Chevy VS Ford - Page 3

marret · 12-08-2018, 05:12 AM

Right, @svtnos above said they are temperamental but never answered your question @regis101.

I haven't experienced that, but under hard use like he describes maybe they are. I know some people have had issues with GMs and won't buy another. Same goes for any make.

My brother was a Ford guy and had electrical problems with two Expeditions when they got to higher miles. He had my old Avalanche and his mechanic said the drive trains were more durable, and he didn't have electrical issues.

I have a 112k on my van right now and haven't had electrical problems to this point. Time will tell. It started life as a 3500 cargo van and doesn't have all the more complicated electronics either.

I think people can have good experiences, and bad, with any brand/make. Over time certain models have known issues as well.

regis101 · 12-08-2018, 08:02 AM

Yep yep true true. I don't think or look at this thread so much as what brand is better. Thats beating a dead horse. I try to read between the lines to find quirks that can then be looked at or addressed.

The 98 that I had would have been a drag to just change the spark plugs for the average Joe. Whereas, if my info is correct, the GM still used iron heads/block into the 2000's. Up to 2003 (?) they still had an ignition distributor.

These are the kinds of things I use in a comparison data sheet of sorts.

But in the end, ya pays yer money and ya makes yer choices.

marret · 12-08-2018, 10:23 AM

Right.

Don't know what year some of those things changed. For instance, at one time the IAC (idle air control) valve was known to fail. Easy to fix, known issue. My van is late enough to not have one (or so I'm told/based on my research).

My 2008 has the 6.0L as an option. It is a cast iron block and aluminum heads.

From what I have read, the 6.0L remains cast iron block/aluminum head today. Apparently the L96 (Generation IV, 2010-2017) version still in use is the last of the Vortec and is being replaced by EcoTec3 (Generation V).

What I read is that the first couple years, beginning in 1999, of the 6.0L Gen III LQ4 did have iron block/heads before being switched to aluminum heads. Gen IV all had cast iron blocks and aluminum heads.

Here is some engine info, don't know how accurate it is. If you scroll down a bit, there is a nice table.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LS_bas...l-block_engine

regis101 · 12-08-2018, 01:57 PM

Excellent reading. Thanks for the link.

regis101 · 12-08-2018, 03:55 PM

Im seeing a lot of the 1500 and 2500 cargo vans with the 4.3 V6.
A quick check on specs has it real close to the 4.6 V8 that was in the Ford.

Now , a V6 is paltry for what type of vehicle most of the folks on here are running, but as a weekend warrior pavement pounder, >250 lb/ft is ok.

marret · 12-09-2018, 06:02 AM

Welcome.

Interesting on the 4.3. Agree.

My 3500 was originally spec'd with a 4.8 V8.

gahamby · 12-09-2018, 09:29 AM

You'll be dissapointed with that 4.6. From what I've read and experienced, electrical add ons are easier on the GMC.
When I added a 3rd eye brake light camera all I had to do for power and reverse wiring was tap the top of the fuse box. What I read about Fords implied it wasn't so simple. I could be wrong there. I've no hands on experience in an E series fuse box.

sscott3d · 12-09-2018, 11:23 AM

As an electrician I've done a lot of miles in both the Chev Express and the Ford Econoline. At work we load them up heavy and drive them hard. I agree the Express rides and handles better. However it doesn't hold up as well. My company Express' tranny went out at 40k and of the four other Express' in the fleet none had their tranny last longer than 60k from new. Other common problems within the small fleet seem to be exhaust leaks, dash electrical issues, and premature brake wear. One issue that drives me nuts about the Express is if it's parked on an uneven surface it's hard to open and close the doors. Sometimes the van has to be moved to a flat spot to close the side or rear doors. Most problems with the Econoline, we only have the 5.4, like spit out spark plugs, tranny, and head gasket(165k) seem to happen at much higher millage.

regis101 · 12-09-2018, 02:56 PM

Copy. Thanks for the real time info. I recently retired from the trade.

I go to the boneyard often to browse around, steal light bulbs and pee on the tires. Just my hang up. Oh, and to look at the carcasses of dead vans.

Regarding body flex. On one hand I like the Chevy's vertical ribs, almost like wall studs. Would be easy to insulate and prewire. But I have thought that there are not enough of the ribs. GM might do well to add extra reinforcement in those areas. Or a couple sheets of plywood would add shear.

The ford side walls have the outer skin and then an inner stamped skin. Good for what it is. May have to get a bit more creative with wall design and insulation.

The 4.3 V6 would be doable for my style of driving. I'm a lightweight. I'm a short shifter. The 4.3 has peak torque at 2800. Most likely that'd be cruising speed at freeway as well as low speed crawl.

The 4.6 in my , now dead and gone, E150 Club sometimes would have the trans downshifting a few times. It did get a best of 20.3 mpg down the highway under laboratory conditions, mostly 15-18.

As for your companys fleet, what year(s) are the Chevy's? Thanks

sscott3d · 12-09-2018, 11:30 PM

The Express' in our fleet are '06 to '12 and have the 4.8 or 5.3. They get about the same mileage loaded of around 11 in town. The 5.3 is much more fun to drive than the 4.8 but doesn't seem to have the torque of the Ford 5.4. Maintenance is not a top priority at our shop so with a little care the Chev's would probably hold up better. Good luck with your van quest Regis.