Bob Rosadini Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Paccar has announced a new cab over class 6/7 that will be sold as a KW. I would imagine that Peterbilt will not be far behind. Truck is powered by the PX -7, 6.7L which I believe is a Cummins?? Not sure how this cab gets into this country as some sort of knockdown kit, but its interesting that Paccar thinks there is sufficient volume in this market to give the Japanese some competition. Wonder if Ford might consider bringing in one of the Cargo variants, adapting to the 650/750 chassis, and including that in the Avon Lake mix??? Again if the all Ford power train in 650/750 gives Ford a good competitive price advantage, this just might make some sense-"One Ford", "economy of scale" etc etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 That would hinge, it seems, on whether the Scorpion and whatever engine Ford sells overseas can fit in the same cab over configuration, because I don't see any reason why Ford would sell the 6.7 in a market that doesn't have the US's extremely strict HD diesel emissions regs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 That would hinge, it seems, on whether the Scorpion and whatever engine Ford sells overseas can fit in the same cab over configuration, because I don't see any reason why Ford would sell the 6.7 in a market that doesn't have the US's extremely strict HD diesel emissions regs. Richard for sure, the space issue of putting a V-8 into the Cargo is an issue. I would have to believe however that it could be done-again at what cost. I think the key point here is that Paccar sees a market and is spending money to be a player. The PowerStroke/torqueshift combo as slated for 650/750 should be a natural for this application-in particular as I see the low cabover market as one in which the load factor is usually a diminishing one-that is say you have an F-750 dump truck- It's 33,000 lbs loaded, then empty. Loaded, then empty. A box delivery truck say delivering furniture? May start out at 33,000 but as the day goes on, load goes down-multiple stops- a lost less stressful on the power train. As for the space issue, remember the C-model? Budd built cab that Ford put V-8 gas engines in and then the 3208 Cat V-8 as well as C-160-C-180 cummins 6 cyl. Mack used the same cab as the N series and you could get the range of class 8 Mack engines-difference- The Mack N did not have a 3 person cab but rather had a big dog house to accomodate the big engines-not ideal as I think such a truck needs a 3 man cab but the point is there are ways to tackle this. Of course another consideration, while the no compete with Daimler is gone, is there some sort of long term agreement that gave them permanent rights to the Cargo cab??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I think that Ford will hold off on something like this. Most of the cabovers I see are the Isuzu NPRs (class 4 & 5), particularly box trucks. a few landscapers and small excavating companies have NPRs with dump bodies. I see very few of the Isuzus in the class 6 flavor. I think Paccar might be feeling out the market in class 6 and 7 with their new offering. If it does well, others might follow. The only advantage I see is shorter and more manuverable due to being shorter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Similar to the E-Series stripped chassis and the F-53/F-59 stripped chassis, would something like a stripped chassis version of the new F-750 be suitable for intercity buses, i.e. general Greyhound bus service? I'm aware that above is the current model, but all Ford would have to do is add a tag axle to the F-750 and remove the cab. Seems like an easy, inexpensive modification to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I think intercity stuff is almost all pushers, and those are pretty specialized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I think intercity stuff is almost all pushers, and those are pretty specialized. For sure and you are talking big bore power-a totally different beast then an airport shuttle bus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 (edited) I think intercity stuff is almost all pushers, and those are pretty specialized. For sure and you are talking big bore power-a totally different beast then an airport shuttle bus. Alright, so an additional modification would be to move the engine to the rear. A number of intercity buses use a Cummins, right? A Cummins ISB is what is currently being used in the 650/750 before Ford replaces them with the Powerstroke. A Powerstroke definitely would be up to the task, wouldn't it? BTW, the above pictured F-750 is already a long-haul, intercity coach: DEFINITELY not an airport shuttle... Edited July 10, 2014 by zipnzap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 AFAIK, there are two major manufacturers of transit buses and motor coaches, MCI and Gillig, and between the two of them I can't find evidence that they employ over 4,000 people. In 2012, Gillig was turning out only 100 transit buses a month. This is not a market that Ford needs to be in. