Jump to content

Avon Lake Medium Duty


Recommended Posts

If the body is a simple box van or flatbed, the upfitter has little more to contend with than lights. However, some of the more involved vocational bodies with P.T.O.'s, ect., do require extensive integration with the powertrain/chassis electronic network. This is particularly true of fire and ambulance applications. So, yes, the upfitters often do care about engine and chassis management.

 

AFAIK, you can't get an engine with a PTO in an E-series.

 

BTW: CANBUS is a horrible protocol. You could not find a worse one, and SAE needs to get serious about replacing it before vehicle hacking becomes a major issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

AFAIK, you can't get an engine with a PTO in an E-series.

 

BTW: CANBUS is a horrible protocol. You could not find a worse one, and SAE needs to get serious about replacing it before vehicle hacking becomes a major issue.

 

this is the first I've heard of a hacking problem with CANbus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will absolutely not be the last.

 

Read up on the specs. The only security CANBUS provides is obscurity. Complex encryption is restricted by the abysmal network speeds (1Mb/s in optimal conditions), restricted packet size and inability to route traffic/address devices on the network.

 

Given the widespread use of common sensors, the networking of hacker data sets will make additional hacks easier than the first. Once one hacker identifies the signatures of a TPS packet on a CANBUS network, that information can be embedded in a kit and used on any vehicle with the same TPS.

 

--

 

How do you think that Chrysler hack worked? It sent fraudulent signals over the CANBUS network. Don't confuse the point of entry (the embedded cellular data connection) with the actual attack (spoofed CANBUS traffic).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will absolutely not be the last.

 

Read up on the specs. The only security CANBUS provides is obscurity. Complex encryption is restricted by the abysmal network speeds (1Mb/s in optimal conditions), restricted packet size and inability to route traffic/address devices on the network.

 

Given the widespread use of common sensors, the networking of hacker data sets will make additional hacks easier than the first. Once one hacker identifies the signatures of a TPS packet on a CANBUS network, that information can be embedded in a kit and used on any vehicle with the same TPS.

 

--

 

How do you think that Chrysler hack worked? It sent fraudulent signals over the CANBUS network. Don't confuse the point of entry (the embedded cellular data connection) with the actual attack (spoofed CANBUS traffic).

 

couldn't you simply isolate the network from intrusion?

 

Its scary becuase every ford product use CAN bus network protocol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The E series should be fine until it's demise with EEC-V, it's not used in the more involved applications that would require the upfitter to concern himself with networking. I have not seen a new E series ambulance in years, and last time I did it was a basic squad, not one of the rolling hospitals currently in favor.

 

Allison automatics have had P.T.O. capability for years. The P.T.O.'s used with automatics are different, they have a hydraulic clutch pack (very similar to they type of clutch used in an automatic transmission) in them and are shifted with a solenoid.

 

Yes, looks like CANbus can be hacked! I think the decision to go with it was made back in the 90's (didn't Bosch push it?). Manufacturers really liked it as it cut back on the amount of wiring considerably. Remember this isn't the aerospace industry, these auto manufacturers move slow with technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

couldn't you simply isolate the network from intrusion?

 

Its scary becuase every ford product use CAN bus network protocol.

 

No. Your car's keyless entry system is tied to the CANBUS.

 

If someone gets access to your vehicle, they can insert a device into the network by a process as simple as clipping a few wires.

 

The only 'security' CANBUS provides is the difficulty of sorting packet traffic because, as mentioned, the packets are neither addressed nor routed, thus making it difficult to separate, say, engine RPM data from TPS data. However, that 'feature' can be defeated given enough time with a donor vehicle.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, looks like CANbus can be hacked! I think the decision to go with it was made back in the 90's (didn't Bosch push it?). Manufacturers really liked it as it cut back on the amount of wiring considerably. Remember this isn't the aerospace industry, these auto manufacturers move slow with technology.

 

Bosch invented it--in the early 80s. And, yeah, as far as I can tell, its biggest advantage was that you could just hook up stuff serially as long as each device passed on network traffic that it didn't recognize/need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are still some E-Series Ambulances being built. One local squad just purchased 2 E-Series gassers. Most around here have moved to either the F-Series and International TerraStar. Our squad went Freightshaker and hates them. Another went to the Chevy Express chassis and they seem happy with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Remember the ongoing discussions here about the suitability of using Transit components to make a medium duty truck cab? Take a look at this:

 

http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/41334-gaz-developing-ural-next-long-haul-prototype/

 

Looks like GAZ has made a heavy duty truck cab out of components from their GAZelle and GAZon van/light truck line. Those vehicles are similar to the Transit. I think the results speak for themselves. Just because you can do something does not mean you should. In all fairness, if this truck is true to the Ural name, it will be very durable if nothing else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, production is supposed to start today. Detroit Free Press article (I have tried to link it here, but I cannot for some reason) calls them Ford's large pickups. Cue to Bob R. - they seem to have a worse handle on mediums than Ford Fleet marketing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, production is supposed to start today. Detroit Free Press article (I have tried to link it here, but I cannot for some reason) calls them Ford's large pickups. Cue to Bob R. - they seem to have a worse handle on mediums than Ford Fleet marketing.

 

Detroit Free Press article

 

PS: Please note that I did e-mail the author of the the Detroit Free Press article, and she corrected the piece about referring to it as a "pickup truck"....

 

635749188990055421-Ford-F-650-F-750-06.j

Edited by twintornados
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, production is supposed to start today. Detroit Free Press article (I have tried to link it here, but I cannot for some reason) calls them Ford's large pickups. Cue to Bob R. - they seem to have a worse handle on mediums than Ford Fleet marketing.

They are not alone in inaccurate reporting- another story told how the trucks had been built by Blue Diamond since 2000.-wrong-how about Ford at Cautillan-2000-2004- then Blue diamond 2004 on. Another article talks about it like its Ford's first venture into medium duty trucks in the US.!

 

I always say, we quote stuff we read about in the papers like its gospel-"well I read it in the WSJ". then you read an article on a subject you have specific knowledge of and you say..."what are they talking about!"

 

We will see what coverage the Journal gives this story tomorrow. In any case, glad production is finally up and running

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember the ongoing discussions here about the suitability of using Transit components to make a medium duty truck cab? Take a look at this:

 

http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/41334-gaz-developing-ural-next-long-haul-prototype/

 

Looks like GAZ has made a heavy duty truck cab out of components from their GAZelle and GAZon van/light truck line. Those vehicles are similar to the Transit. I think the results speak for themselves. Just because you can do something does not mean you should. In all fairness, if this truck is true to the Ural name, it will be very durable if nothing else.

 

But isn't the GAZon Next itself (which this is taking components from) literally a medium duty truck based on the (older) Transit cab?
The GAZon Next is not a light vehicle.
Not sure, but are you aware of any issues that have popped up with the GAZon Next so far?
EDIT: Not the Transit. I think that GAZon cab comes from the LCD Maxus van?
Edited by zipnzap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

But isn't the GAZon Next itself (which this is taking components from) literally a medium duty truck based on the (older) Transit cab?
The GAZon Next is not a light vehicle.
Not sure, but are you aware of any issues that have popped up with the GAZon Next so far?
EDIT: Not the Transit. I think that GAZon cab comes from the LCD Maxus van?

 

 

This tells me you actually never read anyone's post enough to comprehend what people are trying to say :sing_rain:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...