- Thread starter
- #21
Thanks the kind of information I am looking for. Having to deal with water and refilling it would be a pain. I am holding out for the new electric ID VW microbus coming out in 2020. I hope they have full autonomous by then.
Overlanding: LC vs Sprinter 4x4 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Reckless
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Thanks the kind of information I am looking for. Having to deal with water and refilling it would be a pain. I am holding out for the new electric ID VW microbus coming out in 2020. I hope they have full autonomous by then.
Very capable, but you had best be happy topping out at 55 mph on the highway.
The main appeal to me of something like a Sprinter would be the ability to have a toilet (even if the cassette variety).
Imagine the cost of fuel in that thing...oh wait it's around 10mpg so not that different from a 200..LOL
They have been quite problematic on the Ford forums
+1, my Sportsmobile had a portable cassette toilet that had a spot in a cabinet under the sink. I've packed one on the Rubicon in my Jeep so you don't necessarily have to get a camper to bring one a long. They do take up space and spillage is a concern. Though once you get used to having one around they are missed when you don't.
XPCamper has a cassette built in which is nice. Think I prefer a cassette over a black water tank an hose. It is a bit more flexible in that you just need to find a toilet to empty, not a dump station. Unless you are in a motorhome size vehicle, the size of the blackwater tank is an issue. We've gone a week with judicious use of the 5 gallonish cassette tank in the XPCamper.
37s, a toilet, ability to cruise 75-80 MPH all day long, means endless vistas...
What kind of problems? Mostly turbo related?
bloc
SILVER Star
I personally know a few guys with fuel injection issues. They also reported worse than v8 mileage numbers when loaded.
On top of that I refuse to believe such a highly stressed (power vs displacement) all-aluminum engine will have much in the way of longevity.
+1
I have a 3.5 ecoboost Explorer that gets only 2 mpg better than my 80" tall, 275/70 tire-d, 1000 lb heavier Landcruiser. When it was stock they were dead even. I found turbo engines do work well when the displacement is appropriate for the vehicle. My M5 is a 4.4 turbo which nets me 24-25 mpg highway and about 17 mpg city - right about what my wife gets in her GS350 (3.5 engine but the power is way up the rev band).
Reliability wise its a no-brainer as you said.
Yes.
We were thinking of adding a Navigator to the fleet, but after spending 2 weeks on the Ford forum, no thanks. Tons of problems with the Ecoboost engines.
Now that New Raptor won't have silly ecoboost anymore, we will be ordering that instead.
That for me was the sign that the ecoboost was not doing well when the Raptor had it for one year and said, see ya.
bloc
SILVER Star
A small-displacement aluminum petrol engine turbocharged within an inch of it's life to make acceptable (even impressive, see raptor and ford GT) power numbers just doesn't make sense in the use-case of a truck or van.
I'll need to do some reading on the new Raptor engine.. first I've heard of it.
And while we are talking overland options.. a Raptor with the top of a RTT flush with the cab mounted in the bed would be a hell of a lot of fun. Obviously there are more practical options but.. it's a raptor. Practicality is not the point.
I'll need to do some reading on the new Raptor engine.. first I've heard of it.
And while we are talking overland options.. a Raptor with the top of a RTT flush with the cab mounted in the bed would be a hell of a lot of fun. Obviously there are more practical options but.. it's a raptor. Practicality is not the point.
The injector issues have mainly been due to direct injection resulting in carbon deposits on the valves. Toyota has had similar problems with direct injected engines, which is why Toyota and Ford are both building engines that have port and direction injection. This purportedly eliminates the carbon buildup issues.
I don't particularly worry about the longevity of modern turbos.
I have a friend in southern UT with an awesome Sprinter 4x4 (lifted, 34" tires, home built camper van outfitted) and if I were going to live in the vehicle for days on end there is nothing I can imagine better. Especially in the west where lots of the trails are fairly open (no tight trees) it'll get anywhere most people take their (insert whatever 4x4 you want here). If you want creature comforts, this will be your daily driver, or you are planning on doing more 4x4'ing and less van life, then the 100 or 200 series starts to make more sense. FWIW, my friend with the sprinter daily drives an 80 and his wife daily drives 5th gen 4 runner, so their sprinter sits when they're not living the van life.
I have known several people with the F150 and they have been very reliable - not sure if the engine gets any changes for the Transit. But as we know nothing is perfect - seems like most forums just address the issues people are having (just take a look at all the posts this forum and LC/LX is supposed to be one of the most reliable!) so I'm not surprised but overall from what I know I think the ecoboost would be less costly to maintain than the MB. Having said that I like to looks/fuel mileage of the MB more than the Ford and would lean that way if I were buying a van.
Last edited:
If they bring the Ranger Raptor to the US with a decent engine, that'll be the one to watch over the F-150 Raptor. Payload will probably suck though. I've been toying with the idea of getting something else. If I can get a good deal being deployed on the real engine'd Raptor, I might make the leap.
Unless I can get a killer deal on a new vehicle, I want something simpler with less electronics and fewer compromises. We'll see. Just a thought for now
indycole
GOLD Star
While I'm nowhere near thinking of a change, the one thing that I've found to be a problem that I simply never considered was being able to build out the truck to serve my purposes without going over weight ratings.
At this point I've kind of accepted it as a necessary tradeoff and also acknowledge that it's a lot to ask of an already beefy vehicle to simultaneously be an occasional daily driver, extended backcountry camping rig (i.e. lots of water, fuel, tools, self-sufficient stuff), and to safely negotiate relatively technical trails (Hells in Moab, Slickrock in Sierras, etc.).
