I'm new to the forum and am looking at buying a 1992 Chevy 350, mid bath. Asking price is $6800. Miles are 105k.
I'm going to look at it, but from the initial conversation .
Here's what it doesn't have:
NO rear A/C, just a swamp cooler.
NO awning.
NO Generator.
Anyone have any advice on costs to replace / install these items and whether they are deal breakers?
Jared
Most LDs without roof A/Cs are usually pre-wired . Check to see.
Awnings can be added.
Generators are difficult to install and can cost several thousand dollars.
If you want a generator, wait and find an LD with Factory one
A 105,000 is a lot of miles for a Chevy 350.
Larry
I'm new to the forum and am looking at buying a 1992 Chevy 350, mid bath. Asking price is $6800. Miles are 105k.
I'm going to look at it, but from the initial conversation .
Here's what it doesn't have:
NO rear A/C, just a swamp cooler.
NO awning.
NO Generator.
Anyone have any advice on costs to replace / install these items and whether they are deal breakers?
Jared
If these missing items are deal breakers is your call but if the coach is sound and you don't mind the possibility of a motor rebuild in the near future and if you could get it for 5k it would be a cheap way to get in the game.
It might be a 350 chassis (one ton) but may have the 454. Get the vin and use a vin decoder to find out. I've had two of the LDs with 454 and they are a treat to drive and if properly cared for I suspect could be ok at 105k. A compression and leakdown test would be your friend.
Rear AC - wouldn't invest the money .
Awning - easy replacement - readily priced on the Google
Generator - also wouldn't invest the money (but that's more tempting)
It might be a 350 chassis (one ton) but may have the 454. Get the vin and use a vin decoder to find out. I've had two of the LDs with 454 and they are a treat to drive and if properly cared for I suspect could be ok at 105k. A compression and leakdown test would be your friend.
Rear AC - wouldn't invest the money .
Awning - easy replacement - readily priced on the Google
Generator - also wouldn't invest the money (but that's more tempting)
I would question the need for a generator without AC. We went twenty plus years in a camper without either and if all you really need is a light at night a generator seems like a waste of weight and money. Having said that now that I'm old and soft and have both AC and a generator to run it I really like having both!
92 Chevrolet could of been throttle body injected. I ran one in my work truck 220,000 miles before a rebuild. It always used a quart of oil in 900 miles from the day it was new. If it's a 350 it's a good motor, a 454 would be a bonus.
92 Chevrolet could of been throttle body injected. I ran one in my work truck 220,000 miles before a rebuild. It always used a quart of oil in 900 miles from the day it was new. If it's a 350 it's a good motor, a 454 would be a bonus.
Yes, it makes me wonder exactly what people are talking about when they say a Chevy 350 TBI is an unreliable motor, it is one of the most reliable Chevy ever made.
140,000 miles in my LD, hauling up and engine braking down all the mountain passes around here. I expect another 60,000 more.
Yes, it makes me wonder exactly what people are talking about when they say a Chevy 350 TBI is an unreliable motor, it is one of the most reliable Chevy ever made.
140,000 miles in my LD, hauling up and engine braking down all the mountain passes around here. I expect another 60,000 more.
Interesting. I think the assumption is the 350 is working so hard with the weight of the LD that it shortens it's life but maybe not.
The 350 V8 was and still is a very popular engine, used in millions of cars and light trucks.
When powering a lighter vehicle, they worked great but when saddled with an 11,000-lb RV, especially the earlier LDs, they fell on their faces, power wise. Our 1983 felt extremely underpowered, even with dual exhaust and any other trick I could think of.
165-HP doesn't provide a lot of get up and go power. Anyone who thinks so probably has not driven a V-10.
It was an eye opener the first time I drove a V-10.
There are not a lot older 350-powered LDs around anymore but when they were popular, engine replacements were common, caused primarily by overheating.
The radiators were not over sized and when owner did not properly maintain them, they lost cooling capacity.
This was back in the dark days before engine chemistry was not well understood and didn't do a good job of preventing rust and corrosion. Its coolant was primitive, compared to today's coolants.
