Jump to content

New Light & Medium Duty News


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Do you think that an air brakes option is something Ford feels is better left to

a tier 1 supplier to develop for post production fitment?

 

I could see that working much the same way that CNG prep allows buyers to

have that option without Ford handling the complete system.

I don't have an opinion on med duty air brakes. Fleet sales might know what fleet owners may want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys-what am I missing?  We are not talking about anything overly complicated.....Air brakes!  All the stuff is readily available.  Somehow, Ford has a problem because the 7.3 runs hotter than a 6.8 V-10?? or a 6.7 Power Stroke? OR ANY OF THE CUMMINS/CAT OPTIONS THAT WERE AVAILABLE ON THE OLD 650/750 Cautilan Fords or the Bluediamond Fords??  

 

Glad these guys aren't working on a space capsule?

 

Oh and 7m- you might be right on an air braked 650.  I think the bigger market now is a properly specced 33,000 lb 750 that carries a derated plate to 26,000 (25,999?) to avoid hiring a cdl driver.  Its all about the cost-and availability -of a CDL driver.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/20/2021 at 11:47 AM, Bob Rosadini said:

Guys-what am I missing?  We are not talking about anything overly complicated.....Air brakes!  All the stuff is readily available.  Somehow, Ford has a problem because the 7.3 runs hotter than a 6.8 V-10?? or a 6.7 Power Stroke? OR ANY OF THE CUMMINS/CAT OPTIONS THAT WERE AVAILABLE ON THE OLD 650/750 Cautilan Fords or the Bluediamond Fords??  

 

Glad these guys aren't working on a space capsule?

 

Oh and 7m- you might be right on an air braked 650.  I think the bigger market now is a properly specced 33,000 lb 750 that carries a derated plate to 26,000 (25,999?) to avoid hiring a cdl driver.  Its all about the cost-and availability -of a CDL driver.

From what I’m seeing F600 has taken a big chunk of sales growth potential away from F650,

It might be only 600 sales per month but that’s added to F550’s 4,500 to 5,000 sales per month.

In good months, F650 is up around 1500-1800 sales while F750 is about 10%-15% of that.

 

Perspective is important here, the MDs could be more but Ford isn’t thinking that way,

F Series got the 7.3 exactly because it was just big enough to cover “everything else”

that needed a better sized/ bigger gasoline engine than the 6.2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, jpd80 said:

From what I’m seeing F600 has taken a big chunk of sales growth potential away from F650,

It might be only 600 sales per month but that’s added to F550’s 4,500 to 5,000 sales per month.

In good months, F650 is up around 1500-1800 sales while F750 is about 10%-15% of that.

 

Perspective is important here, the MDs could be more but Ford isn’t thinking that way,

F Series got the 7.3 exactly because it was just big enough to cover “everything else”

that needed a better sized/ bigger gasoline engine than the 6.2

JP-no doubt F-600 is eating into some 650 sales.  My guess is the cab size appeals to a lot of "non-truckers" who view the 650 as a big truck.  I would be shocked if U-Haul for example continues with 650 over 600-unless wheel base is an issue-should get off my butt and see if I have any literature with respective available WB's.

 

On another note,  I've previously mentioned how while Ford with LN -8000 in the "old days" was the predominant 33,000 gvw  (2800 gal)  heating oil truck around here, International, F'liner and Paccar now share  that business.  Although today  I saw a new Pete that was chromed to the hilt. Outfit in question still has some good looking Ln-8000s  but given Fords drive to boost ATP's, when I look at that Pete, for sure cost savings was not an issue when this Pete was specced.  Again big motivator IMO is driver retention as well as company image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figured it was a matter of time before Blue Bird adopted the 7.3L.  They should sell a few in rural areas, at least for a while.  School buses are prime candidates for BEV electrification due do relatively short fixed base routes.  The vehicles also have a lot of space for batteries and parents like the safety and zero emissions characteristics of BEV's.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/27/2021 at 12:39 PM, 7Mary3 said:

I figured it was a matter of time before Blue Bird adopted the 7.3L.  They should sell a few in rural areas, at least for a while.  School buses are prime candidates for BEV electrification due do relatively short fixed base routes.  The vehicles also have a lot of space for batteries and parents like the safety and zero emissions characteristics of BEV's.   

Hopefully Ford will be able to capitalize on the F150 Lightning technology and between Roush and Ford come up with a system for buses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, edselford said:

Mary,

Do you think the comments on the heat issue regarding 7.3 liter is due to the limited amount of coolant flowing through the fly cut between the cylinder bores and the cylinder head or could it be due to a deck height that is somewhat short for a 101mm stroke?

Thanks

edselford

 

 

I am not really sure, but my guess is the issue would have more to do with how much coolant is in the heads.  The slots should help with cylinder bore distortion, and the 7.3L looks to have good sized water jackets in the block.  Problem is that's not where most of the heat is generated.  The 7.3L's heads on the other hand, appear not to have a lot of coolant flow through them.  I have not as of yet actually measured how much water the heads hold, I am just going by what I have seen so far.  

