Ford Transit USA Forum banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
There was a recent article on Autoblog about the cab chassis and cutaway version of the E-Series remaining in production for the remaining part of the decade. Keep in mind that the van version is still going away after 2014.

But then in the comments section...

You mean Americans aren't thrilled by the mostly euro class 2 and the prospect of losing their beloved load carrying? Who knew. Next you'll tell me Americans don't buy diesels.
But it's good to see Ford realizing that the limp wristed Transient isn't as capable as the tried and true E-Series.....looks like Ford doesn't want to throw away yet another market they basically own.
Ford E-Series chassis cabs and cutaways to survive mass Transit onslaught [UPDATE] - Autoblog

I'm still seeing comments like these everywhere.

Why exactly would someone miss the Econoline? Haven't people looked at the specs?

The only reason something like the E-Series cab chassis and cutaway is still alive is because it has a higher maximum GVWR... an advantage that the E-Series van doesn't have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,112 Posts
...cut.....

Why exactly would someone miss the Econoline? Haven't people looked at the specs?

The only reason something like the E-Series cab chassis and cutaway is still alive is because it has a higher maximum GVWR... an advantage that the E-Series van doesn't have.
The E-Series has much higher GCWR which allows towing up to 10,000 pounds or thereabouts. And the top engine, the V10, is used on vehicles with GCWR of around 30,000 pounds. For some people this sounds a better deal than a van with an engine that was designed originally for small cars. Yeah, it's been upgraded a bunch over the years, but a 3.7L in a Ford F-650 wouldn't take the abuse a 6.8L V10 handles.

They are two very different vehicles. For many of us the Transit is better due to modern design and fuel economy, but for those towing a horse trailer or a 30-foot RV the Econoline will be missed. At least until Ford upgrades Transit to T-450 and T-550 models as has been rumored for some time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
This just proves how much Ford has neglected the RV market. To continue to make a cut a way chassis with 50 year old technology and fuel economy not even close to 10 mpg doesn't say much for Ford. I've heard a rumor that Sprinter is coming out with a heavier van and cut a way chassis in the near future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
There was a recent article on Autoblog about the cab chassis and cutaway version of the E-Series remaining in production for the remaining part of the decade. Keep in mind that the van version is still going away after 2014.

But then in the comments section...





Ford E-Series chassis cabs and cutaways to survive mass Transit onslaught [UPDATE] - Autoblog

I'm still seeing comments like these everywhere.

Why exactly would someone miss the Econoline? Haven't people looked at the specs?

The only reason something like the E-Series cab chassis and cutaway is still alive is because it has a higher maximum GVWR... an advantage that the E-Series van doesn't have.
You're getting worked up because some fanboys in the comment section of the internet called a vehicle that hasn't been released "limp wristed"? C'mon, don't take life so seriously.

There will always be some meat head willing to bash something somewhere on the internet. When the sales numbers come back, then you will have something to talk about. The vast majority of van customers do not haul 10,000 lbs with their van... in fact I've never seen a contractor do that. If they have to haul that much they're riding in a F-250, almost to a man. Fleet owners and General Contractors will buy the 3.7L in droves given low cost, fuel efficiency, and reliability of that motor. If they don't ... we'll then Ford (and you), should worry. Until then, relax.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
You're getting worked up because some fanboys in the comment section of the internet called a vehicle that hasn't been released "limp wristed"? C'mon, don't take life so seriously.

There will always be some meat head willing to bash something somewhere on the internet. When the sales numbers come back, then you will have something to talk about. The vast majority of van customers do not haul 10,000 lbs with their van... in fact I've never seen a contractor do that. If they have to haul that much they're riding in a F-250, almost to a man. Fleet owners and General Contractors will buy the 3.7L in droves given low cost, fuel efficiency, and reliability of that motor. If they don't ... we'll then Ford (and you), should worry. Until then, relax.
I agree with this sentiment. Some comments on the internet don't really mean much, especially with a vehicle that hasn't even been released yet. Let's at least reserve judgement until people take it home and get a chance to drive it.

I'm trying to figure out what people would be transporting that would get the weight up to 10,000lbs. That is an awful lot of weight. I really don't think that the Ford Transit is a step backward or anything. Anytime there is change there will be those who resist and hate on whatever is new and different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,112 Posts
This just proves how much Ford has neglected the RV market. To continue to make a cut a way chassis with 50 year old technology and fuel economy not even close to 10 mpg doesn't say much for Ford. I've heard a rumor that Sprinter is coming out with a heavier van and cut a way chassis in the near future.
In fairness to Ford, they are not the ones buying huge RVs that have a frontal area close to 100 square feet and the coefficient of drag of a brick. Ford only supplies the chassis required for such vehicles, and if they didn't, Chevy would in larger numbers. At present the Ford Econoline owns the market so they must have the best product value overall.

If Ford comes out with a small light-weight cutaway chassis similar to the Sprinter so that it has comparable fuel economy, people complain that it's not as capable as the largest Econoline. Do we want size and mass, or fuel economy?

