Jump to content

New Light & Medium Duty News


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, bzcat said:

 

The 4.9 I6 was gas engine mated to a relatively short 4 speed auto. We are talking about a modern I6 turbo diesel and modern auto (even the 6 speed used in E-series seems outdated). Plus all the emission equipment required. I think it will take a pretty substantial surgery of the entire front half of the frame to make it work. My point was that if you are going thru all the trouble, you might as well design a whole new chassis that works with all the current and future drivetrains including EV and PHEV applications. 

 

I've always felt that the 3.2 5 cylinder diesel would have been a good fit in E-Series...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

For sure.   As for the E-Series, a consideration for sure  but as Transit gains  a following I would have to think the E will end up very low on the priority list.  

I don't know enough about the medium duty business, but I still see a lot of "box trucks" built on the E-Series chassis.

 

Anyone hoping for any significant upgrades on the Transit can forget about it !  Full frame ?  Nope !  How about dual rear wheel that go outside of the body (like all dually pickups).  Nope !  Why, ?  Because EU is in charge of the Transit.  Same reason there is RIDICULOUS second and third row seating.

 

Don't forget, E-Series is by far the most the most common platform for shuttle buses and Class C motor homes.  Those are worthwhile markets as long as Ford does not have to spend a lot on unique upgrades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

For sure.  As many on this site have questioned-what would it take to bring the 9L Duratorque over from Otosan?  Or perhaps build off of its design?  

My gut says that it is too old of a design (and too big for Class 4-7) to be worth investing in.  Better off with a clean sheet.

 

19 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

For sure.And given the success of the 7.3 I would have to believe that will displace a lot  of potential diesel sales-in particular given the likely premium for a diesel option.

Do we know that yet ?

 

From my observation point, the usefulness of diesels in Class 4-7 is long past its peak.  Emission has emasculated the power and fuel economy is nothing exciting (especially since diesel sells for more than regular around here).  Add in the initial cost premium, the cost of DEF and those 4 GALLON oil changes with expensive filters and things don't look very promising for it future  Diesels niche is very high loads and very long hauls (>50K/year).

 

10 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

Over the past 4 years, we have been phasing out our class 6 and 7 diesels, replacing them with CNG powered units.

 

Frito Lay delivery trucks in this area are all propane powered.  While propane may be more expensive than CNG, if you have your own pumping station with a large storage capacity you can negotiate non-seasonal prices and the conversion cost is much lower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, theoldwizard said:

My gut says that it is too old of a design (and too big for Class 4-7) to be worth investing in.  Better off with a clean sheet.

Well my thought is use of the Duratorque gets Ford into  an different class of engine far quicker and for sure with much less expense.  In particular when some will argue that electrics  are the not too distant future.

Any clue what it cost to  bring the 6.7 PS out?

Do we know that yet ?

I have to believe that is a given.  IIRC a consortium of  the tree service industry actually published some sort of paper asking for gasoline power as they were tired of the diesel issues associated with high engine idle hours and regen issues.  And your next statement actually supports the case for the 7.3.  As many of us have repeatedly said with words to the effect of..."If  you don't run the miles and pull/carry the weight  consistently gas is a better bet.  I think the only thing holding the 7.3 back  in 650/750 is lack of an air brake option and  that will be  addressed in...January??

 

From my observation point, the usefulness of diesels in Class 4-7 is long past its peak.  Emission has emasculated the power and fuel economy is nothing exciting (especially since diesel sells for more than regular around here).  Add in the initial cost premium, the cost of DEF and those 4 GALLON oil changes with expensive filters and things don't look very promising for it future  Diesels niche is very high loads and very long hauls (>50K/year).

 

 

Frito Lay delivery trucks in this area are all propane powered.  While propane may be more expensive than CNG, if you have your own pumping station with a large storage capacity you can negotiate non-seasonal prices and the conversion cost is much lower.

7M3's comments speak volumes as a current user

And now I'm headed down to my barn to pull the steering box out of my B-61X....Which sports a current inspection sticker and valid commercial plates.  Think any  new Paccar will still be on the road 60 years from now?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of the tree industry, CT and I imagine other states in New England got hit hard by Isaias.  Unfortunately Eversource intelligence said CT wouldn't be hit hard so they sent all their trucks and crews to the Carolinas!  Now Canadian crews are coming down!  I was eating lunch under a huge tent held down by 10  almost half-ton concrete blocks and 2 inch diameter metal rods buried in asphalt today and 15 Blue Diamond Asplundh F750's paraded by!  That tent had been up since outdoor dining started a couple months ago and I said it would never come down from a storm until it did a few days ago like it was a toy, those blocks were flipped over like Legos!  The storm was Tuesday, but he got it back up Thursday (yesterday)!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if Ford wants to be taken seriously in class 7, they have to go into class 8.  Also, if a new medium duty cab/chassis is coming, it will only be financially feasible if class 8 is re-entered.  But I think VW (who will eventually own Navistar/International) ORDERED Ford to stay out of class 8.  Because if Ford does go into class 8 VOCATIONAL, Freightl'r and Intern'l and the rest are all done! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Joe771476 said:

