lfeg Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Why incur the costs of shipping large body panels and/or subassemblies when it is not necessary? And the costs are more than just the transportation cost - you add work in process, cost of safety stock (in case of transport disruptions), administrative costs and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 (edited) Why incur the costs of shipping large body panels and/or subassemblies when it is not necessary? And the costs are more than just the transportation cost - you add work in process, cost of safety stock (in case of transport disruptions), administrative costs and so on. Ironically This is what has been going on with the F-150 for decades, MTP ships almost every panel for the KCAP for assmbly, this changed but again this has and continues to happen today. The idea is to replace the existing Stampings used for the E-series, not to simply have KCAP feed OHAP every part. There will be cutaway only Stampings that would be better produced closer to, or on-site of OHAP. As for engines all gas transit engines are produced in Ohio in fact the EB35 is produced 20 miles away at CEP 2. Lets no forget the Transmission is currently being made in Ohio too. Edited August 28, 2015 by Biker16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Ironically This is what has been going on with the F-150 for decades, MTP ships almost every panel for the KCAP for assmbly, this changed but again this has and continues to happen today. DSP. Dearborn Stamping Plant. MTP (Michigan Truck Plant) doesn't exist anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 DSP. Dearborn Stamping Plant. MTP (Michigan Truck Plant) doesn't exist anymore. Shhh. He thinks it's still 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 DSP. Dearborn Stamping Plant. MTP (Michigan Truck Plant) doesn't exist anymore. Shhh. He thinks it's still 2006 funny guys you knew what I meant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) It's fine--as long as it's not looking over a MD-grade diesel engine on a MD frame. Richard I keep seeing these Medium duty Trucks during my commute and I still cannot figure out What visibility issues there would be with a Van based cab. vs All i can see is shorter hood, lower cowl and higher seating position. Edited September 1, 2015 by Biker16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) That top model is out of production, and it didn't sell worth a crap when it was on the market. The bottom model has the worst cab in the segment for visibility (compare the International & FL MDs) And regarding the use of a van cab. Sure, Ford could use a van cab. And they could also just slap a Lincoln grille on the Edge. Worked in the past. Kind of. So why not continue to do so? Edited September 1, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 This endless discussion about cabs would be much less endless if some posters actually would spend some seat time in these classes of trucks. We seem to keep beating that dead horse that we already beat into a pink mush. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 This endless discussion about cabs would be much less endless if some posters actually would spend some seat time in these classes of trucks. We seem to keep beating that dead horse that we already beat into a pink mush. What? How dare you ask an armchair CEO with zero heavy truck driving experience actually do such a thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 2, 2015 Author Share Posted September 2, 2015 That top model is out of production, and it didn't sell worth a crap when it was on the market. The bottom model has the worst cab in the segment for visibility (compare the International & FL MDs) And regarding the use of a van cab. Sure, Ford could use a van cab. And they could also just slap a Lincoln grille on the Edge. Worked in the past. Kind of. So why not continue to do so? The GMT-560 TopKick/Kodiak class 6/7/8 models actually sold rather well (the class 4/5 didn't however). The problem was they were not profitable. Overenginereed, too many options, ect.. That picture illustrates the issue with the Fords well: Look at the distance between the rocker and the cab roof. That's the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 This endless discussion about cabs would be much less endless if some posters actually would spend some seat time in these classes of trucks. We seem to keep beating that dead horse that we already beat into a pink mush. Hey, I sit in Class 3-5 at least once a week, I have little experience in Class 6-7. Hey could completely wrong about using a Van Cab in class 5-8 but I enjoy, Thinking of the possibilities for that cab in those segment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 Hey, I sit in Class 3-5 at least once a week, I have little experience in Class 6-7. Hey could completely wrong about using a Van Cab in class 5-8 but I enjoy, Thinking of the possibilities for that cab in those segment. The point is NOT that the van cab would be bad in class 5-8, or that it is NOT better than what is already there. The point is that the van cab is not the IDEAL solution for 5-8. And if you are going to go all-in and try to make a big impact in the market, you need to put the cab that is BEST for that class on there, not something you have re-purposed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 The point is NOT that the van cab would be bad in class 5-8, or that it is NOT better than what is already there. The point is that the van cab is not the IDEAL solution for 5-8. And if you are going to go all-in and try to make a big impact in the market, you need to put the cab that is BEST for that class on there, not something you have re-purposed. I agree, but does ford want to be all in in the 5-8 segment? does ford want to sacrifice there 3-4 to make a competitive 5-8 product. I think we have the 5-8 product we have because Ford doesn't see the need for a perfect product in that segment. That being said, I strongly believe that replacing the E-series cutaway with a Non-van Form factor product would make Ford less competitive than they are today in that segment. You have 60,000 Class 3-5 E-Series sold. Add in an estimated 30,000 6-8 F-series medium and an Unknown to me an additional number of Class 3-6 F-Series Chassis cab. Is it worth the effort or even possible to Consolidate these into one product. who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 I agree, but does ford want to be all in in the 5-8 segment? does ford want to sacrifice there 3-4 to make a competitive 5-8 product. I think we have the 5-8 product we have because Ford doesn't see the need for a perfect product in that segment. That being said, I strongly believe that replacing the E-series cutaway with a Non-van Form factor product would make Ford less competitive than they are today in that segment. You have 60,000 Class 3-5 E-Series sold. Add in an estimated 30,000 6-8 F-series medium and an Unknown to me an additional number of Class 3-6 F-Series Chassis cab. Is it worth the effort or even possible to Consolidate these into one product. Personally, I think the current 6-7 trucks are a trial for Ford. If this goes well, then they will go all-in in that class and truly attempt to make inroads in that market. If the new MD trucks are a relative failure, then they will bow out and forget it. I think the results of that 'trial' will dictate what happens with the 3-5 E-Series. If it goes well, Ford goes to a custom cab for the 3+ E-Series and 6-7 MD together, making an all-around better vehicle for both classes. It could be a combination of van-ish and a MD cab similar to the FL version. If the trial does not go well, then the 3-5 will get the Transit cab and 6-7 just fades into the wind. I don't think 3-5 F-Series Chassis Cab trucks will be affected at all. They will stay with the 2-4 Super Duty pickups as they are today, albeit with a separate frame. who knows. Bingo! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted September 2, 2015 Share Posted September 2, 2015 (edited) The GMT-560 TopKick/Kodiak class 6/7/8 models actually sold rather well (the class 4/5 didn't however). The problem was they were not profitable. Overenginereed, too many options, ect.. That picture illustrates the issue with the Fords well: Look at the distance between the rocker and the cab roof. That's the problem. That right there kind of highlights the whole issue, doesn't it? (Though, to be fair, the Class 4/5 version probably tanked due to there already being an Express/Savana 4500) Also, didn't the Topkick/Kodiak use the Express/Savana cab (which the Transit cab is taller than)? It seems the question of whether to merge the whole of Class 3-7 into one cab comes back to the issue of Class 5. Does Ford really want to introduce a non-Super Duty Class 5 vehicle? (I wonder what they would even call it. They can't call it a 'F-550') Would they find it in their current best interests to do so? Remember that Ford already leads the Class 4-7 market over both Freightliner and Navistar (with those mainly being Class 4-5 sales, obviously) due to the Super Duty. Keep in mind that neither Freightliner nor Navistar offer a product that tackles the lower-end medium duty market that the E-350/450 does, nor even the lower Class 4 market that the E-450 does (and I'm willing to bet that the E-450 completely trounces any "Class 4" M2 and TerraStar sales). And also, remember that although the E-350 and the E-450 is the cutaway leader, the E-550 completely bombed. I think the question comes down to how much Ford would save using one cab for Class 3-7 vs. using two separate cabs between something that 100% suits Class 6-7 (and maybe a potential 5) and something that 100% suits Class 3-4, and which of the two routes would actually be worth the costs. Edited September 2, 2015 by zipnzap 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 (edited) Personally, I think the current 6-7 trucks are a trial for Ford. If this goes well, then they will go all-in in that class and truly attempt to make inroads in that market. If the new MD trucks are a relative failure, then they will bow out and forget it.I would agree that it is definitely a trial. Hopefully they are putting enough resources into it to give it a chance. The F650/750 desperately needs a bigger petrol engine. A bigger diesel engine is not a bad idea either, Then, of course, there is the "yet unproven in this class" 6R140. Edited September 21, 2015 by theoldwizard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted September 3, 2015 Share Posted September 3, 2015 That right there kind of highlights the whole issue, doesn't it? (Though, to be fair, the Class 4/5 version probably tanked due to there already being an Express/Savana 4500) Also, didn't the Topkick/Kodiak use the Express/Savana cab (which the Transit cab is taller than)? It seems the question of whether to merge the whole of Class 3-7 into one cab comes back to the issue of Class 5. Does Ford really want to introduce a non-Super Duty Class 5 vehicle? (I wonder what they would even call it. They can't call it a 'F-550') Would they find it in their current best interests to do so? Remember that Ford already leads the Class 4-7 market over both Freightliner and Navistar (with those mainly being Class 4-5 sales, obviously) due to the Super Duty. Keep in mind that neither Freightliner nor Navistar offer a product that tackles the lower-end medium duty market that the E-350/450 does, nor even the lower Class 4 market that the E-450 does (and I'm willing to bet that the E-450 completely trounces any "Class 4" M2 and TerraStar sales). And also, remember that although the E-350 and the E-450 is the cutaway leader, the E-550 completely bombed. I think the question comes down to how much Ford would save using one cab for Class 3-7 vs. using two separate cabs between something that 100% suits Class 6-7 (and maybe a potential 5) and something that 100% suits Class 3-4, and which of the two routes would actually be worth the costs. One would presume that if F650/750 are indeed successful, Ford would expand further into Class 5-6-7 with their CARGO line of low cab forward trucks. A Transit based cab for Class 4 to replace the aging E-Series (renamed T-Series MD) would put M2 and TerraStar sales on their ear.... Or.....E-Series CC cabs can soldier on for years with updates to frame and floorpans to accommodate new drivelines. (But I don't see that happening.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Found this online Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 11, 2015 Share Posted September 11, 2015 Well on I-495 southbound just below Mass Pike and I pass a transport with 4 new chassis piggybacked on it-a Ram 3500/5500 on ass end resting on some 2016 650/750's. So for sure they are being shipped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted September 11, 2015 Share Posted September 11, 2015 Well on I-495 southbound just below Mass Pike and I pass a transport with 4 new chassis piggybacked on it-a Ram 3500/5500 on ass end resting on some 2016 650/750's. So for sure they are being shipped. Dang....shoulda snapped a pic if you could've..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 12, 2015 Share Posted September 12, 2015 Dang....shoulda snapped a pic if you could've..... Well I'm in the hammer lane and I'm coming up on this guy fast-and I see what looks like a Ram on the ass end-which it was-then I see the Fords!. In any case I call a dealer friend of mine to tell him of my sighting and he has 9 completed trucks sitting on the ground at OAP awaiting transport. He also said no more "drive aways"-everything is going to be shipped via drop deck trailers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe771476 Posted September 20, 2015 Share Posted September 20, 2015 I was just up that way Bob to Ogunquit ME and was actually keeping an eye out for a piggy back of the new mediums. There's not much you don't see on the Mass Pike. Sorry I missed it! By the way, are they ever going to finish construction on I-495??!! 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.