 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Trucks / January 2006460 vs. V-10 in 26' motorhome?
I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? What about the V-10? I've heard of problems with wrist pins, warped heads, spark coils, etc. but they are supposed to get better fuel economy. I've also heard that the V-10 is a higher reving engine which, I would think, would not be desireable in a motorhome. Any thoughts????????? Talking about what would be "desirable in a motor home," I wouldn't even consider a gas engine when I could have a diesel. The price premium up front is several thousand dollars, but the durability, longevity, fuel economy, and resale value should even things out over time. CJB >I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved > exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > heard that the V-10 is a higher reving engine which, I would think, would > not be desireable in a motorhome. Any thoughts????????? I would be inclined to agree with you, however we are downsizing from a class "A" diesel pusher so that we can get into State Parks, BLM campgrounds and other similar small parks and we will be buying a used rig. There just aren't that many used Class "C" rigs with diesels running around. In addition, with diesel fuel at a 15% premium in price and driving around 4,000/year, it takes a long time for th durability and longevity to kick in. > Talking about what would be "desirable in a motor home," I wouldn't even > consider a gas engine when I could have a diesel. The price premium up [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > heard that the V-10 is a higher reving engine which, I would think, would > > not be desireable in a motorhome. Any thoughts????????? I disagree, a gas motor can be quite durable IF it is properly fed, cooled and lubed. Also I question the resale value of a oil burner MH in future because it is likely the diesel fuel will always be more than gas and likely by more than a dollar at times. The only thing that saved diesel prices this winter has been the warmer than normal winter reducing oil demand for heating. If it had bee a cold winterm you would still be paying well over $3/gal for the stuff. > Talking about what would be "desirable in a motor home," I wouldn't even > consider a gas engine when I could have a diesel. The price premium up [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >>heard that the V-10 is a higher reving engine which, I would think, would >>not be desireable in a motorhome. Any thoughts?????????  Signature----------------- www.thesnoman.com > I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved > exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? What > about the V-10? I've heard of problems with wrist pins, warped heads, spark > coils, etc. but they are supposed to get better fuel economy. I've also > heard that the V-10 is a higher reving engine which, I would think, would > not be desireable in a motorhome. Any thoughts????????? V10 is a good engine if it is kept cool in a MH. It has higher compression so in theory it should do a bit better on gas as all Ford modern 460's have a low CR. LAso the V10 needs to wind up more to make its power so it will need about one step deeper gearing than a like powered MH with a 460 in it. Signature----------------- www.thesnoman.com > > I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved > > exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? What [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > its power so it will need about one step deeper gearing than a like > powered MH with a 460 in it. V10 has a longer stroke than a 460. Why would it need to rev higher? Al >>>I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved >>>exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Al Less displacement. HP is figured by taking "torque x RPM /5252". To get higher HP rating with smaller engine that raise the RPM of its torque curve to yeild a higher HP output from a small dispacement motor at a higher RPM than a larger one. With turbo charged diesels you are in effect increasing its effective displacement because you are paking more air into cylinders (you could do same with a gas engine with correct fuel) and making engine feel bigger than it is and hence more power output because more air and fuel is burned with each cycle. It is the heat energy from these cycles that drives the engine so with a small engine, you have to have more of them per minute to obtain the same output as a larger motor when all else is equal. Signature----------------- www.thesnoman.com >I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved >exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? What >about the V-10? I've heard of problems with wrist pins, warped heads, spark >coils, etc. but they are supposed to get better fuel economy. I've also >heard that the V-10 is a higher reving engine which, I would think, would >not be desireable in a motorhome. Any thoughts????????? I don't see any real problems. The V-10 is a decent motor, certainly equivilant in durability to many of the older 460s. The only problem I've seen mentioned frequently regarding the V-10 is the popping of sparkplugs. This is a costly problem to fix and has occurred with many. That being said though, the number is still very small when compared to how many engines have actually been built. (This potential problem was recently fixed when new cylinder heads were added a year or two back.) As I recall, the early 99 and earlier V-10s (which were mostly in vans and Class Cs) had other problems, probably the wrist pin issue you mentioned. These problems surfaced after several thousands of miles and you could potentially find one of these in a motorhome that didn't get replaced under warranty. Matt 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 >>I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved >>exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? What [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Matt > 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 This popping of spark plugs was caused by improper plug torque causing them to loosen up in some engines due to differing expantion rates in the aluminum head and steel plugs. Ford changed the torque spec and the plug design to "fix" the problem. If you have a older V10 just check the plug torque every 5k miles or so (or oil change) and see if they have loosend up any. If they have not after a few checks, do not bother checking again until they are changed. Signature----------------- www.thesnoman.com >>>I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved >>>exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > up any. If they have not after a few checks, do not bother checking again > until they are changed. == I have a 21' Motorhome 10,500 #'s It is a an '87. It has 200,000 Kilometres.