theoldwizard Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 Wiz....better check the Ford website, the Twin I Beam front end is still in use under the Econoline....read the specs for yourself man. If Twin I Beam died....someone better call Ford and let them know..... I don't care what the specs say. I've been crawling under my 1998 E150 for 11 years. It ain't no Twin I beam ! It has upper an lower ball joint s on both sides. IRRC, the Twin I Beam still used kingpins ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 Has Ford said the Transit Connect will be built in the U.S. in 2 years? I missed that. What plant. Link? Definitely rumors to that effect. One said it would be built at Ohio Assembly along with the E Series. Just rumors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Underpowered? For comparison the standard Ranger with a larger 2.3L AND the benifit of a 5-Speed transmission has a 4320 GVWR while the Transit Connect with the 2.0L 4-Speed is rated at 4950 GVWR. And that Ranger gets better mileage. Ford has said the American Transit Connect gets a 2.0L gas engine and 4-Speed automatic transaxle...not a manual and not a diesel, do you have proof of other powertrains and when they will be available? Ford only sell diesel ony Transit Connects in the UK. http://www.ford.co.uk/Commercialvehicles/T...nect/Powertrain We did use to have a Gasoline/LPG Transit Connect a few years ago but it died a death nobody brought them. Would it not be a good idea to offer a duel fuel Gasolone/LPG Autogas version Stateside, gotta say l am not sure how good your network of filling stations are in the US but ours are quite good in the UK l pass two on the way to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 What about Transit Connect with 1.6 Ecoboost and new select shift 6-speed transmission. Sounds like just the ticket for turning a sow's ear into a silk purse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKII Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 TOTAL COMPANY OUR PLAN -- ONE FORD PRODUCT LINEUP Ford July Announcement Allan Mulally said regarding platforms Today the amount of platforms for Commercial Van (Econoline, Transit) are 4 platforms in the future 1 platform. Doesn't that suggest that Ford will merge the 2 commercial vans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) What about Transit Connect with 1.6 Ecoboost and new select shift 6-speed transmission.Sounds like just the ticket for turning a sow's ear into a silk purse. It about time Ford got Obama who is a big fan of Global Warming to change the rules and regulations on diesels which are low on CO2, the laws an arse in the US it bans small fuel efficient diesels like the Connect but allows big diesel trucks. UK's Fords Transit Connect diesel 1.8 Duratorq is a lot more fuel-efficient. Urban in town - 29.8 MPG US (35.8 MPG UK) Combined - 36.9 MPG US (44.4 MPG UK) Extra Urban out of town - 42.8 MPG US (51.4 MPG UK) http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/ve...ls.asp?id=21770 No doubt by the time it's been fine tuned by Ford USA Engineers for the Californian consumer and had air con - automatic transmission rather than the manual stick which 99% of Brit car buyers use it would end up getting 10 MPG. When finite fossil fuels do run out Californians that consume more oil than China will go down in the history books as the biggest arseholes on planet earth. http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/07...ng-stat-ca.html Edited January 14, 2009 by Ford Jellymoulds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) I don't care what the specs say. I've been crawling under my 1998 E150 for 11 years. It ain't no Twin I beam ! It has upper an lower ball joint s on both sides. IRRC, the Twin I Beam still used kingpins ! Upper and lower ball joints are indeed on the ends of the beams....but it is still a Twin I Beam suspension. The King Pin set up was updated to upper and lower ball joints to help with geometry and wear issues, but the fact that it now has ball joints does not negate the fact that it is still a Twin I Beam setup. Cut and pasted from the Ford website: Chassis Specifications Front suspension Twin I-beam IFS with computer-selected coil springs and larger-diameter stabilizer bar Rear suspension Multileaf 2-stage leaf springs/solid axle Front and rear shocks Heavy-duty gas-pressurized Traction assist AdvanceTrac® with Roll Stability Control™ (RSC®) Brakes Power 4-wheel disc anti-lock Steering Recirculating ball, power assisted Edited January 14, 2009 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I think the confusion of Transit and Transit Connect is in the naming scheme....it would be like calling Transit Connect the Econoline Connect for the North American market. If the full size European Transit and North American Econoline do merge onto one chassis, the naming of them should remain Transit and Econoline for their respective markets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) Funny. Most here are always knocking Ford for something. Ford comes up with a reasonably