RV News RVBusiness 2021 Top 10 RVs of the Year, plus 56 additional debuts and must-see units → ×
 


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-15-2014, 12:17 PM   #41
Site Team
 
BroncoHauler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southern New Mexico
Posts: 9,424
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

I'm an engineer, so I tend to over analyze things, but when it comes to vehicles and their engines, my primary decision maker is seat-of-the-pants. I need to drive it (hopefully while towing too) and see if I like how it drives in terms of power, shift-points, RPMs. Fuel usage is important, but it's a secondary consideration.

Herb
__________________

__________________
SMB-less as of 02/04/2012. Our savings account is richer, but our adventures are poorer.
BroncoHauler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2014, 01:47 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 577
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

I get that, but everything else being equal we all want improved fuel economy.

One of the least expensive ways to reduce fuel consumption is to reduce engine displacement (to a point). Otherwise, in my opinion, the new Transit would likely have a 6.8L V10 or similar instead of a base engine nearly half that size. The new goal seems to be getting more power and torque out of smaller engines so driving experience is not compromised too much. I think that's what Eco-Boost tries to do. But it comes at a cost, and the question was whether it would save enough to pay for itself.
__________________

Chance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2014, 12:27 PM   #43
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 577
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

The fuel-economy comparison between naturally aspirated (NA) versus Eco-Boost (EB) engines interested me on both practical and technical levels, so I looked a little deeper to see if what Ford estimated from the study mentioned above materialized or not.

In any case fuel economy differences seem small. When same/similar size engine is "boosted" (which then makes more power), MPGs go down slightly in EPA ratings like we see for F-150 (3.7L NA versus 3.5 EB).

However, if EcoBoost engine is downsized in displacement so it has similar power and torque as its naturally-aspirated counterpart, then MPGs could go up slightly. This can be seen on Transit Connect with 2.5L NA I-4 (rated 169 HP and 171 lb-ft) which gets 21/29 MPG versus 1.6L EcoBoost I-4 (rated 178 HP and 184 lb-ft) which is rated slightly better at 22/30 MPG by EPA for same model.
Chance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2014, 05:40 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 577
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

As some may have noticed from different sources, additional information for the new Transit continues to roll out slowly. I'm updating info in the OP because part of it has been revised.

Std V6 -
266 HP at 6500 RPM
249 lb-ft at 4000 RPM

Eco-Boost -
300 HP at 5000 RPM
400 lb-ft at 2500 RPM

3.2L Diesel -
190 HP at 3000 RPM
346 lb-ft at 1500 RPM

It seems the EB engine option was revised down to 300 HP.

Several buyers' guides have listed ordering information, and a couple of them have preliminary data suggesting the new Transit won't be anywhere as capable as the Econoline when it comes to towing. As an example, a T-250 3.7L V6 with a 9,000 GVWR had a GCWR of only 10,800 pounds. Tow ratings thus far, depending on van size/model, range from 4800 to 5300 pounds.

I'm hoping this information is not accurate because the GCWR is actually lower than the FWD ProMaster with gasoline engine. That van has a rating of 11,500 pound GCWR.

If any of you have additional information on Transit capabilities and/or ratings, please share.
Chance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2014, 05:21 PM   #45
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Danville, Kentucky
Posts: 65
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

Well I can understand Ford's reasoning for the derating of their engines for the Transit but why on Earth are the tow rating so dismal? The current and outdated Econoline can tow twice the amount of the average 5,000-pound Transit rating. I know it's unibody and all, but still. Like Chance mentioned, the Promaster's GVWR is higher... as is the Sprinter. Perhaps Ford is waiting until right before sale date to all of a sudden announce increased GVWR figures? As they did with the diesel power rating a few years ago?

