Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Big v10 or small v10  (Read 1089 times)
billy
SuperHero Member
******

Helpful Rating: 72
________
OwnPC: Yes
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Feb, 6 2011. Same day Packers won super bowl
Model: 3100
Slide: Yes
Location: Coarsegold, Ca. About 20-25 miles S/W Yosemite
________
Posts: 760


Best Friends


View Profile
« on: April 13, 2012, 11:05:08 pm »

I'm really not sure. I have been told there are two v10's a big v10 for class a and a smaller one for the c's and b+. the class a Winnebago 30a has a 6.8 v10 362 hp. Is any one sure of the size of our engines?
Logged

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
DownBy TheRiver
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: -3
________
OwnPC: No
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Hopefully soon
Model: 2910
ModelYear: 2910D is my favorite model
Slide: Yes
IntColor: Dusk
ExtColor: Dusk
Location: N/E Illinois
________
Posts: 117


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2012, 07:56:06 am »

Hey Billy -

Am rushing out the door this AM, but off the top of my head, both the same motor.  If I remember correctly, "we" have a 2-valve per cylinder head, while "they" have 3 valves.  Significant gain in horsepower, less impressive gain in torque - but same displacement, same basic hamburger patty, only the "bun 'n fixin's" are different.

E-series chassis vs the F53 chassis(?) (super-duty) I think?

Even some of the Cummins and MaxxForce diesel engines of a given displacement in Class A's have different states of "tune", different "buns" to more closely match anticipated duty cycle of the chassis, whether via valves, cams, compression, injection specs, turbos, etc.

I'll check more closely later today and see what else I can dredge up.
Logged
billy
SuperHero Member
******

Helpful Rating: 72
________
OwnPC: Yes
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Feb, 6 2011. Same day Packers won super bowl
Model: 3100
Slide: Yes
Location: Coarsegold, Ca. About 20-25 miles S/W Yosemite
________
Posts: 760


Best Friends


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2012, 10:34:24 am »

I have been told the same about the valves.
Logged

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
DownBy TheRiver
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: -3
________
OwnPC: No
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Hopefully soon
Model: 2910
ModelYear: 2910D is my favorite model
Slide: Yes
IntColor: Dusk
ExtColor: Dusk
Location: N/E Illinois
________
Posts: 117


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2012, 01:33:10 pm »

Heres a Ford link where you can compare both chassis:

https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/specialty_vehicles/Motorhome.asp


Class A 6.8 V-10: 362 hp/4750 rpm

Class C 6.8 V-10: 305 hp/4250 rpm


Class A 6.8 V-10: 457 lb-ft/3250 rpm

Class A 6.8 V-10: 420 lb-ft/3250 rpm


Granted, it can get really complicated really fast - both horsepower and torque figures make their own characteristic contributions to forward propulsion.  But generally speaking, torques contribution is grunt what it is that gets you moving, and what factors most greatly in terms of acceleration.  If you look at some Class A diesels, youll often find horsepower ratings often barely breaking 300 hp, yet torque ratings often climb into the 600+ lb-ft realm.

Horsepower, again speaking generally, is the force that more accurately predicts your ability to continue propelling a given load at a given speed at least until the next hill or grade, at which point your load requirements change, and torque takes over once again.
Logged
DownBy TheRiver
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: -3
________
OwnPC: No
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Hopefully soon
Model: 2910
ModelYear: 2910D is my favorite model
Slide: Yes
IntColor: Dusk
ExtColor: Dusk
Location: N/E Illinois
________
Posts: 117


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2012, 01:33:41 pm »

I our case, I wouldnt engage in Class A envy, Billy.  Chances are when comparing overall performance between the Phoenix Cruiser units against any other V-10 Class A chassis, (or even typical Class Cs with the lower rating for that matter) youre well out ahead in performance and mileage.  The 8% increase in torque is entirely eaten up by the heavier chassis and loaded weight of a Class A.  Weight consumes torque.

In the case of horsepower, the 16% increase may seem like a lot, but that is also entirely consumed as well by shear wind resistance and drag.  Wind resistance created by sheer frontal area, drag created not only by the rear house walls greater dimensions, but the larger gap between chassis and the road surface.

