Any 30 mpg vans you can recommend for camping?

[EcoVan]

I am running the stock LT245-75r-16 tires (80psi), if that will help your calculations. These factory Bridgestones drive quite well and are very likely going to be replaced with the same when the time comes ( we've got about 47,000 miles on the van now). I upgraded the shocks to Ridetechs... the factory shocks were nearly useless when the van is loaded.

I am not sure what axle is has, but as I said before the drivetrain on this van is much bigger than that on my 2002 Ford e250 with the 5.4 gas v-8.

[racprops]

OK your tire size is 30.46 and at 70 MPH running at 1500 RPMs your rear end is running around 2.78:1.

If I could find a list of rear end gears for that year of van with the 2.8 Diesel I could pin that down but so far they don't list that van with that engine.

Rich

PS doing some numbers I will need a minimum tire of 27.2 to reach 1683RPMs at 70 MPH.

Or consider upgrading to 265/50/20s (same 30.46 inches) and recalculating my speedo. That would give me the same final drive ratio as your van....

PPS I kind of thing the wheels are a little small and think I would like to go to 20s like they do on your model of van.

PPPS I think that the gears in your van is as low as I can hope to find.

[redneck]

.

Toyota Diesel Hiace Van




>

.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by racprops

Chevy and Ford are running the same transmissions, 6L80 and 8L80s.

AFAIK the 10-speed was co-developed between GM and Ford, yet I'm not sure about the others.

[Tosca]

Originally Posted by User1

Hello all,

I'm looking to put together a van that can be used for 1-2 people and used for camping. I'd really would like to put something together myself. So it would be gutted more than likely.

My main requirement is that it can get 30 mpg going ~65 mph. I don't need anything new and shiny. Just something dependable that has been taken care of.

Have a budget of 5-6k for the van itself.

Some advice on what to shoot for would be greatly appreciated. If any threads or groups I could "feed" off of would be great too.

Thanks,

Without having read the numerous responses, I can vouch for the VW T4 (Eurovan) Transporter. Though not available in the USA, from 1992-1997 almost all Transporters sold in Canada were equipped with a 2.4L diesel and 5 speed transmission. I think all the Transporter panel vans came with the 5 spd diesel. In addition to impressive fuel economy this happens to be the most reliable engine/trans combo available for these vans, not counting the TDI which appeared in 1998 but never made it to North America.

The Transporter is 16 inches longer than a standard Eurovan Westfalia camper. The interior is way roomier than that of any minivan and much taller too. The Winnebago version which came out in 1995 uses the long wheel base Transporter body.
My Transporter had an RV conversion done when near new by a previous owner. It has a pop top roof and rear seats that fold down to form a bed. It consistently returns 6.5-7L/100km, approx. 30-36mpg, though it is officially rated at 8.7L/100km for city and hwy but upgrading to bigger wheels and tires takes off a lot of rolling resistance, plus I've noticed that diesel powered vehicles usually get better fuel economy than they are rated for.

If you're looking for even a modicum of power, though, I would suggest you look elsewhere. That 2.4D generates a whopping 77 bhp.

[racprops]

Originally Posted by EcoVan

I am running the stock LT245-75r-16 tires (80psi), if that will help your calculations. These factory Bridgestones drive quite well and are very likely going to be replaced with the same when the time comes ( we've got about 47,000 miles on the van now). I upgraded the shocks to Ridetechs... the factory shocks were nearly useless when the van is loaded.

I am not sure what axle is has, but as I said before the drivetrain on this van is much bigger than that on my 2002 Ford e250 with the 5.4 gas v-8.

Well this is interesting, I am surprised to learn that ALL the 2017 vans come with a standard 3:42 rear end.

I cannot show what is special order but it is normally with a towing package they go up not down with the gear sets…so it would be very odd to get a lower that 3:42 and more likely to go up to a 3.73 or 4.11.


At 70MPH running with a 30.46 Tire with a 3.42 it would be 1849 RPMs, with a 3.08 it would be 1665, with 3.23 it would be 1746 and lastly with a 2:73 gear it would be 1476.


Note the lowest gear that GM makes and installs is the 3:08 so at best that would run at 1665. An 165 RPM tach error is very possible.


I found a place that shows a 2:73 as a special order… And that there is only a little difference between a 3:43 and say a 2:73. That is only 373 RPMs…BUT I will want that 373 RPMs.

Rich

[freebeard]

So the first thing I though of when the old VW bus didn't fly was this story from Just A Car Guy. I finally took the time to go through every Honda tag to find it.

justacarguy.blogspot.com: Nick made his own camper from his Honda Element (cheaper and more reliable than an old VW van)




Note the cabinet sliding tambour door needs to be open to accommodate the bicycle's handle bar.

The strangest rock-and-roll bed, ever.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

I remember seeing only one Honda Element in my hometown in 2011, with Bolivian plates. Didn't really seem so roomy as in those pictures.

Originally Posted by Tosca

Without having read the numerous responses, I can vouch for the VW T4 (Eurovan) Transporter. Though not available in the USA, from 1992-1997 almost all Transporters sold in Canada were equipped with a 2.4L diesel and 5 speed transmission.

