I have owned a 1995 351 cid E-150 and a 1997 4.6L E-150 before, both high-top conversion vans and did quite a bit of work on both.

1995's 351 was strong, I ran it to 230k miles with very minor problems before I sold it, although transm was rebuilt at about 220k. However I wasn't thrilled with its fuel economy, while the 97 4.6 did a lot better in mpg (avg 16-17 versus 11-12). Ended up selling it to get a different daily driver. Miss it a lot / made a mistake by selling it.

I am looking to purchase another high-top, but this time my needs have changed somewhat.

- I will be loading these vans with about 1000 lbs (people and luggage) at 80% of the time. (I will be installing a 4 foot x 5 foot luggage Box on a hitch rack -- part of the 1000 lbs).

- I will not be towing much this time.

- This will be used 90% highway.

- It will be about 10 years old

- It will be used for about 4 years at an average of 15k miles a year.

Should I be looking into 5.4L E-250 or 4.6 E-150? This is from the perspective of load-carrying and fuel economy. I am aware of the differences in chassee, suspension, brakes, plus engine outputs. Will a 4.6 be able to handle the load, while providing an advantage in mpg? My previous '97 4.6 was actually used as daily driver (without any load, except 250 lbs of me).

 

It all depends on what you will expect from the van. The payload of a high top E150 is going to be maybe 1200-1400 lbs, and you will have a tendency to wear out brakes if you use them hard, and it will struggle a bit up steep grades loaded and with the 4.6. I've got an '02 E150 with a 4.6 and will agree that it's great for gas mileage--but mine is not a high top. (I bought it new and it now has 86k miles on it.)

You could certainly consider an E150 with a 5.4 as well. Basically, looking at older vans, finding one at the right price in the right condition may help you make the choice as to which type to get.

The 250 will definitely hold more weight if you occasionally load it up beyond the 1000 lbs, but will ride harder and you will lose maybe an mpg or two due to additional weight and probably stiffer gearing. Likewise, I'd expect the loss of 1-2 mpg with the 5.4 over the 4.6, but if you are working the 4.6 hard, the mileage penalty of the 5.4 will be less, and it may do every bit as well as the 4.6.

The 5.4 is more likely to blow out a spark plug from what I've read. If you could get a newer 5.4 or 4.6 (2005 or so) there will be more threads in the cyl heads. Also, the early PI Romeo 4.6 engines (2001-2004) had a problem with cylinder head cooling--causing the exhaust valves in the rear of the heads to stick in the guides. I got a new pair of heads for my '02 under warranty. I think almost all 4.6 vans had the Romeo, as opposed to Windsor, engine. TSB 03-25-6 describes the problem. Romeo engine code is "W"

Here is a link:
https://www.ford-trucks.com/tsb/full...hp?tsb=03-25-6

George

 

Thanks for the reply George. I wasn't aware of Romeo 4.6 head's cooling issues for '01-'04. Good tip. I did change the plugs myself on the 4.6 and I am aware of the issue. I would take the chance again, rather than spend $ 500-600 for it.

Although my previous 4.6 was nimble, I never pushed it with load. I felt that the 5.8 ran like a bear, while the 4.6 ran like a dear.

On the 150, yes, I will be at about 80% of the allowed payload, which I don't like very much.

You're right about the fuel economy. I may or may not save much on fuel, while I may spend more on suspension.

I have read on this board that the 250 ride will be harsher. Since I live in NYC, with potholes galore in a 50 miles radius, I would prefer a softer, smoother ride. What would you recommend to soften the e-250's ride?

My budget is 6k or lower. I would prefer a much lower price with work needed, which I don't mind, as long as it is not an engine or transm overhaul.

 

Based on your budget, I would suggest your staying open to 150, 250, 4.6, and 5.4. A clean and healthy van is going to be your best buy even if you have to make some compromises. You might even want to stay open to other brands if you need a raised roof--they are just not that common. (Although my hellish experience with a 1996 first year GMC Savana made me swear off GM bigtime...but the 350 engine ran great.)

If you get a 150 and plan to load it heavily, you might consider some helper springs or air bags just to keep it more stable. For a better ride in a 250, lowering tire pressures would be your only easy solution so long as you have adequate pressures for the load you are carrying. Maybe moving to a larger size tire and running it with a slightly lower pressure would be an option. But I'd never go below, say, 45-50 lbs no matter what. And if you get any sway, especially with the high top, raise pressures as needed. Tire brand makes a big difference also. The OEM tires on my E150 were Michelin LTX M/S's and they ride REALLY well for the amount of pressure I run. The LTX is available in heavier load ranges and I'd bet they would give you the best possible ride as well. I am a bicyclist, and will note that a really expensive supple tire with 120 lbs of air will ride better than a stiff tire with 90 lbs in it. I ride through Detroit chuckholes, which I'd put up against NY or anywhere else

I've had four big vans since 1986 and remember how the oldies all got 12 mpg, even with smaller engines. I really love my E150/4.6 for mileage but a raised roof and running with a load would tax it.

George

 

Yes, I agree on tire quality. I haven't use the Michelin LTXs but will keep that in mind.

Regarding other brands -- I have never owned any GM or Dodge full-size vans. I have taken them for rides, but I always like Fords better, for many reasons, reliability, my own familiarity, etc. Another reason why I would chose Ford over GMC / Chevy is that actually E vans are about 10" shorter (outside) and wider (inside). Since I will be installing a tail to it (luggage box, plus 4 or 5 bikes on top of the box), shorter is an advantage when trying to park in the City. BTW, this luggage box (installed on a reinforced hitch rack) with gear inside and bikes on top of it will exceed 500 lbs alone.

If I am not mistaken your '02 4.6 is a little stronger than my '97 4.6, which again I found peppy enough.

 

You're a cyclist or cycling family? Serious or recreational?

If you are going to carry a cargo box, why not just look for an extended length van?

We are cyclists (my son races) and bikes go *inside* the van, not outside; their value usually dwarfs the value of the van. I'm a big fan of Fords over GM and Dodge, but in the $5k range, condition can trump a lot.

Good luck,
George

 

My serious mountain biking / triathlon days are over. Now it simply rec. We take our family bikes along everywhere we go, and in many places, there is no better way to get around. Bikes are probably only $ 1,500 worth. I do ride my $ 4k Cervelo P3 on the weekends but don't take it with me on travels.

We use the 4 captain chairs and the pull-out sofa, so bikes would need to be in the far back in an extended van. There does not seem to be room there for 4 or 5 bikes, plus luggage and other gear. Again with sofa layed down.

I have bought 2 other conversion vans before and I think my budget should get me something decent, plus I do plan to make repairs, plus some other upgrades. As you know better than me, these vans run forever, and parts are cheap.