Any difference between a 8.1L or 6.8L gas engines
- Thread starter TooPoor
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Gary RV_Wizard
Site Team
You will have to be more specific about chassis type and year. Workhorse (not Chevy) builds a couple different Class A chassis using the GM 8.1L V8 and there are a few Class C's using a Chevy van chassis as well. Ford offers their F53 Class A chassis in several configurations (wheel base length and weight capacity) as well as the E350 and E450 van chassis for Class C motorhomes. And both manufacturers chassis changed from year to year, so any attempt to compare has to be specific to a year and configuration of the chassis.
In broad terms, durability, fuel economy and ride of the Workhorses and Fords are pretty much the same. However, the coach builder doesn't always select the best possible chassis configuration for optimum ride and handling - sometime they choose on the basis of cost instead. That can result in a overloaded or off-balance coach that rides and handles relatively poorly compared to another similar model that has a better choice of chassis. In general, longer wheel base and higher weight carrying capacity are to be desired.
Around 2002-2004, Workhorse made a quantum leap ahead of the Ford F53 with their W20/W22 chassis and it took Ford awhile to catch up. If looking at those years, and those particular chassis, I would give the Workhorse an edge. Later, they got pretty near equal again.
In broad terms, durability, fuel economy and ride of the Workhorses and Fords are pretty much the same. However, the coach builder doesn't always select the best possible chassis configuration for optimum ride and handling - sometime they choose on the basis of cost instead. That can result in a overloaded or off-balance coach that rides and handles relatively poorly compared to another similar model that has a better choice of chassis. In general, longer wheel base and higher weight carrying capacity are to be desired.
Around 2002-2004, Workhorse made a quantum leap ahead of the Ford F53 with their W20/W22 chassis and it took Ford awhile to catch up. If looking at those years, and those particular chassis, I would give the Workhorse an edge. Later, they got pretty near equal again.
Utclmjmpr
Well-known member
NO substitute for cubic inches.>>>D
our decision was based more on finding the layout we wanted & also fitting into our budget. Seems like they get similar mpg & have similar power however the allison trans appealed to me since it has a 6th speed.
Ideally, take a testdrive where you can drive the same coach with either chassis. Seemed like most dealership had ford chassis on hand, possibly due to added cost with the workhorse??? We drove a fleetwood terra 34g (ford) & a bounder 38p (workhorse) unfortunantly at different dealerships. The 38p felt a LOT better on the road but unfortunantly we have no clue if that was due to the different chassis, differences in weight or the different trim levels of the coaches.
Ideally, take a testdrive where you can drive the same coach with either chassis. Seemed like most dealership had ford chassis on hand, possibly due to added cost with the workhorse??? We drove a fleetwood terra 34g (ford) & a bounder 38p (workhorse) unfortunantly at different dealerships. The 38p felt a LOT better on the road but unfortunantly we have no clue if that was due to the different chassis, differences in weight or the different trim levels of the coaches.
JNewkirk77
Well-known member
Having driven rigs with both engines, the 8.1L will give you more power on the low end of the RPM range. The 6.8L likes to rev pretty high, which is good, because it makes most of its power at higher speeds.
Gas mileage is going to be similar -- in other words, don't expect much! My 6.8L '00 Jayco Class C gets about 7-9 MPG. Bear in mind that if you, like me, travel where there are a lot of hills, that's probably going to be where you are. On flat land, maybe 1-2 MPG more. I am going to go out on a limb and say a newer rig with the TorqShift transmission ('05 and up, I think?) will do a little better.
I think that time will prove both engines to be really durable. Ford had some issues with blowing spark plugs out of the heads a few years ago, but that's not going to be a problem with the 2010s. The GM 8.1L is basically the same big-block motor they've been building for decades.
You're going to find folks who have good and bad things to say about both. Get the rig you like the best overall, and everything else will fall into place.
Gas mileage is going to be similar -- in other words, don't expect much! My 6.8L '00 Jayco Class C gets about 7-9 MPG. Bear in mind that if you, like me, travel where there are a lot of hills, that's probably going to be where you are. On flat land, maybe 1-2 MPG more. I am going to go out on a limb and say a newer rig with the TorqShift transmission ('05 and up, I think?) will do a little better.
I think that time will prove both engines to be really durable. Ford had some issues with blowing spark plugs out of the heads a few years ago, but that's not going to be a problem with the 2010s. The GM 8.1L is basically the same big-block motor they've been building for decades.
You're going to find folks who have good and bad things to say about both. Get the rig you like the best overall, and everything else will fall into place.
JNewkirk77 said:
Do the fords rev high on the highway? I thought I was well below 3K rpm's at 70 ish mph...... like I mentioned earlier the wh has a extra gear compared to ford.... hopefully mt rv will be out of service soon so I can get on the highway & check the RPM's
According to the computer my 1st trip in my RV 7.7mpg is what the computer stated was the average over about 5,000 miles. 6.9 was the worst & I had over 8 on another tank. I seem to get the best mpg in the hills however I use momentum to go down them & I am a moving chicane going up......
