X3 on engine size. I've had the v6, now I have the v10.

**Little engine got 13-17 mpg (averaged 14.5 for me)

**Big engine gets 11-13.5 mpg (averages 12.xx for me).

It varies mostly on driving style (top speeds, coasting, accelerating) and idling time. If you pull trailers that's a whole new conversation. I've done that with both also.

Take it from me: a guy who has put over 200,000 miles on Ford vans with each engine. Talk to other guys about their V8's.

If fuel economy is your biggest fear: just do the math. A difference of 2mpg isn't worth worrying about.

 

I've had a 4.6 E150 for 126k and my average has been 16.00 mpg for all those miles, every tank since the van was brand new. A 4 mpg difference for 126k miles at $3.50 per gallon is about $9000 in fuel cost. And a 2 mpg difference would be $4500 over 126k miles. I did math for a living... And if I had invested the money, it would be even more at the end point of the calculation... You may not worry about flushing 9 grand down the toilet but I would.

The 4.2 V6 is simply too small an engine for a van; the 4.6 is the best fuel mileage engine for a lightly loaded van and the EPA ratings for the 4.6 were better than for the 4.2. The V10 is not needed unless you are towing BIG stuff.

George

 

16mpg is good; I'll grant that.

However the average gas price in USA for the last 5 years is $3.01/gallon though (thanks, Obama).
The difference between 12mpg and 16mpg over your 126,000 miles is 2,625 gallons. That's $7,875 more fuel cost for the V10 over the course of 5 years. That's $30.28 per week. Driving 88 miles per day, for 5.5 days per week.

I've driven the V10 van for 110,000 miles now. It's worth that.

I think we all agree the V6 sucks though.

 

$7875 vs $9000 flushed down the toilet does not make me feel that much better. I'm retired and would prefer not to run out of money before I run out of life...

And looking forward into the future, we both know fuel costs will rise again. We need new roads in Michigan and a gas tax would hurt, but it seems the fairest to me to tax fuel for road repairs since vehicles damage roads, people who drive more benefit more from road-eating salt, etc.

And the 4.2 absolutely sucks for a big van; that's why Ford stopped offering it in 2003 or 2004.

George

 

All right, all right. I give up. You are correct. The math doesn't lie.
I guess part of me is trying to justify my V10, but if you break it out over the course of four or five or six years or so.. It isn't bad. That $30 per week that I referred to was based on driving almost 500 miles per week. I suspect most van owners probably do about half that. So that comes out to about $15 per week. If someone can't afford to flush $15/week down the toilet, they probably don't have a full size van.

I'm not trying to say you're wrong: I realize $7000 or $9000 is a lot of money over any amount of time. But I'm trying to put it into real world, every day examples. How much money per paycheck does it cost to have a V 10 instead of a small V8?

Nonetheless, victory goes to the elder van owner for this discussion. I bow to you on this one.

Have a great day Yo.

 

I owned numerous 10 mpg muscle cars going back to 1970 and my old 70's and 80's vans (which were my daily drivers for years) got 12-13 mpg, so I have used my share of the world's energy resources and done my share of justification of gas hogs. But when I started driving gas was 25 cents per gallon. Altho when rolling up for inflation, that would be over $1.50 in today's money.

I'm not quite in Prius territory but my daily driver is a 26 mpg Subaru Forester and my wife is driving a 35 mpg Civic. When gas was over $4 per gallon the $120 van fillups made me want to puke...I had to hit the debit card twice because the pump limit was $75 or $100.

I don't price anything "per paycheck". Being steeped in pension concepts from the age of 22, I look at real costs. The "per paycheck" game is how salesmen get people into overpriced 72 month car loans or leases for $60k F150's and Expeditions that they don't need. (Or how drug dealers get addicts started, or how Starbucks sells you a $6 latte every day.) I look at vehicle costs in terms of cost per mile and include depreciation as well as operating costs.

If you need a V10 van or truck to pull a heavy trailer for your vocation, you need it. But a big engine for the sake of a big engine makes no sense these days. If you like high performance vehicles, a V6 Mustang will give you much more performance than any van and still get 30 mpg on the freeway.

