Ford 5.8l-fuel consumption

Submitted: Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 15:33
ThreadID: 84897 Views:10173 Replies:7 FollowUps:5
This Thread has been Archived
Hello all

I am looking at purchasing an ex ambulance converted to a camper.

As mentioned above it is 5.8l V8, auto.

Any ideas please on what the likely fuel consumption might be?

Thanks in advance,
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Road Warrior - Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 16:06

Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 16:06
Quite high!

sounds like it would be an old F-series truck converted to an ambulance body which would make it rather heavy. Add the trusty old 351 Cleveland V8 and 3 speed auto to that mix and it will be sure to gobble the juice. If its anything like 351's I have had before, it will use sometimes well over 20L/100

You could get it gas converted to make it easier on the hip pocket.
AnswerID: 447773

Follow Up By: Member - onemore - Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 16:30

Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 16:30
I did forget to mention that it is a F250 and that is a 86 model with fuel injection,I had an idea that it was going to be is the ouch factor!

Thanks for your input.
FollowupID: 720082

Follow Up By: Road Warrior - Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 17:12

Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 17:12
Ok, so that would make it a 351W (Windsor) but the later US-built series with EFI and catalytic converters. The vehicle is most likely an import that was converted. Will probably be a bit thriftier on fuel than the old carby Clevo but its still going to be a guts because of the weight it has to lug.

Don't know how much its being offered to you for but I would be inclined to leave it alone and go for something like a Troopy if large internal volume is what you are after.
FollowupID: 720084

Follow Up By: Member - BUNDY BOY (WA) - Tuesday, Mar 22, 2011 at 00:53

Tuesday, Mar 22, 2011 at 00:53
my ambo 302 w...injected.yes heavy on fuel.......i run lpg...250lt....get around 4.5........all day.......but heavy yes ....loaded.4.4 ton .with all my crap.insitd.......but i carry .genies .full toolboxes.and totsly self sufishant for 1 month...........250lpg.145 fuel....80lt water.......ant kitted to b comfortable.....triple battreys.......2 40lt engles.............but its real combfy ....want for nothing................................. Bundy
FollowupID: 721190

Reply By: Hairs & Fysh - Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 16:23

Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 16:23
Hi onemore,
A 351 Cleveland Auto, Hmmm Thirsty bugger, but that depends on how heavy your right foot is and how sweet the exhaust sounds,

I've got no idea how much they weigh, what the diff ratio is or what size tyres it is running. It's not on Gas is is it?
I use to have a XW 351, 4V heads, 30/70 cam, square bore 600cfm Holley(55 power valve, 75 jets), C4 Auto with 2.75 LSD disc brake rear end, 14x7(F) 15x8(R) mags with Goodyear Z 245, 45 series tyres that would get close to 5kpl.
Is she in original condition? and does it have the original carby on her? If it has, it would be a Thermoquad, which, when tuned correctly do work well, but a 600 Sq bore 4 barrel Holley would give better economy, while still giving good performance.
They are a good old truck.
But as Road Warrior said, they can be thirty.
AnswerID: 447776

Reply By: Sir Kev & Darkie - Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 17:14

Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 17:14
Ask Member Trevor QLD as he has an ex ambo ;)

I'll flick him an MM to alert him to this thread.

I would say they have better fuel economy than a 4.2TD Missan Patrol as he has 2 of those as well and is always complaining that they are thirsty hehehehe

Cheers Kev
Russell Coight:
He was presented with a difficult decision: push on into the stretching deserts, or return home to his wife.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 447779

Follow Up By: Member - Michael P (QLD) - Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 18:11

Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 18:11
FollowupID: 720089

Follow Up By: Trevor R (QLD) - Tuesday, Mar 15, 2011 at 23:28

Tuesday, Mar 15, 2011 at 23:28
Typical Toyota driver, wouldn't know the difference between a 6.5T Chev and a 5.8 Windsor even if you told him one was diesel the other petrol. ;-)) When have you heard me complaining of the economy from my 4.2's Kev? I have always been happy with the 6.5K/L I get from them just not happy that another tonne won't squeeze into them at times thats all LOL!!! (even though I have tried).

Sorry onemore but my GMC Ex Ambo is a 6.5 Turbo Chev so a completey different animal to the beast your asking about. I typically get around the 6K/L loaded or unloaded, up hill or down dale. Only if I really stick the boot in does it get worse than this, but if I try I can get 4K/L out of her on a lonly back road somewhere. Comfy and relaxed touring unit would be my description of it.

Cheers, trevor.

FollowupID: 720684

Reply By: Member - peter f (VIC) - Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 19:15

Wednesday, Mar 09, 2011 at 19:15
gooday ,
just to clear up the confusion , if its an 86 build date it will be a 5 lt , the 5.8lt
didn,t come in till 1990 . the f/series was the only vehicle in fords line up to use that engine , and it was calibated for US fuel , thats why you hear so much about the running problems . the reason for the pour fuel economy is its not
sequential injection , it fires 4 injectors at a time.
even on gas it will use plenty .
AnswerID: 447786

Reply By: Polaris - Thursday, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:18

Thursday, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:18
We used to have a 1991 F150 4x4 XLT - 5.8 windsor EFI, auto with dual fuel.

Typically used to achieve 4.9 to 5.3 KPL on ULP and 3.5 to 3.8 KPL on gas.

It could pass anything on the road - except a servo! Certainly liked a drink or three!

AnswerID: 447837

Reply By: TerraFirma - Thursday, Mar 10, 2011 at 15:06

Thursday, Mar 10, 2011 at 15:06
Convert it to Gas, I think 20L / 100 is being kind, i would think more than that especially once the vehicle is laden.
AnswerID: 447858

Reply By: MattR - Thursday, Mar 10, 2011 at 20:55

Thursday, Mar 10, 2011 at 20:55
The US government fuel economy data for US-market vehicles back to 1984 is available here. You can't pick "van" for pre-1994 cars, but you can pick "Ford", "8 cylinder", etc - when you get the results they will be in statute miles per US gallon; click the "liters/100 km" over on the right to change that.

You probably are looking at an Econoline 250 (E250) base van chassis; running a search reveals a V8 5.8 liter 3-speed automatic at 23.5 city, 19.6 highway, 21.4 combined (all liters/100 km).

These numbers are determined on a standard "city" and "highway" drive cycle. The drive cycles changed a few years ago, and all the numbers for model years before that time have been adjusted to try to reflect the new drive cycle. The "combined" number is a mix of the city and highway numbers.

These numbers are going to be for what a consumer could buy from a US Ford dealer at retail, and probably reflect an 8-passenger van (two bucket seats up front, two 3-across bench seats in back) or maybe a 2-passenger cargo van (two buckets up front, nothing in the back). Ford would have offered more options to the ambulance builders, including different transmission and rear axle ratios, heavy-duty suspension, and other things that are good for an ambulance but tend to make it suck fuel. This also means that it might not be sufficient to go to the auto parts store and ask for parts for an '86 Ford E250; it is probably a good idea to bring the old part with you to make sure the new one matches.

Also, these numbers are for a new car (or maybe one with a thousand or so miles on it; I think the government allows some break-in/running-in time) with everything working perfectly; 25 years later it's gonna use more.

I hope this helps!

AnswerID: 447874

Sponsored Links