7Mary3

Navistar uses Cummins and Caterpillar in the International class 8 trucks, but is working on their own proprietary class 8 diesel with MAN of Germany. It should be out shortly.

You can all say what you want, but if Ford can't stop their market share from going down, they will have to sell Volvo to pay those loans. Do they need to sell Volvo today? No, they don't.

Been luring around here for some time. Confused by it, but interested. Sounds funny. What's the deal?

My local department just bought 16 Chargers. Even though they were considerably more expensive than the Crown Vic., the Chief overruled the fleet dept.. Maybe he figures he will eventually have to go with Chargers anyway.

Well, if you are so sure then you should short GM stock. Of course if it doesn't happen, you would be in a lot of trouble then, wouldn't you?

Remember that GM sold 51% of GMAC to Cerberus, so they are only liable for 49% of that debt. Yes, if Ford repayed that secured debt tomorrow it would be off the books, but what would they pay it off with? They would not have borrowed the money if they didn't need it to retain liquidity. GM is still a much larger company than Ford is, so I think Ford's debt problem is more significant than GM's. In any event, I don't see either one declaring bankruptcy in the foreseeable future.

May have been a possibility 2 years ago, but GM will not declare backruptcy. If they did, it would force Ford to do the same. Ford, by the way, has far more debt than GM currectly does, and also remember that Ford has basically mortgaged all their facilities.

http://www2.uol.com.br/bestcars/carros/cla...ecker-cab-2.jpg

The new Hemi is a pretty good engine. Not an update of the LA 318/360 block, but it does share some dimensions. What I think is funny about this thread is that some here think Chrysler's statement about the Hemi not being the primary engine of Chrysler's future is somehow funny, that it proves Chrysler is lame and weak, ect.. Well, I got news for you. Just as the Hemi is not the engine of Chrysler's future, the Boss won't be the engine of Ford's future either. The Energy Bill will RADICALLY change what most of you will be driving 10 years from now. The Hemi will probably still be around, powering the HD Rams and nothing else. Same goes for the 3V 5.4 Triton and the larger GM LS engines. The Boss? I was really hoping Ford would finally build this one, but I now have to admit it is going to be really tough to make a business case for it at this time.

I guess that's the idea. I wonder if Ford really ought to bother at this point in their history. Is NASCAR really that relevent to new cars sales anymore?

Assuming that the 'Boss' will see the light of day..........

Any more on this? I heard 3rd. hand the Ford doesn't want to be in the medium market after Blue Diamond ends. The story supposedly came from a dealer rep.. I don't know that I am ready to believe that yet.

This is the future, like it or not. The reasons Lutz has given for moving away from RWD car platforms are valid, and Ford is facing the same situation. The Energy Bill is going to change what types of vehicles are sold in this country. I am not holding my breath for any U.S. bound Falcon or the Hurricane/Boss V-8.

Yes, the GM 15 passenger vans have a longer wheelbase and are more stable. They also have electronic stability control standard. In my state, you can't drive a 15 passenger van without a class 'B' license.

If you take a close look at Navistar's 10K report to the SEC, there's some information about 'Blue Diamond': http://secfilings.com/filings/808450/14527...secfilings.aspx Scroll down to 'Acquisitions, Strategic Agreements, and Joint Ventures' (it's a bit hard to find).

CNG Crown Vic.'s were dropped years ago.

The Caprice squads handled better than same year Crown Vic's. '96 Caprice vs. current Crown Vic very close.

As far as body-on-frame goes, remember that the Chrysler products, which completely dominated police work from the late 1950's up through 1989, were all unit body cars. The Crown Vic, in my neck of the woods, was 'winner by default'. They didn't hardly sell at all to the local agencies as long as Chevy and Dodge were in the game.

Please, not another Caterpillar rumor. Caterpillar has stated many times that they have no interest in building diesels for pickups or other light trucks. They have no suitable engine (the C-7 is too long and heavy, the 'Perkapillars' are not emission compliant). In fact, there's rumors that Caterpillar may leave the heavy truck engine business after 2010. International will soon be offering proprietary MAN diesels, PACCAR is making Cummins standard across the board (and has built a plant to produce Cummins engines themselves), Freightliner has both Mercedes Benz and Detroit Diesels in-house. Caterpillar may find itself with no customers.

You need to realize just what the Energy Bill will require. Not only will truck based SUV's and traditional pickup trucks below 8,500 GVW be pretty much gone from the automotive scene, you can count out RWD cars as well. I don't like the Ridgeline either, but it represents what direction the market will probably go. And, even if the Energy Bill wasn't a factor, $150/barrel oil will be. Think of how many dolled up Super Duty and F-150's are sold to kids who can barely afford to make the payments (a situation often made worse with loads of negative equity from their last vehicle purchase tagged on). Those guys ain't gonna be a buyin' if they can't afford to fuel the thing. Those of us with a few years under our belts probably remember the muscle car thing back in the late 60's. Many of the guys snapping up all the 428 Cobra-Jet Mustangs were later forced into 200 cube 6 cylinder Grabber Mavereks. So, what does this all have to do with 650 and 750 Super Duties? Well, if demand for those King Ranch and Amarillo Super Duties dries up, they will need something to build there, won't they?

I was told it is more like the Honda Ridgeline. Front wheel drive, unit-body.

As syrtran pointed out, we have such standards here in the U.S.. This story is from England.

Got news for you: With the passage of the Energy Bill, everyone's RWD plans are up in the air, Ford's included.

Back in the day, Detroit Diesel produced 2 very similar 6 cylinder diesels, the 6-71 in-line 6, and the 6V-71 V-6. Both were rated exactly the same H.P. and torque, were the same displacement, and were equally reliable. The only difference was the V-6 was shorter, wider, and not as long as the straight 6. It was also lighter. All things being equal, there is no durability advantage to an in-line engine. The B5.9L Cummins torque characteristics are due to it's stroke. Build a V-6 of similar demensions and you will get the same thing. Class 8 trucks have standardized on in-line 6 cylinder engines for ease of engineering. A Detroit 60 Series, Cummins ISX, and Cat C-14 are very similar in size and configuration, and that way a truck can be designed to use any of the 3 engines. Yes, the old Ford 300 in line 6 was a great engine, but a 4.3L Chevy V-6 performes better every time. I worked for a fleet that had large numbers of both, and we commonly got over 200,000 miles out either one.

Still doesn't sound promising: http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index...c=17552&hl= As the man pointed out, if big trucks are coming back to KTP, there sould be evidence of it soon. Wait and see. BTW- on the C series: It died because the floor pan and grill opening couldn't accommodate the moderm aftercooled in-line medium duty diesels. The body dies were also badly worn. Ford thought it could be replaced by the Cargo, but the Isuzu, UD, and Hino mediums were better trucks.