I saw some other websites with pricing info and was quite pleased to see some options on the cargo. One of which is the actual factory spray-on floor lining! Kudos, Ford! I like how on the Wagon, the RV-prep package can be ordered without any back seats for the owner's own customization. There are more but most has already been said elsewhere in this thread. I'm actually looking forward to this Transit as well as SMB's offering.
__________________
I'm a quiet guy from Kentucky in my 30s. I have Usher Syndrome, which is similar to Retinitis Pigmentosis, so I don't drive. I love Ford cars and trucks... and now Sportsmobile vans! Sportsmobile, please consider building the upcoming Ford Transit Sportsmobile!! :)
pffan1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2014, 06:24 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
carringb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 4,857
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pffan1990
Well I can understand Ford's reasoning for the derating of their engines for the Transit but why on Earth are the tow rating so dismal? The current and outdated Econoline can tow twice the amount of the average 5,000-pound Transit rating.
I suspect there's some marketing rational in there.... The diesel and EcoBoost will no doubt be rated higher, and they have to keep the standard motor rated lower to nudge buyers towards the more expensive/ more profitable (for Ford) motors.
__________________
2000 E450 dually V10 wagon
carringb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2014, 08:17 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 577
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

Regarding the low tow ratings, which are not official yet as far as I know, I think two factors could be making a considerable difference relative to Econoline.

As mentioned above, a light weight unitized structure makes it difficult to attach a heavy load like a receiver to what is not much more than thick sheet metal. Some Sprinters may go up to 7500 lbs but most are limited to the same 5000-pound range.

The second big difference may be that starting with 2015 models, Ford is "reportedly" going to rate towing capacity based on SAE Standard J2807. If so, other factors beyond power or structural strength may limit tow capacity. The new standard should be interesting to follow since different brands and models will be rated on same basis.
Chance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2014, 08:41 PM   #48
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Danville, Kentucky
Posts: 65
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chance
The second big difference may be that starting with 2015 models, Ford is "reportedly" going to rate towing capacity based on SAE Standard J2807. If so, other factors beyond power or structural strength may limit tow capacity. The new standard should be interesting to follow since different brands and models will be rated on same basis.
Bingo! I will have to stand corrected here once you mentioned the new J2807 standards. I had completely forgotten about that. Now that you mentioned it, Ford has said they would switch to that in 2015 starting with the F-150, so I am sure the Transit would switch to that as well. I never even thought about that and it does make sense considering the new standards does significantly reduce tow ratings compared to the current standards. Glad you brought this up.
__________________
I'm a quiet guy from Kentucky in my 30s. I have Usher Syndrome, which is similar to Retinitis Pigmentosis, so I don't drive. I love Ford cars and trucks... and now Sportsmobile vans! Sportsmobile, please consider building the upcoming Ford Transit Sportsmobile!! :)
pffan1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2014, 09:07 PM   #49
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Danville, Kentucky
Posts: 65
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

Whoa! The page of the Transit on Sportsmobile site has been updated just a few days ago. It now includes the pdf sheets for basic info. All is basically there except a few pricing info that are listed as 'TBD'. Also, the MSRP pricing for the Transit has been left blank so I guess they didn't know at the time of making the pdf files. But it's so nice seeing the page updated. I can't wait to see the actual Transit floor plans and pictures when they get them ready!!

http://www.sportsmobile.com/1a_tr_vaninfo.html
__________________
I'm a quiet guy from Kentucky in my 30s. I have Usher Syndrome, which is similar to Retinitis Pigmentosis, so I don't drive. I love Ford cars and trucks... and now Sportsmobile vans! Sportsmobile, please consider building the upcoming Ford Transit Sportsmobile!! :)
pffan1990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2014, 01:49 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
moorefc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: PNW or maybe Baja Sur
Posts: 213
Re: Transit updates from SMB?

Looks like the prices are posted....a little confusing if the mid length comes in a low roof option, but prices are there...bout the same as E series...
__________________

__________________
Pac NW and warmer places
1995 E250 EB 5.8 2WD on to a new owner
2006 E350 EB Elect Top 2WD
moorefc 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 09:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×