cancel
Showing results forย 
Search instead forย 
Did you mean:ย 

Going from Class A to Class C

Johnny_Hurryup
Explorer
Explorer
I sold my 33 ft Class A (Ford F53 chassis)a few years ago. I was never happy with the ride. Solid axles, leaf springs,80 lbs.air in tires etc. I'm thinking of going to a smaller (26 to 28')Class C. What might I be in for?
16 REPLIES 16

adayjk
Explorer
Explorer
I've owned both A and C. If ride quality is a major criteria, you should test drive some units. The front of my Class C is better, the rear is really no better. If you test drive a new MH make sure the tires are inflated properly if you plan on a comparison. Driving around with the tires 20 psi low will take off the harsh bumps, but you can't travel that way. I also agree that they all need shocks if you want the best ride, but the improvement is not dramatic. It is enough that anyone can tell it is better however.

As far as the brand loyalty, everyone just seems to like what they have or be mad at what they hate. There is almost no logic to it. As an example, the 450/4500 GVWR is exactly the same (14200), unlike what is stated here. While GVWR is important because many RVs are heavy enough that the available remaining capacity can limit what you can carry, it isn't really a brand thing between GM and Ford. They are the same, and have been for years. The fanboys will be along in a second to explain how another specification matters for their favorite...

Specs to prove my point about GVWR if you care:
https://www.ford.com/commercial-trucks/e-series-cutaway/models/e450-cutaway-drw/
https://www.gmfleet.com/chevrolet/express-4500-cutaway-van.html

ron_dittmer
Explorer II
Explorer II
Johnny Hurryup,

I think you will find it much more simple to own, operate, and service a class-C chassis compared to a class-A chassis. You are buying a straight-forward van with a house behind it. Every shop will be familiar with your "van" portion. There is also something to say about the quality and feel of the van when driving. The doors are user friendly with easy entry/exit, they seal well, they have nice working windows, the general fit identical to a mass production car....not a kit car.

Ford E350/E450 or Chevy 3500/4500, all four are great choices for the right weight/load. In the 26/28 foot lengths, you will want to make sure you get either the Ford E450 or Chevy 4500 chassis. The Ford E450 handles more weight compared to the Chevy 4500 so make sure your rig of choice is covered well in that regard. The Ford will generally be more temperamental in it's handling but a little extra investment in suspension upgrades resolve them well.

Here are some general class-C things to consider. It is a long read, but worth it. It might help narrow your class-C selection further.

Ron Dittmer

------------------------------------------

New, used, or well used, when shopping for a conventional class B+ or C, the most important consideration is how it is constructed. This post outlines construction methods which are most affordable and methods that cost more, but are built to hold up much better to the elements and also the punishment of the road.

Some motor home manufactures offer different levels of quality through their various model lines. Instead of providing a list of brands to consider, it is best to identify what "Better" is.

When shopping for a motor home, don't get distracted with "Eye Candy" and "Square Footage". You want to pay close attention to how the house is constructed. Water infiltration is the number one killer of motor homes, rotting them away long before anything is worn out. Once water gets inside, it is like termites. By the time you realize there is a problem, a lot of damage has already occurred. Also consider that mold & mildew can grow inside the walls which then you have a health hazard. My advise focuses on identifying a reliably well sealed motor home.

#1 BEST (Very Expensive, Can Be 1.5 times the cost of Second Best)
NO structural seam work. The brand Coach House is a fine example. It is seamless, made from a mold. The only places where water can leak is cutouts for windows, entry door, roof-top vents & a/c unit, storage compartments & maintenance access, all of which are in areas of very low stress. Because they have a seamless shell, these motor homes are not common and have a limited selection of sizes and floor plans.