These were the only engine and transmission fitted to the Caravelle and the Eurovan in Brazil, where they were imported only between '98 and '99 as a failed attempt to replace the locally-made T2 and compete with Korean vans which used to rule the market at that time.

If you're looking for even a modicum of power, though, I would suggest you look elsewhere. That 2.4D generates a whopping 77 bhp.

Nobody should actually expect any naturally-aspirated Diesel with indirect injection under 3-litre to pull like a 14 with a Playboy anyway, but it can get the job done as long as it's not in a hurry. I don't remember if it was in September or October 2019 that I had a talk with an Argentinian who was travelling from Argentina to Alaska in a Transporter converted into a campervan with this very same engine.

[racprops]

So after a ton of research and working the numbers I have figured this out:

4L60 4L80 6l80 8L80 Gears
1St 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th
4L60 3.06 1.63 1.00 .70
4L80 2.48 1.48 1.00 .75
6L80 4.03 2.36 1.53 1.15 .85 .67
8L80 4.56 2.97 2.08 1.69 1.27 1.00 .85 .65

Possible GM Gear ratios (2.73 Is aftermarket only.)

2:73 3.08 3.23 3.42 3.73 3.90 4.11

Gear Venders is a .78

BW is a .72 or .33% reduction x.67% Or as 5th .47

RPMS and MPH:

https://www.blocklayer.com/rpm-gear.aspx

Running all the four Transmissions with the different rear end gears, I find that the cost of putting in a 6 or 8 speed transmissions NOT worth the cost and time because here is the numbers of them at 70MPH with a 3.42 gears set:

4L60 @ 70MPH = 1990
6L80 @ 70MPH = 1920
8L80 @ 70 MPH = 1850

With 3.08

4L60 @70 MPH = 1800
6L80 @ 70MPH = 1730
8L80 @ 70 MPH = 1790

And with a special 2.73
4L60 @ 70MPH = 1590
6L80 @ 70MPH = 1530
8L80 @ 70 MPH = 1490

These new transmissions only slightly improve on the over drive ratios, a grant total of .10, and only with the more costly 8 speed, the main thing is more lower gears, to get things moving and to help keep narrow power curve engines with in their best power range. The new 6 and 8 speed transmission are for smaller engines to get them moving

Problem is I built a special high torque engine before they became kind of reasonable to buy… I kind of figure a 6 speed with a rebuilt rear end will run around $3 to $4K.

After all my research I find I cannot get what I need this way. First my Van with its old 350 have plenty of power, it could get going very well…in fact I NEEDED a postreaction rear end then, and with an estimated 30%+ more power with my 383, I figure all a 6 or 8 speed will do is burn up a lot of tires…not good.

My originally figured on much lower rear end gear ratios, they are on record but cannot be bought now a days. My plans were in the ranges of 2.24 or 2.40.


So I am back to my 30 year plan, add a second Over Drive, and I have two of the old Borg Warner over drives, so I can just devoice it from the three speed housing and rig it up as a midship “brownie” transmission.

My studies of a number of good MPG cars has shown that the best MPG is at around 1500RPMs at cruse. Figuring that my van has a lot of weight, rolling resistant and air resection and that at 1500 RPMs this MPG is dependent on the engine’s torque to do the work. So I want my drive train to run my engine at 1500 RPMS at my chosen cruse speed around 80MPH.

For an engine to operate at 1500 RPMs it needs to be camed for that low power range, you cannot run a high RPM engine below its power curve. So my 383 is built for low RPMs.

These newer transmissions do not fill this speeds…the OD is not low enough without impossible to find low gears, so:

So here is the final number, the BW Over Drive is a .71 ratio or more precise a .67 lower gear, thus the final RPMs of the 4L60 at say:

3.42 @ 70MPH is 1990 kick in the over drive and it will be 1333,
This might be a touch low but at 85MPH the RPMs of 2430 drops to 1628….

I might even consider a taller gear..Which will make for strong take offs…AND I bet finding a Possi with a 3.73 or a 3.90 is a lot easier. I will have to do some tests to see how my new engine runs and work out if it can handle the loads made at speed and its best MPG RPMS.

I figure the rigging up of this old BW over drive will run somewhere from $300.00 to $800.00, a LOT cheaper that all it will take to do a 6 or 8 speed and special rebuilt rear end.

Rich

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by racprops

These new transmissions only slightly improve on the over drive ratios, a grant total of .10, and only with the more costly 8 speed, the main thing is more lower gears, to get things moving and to help keep narrow power curve engines with in their best power range. The new 6 and 8 speed transmission are for smaller engines to get them moving

Even though I can't claim to be totally unfavorable to these newer automatics with a considerable amount of gears, sure they're more useful for those smaller engines. On a sidenote, 2 years ago I had a talk with a Bolivian on a beach and he told me the 10-speed transmission in his F-150 with the 3.5 V6 EcoBoost was great for fuel economy. Well, considering the forced induction, I wouldn't consider the EcoBoost to be on the same level of other engines within the same displacement range.