Ford Transit USA Forum banner

21 - 40 of 64 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,095 Posts
I initially wanted the Ram Master, at the time they were much cheaper than the Transit, and obviously the Sprinter. The low rear drop axle worried me enough that I eliminated it as a choice, though. And at about that same time, for some inexplicable reason the Ram Van prices went up to be the same as the Transit. There are always discounts on Transits, and dealers are willing to budge a lot (my van was $26k new), but Sprinters are rarely less than MSRP. At least when I was shopping.

But yeah, at first the PM being wider, cheaper and getting better MPG was my choice. They are probably fine, since they are the most popular platform in Europe for RV builders and upfitters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
I initially wanted the Ram Master, at the time they were much cheaper than the Transit, and obviously the Sprinter. The low rear drop axle worried me enough that I eliminated it as a choice, though. And at about that same time, for some inexplicable reason the Ram Van prices went up to be the same as the Transit. There are always discounts on Transits, and dealers are willing to budge a lot (my van was $26k new), but Sprinters are rarely less than MSRP. At least when I was shopping.

But yeah, at first the PM being wider, cheaper and getting better MPG was my choice. They are probably fine, since they are the most popular platform in Europe for RV builders and upfitters.
You won't get any kind of deal on a 4x4 Sprinter, but I believe the "got to have" craziness on the 4x4 has increased the dealer's willingness to negotiate on the 2WD models. I paid way less than MSRP on mine. Kind of irrelevant now that the new bodystyle Sprinter is out. I priced out a new one and they appear to have gotten about $5k more expensive. While Sprinters were previously diesel-only, now diesel is an expensive option much like the Transit. So the new GAS Sprinter starts out at the same base price as the previous-gen diesel Sprinter. If you're like me and only want diesel, a base van is going to cost you that much more. I'd be very interested in the 4 cyl diesel Transit if I were in the market.

The Promaster has an entirely different powertrain in the rest of the world. Chrysler literally looked around in their parts bin and put a Dodge Caravan engine and transmission in the van. Actually the powertrain is widely used in Dodge and Chrysler cars, SUVs and Jeeps. I can't imagine the transmission was ever designed to carry the kind of payload + towing capacity the Promaster has. Regardless of its intent, there's no arguing the transmission is big weakness on the PM.

I'm not here to rag on the PM, but there's also a very well known rocker arm problem that is all over the web, just google "dreaded pentastar tick." Jasper, a used/rebuilt engine manufacturer, has basically completely rebuilt the Promaster engine with better parts than Chrysler saw fit to use from the factory. I took this picture from Automotive Engineering maganzine when my Sprinter was being smogged at an auto shop.




I think it's sad the aftermarket has to address Chrysler's shortcomings.

I hope the OP finds this helpful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
High roof RAM Vs Transit

Note that if you are talking the high roof Transit (not the mid), it has quite a bit more interior height than the RAM. The interior height of the mid transit is 72", the High is 81.5", whereas the High Promaster is 76". A lot depends on your height as to which one fits you best.

On the other hand, they are very different vans from a van life perspective in that one is FWD, the other RWD and the interior width of the RAM is about 4" more. The Transit drives really nice and has great power with eco boost.

I may not have helped with the decision but those are the nuances of each van.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Of course it depends on what you want to use it for. I'm surprised that @Mobileempire was the only one that mentioned the front wheel drive. That was a deal breaker for me but I suppose it doesn't matter to a lot of users.

Also surprising that wasn't mentioned, the PM is more square on the inside so it would be a lot easier to build out (from what I read) if that's something you're doing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,169 Posts
......cut..... The interior height of the mid transit is 72", the High is 81.5", whereas the High Promaster is 76". A lot depends on your height as to which one fits you best.

.....cut.......
Agree. I was at Ford dealer for oil change on my old van yesterday, and took a very quick look at Transit again. I don’t know how the 72” height is measured for mid-roof Transit, but it seemed lower than that under the roof ribs. I didn’t have a tape with me, but it seems the ProMaster is more than 4” taller inside. I’ll have to double check, because the high roof Transit is out of the question for me.

I’m not towing much, and like idea of AWD Transit, but if Ford offered FWD Transit in North America, I’d seriously consider it for the added headroom alone. The RWD mid roof is very tight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
How many heights does Transit have? I am about 66”, and touched the roof ribs in what I thought was a mid. About the same as a low-roof PM. (Both bare vans). That would be absolute no-no for me.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,344 Posts
How many heights does Transit have? I am about 66”, and touched the roof ribs in what I thought was a mid. About the same as a low-roof PM. (Both bare vans). That would be absolute no-no for me.
Transits are available in 3 heights, 2 wheelbases, and 3 lengths. The extended length is available with Dual rear Wheels as well.

FWIW, it appears this thread is providing good information for those with comparison questions, yet @ShawnL who started this thread appears to have thrown out the question and then left the forum with only that one single post. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,095 Posts
Transits are available in 3 heights, 2 wheelbases, and 3 lengths. The extended length is available with Dual rear Wheels as well.

FWIW, it appears this thread is providing good information for those with comparison questions, yet @ShawnL who started this thread appears to have thrown out the question and then left the forum with only that one single post. ;)
Also keep in mind that the Wagon (passenger) Transits have 2.5-3" less interior height than the cargo vans due to the raised floor.
I'm 5'10 and can touch the ribs with my head if I stand straight and on my toes a bit, in my MR140 cargo Transit. In the center. Ribs are a couple inches lower toward the windows because of the curved roof, but I can't get close enough to the walls to stand there so it doesn't matter. (because of cabinets, wheel wells, etc)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,169 Posts
Roof ribs curbed to a greater degree might make it very difficult for me to have a shower near walls in a mid-roof Transit.

