Starting from scratch! Which model of van do you recommend?

[Clinto]

I just joined the site, and I have a basic (but important) question. I'm at the very beginning of buying a class B van and converting it into a simple camping and road trip vehicle.

I don't plan to install kitchenette or shower or anything like that. It will be a passenger van a lot of the time - taking kids to soccer games, etc. When we go on camping trips, we'll just load gear into the back of the van - including tents & sleeping bags. I plan to have bench seats in back that can fold down to make beds. We'll use the fold-down seats as beds occasionally, but usually will use tents for camping.

I'm looking for advice on which model of van to start with. I plan to buy a new van, and then have it converted. I am thinking about the long wheelbase, high-roof version of one of these models:
• Mercedes Sprinter
• Dodge Promaster
• Ford Transit
• Nissan NV (but not sure if they have a long wheelbase model)

I'm not sure if this is the right forum for posting this, but if it is, here are the questions (or advice i'm looking for):

Which of these is best for reliability? I.e. frequency of repairs? Cost of repairs? Ease of finding qualified repair centers?

Do you have any comments on comfort (for driver and passengers)? I want a van that is very comfortable for long road trips.

And, finally, I would appreciate any general comments or recommendations on selection of a new van for a conversion.

Thanks!
Clint

[rockymtnb]

My Roadtrek wrote:
'The gen.2 ecoboost engines have both port injection and GDI systems (all cylinders)"
I believe this is to eliminate the carbon build up.

That dual injection (port and direct) is for the new Ecoboost 3.5 HO (High Output) engine that will appear in the 2017 Raptor pickup this fall and eventually in the Ford GT sports car.

Here's Road and Track's description of the new Ecoboost 3.5 HO:

Calling the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 that's destined for the new Ford GT and second-generation Raptor pickup a high-output version is a bit disingenuous. Ford basically wiped the slate clean to make it, retaining only the displacement measurement—and, you know, the fact it has six cylinders in a vee configuration fed by turbochargers and direct injection.

It starts with a new block, heads, pistons, and intake, plus bigger turbos. Ford adds a dual-injection system, a combination of port and direct fuel injection, like Subaru uses on the BRZ/FR-S motor. That makes the H.O. 3.5 the first and only EcoBoost engine to use port injection. Ford calls this a second-generation EcoBoost, so maybe that dual-injection scheme will spread to other engines.

[My_Roadtrek]

From what I have read it has both.
'The gen.2 ecoboost engines have both port injection and GDI systems (all cylinders)"
I believe this is to eliminate the carbon build up.

[rockymtnb]

My Roadtrek wrote:

The Transit Eco Boost is port injection, not direct injection. Carbon build up should not be problem.

Ford Transit engine specifications page lists the Transit 3.5 EcoBoost as direct injection, same as the F-150. Presumably it would be subject to the same valve issues as the pickup.

Ford Motor Co - Transit Engine Specifications

[Clinto]

Thanks for the comment. Over the weekend I read a few articles comparing the Transit to the Sprinter - including the article you reference. It's interesting - most reviewers prefer the Transit.

[My_Roadtrek]

Clinto wrote:
I watched a few Youtube videos about carbon-fouled intake valves in engines with direct injection and started scratching my head and humming that old Bruce Springsteen song "one step forward and two steps back". 🙂

I'm kind of leaning towards the passively aspirated engine vs. the turbocharged model. I'm a pretty conservative driver and I've heard that repairs tend to be more frequent and more expensive on engines with turbochargers. I don't know how valid that is, but I've heard it quite a bit.

The Transit Eco Boost is port injection, not direct injection. Carbon build up should not be problem. It will out perform the other vans in the mountains, and MPG is around 5 to 7 more than the Chevy Express.
The right equipped Transit can tow 7,500 lbs.

Even though this is from the UK, and some things don't apply to the US models, it is a good write up comparing the Transit to the Sprinter.
Transit vs Sprinter

[Clinto]

Thanks for the input Tom.

I don't need 3500 class package. All I plan to put in the back is three bench seats that can fold down to be beds, and some shelving to hold the tents, sleeping bags, ice chest, etc.

