Anthony Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I would think the reg cab take rate on 250/350 is higher than the 5% reported for 150 retail. True, that's why if they all share the same cab going forward, it makes sense why they kept it for the 150. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Yeah, but for what amounts to ~25k trucks a year (5% of 2/3rd F-Series total sales...going by 2014 totals) it seems like more work than it is worth First off, I see no reason to believe that the take rate for SD cabs is that much higher than the F150s. Secondly, even if it were double the take rate of the F150, that would still only add about 25k units, based on the proportions. Thirdly, the configuration passed business case testing under significantly lower volumes, and without a projected integration of the SD cab, in the '09 reconfiguration where, apparently, the supercab was considered for elimination--and I would point out that the '09 regular cab got a pretty significant reconfiguration, as the pocket sized rear door was removed. I don't see Ford's decision to keep the regular cab as being based on the prospective merger of cabs. The number of unique components with the regular cab is pretty limited. Depending on fabrication methods, it could be only a handful of different dies and the cost of programming the robot to weld that body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 (edited) First off, I see no reason to believe that the take rate for SD cabs is that much higher than the F150s. Secondly, even if it were double the take rate of the F150, that would still only add about 25k units, based on the proportions. Thirdly, the configuration passed business case testing under significantly lower volumes, and without a projected integration of the SD cab, in the '09 reconfiguration where, apparently, the supercab was considered for elimination--and I would point out that the '09 regular cab got a pretty significant reconfiguration, as the pocket sized rear door was removed. I don't see Ford's decision to keep the regular cab as being based on the prospective merger of cabs. The number of unique components with the regular cab is pretty limited. Depending on fabrication methods, it could be only a handful of different dies and the cost of programming the robot to weld that body. Who knows? It does seem like an odd thing to keep at such low volume. Mind you it's not just the dies that are different. They also have a unique frame length (and driveshaft) on the short bed models, interior trim pieces, crash-testing & certification... Granted, a Supercab would obviously cost a lot more in development due to the extra doors. I'm sure they have their reasons though. Edited July 30, 2015 by Intrepidatious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 So... the bottom line is that Ford designed the crew cab pass the IIHS small front offset test but not the super cab (or presumably regular cab) because IIHS only tested best selling body style. You can either characterize this as "cheating" or smart planning depending on your perspective... because I'm sure Ford is not the only one that does this to game the IIHS test. If IIHS starts testing alternative body styles of all other vehicles, there will probably be some interesting raised eyebrows. For the record, I think this is "cheating"... Ford choose expedience over safety. However, I will leave room for debate on whether IIHS small front offset test is a meaningful test. They cheated and got caught and are paying the short term price in bad headlines and stories for a day but that will be over by Monday, long term there will be no real effect. IIHS has said they are going to start different tests because they feel that manufactures are gaming the test like only making the left side of the vehicle stronger where the test is done and leaving the right side of the vehicle alone. So now they will test some vehicles on the right side, add in different configurations as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 They cheated and got caught and are paying the short term price in bad headlines and stories for a day but that will be over by Monday, long term there will be no real effect. IIHS has said they are going to start different tests because they feel that manufactures are gaming the test like only making the left side of the vehicle stronger where the test is done and leaving the right side of the vehicle alone. So now they will test some vehicles on the right side, add in different configurations as well. Sounds like the hybrid scandal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 It does seem like an odd thing to keep at such low volume. Are you even more shocked that FCA is still building regular cabs? Given that they have even less volume for their distinct frames and drivelines? (BTW I'm pretty sure that there's minimal cost involved in manufacturing different driveline lengths and different frame lengths--and even less with custom plastic pieces.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I love my 8' bed so much I don't know how people make due with the shorter ones. Then again I'm not daily driving it either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
94bronco Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 This is rather disappointing but not surprising, Ford should do the right thing and retrofit all 2015 Supercab's as I would surely be pissed if I owned one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 I love my 8' bed so much I don't know how people make due with the shorter ones. Then again I'm not daily driving it either. Because you use your truck for truck purposes instead of a family hauler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4d4evr-1 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Sounds like the hybrid scandal. What hybrid scandal. For what it is worth my wife and I get better than 50 with our almost 3 year C-Max now. Only time below 50 is winter gas and that is just below. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 The sad thing is, how much money would have a bracket cost here and there, compared to how much money and time their PR dept. will require to spin this into a positive. The media is already have a field-day with this BS... urrggg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Are you even more shocked that FCA is still building regular cabs? Given that they have even less volume for their distinct frames and drivelines? I'm surprised ANYONE is still making them if those rates are constant across the industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The sad thing is, how much money would have a bracket cost here and there, compared to how much money and time their PR dept. will require to spin this into a positive. The media is already have a field-day with this BS... urrggg The finance guys don't care about that, they only care about the 11% margins and how they can get that higher: F product, quality and PR my bonus is based on that profit number. It's the late 90's all over again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I'm surprised ANYONE is still making them if those rates are constant across the industry. Aren't frames & drivelines extruded? I would think that stretching/shortening a frame or driveline is pretty cheap. I don't know how these cabs are fabricated, but the doors and back of the cab are common, so you're looking at what? A different roof die? You would assume that the floor pan consists of a common front half and unique rear sections for the super cab & crew cab, and maybe the standard cab floorpan just welds onto the back of the cab? Somebody know how these things are put together? injection molded plastic is pretty cheap, so I don't credit too much expense for unique interior parts behind the cab. Ditto carpet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 UPDATE: "When this crash test was introduced in 2012, the new F-150 was already far into development, Ford spokesman Mike Levine said. Engineers weren't able to design the extra front-end protective measures quickly enough for all versions, he said, so a decision was made to add them first to the four-door SuperCrew truck, which accounts for a large majority of F-150 sales. The protective measures will be part of the vehicle's 2016 design." http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/30/autos/ford-f-150-crash-test/ If they knew about the test since 2012 I don't know what the hold up was for the other versions. At least they are fixing it for 2016 MY. Maybe this is part of the reason why a lot of the RC and SuperCab long wheelbase trucks and all HD Payload trucks were cancelled and not built for the 2015 MY and will start in 2016 MY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 (edited) Somebody know how these things are put together? All cab configurations require unique DOP's (Door Opening Panels), floor pans and roofs. Everything else is shared. So, each cab requires 4 seperate sets of dies. Edited July 31, 2015 by Pioneer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 (edited) What I'm most surprised with is that the 2017 Raptor will have the SuperCab with the 5.5ft bed again. That is a one of customized frame and wheel base for a very low production vehicle. I'd guess volume for that is only 3,000-4,000 of them per year. At its peak, Ford was selling around 2,000 Raptors a month in the last mode. I think that there's a great opportunity to increase that previous volume by a long way.. Edited July 31, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 UPDATE: "When this crash test was introduced in 2012, the new F-150 was already far into development, Ford spokesman Mike Levine said. Engineers weren't able to design the extra front-end protective measures quickly enough for all versions, he said, so a decision was made to add them first to the four-door SuperCrew truck, which accounts for a large majority of F-150 sales. The protective measures will be part of the vehicle's 2016 design." http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/30/autos/ford-f-150-crash-test/ If they knew about the test since 2012 I don't know what the hold up was for the other versions. At least they are fixing it for 2016 MY. Maybe this is part of the reason why a lot of the RC and SuperCab long wheelbase trucks and all HD Payload trucks were cancelled and not built for the 2015 MY and will start in 2016 MY. IIHS let manufactures know in 2009 this test was coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 (edited) IIHS let manufactures know in 2009 this test was coming. I don't think they released the design of the test in '09; I think they just announced that they were going to institute it. At least according to what I could find on the internet. Edited July 31, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 A small but important addition to the frames to make the new F150 comply, well done Ford. All the blather stops with 2016 model and full roll out of the modifications.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordtech1 Posted August 1, 2015 Author Share Posted August 1, 2015 I'm not sure if the excuse they give is valid or not. However, I think Ford knew this would be the case but hoped IIHS wouldn't test lower volume configurations. I think they gambled and it didn't pay off. I do have to give them credit that they did reinforce both sides of crew cabs not just driver's side like some are accused of doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 You could make a case that left side offset crashes are usually more severe than right side because they commonly involve a vehicle crossing over into oncoming traffic rather than a vehicle hitting a stationary object on the right side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 You could make a case that left side offset crashes are usually more severe than right side because they commonly involve a vehicle crossing over into oncoming traffic rather than a vehicle hitting a stationary object on the right side. Not to mention the driver is on the left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) Some 2015 Rams are not reinforced eventhough Ram said they were all built the same. Ram, you lie! Mike Levine @mrlevine 11h11 hours ago Fact: Ram only putting "wheel blockers" on some 2015 trucks. 0 retweets 0 favorites https://twitter.com/mrlevine/status/628219289263325184 Edited August 4, 2015 by Bryan1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) Some 2015 Rams are not reinforced eventhough Ram said they were all built the same. Ram, you lie! Mike Levine @mrlevine 11h11 hours ago Fact: Ram only putting "wheel blockers" on some 2015 trucks. 0 retweets 0 favorites https://twitter.com/mrlevine/status/628219289263325184 Who says Ford never mentions the competition? Lol Ram never had wheel blockers in the first place. They are introducing them as a running change beginning with the 2015 1/2 Rebel. http://www.autonews.com/article/20150803/OEM11/308039933? Ford engineers welded tubular bars to the pickup's frame and placed them in the front wheel wells, fore and aft of the tire. It was so effective that the redesigned 2015 Ford F-150 SuperCrew passed the IIHS offset test with flying colors, the institute revealed last week. Rival Ram has decided to use a similar solution for all its pickups, beginning with the 20151/2 Ram Rebel, released last month. Are you saying Levine is saying that FCA lied or is this something you are espousing? . Edit: just read all his tweets regarding this (he is getting creamed today). He never insinuated that FCA lied. He is trying to say that Ram only has blockers on one model so why is it any different than F-150 having it only in one model. Unfortunately for him and Ford, he is coming off as an UP in the process (as Pete D would say). . Edited August 4, 2015 by Intrepidatious 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.