fuel efficient commercial vehicle targeted at an under served market segment and just about the first thing said is UNDERPOWERED! Have any of you driven it? I will withhold judgement until I do. This vehicle is not the "demon sent to kill the E Series". To use an overused term, it is a white space vehicle. In the all too common trend of everything getting bigger and heavier over time, there is a market for a small, light commercial vehicle. Ford's entry will do better than the HHR Panel, because it is not a passenger car variant, but a true commercial vehicle (that some passenger car customers will buy). Kinda like the E Series is. It is not meant for mass consumer consumption, hence the lower power ratings. By the way, fleet managers usually have no problem with low power ratings, in fact some prefer them. Edited January 14, 2009 by lfeg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 Upper and lower ball joints are indeed on the ends of the beams....but it is still a Twin I Beam suspension... I can read and write ! And I don't believe every word written by some marketing folks. Can you crawl underneath an E150 and see that it has unequal length A-arms IFS like almost every other large US vehicle ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I can read and write ! And I don't believe every word written by some marketing folks.Can you crawl underneath an E150 and see that it has unequal length A-arms IFS like almost every other large US vehicle ! I will be able to look at it when Ford updates the suspension...until then, every single Econoline currently made has Twin I Beam.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Underpowered? For comparison the standard Ranger with a larger 2.3L AND the benifit of a 5-Speed transmission has a 4320 GVWR while the Transit Connect with the 2.0L 4-Speed is rated at 4950 GVWR. And that Ranger gets better mileage. The Ranger with the 2.3 and the AUTO gets 19/24. With it's 5 spd auto. Agian What is your complaint? The Ranger 2.3 143 hp @ 5,250 rpm Torque 154 lb.-ft. @ 3,750 rpm transit connect 2.0 145hp 140-145ft/lbs With its standard, 2.0L four-cylinder engine and automatic transmission powerpack Transit Connect will deliver excellent fuel economy, estimated at 19 mpg city and 24 mpg highway. This could represent a savings in fuel of more than 40 percent[/40] compared with a full-size van. In addition to its obvious commercial applications, the Transit Connect is so flexible that it makes an ideal personal-use vehicle with potential seating for five people. “It drives like a car, works like a van and is engineered to be as tough as a truck,” said Rob Stevens, Chief Engineer of Ford Transit Connect in the U.S. Ford has said the American Transit Connect gets a 2.0L gas engine and 4-Speed automatic transaxle...not a manual and not a diesel, do you have proof of other powertrains and when they will be available? Has Ford said the Transit Connect will be built in the U.S. in 2 years? I missed that. What plant. Link? I have not proof, But you can make educated guesses. Ford is Developing a Electric Van, along with an Electric car, to be based on Ford "C" platform. FYI The TC and FOcus Share the same powerpack. the ATX for the transit is made in Michigan and exported to Turkey. And then There is the TC that should replace the CV as the NYC Taxi. ( by law has to be a Hybrid vehicle) The escape is not well suited to Livery work. The C-sized TC will be built at MTP or LAP, along side the Focus and other C car derivatives. Michigan Truck is one of three truck and SUV plants in North America that will be converted to build small fuel-efficient compact and subcompact vehicles. In 2010, Cuautitlan Assembly, which currently produces F-Series pickups, will begin building the new Fiesta subcompact car for North America. Louisville Assembly, home of the Ford Explorer mid-size SUV, is slated to start production of yet more unique small vehicles from the automaker’s global C-car platform the following year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 The Ranger with the 2.3 and the AUTO gets 19/24. With it's 5 spd auto. Agian What is your complaint? The Ranger 2.3 143 hp @ 5,250 rpm Torque 154 lb.-ft. @ 3,750 rpm transit connect 2.0 145hp 140-145ft/lbs The Ranger gets a TC spanking 21/26 MPG with it's available 5-speed manual transmission. Where are you getting the horsepower and most importantly torque specs on the Transit Connect's 2.0L? Has Ford released them for this engine with U.S. emissions yet? Again, the Transit Connect has a smaller engine than the base Ranger's 2.3, it has only a 4-speed automatic the Ranger offers both 5-speed auto and manual transmissions YET Ford overrates the TC's GVWR higher than the Ranger. Load the TC to it's overrated capacity and the driver is going to have to keep the throttle wide open to keep up with traffic...which will kill the drivetrain even faster. I have not proof, But you can make educated guesses. The Transit Connect will be imported to the U.S. from Turkey AND Ford announced a new plant in Romania to increase capacity. Those