if Ford wants to be taken seriously in class 7, they have to go into class 8.  Also, if a new medium duty cab/chassis is coming, it will only be financially feasible if class 8 is re-entered.  But I think VW (who will eventually own Navistar/International) ORDERED Ford to stay out of class 8.  Because if Ford does go into class 8 VOCATIONAL, Freightl'r and Intern'l and the rest are all done! 

Joe as always admire your passion for getting back into 8.  But real world, I would settle for a serious upgrade in 6 and 7 with an inline 6 diesel, an Allison option,  and a tandem axle with at least a 40,000 lb rating.  I see that as a least cost path to expand the "commercial" line and many will say..."Ford won't spend the bucks to do that given limited market share.

 

Then I look at this guy who is about to turn loose a kick ass Autocar conventional and I say..."how does a little guy like that do it?  But Ford can't?"  and to answer my own question, its not that they "can't", its more a question of the bean counters saying 'but we can make more money doing another SUV-or a unibody Maverick pick up"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About $2300 (driveway install) to remove the epa garbage on any 6.7..we are on our 3rd conversion...crap is gone and it becomes a truck....20mpg on the 2012 6.7 (f350) without the choke hold on the diesel has been done......looking for a low mileage 2014 f350 now...the 7.3 can rot on the lot..not worth even considering

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, snooter said:

About $2300 (driveway install) to remove the epa garbage on any 6.7..we are on our 3rd conversion...crap is gone and it becomes a truck....20mpg on the 2012 6.7 (f350) without the choke hold on the diesel has been done......looking for a low mileage 2014 f350 now...the 7.3 can rot on the lot..not worth even considering

And you have no state annual inspection that creates a problem?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, snooter said:

About $2300 (driveway install) to remove the epa garbage on any 6.7..we are on our 3rd conversion...crap is gone and it becomes a truck....20mpg on the 2012 6.7 (f350) without the choke hold on the diesel has been done......looking for a low mileage 2014 f350 now...the 7.3 can rot on the lot..not worth even considering

 

image.png.4570207b0f8d157c0e8f662f70387e8d.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/7/2020 at 4:31 AM, bzcat said:

They need to invest in a new medium duty chassis to make investment in I6 make sense. Don't think I6 can fit in the E-series and if you have to spend money to make it fit, you might as well look at a modern clean sheet design. 

 

Right now, E-series + F650/750 + stripped chassis doesn't add up enough volume for Ford to make a clean sheet new chassis design so I don't see any new engine investment happening. 

 

The big question is electrification. Ford hasn't really tipped its hand about how they will address this issue from both regulatory and demand standpoint. The answer can't be putting batteries in the ancient E-series. 

You'd be surprised, especially if there's room to do it.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw no reason to start a new thread in the Lounge forum, so let's relax and have some fun and just take the time to view the most fun you can have in 2-1/2 minutes!  In these trying times, we need a break!  No dancing girls (except for the ones bouncing out of their seats!), no lasers, no lip syncing, no smoke and mirrors. This was posted in 2016 of a live performance in 1964 and it has almost 36 million hits!  Forward it to some of your younger friends and relatives.  They'll thank you later!  Enjoy!

 

The Beatles - Twist & Shout - Performed Live On The Ed Sullivan Show 2/23/64 - YouTube

Edited by Joe771476
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2020 at 2:31 PM, bzcat said:

They need to invest in a new medium duty chassis to make investment in I6 make sense. Don't think I6 can fit in the E-series and if you have to spend money to make it fit, you might as well look at a modern clean sheet design. 

 

I believe that with some minor modification to the E-Series dog house (at the expense of interior space) at "big" I6 diesel would fit.  Not that expensive.

 

On 8/6/2020 at 2:31 PM, bzcat said:

 

Right now, E-series + F650/750 + stripped chassis doesn't add up enough volume for Ford to make a clean sheet new chassis design so I don't see any new engine investment happening. 

 

Concur !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the point, in Medium Duty, the chassis is fine (even E-Series, with her twin I beam front suspension) the issue is depth of coverage. We have said that Ford will not update the engine bay of E-Series, but here we are, E-Series gets the 7.3L gas motor. Put the I-5 Powerstroke in E-Series with a ten speed and 4:30 rear gears and point it directly at Izuzu NPR line and it's GM derivatives.

