6 liter V8 Chevy Vortec question

[obie311]

I'm considering downsizing from a 8 ton GVWR 35' 4 season 5'er and a Duramax crewcab dually to a Forest River Sunseeker LE 2250SLE w/6 liter V8 Chevy Vortec for a number of reasons.

I have rented a 32' Class C previously with a Ford V10 in it and absolutely hated it. It was gutless, sounded like it was going to blow up in Haul mode going up grades, and got 6-8 mpg on average.

I love gas Chevy V8's but is that enough engine and torque to propel this Class C to my standards. My 5'er is not fast but the rig will pull the load with decent (usually) fuel consumption (8-10 mpg).

[DaCarmack]

As a GM guy the biggest thing on any of LS base motors is to get the computer reprogrammed and get rid of the torque management. You'll be like why the heck wasn't this done from the factory in the first place.H ad a 6L and a 3/4 ton you put your foot into it and get the 4,000 RPMs and watch the motor pull timing and drop RPMs plus and it shifted kind of soft. Trust me look it up on the GM forms you'll see that reprogramming the computer is the best thing since sliced bread on those things, especially turning off the displacement on demand that doesn't do anything but ruin a motor

[PatJ]

I've had two Chevy RVs with 1G small blocks (admittedly not the 6.0 or LS.) Currently on my third RV which is a 2019 V10 class C with the 6 speed and 4.56. At work daily I run a 2017 6.0 Chevy pickup with the 6 speed at 12,000 lbs.

In my opinion, apples to apples weight and having extensive experience with both, the V10 beats the 6.0 at 12k, but not by much. Neither is going to smoke the other, but the V10 will take 12k down the highway quicker and quieter than the 6.0, with less fuel used and less down shifting/hunting. Slightly better, but not by much.

I am a die hard Chevy guy, my wife and I each DD LS Tahoes, and our pickup is a Chevy. The 5.3 and 6.0 win all day long as daily drivers hands down, but the Ford V10 is the better Class C motorhome engine in my humble opinion (since you asked.)

[Lumpty]

I've had, in order, a '94 E350 with an EFI 460/E4OD (245hp/410 ft-lbs, with a 4.10 rear), an '04 GMC 2500HD with the LQ4 6.0/4L80E (300hp/360 ft-lbs with 4,10's) and the current '10 chassis E450 that has a SOHC V10 and 5R110 (305hp/420 ft-lbs and a 4.56 rear).

Up to a certain weight, about 15,000 GCW, the 6.0 was definitely the snappiest, and felt the most responsive. One time I had about 1000 lbs more in the trailer, approaching 9,000 lbs, pretty much right on the chassis limit of 16,000lbs GCWR, and it was not happy. Night and day how that 1,000 lbs emasculated it. mileage was always in the 8's, maybe 9 tops.

Going back to the 460 in the 1st Class C, it was classic big block power and torque. I didn't ever tow heavy with it, at the most 5500-6000lbs and a GCE of 18,500lbs, right on the chassis rating, but the drivetrain just shrugged, never feeling stressed. Mileage though was terrible. Solo, 7-7.5, towing, 6-6.5.

So onto the current V10. Never feels as eager as the 6.0 nor as unstressed as the 460, but after 80k+ miles, I am a begrudging fan. It has pulled 9000lbs, plus the 24' Class C it's in, all-up at 20,000lbs +. Solo mileage is around 8, towing 7, and has never pulled a hill (nothing out west but has done a bunch on the Mass Pike in the Berkshires and Fancy Gap on I-77) at less than 55, with plenty of pedal left. I agree the V10 does not make V8 noises; I'd much rather listen to the 6.0 LQ4 at 4500rpm than the V10, but for hauling ability, there's no comparison. The 2V SOHC V10 has gone into thousands of Class A's, which is not something that can be said for the 6.0. As cheap as RV manufacturers are, if it was a suitable engine for heavier weights, it would have been available in the Workhorse stripped chassis when they were available, instead of the 8.1 only.

[FunTwoDrv]

Here's my experience. We have the 6.0 in a 4500 chassis under a 32' C. Loaded for travel, it crossed the scale at 13k pounds. In addition to that, our Jeep weighed 4660. We travel from the East coast to CO every Summer. On reasonably flat ground with no significant head wind, it will run at 2000rpm in 6th gear. On long grades, it will gear down and sometimes turn about 3200rpm. Running down the East coast to FL, it runs a steady 2000rpm and gets between 8 and 10 mpg, depending on wind.

Gary

[kwplot34]

klutchdust wrote:

kwplot34 wrote:
If you don't like the performance of a gas C, look into a super C with a diesel engine. Had 2 different C's with the gas engine an E350 and a E450 and now have a Thor Omni XG32 on the F550 chassis with 6.7L diesel, It has all sorts of power, drives great with no modifications needed for handling and is comfortable and quiet. Oh and very good fuel economy, we are averaging 14MPG pulling a trailer and it never down shifts on hills except for some very long steep grades, set the cruise control and go.

