Van Or Truck Chassis

Sixinarow

Adventurer
Hi, all. I know this is the van forum and may get some biased responses but figured I'd ask anyway. I've been looking at 4x4 Turtletop Van Terras, specifically the E-350/V10 combo.

However, I came across a few 2010-2012 F-550s with a Glaval body, like this one http://busesonline.com/single-bus/?busNumber=4114. Most truck chassis shuttle buses I've seen are huge, but this particular Glaval is short like the other mini buses.

So, if you were choosing one of these, which would you pick as far as pros and cons as far as just the chassis goes?

Would anyone choose the truck over the van? Why?
 
Last edited:

eporter

Adventurer
That’s a nice rig. I’d like some kind of slightly smaller F350 4x4 with a box on the back.

I think most prefer the vans for the better turning radius and shorter overall length. Trucks are easier to work on, especially with a huge diesel shoehorned in.

4x4 vans command a huge premium, I think a truck is the better way to go if you don’t have a preference for one or the other.
 

12paws4feet

Member
Considered a retired 4x4 fire fighting truck w/ that body. Ended up with a 2010 E350 SD XLT 4x4 w/ V10 engine. Felt like the fire truck was nearly a class-b or cabover truck camper. Looking at trucks also helped me realize that owning a cool ass 4x4 van was something I've wanted since the 70's! #vanlife The height of my van has surprised when off road. If I had a pop top it would have been stripped off the roof by now by branches. -Cheers
 
Last edited:

Raul

Adventurer
That looks like an awesome rig, Truck chassis will give you a more modern engine, interior and other components. Ford didn't spend a lot of resources on the E vans. Engine accessibility will be nicer too. On the other hand, a van chassis will be a little bit more compact.
I will depend on your needs. The example you provide will give you plenty of space, but as far as 4x4 your wheel base (crest angle and turning radii) will limit you to flatish roads. On the aesthetics side, I have a hard time with the bus doors replacing the passenger side of the cab, but this is a very personal opinion.
 

Sixinarow

Adventurer
That’s a nice rig. I’d like some kind of slightly smaller F350 4x4 with a box on the back.

I think most prefer the vans for the better turning radius and shorter overall length. Trucks are easier to work on, especially with a huge diesel shoehorned in.

4x4 vans command a huge premium, I think a truck is the better way to go if you don’t have a preference for one or the other.

I'm still thinking of what I want. Shorter turning radius is always a plus.

Vans do command a premium, it's crazy. I've been a truck guy forever but some vans...man, they call to me.

Considered a retired 4x4 fire fighting truck w/ that body. Ended up with a 2010 E350 SD XLT 4x4 w/ V10 engine. Felt like the fire truck was nearly a class-b or cabover truck camper. Looking at trucks also helped me realize that owning a cool ass 4x4 van was something I've wanted since the 70's! #vanlife The height of my van has surprised when off road. If I had a pop top it would have been stripped off the roof by now by branches. -Cheers

Nice! I've looked at ambulances and firetrucks, also.

Yeah #vanlife!

That looks like an awesome rig, Truck chassis will give you a more modern engine, interior and other components. Ford didn't spend a lot of resources on the E vans. Engine accessibility will be nicer too. On the other hand, a van chassis will be a little bit more compact.
I will depend on your needs. The example you provide will give you plenty of space, but as far as 4x4 your wheel base (crest angle and turning radii) will limit you to flatish roads. On the aesthetics side, I have a hard time with the bus doors replacing the passenger side of the cab, but this is a very personal opinion.

That's true! Not a huge Ford diesel fan but the 6.7 is the best after the 7.3.

Yes, wheelbase is going to be long on anything I'm looking at but on that Glaval the rear axle is set back quite a ways. 201" WB.

As for the passenger door delete. They are ugly! I can see maximizing cabin space but I may want/need a passenger/co-pilot seat. The Van Terras keep that door and seat which is nice.
 