 

ADD ON: In F-650/750 Mediums, 750 could use a dedicated larger motor but we have beaten the "Cummins/Alison" combo add on to death....as for cab structures, time will tell when the cabs transition to aluminum so we'll see. 

Edited by twintornados
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is another thought about Medium Duty cab structures to keep the costs down, and give an updated common cab across the line. Use Transit "top hat" on a specific floor pan to fit F650/750 chassis and same for E-Series, the differences in nose length being taken care of similar to how Ford uses a common cab in F150 through F600 but with unique front structures forward of the windshield. FYI, Transit is 81" in width and F650 is 74.6"....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, twintornados said:

Here is another thought about Medium Duty cab structures to keep the costs down, and give an updated common cab across the line. Use Transit "top hat" on a specific floor pan to fit F650/750 chassis and same for E-Series, the differences in nose length being taken care of similar to how Ford uses a common cab in F150 through F600 but with unique front structures forward of the windshield. FYI, Transit is 81" in width and F650 is 74.6"....

TT..I believe  we have voiced this  thought about utilizing the Transit "top hat" or "glass house" before.  Someone I believe posted that a new cab design is NOT that expensive using today's design tools. No clue but when you  look at strides in CAD over last 20 years I'm sure there is a lot of truth there.  Biggest issue I would  have with the Transit cab is the flat angle of the windshield. I  would think a more vertical design would allow a higher seating position with better line of sight-like the old Louisville! or the Hinos or F'liners etc.

 

As for the 5 cylinder, I can't find any HP/torque numbers for that.  ????  The 5.2 4 banger in the NPR by comparison is 215 HP and 452lb/ft.  You put a high cube box on an E series and inn addition to GVW you are dealing with big time frontal area which says it needs some decent numbers IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bob Rosadini said:

TT..I believe  we have voiced this  thought about utilizing the Transit "top hat" or "glass house" before.  Someone I believe posted that a new cab design is NOT that expensive using today's design tools. No clue but when you  look at strides in CAD over last 20 years I'm sure there is a lot of truth there.  Biggest issue I would  have with the Transit cab is the flat angle of the windshield. I  would think a more vertical design would allow a higher seating position with better line of sight-like the old Louisville! or the Hinos or F'liners etc.

 

As for the 5 cylinder, I can't find any HP/torque numbers for that.  ????  The 5.2 4 banger in the NPR by comparison is 215 HP and 452lb/ft.  You put a high cube box on an E series and inn addition to GVW you are dealing with big time frontal area which says it needs some decent numbers IMO.


3.2L Power Stroke produces 185 horsepower and 350 lb-ft of torque. I believe any cab Ford produces for Medium Duty will be derived from an existing model or Ford will just out-source the cab like they did with the LCF cab from Mazda. 
Edited by twintornados
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

TT..I believe  we have voiced this  thought about utilizing the Transit "top hat" or "glass house" before.  Someone I believe posted that a new cab design is NOT that expensive using today's design tools. No clue but when you  look at strides in CAD over last 20 years I'm sure there is a lot of truth there.  Biggest issue I would  have with the Transit cab is the flat angle of the windshield. I  would think a more vertical design would allow a higher seating position with better line of sight-like the old Louisville! or the Hinos or F'liners etc.

 

As for the 5 cylinder, I can't find any HP/torque numbers for that.  ????  The 5.2 4 banger in the NPR by comparison is 215 HP and 452lb/ft.  You put a high cube box on an E series and inn addition to GVW you are dealing with big time frontal area which says it needs some decent numbers IMO.

 

Lots of talk about 5/6 cylinder engines and small engine bay space, and you mention the 5.2 4 banger which to me is the best option here.  (The 4 banger part, not the Isuzu part...LOL.)

 

Ford just needs to peek down Telegraph Road to find an awesome example of a medium duty 4 cylinder engine.  5.1 liters, up to 240hp/660 torque, B10 life of 410K miles, oil change intervals  every 35,000 to 50,000 miles depending on duty cycle, etc.  

 

https://demanddetroit.com/engines/dd5/

 

Can't be too hard to reverse engineer that one, right?  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, iamweasel said:

 

Lots of talk about 5/6 cylinder engines and small engine bay space, and you mention the 5.2 4 banger which to me is the best option here.  (The 4 banger part, not the Isuzu part...LOL.)

 

Ford just needs to peek down Telegraph Road to find an awesome example of a medium duty 4 cylinder engine.  5.1 liters, up to 240hp/660 torque, B10 life of 410K miles, oil change intervals  every 35,000 to 50,000 miles depending on duty cycle, etc.  