Pre-1991 LDs came with a 3-speed Turbo 400 transmission, while being a strong transmission, it did not have overdrive, The lack of overdrive causes the engine to turn at higher than desired RPMs, at highway causing speed, increasing the overall wear.
.
Our 1983's LD's 350 timing chain was very loose at 80,000 miles. While replacing the timing set, the main and rod bearing were examined. The rod bearings were very worn, almost to the point of damaging the crankshaft, the mains showed sign of heavy wear too...all caused by excessive RPM. Changing the bearings in the driveway wasn't much of a treat.
Early models were burdened with a 4-barrel Quadtrajet carb, one of the more complicated carburetors to works on.
Q-Jet Carburator parts were becoming hard to find in the late 90s, so an Edlebrook aftermarket carb was installed on our 1983 LD. It was turnable and helped a little bit in both mileage and power.
In the late 80s, throttle body fuel injection was added, finally getting true, direct port fuel injection in 1991, along with other engine enhancements..
The 4-speed 4L80E was introduced in the 1990-91 LDs, allowing the engine to cruise at lower RPMs and to last much longer.
It's a well respected, strong transmission.
The 1991 LD was the pinnacle of the 350 equipped LDs.
454 big blocks are well liked but are a rare breed. 1991 and later models, with the 454 were popular for towing, back before the Ford V-10s were available.
If you want an older LD, with a G-30 chassis, look for a 1991 or later model..
Besides the engine and transmission upgrades, it will also have the one-piece plastic nose, eliminating many sources of leaks.
Larry
We have owned a 350 with a holly carburetor in a G30 Chevy chassis on a SOB itasca for 22 years. It has been dependable but we have owned it from 22K to 80K. I am not a fan of the Holly but since we updated it with new electric choke it has worked much better. We always changed the oil and maintained all belts hoses and fluids and serviced the transmission. Was this done on that LD? Get some history if you can as well as a good mechanical check of all the systems, if you are not competent hire a mechanic who is and definitely have a compression and leakdown check done on the engine.
Karen~Liam
98 ~ MB
I bought a 1984 Chevy the end of May this year. It has about 50,000 miles on it. Rather then driving it home though, I drove it to a recommended mechanic. I gave him a list of stuff to do plus the kind people in this group added to my list. It drove well, but being an older unknown vehicle and me being an old lady who cant even change a tire by herself, I wanted to be safe. For many reasons I like the older LD instead of the newer ones and I am old enough to remember the 350 being a loved engine and cheap to fix. But my list was going to cost $2800 and with the additional added from this group it went up to $4900 (not including an additional $1200 in all new tires). However, my LD has an overdrive and it failed while the mechanic had it. The overdrive manufacture said it was a complete failure and had to be replaced, so an additional $1400. The LD has been at the mechanic literally all summer! To be fair, the mechanic is very busy with 48 other vehicles there and I called the auto repair bureau place to check him out. But finally it looks like I am going to get it this week! Some will call me foolish, and maybe I am fooling myself, but I got the LD for cheap and loved the t/k floor plan, the small size of it, that the outside was not old style ripple like, and it didnt cost me 10s of thousands of dollars. I figure if I had bought a newer one then I would have spent more upfront plus I would have still wanted it gone thru with a fine tooth comb by a mechanic and changed all the rubber, repacked bearings, etc. It also helps that I intend on this being the last vehicle I ever buy so resale value and all does not make a difference.
Another group I belong to is the Clipper Club. I narrowed down my choices and was either going to buy a class c clipper or a LD. Interesting that both motorhomes are about the same size. The clippers stopped being made in about 1981 though. But most clippers have a ford 454 and most of the members there prefer a chevy 350. They say they are less costly to work on and easier to find parts for and dont use as much gas. But they also say they are gutless and doing 55 is about mandatory. I am hoping the overdrive switch on mine will save me gas and help on the hills and with any towing I might someday decide to do.