Thing of what it is youre pushing AND dragging through the air:


Phoenix Cruiser/B+ = Shed Door

 Class C = Garage Door

Class A = Barn Door
Logged
DownBy TheRiver
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: -3
________
OwnPC: No
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Hopefully soon
Model: 2910
ModelYear: 2910D is my favorite model
Slide: Yes
IntColor: Dusk
ExtColor: Dusk
Location: N/E Illinois
________
Posts: 117


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 15, 2012, 01:56:57 pm »

So while the 3-valve Class A motor does produce more power, its advantage is entirely consumed by the models attributes its powering.

On the other hand, who doesnt like more?  Yet more also gets you less.  Less fuel economy and less quiet that engine has the same peak torque rpm rating, but has to run at higher rpm to produce that extra horsepower.  And less cockpit comfort - the Class A motor will running hotter in the E-series.

Heat both saps power and intensifies the wear and aging of the motor and auxiliary components and systems.  The relatively cramped E-series doghouse only further intensifies those issues.

Whether on van or pickup chassis, weve all noted in the last few years weve gone to relatively giant and up-sized front grilles.  While yes, they make a given truck look more macho or butch their greater benefit is in service of more efficient motor cooling.

In this case, the Styling AND Engineering Departments both get what they want.
Logged
ragoodsp
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: 37
________
OwnPC: Yes
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: May 5, 2012
Model: 3100
ModelYear: 2012
Slide: Yes
IntColor: cafe
ExtColor: cafe
Location: New Hampshire
________
Posts: 288


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: April 25, 2012, 08:58:31 am »

Folks:

It is my understanding that 362 HP V-10 will never make it into and E-cutaway chassis; it is all about the heat,  period; the engine bay is just to small to get rid of the heat build up and therefore the smaller rated V-10.  Thanks
Logged
billy
SuperHero Member
******

Helpful Rating: 72
________
OwnPC: Yes
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Feb, 6 2011. Same day Packers won super bowl
Model: 3100
Slide: Yes
Location: Coarsegold, Ca. About 20-25 miles S/W Yosemite
________
Posts: 760


Best Friends


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: April 25, 2012, 11:42:20 am »

I was told the same..
Logged

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
bigbadjc
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: 28
________
OwnPC: Yes
NewUsed: Used
PurchDate: February 2010
Model: 2551
ModelYear: 2006
Slide: Yes
________
Posts: 223


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2012, 11:53:17 am »

I guess I have two questions.  Has anybody actually felt limited by the power of their V10 powered PC motorhome?  I have a E350 based 2551 and tow a Chevy HHR, admittedly a smaller combination than many of you have, but have criss crossed the Canadian Rockies without feeling underpowered.  Yes, the cars can run away from me, but I routinely found myself passing all the big rigs on the climbs.  Also, if you really want more power, wouldn't it be cheaper to use some hot rod kits like Banks, who claim their kits run cooler with more power, than contemplate changing out your engine?  Just wondering??

Jerry
Logged
billy
SuperHero Member
******

Helpful Rating: 72
________
OwnPC: Yes
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Feb, 6 2011. Same day Packers won super bowl
Model: 3100
Slide: Yes
Location: Coarsegold, Ca. About 20-25 miles S/W Yosemite
________
Posts: 760


Best Friends


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 25, 2012, 03:09:59 pm »

Pc 3100 with Honda crv. I very much considered the total banks system but looking for a small truck and $4k would go a long way. The part I do not like is pressing on the gas and feeling like I just stepped on a wet pile of cow s----. Very slow response.
Logged

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
DownBy TheRiver
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: -3
________
OwnPC: No
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Hopefully soon
Model: 2910
ModelYear: 2910D is my favorite model
Slide: Yes
IntColor: Dusk
ExtColor: Dusk
Location: N/E Illinois
________
Posts: 117


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2012, 05:01:43 pm »

But then again, Billy -

You ARE actually piloting an approximately 14,000#, 7-ton "pile".

But as I've said before, who doesn't like "more"?

