Hey folks,
I'm looking at the new 2006 and 2007 cargo vans to replace my aging F150. A half ton model should be enough and real easy on the options. In the past I've always given Chevrolet a fair chance at my business but Ford always seemed to offer that little extra to get the sale. How do the New chevys stack up against the Fords in a base configuration?

Motor Ford 4.6V8 vs Chevy 4.3V6
Tranny
Handling and ride
Reliability record
Fuel economy
Ease of maintenance
Performance (there will be no heavy hauling or drag racing so my expectations are not high)

Thanks

 

Being a Ford forum, you are going to get biased answers. BUT, in all honesty, if I were to go buy a brand new van and price was not a factor, I woudl go FORD. This only comes as a result of having driven the crap out of both Ford and Chebby vans at work. The Fords are still going and the Chebbys are scrap.

 

No question on motor. The 4.6 blows away the 4.3 in power and smoothness. Mileage is similar.

No question on tranny either. The GM 4L60E/4L65E is junk. The number one transmission in the repair industry. The 4R70W behind the 4.6 is one of the most reliable units on the market. I know, I owned an AAMCO Center for several years and we did 25 to 1 4L60Es over 4R70Ws.

Reliability goes to the Ford. I had two Chevy vans before my Clubwagon and they nickel and dimed me to death. The Ford has been a rock.

Ease of maintenance is about the same but you will do less of it on the Ford.

Fuel enconomy is going to be about the same on the two but the 4.6 will out perform the 4.3 on the same amount of fuel.

Performance, the GM drives nicely. Its smooth and handles well. It is a newer design than the Ford. I like my E150 Clubwagon but I upgraded it with KYB shocks, a helwig front bar and a set of rear helper springs. As for motor, the 4.6 will feel effortless compared to the 4.3. The 4.3 will never feel anything other than overstressed.

Steve
'95 Clubwagon XLT

 

> Reliability record

Both vans do poorly according to Consumer Reports.

From working with a large amount of fleet vehicles, the Chevy pretty much falls apart and they have some serious design issues. When will GM stop putting all the fusible links on the starter (especially for the alternator) where you can not reach or repair them?

The Ford is pretty much still old school, but, it is Ivy league. Just search the topics of the van forum to get an idea of what problems you will have. Mostly stupid electrical or small stuff.

I would not want to give odds on a GM or Dodge automatic transmission outliving a Ford. I have seen them die frequently on a regular basis in Dodge trucks.

 

I am working my third Ford van.

#1 was an 86 E150 with a 302, 290K miles before the rust got it, no problems with the transmission or the engine.
#2 91 E150 extended with the 351, almost the same, only a few miles less, with this one the rust was not a problem.
#3 E350 SD extended with the V10, still running it with 65K miles and narry a problem.

When its time for a new one I will be at my local Ford dealer looking!

 

Too bad the Ford modular engines have the spark plugs placed in the top, and the engine completely under the dash, and so close to the overhead firewall that you can't get your hand between them. You'll not be doing engine repairs or spark plug changes at home yourself, dealer service required, had my plugs done last year, after a quick look fore myself, knew it was out of the question. Maybe all vans are this way now, manufactures have figured out how to stop the public from doing all the service on their own vehicles, it's all in placement and design.

 

In most cases it will be well over 100k miles before you need to do plugs on a modular.

 

I personally think the plugs are easier to change on these than on a newer GM van.
They really aren't as bad as they look.

 

Well, the plugs are difficult to get to in the vans. But Ford didn't do that on purpose. These engines were designed to go in trucks where access to the top of the motor is easy. Packaging for the vans was of little consideration.

If they had put the plugs on the outside of the camshaft tower then people would have been bitching about access in the trucks. And I doubt it would have been any easier in the vans.

Steve
'95 Clubwagon XLT

 

I have a '05 E-150 with the 4.6L besides just a few minor problems I've had great luck with it so far. My biggest problem is I have to watch the weight especially with my power washing trailer so I don't overload it. I've got 16K on it now and with the van and trailer at 11,700 lbs I get about 12 MPG. Ford says that engine though won't break in til about 25K, they are extremely tight engines. I know, I know I should get a 1 ton if I was smart about it...lol

 

I've got an '02 E150 (mild conversion) that is the "antidote" van to a 1996 GMC Savana that was the Van from HELL.

I bought a 5/60 warranty for the Savana--also a conversion that we bought new, and I believe total warranty repairs were well in excess of $10,000. This includes three transmissions (4L60E's), seven valve bodies, two fuel pumps, alternator, windows that fell off their bonded frames. At around 60k miles, it was also popping Oxygen Sensors like popcorn. I traded the van in after 66k miles because I was having to pay for repairs myself--like intake manifold gaskets that dissolved at 65k from the orange antifreeze (fortunately just leaks, no hydrolocking). After a lot of targeted letter-writing I did get GM to pay for half of that repair. I loved the 350 engine, my wife loved the passenger legroom in the Savana. Oh yeah, they weld on the door hinges, and mine were starting to bind. It ate brakes too.

The '02 Ford has had a LOT less problems, although it has the '02 Romeo engine which had a valve guide problem--I bought the extended warranty on IT as well, and the dealer just replaced the heads at 42k miles. I will accept this as a design fluke on my particular engine and not applicable to all 4.6's, though. And the rest of the van is just much more solid than the GMC.

Before the '96 Savana, I had an '86 GMC 2500 van, and managed to blow up the 305 at around 40k miles when the timing chain let go on the freeway...that was a fluke as well and I liked that van way better than the Savana.

Oh yeah, we can get an honest 17-18 mpg with the 4.6 (light loads but pretty fast crusing 70-80); the Savana usually got around 15-16; the '86 GMC got 12-13 with the sucky 305 (and a carburetor)....and my old '73 flatnose Ford with a 302 also got 12. So, I consider the 4.6 to be very good in terms of mileage.

George

 

We happen to have Fords, Chevy, and Dodge vans at my company. All fairly new under 4 years. Ford has to be the best all around. Chevy is not that far behind though, you just have to get used to that Chevy suspension. We have very few problems with the Fords and the Chevies. When it comes down to it I would consider price being the deciding factor. I'm glad you did not mention Dodge. The Dodge vans we have are the older body style. We got five the last year they made them. We currently have three sitting in the parking lot with blown engines all with under 50,000 miles.

 

I just drove a E150 1200 miles over the weekend. It was a rental so it may have seen some hard use/abuse. I thought it rode nice enough that I am thinking of trading in my truck and ordering one of these.
We had 7 people in the van along with luggage for 4 days and averaged 70 mph and got about 15 mpg. I was pretty happy. I wasn't expecting to like the van or the 4.6 (I'm used to my v10).

 

Yeah, I think that's how most of us ended up here. I used to tow with a truck and got a van kinda by accident. Now I wouldn't consider going back to a truck.

Steve
'95 Clubwagon XLT