#2 SECOND BEST
Common, Affordable, & comes in Many Sizes so this is my main focus
I own an example of this type. My Rig Here manufactured by Phoenix USA.
Made in sections, but assembled in a way that greatly reduces the threat of water damage. Here are the good things you want to look for.

a) Structural Seams Away From Corners
When a motor home is driven, the house bounces, resonates, shakes, and leans countless times, representing a endless series of earthquakes. Corner seams see greater stresses than seams located elsewhere. Corner seams are more easily split, especially when the caulk gets brittle with age & exposure to the sun. One extremely bad bump in the road can instantly breach a corner seam. Seams hold up much better when they are brought in from the corners in lesser stressed areas.

b) A Seamless Over-The-Van Front Cap
A huge bed above the vanโ€™s roof is the most vulnerable area of a motor home. No matter how well they are made, that long frontal over-hang resonates when the RV is driven making it common for seams to split there, most troublesome with age & exposure to the elements. HERE is an example, one of many water-damage threads I have read. Scroll down in that thread to see pictures of the real damage.

The small front aerodynamic cap of a B+ design HERE eliminates the overhang which eliminates most of the resonation, along with the most vulnerable seam work.

There are a few conventional โ€œCโ€ Designs (big over-van bed) where that area is seamless. If you absolutely must have that huge bed, then look for a seamless bucket-like design. The Itasca Navion Here is a fine example. Some manufactures as of late offer a partial bucket design with fewer seams located in less-stressed areas. Some manufacture models like the Minnie Winnie and the Nexus Phantom utilize a compromising partial bucket design, making it a better choice compared to a fully seamed cab-over bed.

If you plan to accommodate more than 2 people, having that large extra cab-over bed will be extremely useful.

c) A Crowned Roof
Rain and snow melt runs off a crowned roof. A flat roof will sag over time, then water puddles around heavy roof-top items like the a/c unit. Water eventually finds it's way inside after gaskets & caulk have degraded from age, sun, and change in seasons.

d) Rolled-Over-The-Edge seamless Fiberglass Roof Sheathing
A single sheet of fiberglass as shown HERE that rolls over the right & left sides of the roof, down to the wall. The overlapping of fiberglass to the wall provides a good water seal and the fiberglass sheathing holds up better than roofs made of sheet rubber or thin plastic called TPO, which require more attention to keep your RV well protected.

e) A Five Sided Rear Wall Cap
A five sided back wall moves the seams around to the sides to areas of much less stress as seen HERE. The rear wall resembles a shallow rectangular cooking pan standing on it's side. Like the example, some rear wall sections are constructed with an integrated spare tire compartment and rear storage compartment. Not only are they convenience features, but that rear wall/cap offers a solid double-wall for exceptional strength which is more resistant to flexing the adjoining seam work. It helps in keeping the house together.

Don't be fooled. There are a select few manufactures who add rear wall sectional styling pieces over an entry level rear corner seam design which gives the appearance of a 5-sided pan design. You can easily tell by noting the sections & seams between them and the flat back wall that remains exposed.

Bigger Will Be Weaker
The size & floor plan you select MUST FIRST meet your needs before this consideration.
The bigger the house, the weaker the structure will be. Consider two cardboard boxes made from the exact same corrugated material. The smaller box would naturally be stronger. It will be more resistant to bending, twisting, and other types of flexing. So if you are on the fence between models, the smaller one will be your stronger choice.

Potentially Troublesome Construction
Entry level motor homes are made with seams in corners and finished off with trim, including the massive cab-over bed. Their roof is flat and finished with rubber or TPO. They are most affordable, and come in all sizes. HERE is one such example. If considering this construction type, keep in-mind they require more regular care with bi-annual inspections. Plan to use a caulking gun now and then. When buying a used one, consider that you really don't know how well the previous owner maintained it. Buying new or used, that construction method will be counting on you to be a good non-neglectful owner.

There are also the rare exception of the Lazy Daze which has seam work in the corners, but the substructure and sealing method is of the highest quality that it holds up like a seamless body. It's excellent sectional construction methods are not commonly found in other brands. I am no expert on this, but I'd give it a #1.5 Almost Like Best

About The Chassis
The most popular is the Ford E350 and E450 with the V10 engine. The Sprinter diesel is a popular alternative to the E350 in the smaller sizes. Also within this past year is the recent introduction of the Ford Transit. The GM 3500 & 4500 chassis are not popular but are a very good choice for the right application. Any of the chassis mentioned made since 1998 are real good, new or used. If you plan to tow a car or heavy trailer, be aware that the Sprinter & Transit will be least powered. People who tow with them naturally take it slower.