I looked that vehicle up, my goodness is that a beauty.

We really like it a lot. Certainly get a lot of people coming up wanting to ask questions and look at it, The handling and driving comfort was definitely worth the upgrade.

[klutchdust]

kwplot34 wrote:
If you don't like the performance of a gas C, look into a super C with a diesel engine. Had 2 different C's with the gas engine an E350 and a E450 and now have a Thor Omni XG32 on the F550 chassis with 6.7L diesel, It has all sorts of power, drives great with no modifications needed for handling and is comfortable and quiet. Oh and very good fuel economy, we are averaging 14MPG pulling a trailer and it never down shifts on hills except for some very long steep grades, set the cruise control and go.

I looked that vehicle up, my goodness is that a beauty.

[kwplot34]

If you don't like the performance of a gas C, look into a super C with a diesel engine. Had 2 different C's with the gas engine an E350 and a E450 and now have a Thor Omni XG32 on the F550 chassis with 6.7L diesel, It has all sorts of power, drives great with no modifications needed for handling and is comfortable and quiet. Oh and very good fuel economy, we are averaging 14MPG pulling a trailer and it never down shifts on hills except for some very long steep grades, set the cruise control and go.

[BruceMc]

Pleased as punch! The 6.0 is a great engine in the 2250; we've had ours 5 1/2 years now, and wouldn't consider anything else.

A few years ago, my brother purchased a V10 powered shorty Class A; knowing it wouldn't be a powerhouse, it did ok. Pulling a long 5-6% hill, I was behind him where both of us were poking along at 50-55, then I decided to pick up the speed a bit. I flew past him at 80 with lots of gas pedal to spare! He stated he had no more pedal on that hill, that was all he could do.

This is in contrast to our old 2000 Four Winds on E-350 with the V10 - we'd have been setting at 50mph, 2nd gear and screaming at 4500 rpm. Both units weigh about the same, but the Chevy has twice the engine compared to that old Ford.

Keep in mind, as others have said - there's lots more to a chassis than just the engine. Access and drive-ability are two big factors. The ford cab is cramped, noisy and hot, and most folks have to sink an additional $2K in the front end just to make 'em drive decently.

Take one our for a test drive - you'll be pleasantly surprised.

[bobndot]

Lwiddis wrote:
You only need one step? Gee lol

Its a 12v elevator step. :B

[Gjac]

I think what most people are missing he is comparing a 32 ft MH with a V-10 to a 24 ft MH with a Chevy. The 24 ft MH will perform much better because it has a much better HP to weight ratio regardless of what engine Ford or Chevy. I think the Ford is 305 HP and the Chevy is 323 HP. Most people like the Chevy chassis in a Class C better because of the leg room and the ride. A 24 ft Class C will perform much better on hills than the 32ft V-10 and probably beat your 35 ft fver and most DPs up a hill.

[ron_dittmer]

Many years ago, I got into comparing the specs of the Ford E350/E450 and the Chevy 3500/4500 chassis.

Comparing frames of the E350 to the E450, the gauge thickness of the E450 frame it a tab bit thicker than the E350 but is otherwise dimensionally identical. At a glance, you don't see a difference, but you can measure the difference with a calipers.

I recall the frame of the Chevy/GM is dimensionally smaller than the Ford, and it is significant. I don't know if GM uses a different type of steel to achieve it's GVWR, but I always wondered about the stability of it's physically smaller frame. Given everything else identical, a physically bigger frame would have less frame twist over uneven surfaces. Less twist means the house is better protected from seams breaching.

[Lwiddis]

You only need one step? Gee lol

[AJR]

MDKMDK smiles & miles only till you need normal service or repairs. It is great you love it.

All I know is my 2013 4500 chassis with its long wheelbase and a 6.0 engine is a great driving rig that is all stock. Great ride and the best wind handling class C I have had. My first class C was on a F350 chassis V10. I won’t go there for this discussion.

I have to listen for downshifts. I can get my size 13 shoes past the dog house with no problem. My only issue is the 4500 chassis is several inches taller. So being an old geezer I have to have to put out a step to comfortably get into the rig.

[MDKMDK]

klutchdust wrote:
Depends on what your standards are.I have owned A Ford V-10 and found it to be strong, reliable and averaged 8.5 MPG over a 40K mile period. Sure it howls when pulling a

grade but when the fan kicks on when my Duramax is pulling a grade I tend to look for low flying aircraft because that what it sounds like. I doubt the Chevy is going to get

any better mileage than the Ford and a few miles per gallon isn't worth my time however they are both very reliable and easy to maintain. Motorhomes are fuel consumers.



Some run to the MB models for fuel savings only to end up with a sad face come maintenance /repair time.

Nothing but miles of smiles in my 15mpg diesel Navion. :B