I haven’t seen any factory mid-roof Transit Class Bs (all were high roof), but expect that overhead cabinets would end up much smaller in a mid-roof Transit than ProMaster. ProMaster is much wider near the top, so cabinets could be deeper and taller (everything else being equal).
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,446 Posts
Anything in the known universe has to better than an Fiat, built in Mexico, with a Chrysler mini van powertrain. How does this even rise to the level of debate?
I know, right ? I'm so glad the guys who made the exploding Pinto's and the Mustang II's that rusted on a humid day aren't still building anything... oh wait..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
I'm lucky to see 14mpg in my 136 midroof ecoboost. Ladder racks and 80mph freeway speeds don't help. If I ever got stuck behind someone getting 18mpg in a transit gasser, the resulting road rage incident would make national news.
Funny you say that. Just got back from baja and averaged close 18.5mpg on my ecoboost 130 med roof on my way there. This is leaving the SF bay area on highway 5. Very level, flat road with the grapevine being the highest grade. My average speed was 70. I do not have anything on my roof. Not even a fan. My rear axle is a 3.31 and have 245/75-16 tires.
I have just under 24,000 miles and my mileage has gotten better but this trip I actually babied it. I normally get on it hard and average much less than that. On my trip back I averaged less. More headwind but really not bad.
I also considered the sprinter and drove the 4x4 but the v6 was not to my likeing. If it was a 4cyl I would have bought it. The ram I really liked is the the small 118. This is due to me working in SF and parking is important, but I settled on the 130 med roof transit. I'm only 5'-8" and as others mentioned, the cargo has a diffrent floor than the passenger. I have a cargo. The ecoboost engine just did it for me. For me, it's extremely important to be able to merge in to traffic and have an engine that will breath at high altitude.
I still think the sprinter looks better and has really cool aftermarket parts, bigger wheel wells to fit larger tires, but i would sacrifice mileage for the power. Its a shame the transit is limited to 97mph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,394 Posts
I came very close to buying the 118 Promaster. Then I got on their forum to get a perspective on user experience. It was terrifying. Transits have their flaws, but early Promasters were a disaster. My Transit needed rear brakes early and I've had to change the giubo a few times, but in 90k miles it's never had to visit a dealer. Now I'm in a quandry. Do I sell it at 100k as planned, or do the 100k service and stretch it to 150 or 200? It's been a gem and I'm no fan boy. I sincerely believe there is a risk of getting a straight up lemon if I trade it in on a new one. On the other hand, they tend to make these things disposable. So getting to 100k without issue is expected but after that, it's treading on thin ice. The bean counters end the extended warranties at 150k for a reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,169 Posts
Anything in the known universe has to better than an Fiat, built in Mexico, with a Chrysler mini van powertrain. How does this even rise to the level of debate?
ProMaster is less expensive.

ProMaster has more interior volume at same length.

ProMaster reportedly gets better fuel economy.


Both have advantages and disadvantages, but it’s not so black and white as to not deserve discussion. I wouldn’t go as far as debating what anyone else should like.

Personally, I like the Econoline a lot and wish Ford had updated and added a tall roof. I’m at just over 190,000 miles and waiting for something I like enough to want to own for many years. Neither the ProMaster or Transit do it for me at present.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Note that if you are talking the high roof Transit (not the mid), it has quite a bit more interior height than the RAM. The interior height of the mid transit is 72", the High is 81.5", whereas the High Promaster is 76". A lot depends on your height as to which one fits you best.

On the other hand, they are very different vans from a van life perspective in that one is FWD, the other RWD and the interior width of the RAM is about 4" more. The Transit drives really nice and has great power with eco boost.

I may not have helped with the decision but those are the nuances of each van.
The PM is a car chassis and front wheel drive train..... it's a car. The Transit is a rear wheel drive truck. They each appeal to different people but I think over the very long haul, a truck will last longer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
Anything in the known universe has to better than an Fiat, built in Mexico, with a Chrysler mini van powertrain. How does this even rise to the level of debate?

...it's not a debate, but a worthwhile comparison. One man's treasure is another man's trash. No points awarded, just good info for someone trying to understand and make a decision.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,095 Posts
My 1974 Fiat 128 was bulletproof. Not literally, but figuratively. It would not die. Unless it burned up too much oil and the engine would stop, but I'd add a quart and start it up and take off. Try running your Transit without oil until the motor stops and see what happens. It would be an interesting experiment, and a great story to share.

But really, as mentioned above, different specs and sizes and construction for different requirements. I don't know where the "DucatoMaster is cheaper" came from, when I was ready to buy the ProRam was actually MORE than a similar Transit. They started out cheaper, but something happened.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,023 Posts
The power of the Ecoboost allows me to have a heavy build and equipment load (in my high roof extended length Transit) yet it still drives like a car, even in the mountains. I suspect that the Promaster engine would struggle at times, requiring more downshifting and higher revs.

When I test drove both makes, the Ecoboost Transit seemed extremely overpowered, but now that I have the build done and the van loaded up, the power seems just right.

2016 T350, high roof, extended length, at 88% of maximum weight
front - loaded 1640 kg (3610 lb) maximum 1870 kg (4120 lb)
rear - loaded 2400 kg (5280 lb) maximum 2720 kg (5990 lb)

Cheers.
 
21 - 40 of 64 Posts
Top