are offical statements from Ford, not guesses. The new Connect plant is in Romania, production is scheduled to begin in '09. People talking about the American spec Transit Connect need to wake up...Ford has said 2.0L gas 4-speed auto only. No diesel No manual transaxle No 5 or 6 speeds No EcoBoost engines As of today there are no official U.S. power ratings and only "preliminary Ford mileage estimates" according to the Transit Connect site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94bronco Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 I will be able to look at it when Ford updates the suspension...until then, every single Econoline currently made has Twin I Beam.... You can always tell a twin I beam vehicle without even looking underneath it as the camber is almost garunteed to suck after repeated alignments and will continue to wander all over the road ( Yes I despise Twin I beam and cannot wait to swap a solid axle 44 in eventually), But yes it is time for Twin I beam to be put to rest as it never should have existed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 16, 2009 Author Share Posted January 16, 2009 Can you crawl underneath an E150 and see that it has unequal length A-arms IFS like almost every other large US vehicle ! I will be able to look at it when Ford updates the suspension...until then, every single Econoline currently made has Twin I Beam.... Lazy and arrogant. Great combination. Just keep eating that pablum the marketing folks keep feeding you ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Just a quick note. They parked a van in the warehouse overnight. Since it was warm and dry (as opposed to -12 outside) I lookes underneath. Twin I beam with radius arms. This is on an E 250, built around 04. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 (edited) I will be able to look at it when Ford updates the suspension...until then, every single Econoline currently made has Twin I Beam.... Lazy and arrogant. Great combination. Just keep eating that pablum the marketing folks keep feeding you ! you have got to be joking......I will state this once more wiz....Econoline has Twin I Beam suspension, has had it for decades, and will continue to have it until Ford re-designs the front end...the fact that there are upper and lower ball joints in the place of the old style king pin is meaningless, it is still two long I beams attached at opposing sides of the vehicle held in place by radius arms. This suspension has been in use by Ford since its mid sixties introduction. If you are telling me that your Econoline has a "short/long arm" setup, then it is the only one....snap a picture of it so we can see it. Edited January 16, 2009 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang_sallad Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Funny. Most here are always knocking Ford for something. Ford comes up with a reasonably fuel efficient commercial vehicle targeted at an under served market segment and just about the first thing said is UNDERPOWERED! Have any of you driven it? I will withhold judgement until I do. I was driving a TC all last year, 1.8L dual fuel 4-cyl with a manual transmission. It was really pleasant to drive, plenty of power and decent handling for a van. Either way, this segment isn't about power. Businesses that buy this vehicle aren't gonna be maxing out it's payload capacity. This isn't trying to be a Ranger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 you have got to be joking......I will state this once more wiz....Econoline has Twin I Beam suspension, has had it for decades, and will continue to have it until Ford re-designs the front end...the fact that there are upper and lower ball joints in the place of the old style king pin is meaningless, it is still two long I beams attached at opposing sides of the vehicle held in place by radius arms. This suspension has been in use by Ford since its mid sixties introduction. If you are telling me that your Econoline has a "short/long arm" setup, then it is the only one....snap a picture of it so we can see it. right from the ordering guide...AXLE...front, twin I beam, rear, semi float.....hey, regardless, its UNBREAKABLE and obviously relitively cheap and EASY to maintain...what more would one want in a Commercial vehicle...active suspension????