Buying Ford Transit 150 or 250?

[mnpaul]

Hello, I'm going to pull the trigger today(last day of pretty big incentives if I buy 2017/16)
Will be visiting several dealers looking for best deal.  Will choose the 3.5L ecoboost V6.
Length: most likely 148"WB(should I consider the 130" or too small)
Roof: Medium(I'm 5'7" when I test drove some height but with insulation will be close)
High roof almost too high, but might consider, will test drive today.
Would appreciate any insights from those who drive a Transit their likes/dislikes what you'd recommend.

Is their much difference between the 150 vs 250?  Will one be more durable long term, will one be better on forest roads/etc.?
150: GVWR 8600  Payload 3680
250: GVWR 9000  Payload 4080

Thanks.
Paul

 

[OutdoorFT]

I dont know much about them except that theyre ugly. But, if the extra payload may come in handy for any reason, Id go 250.

I went F350 for that reason.

 

[Dgorila1]

I looked at the transit, Nissan and chevy vans yesterday. Nissan was too short for me, chevy was way too short, but the transit high top was perfect. The chevy and Nissan also cost more than the ford. All 3 were basic work van package so it was an even comparison. The sticker price here is approx $35,500 for a new transit hightop with the 3.7 engine.

 

[DuneElliot]

I'd definitely go with a 250 over 150. Yes, the ride will be slightly rougher due to the suspension being stiffer BUT that will also result in better longevity when used for hauling anything or on rougher roads.

 

[mnpaul]

2017 Med roof 130"WB 3.5L 250T $31,467
2017 Med roof 148"WB 3.5L 250T $33,518
2017 High roof 148"wb 3.7L 250T $33,956
In Minnesota.  On website will visit later today

 

[mayble]

Let me know how it works out for you - I'm looking for one myself (tho I'm looking at used or leftover "new" 2016 models)
I like the 130" wb for maneuverability, but I'm sure the extra 18" living space would be nice too.

 

[mnpaul]

Thanks mayble, yes I agree with pro/con of 130" vs 148".  There is a used 2015 but it's a 150T but I'm going to look at it.
Paul

 

[Dgorila1]

2017 Med roof 130"WB 3.5L 250T $31,467
2017 Med roof 148"WB 3.5L 250T $33,518
2017 High roof 148"wb 3.7L 250T $33,956
In Minnesota.  On website will visit later today

 Let us know how much cheaper you can get it than for the list price. Prices seem to be higher on the East Coast here for some reason. I'm curious to know how much cheaper I can get it somewhere else. I want the high top 250.

 

[deadwood]

I have a 2016 High roof 250. I would say go with the 250 because you don't know what the future holds. You might end up re building the interior a few times over the next so many years. Not much more money to get more payload. The only other thing I might suggest is if you can spring the extra money for the eco boost. That engine is a beast. Incredible power and makes the van a joy to drive every day. On the highway running at 70 mph I think that RPM's run low around 2000. I would definitely make sure you test drive both of them to see the comparison.

 

[NaturePhreak]

I have the 2017 medium roof 250. I went with the 250 just to make certain I could carry lots of stuff. I skipped the eco boost engine because I read that those engine have problems with carbon buildup over time. Also, it's a cargo van and not built for speed.

 

[mnpaul]

Deadwood I tested both engines and preferred the eco-boost.
NaturePhreak do you have the 130 or 148" wheelbase. The 130 handles easy like a car the 148 is 2extra feet in cargo(nice) but harder to manuver for parking.

 

[deadwood]

Deadwood I tested both engines and preferred the eco-boost.
NaturePhreak do you have the 130 or 148" wheelbase. The 130 handles easy like a car the 148 is 2extra feet in cargo(nice) but harder to manuver for parking.

You won't be disappointed with the eco boost. It's just fun to drive. I've had the van a little over a year and not one second of a regret over buying it. Slowly making it's way into a full time camper. This is my daily driver even while I build it out. I never get tired of driving it.

 

[makenmend]

The Eco boost is nice in that it has better acceleration/power and with 400 ft lb torque, less down shifting on grades or whilst towing.
That being said the standard 3.7 is more than capable and less expensive,  and more widely available in the used vehicle market.
I have the T350 LR 148''WB T350 Wagon. 10 seats/rails removed/sold, saves over 1,000 lbs, lowering tire pressure a few lbs, full insulation and IMO rides very nicely averaging Hi 18s mpg. ( seen 20+ ) on back roads cruising.

                            

 

[mnpaul]

Just to update, I just bought a 2006 Dodge Sprinter van instead.  Much cheaper than new or 2 year old transit.
I believe it will be a good platform to get me started, I have a 1 year leave from work.  It will give me a good idea about van living without a huge investment.  Thanks for all the advice.

Paul

 

[user 37446]

If you bought a Sprinter it would be a good idea to read up on the various Sprinter forums about their peculiarities mechanically. Here's one (among others):

http://www.sprinter-rv.com/buying-a-used-sprinter-top-ten-problems-to-look-out-for/

[font='Franklin Gothic Medium', Arial, sans-serif]Buying a Used Sprinter Van – Top Ten Problems to Look Out For[/font]

That's all I will say about it. Hope yours runs well for a long time!

 

[deadwood]

The Eco boost is nice in that it has better acceleration/power and with 400 ft lb torque, less down shifting on grades or whilst towing.
That being said the standard 3.7 is more than capable and less expensive,  and more widely available in the used vehicle market.
I have the T350 LR 148''WB T350 Wagon. 10 seats/rails removed/sold, saves over 1,000 lbs, lowering tire pressure a few lbs, full insulation and IMO rides very nicely averaging Hi 18s mpg. ( seen 20+ ) on back roads cruising.

                            
Looks great inside

 

[deadwood]

Just to update, I just bought a 2006 Dodge Sprinter van instead.  Much cheaper than new or 2 year old transit.
I believe it will be a good platform to get me started, I have a 1 year leave from work.  It will give me a good idea about van living without a huge investment.  Thanks for all the advice.

Paul

Sprinter Source is a great forum. Tons of information because the Sprinter has been around for so long they have been converting them a lot longer then the Transit.

There's actually a lot of good general conversion info for anyone doing a build on any kind of van. Even though I have a Transit I still check in there frequently and always learn something new.

 

[NaturePhreak]

Congratulations on your new van purchase, mnpaul. For me, the decision on what van to purchase took longer than the van conversion itself. happy adventuring in your new Sprinter.

 

[lisantica]

"Just to update, I just bought a 2006 Dodge Sprinter van instead."

I have a 2004 Sprinter.  I read about Do it Yourself troubleshooting here:
https://sprinter-source.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=106

Mine had one leaky injector, I had that fixed.
Upon purchasing it, I had all fluids replaced so that I would be starting with a clean slate of general maintenance.

Congrats, I think you'll love it.  I can regularly get 22 miles per gallon and I hope to put many miles on it.

Like you, one reason I bought it was because it was inexpensive as a starter van.  I figured if for some reason it turned out to be a lemon, I could always buy a Transit or other and not be out too much money on the lesson learned, but so far I am staying with this van as I have confidence in it at this time.