I bought a 1984 Chevy the end of May this year. It has about 50,000 miles on it. Rather then driving it home though, I drove it to a recommended mechanic. I gave him a list of stuff to do plus the kind people in this group added to my list. It drove well, but being an older unknown vehicle and me being an old lady who cant even change a tire by herself, I wanted to be safe. For many reasons I like the older LD instead of the newer ones and I am old enough to remember the 350 being a loved engine and cheap to fix. But my list was going to cost $2800 and with the additional added from this group it went up to $4900 (not including an additional $1200 in all new tires). However, my LD has an overdrive and it failed while the mechanic had it. The overdrive manufacture said it was a complete failure and had to be replaced, so an additional $1400. The LD has been at the mechanic literally all summer! To be fair, the mechanic is very busy with 48 other vehicles there and I called the auto repair bureau place to check him out. But finally it looks like I am going to get it this week! Some will call me foolish, and maybe I am fooling myself, but I got the LD for cheap and loved the t/k floor plan, the small size of it, that the outside was not old style ripple like, and it didnt cost me 10s of thousands of dollars. I figure if I had bought a newer one then I would have spent more upfront plus I would have still wanted it gone thru with a fine tooth comb by a mechanic and changed all the rubber, repacked bearings, etc. It also helps that I intend on this being the last vehicle I ever buy so resale value and all does not make a difference.
Another group I belong to is the Clipper Club. I narrowed down my choices and was either going to buy a class c clipper or a LD. Interesting that both motorhomes are about the same size. The clippers stopped being made in about 1981 though. But most clippers have a ford 454 and most of the members there prefer a chevy 350. They say they are less costly to work on and easier to find parts for and dont use as much gas. But they also say they are gutless and doing 55 is about mandatory. I am hoping the overdrive switch on mine will save me gas and help on the hills and with any towing I might someday decide to do.
Best of luck to you and I hope you get lots of fun out of your LD. I think you did right having it gone over by a mechanic and you should be just fine. I have a 350 on my 1994 Chevy travel van which is fairly heavy. It doesn't scream over passes but I'm in no hurry and it's a good motor. Over 100k on it and still uses no oil.
Teresa,
so in addition to the purchase price you have dropped $7,500 into something you are going to drive forever. Once you put another 50,000 relatively trouble free miles on it that will drop to $0.15 / mile. And it was done conveniently and not 47 km past Timbucthree. Good investment.
Safe travels and see you down the road.
Joel
I am hoping the overdrive switch on mine will save me gas and help on the hills and with any towing I might someday decide to do.
The overdrive switch will NOT help on hills, I do not recommend towing anything with this engine. The overdrive may help with mileage on long, flatland drives...
Steve
Teresa, I wish you many miles and enjoyable adventures with your "new" LD. I share the view that these costs are nothing compared to a new new one, and the retro charm adds a little fun factor.
Towing a toad is desirable, but I would add my voice to those who advise against.
Overdrive, when engaged, improves the ability of the engine to run at lower RPM while cruising, delivering better mileage. As a result, when engaged, it reduces the engine's ability to do work, like climbing or towing. Disengage in the mountains.
It's odd that this vehicle has an aftermarket overdrive - an UNderdrive is a more common addition, which WOULD help up steep grades...
Steve
Steve and Teresa,
The "Underdrive/Overdrive" is a trade mark of Gear Vendors. It is only an overdrive. One rarely needs 1 under. That is 4x4 territory.
There were two common overdrives up to the 1990,s or so. Initially the overdrive allowed one to leave a car in 2nd, start with the clutch and shift into overdrive in the city without the clutch, a convenience to the ladies. In the country of two lane roads and steeper grades, it allowed fuel savings in the flat lands, and a no clutch downshift on minor inclines. Chrysler designed the Borg-Warner overdrive and let BW build it to save on tooling cost. DeNomanville designed the one in Europe now sold by Gear Vendors.
