E-Series Cutaways will continue

[J-150]

Wonder about the durability of the 3.5 vs the 6.8?

 

I'm a fan of turbo's, but I also know that the V-10 in my F-250 gets the crap worked out of it and keeps coming back for more. Out of 109K miles, probably 80K of that has been pulling a sizable load (8K-10K lbs).

 

There is a significant difference between a 6K pick up pulling/hauling 5K every other weekend, and a Van hauling that everyday.

 

Not doubting the EB 3.5, just wondering out loud.

 

 

Anyone with commercial fleet experience will tell you the same thing.

 

Run a fully loaded box body ambulance with a 3.5 and you will blow the engine after 20,000miles.

 

Peak is peak and that is fine. But you can't run an engine at 3,000rpm with turbos going all out for that length of time without something giving out.

 

 

I really don't care what bench testing says. I've seen what happens when you use too small of an engine under sustained load.

[351cid]

 

 

Anyone with commercial fleet experience will tell you the same thing.

 

Run a fully loaded box body ambulance with a 3.5 and you will blow the engine after 20,000miles.

 

Peak is peak and that is fine. But you can't run an engine at 3,000rpm with turbos going all out for that length of time without something giving out.

 

 

I really don't care what bench testing says. I've seen what happens when you use too small of an engine under sustained load.

I suspect that is the reason the EB3.5 has not been offered in the Super Duty. It compares favorably with the 2V 6.8L and the 6.2L.

[Joe771476]

I'm here to tell you I see new E-series van and cutaway ambulances all over. I can only assume they are gas since supposedly they can't fit a diesel in there, right? Here in CT, E-series owns the cutaway segment as airport shuttles, ambulances and school buses. I never heard of the "gasoline forbidden" rule in ambulance or school bus apps..

[jpd80]

Could a variation of the SD chassis eventually replace the E-Series Cutaway and Stripped chassis?

How hard would it be to combine existing parts from both to make a new chassis...

[twintornados]

....How hard would it be to combine existing parts from both to make a new chassis...

 

You mean, the "GM effect"??

[Bob Rosadini]

Sort of related to topic, talking to a service tech today who was driving an NV. His company bought 5 as a test and they are going back to Ford F-250's He mentioned the type service body but it went over my head-kind of strange-low roof NV to an F-250 but in any case, these guys were not happy campers with their Nissans.

[RichardJensen]

Yeah, well, if the commercial market were easy, GM would be doing terrific in it.

[jpd80]

Yeah, well, if the commercial market were easy, GM would be doing terrific in it.

Interesting that GM seeks out collaboration on its next van offering, maybe the costs are mounting up.

GM's Commercial plans look completely dysfunctional .... but what's new. (too much focus on Caddy and Buick?)

 

 

looking at the US Transit page, 2015 Transit has a GVWR range from 8,600 to 10,360 pounds

and when I look at E350 w/ 6.8, the GVWR is 9.500 lbs but max towing is 10,000 lbs - GCWR is 18,500 lbs.

No doubt Ford's goal is to cover E150 to E350 with Transit... so I'd expect the max towing figure to about the same..

 

Seems obvious that the big E450 has to stay, maybe shares production line with Cutaway/stripped chassis?

I really wonder how many of the above Ford actually produces a month, obviously enough to justify continuing

but I can help feeling that transit covers the bulk of the old E series market.

Edited April 18, 2014 by jpd80

[RichardJensen]

Actually, the E-450 goes as high as 22,000 GCWR.

 

I remain convinced that Ford is going to introduce a new medium duty range consolidating the E-Series and F-6/750 at OHAP.

[jpd80]

Actually, the E-450 goes as high as 22,000 GCWR.

 

I remain convinced that Ford is going to introduce a new medium duty range consolidating the E-Series and F-6/750 at OHAP.

That makes sense when i remember recent announcements at OHAP, future included optimism over building more products.

