Ford's New V-6 Truck Strategy

[Ben99GT]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
If the Transit isn't full-size, then neither is the Sprinter. Both are large vans.


Don't be fooled by their similar appearances and profiles. The Sprinter is (was) a substantially larger vehicle (IIRC the two wheelbases were 144 and 170), with V-6 engine choices (after the early I-5).

The Transit's wheelbase is "only" 114.6 inches, and it's powered by a relatively small 2.0L I-4. It may be a very capable vehicle, but "large" it's not, at least not in traditional van terms.


What are you talking about? The standard Transit wheelbase is 147.6".

Don't confuse the Transit with the Transit Connect.

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
I'd say it looks pretty "full-szize".

some people just have issues with new things.


I say, it looks like a Sprinter. How well does it compare to the Sprinter we get over here?

 

[another Todd]

300 HP in a truck doesn't mean squat if you have to run at 6500RPM to see it! Torque is what matters, and if you have to run at 4000 rpm to see the best of torque, that isn't good either. Look at the V10s, good horsepower figure, but at unreasonable high RPM, makes for a terrible truck/motorhome engine. What we want is tons of torque down low like 2000 RPM or lower. Thats what gets you rolling and keeps you rolling on the hills.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: another Todd
300 HP in a truck doesn't mean squat if you have to run at 6500RPM to see it! Torque is what matters, and if you have to run at 4000 rpm to see the best of torque, that isn't good either. Look at the V10s, good horsepower figure, but at unreasonable high RPM, makes for a terrible truck/motorhome engine. What we want is tons of torque down low like 2000 RPM or lower. Thats what gets you rolling and keeps you rolling on the hills.


Sounds like you want diesel power out of a gasser. And that isn't happening.

While the new 6.2L is 385/405, it makes those numbers at 5,500RPM and 4,500RPM respectively. Though I have no doubt in my mind low-end torque is FAR from lacking.

On the other hand, the new 6.7L Diesel makes 400/800 and makes those numbers at 2,800/1,600 respectively. 800lb-ft of torque at 1,600RPM is rather ummmm.... respectable for a pick-up truck engine. And I dare say motorhome.

And BTW, the V10 makes 305HP @4,250 and 420lb-ft @3,250. It is FAR from the "high revvin' screamer" you are making it out to be.

 

[Steve S]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
I'd say it looks pretty "full-szize".

some people just have issues with new things.
So Euro socialist looking. It looks like it belongs in France.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
If the Transit isn't full-size, then neither is the Sprinter. Both are large vans.


Don't be fooled by their similar appearances and profiles. The Sprinter is (was) a substantially larger vehicle (IIRC the two wheelbases were 144 and 170), with V-6 engine choices (after the early I-5).

The Transit's wheelbase is "only" 114.6 inches, and it's powered by a relatively small 2.0L I-4. It may be a very capable vehicle, but "large" it's not, at least not in traditional van terms.


Don't be fooled by their similar names, the Transit and Transit Connect have absolutely no components in common.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: L_Sludger


I say, it looks like a Sprinter. How well does it compare to the Sprinter we get over here?


The Transit has been the best selling light commerical vehicle in Europe for the last 40 years. I'd say the Europeans have voted with their Euros that the Transit outsprints the Sprinter.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: Steve S

So Euro socialist looking. It looks like it belongs in France.


It should do very well in Canada then eh?

 

[OVERKILL]

Ekpolk, to remove the confusion:

Ford Transit

Wheelbase: 147.6 in
Width: 77.7 in

European engines (no idea what they'll bring here):
2.2L Duratorq TDCi I4
2.4L Duratorq TDCi I4
3.2L Duratorq TDCi I5
2.3L Duratec I4


Transit Connect:

Wheelbase: 104.9 in, 114.6 in (LWB)
Width: 70.7 in

Engines:
1.8L Duratorq TDCi Diesel I4
2.0L Duratec Gasoline I4

 

[Herz]

wow those vans are hideous

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Ekpolk, to remove the confusion:

Ford Transit

Wheelbase: 147.6 in
Width: 77.7 in

European engines (no idea what they'll bring here):
2.2L Duratorq TDCi I4
2.4L Duratorq TDCi I4
3.2L Duratorq TDCi I5
2.3L Duratec I4


Transit Connect:

Wheelbase: 104.9 in, 114.6 in (LWB)
Width: 70.7 in

Engines:
1.8L Duratorq TDCi Diesel I4
2.0L Duratec Gasoline I4


Point well taken. Only questions I have left are these:

1) Isn't there a long WB version of the Transit Connect?

2) Why on earth is the "Transit", as distinct from the "Transit Connect" totally absent from the Ford website? (at least the one we see from the US)????

