The difference is if you’re in the vehicle and someone gets a hand or other part in the way you see it immediately and can reverse it. With global close you may not even be able to see the vehicle so if someone got their head stuck you’d never know.
Ahh, the Kodiak line. Closest Ford came was when they built E-550 Chassis/Cab....a beast in it's own right. I still maintain that Ford could bring over a JMC tilt cab and mount it on a Medium duty E-Series chassis for a low cost entrant to class 4/5/6 where maximum space is needed for maneuvering in tight spots....but, since I am only a JAFO, my opinion is meaningless.
When I read this thread it makes my blood boil. None of these actions benefit the customer, the that’s for sure, because they sure a hell aren’t getting a discount. Regarding this post, there isn’t much premium about the 200a package at this point. Those wheels are awful.
That may indeed be true, but I think there is an issue with the roofs in question. Of course roof strength does not seem to be the only factor in many of these accidents.
Like GM did when they created class 6 and 7 trucks when they used the..what would you call it?..front cab clip cowl/windshield/doors, from the GM vans to make a medium duty cab.
Great reminder that everything is relative. 😀. A good friend in high school and his dad restored classic MGAs, beautiful cars that lacked conventional glass windows. Made me grateful that my Mustang had crank-up windows. No auto up or down, but also hard to smash a finger — at least your own. Somehow I managed through the indignity of the manual labor.
Seriously though having sensors to limit finger damage is a good idea, mostly to protect children, yet only finger damage I’ve actually witnessed myself were fingers caught in closing doors. Another reminder that we have to be careful and personally responsible for lots of other things, and that automation for safety’s sake can get expensive and still not protect everything that can go wrong.