(124,000 Miles) It uses NO oil between oil changes and gets 12 MPG(Imperial) on the Highway and 10 MPG overall. Geoff. >>I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved >>exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? What [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >after several thousands of miles and you could potentially find one of >these in a motorhome that didn't get replaced under warranty. The plug-puking is an issue with a lot of Ford engines, not just the 6.8l Triton.. The fix is not new heads, but inserts in the heads to stop the problem from happening. www.timesert.com has a kit to repair one or all 10 (or 6 or 8 or however many cylinders your engine has) plug holes permanently. I don't see the logic in replacing a head with the same flawed design... >The plug-puking is an issue with a lot of Ford engines, not just the >6.8l Triton.. The fix is not new heads, but inserts in the heads to >stop the problem from happening. www.timesert.com has a kit to repair >one or all 10 (or 6 or 8 or however many cylinders your engine has) >plug holes permanently. I don't see the logic in replacing a head >with the same flawed design... My understanding is the new heads introduced (3 valve) a couple of years back allowed for more thread area for the sparkplugs, decreasing the likelyhood of the plugs loosening. Is this wrong? (And I'm not saying these heads can be used to replace those on the earlier engines/blocks. My understanding was this change was incorporated during a redesign to bump the HP and torque.) I agree about using the inserts to make the repair. That will be my plan if I ever pop one..... Matt 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 >>The plug-puking is an issue with a lot of Ford engines, not just the >>6.8l Triton.. The fix is not new heads, but inserts in the heads to [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >engines/blocks. My understanding was this change was incorporated >during a redesign to bump the HP and torque.) My local dealer service <ahem> "manager" told me there was a design change to increase the thread length in the plug holes.. The guy who did my inserts told me the plug hole was threaded 16mm in my heads (the "old" design) but the plugs themselves only had like 6mm of thread on them and different plugs might have lessened the loosening tendency. This guy is a straght up, no BS kind of guy - been using him for nearly 20 years - so I doubt this is some sunshine being blown under my skirt. >I agree about using the inserts to make the repair. That will be my >plan if I ever pop one..... My guy says he's never had one come back that's he's done the inserts in. Says they're a pain in the a.s to do on the vehicle, but with the heads on the bench it's a cakewalk. >I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved >exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? What >about the V-10? I've heard of problems with wrist pins, warped heads, spark >coils, etc. but they are supposed to get better fuel economy. I've also >heard that the V-10 is a higher reving engine which, I would think, would >not be desireable in a motorhome. Any thoughts????????? My experience with the Modular line of Ford engines have been ok I guess. My first one a 2002 E-250 with a 5.4L V-8 ran well and got 10 to 11 miles per gallon on a 8,500 lb truck with 3.23:1 rear gears. The engine blew a couple of plugs out and the transmission was going when the odometer reached about 98,000 miles. These problems seemed to happen to a number of trucks in my branch. We were told that the problem was that we were hard on the trucks and possibly overloaded too, even though we did the regular maintenance at our national account schedules. Now I'm running a 6.8L V-10 2005 E-350. The rear gears are now 3.73:1 and I get 11 to 12 mpg. Not much of a difference at first glance until you figure in the rear gear difference and the overdrive transmission. Acceleration is great compared to the 5.4. I haven't heard of any problems with these trucks from any of my co-workers as of yet, but most of us only have about 30,000 miles on them so far. Find a replacement RV with a 4 speed automatic/overdrive. There is where you will make up the gas mileage. ...Ron -- 68'RS Camaro 88'Formula 00'GT Mustang > I had a 1988 460 with a C-6 that loved gas almost as much as it loved > exhaust manifolds! Are the newer 460s with fuel injection any better? What > about the V-10? I've heard of problems with wrist pins, warped heads, spark > coils, etc. but they are supposed to get better fuel economy. I've also > heard that the V-10 is a higher reving engine which, I would think, would > not be desireable in a motorhome. Any thoughts????????? Class A or Class C? It matters Many early to almost recent Class A MHs have an air-filter issue, there is a TSB to fix this, but make certain it's fixed. What happens is under certain rainy conditions they will injest water. Some recent Class C chassis, Ford has derated the engine. The Class C chassis doesn't have as good cooling as the A, and the new engines (3 valve) can generate too much heat. All in all, the 460-EFI or V10 would be a serious upgrade for your. BTW, watch the E4OD trany and make certain it gets service as needed, neglecting that results in a bad situation. This is not a trany that thrives on neglect. Signature-------------------------------------------------------- Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.