Flexibility in a new MD Truck may allow Ford to build more product s at OHAP.

 

Edit,

Maybe moving 450-550 to OHAP under combined MD plan allows other improvements at KTAP,

- increased 250-350 production?, switch to aluminum body?

 

 

 

Lots of possibilities...

Edited April 18, 2014 by jpd80

[7Mary3]

I tend to agree that a future platform consolidation of the E series cutaway, medium duty, and stripped chassis could one day be a reality.

 

And I also agree that GM's commercial operations are dysfunctional. They recently started a new commercial incentive program for Chevy and GMC dealers that has some nice features for fleets. The only thing missing is the vehicles! They need a class 4-5 chassis cab at the very least. Their Savanna/Express cutaway is doing pretty good since it offers a high GVW model and a diesel option, but that's basically it. Supposedly, plans are underway............

 

We will see about that.

[jpd80]

I tend to agree that a future platform consolidation of the E series cutaway, medium duty, and stripped chassis could one day be a reality.

It seems as though Ford is working to a bigger plan than just bringing new F650 and F750, fingers crossed that Richard is on the money

with his new MD range hunch - that would answer a lot of questions and Avon Lake workers' prayers too. .

Edited April 18, 2014 by jpd80

[hwyman3]

The GSA spec for Ambulances calls for a diesel engine, but that is the only "requirement" I know of for a diesel in an Ambulance. They are moving away from the GSA specifications and going towards an NFPA spec

[theoldwizard]

Story I was told (maybe the oldwizard can back this up?) was that the 3 valve 5.4/6.8, Boss, and 6.7L Powerstroke are all too big to fit through the hole in the E series floor. Can't do the body drop during assembly, no way to build it

Definitely true for the 6.7L Powerstroke. I can not confirm the others.

[theoldwizard]

I'm a fan of turbo's, but I also know that the V-10 in my F-250 gets the crap worked out of it and keeps coming back for more. Out of 109K miles, probably 80K of that has been pulling a sizable load (8K-10K lbs).

I have never heard any complaints about the V10 except for fuel economy and possible the desire for more power (so that it could closer match the PowerStroke).

[Joe771476]

I just saw an F650 pumper with V10 gas engine for sale in a fire apparatus mag. So I still question the "gasoline forbidden" in emergency vehicles.

[pffan1990]

And on the E Series cutaways, in some states minibusses for school and public transport are not permitted to use gasoline as a fuel by law. And in some jurisdictions gasoline powered ambulances are also not permitted (goes back to that horrible bus wreck in KY back in the 80s). Around here the only E Series based busses that I see are private airport shuttles and old age home transport. All public agencies have dropped the E cutaways for the Chevys with the Duramax.

You know, that's interesting what you just brought up here. I remember that bus accident back in 1988 when I was only 8 years old. I have lived in Kentucky all my life so far and I was living about an hour or so from that crash road. I wasn't aware that it was a gasoline-powered bus and that it was a Ford. I had to go look up that accident for more info. I thought the reason why the bus exploded was because the drunk driver had collided the side of the bus, causing the fuel tank that I thought was mounted outside the frame at the time (like the GM trucks during the time I do believe) to explode. But the driver had actually slammed head first into the front of the bus, causing the tank (which was mounted close to the front access door which was jammed) to explode. The accident caused all buses to be redesigned in terms of fuel tank placement, side emergency doors to be added, etc. I didn't know that this caused most states to ban gasoline-powered buses and such.

 

Which brings to this: why would local ambulances use gasoline-powered Econoline Cutaway-based vehicle if I am in Kentucky and an actual hour away from that horrible crash site? I figured that Kentucky would be one of the states to ban gasoline-powered buses and transportation vehicles of sorts. Odd to me, I think. However, I forgot to add in my previous post regarding gas-powered Econoline Cutaway that the hospital here also uses Chevy Express with diesel-only and the big International that is called Terra... something; can't remember the full name of it but is the huge F-650 size vehicle that is also diesel-powered. In some rare instances, I have seen F-350 Super Duty Chassis-Cab ambulances with the diesel engines.