If considering a current-day โ€œsmallโ€ class B+ or C motor home, here is a comparison between the two current main chassis contenders, the Sprinter with the V6 diesel engine and the Ford E350 with the V10 gasoline engine.

Advantages Of The Mercedes Sprinter With Diesel Engine
- Offers a 35%-50% improvement in fuel economy over the Ford-V10, when both are loaded and driven identically.
- More ergonomic driver compartment with more leg room.
- Comfort continues with a car-like feel & quiet ride.
- A grander view out the windshield
- Made by Mercedes which people are attracted to.

Advantages Of The Ford E350 with V10 Engine
- Given identical motor homes both brand and model, the Ford is around $13,000 MSRP cheaper
- The Ford V10 engine has 50% more horse power and torque
- The Ford E350 chassis handles 1430 pounds more weight.
- The E350 is able to tow a heavier load.
- The E350 rear axle is significantly wider which translates to better stability.
- In most places traveled, gasoline costs less than diesel fuel
- The Sprinter diesel has limited mechanical service shops around North America
- The Sprinter diesel is typically outfitted with a propane generator. Propane is a critical fuel for RV operations, and generally needs to be rationed when dry camping.
- This Next Point Is Debatable But Still Worth Noting....The V6 Sprinter diesel engine is not allowed to idle for extended periods. This limitation is detrimental when you need a/c but there are generator restrictions, you are low on propane, or you have a mechanical failure with the generator or roof a/c. The Ford offers a great backup system. The V10 can safely idle for hours on end, heating, cooling, and battery charging, all valuable if you have a baby, pets, or health/respiratory issues.

You decide what your priorities are, and pick the appropriate chassis. There are some really sweet motor homes being built exclusively on the Sprinter chassis, such as the Winnebago Navion and View. Others like Phoenix USA build their model 2350 and 2400 on both the Sprinter and Ford E350. They will even build it on the heaviest duty E450 upon request for a nominal fee. People who request an E450 for a small motor home, tow heavier things like for example, a multi-horse trailer. You can even special order a E350 & E450 4x4.

There is so much cool stuff offered in recent years on the Sprinter and most recently on the new Ford Transit.

The Ford Transit Chassis
This chassis has the potential to dominate the class B+ & C motor home market in the smaller sizes. According to Ford's website, the Transit DRW chassis is offered in the 156", and 178" wheel base, and is rated as high as 10,360 GVWR. Ford offers a motor home package specific for the RV industry. It's diesel engine compares to the Sprinter in power and fuel economy, but is more affordable and is easily serviced at Ford service centers, just like the E350 & E450. The cab has a much lower stance than the Sprinter making it much more friendly to get into and out from for people in their later years. It's more like a mini-van rather than a standard van. The Transit's lower cab also offers roomier over-head bunks that are easier to access.

The Dodge Promaster 3500 Cut-Away Chassis
This front wheel drive chassis is another recent entry in the RV industry. I am concerned over it's lack of load capability as reflected with single free-wheeling rear wheels. I have been reading posts written by new Promaster RV owners stating they are over-weight with just two people, some personal effects and food. They say they can't carry water and never a 3rd person. I would not be comfortable with such a limited load range in a B+ or C. This chassis does seem to be a good option in the "B" motor home market.

The Chevy 3500 & 4500 Chassis
Unfortunately this chassis is not more popular, primarily because GM sort-of gave up on competing with the Ford E350 & E450. It offers more interior comfort than the Ford, but not as much as the Sprinter. It's power & weight ratings are a little less than their Ford counter-parts making them a great chassis for all but the heaviest of class Cs. They are also a little better on fuel consumption. One thing to keep in-mind, if you are counting inches in storing your rig, the Chevy is a little longer than the Ford by a number of inches which was critical for us with our garage as seen HERE with our Ford 2007 E350 rig. That could be the reason why the Chevy has a little more interior driver/passenger leg room.