Then the average speeds were no where near 80 mph we see now, unless you were street racing. With the interstate highways, 1972 fuel crisis, and mandated CAFE efficiency requirements car makers added overdrives and more gears to their transmissions to improve the CAFE value. When the speed limits were raised around 1986 to 1988 those vehicles designed for 55 MPH were relegated to the slow lane. My '88 MB with 460 V8, C6 3 speed, 4.10 rear ratio is turning 3300rpm at 65 mph and closer to 3800 rpm at 70 mph. Peak HP is at 3800rpm. The chart stops at 4000rpm. Red line is ??00RPM, this is the Ford Police Interceptor block ya' know. Hence the engine wear Larry W. eluded in his reply above. First gear gets the MB up the Pole Line Road into Mt. Madonna, Santa Clara County Park without an underdrive.
I installed a Gear Vendors Underdrive/Overdrive 120 miles ago. I now have overdrive at 45 mph in auto mode. This results in 3000rpm at 70MPH on flats. I also have 6 speeds:1, 1 over, 2, 2 over, 3, and 3 over above 20 mph in the manual shifting mode This gives me smaller gear splits for long grades. I can keep the engine closer to peak torque at 2400 RPM. I merge onto the freeways with the overdrive off. I then engage the overdrive at 60 mph. In about a minute I reach 70MPH, when I want to. I am definitely not going to be towing with this set up.
Teresa,
Assuming you have a Gear Vendors overdrive, give Gear Vendors a call in El Cajon (San Diego) CA. I found their operators to be knoweldgeable. They went through the operating procedures for both the automatic shifting mode and the manual shifting modes of operation with me, before I purchased in May. My guess is they drag race these things or drive classic cars at modern freeway speeds.
We will not be able to tow in 3rd over, in either mode. We will not be able to tow at speeds over 55 MPH. The engines just do not have power to move that much weight and move the air out of our path of travel above 55.
Note, it took my shop 2 months to repair the exhaust manifold leaks, air conditioning, power steering, change the ignition module, and install the overdrive. Most of the time (6 weeks) was spent removing broken exhaust manifold bolts and having the new Ford hex studs fabricated.
Interesting. I think the assumption is the 350 is working so hard with the weight of the LD that it shortens it's life but maybe not.
Considering the modest power, it is pretty amazing and far above what I expected. I live in Durango, CO, so most camping trips involve a brutal climb up into the San Juans. On Wolf Creek Pass (yes, that WCP), it will hold the 45 mph speed limit the whole way up, moving between 2nd and 3rd gear as needed. It has never run hot, even when climbing, even when climbing with a ~2000 lb trailer. Yes, I trailer with it, including over Red Mountain Pass.
At 140,000 miles, the engine appears in excellent shape. 55-60 PSI oil pressure tells me the bearings are still tight.
Some of this is that a fuel injected 1987+ cab is worlds different than a 1986 and earlier. You get a little more power and A LOT better fuel metering, which helps longevity- running a carb rich at full throttle leads to the potential for fuel to wash lubrication off cylinder walls= early rebuild. They also tweaked airflow under the hood to address some earlier issues with overheating manifolds and general cooling issues.
I get 11-12 MPG even with the non-overdrive 3 speed- more like 11 if climbing passes, high end of 12 if on flat ground.
Hell, I'm not even 100% sold that one should stay away from the front window like mine (1989) has. YES the window is problematic for leaks (had one develop), but what is not problematic is aircraft aluminum all the way down rather than a 30 year old plastic nosecap.
Jeff,
Thank you for the information on your towing experience. Sound like the experiences I have had crossing the divide going to Canyon City CO.
Considering the modest power, it is pretty amazing and far above what I expected. I live in Durango, CO, so most camping trips involve a brutal climb up into the San Juans. On Wolf Creek Pass (yes, that WCP), it will hold the 45 mph speed limit the whole way up, moving between 2nd and 3rd gear as needed. It has never run hot, even when climbing, even when climbing with a ~2000 lb trailer. Yes, I trailer with it, including over Red Mountain Pass.
At 140,000 miles, the engine appears in excellent shape. 55-60 PSI oil pressure tells me the bearings are still tight.
Some of this is that a fuel injected 1987+ cab is worlds different than a 1986 and earlier. You get a little more power and A LOT better fuel metering, which helps longevity- running a carb rich at full throttle leads to the potential for fuel to wash lubrication off cylinder walls= early rebuild. They also tweaked airflow under the hood to address some earlier issues with overheating manifolds and general cooling issues.