 

Funny the big issue 50 years ago with the Ford FT 330-361-391 truck engines was coolant flow through the heads.  Those engines were chronic over-heaters when pushed hard. 

 

I wouldn't think the deck height would be much of an issue regardless of what it is.  Does anyone know what the 7.3L's connecting rod ratio is?  Just curious.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Lima's were a much better truck engine than the FT's ever were, in my opinion.  I think the only reason the Super Duty V-8's stayed around so long was because the FT391 could not compete with the GM 'truck' 427's.

 

Interesting about the rod ratio of the 7.3L.  I never thought rod ratio was that big a deal, one of the 'worst' engines from a rod ratio standpoint was the Ford 300 6 cylinder.  Right around 1.5 as I remember. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, edselford said:

Yes, the rod to stroke ratio of the 7.3 is 1.589 to 1. This is probably the lowest of any ford V8! 
The FT series truck engines had problems with heat that was never fixed . The fix was the 370 V8 from the 385 series I think ?

edselford

For decades now, anything around 1.6 has proven to be more than acceptable in most regular applications.

While having a long enough rod is important, improvements in other areas of engine design have made 

newer engines more efficient. I don’t claim to be an expert in this field but it seems to me that HD & MD

require gasoline engines  to be at least 7.0 litres to have sufficient capacity to maintain efficiency under 

continuous load. Going larger capacity probably treads on the toes of sacred cow diesel sales….

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jpd80 said:

For decades now, anything around 1.6 has proven to be more than acceptable in most regular applications.

While having a long enough rod is important, improvements in other areas of engine design have made 

newer engines more efficient. I don’t claim to be an expert in this field but it seems to me that HD & MD

require gasoline engines  to be at least 7.0 litres to have sufficient capacity to maintain efficiency under 

continuous load. Going larger capacity probably treads on the toes of sacred cow diesel sales….

Well JP and Edsel appreciate the education-way above  my pay grade. But what was the sales pitch back in the 50's when the OHV's replaced the flathead and "short stroke design"was a sales pitch?  Or does that get lost when crankshaft design is taken into consideration?

 

And as for 7 liters being max, go  back to the days of the 534  Ford, 549 International and the V-12 GMC.  They competed quite well with the likes of a 220 Cummins, 6-71 Detroit etc.  Pretty much on the first cost issue- for sure fuel consumption was not a factor.  I always wondered how those old gassers would perform today with modern fuel and ignition systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Well JP and Edsel appreciate the education-way above  my pay grade. But what was the sales pitch back in the 50's when the OHV's replaced the flathead and "short stroke design"was a sales pitch?  Or does that get lost when crankshaft design is taken into consideration?

 

And as for 7 liters being max, go  back to the days of the 534  Ford, 549 International and the V-12 GMC.  They competed quite well with the likes of a 220 Cummins, 6-71 Detroit etc.  Pretty much on the first cost issue- for sure fuel consumption was not a factor.  I always wondered how those old gassers would perform today with modern fuel and ignition systems.

The 7.3 makes it easy to imagine the 370, 429, 460 Lima engines, modernised with alloy heads and fuel injection.

How I wish that Ford had merged 302, 351 and 400 engines into one engine architecture like Ford Motorsport did.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From CCJ........

 

  1. COMPANIES

Shareholders approve Daimler Truck spinoff

Ccj Logo White
Oct 4, 2021

Trucking news and briefs for Monday, Oct. 4, 2021:

 

Shareholders okay spinoff of Daimler Trucks

Shareholders of Daimler AG, the parent-company of Daimler Trucks North America, Mercedes-Benz and others, approved by an overwhelming margin Friday realignment of the company, which will include spinning off the company's truck and bus business. 

 

A vote in favor of the measure was 99.90%, clearing the way for Daimler Truck Holding AG to become an independent company on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange. Two current members of the Daimler Supervisory Board, Marie Wieck and Joe Kaeser, will step down from their positions and join the Supervisory Board of Daimler Truck Holding AG. 

Shareholders approved, also with an overwhelming majority of 99.89% of the votes cast, renaming Daimler AG to Mercedes-Benz Group AG effective Feb. 1, 2022. The new name, the company said, emphasizes the future focus on cars and vans of the brands Mercedes-Benz, Mercedes-AMG, Mercedes-Maybach and Mercedes-EQ.

The two measures must now be entered in the Commercial Register. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/4/2021 at 12:42 PM, 7Mary3 said:

That was expected, but still big news.  What is amazing about Daimler Trucks is how DTNA (Freightliner) constitutes the largest part of the company, both in sales and profit.  By large margins too.  

The reason why Daimler bought Freightliner  is because of those butt ugly Mercedes Trucks they were selling around 1996!  One floral company in CT bought about 20 of those ugly beasts!  Only problem was he was the ONLY buyer!

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...