 

https://demanddetroit.com/engines/dd5/

 

Can't be too hard to reverse engineer that one, right?  :)

I'm sure it would be a boon for the legal community?  But agree-  great motors or so I  hear.  Who in fact were the engineering minds behind these motors?  I always assumed they were engineered across the pond?  And the only remnants of Detroit Diesel involved is the logo?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, iamweasel said:

 

Lots of talk about 5/6 cylinder engines and small engine bay space, and you mention the 5.2 4 banger which to me is the best option here.  (The 4 banger part, not the Isuzu part...LOL.)

 

Ford just needs to peek down Telegraph Road to find an awesome example of a medium duty 4 cylinder engine.  5.1 liters, up to 240hp/660 torque, B10 life of 410K miles, oil change intervals  every 35,000 to 50,000 miles depending on duty cycle, etc.  

 

https://demanddetroit.com/engines/dd5/

 

Can't be too hard to reverse engineer that one, right?  :)

 

You do know that Demand Detroit and Detroit engine building is owned by Daimler...aka, Frieghtliner and Western Star...

 

Quote

Meet the next-generation of efficiency: the Detroit DD5 engine, available exclusively in the industry-leading, vocational Freightliner M2 106. To learn more, get a personalized quote on your own M2 106 with a DD5.

 

Edited by twintornados
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, twintornados said:

 

You do know that Demand Detroit and Detroit engine building is owned by Daimler...aka, Frieghtliner and Western Star...

 

 

Unfortunately I do-that  was my reference to "across the pond".  F'liner is  the  closest thing to what Mack WAS in the old days.  I  just wonder if DD has any "staff" in this country beyond marketing people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Unfortunately I do-that  was my reference to "across the pond".  F'liner is  the  closest thing to what Mack WAS in the old days.  I  just wonder if DD has any "staff" in this country beyond marketing people.

 

Daimler has a whole host of engineers / R&D staff both at the Detroit Diesel facility in Redford and their Co-HQ in Portland, Oregon.    (Powertrain folks are in Detroit,  while cab and chassis engineering is done in Portland.)  All the Marketing & Sales folks are based in the other Co-HW in Fort Mill, SC.  

 

As far as the DD5/DD8 engines, I cannot say for sure who really designed those.  (US or Germany. )  Daimler is very secretive about that and given those engines launched in Europe first is possibly an indication that Germany had the lead on those engines, but......

 

I do know that on the "big block" motors when it came time to replace the Detroit Series-60's and Mercedes engines in 2008, that the US folks were the lead on that entire project for the world.  (Simply due to the fact that the Series-60 engines were far superior to the Mercedes engines.)  Given that, the DD13/DD15/DD16 were designed by the team here since Series-60's were not used overseas that much and they didn't have the knowledge to handle a new successor to the Series-60.  Europe's duty cycles are different (not as much long-haul) so the MBE motors were just not designed to handle that and "run hot" all day like we do here in the US.  So today they use the same engines worldwide but in the US they are branded Detroit and in Europe they are still branded Mercedes.   Aside from some minor tweaks they aren't two different engines anymore....

 

So my point with all that is even though the DD5/DD8 launched first in Europe its not a given that Europe was the lead on those engines.  I just don't know and Daimler makes it seem like everything was designed here but you know how that goes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, iamweasel said:

 

Daimler has a whole host of engineers / R&D staff both at the Detroit Diesel facility in Redford and their Co-HQ in Portland, Oregon.    (Powertrain folks are in Detroit,  while cab and chassis engineering is done in Portland.)  All the Marketing & Sales folks are based in the other Co-HW in Fort Mill, SC.  

 

As far as the DD5/DD8 engines, I cannot say for sure who really designed those.  (US or Germany. )  Daimler is very secretive about that and given those engines launched in Europe first is possibly an indication that Germany had the lead on those engines, but......

 

I do know that on the "big block" motors when it came time to replace the Detroit Series-60's and Mercedes engines in 2008, that the US folks were the lead on that entire project for the world.  (Simply due to the fact that the Series-60 engines were far superior to the Mercedes engines.)  Given that, the DD13/DD15/DD16 were designed by the team here since Series-60's were not used overseas that much and they didn't have the knowledge to handle a new successor to the Series-60.  Europe's duty cycles are different (not as much long-haul) so the MBE motors were just not designed to handle that and "run hot" all day like we do here in the US.  So today they use the same engines worldwide but in the US they are branded Detroit and in Europe they are still branded Mercedes.   Aside from some minor tweaks they aren't two different engines anymore....

 

So my point with all that is even though the DD5/DD8 launched first in Europe its not a given that Europe was the lead on those engines.  I just don't know and Daimler makes it seem like everything was designed here but you know how that goes.  

thx for the good  info.  When Hebe "bought" Ford's heavy truck business he sure did know what he was doing.  And Jac the Knife?  I don't think so.  But as many regulars will say here..."well HD trucks made no money".

I say when you are as big as Ford, diversity of product lines is/was a good thing.

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...