Hey guys, check out my new windmobile!

[KGB-NP]

How are you liking the Promaster so far? I'm looking at replacing my 2005 GMC and thinking something diesel for the fuel savings and Sprinter and Promaster are considerations.

[GuyT]

[spennie]

Nice setup!

Finally squeezed some info about the Transit out of Ford at the dealership: The most powerful option (only one I inquired about) is a 3.7 liter V6 with Eco-Boost, which is twin water-cooled turbos. It generates 320 HP and gives the vehicle a 7800 lb. towing capacity, with an MPG of 17/25!

The dealership expects them in June of this year.

[GuyT]

[spennie]

I can only speculate at this point, and am admittedly Ford-biased, since my current van has been so good to me, but here's a few thoughts: Ford makes excellent trucks, although I believe their cars are pretty ordinary, quality-wise. (I'm a Honda guy then)

Ford's been making that same van for many years, and it's been the go-to van for ambulances & RVs, which would explain a pretty good percentage of those sales. Those companies are all going to have to re-tool once the E-series is gone. It's also been the van of choice for those who, like myself, tow a trailer and/or carry a lot of gear. Look at your local windsurfing spot, you'll see a bunch of us.

I'm also skeptical of their 17/25 mpg figures, but it's gotta be better than the 13 I get now!

[isobars]

My turbocharged Subaru got mid to upper 20s cruising down the highway without boost; when pushed (i.e., on boost often), AVERAGE consumption doubled. Lessee ... two turbos, headwinds or just in a hurry ... doubled doubled ... are you looking at 25/2/2 = 6.25 mpg?

Naah; of course not. But it will matter significantly.

My Winnebago, OTOH, with a brute force V10 w/no turbo, averages darn near the same mileage cruising @ 55 as it does WAY above that. It's as though it takes a certain amount of fuel to run the engine and not much more to run it HARD. Engine pros have told me that's normal for at least that particular big Ford engine.

BTW ... a fleet owner in Florida is getting well over a million miles of solid service out of his V10s, according to the mechanic who flies from CA to FL to change the guy's spark plugs every 70,000 miles.

[KGB-NP]

I've owned a couple of E series Ford vans and found they drive like tanks compared to the GMC / Chev. vans. That's why I ended up going with the GMC vans later, now when I get in a friends Ford I hate it. That said, my 1998 Chev. was probably the biggest piece of crap I've ever own, but my 2005 has been one of the best.

GM may have the majority of the commercial van market but their probably going to lose a big share of that market with all the new alternatives coming out. I'm finding the GM vans now seem overpriced compared to the alternatives. That fugly Nissan van is almost $6K less than a comparable GMC van.

When I do an operational cost comparison between my van and the Sprinter it appears that over 6 years it would cost me close to $30K less to operate than the Sprinter, which pays for a good portion of the van. The only thing that is pushing me back to a GMC is I'm not too keen on driving those big ol' school bus type vans and it's nice if I can actually park inside of my 9 ft. X 8 ft. garage doors.

I would love if Toyota or Honda got into the van market. I think that would be a no brainer purchase for most especially if it came with a diesel power plant. The VW vans are cool but way too pricey in my opinion.

[spennie]

You mean you don't like the brick-like ride of the Fords? Or is it the 900-foot turning radius? ;-)

[isobars]

I bought my Econoline van (and chose the Econoline chassis over the Chevy chassis for my 24' Winnebago) after interviewing many truck/van/RV professionals and reading up on them. Every one gave Ford the edge in handling (i.e., safety) at the expense of ride, which suits my preferences. Aftermarket shocks and the long wheelbase of the stretched Ford Supervan model both helped the ride tremendously, but 10 ply tires just aren't going to ride like wimpier tires.

I also am very picky about the tires I run for the same reason, having discovered by trial and error and research which ones hold up and handle better and which ones suck in the 10-ply/load range E these heavy vehicles demand. The Bridgestones and Michelins cost more than lesser tires, but ride, handle, and wear vastly better, in my experience. And even though I have lifetime free rotations, the Michelins on my RV have never needed rotation.

But I gotta admit: even my Mustang seemed to take 900' feet to turn around, unless you count throttle.

[GuyT]