 

Also, the city's busing transportation actually uses Econoline Cutaway with the shuttle Turtle Top shells and yep.. gasser V10 engines! The town is pretty small so there's no need for the huge transit city buses but I'm surprised they're using the Econoline with gas engines for the vans. These vans are pretty new since the city just started the transportation program just a few years ago and the vans are new enough to have that 2008+ front end styling that resembles the Super Duty trucks. Perhaps as long as the fuel tanks are now either midship inside between the frame or securely within the frame aft of rear axle, it could be legally sold here.

 

As for the Transit Chassis-Cab and Cutaway, I was hoping that Ford was being a bit conservative with their GVWR specs at first when they announced it over a year ago. I thought their plan was to announce it and then close to the vehicle's launch, announce the new set of numbers as if they figured out how to strengthen the vehicle's capability to increased GVWR. Like what RAM and Super Duty are both doing with their diesel engine power rating. A game of chicken of sorts when you think about it. Ford kept announcing updates to the second generation 6.7L diesel but that it would have more power. Then right close to production time, they officially release the specs of which torque happens to be 10 more foot-pounds than the RAM Cummins. I was hoping that is what Ford was doing with the Transit's Chassis and Cutaway GVWR ratings as they were still developing for a year since they last announced it. I actually hoped that after Ford saw the RAM Promaster's announcement and initial sales along with the announcement of next year's Sprinter including 4x4, that Ford would all of a sudden 'found a way' to increase the Transit Chassis-Cab and Cutaway GVWR to be even more competitive. But that doesn't seem to be the case here. It actually does seem that the Sprinter still has higher than Transit with the 3500 category DRW. I am a bit disappointed because Ford could have gotten a lot more capability so that they could appeal to Sprinter customers as well as existing Econoline customers now that the wagon and van are going bye-bye. I was wanting to see many Class B and Class C RVs switching from Sprinter to Transit but I saw on another thread or even another site altogether that Forest River RV is NOT going to use Transit because they said the Transit GVWR is simply 'too low' to utilize their products on it. A sad shame on Ford's part, I think. But hey, at least the Econoline Cutway is continuing through 2020. I just hope Ford either do something to increase Transit's capability or do some kind of product planning like what one user said above me about merging the Econoline Cutaway to the Medium Duty platform kind of idea. That could work. And who knows, maybe the Transit could prove to be yet another of Ford's success stories! I may just be judging to fast simply on numbers alone. We'll have to wait and see I guess.

[7Mary3]

The Kentucky bus crash- I remember reading the front impact caused the right front leaf spring to break loose and impale the (gasoline) fuel tank, which was located outboard of the frame on the right side beneath the door. The fuel tank location may have been specific to that bus's chassis and body combination, because I can't say I ever saw a school bus with the fuel tank located there. Somewhat of a freak accident nonetheless. Since then, regulations mandated safer fuel tank placement (though not necessarily inboard of the frame rails) and safety cages.

 

Ford and gasoline ambulances- Back in the 1980's, there were a series of fires involving Ford gas engine ambulances caused when the fuel in the tank started to boil and spray out of the cap, due to high temperatures under the vehicle caused by excessive idling. The problem seemed to be specific to Ford E series units. I don't think there was ever a 'fix' for the problem, but Ford restricted the ambulance prep. package to diesel powered E and F series trucks. Every truck and van Ford built for the next several years that was not a diesel equipped with the ambulance prep. package got a door jamb decal stating the vehicle was not to be used as an ambulance! Some departments spec'ed only diesel ambulances as a result of the incidents, but I don't remember any NFPA regulations prohibiting gasoline powered ambulances.

[pffan1990]

Thanks 7Mary3 for everything you said. That clarified what I was wondering about regarding the gas-powered Econoline ambulance.

