I have tested it, and believe me, there’s a lot wrong with current webdav handling in gvfs-using tools. I guess the true reason why not more people are seeing the problems is that they are possibly race conditions. If you are using a mostly sleeping pc you likely will not see troubles. If you try the very same things on virtualised environment chances are a lot better gvfs has severe problems.
The tools (like file managers) are pretty much the same. Take Thunar as an example. It looks good and seems to work with reasonable speed. But entering a folder mounted with davfs2 it takes around 28 seconds on my environment to show it, whereas in a bash using “ls -l” you get the output immediately. So davfs2 works as expected, whereas Thunar seems broken as well. I talked to the author and he obviously has not the slightest idea what is going on. All implemented switches regarding thumbnails and the like make no difference in terms of time.
Mounting with gvfs btw shows exactly the same problems (ridiculous speed).