THREE YEAR FORD TRANSIT 350HD DIESEL/WBGO FUSE REVIEW

With the entry of the Ford Transit chassis to the stable of Phoenix Cruiser RV models, I thought I would share a report recently put together for the Winnebago Fuse Owners Forum.  It has been 3 years this week since Winnebago introduced the Ford Transit Fuse.  Pretty much the first RV manufacture to utilize the Transit chassis as a class C motorhome in the U.S.

The report covers basic facts about the Ford Transit and reasons why folks chose the Transit over other chassis.  The report does not cover the performance, fit and functions of the Winnebago coach/body.  I would have to say that like any new entry's of the big three, Winnebago had its share of glitches on the Fuse.  Mostly annoying items that should have been caught during production.  That said, I think Winnebago has responded well to owners concerns and has made many changes to fix most issues.

The opinions and stats surely do not represent all RV owners or future owners.  This is a small, lightweight RV and would most likely not satisfy folks that are looking for a full time unit, or one with lots of living space.  It seems that there is a trend with the late boomers and other younger generations for a smaller more nimble RV's.

Personally hutch42, I feel the best chassis is an E350 under model PC-2100.  I do think some kind of a lift kit (maybe an extra leaf spring per rear corner) would make the 2100 better yet.  Given so much weight rests on the rear axle, I also wonder if lesser-rated springs up front would also benefit the 2100.  Some light suspension modifications could make the 2100 absolutely perfect.

The V10 is a lot of extra engine for model 2100.  I hear the smaller V8 engine will increase fuel economy by at least 10%.  The smaller & lighter V8 engine would further aggravate the load imbalance.

If I were special ordering a 2100, I would surely look into chassis options like the V8 engine (yet keeping the 55 gallon fuel tank) and see what can be done getting the spring weight in-line with the actual coach weight.  Without mods, model 2100 sits way too high up front, and far too low in back.

Ron D---The WBGO Fuse Transit also has some height issues.  The major complaint from owners is tail dragging.  The coach was built very low to the ground for some viable reasons (entry access) but still to low for rougher terrain.  Many of the owners have added extra leafs in the rear or Sumo Springs.  Both these have increased rear height by 2-3 inches.  I did notice that the new PC TRX had much more rear clearance then other Transits out there.

The other items that sometimes frustrate is the quirks of a newer diesel engine requiring the use of DEF.  Although the Transit has not suffered through all the engine glitches of the early MB Sprinter platforms, the unique procedures of regeneration, lots of warning lights and special instructions tend to make folks nervous until they get use to them.  Gas engines much less complicated.

The performance and handling is what has impressed everyone.  It truly handles like a sports car.  Weve camped in both models of the fuse.  Not overly impressed with coach functions from WBGO.  I think PC use better equipment vendors and materials.  Fit and finish a lot better.

Ron D---The WBGO Fuse Transit also has some height issues.  The major complaint from owners is tail dragging.  The coach was built very low to the ground for some viable reasons (entry access) but still to low for rougher terrain.  Many of the owners have added extra leafs in the rear or Sumo Springs.  Both these have increased rear height by 2-3 inches.  I did notice that the new PC TRX had much more rear clearance then other Transits out there.

The other items that sometimes frustrate is the quirks of a newer diesel engine requiring the use of DEF.  Although the Transit has not suffered through all the engine glitches of the early MB Sprinter platforms, the unique procedures of regeneration, lots of warning lights and special instructions tend to make folks nervous until they get use to them.  Gas engines much less complicated.

The performance and handling is what has impressed everyone.  It truly handles like a sports car.  Weve camped in both models of the fuse.  Not overly impressed with coach functions from WBGO.  I think PC use better equipment vendors and materials.  Fit and finish a lot better.

You offer some interesting observations on the Fuse.

My first "Fuse Encounter" was at the Chicago Auto Show.  The first thing I noticed was the low stance of the cab feeling more like sliding into a mini-van, rather than stepping up into the Sprinter and E350.  I thought that would be very appealing to seniors who have trouble climbing up into the driver and passenger seats.

While at that auto show, I took some pictures of the Sprinter and Fuse chassis SEEN HERE.  The Sprinter was a C&C, the Fuse was too, but had a work bed on it's back.  I sure wished that Fuse was bare like the Sprinter so I could get great pics of the frame and such.

Back to model 2100, it would have been ideal if Phoenix could incorporate the E350 and Fuse 158" wheel base into a model that short.  Doing so would place the rear axle 20" farther back, addressing all "imbalance troubles".  The turning radius would be compromised, but I feel the benefits would far outweigh the small sacrifice.  The 158" wheel base would also equip that model perfectly for towing anything 5000 pounds heavy.  Towing with a 2100 today seems ripe for trouble.