Last edited:

jkam

nomadic man
My next RV will not be a van. I've had one now 11 years and the shortcomings became obvious over time.
Vans are harder to work on, have much less leg room and you sit right over the front suspension giving a less than
comfortable ride.
I've been looking for a Ford F550 based RV now and haven't come up with one that meets my needs. Most are over 30 feet long and that
won't work for me.
I like the Dynamax Isata 274, at less than 30' it's one of the few I've seen. Not many others around that aren't crew cab. That makes them too long for me.
5b78ef807445d23f4034af75.jpg
 
Last edited:

86scotty

Cynic
I've got to disagree on personal preference. I think from the inside out on an overland vehicle and vans are great on the inside because of the flat floor and upright seating position. Like I said, personal preference. I've always driven commercial trucks (semis) and vans and I have yet to be comfortable for long drives in any 'feet forward' position, meaning any truck. Also, you can swivel van seats and not truck seats making a smaller cabin more user friendly for camping duty. I really REALLY want to like an F-series truck based camper/overlanding vehicle but I can't get past the seating position.
 

Bikersmurf

Expedition Leader
Vans are definitely a pain in the rear to work on.

Truck cabs are longer. In some ways not significantly... in other ways, the difference between a 21’ Ambulance and a 23’ Ambulance is huge when trying to parallel park in a 21’ long space.

I’d not trade my E350 Ambulance for an F series for any reason... I’m just glad I infrequently need to work under the hood and am dreading changing the grow plugs.
 

68camaro

Any River...Any Place
I recently bought a 2001 Chinook Concourse on a E350 v10 chasis. Its dually but 2wd so I am in process of lifting and maybe a trutrac diff locker in rear. I think a heavy camper van is certainly fine for forest graded roads and washboard roads, and I have no intent of mudding or rock crawling. If you wanted something built
stronger than e350 you can get a e450 which I heard has beefier suspension.

I almost pulled trigger on Provan Tiger (http://www.tigervehicles.com) on a 3500HD or F-350 truck chasis but decided to hold off this route for three - four years. Since my off-road use is on mild roads I didn't think I need beefiness of 3500hd/F350 chasis. Once I retire and have more time to head out West, I will look to upgrade to truck chasis to be less teeth-chattering on more rugged roads.

I've been looking for a Ford F550 based RV now and haven't come up with one that meets my needs. Most are over 30 feet long and that
won't work for me.
/QUOTE]

The Provan Tiger Bengal are built on F350 and they recently built one on 450 I believe, they are 21' - 24" in length. They used to make bigger heavier model (Mayalan and Sebarian = http://larrysrv.com/provan.html) but discontinued them, although you can find for sale used.

Agree on seats not swiveling but a member here is rebuilting a Provan Tiger on F-350 and his seats do swivel, I think it's this tgread: https://www.expeditionportal.com/fo...ompanys-4wd-provan-tiger-build.139003/page-15)
 

broncobowsher

Adventurer
A truck platform gives a roomier cabin since you are not sharing the interior space with the engine. Also make working on it easier wince you can access stuff through the hood. You also tend to get a better ride since you are not sitting so close to the front tires.

The downfall of a truck chassis is for the same interior room the wheelbase is longer as is the overall length. This can make it harder to park/turn when you are at the limits.

For rolling down the highway I think the pickup chassis is better.
 

Raul

Adventurer
Answer to PIA to work on plus legroom !

You are absolutely right. I does check all the boxes, but this is a perfect example of designing by committee. Nissan made a big deal about surveying a lot of possible customer and what they wanted: Leg room? check, engine accessibility? check, big engine? check... Arguably, I think the design lacks soul, the nose is huge and looks cartoonish. I do not think that they are getting the commercial results they expected. Vans are not sold by its looks, but this is an acquired taste. It also has the issue of usable length. Given the overall length, the box seems short.
Nissan has a lot of Sprinter like vans in Europe. I think they would have done better bringing one here like Fiat has done.
Again, this is my opinion and I've look at this vans before as I believe they are a great vehicles. It just seems to me that it tries to please everybody.
 

Glidedon

New member
Well , i'm all about practicality I don't really care about what other people think about the looks.

The usable space is 10 long. Could I use more space, absolutely , but then I lose my good departure angle and the ability to park in normal parking spots.

It's a great utility vehicle. I don't have a mini apartment inside with a lot of cabinetry. I change things up for the mission at hand. I have a pretty good camping setup and I can haul my motorcycle inside. And I can be back to empty cargo van in under 45 minutes.

I used to drive a Sprinter at work and the Nissan is much more comfortable drive and a lot less costly to maintain. Mine is a 2013 and have had zero costs outside of fluid changes and tires.

It's good to have a variety to choose from, this is my third van and the only one I was willing to work on in the engine compartment.

Don
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,534
Messages
2,875,615
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top