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/us/gillig-a-bus-maker-in-hayward-calif-wins-a-local-contract.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 AFAIK, there are two major manufacturers of transit buses and motor coaches, MCI and Gillig, and between the two of them I can't find evidence that they employ over 4,000 people. In 2012, Gillig was turning out only 100 transit buses a month. This is not a market that Ford needs to be in. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/us/gillig-a-bus-maker-in-hayward-calif-wins-a-local-contract.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 There are tons of current bus manufactures. You forgot Prevost (Volvo) and VanHool for intercity coaches and New Flyer, NABI, ElDorado National for transit buses. In fact, New Flyer is the largest transit manufacturer. I didn't say Ford should be producing buses themselves. I was suggesting they provide stripped chassis for the large bus market, the same way Ford already provides both E-Series cutaway chassis and stripped-chassis to mid-size bus manufacturers. A stripped, modified F-750 would be cheap and inexpensive to produce. And with the economies-of-scale, they could sell it to both transit and intercity bus manufacturers for cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 A stripped, modified F-750 would be cheap and inexpensive to produce. And with the economies-of-scale, they could sell it to both transit and intercity bus manufacturers for cheap. Do you have *any* evidence for this other than the unsupported assertion that it *looks* easy? Also, New Flyer has 2,200 employees. That's about six hundred less than MCI. New Flyer owns NABI, so those employee figures are rolled into New Flyer's. So between Gillig, New Flyer and MCI you've got less than 6,000 employees. Or, basically, about how many employees Ford has working at its two plants in Louisville, give or take. El Dorado *could* use existing F650/750 chassis if they wanted, since they're already using the cabs of the Navistar versions of the F650/750. This is a tiny market that is already well served by existing manufacturers. There is absolutely no reason for Ford to get involved in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 New Flyer bought NABI a couple of years ago. As for providing a chassis, what chassis? Heavy duty transit COACHES (they are not buses) exclusively rely on unit construction, there is no chassis. Some are even full composite now. Been that way since 1939 when GM came out with the first unit body rear engine diesels with automatic transmissions. No way would an F-750 chassis work, transits have to be low floor ADA compliant these days. Can't do that with a conventional ladder frame/leaf spring suspension. It would be kind of neat if Ford could get involved in transit, but they really have no place in it. I think the 6.7 Powerstroke would not be large or durable enough, and the low volume/labor intensive nature of transit coach assembly isn't something that Ford could do competitively. I was in the business a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 (edited) There are 4 credible players for transit bus in North America: 1. New Flyer (which bought NABI last year) 2. Nova (Volvo) 3. Gillig 4. Eldorado Orion (Daimler) dropped out the market in 2013 and sold the operation to New Flyer. There are also 4 credible players in intercity bus in North America: 1. MCI 2. Prevost (Volvo) 3. Setra (Daimler) 4. Van Hool Cutaways or stripped chassis (of any form) is really not in the mainstream market for either transit or intercity buses. Edited July 10, 2014 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Do you have *any* evidence for this other than the unsupported assertion that it *looks* easy? Also, New Flyer has 2,200 employees. That's about six hundred less than MCI. New Flyer owns NABI, so those employee figures are rolled into New Flyer's. So between Gillig, New Flyer and MCI you've got less than 6,000 employees. Or, basically, about how many employees Ford has working at its two plants in Louisville, give or take. El Dorado *could* use existing F650/750 chassis if they wanted, since they're already using the cabs of the Navistar versions of the F650/750. This is a tiny market that is already well served by existing manufacturers. There is absolutely no reason for Ford to get involved in it. Number of employees? Again, how is this a problem? I'm not suggesting Ford goes into the bus industry. I'm suggesting they supply the manufacturers and coachbuilders themselves. Ford already provides chassis to the mid-size bus industry. How much resources, re-engineering and effort did it take to produce stripped versions of the E-Series and F-Series chassis? You really feel the market for mid-size buses outnumbers the market for normal large buses? You feel the market for transit buses and motor coaches.is tiny compared to that of mid-size buses? New Flyer bought NABI a couple of