I get 11-12 MPG even with the non-overdrive 3 speed- more like 11 if climbing passes, high end of 12 if on flat ground.
Hell, I'm not even 100% sold that one should stay away from the front window like mine (1989) has. YES the window is problematic for leaks (had one develop), but what is not problematic is aircraft aluminum all the way down rather than a 30 year old plastic nosecap.
Interesting stuff. I don't pull hills a lot faster with my 460 and don't get that MPG, lucky if I get 10. Didn't know about the nose cap on those older ones either and it makes me wonder why they went to plastic. I have a 94 travel van with the 350 with 120 k on it that burns no oil and I get 15 mpg in it but even it struggles on hills so I thought the LD with that motor would be severely underpowered but apparently not.
Interesting stuff. I don't pull hills a lot faster with my 460 and don't get that MPG, lucky if I get 10. Didn't know about the nose cap on those older ones either and it makes me wonder why they went to plastic. I have a 94 travel van with the 350 with 120 k on it that burns no oil and I get 15 mpg in it but even it struggles on hills so I thought the LD with that motor would be severely underpowered but apparently not.
During the eight years, and 60,000 miles, we owned our 1983 22' FL, we never got over 9 MPG, normally less.
The poor 350 struggled going over the Sierra passes and, because of the carburetor, wouldn't go over 10,000'.
I made a couple feeble attempts to tow things but it was just too underpowered to consider anything beyond a small motorcycle trailer.
It was almost like dying and going to heaven to switch to the E450, with the V10, it was that big a difference.
If you have not keep up with the front cap issues, the older, pre-90 LD had a front end made of multiple pieces of aluminum and trim pieces, all glued and screwed together. The sealants shrink, over time, and eventually opening up cracks that leak into the overhead and rear corners. Beside the corners, there are two types of front windows, one that have leaked and ones that will leak.
The one-piece front cap eliminated all most all of the potential leakage points, in the front end, and is one of the most important improvements that LD has made, IMHO
I have open up too many older LDs with serious rot issues, usually in a newly bought used LD, where the buyer didn't do their homework and purchased and RV without a complete inspection. It's always a sad moment when a new owner, with stars in their eyes, find out they own an rotted RV that needs more work than what the rig would be worth.
Larry
During the eight years, and 60,000 miles, we owned our 1983 22' FL, we never got over 9 MPG, normally less.
The poor 350 struggled going over the Sierra passes and, because of the carburetor, wouldn't go over 10,000'.
I made a couple feeble attempts to tow things but it was just too underpowered to consider anything beyond a small motorcycle trailer.
It was almost like dying and going to heaven to switch to the E450, with the V10, it was that big a difference.
If you have not keep up with the front cap issues, the older, pre-90 LD had a front end made of multiple pieces of aluminum and trim pieces, all glued and screwed together. The sealants shrink, over time, and eventually opening up cracks that leak into the overhead and rear corners. Beside the corners, there are two types of front windows, one that have leaked and ones that will leak.
The one-piece front cap eliminated all most all of the potential leakage points, in the front end, and is one of the most important improvements that LD has made, IMHO
I have open up too many older LDs with serious rot issues, usually in a newly bought used LD, where the buyer didn't do their homework and purchased and RV without a complete inspection. It's always a sad moment when a new owner, with stars in their eyes, find out they own an rotted RV that needs more work than what the rig would be worth.
Larry
Good info on front cap and older 350, Thanks
Have you driven an LD with the 460 and if so how does it compare to the V10? I did lots of research on the earlier V-10s before making my buying decision and opted to get one of the last year's the 460 was available due to the plug spitting issue but I still wonder about power and MPG in the V-10 verses the 460. The way I understand it is the V-10 was only developed because the 460 with bigger cylinders couldn't meet emmision requirements so I have to wonder if the V-10 is an improvement or not. I know diesel motors went straight to hell trying to meet new emissions standards.
