Biker16 Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 The GAZ model seems to be a Smart way for Ford to go. It's not perfect but it allows FORd to hold on the its lead in the class 3-4 and compete in the Medium segment as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) No. The E-450 is a medium duty vehicle. Class 4 (the beginning of the medium duty classification) starts at 14,001 lbs. GVW The E-450 is limited to only 14,500 lb. GVW (and for a majority of its history [until 2008], it was only up to 14,050 lb.): https://www.fleet.ford.com/truckbbas/non-html/2008/whatsnew2008.pdf The E-450 barely qualifies as "medium duty" And did you notice that Farley said *nothing* about building some hybrid Transit with a medium duty engine and a medium duty frame? This isn't about companies buying the E-450 for uses that can be met by the Transit. So what is he talking about, specifically? Within a few years, Ford marketing chief Jim Farley said he expects ambulance companies and other commercial customers to switch to the new Kansas City-built Transit van line. "There will be a transition period away from (Econoline)," Farley said at an event in Detroit to show off the Transit, a van set to go on sale late next year. "The cutaway business is extremely important, and we want to maintain customer choice while we go through that process. But eventually, we want to be down to one commercial van." And it can't be Type II (cargo van-based) ambulances. The E-Series cargo van stopped production immediately as the Transit went into production. Edited August 20, 2015 by zipnzap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 I said 3-4 not 4-5 there is a difference If Ford had plans to build a class 3/4 Transit, they would have built a class 3/4 Transit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Class 4 (the beginning of the medium duty classification) starts at 14,001 lbs. GVW The E-450 is limited to only 14,500 lb. GVW (and for a majority of its history [until 2008], it was only up to 14,050 lb.) Medium duty, friend, is Class 3-7. http://www.nada.com/b2b/NADAOutlook/CommercialTruckBlog/tabid/147/entryid/43/Medium-Duty-Market-Update.aspx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 I can see E-350 going away soon but E-450 is a tough nut to crack for Ford. T-350 HD cab chassis can probably be up-rated just like the E-series once Ford has better real world durability data from its fleet customers. E-450 with higher GVWR is probably beyond reach for Transit. So if Ford is developing a replacement, it will probably be a dedicated class 4-5 vehicle, which plugs the hole nicely between Transit and F-650. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 The GAZ model seems to be a Smart way for Ford to go. It's not perfect but it allows FORd to hold on the its lead in the class 3-4 and compete in the Medium segment as well. Why use a bastard configuration when you've got the sales volume to justify a tailored solution? Maybe Ford should use the Focus as the basis for the next Mustang. "It's not perfect but it allows FORd to hold on the its lead in personal coupe segment" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Nah. You're right. It'd be better if Ford copied a second-rate Russian outfit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) Medium duty, friend, is Class 3-7. http://www.nada.com/b2b/NADAOutlook/CommercialTruckBlog/tabid/147/entryid/43/Medium-Duty-Market-Update.aspx Hmm... The FHWA must have altered their classifications recently. http://changingears.com/rv-sec-tow-vehicles-classes.shtml http://www.dieselhub.com/tech/truck-classifications.html So in other words... That means even the Transit 350HD (10,360 lb.) basically qualifies as a "medium duty" vehicle. So I guess Transit is already medium duty. Also, if the Transit 350 already has a much larger windshield than the E-450, and has lager side windows that slope downward towards the beltline, unlike the E-450, has a more upright seating position, and with the E-450 also shorter as a whole, yet its visibility is still bad for what the E-450 is, then doesn't that make the E-450's visibility itself pretty awful? Edited August 20, 2015 by zipnzap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 then doesn't that make the E-450's visibility itself pretty awful? That's a straw man argument, if ever I saw one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) That means even the Transit 350HD (10,360 lb.) Yeah, the Transit 350HD is about as far into class 3 as the E450 is into class 4. Edited August 20, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) If Ford had plans to build a class 3/4 Transit, they would have built a class 3/4 Transit. How come no other medium duty truck manufacturer is building a conventional Class 4 truck? Why did the ones who did stop building them? That's a straw man argument, if ever I saw one. The Transit already has better visibility than the E-Series as a whole due to factors listed above. Reviews say as much: Thanks in part to all those windows, outward visibility is a revelation. Sure, this van’s archenemy, the Mercedes-Benz/Freightliner Sprinter, offers a similar glass area, but the windshield and front-door windows in the Transit dive deep, making maneuvers in tight quarters far easier than you’d expect for a nearly 20-foot-long vehicle. http://www.caranddriver.com/ford/transit First, most of our staffers found the van's cab-forward setup to be seriously difficult to get used to. You're basically sitting over the engine, right at the front of the van. That's a big departure from where you used to sit in the E-Series, which had a more traditional seating position. But once you're used to it, you realize that the Transit's cab-forward seating makes a lot of sense. Specifically, it allows you to see everything, including the van's corners, which can sometimes be a challenge in the world of full-size cargo vans. The big advantage is that this seating position makes