Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-25-2015, 09:12 AM   #11
Senior Member
Total Loss's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 582
Originally Posted by rabbitdiesel1 View Post
Not only does Mercedes put the 4 cylinder in the 11030 lb. cutaway chassis, there are Views and Navions on the road with that engine. GCWR is the same for the 4 cyl. compared to the V6, both are rated at 15250 lbs. Owners of the Sprinter vans claim the new 7 speed transmission is far superior to the old 5 speed.
Thanks for making me do more research. I had not looked on the website recently.
I dio see that it is now standard on this model.
Still scratching my head. Seems awfully small for 15 k weight (what I will be moving around) I would have to drive one to be convinced (towing also)
Back probably 2 years ago- I spoke with a Merc Sprinter tech and they did not have this configuration yet. I was interested of course.

As for the torque specs- I think Mercedes is not telling us the truth on the
V6. They feel like much more than 325. The GL config boasts 455 and 240 HP with the 7 spd.

Me personally- I would go with the tried and true V6 5 spd.
2 overdrive gears is not really needed in a motorhome.

I have looked at the 4 cyl as my colleague has one.
VERY simple and small platform. Looks very good.

AWD is next up.

Total Loss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2015, 09:36 AM   #12
Senior Member
dieselguy's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Kansas
Posts: 896
"It's interesting that when talking about Ford, everyone asks about a Diesel. When we tell them the Ford gas has more Horsepower and almost as much torque, the response is always that "on a diesel its Torque that is more important, Horsepower is not important".
Not being disrespectful, but someone obviously has not towed very serious weight, or in mountains, or for overall long distances to elude to a newer gasser will pull right along side a diesel. You can look at the "numbers" all day long ... seat of the pants towing experience with diesels will shove aside the smoke and mirrors. Horsepower and RPM can be talked up at the race track ... torque gets you down the road.

dieselguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2015, 10:54 AM   #13
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Anacortes, WA
Posts: 1,167
It's the old problem of "driver opinions" vs. "hard data". You can't confuse some people with facts!
Frank and Eileen
No longer RVers or FR owners
F and E Damp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2015, 11:06 AM   #14
bclemens's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Elkhart, IN
Posts: 8,288
Forum user sent me a nice video that "winnie" did of a real world comparison. Half way through I thought, this I4, maybe it does match up nicely.

Until they hit a nice grade and tried to gas it. V6 pulled away (This of course was unloaded with NO toad). Then when they finished up, the 4 only got about 1 mile better real work than the V6.

So while the 7 speed seems nice...way too many trade offs.
PLEASE do not send questions via Private Message. Post questions in the forum as a new thread so that other users can benefit from the answers. Use Private Messages for sensitive information only. Our owners manuals are available online and via iPhone/Android Apps.
bclemens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2015, 11:40 AM   #15
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 218
Great info Brian. I really appreciate your perspective and value your judgment. Even though you're an employee I don't feel like you cut yourself much slack. Nice to have an insider that's not too biased!
Eric Jackson
Ottawa Ontario Canada
2015 Solera 24R
backdoctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2015, 12:24 PM   #16
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 3
The comparison test WBO did (4 vs 6) was flawed. According to the Sprinter expert from the Sprinter Source, leaving the 4 in 7th gear and pushing the pedal to the floor will get you nowhere. The 4 needs to be down shifted to keep the rpms up. If that would have been done the 4 would have done better in both acceleration and mpg. The 4 will work harder in the mts and lose some of its fuel advantage but should increase its fuel economy considerable when not under hard conditions. If your going to pull a heavy toad maybe you'll want to stay with the 6. I put on 40,000 mi a year and 2 or 3 mpg saves me a lot. Most owners who can afford a new motorhome can easily afford the extra fuel cost of the 6. It's a personal choice. I had a 06 View (2.7) that avg. 17.25 mpg in 178,000 mi. My 2011 View (3.0) has avg. 14.95 in 115,000 mi. It's amazing how Mercedes can use a tiny 2.1 engine. It's not that I dislike the V6, it's the smoothest engine I've ever owned.
rabbitdiesel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2015, 06:57 PM   #17
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,748
It just seems like a huge load to put on a 4cyl. IMO
Still Kickin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2015, 09:57 PM   #18
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by Still Kickin View Post
It just seems like a huge load to put on a 4cyl. IMO
You are correct, huge load, very small displacement engine. FedEx drivers say they can't tell any difference in the performance between the 6 and the 4. A motorhome would be a lot heavier. Based on my experience with the 2.7 (154 HP 243 lbs torque) I think the 4 would do fine (161 HP 265 lbs torque. The 7 speed makes a big difference. The 7 speed would make a big difference in the 6 also. If you don't care about a little extra fuel cost, just get the 6. I put on 40,000 miles a year and I think the 4 would save me approx. 1500$ a year. Not a large amount but I'm a mpg guy. I'd drive the 4 before I buy if it becomes available.
rabbitdiesel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2015, 10:28 AM   #19
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Washington State
Posts: 114
Prior to my 3 litre Solera, all my RV'ing was with a 99 Dodge Cummins 24 valve 5.9 litre turbo diesel (24 valve head was for emission purposes, not power). The automatic trans is a relic of 60's muscle cars - a 727. The truck weighs in at 7,700 lbs. The loaded trailer was around 7,000 lbs. The HP, Torque and combined weights are within about 10% of my Solera's. Also, I keep meticulous fuel records for both vehicles. Overall, the Dodge/trailer combo averages in the 14 mpg range. So does the Solera. Never enjoyed Physics in High School but my appreciation for it has grown immensely. It will take "X" amount of fuel to move "Y" amount of weight, given similar conditions and technology. It would appear that four, five or six cylinder turbo diesels - 4, 5 or 7 speed transmissions are interesting but not necessarily relevant. I prefer the Solera's comfort and ease of operation, however, I prefer the ease of maintenance and economical operation of the 99 Cummins and 95 Holiday Rambler - I'm fortunate to have little enough invested in older technology that I have the choice.

MiataHoarder is offline   Reply With Quote


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

» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by is not in any way associated with Forest River, Inc. or its associated RV manufacturing divisions.

Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 PM.