I’ve owned a ‘91, E350, 460 ci, rear bath Lazy daze and now a 2012, E450, v-10 RB. The 460 had a 3 speed w/overdrive tranny. The v-10 has a 5 speed w/tow haul. I tow a 2000 Jeep Sahara Wrangler.
My impression of the E350 Ford 460 is that it has enough power to tow anywhere you need to go if you are willing to down shift on extreme climbs and descents. It is a reliable brute. Average mpg @ 8, realistically, towing. Will not over heat.
The v-10 E450 package is a higher revving engine that has adequate power to tow also. Mated with the 5 speed tranny with tow/haul mode and E450 chassis, it has a more comfortable and driveable power combination. Avg. mpg @ 9, towing.
Both are very reliable drive trains and are a pleasurable experience to drive. But, I would have to say that I would give the edge to the E450 package. This is just my opinion and both are fantastic products if well maintained.
Dale from Downey.
Interesting stuff. I don't pull hills a lot faster with my 460 and don't get that MPG, lucky if I get 10. Didn't know about the nose cap on those older ones either and it makes me wonder why they went to plastic. I have a 94 travel van with the 350 with 120 k on it that burns no oil and I get 15 mpg in it but even it struggles on hills so I thought the LD with that motor would be severely underpowered but apparently not.
Gearing matters. I don't recall if Lazy Daze used 4.56 or 4.11 gearing in the rear diff, but it means the engine is pretty much spun out at 70 mph. Passenger van gearing is probably in the 3 range or even lower for milage and better top speed. That torque multiplication is a big deal in a motorhome.
I'm not going to pretend it charges up hills, but it goes fast enough and can hold 65 mph on flat ground towing (~2000 lbs) without working very hard. Hell, when I took it out for a test drive, I was amazed that it even reached 65...
Gearing matters. I don't recall if Lazy Daze used 4.56 or 4.11 gearing in the rear diff, but it means the engine is pretty much spun out at 70 mph. Passenger van gearing is probably in the 3 range or even lower for milage and better top speed. That torque multiplication is a big deal in a motorhome.
I'm not going to pretend it charges up hills, but it goes fast enough and can hold 65 mph on flat ground towing (~2000 lbs) without working very hard. Hell, when I took it out for a test drive, I was amazed that it even reached 65...
I'm a slow driver in my LD for many reasons. First off I've got nowhere to go and all day to get there. Secondly I enjoy the scenery and the slower I go the more I can look around. Then of course there's the MPG to consider and staying around 55 greatly improves that. On grades you will find me chugging up and over in the truck lane doing a whopping 45mph. My 460 could go over much faster but as I said I'm in no hurry and I figure why make my motor woirk harder than it has to and again there's the MPG to consider.
I’ve owned a ‘91, E350, 460 ci, rear bath Lazy daze and now a 2012, E450, v-10 RB. The 460 had a 3 speed w/overdrive tranny. The v-10 has a 5 speed w/tow haul. I tow a 2000 Jeep Sahara Wrangler.
My impression of the E350 Ford 460 is that it has enough power to tow anywhere you need to go if you are willing to down shift on extreme climbs and descents. It is a reliable brute. Average mpg @ 8, realistically, towing. Will not over heat.
The v-10 E450 package is a higher revving engine that has adequate power to tow also. Mated with the 5 speed tranny with tow/haul mode and E450 chassis, it has a more comfortable and driveable power combination. Avg. mpg @ 9, towing.
Both are very reliable drive trains and are a pleasurable experience to drive. But, I would have to say that I would give the edge to the E450 package. This is just my opinion and both are fantastic products if well maintained.
Dale from Downey.
I've heard the 450 has a little rougher ride. Have you found that to be true? On MPG my 460 has the Flowmaster exhaust system and I get right under 10mpg so it seems to work as advertised.
The e350 had a rougher ride. It didn’t have a rear sway bar. It did have Bilstein shocks in front and back. It required me to be a more active driver, if you know what I mean.