the Transit easier to turn, easier to move through tight corners and easier to park. We ended up coming away impressed with the setup. http://www.autotrader.com/car-reviews/2015-ford-transit-150-xlt-passenger-real-world-review-236596 This van is surprisingly easy to drive, thanks to a sky-high seating position and excellent visibility. FedEx and UPS drivers who spend most of the day behind the wheel will appreciate the Transit's tall, comfortable seats... http://car-data.com/ford-transit-a-serious-hauler-p2732-103.htm The E-Series van was clearly a good vehicle, but Transit is remarkably better. It gets better fuel economy. It can haul more cargo. Visibility is exponentially better. The van is simply a better work tool. http://www.hardworkingtrucks.com/transit-should-make-fords-transition-from-e-series-painless/ Yet, you said the visibility for a Transit equivalent of the E-450 would be bad. What makes the E-450's visibility decent where the Transit equivalent wouldn't be? Edited August 20, 2015 by zipnzap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 If Ford had plans to build a class 3/4 Transit, they would have built a class 3/4 Transit. That is an very arrogant statement. The product just launched in North America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) Nah. You're right. It'd be better if Ford copied a second-rate Russian outfit.Again no substance to your argument. Why not? Edited August 20, 2015 by Biker16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 How come no other medium duty truck manufacturer is building a conventional Class 4 truck? What makes the E-450's visibility decent where the Transit equivalent wouldn't be? Both Freightliner and International make Class 4 trucks. Repeating zipnzap's straw man argument does not make it any less of a straw man argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Both Freightliner and International make Class 4 trucks. Repeating zipnzap's straw man argument does not make it any less of a straw man argument. Where are they? TerraStar starts at 16,000 lbs. http://www.internationaltrucks.com/vgn-ext-templating/itrucks/assets/pdf/TAD11006_TerraStar_Spec_Card_LR.pdf And what strawman argument? Does the Transit have better visibility than the E-450 or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 what strawman argument? Does the Transit have better visibility than the E-450 or not? I have highlighted the strawman argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 I have highlighted the strawman argument. Did you not say this? The disadvantages of F-Series visibility aren't in the cab, they're in the snout of the truck, a problem which is even more pronounced w/the MDs. E-Series visibility is superb--but you can't fit a modern MD diesel into that engine bay. So you agree that the Transit's visibility is perfectly fine for a E-450 equivalent, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 FYI: 16,000lbs is Class 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) So you agree that the Transit's visibility is perfectly fine for a E-450 equivalent, right? Straw man. Again. Can you fit a modern MD diesel powertrain into either an E450 or a Transit? Edited August 20, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 ...Can you fit a modern MD diesel powertrain into either an E450 or a Transit? I would think that with a revised floorpan that is created for a Medium Duty applications along with the attachment points for the Transit Full Size cab components, i.e.; rear wall, "A" and "B" pillars, greenhouse, doors and roof and a MD specfic fiberglass front tilt hood and fenders.... fitment should not present a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 FYI: 16,000lbs is Class 4. And Class 5 starts at 16,001. So literally 1 pound makes it fully adequate for Class 4 applications? Straw man. Again. Can you fit a modern MD diesel powertrain into either an E450 or a Transit? The 6.7 Power Stroke doesn't into the E-450. And this revolves around using either the E-450 or Transit 350 as they currently are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 And this revolves around using either the E-450 or Transit 350 as they currently are. No. No it doesn't. The question is whether Ford should design a new cab that uniquely supports their MD offerings or whether they should adapt the Transit cab. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 So literally 1 pound makes it fully adequate for Class 4 applications? It makes it a Class 4 truck, which directly answers the assertion that neither International nor Freightliner manufacture Class 4 trucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 I would think that with a revised floorpan that is created for a Medium Duty applications along with the attachment points for the Transit Full Size cab components, i.e.; rear wall, "A" and "B" pillars, greenhouse, doors and roof and a MD specfic fiberglass front tilt hood and fenders.... fitment should not present a problem. Yes. You could adapt the Transit cab for use on a Class 7 vehicle. You could also adapt the E-series cab for use on a Class 7 vehicle. The question is why you would if you have the ability to create a high volume and comprehensive Class 4-7 vehicle that would go toe to toe with International and Freightliner which both use unique cabs for their ranges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) A custom MD cab gives Ford the ability to cover the full MD spectrum with offerings that are directly on target with FL & Navistar. Arguing that the MD cab configuration used by FL & Navistar would somehow be 'inappropriate' for Class 3 is bizarre. Under what circumstance is it 'inappropriate' to reduce the forward blind spot of a large vehicle? To go back to the Mustang analogy from earlier: Which works better? A custom solution--or something cobbled together from other parts: Edited August 20, 2015 by RichardJensen 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.