Meghan (Soon2BNewbie) -
To continue from my previous post ...
The fact the motorhome you're considering has a 360 engine is not a mark against it. There's no reason to be wary of the 360 and having that engine may very well be a reason to prefer that motorhome over other possibilities.
The fact there's little mention of the 360 engine in this thread may be due to few people having any problems with their 360 engines. People tend to sound off when they're having problems or are dissatisfied. Alternatively, the lack of mention may be due to more people having big block engines. So, it's a guessing game as whether the lack of mention is due to the engine's reliability or relatively few numbers among this crowd.
I think it was Leeann who said people tend to be satisfied with their engines, regardless of whether they have small blocks or big blocks, as long as they do the job.
I've said it before and will repeat my opinion: Most motorhomes are unnecessarily overpowered with big block engines. Leeann is the only person I know who has a reasonable justification for having a big block engine. In her case, the motorhome is routinely used to tow a large, heavy trailer to carry all the stuff needed to support her husband's boat racing endeavors.
While there's been a long history of people trying to create motorhomes, the commercial production of motorhomes began in the late '50s. (The exact date depends on which book you read and people's definition of commercial production.)
These early production motorhomes were built on Dodge chassis equipped with the 225 cu. in. slant-six engines. Because of its design, the slant-six had ample torque and power and the motorhomes with them had good acceleration and were capable of tackling most passes in mountainous areas. Unfortunately, the slant-six had limited top-end, which generally prevented the motorhomes from getting much over 50 mph.
This is probably the start of the general impression that motorhomes are slow, lumbering, traffic-impeding obstacles, an impression that's perpetuated by rubber-necking tourists.
Interestingly, motorhome manufacturers abandoned the slant-six in favor of V8 engines with more top-end around the same time as the oil embargo and the nationwide 55 mph speed limit. (Around the same time, I traded my '49 International Metro, which couldn't go over 65 mph without blowing up the engine, for my go-fast '66 Dodge Polara, which was capable of 120+ mph speeds.)
The 1976-era 360 was the largest of the LA small block family, that consisted of the 273, 318, 340, and 360 engines. You may have noted my signature block lists a 1969/1970 (split year) M300 Class A Explorer with a 318 engine. You may also have noted I am swapping that engine (and A727 transmission) into my 1973 RM350 chassis, which originally had a 440 engine. (The engine and transmission were missing when that chassis was given to me.)
Elsewhere in this thread, I've mentioned the M300's performance, with particular reference to Turnagain Pass. The following picture gives you some idea as what that pass is like, although it's evident to me that they've made improvements to reduce some of the steeper grades in the two decades since I last travelled it.
Likewise, I've made mention of my '77 B200 van, which also had a 318 engine. The van had 2.8 miles on the odometer when I bought and was still on the "rolling parking lot" (i.e., automobile transportation semi-trailer) when I first saw it. I had to wait several hours, with a firm grip on the keys to the '75 AMC Gremlin I was trading in, while the dealer prep'd it.
That van was still running when I traded it off after 8-1/2 years and 170,000+ miles of hard use. (It lead me to be pulled over for going the speed limit. The trooper explained, "This is the slowest I've ever seen this van go and wanted to make sure it wasn't stolen.")
BTW - The Dodge 3.9 liter V6 is based on the LA small block engines. It is essentially a 318 minus two cylinders and some of the parts (such as pistons, connecting rods, and water pumps) are interchangeable between the 3.9L V6 and the 318 V8.
Based on my experience, I have significant appreciation for the 318 LA small block engine. It is a strong, durable engine, which is why I chose it for my "impossible" project of building a custom motorhome, with one of the project goals being 20+ mpg out of a Class A motorhome. (My M300 got 15-16 mpg after I tweaked the engine ... and behaved myself.) My experience with the 318 is also the primary reason I sought out and obtained a 3.9L V6 for a future as-yet-to-be-determined project.