The e450, although it has the stock Ford shocks and larger front springs, has a more solid feel. It handles poor roads much more smoothly. It also has oversized Road Master sway bars front and rear to deal with “tail wagging” and swaying. The width of coach is also a few inches wider, which helps.
I guess the difference would be similar to going from a Chevy to a Cadillac or a ford to a Lincoln. Maybe not quite that noticeable, but, you know what I mean.
Dale from Downey.
The concept of spending "more than it's worth" poses an interesting paradox. Presumably, the phrase is meant to convey a practice of false economy.
For example, let's say a used RV is purchased for $15k, but would actually be potentially worth $17k if an additional $2k were invested in certain areas. Alternatively, what if the rig actually required an further $3k to make it fully operationally functional? If the implication is that the RV would still only be worth $17k, it therefore presents the owner with the prospect of having a new basis of $20k or "spending more than it's worth".
Now, let's compare this scenario to the option of buying new. I'm not going to go around digging up stats, but what's the depreciation rule of thumb of driving a car off the lot? Or, more accurately, what about driving an RV for 3-5 years? In fact, even with putting on moderate mileage - let's assume 12k miles/year - what's the typical net depreciation hit?
Hasn't the owner in effect spent more money (new) than what the rig is (now) worth? Sure, let's divide the number of day/nights used to get an effective 'usage rate', but we can also apply the same calculation to the original example presented above.
The conclusion is - within certain bounds - there isn't really any firm or fixed rule of thumb about spending/investing "more than it's worth". If an RV is actually used sufficiently enough to amortize the costs comparative vis-a-vis to other vacation/travel alternatives, then it's a net win.
The killer - whether facing a surprise rot out or parking a brand new rig - it not using the vehicle. Use an RV, the cost nexus is some undefined point where either alternative is probably roughly comparable. Don't use the RV, and either option ends up costing money that could be better spent elsewhere.
The concept of spending "more than it's worth" poses an interesting paradox. Presumably, the phrase is meant to convey a practice of false economy.
For example, let's say a used RV is purchased for $15k, but would actually be potentially worth $17k if an additional $2k were invested in certain areas. Alternatively, what if the rig actually required an further $3k to make it fully operationally functional? If the implication is that the RV would still only be worth $17k, it therefore presents the owner with the prospect of having a new basis of $20k or "spending more than it's worth".
Now, let's compare this scenario to the option of buying new. I'm not going to go around digging up stats, but what's the depreciation rule of thumb of driving a car off the lot? Or, more accurately, what about driving an RV for 3-5 years? In fact, even with putting on moderate mileage - let's assume 12k miles/year - what's the typical net depreciation hit?
Hasn't the owner in effect spent more money (new) than what the rig is (now) worth? Sure, let's divide the number of day/nights used to get an effective 'usage rate', but we can also apply the same calculation to the original example presented above.
The conclusion is - within certain bounds - there isn't really any firm or fixed rule of thumb about spending/investing "more than it's worth". If an RV is actually used sufficiently enough to amortize the costs comparative vis-a-vis to other vacation/travel alternatives, then it's a net win.
The killer - whether facing a surprise rot out or parking a brand new rig - it not using the vehicle. Use an RV, the cost nexus is some undefined point where either alternative is probably roughly comparable. Don't use the RV, and either option ends up costing money that could be better spent elsewhere.
I think like this when buying used vehicles. First as you say you lose thousands the minute you drive it off the lot. Then there's the tax you pay on high priced new vehicles and then there's insurance and registration. I figure I can buy used and put all that money into making my used vehicle much like new for a fraction of the cost. Having said that I bought my 1994 f250 diesel 4X4 brand new and when I did I told myself the only way this works is if I keep it twenty years. I still have it and it's still a nice truck so that time it did work out.
My few cents worth. (Disclaimer: I do not understand the concept of turning the vehicle over every 2-3 years. I buy with the expectation I may drive it forever).
Say you drop $10K on a rig and then drop another $10K for fixing and spiffing. Say you then get 5 years and the same 50K trouble free miles out of it as someone who bought new. What was the 'worth' when you got on the road and what is it after 5 years, and the dollar-cost valuation of the 5 years experience?