JNewkirk77
Well-known member
My 2000 model doesn't have a tach, so I can't be sure, but I know it sounds like it revs higher than I'm used to with a truck engine. Also, others I've spoken to seem to agree that Ford's OHC motors are more rev-happy than the GM engines that are OHV designs.
Sounds like you drive the way I do ... I'm still getting comfortable with our rig, but a 600-mile maiden voyage helped out with that a LOT.
I'm considering the purchase of a ScanGauge II so I can see exactly what the engine is doing at a given speed. For the price (less than $200, last time I checked) it seems like a neat tool. Heck, I might even be able to adjust my driving style and squeeze a few more miles out of a tank of gas. Couldn't hurt!
Sounds like you drive the way I do ... I'm still getting comfortable with our rig, but a 600-mile maiden voyage helped out with that a LOT.
I'm considering the purchase of a ScanGauge II so I can see exactly what the engine is doing at a given speed. For the price (less than $200, last time I checked) it seems like a neat tool. Heck, I might even be able to adjust my driving style and squeeze a few more miles out of a tank of gas. Couldn't hurt!
letsgo
Member
ALWAYS REMEMBER THERE IS NO REPLACEMENT FOR DISPLACEMENT MORE HORSRES DOES NOT MEAN MORE TOURQE ,TOURQE IS WHATS IS AS IMPORTANT AS HORSES OR H.P. TRITON V-10 MORE TOURQE AND H.P.
Gary RV_Wizard
Site Team
That is incorrect. There is a fixed relationship between torque and horsepower, so if you have the horsepower you also have the torque.
HP = Torque x RPM/5252
Where the larger displacement comes in is its ability to produce torque and horsepower at lower RPMS, which makes both the torque & HP more usable in normal driving. The lower the RPMs fpr max torque and horsepower, the better the engine will be for heavy hauling applications. That's much of why a diesel excels at this.
Wizard46
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2009
- Posts
- 2,146
As a statement above states, find a coach you like and don't worry about the engine/chassis. Both are good choices and engine combinations. I have owned both.
If you are a die-hard Chevy or Ford fan then it may make a differen
If you are a die-hard Chevy or Ford fan then it may make a differen
Bikeswimlaugh
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Posts
- 47
On a quick note...we've stumbled upon a few Class C RV's that were 28-feet and they only had the 6.0 Chevy Vortec engine....yep, that's right...only a 6.0
Some people might be led to believe that the smaller engine would get better mpg on account of, well, being smaller. Fact is, the smaller engine has to work harder and is less efficient. The bigger Triton V10 or larger Chevy engines will actually provide more power/torque and get better mpg then a smaller struggling engine.
You may also want to ask yourself if you plan to tow a trailer (ATV's, sandrail, motorcycles, etc) or if you might eventually get a Toad. You can easily upgrade your headlights & tires, but that engine is what it is and don't go thinking an exhaust system & headers will bump it up to cover the spread! lol
Some people might be led to believe that the smaller engine would get better mpg on account of, well, being smaller. Fact is, the smaller engine has to work harder and is less efficient. The bigger Triton V10 or larger Chevy engines will actually provide more power/torque and get better mpg then a smaller struggling engine.
You may also want to ask yourself if you plan to tow a trailer (ATV's, sandrail, motorcycles, etc) or if you might eventually get a Toad. You can easily upgrade your headlights & tires, but that engine is what it is and don't go thinking an exhaust system & headers will bump it up to cover the spread! lol
JNewkirk77
Well-known member
I've yet to see -- in person, at least -- a newer Chevy-chassis "C" with anything more than the 6.0 engine. I can tell you this: There is NO way I'd tow ANYTHING if my RV had that engine. It's a good, solid motor, don't get me wrong, but my gut feeling is that it's not big enough nor powerful enough to pull that much weight around reliably.
supermod38
Well-known member
I am a die hard chevy man, my first MH had the 454. Loved it, now I have a Ford chassis and I love it more, go figure.
Bikeswimlaugh
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Posts
- 47
supermod38 said:
Same here. My wife drives a Yukon-XL and I drive a Hummer H2...all Chevy and they've been absolutely EXCELLENT. Meanwhile, most my friends with Ford vehicles have not done as well...issues, problems...just not as well built as well. As a contractor I know several other contractors and we all have trucks...Chevy's seem the most solid, Ford is just okay...and the Dodge series is a disappointment across the board. Course, things have improved but I've always felt solid with Chevy.
That said, I've been told that when it comes to RV's things are a bit different....and Ford is a solid choice and actually a bit better then Chevy. About the only thing I've heard is to stay the heck away from that little diesel engine made by Mercedes that they are dropping into some small/mid-sized RV's nowadays; problems!!
IMO, any vehicle weighing more then 5,000 pounds should be diesel powered...the diesel gets better mileage, last longer and is seemingly impervious to lugging heavy loads.
Mark R.
Well-known member
1.3L
Utclmjmpr
Well-known member
That would be 79.3 cubic inches.>>>Dan