The Ford E350 & E450
The majority of class B+ and C motor homes are built on one of these two chassis for a number of very good reasons. They have more power and load capability than the others. Ford approves outfitters to modify the chassis to increase or decrease the wheel base which supplies motor home companies a lot of design freedom. Ford has off-the-shelf components that work with the wheel base modification. So if you need a new drive shaft, fuel line, brake line, parking brake cable, wire harness, whatever, Ford has them available. Finally, the E350 and E450 chassis is competitively priced.

Engine Power Ratings of Ford, MB-Sprinter, Chevy, and Dodge
Ford E350 & E450 - 6.8L-V10, 305hp, 420ft
Ford Transit Diesel - 3.2L-I5, 185hp, 350ft
Mercedes Sprinter Diesel - 3.0L-V6, 188hp, 325ft
Chevy 3500 & 4500 - 6.0L-V8, 323hp, 373ft
Dodge Promaster - 3.6L-V6 (GVW only 9,300 pounds)

Desert_Captain
Explorer III
Explorer III
IAMICHABOD wrote:
Aw Captn Crunch,the best I can do for a brand name bully and keyboard commando such as your self is to quote some Mark Twain,let this thread continue with out such DIVERSION and put you on THE LIST.


It is sad that you have to resort to name calling, just nothing more to contribute?
I have no issues with a Chevy chassis almost bought one but found a better coach sitting on a Ford. No problem being on your list... but I guess you will never know.

:C

pnichols
Explorer II
Explorer II
I sometimes quote an Old Chinese Proverb that I made up: "If you want something to perform best, buy a heavy duty version of it and use it in a light duty way."

The more I read these forums, the more I'm beginning to think that the E350 and E450 chassis are in general being fulltime loaded too heavily by most Class C motorhomes built on them. What I mean by "loaded too heavily" is not that it's fulltime loaded above it's design maximums - just that it's fulltime loaded too close to it's design maximums.

Imagine driving an E350 or E450 based box delivery van eight hours a day that is all the time loaded way up - never unloaded. I wonder if the driver wouldn't eventually begin to think that the E350 or E450 chassis under their van was somehow a poor performer and maybe not the best?

In contrast, my 24 foot Class C on it's E450 chassis is enough under-loading the chassis such that everything about it's handling has felt well controlled since day-one, with all stock components. We just have had to tolerate it's stiff ride in the rear from the under-loading.

Of course there are many factors that come into play with a big box going down the road on a frame and it's suspension with six small tires, but having a frame and suspension design that is not stressed as much under that big box seems to make sense.
2005 E450 Itasca 24V Class C

IAMICHABOD
Explorer II
Explorer II
Aw Captn Crunch,the best I can do for a brand name bully and keyboard commando such as your self is to quote some Mark Twain,let this thread continue with out such DIVERSION and put you on THE LIST.
2006 TIOGA 26Q CHEVY 6.0 WORKHORSE VORTEC
Former El Monte RV Rental
Retired Teamster Local 692
Buying A Rental Class C

Desert_Captain
Explorer III
Explorer III
IAMICHABOD wrote:
Desert Captain wrote:

Yep, all thatโ€™s true, probably why Chevy Class Cโ€™s out number Fordโ€™s by 100 to one...
:S

Seriously??? LMAO

Hurling spurious mud balls advances this conversation...HOW?
Captn thought you were better than that.



Your gross and frankly inaccurate generalizations donโ€™t advance this discussion either. Brand loyalty chest thumping serves no useful purpose so I called you out.

Yes, like you I am very happy with my Class C, and yes it is the dreaded Ford E-350.
It drives and rides very well, does not introduce excess heat to the cab, the power drivers seat is awesome, and has more power than the comparable Chevy.
Nowhere have I ever seen evidence that the Ford is any louder than the Chevy which having less torque might have to work that much harder... no?

Please feel free to dispute this vicious pack of facts.
Sorry if my use of sarcasm/humor offended. Beyond Class Cโ€™s start counting EMT vans, airport shuttles and the myriad of other commercial uses of the venerable E-350/450โ€™s and the dominance of Ford quickly becomes glaringly apparent.

