Bob Rosadini

Joe, It is only good news if Ford choses to capitalize on it. Like offer a tilt hood for serviceability on 450-600...which they won't🤔. I'm not sure what the Chevy/ International numbers were vs Ford but looking at the bi weekly truck rag that comes out covering New England there were always a lot of unsold 23 and 24 model years advertised.

On another note, terrible incident happened outside of Boston last week. A 30 year old trooper had ended his shift at 2AM. Was headed home....Mass Troopers take their vehicles home..when call came in on SB vehicle traveling on US 1 in NB lane. He answered call and in a few minutes had a headon with the SB vehicle- a Jeep 4dr. Assumption is he attempted to perform a blocking move. He was driving a new Tahoe. Jeep driver dead at scene, and Trooper passed at hospital. Just curious, anyone know frontal crash ratings for Tahoe vs Explorer Interceptors? Bulk of MSP vehicles are Explorers but they do have a good number of Tahoes. My small town all Explorers except for a 150 EB. Neighboring town mix of Tahoes and Explorers. Tahoes are in fact cheaper under state contract. I'm of course a Ford diehard, but my prejudices aside, given less cost of Tahoe with its pushrod V-8, that would be my choice. Also love my Coyote 150, but Ford in their wisdom only offer Police rated 150 with 3.5EB. Now that 6.8 is not longer offered in Super Duty, would that fit in a 150? Or an Expedition?

Seems like a tall order, improve your quality, and do it for less🤔 How many of the recalls are related to an outsourced component failure? Back in the days of a more vertically structured company I would imagine the quality and the cost were viewed by the same people seeking the best resolution on both counts.

AK thx but I guess I'm not only "old", but also "Old School"😎

Very good...Let's see?? I think we have been here before. Remember when Jac the Knife bought a bunch of "Junk yards"..OR "Salvage Yards"? In an interview with the Boston Globe he said.."this will enable us to analyze parts failures" or words to that effect. My thought at the time was.." why not look at your warranty claims first!" As you know that effort was a failure. Ford bought a local yard for a very large sum...the family ended up buying it back from Ford at a fire sale price, and they are doing very well today😎

Since my 23 150 was new I had my auto start/stop feature disabled. As I recently prevailed on the dealer to change my battery under the warranty-many of you have responded to my previous posts on that subject -thx, I now am faced with the the ASS feature-no pun intended- takes over and it shuts the truck off. As I would rather pay for the thimble full of gas that the feature saves vs a shortened starter life, I checked my owner's manual on ability to disable permanently -no such thing. Any opinions? By the way I stumbled on a you tube post on how to extend the life of your Ford or some such language. Disabling this feature was one thing.

For sure on the 25-55 HP range. I've had 3 JD's in those HP ranges-all hydro. My 4720-now 4066 -is rated at 58HP. Primary use involves loader work-either with bucket or grapple to handle brush or logs. Do you loose some HP? I'm sure but IMO bullet proof. When working my way through school I worked for a contractor-we had a Ford tractor that was unique -manual trans with an aftermarket driving front axle-Elanco. this was back in the days when 4WD loader/back hoes did not exist except for the Bucyrus Erie Dynahoe-which were BIG machines. Needless to say this Ford was "all gears" including the shuttle stick- complete stop before direction change. I believe the big Deere compacts with the "Power Reverser" trans require use of clutch to change gears but the reverser does not.

That is my point. And if they do learn, they will go and spend a lot of money at a driving school-and their chances of getting hired driving a class 7 or 8 will depend on just how hot the economy is- or they will be willing to work for very low wages.

thx for education😎

They were a good bang for the buck to use an old phrase. I bought a good number of Louisvilles when I was in a staff job and when I went to a unit mgr operations job the company continued to buy them-in particular for my operation...until the weight issue and Freightliner agresiveness took over. As I think I have said previously, IMO they should have stuck with the original truck with minor changes as a vocational truck. Thinking that they could make a dent in the OO market was a bad assumption. The Paccar twins for sure own that and it will be interesting just how well Mack makes out with their latest attempt at capturing a good share of that OO market. And speaking of Mack, if there was a market they ruled here in the northeast, it was construction. Now unfortunately you are seeing many such fleets going to Paccar and Western Star. And Macks decision to no longer offer manual transmissions in their new trucks will probably accelerate that trend. With many new CDL drivers road testing on automatics thereby restricting their license rating that may prove to support that decision but for the near term it will hurt them IMO.