years ago. As for providing a chassis, what chassis? Heavy duty transit COACHES (they are not buses) exclusively rely on unit construction, there is no chassis. Some are even full composite now. Been that way since 1939 when GM came out with the first unit body rear engine diesels with automatic transmissions. No way would an F-750 chassis work, transits have to be low floor ADA compliant these days. Can't do that with a conventional ladder frame/leaf spring suspension. It would be kind of neat if Ford could get involved in transit, but they really have no place in it. I think the 6.7 Powerstroke would not be large or durable enough, and the low volume/labor intensive nature of transit coach assembly isn't something that Ford could do competitively. I was in the business a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away......... There are 4 credible players for transit bus in North America: 1. New Flyer (which bought NABI last year) 2. Nova (Volvo) 3. Gillig 4. Eldorado Orion (Daimler) dropped out the market in 2013 and sold the operation to New Flyer. There are also 4 credible players in intercity bus in North America: 1. MCI 2. Prevost (Volvo) 3. Setra (Daimler) 4. Van Hool Cutaways or stripped chassis (of any form) is really not in the mainstream market for either transit or intercity buses. There's also Stallion. (5,118 employees) So how about supplying engines, transmissions and other components? Though, I'm curious, how does unibody construction manage to survive the rigors or large coach and intercity bus duty? BTW, there's already low-floor buses built off of frame-based chassis, such as cutaways vans, Freghtliner/Navistar chassis, and even the Super Duty chassis. This, being one example: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20090116005032/en/Detroit-Custom-Chassis-Announces-Contract-Supply-F450#.U772uPlEB1s Also, companies such as Spartan, Workhorse and Detroit Chassis have been suppliers to the transit industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 (edited) Number of employees? Again, how is this a problem? I'm not suggesting Ford goes into the bus industry. I'm suggesting they supply the manufacturers and coachbuilders themselves. Ford already provides chassis to the mid-size bus industry. How much resources, re-engineering and effort did it take to produce stripped versions of the E-Series and F-Series chassis? You really feel the market for mid-size buses outnumbers the market for normal large buses? You feel the market for transit buses and motor coaches.is tiny compared to that of mid-size buses? - Number of employees and number of factories is correlated with the amount of vehicles manufactured. A handful of people working on a very labor intensive product is your indication that the market is tiny and not especially profitable - How would Ford get into this business? By undercutting established players? And how would that be in Ford's best interest? Just to be able to say they were selling in that market? - Are you serious? How many resources are involved in selling an E-Series without any bodywork on it? Approximately none--apart from figuring out how to pack and ship the dang thing. - The market for midsize buses can be served by products that can also be sold to any number of additional customers (ambulances, box van builders, RV builders, etc.) Edited July 10, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 A 1939 Ford Transit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 - Number of employees and number of factories is correlated with the amount of vehicles manufactured. A handful of people working on a very labor intensive product is your indication that the market is tiny and not especially profitable There's plenty more manufacturers than just Gillig, New Flyer and MCI. Bzcat's list are just a few examples. And as I pointed out, Stallion has 5,118 employees. Think, how many states are there? How many large cities and rural across the entire United States and Canada? A majority of those cities and counties run large transit fleets. How many of these things are running around in just your city alone? That's not even mentioning private operators and contractors. You're saying there's no market supplying the people who build these things? - How would Ford get into this business? By undercutting established players? And how would that be in Ford's best interest? Just to be able to say they were selling in that market? Undercut who? There are only a few number of chassis, powertrain and components suppliers supplying a substantially larger number of transit manufactures and coachbuilders. Most of these suppliers don't produce their own vehicles, and they mainly produce components just for the bus industry, some of them also for fire vehicles and large trucks. Ford's powertrains and components are shared with their own vehicles. You're saying Ford can't undercut those suppliers utilizing their own economies-of-scale? - Are you serious? How many resources are involved in selling an E-Series without