EC FX vs. GXV Patagonia

How is the 4WD accomplished with the GXV K370 vs. what E/C is doing? I also wonder if you would have similar maneuverability between the platforms if you build a smaller (17') habitat Patagonia.
 

ScottPC

Active member
I can't speak to the 4WD differences partially because it looks like GXV has a few chassis options. I do know first hand that the EC is more maneuverable than my stock 3500HD Duramax crew cab with truck camper. With the 2020 EC, you can manually control each axle. It's not 4wd all the time and you need to be stopped engage 4wd. I do know EC tries to carefully balance the load of the habitat with the suspension, and proprietary axle and Allison transmission profile. The also try to achieve a 50/50 weight distribution. All of this helps with handling. I suspect GXV tries to do the same. Certainly going a little shorter can help maneuverability, parking, 3 pt turns etc. Specs like wheelbase (fuso 134), turning radius (Fuso ~40ft), approach and departure angles, clearance, width (GXV +10in) and height are other factors. Height can also make a difference when driving in crosswinds as well the other considerations, I mentioned (eg, bridges, branches, drive throughs, rock ledges, etc. Though a longer wheel base can help in these conditions, too. There are always pros and cons! This is why I like the EXP over the FX.) Weight and Center of Gravity can make a difference too. With the 2020 version, EC uses a gas engine with a relatively flat torque torque curve, helping with low end torque that was usually only found in diesels. It would be cool to see a side by side comparison of these beasts going through their paces.
 

gregmchugh

Observer
How is the 4WD accomplished with the GXV K370 vs. what E/C is doing? I also wonder if you would have similar maneuverability between the platforms if you build a smaller (17') habitat Patagonia.

The 4wd conversion for the K370 is done by Tulsa Truck Manufacturing and it replaces the front suspension with a drive axle with manual locking front hubs and front air bags and they add a two speed transfer case and new drive shafts. The dual rear wheels are replaced with super single Goodyear G278 tires which are also used on the front. The rear comes from Kenworth with airbag suspension and a locking differential. Front axle does not have locking on ours, not sure if that is now an option or not. No changes to the PACCAR PX7 engine (Cummins 6.7) or Allison Transmission.

So similar to what EC is doing but no replacement of the rear axle which means the wheels are dished on the K370 and reversed on the rear to get consistent wheel track from front to rear.

Our Kenworth with a 20 ft cabin has a 182” wheelbase but I am not sure what the wheelbase is on a shorter cabin. The turning radius will never be as small as an EC and it is also not as small as a standard K370 after the changes to the front suspension. I do not know the exact measure of the turning radius on ours.
 

lucilius

Active member
IMO, they're both decent with various pros/cons that have been discussed at length elsewhere. I realize everyone has different priorities but I would look for diesel, quad cab (or seatbelt-equipped seats in the camper) and a proven truck/chassis/camper configuration that has been run through the wringer by a number of owners for at least a few years. Beyond that, user requirements/preferences win the day as both companies have a good reputation.
 

gregmchugh

Observer
IMO, they're both decent with various pros/cons that have been discussed at length elsewhere. I realize everyone has different priorities but I would look for diesel, quad cab (or seatbelt-equipped seats in the camper) and a proven truck/chassis/camper configuration that has been run through the wringer by a number of owners for at least a few years. Beyond that, user requirements/preferences win the day as both companies have a good reputation.

I am not positive but I think our GXV Kenworth Patagonia which is almost 3 years old and with 50,000 miles it is likely the one with the most use. No major problems on the truck chassis or 4wd conversion or the camper. Not used much in 4wd though but lots of travel on gravel roads in Alaska and Yukon and NWT and twice to the Arctic Ocean. Is it overkill in terms of rough road capability for these travels, probably, but it is nice to not have to worry about all the things the normal RV would have issues with on rough roads (tires, suspension, interior coming loose, etc.). And up north, no matter how bad the road looks when you get to the end all the locals are there in their compact cars and minivans and Class C RVs and travel trailers wondering why you need such a beast to travel there... :)
 

ScottPC

Active member
Coincidentally, I subscribed to Overland Journal a few weeks ago and ordered the Spring 2020 back issue because of the expedition campers writeup. It arrived literally moments ago just as I had posted my previous response!!! Lots of terrific info so far...a good read for those in the market. Scott Brady selects two winners, one for international travel and the other for North America with the diesel emissions being an important factor. I don't want to be the spoiler.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,527
Messages
2,875,534
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top