The Black Pearl
Ottawa
Full Member
Joined: 11/17/2005
View Profile
 Offline
|
No matter how you slice it. Its a GM.....
2010 F-150 XLT-XTR - Max Tow
2005 22' Roadrunner 210BH -FOR SALE
GVRW 4750 - Minus UVW 3360 -freshwater 266.56 -LP tanks 22.5-ccc 1,100.94
Eaz-Lift hitch-Ultra Fab Odyssey 3000 Electric tongue Jack
Distribution Bars rating 550lbs
Top Pop Rails -3 bikes
|
carringb
Corvallis, OR
Senior Member
Joined: 07/28/2003
View Profile
Offline
|
Well at least GM is still updating it. If GM stops improving their vans, Ford would likely stop making changes as well since then there wouldn't really be any competition. As as far as a people hauler goes, the GM vans are a little more car-like (smoother ride when empty, stronger "on-center" feel in the steering, lower seats) compared to the Ford vans. Also, for 2010 GM is supposed to start offing some nice safety features like side airbags for the 2nd row, and laminated safety glass in the rear. Also the GM vans are easier to align. Many alignment shops don't get it right then they align the Fords, or just don't want to deal with the camber bushings.
The Ford vans just make a better tow-vehicle IMHO, and can take a heavy load better. Fully loaded the GM extended van will ride very close to the rear bump stops, which can make for a rough ride on some highways when it hits those bumpstops. The E350 has a lot more rear suspension travel, so the rear stops rarely get touched.
Bryan
2000 Ford E350 DRW Wagon (14-pass all captains chairs)
V10 w/ Banks PowerPack, Diablo Predator, 4.56 LS, 250,000+ miles
Had: Weekend Warrior 41' FSW
|
SoCalDesertRider
SanDiego, CA, USA
Senior Member
Joined: 12/14/2003
View Profile
|
Chevy did get something right that Ford didn't. On the extended length vans, Chevy moves the rear axle back, increasing the wheelbase, rather than just tacking on more length behind the axle, which is how Ford does it. I wish Ford would add the length between the axles like Chevy does. It's more expensive to do it that way, but makes for better weight balance when the van is loaded and/or towing, as well as less lever length for the trailer to exert on the van in a sway situation.
05E350 6.0PSD
98Ranger
69Bronco ATC250R CR500
20' BigTex flatbed carhauler
Callen Camper
92F350 CrewCab 4x4 351/C6
LoadNGo service body
B&W TurnoverBall, Curt Magnum V
HD Springs Bilsteins, EnergySuspension
285/75-16E BFG AT on 16x8 Stocktons
4.56's & LockRite rear
|
carringb
Corvallis, OR
Senior Member
Joined: 07/28/2003
View Profile
Offline
|
The Ford's wheelbase has some benefits as well.
1) Understeer. The GM extended van will oversteer when pushed hard, and it's an abrupt transition. StabilTrak has mitigated this to some extent, but the inherent tendency is still there.
2) breakover ground clearance. I can't get the GM extended vans onto our trailers on flat ground.
3) traction. Try a Ford vs Chevy in the snow, and you will see a huge advantage with the Ford.
4) Front axle capacity. The longer wheelbase of the GM loads the front axle more. When fully loaded my front axle tips 4600 pounds. The same load on a GM would overload its front axle. Plus Ford now has a 5000# front axle.
PS - I don't think cost has any reason to do with the design of the E350. Ford offers a 158" SRW cutaway, and the body panels are unique stampings between the regular and extended bodies, so i don't really see a cost difference there. Likewise the frame is unique between the 2 as well. Nothing is "tacked-on".
|
cmizikar
Portage, MI
New Member
Joined: 04/11/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
carringb wrote:
The Chevy vans are still missing the following features that Ford offers:
-factory 7-way wiring including brake control wiring, 40 amp charge circuit, and 30 amp trailer reverse light circuit
-integrated trailer brake control
-fully isolated trailer light circuits (so a trailer fault will not knock out van lights)
-225 amp alternator
-engine oil cooler
-power steering oil cooler
-3" wide rear spring (better lateral stability)
-extendable trailer tow mirrors
-higher available GCWR (Ford up to 20,000 vs GM 16,000)
-decent factory shocks
-backup camera that can see a hitch ball
Thanks
Of all of those (besides the higher GCWR), for my current needs, I whish they had the extendable trailer tow mirrors.
As for the brake controller, the wires are there under the dash so within 20 minutes I was able to hook one up and was ready to go camping.
The one that I am most concerned with not having is the isolated trailer light circuit. Hopefully that will never be an issue for me.
2008 GMC 2500 Savana
2008 Pigrim 28 PQB
|
|
|
cmizikar
Portage, MI
New Member
Joined: 04/11/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
carringb wrote:...As as far as a people hauler goes, the GM vans are a little more car-like (smoother ride when empty, stronger "on-center" feel in the steering, lower seats) compared to the Ford vans. ...
That is the main reason we bought the GM van then the Ford. We use it as a people hauler first and as a TV second. We drove both and the family enjoyed the ride better in the GM compared to the Ford.
|
cmizikar
Portage, MI
New Member
Joined: 04/11/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
carringb wrote:3) traction. Try a Ford vs Chevy in the snow, and you will see a huge advantage with the Ford.
With the factory tires on the GM van, I think any car/van/truck can do better then the Chevy in snow. I can not wait until the current tires wear out so I can get a tire that does better in snow.
|
David_in_TX
Grand Prairie, Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 11/27/2007
View Profile
Offline
|
This is misinformation. Tow ratings have nothing at all to do with warranties. Tow ratings and weight ratings are calculated by engineers based on strength of materials, powertrain performance, etc. I think this your opinion. If you disagree with me, then back it up with something published on an official manufacturers web site.
skipnchar wrote:Tow ratings are basically warranty issues
http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidnicholstx
|
carringb
Corvallis, OR
Senior Member
Joined: 07/28/2003
View Profile
Offline
|
cmizikar wrote:carringb wrote:3) traction. Try a Ford vs Chevy in the snow, and you will see a huge advantage with the Ford.
With the factory tires on the GM van, I think any car/van/truck can do better then the Chevy in snow. I can not wait until the current tires wear out so I can get a tire that does better in snow.
I really like the Toyo M55 tires for snow. They were designed for the logging industry, but are great for snow. I had mine center siped and studded for ice, but even un-altered they have great traction.
Downside is fuel economy. I take about a 15% fuel economy hit when I have the m55s on compared to my summer Open County A/Ts. The Open County ATs are decent on snow but terrible on ice.
|
cmizikar
Portage, MI
New Member
Joined: 04/11/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
David_in_TX wrote:This is misinformation. Tow ratings have nothing at all to do with warranties. Tow ratings and weight ratings are calculated by engineers based on strength of materials, powertrain performance, etc. I think this your opinion. If you disagree with me, then back it up with something published on an official manufacturers web site.
skipnchar wrote:Tow ratings are basically warranty issues
I think your both right. I would expect the ratings are based on strength of material, powertrain performance, etc.. I would not be that happy needing to take my van in all the time for a warranty issue when it was not designed to meet the ratings in the first place.
|
|
|
