Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-03-2017, 10:01 PM   #1
BBQ
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: East
Posts: 2,484
Default Which Chassis Year is better?

.

Which Chassis Year is better than the others?

Which year the manufacturers had the most technology breakthrough?

Which engine has less problem than the others?


I remember the fuel injection made most of the engines more efficient,
and the pollution control killed most the power.
__________________

BBQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 12:02 AM   #2
Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Victoria
Posts: 41
Default

You don’t want to narrow down the manufacturers, year range, etc?
__________________

Roxy4x4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 01:21 AM   #3
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 881
Default

I'd say 2000 is kinda where I see the advantages.

tuned port injection and head design were far better than previous throttle body type injection ( carbs were about done after 1986...)- TPI was first introduced in pass cars, and later in the trucks and vans

and controlled fuel delivery and burn allowed for less EGR to control nitrates of oxygen, cats were better, the entire exhaust system is better for power...

my 2005 6.0l chev gets 15+ mpg, makes 305 hpat the wheels and doesn;t pollute

my 72 eldo has an 8.2 which makes 400 hp at the crank...less at the wheels maybe 9 mpg and spews hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide etc everywhere it goes..
72 was the big year for the caddy 502 and lacks most pollution controls- it has only a PCV
this model is allowed 500ppm of HC, the chev tests at 5ppm on the rollers

no contest

Mike
mkguitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 01:30 AM   #4
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 7,566
Default

With the later model Chevies post redesign in about 2002, all were much better than the older small block 5.7L engines. In 2008 they got variable valve timing and drive by wire, and in about 2010 they got the 6 speed which was a very big improvement.
booster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 04:46 AM   #5
BBQ
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: East
Posts: 2,484
Default

.

What about the Triton V10, are they any good?
BBQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 05:57 AM   #6
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: CA
Posts: 1,599
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBQ View Post
.

What about the Triton V10, are they any good?
Well, they're certainly real good for Exxon Mobile stockholders.

Sturdy and reliable, but with the Chinooks that were equipped with the V10 you were pretty much looking at 8 mpg. The Chevy V8 6.0 will get you double that, around 16.
cruising7388 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 12:05 PM   #7
BBQ
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: East
Posts: 2,484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cruising7388 View Post
Well, they're certainly real good for Exxon Mobile stockholders.

Sturdy and reliable, but with the Chinooks that were equipped with the V10 you were pretty much looking at 8 mpg. The Chevy V8 6.0 will get you double that, around 16.



Wow... that big a difference in MPG !
BBQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 02:10 PM   #8
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 7,566
Default

Of course that V10 could pull the 6.0 backwards up a mountain, too, though as they were serious pulling engines. You really don't see anything else much in the bigger gassers as nothing can really compete with them.

The 6.0 Chevy is a very good engine, and will get 16mpg in a class b van, but I think you would be lower than that in an RV the size of a Chinook. Still a lot better than a V10, but not 16mpg, and probably closer to 12-13mpg.
booster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 03:30 PM   #9
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 881
Default

the V10 was used primarily in commercial chassis...not part of cafe standards, so...

I experience with these is rental vans for work, the mpg was always lacking...typical mixed use might see sub 10.
based on this, I really didn;t look to hard at any ford based vans.
famously we have a PW on a chev...but the other contender was a fantastic chinook on E450.
the v10 mpg & the extra 4 feet parking complication ( I had 6 or 7 cars at the time we were shopping...down to 4 now + van) factored.

mike
mkguitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 08:21 PM   #10
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: CA
Posts: 1,599
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by booster View Post
The 6.0 Chevy is a very good engine, and will get 16mpg in a class b van, but I think you would be lower than that in an RV the size of a Chinook. Still a lot better than a V10, but not 16mpg, and probably closer to 12-13mpg.
Good point. I was comparing the V10 with the 6.0 in the Chevy Roadtrek 210 which has a much lower profile than the Chinook which undoubtedly helps its mpg. But even so, the mpg difference is remarkable.
__________________

cruising7388 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.