Free 7 Day Trial RV GPS App RV Trip Planner Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Free 7 Day Trial ×
 


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 11-20-2014, 06:46 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
boywonder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: So Cal
Posts: 3,471
Re: E350 same rear axel width dually VS single wheel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by carringb
Yes, even 2014 vans have 8x6.5" hubs. I'm sure RSC had something to do with it, even on non-RSC vans. But, it is 4-channel ABS on non-RSC vans too, so that should perform better in extreme weather.
I was wondering if the dual rear wheel stuff, E450, etc were 8 x 6.5.....the 2008+ comment was referring to the independent brake actuation to support RSC. So none of the cutaways, etc have ever used 8 x 170, cool...good info.
__________________

__________________
2008 E350 RB passenger 4WD SMB penthouse
2013 KTM 350 EXC
2008 KTM 250 XCF-W
2000 KTM 200 EXC
2003 Honda Element
boywonder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2014, 04:31 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 577
Re: E350 same rear axel width dually VS single wheel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by carringb
....cut......

All of the cab-chassis with rear fuel tanks have a wider rear axle than the vans (by 4"), even if its has Singe-Rear wheels. The Dually rear E350 axle are 8" wider at 75.4" and the E450 axles are 77.7".

.....cut.......
carringb, do these dimensions mean that all Class Cs based on E-450 chassis have to be a wide body in order to prevent the rear tires to stick beyond the bodywork?

Some Class Cs and newer compact Class As based on E-Series that are 94 inches wide only offer E-350 even though the GVWR are marginal at best. I've been wondering why the manufacturers don't offer E-450 as an option. I don't know the out-to-out tire width on these axles but it seems E-450 would be much too wide for a 94-inch-wide RV.

Thread drift but since original question has already been answered.......
__________________

Chance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 09:43 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
carringb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 5,085
Re: E350 same rear axel width dually VS single wheel?

I have seen some narrower shuttle bus bodies, and those just have large fender flares if its on an E450 chassis.

One thing to keep in mind with the smallest Class C's is that the E450 doesn't come with a 138" wheelbase, so that can limit the possible use.
__________________
2000 E450 dually V10 wagon
carringb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2014, 02:07 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 577
Re: E350 same rear axel width dually VS single wheel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by carringb
I have seen some narrower shuttle bus bodies, and those just have large fender flares if its on an E450 chassis.

One thing to keep in mind with the smallest Class C's is that the E450 doesn't come with a 138" wheelbase, so that can limit the possible use.
Thanks. I found nominal DRW offset at 5.15 inches, plus knowing tires are 225 wide allows me to estimate rear width. And yeah, the E-450 would have tires well outside of 94 inches. By the way, the RVs I like have a much longer 188 inch wheelbase, fairly long for E-350. Ford doesn't even list that as an option on stripped chassis specs I've seen.

From what I can tell the E-450 mainly has wider and heavier rear axle, plus frame is slightly stiffer.
Chance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2014, 04:28 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
carringb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 5,085
Re: E350 same rear axel width dually VS single wheel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chance
... By the way, the RVs I like have a much longer 188 inch wheelbase, fairly long for E-350. Ford doesn't even list that as an option on stripped chassis specs I've seen.

From what I can tell the E-450 mainly has wider and heavier rear axle, plus frame is slightly stiffer.
Any frame length other than 138/158/176" will be modified by the body builder (or MorRyde). As long as its done to spec it retains all its factory ratings: https://www.fleet.ford.com/truckbbas/non-html/Q18.pdf

BTW the E350 cutaway and 14,050 GVWR E450 share the same frame. Only the 14,500 GVWR E450 gets the bigger frame. So mechanically its really just the rear axle and spring rates that make the 14,050 GVWR E450, now that brakes are common across the whole lineup. 14,500 GVWR E450 also gets a slightly larger ring gear in the diff to give it the 22,000 GCWR.
__________________
2000 E450 dually V10 wagon
carringb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2014, 06:06 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 577
Re: E350 same rear axel width dually VS single wheel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by carringb
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chance
... By the way, the RVs I like have a much longer 188 inch wheelbase, fairly long for E-350. Ford doesn't even list that as an option on stripped chassis specs I've seen.

From what I can tell the E-450 mainly has wider and heavier rear axle, plus frame is slightly stiffer.
Any frame length other than 138/158/176" will be modified by the body builder (or MorRyde). As long as its done to spec it retains all its factory ratings: https://www.fleet.ford.com/truckbbas/non-html/Q18.pdf

BTW the E350 cutaway and 14,050 GVWR E450 share the same frame. Only the 14,500 GVWR E450 gets the bigger frame. So mechanically its really just the rear axle and spring rates that make the 14,050 GVWR E450, now that brakes are common across the whole lineup. 14,500 GVWR E450 also gets a slightly larger ring gear in the diff to give it the 22,000 GCWR.

Thanks again carringb. I was not aware that it was common to stretch the E-Series cutaway or stripped chassis to extend the wheelbase. I can't say I like the idea. I've looked under the rear to see the common frame add-on at back to extend rear overhang, but have never looked at frame in mid section. I assume they have to at least stretch frame, driveshaft, brake lines, parking brake cables, fuel lines, and electrical. I would have thought that for major RV manufacturers Ford would have fabricated chassis lenght to order. Modifications sound expensive.
Chance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2014, 07:05 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
carringb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 5,085
Re: E350 same rear axel width dually VS single wheel?

Frame stretches don't both me one bit, when they are done properly. Many of the larger E450 buses also are on a stretched chassis, and they see way more miles (and harder miles) than any RV would ever see.

My frame has been spliced to repair some damage from when I was broadsided by my trailer. It's mild steel so it takes to weld repairs well. I inspect the weld periodically, and have not seen any signs of cracking or fatigue. That was done about 150,000 miles ago. With the high trailer weights I tow, and super stiff rear sway bar (1.5") I think my frame sees more torsional and bending loads than typical.

I think Ford limited to the frame length options because the E-series is a "low-profile" frame, which means its stepped for the engine bay, and is notched for the rear axle. The F53 motorhome frame is completely straight, so it's a lot easier to offer more lengths. But even though they offer up to a 252" wheelbase, some RV builder still shorten them (to make "in-between" wheelbases) or even stretch them further. Newmar stretches the wheelbase to 264" on their 40' V10 coaches.
__________________

__________________
2000 E450 dually V10 wagon
carringb 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

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by Sportsmobile SIP or any of its affiliates. This is an independent, unofficial site.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×