I'm wondering if M-B comes out with a much higher GVWR cutaway chassis if fuel economy will still compare to the smaller Sprinter. Particularly if they stick an 8-1/2-foot-wide by 12-foot-high body on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
I'm trying to figure out what people would be transporting that would get the weight up to 10,000lbs. That is an awful lot of weight.
Most race trailers are gonna be pushing 10K.

Boats

Long bumper pull RVs

Car haulers

Toy Haulers

Plenty of reasons to want a E van over an F truck, and until Ford comes up with a HD Transit, they will lose SOME business. How many E vans regularly tow over 10K? Maybe 1 in 100? But regardless, some folks don't just like the old design because they're stubborn about a new one.

As for another comment about "If it had an Econoline badge all you babies wouldn't be whining".... Not true, completely different vehicle. Say Billy Bob's Doodad Co has been buying E vans for the last 60 years... They know their capabilities and push them to the limit 7 days a week (not uncommon with these vehicles)

10 new vans every 5 years, that's $4.8 million+ invested in Ford. And suddenly Ford says "yep, in 10 months you won't be able to buy those anymore" and the new ones don't meet your requirements. Boohoo??? Pop an econoline badge on it and the tow rating magically goes up to 10K? Nope! For the people that NEED a van on a truck frame, they're pushed out. For everyone else, myself included, this thing is going to kick ass. Can't wait to see if longer wheelbase and HD models are coming in the next few years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
You mean Americans aren't thrilled by the mostly euro class 2 and the prospect of losing their beloved load carrying? Who knew. Next you'll tell me Americans don't buy diesels.
just noticed this part out of the comments

no americans aren't buying diesels.. we really arent. not as many as we should be
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
Although not many are buying it seems like the amount of people buying them is growing, car makers seem to be making more diesels available to the american market than they have before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
Diesel have to be sold in the USA before people can buy them. VW has a few models and BMW and probably a few more? Diesels have mostly been dropped from light trucks, while when they were offered they were so over-sized with high dollar option prices, the normal light truck user could not justify it.

Greg Hayden
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
Diesel have to be sold in the USA before people can buy them. VW has a few models and BMW and probably a few more? Diesels have mostly been dropped from light trucks, while when they were offered they were so over-sized with high dollar option prices, the normal light truck user could not justify it.

Greg Hayden
it is true

compared to europe and asia

our diesel options are.. non existent
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
The EPA vastly under rates diesel mpg. I believe it was motor trend who tested a Passat TDI, they ran it 75 mph for 750 miles and averaged a little over 51 mpg. That's 8 mpg more than it's 43 mpg rating. Imagine what mpg they'd got if they'd drove 55 mph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,585 Posts
The EPA vastly under rates diesel mpg. I believe it was motor trend who tested a Passat TDI, they ran it 75 mph for 750 miles and averaged a little over 51 mpg. That's 8 mpg more than it's 43 mpg rating. Imagine what mpg they'd got if they'd drove 55 mph.
That's definitely true for theVW TDI's, and even the sales staff lets customers know right away that they will get way better mileage than the brochure suggests.
Sprinter diesels are different, very rarely does anyone report getting as good as the EPA estimate.
My '08 V6 Sprinter got 20 city, 20 cruising at 55 mph, but only 17-18 mpg cruising the Interstate at 75 mph. The I-5 guys almost never so the 26 mpg EPA estimate in real life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,156 Posts
I keep accurate fuel mileage records from my 08 diesel V6 5 speed Sprinter. When it was empty before the conversion and weighed 5300 lbs, I averaged 20.75 mpg. Now that conversion is complete and the van weighs 7200 lbs I get around 19.75 mpg. I do actively manual shift the automatic based on the % Load reported by a Scan Gage. Mercedes automatic is not automatic. Very poor programming. One of the main reasons for me to consider a 6 speed Transit is to escape from the Mercedes "automatic". If I had a choice it would be a 6 speed manual.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,585 Posts
I tried to follow the % load on my Scan Gauge II and shift accordingly, but too often I ended up forgetting to shift back to overdrive, And I've driven a manual as my daily driver for 45 years now! I'm sure I could have done better if really trying hard for good MPG numbers, but most people aren't really going to do that.
My real point is that it's the TDI that somehow does much better than advertised, and it's not a universal thing among diesels. Indeed, you must try hard to meet the projections in a Sprinter, while a TDI driver will exceed the numbers without even giving it a thought. The TDI guys that DO try for incredible MPG go WAY beyond the EPA figures.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,156 Posts
No. A 148.7" high roof weighs about 200 lbs more than a Sprinter. It will have slightly more frontal area due to the additional height. No magic here. Just simple physics. I would look at what Mercedes has been able to do and judge from that. The Sprinter move from inline 5 to the V6 reduced fuel mileage from about 25 mpg to about 20.5 mpg. I suspect the primary reasons for the loss is the stricter emission controls and a bit more weight on V6.

If I was buying a Transit diesel, I would use the existing Sprinter V6 as a guide to expected mpg. Do not forget to include all the additional costs for operating a diesel. Do not make the mistake of just comparing MPG numbers.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top