:C

pianotuna
Nomad II
Nomad II
I have air bags in the rear. They help. I'd love to add them to the front--and wish that I could adjust the pressures "on the fly".

I did add an extra leaf in my previous E-350 and that helped the ride a lot.

But a delivery van, is still a van. Smooth as silk it is NOT.
Regards, Don
My ride is a 28 foot Class C, 256 watts solar, 556 amp-hours of Telcom jars, 3000 watt Magnum hybrid inverter, Sola Basic Autoformer, Microair Easy Start.

AJR
Explorer
Explorer
This is fun. I have owned a gasser class A. A 2010 chassis under a 2011 E350 class C and now a 2013 4500 Chevy chassis under a 2014 class C with 40k miles on it.

My experience so far has been the new to me Chevy class C is far better than the E350 class C I had. I did most of the mods to the E350 and still had to hold onto the wheel most of the time with both hands. The major mods were alignment per โ€œHarveyโ€ on this forum. Plus a Safe-T-Plus on the steering. Both worked very well on the Ford with only 13k miles on it.

Without discussing any of the other pluses. The Chevy with 40k miles on it is far more comfortable too drive. It only needs shocks. Cross winds are not a problem like I had on the modified E350. Trucks passing are not the minor problem I had on the modified E350. My E350 was only inches shorter than this Chevy wheelbase. The new to me rig is about an inch longer overall than the Ford.

Just one persons experience. I hope this helps.
2007 Roadtrek 210 Popular
2015 GMC Terrain AWD

IAMICHABOD
Explorer II
Explorer II
Desert Captain wrote:

Yep, all thatโ€™s true, probably why Chevy Class Cโ€™s out number Fordโ€™s by 100 to one...
:S

Seriously??? LMAO

Hurling spurious mud balls advances this conversation...HOW?
Captn thought you were better than that.
2006 TIOGA 26Q CHEVY 6.0 WORKHORSE VORTEC
Former El Monte RV Rental
Retired Teamster Local 692
Buying A Rental Class C

ctilsie242
Explorer II
Explorer II
Some class "C"s have air suspension and ride better than others. Also, if you go for a smaller one, people say good things about Sprinter based models, although you do pay for that.

Desert_Captain
Explorer III
Explorer III
IAMICHABOD wrote:
Well if you are going to a class C on a Ford chassis you may have the same problems.

I may suggest you look at one on a Chevy Chassis

A better ride,larger drivers compartment,quieter and less heat transferred from engine compartment.




Yep, all thatโ€™s true, probably why Chevy Class Cโ€™s out number Fordโ€™s by 100 to one...
:S

Seriously??? LMAO

akrv
Explorer
Explorer
Been there done that. You are not going to get a better ride in a deliver truck. You may want to rent a Class C for the weekend before you buy.
2005 Coachmen Concord 275DS
2004 Malibu Maxx LT

janstey58
Explorer
Explorer
The only way you will really be happy with a better ride is a Class-A with air suspension. I have owned them all, and now I can say I have a great ride.
Jeff and Kim
2015 Fleetwood Discovery 40E
Freightliner Chassis 380HP DP
2012 Ford Escape Limited Toad

DrewE
Explorer II
Explorer II
PartyOf Five wrote:
I was surprised to learn that the Ford chassis is often the same between A n C units. I've been very happy with how well ours has been. Of course the cabover is a perpetual concern with C units, as is storage capacity, and so exceeding the weight limit on the rear axle.


Most often, the chassis is somewhat similar but not the same. Most Ford-based class A's use the F53 chassis, while class C's use the E350 or E450 chassis. There are a few smaller class A's based on the E series chassis. (There are no class C's based on the F53 because it's only available as a bare chassis, and so by definition cannot become a class C since you need to start with a cutaway or cab-and-chassis for it to be a class C.)

The F53 has a solid front axle with kingpins, rather than a twin I-beam with ball joints. It uses the three valve version of the V10 engine, rather than the 2 valve version used in the E series chassis. The overall frame and axles and GVWR are heavier on the F53. Still, there are a fair number of similarities.