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: defektes
wow those vans are hideous


Yes indeed, both of them are absolute visual monstrosities. . .

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Ekpolk, to remove the confusion:

Ford Transit

Wheelbase: 147.6 in
Width: 77.7 in

European engines (no idea what they'll bring here):
2.2L Duratorq TDCi I4
2.4L Duratorq TDCi I4
3.2L Duratorq TDCi I5
2.3L Duratec I4


Transit Connect:

Wheelbase: 104.9 in, 114.6 in (LWB)
Width: 70.7 in

Engines:
1.8L Duratorq TDCi Diesel I4
2.0L Duratec Gasoline I4


Point well taken. Only questions I have left are these:

1) Isn't there a long WB version of the Transit Connect?

2) Why on earth is the "Transit", as distinct from the "Transit Connect" totally absent from the Ford website? (at least the one we see from the US)????


Answer to #1 is yes. I have it listed (specs) beside the regular one (note the LWB).

Answer to #2 is that it is currently only available in Europe and China, so check their respective Ford websites for details.

 

[Ben99GT]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Ekpolk, to remove the confusion:

Ford Transit

Wheelbase: 147.6 in
Width: 77.7 in

European engines (no idea what they'll bring here):
2.2L Duratorq TDCi I4
2.4L Duratorq TDCi I4
3.2L Duratorq TDCi I5
2.3L Duratec I4


Transit Connect:

Wheelbase: 104.9 in, 114.6 in (LWB)
Width: 70.7 in

Engines:
1.8L Duratorq TDCi Diesel I4
2.0L Duratec Gasoline I4


Point well taken. Only questions I have left are these:

1) Isn't there a long WB version of the Transit Connect?

2) Why on earth is the "Transit", as distinct from the "Transit Connect" totally absent from the Ford website? (at least the one we see from the US)????


http://www.ford.co.uk/Commercialvehicles/Transit/Overview

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Transit

The current Transit is not the van we are getting, FYI. The next generation Transit will be moving to a new global platform, which is what will replace the Econoline here.

Hopefully our version gets the 4.4 PSD, 6.2 Boss, and 6.7 PSD. If it does no one will miss the E-Series.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: defektes
wow those vans are hideous


Yes indeed, both of them are absolute visual monstrosities. . .


I think it looks really good in cut away applications.

But I agree the boxy nature of the van version does look a bit odd to our sensibilities over here. They are common as dirt over there and our vans probably look silly to them.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
...
I think it looks really good in cut away applications.
...


Sure, cut away, ALL of the exterior sheetmetal and tack-on decor, and then yes, it would start to look good!

Sorry, I'm a smart-whatever -- I just couldn't resist that bait!

 

[Dualie]

Cut away all that sheet metal and put an econoline body on it

 

[L_Sludger]

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Originally Posted By: L_Sludger


I say, it looks like a Sprinter. How well does it compare to the Sprinter we get over here?


The Transit has been the best selling light commerical vehicle in Europe for the last 40 years. I'd say the Europeans have voted with their Euros that the Transit outsprints the Sprinter.

I'd love to drive a Transit and a Sprinter back to back.
At my work, we have some vans. Two Econolines (1997 and 2001) and one Sprinter (2008)
My impression of the Sprinter is that it blows the Econolines away.
It gets twice the gas mileage, has more space, has great handling at highway speeds, a tight turning radius, and interior fit and finish that are leaps and bounds ahead of the Econolines.
The Econolines have a little more power and better brakes.
The Sprinter was very expensive though. Something like $50,000. The Econolines could not have cost more than $25,000. And they're paid for; the Sprinter is leased.
I have a point here. Ford has sat on the Econoline chassis for way too long. It's about time that they replaced it with something modern.

 

[panthermike]

I think Ford knows what they're doing, they've been #1 for so long for a reason. Plus, there are still two V8's available for those who want it.

I'm one of those "V8 guys". Not because I think lesser of the V6's, but when I have a V8, the first mod is dual exhaust.

I heard the possible figure for the Ecoboost at 390hp/410tq. I would be very impressed if that happened.

Even w/ the 3.7; it has same HP as the 5.4 and 80lbft of TQ less. It will be a great base/fleet engine IMO. Plus, if they can get decent MPG's out of them, that will help them sell well.

 

[mrsilv04]

Originally Posted By: panthermike
I think Ford knows what they're doing, they've been #1 for so long for a reason.


That seems to be an odd talking point, since Ford is not the top manufacturer of pickups, and hasn't been for years.

Don't think too hard on this one...

(And let's not start an all out war on this, it isn't fair for the mods to have to clean up afterwards... OK? Can we agree on that?)