any bodywork on it? Approximately none--apart from figuring out how to pack and ship the dang thing. - The market for midsize buses can be served by products that can also be sold to any number of additional customers (ambulances, box van builders, RV builders, etc.) Exactly. How much would it cost to move the F-750's engine to the rear? You're saying that in addition to the bus industry, the Class A RV market can't also utilize the same chassis? They can't also utilize the same components? Fire trucks couldn't either? Mobile offices? Large specialty vehicles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 A 1939 Ford Transit. The Ford Transit was a somewhat successful light transit bus. It had a full chassis with a rear mounted Flathead V-8 and a 4 speed manual transmission. A lot of small cities bought them, and the design continued after WWII when production was taken over by Marmon-Herrington. The Flathead was replaced with another gas engine, not sure of the type. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 (edited) How much would it cost to move the F-750's engine to the rear? Who cares? That's not how these things are built. I haven't the faintest idea where you get your ideas, but I am impressed at how impervious they are to logic and reason. If you take it into your head that Ford can conquer the bus market by putting an engine on the back end of an F750, then no amount of anything is going to convince you otherwise, is it? Edited July 10, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 ............ Though, I'm curious, how does unibody construction manage to survive the rigors or large coach and intercity bus duty? ........... It does so far better than those RV type shuttle buses do. Typically those cheap minibuses based on cutaways or medium truck chassis have a max. service life of 5-7 years, I knew transit properties in So. Cal. with GM TDH 'New Looks' that made it 20+ years and ??? miles. Riveted aluminum unit body with a few steel bits here and there to hold the engine and suspension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) Who cares? That's not how these things are built. I haven't the faintest idea where you get your ideas, but I am impressed at how impervious they are to logic and reason. If you take it into your head that Ford can conquer the bus market by putting an engine on the back end of an F750, then no amount of anything is going to convince you otherwise, is it? Who said they have to "conquer" anything? This is about Ford gaining an extra source of revenue by using what they already have. If the F-750 chassis itself is unsuitable, then as I said earlier, why not supply things such as powertrains and suspension components to those industries? Edited July 11, 2014 by zipnzap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 Riveted aluminum unit body with a few steel bits here and there to hold the engine and suspension. Airplanes are unitized and they seem to stand up just fine without needing a separate frame bolted on underneath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) This is about Ford gaining an extra source of revenue by using what they already have. Why would any motorcoach builder buy from Ford? What is the incentive to switch to Ford? Would they buy from Ford because the engines have a greater reputation for reliability and a longer track record of service than the Cummins I-6 engines they're using now? No, they would not. Would they buy from Ford because the engines are cheaper? Maybe, but how is it good for Ford's bottom line to be selling to a small market on price? And how much cheaper would the engine have to be to justify re-engineering the engine compartment for a radically different engine configuration? Further, if the 6.7L engine line is running at 95-100% capacity, say, then do they really need extra revenue from a marginal source like this? Edited July 11, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 Opportunity cost. Anytime a a new project is considered, resources and funding has to be taken from elsewhere. By doing a Bus frame, moving engines to the rear ect, takes manufacturing resources that could otherwise be working on existing projects that Ford knows have better returns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) There's plenty more manufacturers than just Gillig, New Flyer and MCI. Bzcat's list are just a few examples. And as I pointed out, Stallion has 5,118 employees. No, my list is the pretty much ENTIRE industry. What you are proposing is to sell 40 ft intercity bus chassis from a customized F-750. 95% of the intercity bus market is covered by the 4 companies I mentioned. The other 5% is contested by various Chinese companies. The various cutaway suppliers do not compete with the Big 4 in unibody highway or transit buses. And despite people who know what they are talking about telling you stripped chassis doesn't belong in this market, you persist... Edited July 11, 2014 by bzcat 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.