[blazerdude20]

Every truck and van Ford built for the next several years that was not a diesel equipped with the ambulance prep. package got a door jamb decal stating the vehicle was not to be used as an ambulance! Some departments spec'ed only diesel ambulances as a result of the incidents, but I don't remember any NFPA regulations prohibiting gasoline powered ambulances.

I believe the F-Series chassis cabs still have that sticker.

[jpd80]

I just saw an F650 pumper with V10 gas engine for sale in a fire apparatus mag. So I still question the "gasoline forbidden" in emergency vehicles.

 

 

Ford has been offering gasoline powered Ambulances in E-Series since 2010

when it lifted its own self imposed ban on Gasoline engines.

 

Ford to Offer Gasoline Ambulances in 2010

 

Decision reverses 22-year diesel mandate that changed America's ambulance fleet

 

James Philips, EMT | | Thursday, March 5, 2009

LINK

 

Unable to introducean emissions compliant diesel engine for its 2010model yearE-Series vans and cutaways, Ford Motor Company announced March 3 its plans to offer a V-10 gasoline engine ambulance prep package instead.Amid tumbling overall sales and financial uncertainty, Fordbroke the news at an National Truck Equipment Association (NTEA)truck show in Chicago. There had been speculation among manufacturers and EMS agencies about Ford's 2010 MY offerings, because new 2010 EPA emissions requirements were forcing the retirement ofits current 6.0L PowerStroke diesel engine found in more than70% of ambulances.

 

 

The newV-10 gasoline engine offering has many merits, but its introduction also represents a dramatic reversal of Ford's 21-year staunch position against gasoline engines used for ambulances. Ford Motor Company shocked the ambulance community in 1988 when it mandated a diesel engine ambulance prep package. At the time, virtually all ambulances used a large gasoline engine. Currently,98% of ambulances in the U.S. operate with diesel engines.

 

 

Edited April 21, 2014 by jpd80

[lfeg]

In some states the reaction to the bus crash in KY was to pass laws restricting school busses to diesel. OH was one. The laws are still on the books in places. As to ambulances, same thing. As 7Mary3 stated, there was a problem in the past, and some places codified (either by law or by spec) that only diesel be used. And there are places like where I live - for simplicity they have a single fuel fleet (diesel) when it comes to apparatus, utility vehicles, and ambulances. Only exceptions are the command car and the outboard on the rescue boat.

[jpd80]

In some states the reaction to the bus crash in KY was to pass laws restricting school busses to diesel. OH was one. The laws are still on the books in places. As to ambulances, same thing. As 7Mary3 stated, there was a problem in the past, and some places codified (either by law or by spec) that only diesel be used. And there are places like where I live - for simplicity they have a single fuel fleet (diesel) when it comes to apparatus, utility vehicles, and ambulances. Only exceptions are the command car and the outboard on the rescue boat.

What about CNG?

I'm thinking that could be another way around the gasoline issue, a CNG tank could be placed away from potential impact areas.

2013 Ford Alternative Fuel Buyers Guide

 

1 Dealer and customer determine appropriate vehicle based on application, payload and range

2 Dealer places vehicle order, and vehicle is delivered to modifier

3 Modifier installs alternative fuel components and system

4 Vehicle is delivered to dealer and dealer delivers vehicle to customer

Edited April 21, 2014 by jpd80

[theoldwizard]

I just saw an F650 pumper with V10 gas engine for sale in a fire apparatus mag. So I still question the "gasoline forbidden" in emergency vehicles.

IIRC, there were issues with the 460(?) V8 where extended idles would heat the fuel in the tank enough that would expand enough to force its way out of the filler. Sometimes it would run down the fill pipe to the exhaust pipe. Ambulance were told to never fill the tank more than 50%.

[sullynd]

I saw a Transit Cutaway School Bus yesterday for the first time. Looked really good!