OTOH, if after adding $10K, it's still a wreak, then it was more than it was worth.
Regarding the Ford 460, the 1980's and early 1990s Econoline cabs had major issues with insufficient airflow around the exhaust manifolds. During heavy use (long uphill grades) the manifold would get so hot as to expand and pop the heads off the manifold bolts. This would then cause an exhaust leak only a few inches from the exhaust valve, and if not promptly repaired, would lead to exhaust valve damage from cold air entering the leak on shutdown and warping the red hot valve.
I had this happen 3 different times in 2 years with a 1988 cab. It happened a 4th time and my father, who actually owned the unit, gave up and sold it broke. Of the 4 times this happened two needed valve work at about $2000 to rebuild the head.
I learned when driving the rig to take it easy and try to avoid climbing hills at WOT and avoid long periods where the motor was running high in the rpm range. After knowing about the issue, I could adapt driving styles to avoid popping the manifold bolts. My father could not- he may have felt safer in trying to stay at the speeds of other traffic. In any case, when he drove his motorhome up mountain passes, more often than not he would pop manifold bolts.
The RV repair shop said that this repair was their bread and butter, that it happened all the time. I don't know if this issue was worked out with better airflow in the new generation of Econoline cabs in the early-mid 1990s.
This repair (and the lousy fuel economy) soured me on 460 engines. I was very pleased to find a rare Chevy cab in my 1989, and wanted it despite the 350 engine vs. 454. Chevy cabs ride like a dream compared to the Ford's I am used to. Bump steer is much more minimal. As I've mentioned many times the Chevy 350 far exceeds our expectations of performance.
I had a 1994 midbath without a generator. That was not a real problem.
Before we bought the rig we looked at a multi plan with the Chevy. I would strongly recommend against it! The 350is not enough engine for the rig. The Ford 460 while a gas hog it is a great engine!
I had a 1994 midbath without a generator. That was not a real problem. Before we bought the rig we looked at a multi plan with the Chevy. I would strongly recommend against it! The 350 is not enough engine for the rig. The Ford 460 while a gas hog it is a great engine!
Were the early-mid 90s MP or TK available on a Ford chassis? I have no idea - I've only seen Chevy G30 chassis configurations for the shorter 22' LDs. If there are shorties running around on the Ford chassis, are any equipped with the 460? (As is the case of my 22' G30 running the 454?)
OTOH, I had assumed the longer early-mid 90s MB were likewise devoted to the Ford 460 platform. However, last month I saw a '95 MB at my repair shop sitting on the G30. I asked the owner if it was a 454 and he said no, it was a 350. We both looked at each other and I said, I can't imagine trying to drive that rig with that engine.
Even in the 22', the 350 is pushing the limits. A neighbor had a 91' G30 22' FL/RB with the 350 and it was pretty underpowered. Of course, the LD was just a lark for him - got it cheap, didn't care, just took it on occasion to the local beach park.
However, some things never die, and with an estimated 100 million small block Chevies (SBC) globally produced (both domestically and overseas under license), that makes for an awfully large target for aftermarket companies. And, sure enough, all the majors, like Holley, Edelbrock, et al have complete, turn key upgrade kits including on board computer, EFI, sensors, performance parts (cams, heads, intake), etc.
Matched with some kind of overdrive (say, drop it to 3.5 [my 4L80E is 4.1 is 3rd but 3.3 in OD]), you would have both good low end power and the ability to run around 2.2k RPM at 60 (like mine) for decent gas mileage. If you could find a decent rig for around $10k and drop $5k on engine upgrades and another $5k overall, you'd have a pretty sweet, relatively low cost RV for around $20k. Not too bad.
I have my rig home today, so was able to access some tech notes I keep on board (for handy quick reference if something comes up while on the road).
I wanted to update my comment above about gearing ratios for my 4L80E 3+OD transmission. 3rd gear is 4.1, but the OD drops it all the way to 3.08. With that type of gearing, I turn 2,100 RPM @ 60 mph and 2,200 RPM @ 65 mph.