Possible?? New Transit Based C

[bobojay5]

On another forum it's been mentioned that Dean of Leisure Travel is saying they have a Unity/Serenity type unit in the works w/no slides and the diesel on a Transit cutaway coming late this fall for 2016.
If so this is the first class C Transit I've heard about. Neat!

I know Winnebago is looking, but nothing announced as yet.

[ron_dittmer]

bobojay5 wrote:

ron.dittmer wrote:
With the F series, do the seats sit upright like in a van? Is the ceiling height comparable? Is there a flat floor or a center hump like in a pickup truck? Assuming none of those points compare to a van, also considering the extra length, I see that being a big show stopper for most RV shoppers. It would for me.

Yes seats sit upright, no flat floor, there is a hump, not sure about ceiling height but a 6'3" person can sit in the Ford pickup cab and not hit his/her head on the cab roof.
One of the things I immediately noticed in the Transit cab seating position was that it was a more stretched out, laid back position like a car vs the chair like seating in the Sprinter. More comfy for me...

I was wondering about ceiling height, hump, and seat positioning for when traversing front seats to the house and back.

Our first rig was an F-series exaggeration being a Toyota pickup truck chassis. As we got older, it became ridiculous to transverse. Between the hump, the seats, and ceiling height, it was not senior friendly. I wonder if the F-series would still have some of the same issues, though of coarse less severe.

People on this forum complain all the time how the E-series is hard compared to the Chevy and Sprinter. I can't imagine what they'd be saying about an F-series.

[bobojay5]

ron.dittmer wrote:
With the F series, do the seats sit upright like in a van? Is the ceiling height comparable? Is there a flat floor or a center hump like in a pickup truck? Assuming none of those points compare to a van, also considering the extra length, I see that being a big show stopper for most RV shoppers. It would for me.

Yes seats sit upright, no flat floor, there is a hump, not sure about ceiling height but a 6'3" person can sit in the Ford pickup cab and not hit his/her head on the cab roof.
One of the things I immediately noticed in the Transit cab seating position was that it was a more stretched out, laid back position like a car vs the chair like seating in the Sprinter. More comfy for me...

[ron_dittmer]

With the F series, do the seats sit upright like in a van? Is the ceiling height comparable? Is there a flat floor or a center hump like in a pickup truck? Assuming none of those points compare to a van, also considering the extra length, I see that being a big show stopper for most RV shoppers. It would for me.

[RobertRyan]

bobojay5 wrote:

rjstractor wrote:
I would hope that a 450 version would be at least 14K GVWR to make it comparable to the current E450. They would need to upgrade the drivetrain because the current Transit has a GCWR of just 13,500 vs the E series which is 20,000.

My opinion, don't think you'll see a comparable number to the E-450. Ford will let the F-series chassis cab take over that niche. Just look at all the public safety vehicles out now that have went from the E-series to the F-series chassis, then they have a much more modern and quality vehicle

It is the most logical option

[ron_dittmer]

I wonder if wheel base & frame extensions will be permitted for the T-series like the outfitters do today with the E-series. The Sprinter does not allow such mods which limits outfitter offerings.

[bobojay5]

rjstractor wrote:
I would hope that a 450 version would be at least 14K GVWR to make it comparable to the current E450. They would need to upgrade the drivetrain because the current Transit has a GCWR of just 13,500 vs the E series which is 20,000.

My opinion, don't think you'll see a comparable number to the E-450. Ford will let the F-series chassis cab take over that niche. Just look at all the public safety vehicles out now that have went from the E-series to the F-series chassis, then they have a much more modern and quality vehicle

[rjstractor]

I would hope that a 450 version would be at least 14K GVWR to make it comparable to the current E450. They would need to upgrade the drivetrain because the current Transit has a GCWR of just 13,500 vs the E series which is 20,000.

[RobertRyan]

bobojay5 wrote:
You all know that a T-450 & maybe a T-550 is in the works for the replacement of the E-series chassis. Ford has the patent on those terms for future vehicles off the Transit platform. We were told this at the ride and drive event I attended last summer. No timeline was given at that time of course....my prediction is 2017 for a 450 version around 12k GVWR

They really need it as on the current Transits numbers it will not make the grade

[bobojay5]

You all know that a T-450 & maybe a T-550 is in the works for the replacement of the E-series chassis. Ford has the patent on those terms for future vehicles off the Transit platform. We were told this at the ride and drive event I attended last summer. No timeline was given at that time of course....my prediction is 2017 for a 450 version around 12k GVWR

[ron_dittmer]

RobertRyan wrote:

PghBob wrote:
I've read that the GVWR of the Transit chassis is 10360 pounds. That's over 2 tons less than my E450. The Transit might work for a smaller, say up to 24 feet, rig, but anything much bigger would likely seriously impact OCCC.

It will be a squeeze to make it into a Class C

I agree with everyone's comments. As is available today, it's just too close in weight capability for my comfort. If they can bump it up even 500 pounds, that will make a huge difference. Maybe Ford will later do what was done with the Sprinter over the years. The earlier model years handled less of a load.

I would recommend a Transit based motor home only if it was small and light enough to offer enough margin. I'd watch that very close when shopping. There is nothing worse than traveling without fresh water and with less people than you want to bring along.

The Dodge Promaster with single rear wheels is worse yet.

Our previous generation 2007 E350 with 11,500 pound capability carries the house, fuel, water, gear, food, and 2 people, weighing in with 1000 pounds of margin. That leaves enough to spare on weekends loading up on guests.

[RobertRyan]

PghBob wrote:
I've read that the GVWR of the Transit chassis is 10360 pounds. That's over 2 tons less than my E450. The Transit might work for a smaller, say up to 24 feet, rig, but anything much bigger would likely seriously impact OCCC.

It will be a squeeze to make it into a Class C

[pnichols]

I'm not a fan of a Class C RV that weighs too close to the maximum that it's chassis is rated for.

I wouldn't care to have a job driving a delivery truck around all day long that was for some reason always nearly fully loaded - or pay the fully-loaded wear and tear maintenance costs on the truck, either. That's the main reason that we have a 11,800 lb. Class C on an under-loaded E450.

[PghBob]

I've read that the GVWR of the Transit chassis is 10360 pounds. That's over 2 tons less than my E450. The Transit might work for a smaller, say up to 24 feet, rig, but anything much bigger would likely seriously impact OCCC.

[mlts22]

Anything on a Transit platform, IMHO, is a good thing. I'm hoping that RV places both offer "euro" RVs like the Trend, as well as "traditional" ones like the View with a slide-out.

Since this is a cutaway, there is (as of now) no EcoBoost engine model available, but the I-5 diesel is no slouch either.