During the time I owned it, the 318 engine in my '77 B200 gave me very few problems. I replaced timing chain and gears (once), had a valve job done on the heads (once), and rebuilt the Carter BBD carburetor (multiple times).
The timing chain and gears reached their expected life span in terms of mileage, so that replacement was reasonable.
I've since learned the valve job on the heads was probably unnecessary and was likely counterproductive. I've learned there is a known problem with the stock valve stems seals in mid- to late-70s LA small blocks disintegrating prematurely. Disintegrated valve stem seals allow oil to be drawn past the valve stems into the cylinders, resulting excess oil consumption and blue tailpipe smoke. The seals can be replaced without removing the heads, provided the person doing the job knows what they're doing. Valve jobs, by themselves, tend to increase piston ring blow-by due to improved sealing between the valve heads and seats. On this basis, I cannot recommend a valve job unless you also, at a minimum, re-ring the pistons.
The multiple carburetor rebuilds were my own unwitting fault, due to excessive routine use of gas line antifreeze. The alcohol in the antifreeze was eating up the carburetor seals and gaskets, leading to lean fuel mixture due to air leaks. This is a problem you may encounter, due to the alcohol in some modern gasoline blends. Newer carburetor rebuild kits contain seals and gaskets that are much more resistant to alcohol, which should eliminate the problem following the first rebuild. (The problem may not apply to you, if the carburetor has already been rebuilt within the past decade or so.) In any case, I'd try to avoid gasoline blends that contain alcohol. (These are usually, but not always, called ethanol blend.) Also, I'd avoid, like the plague, inexpensive gas line antifreeze sold in the yellow bottles and its equivalent products. (This one case where more expensive tends to be better.)
All four of the LA small block engines are reasonably equivalent in terms of strength, durability, and reliability. I prefer the 318 but have no reason to turn my nose up at the other three. Assuming you don't expect sports car performance out of your motorhome, and don't plan to haul heavy trailers, you should be reasonably satisfied with a 360 engine.
Okay, I'm done ... let the arguments and "yeah, but ..." replies commence.
To continue from my previous post ...
The fact the motorhome you're considering has a 360 engine is not a mark against it. There's no reason to be wary of the 360 and having that engine may very well be a reason to prefer that motorhome over other possibilities.
The fact there's little mention of the 360 engine in this thread may be due to few people having any problems with their 360 engines. People tend to sound off when they're having problems or are dissatisfied. Alternatively, the lack of mention may be due to more people having big block engines. So, it's a guessing game as whether the lack of mention is due to the engine's reliability or relatively few numbers among this crowd.
I think it was Leeann who said people tend to be satisfied with their engines, regardless of whether they have small blocks or big blocks, as long as they do the job.
I've said it before and will repeat my opinion: Most motorhomes are unnecessarily overpowered with big block engines. Leeann is the only person I know who has a reasonable justification for having a big block engine. In her case, the motorhome is routinely used to tow a large, heavy trailer to carry all the stuff needed to support her husband's boat racing endeavors.
While there's been a long history of people trying to create motorhomes, the commercial production of motorhomes began in the late '50s. (The exact date depends on which book you read and people's definition of commercial production.)
These early production motorhomes were built on Dodge chassis equipped with the 225 cu. in. slant-six engines. Because of its design, the slant-six had ample torque and power and the motorhomes with them had good acceleration and were capable of tackling most passes in mountainous areas. Unfortunately, the slant-six had limited top-end, which generally prevented the motorhomes from getting much over 50 mph.
This is probably the start of the general impression that motorhomes are slow, lumbering, traffic-impeding obstacles, an impression that's perpetuated by rubber-necking tourists.
Interestingly, motorhome manufacturers abandoned the slant-six in favor of V8 engines with more top-end around the same time as the oil embargo and the nationwide 55 mph speed limit. (Around the same time, I traded my '49 International Metro, which couldn't go over 65 mph without blowing up the engine, for my go-fast '66 Dodge Polara, which was capable of 120+ mph speeds.)
