Mc2guy

Does the NV actually have "real" TPMS where it will tell you the pressure in each tire? Or is it the kind that only alerts you when it senses a tire is "low" via a dash light? I ask because while the former does, the latter type system does not use pressure sensors, but rather relies on the ABS sensors on the brakes to determine when a wheel is rotating more than it should, indicating a lower tire pressure.

Ouch. I would have just "glued" it in place with some epoxy. Assuming the sensor was still working, that is. Did you bump it, or did the seating ring just fail?

What he means is that with an open differential on the front and back, it is possible to spin a wheel on each axle if on a slippery or loose surface. Thus, you will only effectively have two wheels turning (and possibly spinning) due to the open (unlocked) nature of the differentials. This is still better than the stock van, which with an open differential is essentially a one wheel drive. I would wager most stock 4wd vehicles do not have a locker, although some offer it as an option... and of course most off roaders put one on given the significant advantage they offer.

Tires have two expiration issues you need to consider. First is tread-wear, the obvious death of a tire. The second is age. The rubber compounds start to break down with oxygen and especially UV exposure. Generally, 6-7 years is the useful life of a tire, regardless of it's mileage. If your spare is only two years old, then you are fine reusing it, but keep in mind it will have a shorter life than the new tires. That may not matter to you give your application. I usually shop via tirerack to see what the reviews are saying for a particular brand/style/application. Since these are high load rated tires, you need be careful to match or exceed the load rating recommendation. Beyond that, I'd shop based on tread life warranty and price... and maybe availability if you have a favored and trusted tire shop. I personally buy on tirerack and have my tires drop shipped to a local shop that I trust. It generally is cheaper and opens up my choice to pretty much any tire I want vs. what the shop has or can order (at their marked up retail prices).

I'm basing my estimate on the anecdotal information I've seen posted on this site combined with posted data from various industry reviews (trucktrend, edmunds, etc), and Fuelly.com. All of these point to an average of somewhere less than 14mpg in combined driving for the NV. The transit is a direct injection turbo V6 vs. a multipoint fuel injected V8 in the Nissan. Essentially, the ecoboost it is the next generation of gasoline engines. It is more efficient thermodynamically because the direct injection allows for more precise control of fuel/air ratios and the turbocharging means it can function as a small displacement V6 when lightly loaded. It can suck gas with the best of them if you lead foot it, but the ecoboost V6 is a more efficient motor given a careful driver. The Transit is also about 1500 lbs lighter because it is a modified unit-body vehicle, whereas the NV is a full body on frame, which is also why it has higher payload and towing ratings than the Ford. Yes, creating a more laminar air flow off the back of a vehicle can significantly improve drag, hence those devices on semi's. Here is some neat info on Cummin's project truck http://www.cummins.com/cmi/navigationAction.do?nodeId=252&siteId=1&nodeName=SuperTruck+Gets+Close+Inspection&menuId=1050

I don't have a Cd for the NV, but Im guessing it's around .40 or so. The long hood actually shouldn't effect it too bad, it's the square back that kills vans aerodynamically. A tapered finish (think teardrop) makes a bigger difference than a smooth snout. Yes, I am considering both the NV and the Transit. Ford has made some poor design decisions that are pushing me toward the NV, but I'm definitely a Ford guy at heart. The NV's gas mileage is a turn off, but I'm figuring 13.5 with the NV vs maybe 15 with the transit ecoboost, so not a huge deal given my annual mileage of around15,000. The big issue for me with the Transit is the low tow rating and non configurable seats in the wagon. Kind of a deal killer.

Your fuel economy is a product of three things: the engines brake mean efficiency at various loads (a constant), the amount of mass accelerated (how heavy is the van and how OFTEN is it accelerating from a stop), and the aerodynamic drag of the vehicle combined with the velocity at which you drive. Assuming all V6 engines will be within 5% of each other in efficiency, lets rule that out as a cause. You mentioned a "route" and that you drive mostly stop and go between locations (lots of light and slowing down for traffic counts). This contributes to accelerating your mass. The more often, the lower your mileage. This leaves the aerodynamic drag and velocity at which you drive. Drag is defined as the Frontal Area of the Vehicle (A) times the density of air ® times the coefficient of drag (Cd) times the velocity of your vehicle squared. A(Cd)RV^2. We can't control the air density, but we can control the other variables. Adding a roof rack with ladders penalizes you TWICE. First it increases the frontal area of the vehicle by making it look bigger (taller), so A increases. Second, it increases the coefficient of drag because racks and ladders do not present a smooth surface for the air to travel over. Lastly, speed kills when it comes to fuel efficiency. I mentioned drag increases with speed, but it doesn't just increase proportionally like with the size of the vehicle; it increases exponentially, so if you double speed from 40 to 80 MPH, you are actually quadrupling the energy required to go that speed. In conclusion. Driving with a ladder rack, making multiple stops, and traveling at highway (65mph) speeds between lights will kill your mileage. End Stop. Just physics.