Take care,
George

 

I looked for a V10 van for over a year and all I found was junk.
I really wanted one but ended up with the puny small V8.
I'm still looking though.
I want to use as much gas as I can until it's gone.
Gas is cheap, time is not.

 

My 4.6 powered E250 achieves a minimum of 16mpg and will close in on 20mpg strictly highway, and it doesn't seem to care if it's empty or hauling 2000lbs of whatever... I credit the gears with those results. When I was shopping for a van this past spring I didn't even consider a 1/2 ton, having grown up in a family that had a succession of vans starting with a '66(IIRC) the lesson learned early on is that the 1/2 tons are just too easy to overload while an E250 will shrug off the same load like it's not even there. Only downside to that is the E250 rides like a lumber wagon unless it's got some weight in it, but by the time you have converted your van to a camper you will be in the ballpark of achieving enough load to smooth out the ride. All the companies that build conversion vans start with an E250 or larger for good reason.
I also sought out a 4.6L van as most of my driving is city and a smaller motor does better in stop and go, but I ruled out the 4.2 because of it's terrible reliability record.. 200k or less and they all need a topend rebuild while the V8s can and do go 500k as long as you keep spark plugs and exhaust manifolds in/on them.

 

An empty box E150 (pre-2007) has a GVW of 7000 lbs and weighs under 5000 giving a payload over a ton. I think the OP wanted to add a bed, insulation, gear storage, and some solar panels... You think this stuff is gonna weigh over a ton?

NOTE: Some pre-2015 F150 pickups come in with a payload UNDER 1000 lbs. and we are talking about crew cabs. Long thread with guys whining about their Queen Mary sized trucks having the same payload as an Escape. Put 4 big guys in one and you barely have capacity for a cooler full of beer. Ford sells a half million of these a year. Would you tell those buyers they need Super Duty trucks?

My '02 E150 conversion has a 7000 lb GVW, factory windows, a full interior with dual air and heat, carpet and insulation, a sofa bed and a stated payload (after the conversion) of 1600 lbs. And it rides nicely on P rated Michelins with 41-42 lbs of air in them.

In the early days I had 3/4 ton vans which in those days had car type tires (a '73 E200 and an '86 GMC 2500). When Ford (1975) and GM (1996) went to separate body/frame, the 5 lug vans ended up being called half tonners. Dodge 2500 vans used 5 lugs and P rated tires through 2003 (when they switched to the Sprinter). The van converters stayed with car-tired vans so they moved from 250/2500 vans to 150/1500 vans. My '96 Savana was a 1500 and was a pretty tough truck although it had a lot of problems.

For medium duty camping and passenger use, there is nothing wrong with an E150. It has a payload 50-100% greater than a big macho F150 and is a real truck. I don't need 60-80 lb truck tires to rattle my fillings out. If I carried 2 people, 500 lbs of tools, and 2000 lb loads all the time I certainly would go with a 250 or 350 (or a post-2006 E150) with 8 lug wheels.

By the way, the OP may be long gone and we're talking amongst ourselves, not always a bad thing.

George

 

Yeah we either befuddled him with our collective brilliance or baffled him with our BS?!?!

All the discussion aside in the end there seem to be two different camps about the E150 vs E250. All logic and math aside eventually it comes down to personal perception as to what's best suited for a van's foreseen tasks.

My daily driver E250 with 5.4 gets about 15 MPG year round. Come winter its idling long periods of time to maintain cabin warmth. When driving nearly all its miles are freeway, cruise control engaged. Because it weighs 7,800 in its DD configuration I'm content with the MPG's would hate to guess how a smaller engine or lower GVW chassis would fare for my needs.

Another reason I personally prefer the E250 is it could be easily enough modified to E350 spring specs quite affordably. Being a pre-2008 I added that year improved front brakes which are essentially E350 parts---a straight swap of brake parts only, nothing changed in the suspension at all.

As for an E250's ride comfort----that can also be easily modified to at least make it less truck-like, a bit closer to a nice sedan type ride. Minimimal insulation on side walls and inside door cavities, plywood floor all add just enough weight and sound deadening to make even an open floor plan almost pleasant.

Honestly I don't know how anyone could or does drive any E-Series in a full cargo-only capacity without a partition curtain or the insulation I suggest---that tin can rattle would make me crazy.

That's one POV-----YMMV!