The 1976-era 360 was the largest of the LA small block family, that consisted of the 273, 318, 340, and 360 engines. You may have noted my signature block lists a 1969/1970 (split year) M300 Class A Explorer with a 318 engine. You may also have noted I am swapping that engine (and A727 transmission) into my 1973 RM350 chassis, which originally had a 440 engine. (The engine and transmission were missing when that chassis was given to me.)
Elsewhere in this thread, I've mentioned the M300's performance, with particular reference to Turnagain Pass. The following picture gives you some idea as what that pass is like, although it's evident to me that they've made improvements to reduce some of the steeper grades in the two decades since I last travelled it.
Likewise, I've made mention of my '77 B200 van, which also had a 318 engine. The van had 2.8 miles on the odometer when I bought and was still on the "rolling parking lot" (i.e., automobile transportation semi-trailer) when I first saw it. I had to wait several hours, with a firm grip on the keys to the '75 AMC Gremlin I was trading in, while the dealer prep'd it.
That van was still running when I traded it off after 8-1/2 years and 170,000+ miles of hard use. (It lead me to be pulled over for going the speed limit. The trooper explained, "This is the slowest I've ever seen this van go and wanted to make sure it wasn't stolen.")
BTW - The Dodge 3.9 liter V6 is based on the LA small block engines. It is essentially a 318 minus two cylinders and some of the parts (such as pistons, connecting rods, and water pumps) are interchangeable between the 3.9L V6 and the 318 V8.
Based on my experience, I have significant appreciation for the 318 LA small block engine. It is a strong, durable engine, which is why I chose it for my "impossible" project of building a custom motorhome, with one of the project goals being 20+ mpg out of a Class A motorhome. (My M300 got 15-16 mpg after I tweaked the engine ... and behaved myself.) My experience with the 318 is also the primary reason I sought out and obtained a 3.9L V6 for a future as-yet-to-be-determined project.
During the time I owned it, the 318 engine in my '77 B200 gave me very few problems. I replaced timing chain and gears (once), had a valve job done on the heads (once), and rebuilt the Carter BBD carburetor (multiple times).
The timing chain and gears reached their expected life span in terms of mileage, so that replacement was reasonable.
I've since learned the valve job on the heads was probably unnecessary and was likely counterproductive. I've learned there is a known problem with the stock valve stems seals in mid- to late-70s LA small blocks disintegrating prematurely. Disintegrated valve stem seals allow oil to be drawn past the valve stems into the cylinders, resulting excess oil consumption and blue tailpipe smoke. The seals can be replaced without removing the heads, provided the person doing the job knows what they're doing. Valve jobs, by themselves, tend to increase piston ring blow-by due to improved sealing between the valve heads and seats. On this basis, I cannot recommend a valve job unless you also, at a minimum, re-ring the pistons.
The multiple carburetor rebuilds were my own unwitting fault, due to excessive routine use of gas line antifreeze. The alcohol in the antifreeze was eating up the carburetor seals and gaskets, leading to lean fuel mixture due to air leaks. This is a problem you may encounter, due to the alcohol in some modern gasoline blends. Newer carburetor rebuild kits contain seals and gaskets that are much more resistant to alcohol, which should eliminate the problem following the first rebuild. (The problem may not apply to you, if the carburetor has already been rebuilt within the past decade or so.) In any case, I'd try to avoid gasoline blends that contain alcohol. (These are usually, but not always, called ethanol blend.) Also, I'd avoid, like the plague, inexpensive gas line antifreeze sold in the yellow bottles and its equivalent products. (This one case where more expensive tends to be better.)
All four of the LA small block engines are reasonably equivalent in terms of strength, durability, and reliability. I prefer the 318 but have no reason to turn my nose up at the other three. Assuming you don't expect sports car performance out of your motorhome, and don't plan to haul heavy trailers, you should be reasonably satisfied with a 360 engine.
Okay, I'm done ... let the arguments and "yeah, but ..." replies commence.