Tall order that for some reason Ford can't do. My son helped my granddaughter buy a 21 Escape...She is college sophomore that is pursuing a major that will get her a real job. She loves her Ford! A future buyer. I have to believe that most dealers thought this was a dumbass move. And not to go off thread but what is the idea of the day from Mr Farley as far as playing nice with China? Are they a safe bet today or the end of the American auto industry??? Check the box Mr F🤔arley

I don't speak as an "expert" but correct no air brakes on a 600. I think one of the biggest attractions-besides 4WD- is the physical size is less intimidating to the driver vs the size of the 650. For sure it is a safer alternative to a 550 at 19,500 gvw that is always overloaded to the max.

AK........As I was saying....It came up on the the log in to vote my shares..and perhaps it was another "senior" moment, but I'm sure it followed the proxy statement with a Ford "menu". However, as I've previously posted, New England Ford Dealers have run TV spots this winter featuring typical snow plow footage but also a shot featuring a 650/750 dump pulling a tag trailer carrying a loader/backhoe.

Could be, but what threw me was it was

I'm very familiar with that web site. So you are saying that it is ok for one Ford web site to be inconsistent with another?? And more importantly, if I found this Ford site while logging on to vote my shares- if I were another Ford shareholder that was considering buying more shares and wanted a better understanding of the product mix, this failure to carry class 5, 6, and 7 trucks would be acceptable????🤔

Thx, never knew the original agreement had such a term limit. Ford should benefit from this but I would bet they will be indifferent to this opportunity. In voting my Ford shares yesterday I ended up on a Ford site that listed products. I clicked on trucks and guess what, no class 5, 6, or 7 trucks listed! Handwriting on the wall?? On another note, I took the time to read the bio for each director. Aside from the four family members and Farley, the rest of the proposed directors appeared to me to be HR, financial, or PR types with no what I would call "heavy manufacturing" experience, with one exception, that being Mr. May, Deeres CEO. Hopefully Bill Ford's commercial truck experience in his bio will bring some perspective, to say nothing of fact he is Chairman.

Very good..just saw this...534? You must be another old dude😎

Maybe a two billion lesson that can happen again when manufacturers think they can skirt regulatory issues?? PITA that regulation can be Also gives me another soap box to talk about gasoline in class 6 and 7😎

And gasoline also has a place in class 6 and 7 trucks where the vehicle is a support to the primary business. In other words the utilization is such that it is NOT high mileage and fuel consumption is not is key factor--in particular where the lesser cost of the gasoline option also makes sense. Unfortunately the the product planners at Ford continue to ignore this factor.

7m I think your last sentence would be more accurate if you delete..."a lower cost cost". True statement..it IS another gasoline conventional in class 6 and 7. As to "lower cost", I find that hard to believe.

Thx...Hard to believe, 57 years ago!

Understood....and I would always defend Ford on that point. But who is ALWAYS getting the headlines?? And in defending the software issues I get the point, but while some may be fixed remotely, some are a nuisance factor. I'm going through that now...constant "System shutting down to conserve battery" Took it to dealer a few months ago and they said "battery fine"-I still had about 10 months on my 36 month warranty. Now I see there is a recall for batteries!

You have to be kidding. You are right, completely different, but to the "Fix or repair daily" crowd it is the same. For a Ford guy it is tough to listen to the Toyota ads.."The best new vehicles make the best used vehicle".

Well so much for Ford's BS about under hood heat preventing them from installing air brakes on 650/750 when equipped with a 7.3. Blue Bird has done a good job giving a driver good forward visibility with that steeply slanted hood. Amazing they figured out how to control heat associated with a compressor and Ford can't figure it out with a hood that has to provide considerably more frontal area and I would assume a large under hood cavity than the Blue Bird.

Dug into my car invoice file and found window sticker for my wife's 84 EB Bronco II. Base price $11,741, total $15,354. The EB package was $3400 including FREE air conditioning😎.2.9V6 and five speed. AND I still have an EB suit bag and travel bag that came with it.