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 The Ranger gets a TC spanking 21/26 MPG with it's available 5-speed manual transmission. Where are you getting the horsepower and most importantly torque specs on the Transit Connect's 2.0L? Has Ford released them for this engine with U.S. emissions yet? Again, the Transit Connect has a smaller engine than the base Ranger's 2.3, it has only a 4-speed automatic the Ranger offers both 5-speed auto and manual transmissions YET Ford overrates the TC's GVWR higher than the Ranger. Load the TC to it's overrated capacity and the driver is going to have to keep the throttle wide open to keep up with traffic...which will kill the drivetrain even faster. "words of trouble" Underpowered? Overrates? Words that have no objective meausement. Again define what these words mean. Why do you compare the Manual ranger to the Automatic TC????? Why bother comparing the ranger with the TC? they are not in the same class. will the TC be slow? yes! Will it matter for it's desired market? it will not. It has 0 competition. The Transit Connect will be imported to the U.S. from Turkey AND Ford announced a new plant in Romania to increase capacity. Those are offical statements from Ford, not guesses. The new Connect plant is in Romania, production is scheduled to begin in '09. People talking about the American spec Transit Connect need to wake up...Ford has said 2.0L gas 4-speed auto only. No diesel No manual transaxle No 5 or 6 speeds No EcoBoost engines As of today there are no official U.S. power ratings and only "preliminary Ford mileage estimates" according to the Transit Connect site. today, The transit uses the Same Duratec 20 engine used in other FoE products, that means 145hp/ 145ft/lbs torque. You are right, it is just a guess, it doesn't mean that my guesses are wrong. I do have a track record on these things. Small cars are my thing. I knew about the TC 4 years ago. The romanian plant is being uesd to increase production and free up space in turkey for more Full sized transit production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 (edited) dpost Edited January 16, 2009 by Biker16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 right from the ordering guide...AXLE...front, twin I beam, rear, semi float.....hey, regardless, its UNBREAKABLE and obviously relitively cheap and EASY to maintain...what more would one want in a Commercial vehicle...active suspension????? Amen on the cheap to maintain. The only time we ever have needed any kind of alignment done on an E Series was when tie rod ends are replaced. Then it is a simple toe in check and adjust. And tie rod ends are about the only front end part other than shocks that ever need replacing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Amen on the cheap to maintain. The only time we ever have needed any kind of alignment done on an E Series was when tie rod ends are replaced. Then it is a simple toe in check and adjust. And tie rod ends are about the only front end part other than shocks that ever need replacing. And the local tire dealers love 'em too.....eats tires like a lab puppy gulping down dog treats.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 "words of trouble"will the TC be slow? yes! Will it matter for it's desired market? it will not. today, The transit uses the Same Duratec 20 engine used in other FoE products, that means 145hp/ 145ft/lbs torque. Hopefully Ford will announce they have met U.S. emission specs with this engine while maintaining that 145 ft/lb torque at low RPM. In trucks (especially with a wide ratio automatic) it will need as much torque as it can get below 2,500 RPM. You are right, it is just a guess, it doesn't mean that my guesses are wrong. I do have a track record on these things. Small cars are my thing. I knew about the TC 4 years ago. The romanian plant is being uesd to increase production and free up space in turkey for more Full sized transit production. The following is a quote from John Fleming, President and CEO, Ford of Europe: Recently we announced that the Transit Connect is to go on sale in selected American markets in the summer of 2009. We have therefore taken the decision to use the Craiova plant capacity to meet the growing demand for the Transit Connect," The American truck market is quite different from Europe, what sells here in market leading numbers (full size pickups) is insignificant in Europe...and we will see if the reverse is true very soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Hopefully Ford will announce they have met U.S. emission specs with this engine while maintaining that 145 ft/lb torque at low RPM. In trucks (especially with a wide ratio automatic) it will need as much torque as it can get below 2,500 RPM. That looks to be difficult. since the Focus, Mazda3 use the same motor right now. The following is a quote from John Fleming, President and CEO, Ford of Europe: The American truck market is quite different from Europe, what sells here in market leading numbers (full size pickups) is insignificant in Europe...and we will see if the reverse is true very soon. The TC is replacing The Aerostar, and Astro van. the Mid-sized Van. This is the issue Europe cannot fit a US P/U , it is too big. the TC is there for those people who don't need a heavy duty Van, Florists, plumbers, Etc, they want something that is better on gas and is better suited to tight urban spaces, (much like Europe). This is not your fight,because the TC is going after a "new" market, in new markets, the first product there sets the standard for that market. Your true fight is when the Full sized Transit replaces the E-series. that is your fight. They only have to sell, 30,000 per year until they begin building the Hybrid and electric version in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.