compare performance. I figured you will always be going at least 40 mph when you approach a grade. The MH that has the best performance on the flat will do the best on a hill. So I would compare HP to wt ratios to narrow your search , look at gear ratios and then test drive from 40 to 60 at WOT and compare the times. What I have found is most larger DP's that I tested had times of 18 or more secs. I test drove a 34 ft DP that took 22 secs. Mid size gas 35-36ft were about 16 secs and short gas 30-32 ft about 12 secs. So if your current MH for example is a older 454 with 230 hp and is 34 ft and does 18 secs a newer Ford with 362 HP in a 37 ft MH maybe about the same or lower do to the increased HP. Unlike gas MH's DP's have less HP as they get shorter and lighter. I'm sure an automotive eng can do this just by comparing specs but this simple test helps me to compare various MH's that I have looked at.

[Mile_High]

mike brez wrote:

wredman wrote:
how do you dry out the jeep after you launch the boat?

The jeep has rubber grommet plugs in the floor. Remove them and take it for a ride. :B

Yep, Jeeps are waterproof 🙂 That might explain why he needs a V10 in the front instead of a Cummins in the back, because Cummins ain't waterproof and it would certainly be underwater by the time that boat was ready to launch!

Serious - it is a nice setup - I love stackers.

[John_Joey]

mike brez wrote:

vjstangelo wrote:
Nice set up to timmac. Curious as to why you trailer the Wrangler and not tow 4 down.

Most likely so he can bring the boat along.

Plus you can back it up if you have too. I assume that the boat swings down to launch while using the Jeep. If you're on the road for any length of time the trailer can be used to haul other things. Pretty slick setup.