What I envision is that we will have three bench seats when we want to carry a lot of people. For camping, I'll remove the 3rd seat and have a shelving unit that clips in place where the 3rd seat was.

I plan to have a trailer hitch, but that will just be for a bike rack that holds 4 bikes. The 1500 load rating might be enough for what I have in mind.

I need to look at a floor plan of three seats that fold down into beds to see how much total length I'll need in the cargo area of the van. Once I see that I'll know what are viable options for wheelbase and body length.

A step at a time, I'm getting there.... 🙂

[tatest]

Back again. If amount of space is the prime concern, and you are sure you have enough pennies saved, your best option is the Extended Long Wheelbase Sprinter. The high top has 6 1/2 foot headroom in the empty cargo van, the super high top has another 10 inches. The dual rear wheel version of the 3500 has a GVWR of 11,030 pounds, for almost 5000 pounds of carrying capacity, and it can still tow 5000 with the V-6.

That's about 700 pounds more capacity than the equivalent Transit (DRW LWB-E High Top), and the Ford needs the diesel with optional axle ratio to exceed that towing capacity. There are no equivalent vans from Ram, Chevrolet/GMC or Nissan, as single rear wheel axles hold GVWR under 10,000 pounds at highest ratings.

Whether not GVWR matters depends on the nature of your conversion, Chevy and Nissan will still have at least 3000 pounds of cargo capacity to handle your RV build and passenger and cargo loads, and some manufacturers have successfully built "camper" (as opposed to "motorhome") conversions on 150/1500 models with 8000-8600 pound GVWR option packages.

Expect to pay about $8,000 to $10,000 more for a base level Sprinter, compared to a Chevy or Transit, and upwards of $55,000 for a heavily optioned 4x4 dually cargo van. Either is about $4000-5000 more if you want to start with a passenger van, and the extra trim and seats will add 600 to 1000 pounds to the empty weight.

[Clinto]

I watched a few Youtube videos about carbon-fouled intake valves in engines with direct injection and started scratching my head and humming that old Bruce Springsteen song "one step forward and two steps back". 🙂

I'm kind of leaning towards the passively aspirated engine vs. the turbocharged model. I'm a pretty conservative driver and I've heard that repairs tend to be more frequent and more expensive on engines with turbochargers. I don't know how valid that is, but I've heard it quite a bit.

[My_Roadtrek]

That believe that video is about the older direct injection Eco Boost engines.
I haven't heard of carbon build up in the new twin turbo 3.5 Eco Boost, which are port injected.

[stan909]

Something to think about Ecoboost. Ford Mechanic EcoBoost warning

[My_Roadtrek]

The extended Chevy 3500 is 20' 3"

[Clinto]

Thanks (again) for all the helpful input. I'll check to see if the Chevy vans have a long wheelbase model, similar to the LWBs that are available in the Sprinter and Transit. I definitely need that much room to fit in the seating/cargo arrangement I have in mind.

[camperfamily]

The 1500 Chevy Express van, if it offers enough capacity for your needs, also was/is available with factory all wheel drive. Just thow'in something else out there.

[My_Roadtrek]

Have you driven a highly optioned Transit Van, I think you would be surprised how nice it is. Many people who have driven both the Sprinter, and Transit prefer the Transit.
Most dealers don't highly option out the panel vans, so a windowed passenger van might be the best option to look at and test drive.

Transit test drive

[Sebtown]

Clinto, check out the Sprinter as they offer absolutely the best comfort (at least compared to ANY Dodge, Chevy or Ford) I have ever owned or driven. I know we read a lot of comments about the cost of parts and lack of dealer network but many of us have experienced more than satisfactory reliability. You really do "get what you pay for" with Sprinter when it comes to driving comfort. I was not specifically shopping for Sprinter when looking for a used class "B" a few years ago but now, 3 years and 30,000 miles later, I would not go back any of the domestic crowd. I will agree that diesel vechicles need to be driven differently and boy, can they be slow in the mountains. They have the power but not the speed!