But for every benefit, there is yet again, a trade-off.

Logged
DownBy TheRiver
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: -3
________
OwnPC: No
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Hopefully soon
Model: 2910
ModelYear: 2910D is my favorite model
Slide: Yes
IntColor: Dusk
ExtColor: Dusk
Location: N/E Illinois
________
Posts: 117


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2012, 05:11:48 pm »

JC Said:

>>>>  I guess I have two questions. Has anybody actually felt limited by the power of their V10 powered PC motorhome?

It would depend on what your expectations are when it comes to the driving dynamics of a 5-9 ton vehicle, or vehicle combination.  What you think it is that is responsive when piloting what is, in essence, an entire domicile and personal vehicle, out upon the roadways.

And should also be compared to the same weight and/or combination performance vs that of a Class A, or a Class C for that matter.
Logged
DownBy TheRiver
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: -3
________
OwnPC: No
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: Hopefully soon
Model: 2910
ModelYear: 2910D is my favorite model
Slide: Yes
IntColor: Dusk
ExtColor: Dusk
Location: N/E Illinois
________
Posts: 117


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2012, 05:21:52 pm »

Billy -

Assuming your CRV is even a two-wheel drive vehicle, you'd still be quite hard-pressed to find a "truck" or any compact "pickup" of any modern vintage whose gross weight is any less than your CRV.

You can go "lighter", but then it would be for "B" cars, such as the much smaller Toyotas (Corolla's, Matrix's or certainly, the Yaris'), or the Honda Civic's (or certainly the Honda Fit), etc.

You're not likely to find any lighter vehicle that matches the CRV's interior accommodations at a lighter weight.  Uless you're willing to put up with less passenger space and less cargo space otherwise.
Logged
bigbadjc
Hero Member
*****

Helpful Rating: 28
________
OwnPC: Yes
NewUsed: Used
PurchDate: February 2010
Model: 2551
ModelYear: 2006
Slide: Yes
________
Posts: 223


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: April 26, 2012, 05:35:10 pm »

In my case, power is something of a moot point as on long trips we usually tow our Chevy HHR which has a limit of 65MPH.  My PC 2551 handles that quite well.  What I question about wanting/needing more horsepower is what for?  The fact that a toad really needs auxillary brakes reinforces the fact that for many motorhomes braking power is more a concern than acceleration or top speed.  Returning to our high school physics class, we remember that kinetic energy is equal to 1/2 mass times velociy squared.  You put a heavier engine in, the mass goes up.  You drive faster, the kinetic energy goes up by the square of the velocity increase.  If you gotta slow that big beast down fast, the faster you're going the more braking energy it's gonna take. I'm just saying you want enough power to feel you can maneuver safely on the highway, but these things were never meant to be hot rods.

Jerry
Logged
ron.dittmer
SuperHero Member
PCPC
*******

Helpful Rating: 181
________
OwnPC: Yes
NewUsed: New
PurchDate: June 2007
Model: 2350 Ford
ModelYear: 2007
Slide: No
IntColor: Cherry&Green
ExtColor: FullBody Gray
Location: Dundee, IL
________
Posts: 1987



View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 26, 2012, 05:37:01 pm »

Has anybody actually felt limited by the power of their V10 powered PC motorhome?
Our 2007 E350 with 6.8L-V10 towing our Jeep Wrangler (Correction ...LIBERTY...senior moment), I feel has more power than needed.  I wonder if I could have gotten by with the 5.4L-V8 option and save some gas.

I suppose it depends on where you are coming from.  Our first motor home was "Very" under-powered, yet we did fine going 57 mph on the open road and slowing down in the up-hill climbs.  A little 2.4L-L4 (96hp) engine handling 4500 pounds was a bit of a stretch.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2012, 08:52:49 pm by ron.dittmer » Logged

Ron Dittmer (wife Irene) 2007 Model 2350 Without A Slideout
Our Rig Is Available For Viewing Any Time Of Year In Dundee, IL
Stored At Home In Our Heated Garage (Well-Lit & Warm Comfort In Winter)
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
Print
 
Jump to: