RoadwayR

It looks interesting. Seems to be an I-beam front axle under it, and judging by how high the cab sits on the frame I would be willing to wager it has straight frame rails front to back. Tip hood and fenders too, looks like it has DuraStar hood hinges above the front bumper. More of a class 6 design than a 4/5, much like the old TopKick/Kodiak or TerraStar. Might not be too much trouble to expand that platform into the higher GVW ranges.

Grocery stores out to love it. And that is not necessarily a dig. Anyway, listening to the comments on this thread and my own observations indicate to me that Volvo needs to rationalize their operations in North America. I think the sensible thing to do would be to focus Mack on vocational and heavy haul, and focus Volvo on regional and OTR. Mack gets a steel cab, Volvo get aluminum. Share basic engine platforms to a point, but optimize to application. Mack gets severe service frame/axle/suspension options, Volvo gets light weight highway components. I would not offer a Volvo mixer chassis, nor would I have a Mack version of this new VNR (I would offer a way to spec. a Mack for OTR highway service just because I am nostalgic!). Sell both lines at all dealers. Oh yeah, and get Mack back into medium duty. They used to be pretty good at it. Volvo wasn't..........

https://www.trucks.com/2017/06/22/spy-shots-first-look-navistargm-medium-duty-work-truck/

No complete trucks, just gliders?

I think the point is the FTR was first in fuel economy, and by a considerable margin. I personally could care less about acceleration, as long as the truck can safely keep up with traffic. Since if the Isuzu placed mid-pack in the acceleration comparison, it is probably acceptable.

16% to 22% better fuel economy, comparable performance. Interesting to see how the FTR does against the M2 when it gets the DD5. Any word on the tandem FTR?

Well, keep in mind GM has not been accused of any 'cheating' by the EPA, at least not yet. Take a look at who Bronstein, Gewirtz, and Grossman LLC is and what they specialize in. My guess is that Ford is next, and keep in mind Toyota and Hyundai don't sell diesel light trucks in the U.S.. Really staring to think diesel engines are on the way out. I think it is going to be too expensive to clean them up to the standards the EPA is calling for,

Cement mixer? Garbage packer?

They may have something there. It's priced a bit on the high side, but I suspect operating and overall cost-of-ownership will be quite low. And if it's anything like an NPR, it will be very reliable. Question about Spartan Motors: Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Spartan formed by some guys from Diamond Reo and Dodge's heavy truck operation after those truck lines went under in 1975? I seem to remember a Chrysler engineer named Sztykiel that ran Spartan for many years.

Ford's success with these trucks comes from Ford having the lowest priced trucks in the class 6/7 market. No, I don't think the truck is competitive with the International DuraStar or Freightliner M2, but it is priced lower and that will make the Fords appealing despite their shortcomings. Taking that into consideration, I think there is not a lot of incentive for Ford to offer vendor-supplied drivetrain components or a purpose-designed medium duty cab, because doing so with likely cause them to loose their cost advantage. At that point they compete head-on with International and Freightliner, and Ford is clearly not willing to spend the money to do that. I think Ford's position in the market is pretty safe for now. I think there is a possibility that International or Freightliner could come up with a low-cost (Mexican assembled?) class 6 competitor with a specific drivetrain/gasoline engine option, or possibly International could cook something up with GM (likely in the future), but for now Ford is in a good position if they stay the course.

Yellow iron? Say, didn't Caterpillar have a truck..........never mind. Interesting the tier 3 Series 60 is available for off road applications. Great engine.

Look what else was introduced today: https://www.internationaltrucks.com/trucks/rh-series Think I will like it better. Notice only the MAN-based diesel is offered?

Back to the topic, I am not sure where Cummins thinks they are going with this. All they make is a prime mover suitable for railroad service, but what about the rest of the locomotive? Are they going to compete with EMD and G.E., or are they looking only at the repower business? Yes there are a LOT of old 645 powered EMD's still in service (old G.E.'s tend to get scrapped!) but they run and parts are no problem. Unless the E.P.A. comes down on old locomotives I am not seeing big repower business.

It is just that everyone I know is hoping for something along the lines of a Jeep Wrangler, Not saying there is anything wrong with the Everest, but it's all in the name! The Everest would make a fine Explorer.

If this is going to be the new Bronco................a lot of people will be disappointed.

It would be interesting if they built a class 6. Cummins would like to see it.

EMD has a Tier 4 locomotive: http://www.progressrail.com/en/products/locomotives/freight/sd70acet4.html I believe U.P. is putting them in service now. Never heard of G.E. using Deutz power, they originally bought Cooper-Bessemer diesels before obtaining a license to build C-B diesel designs themselves. As far as I know G.E. still manufactures their own prime movers based on Cooper-Bessemer designs.

I knew a guy that had an old Air products tractor, it was a '79 or so White Road Boss, also with a 6V-92. I got the impression Air Products was a bit like Roadway, they would buy tractors from just about anyone, but would always order the exact same powertrain.

I think Cummins will make it, but I see them transitioning from primarily highway engines to non-highway (if they haven't already). And, speaking of highway diesels, think of how much trouble they would be in if they didn't have FCA (Ram) to sell to. Navistar's move to basically replace their VT365 with the Cummins B6.7 generated some good press, but I am not sure that deal represents a lot of volume. In addition, I believe the GM/Isuzu 'Duramax' will be offered in International's new class 4/5 truck, what is to stop that engine from replacing the B6.7 in other International applications?

I was just thinking that.......

I heard rumors that a tandem-axle F-850 and the option of the International DT466E were being planned for the Ford/Navistar Blue Diamond joint venture trucks before the whole 6.0L Powerstroke debacle. The Blue Diamond trucks were available with the Cat 3126/C7 anyway, so they had the engine for a tandem. I think the whole point of the new F-650/750 is to offer a low priced medium with an all-Ford powertrain, so I don't think we will be seeing an F-850 tandem.

I think the basic HN80 cab design would still be reasonably competitive if it were still around today. I don't think anyone faulted the design of that cab, only the assembly quality and material selection. I didn't have much first-hand experience with either the Ford or Freightliner built versions of these trucks, but I do remember hearing some horror stories about them. One in particular was from a driver (I think he was working for a local grocery store chain) who hit a deep dip and had the whole dash assembly break loose and fall into his lap! Freightliner put considerable effort into these trucks for some time after acquiring the line from Ford, and I got the impression the Sterling versions were better than the Ford versions. Of course, Ford would likely have also improved the line had they held on to it. One casualty of the Freightliner take-over was the de-emphasis of the OTR versions of the HN80. Ford introduced the HN80 line with a new Aeromax version, replacing the LTLA-9000 and it even came with the tag line "Together We Will Run the Country". It didn't survive under the Sterling name, as Freightliner saw Sterling as a vocational and regional haul line only. Ever see a Sterling with a sleeper? I never did. BTW- Ford built a long-nose HN80 prototype the was to replace the LTL-9000! It was shown at one truck show (Mid-America?) in 1996 and was never seen again. As for the tooling, I think the whole Sterling assembly line was scrapped when Daimler closed the St. Thomas plant. Sterling's are not easy to find parts for these days.

I have already heard of 6.7L Powerstroke owners buying up all the CJ-4 oil they can find at Walmart, ect.. Funny thing is Ford was recommending 5W-30 in these engines, an oddball viscosity for truck diesel engines. Now this. That having been said, warranty might not be too much of a big deal as long as the proper oil is readily available. What I see that will be a problem is fleets with other makes of diesels that want to run CK-4 5W-40 in everything.

I think the real reason Ford sold the HM80 was to convert KTP over to light duty production (the all-new 1999 Super Duty). Profit-wise, it was one of the smarter things Nassar did. I heard at the time Ford's heavy truck production earned just about enough money to fund their NASCAR effort. From what I understand, Ford came close to selling their medium duty line to Freightliner in 1997 as well. As you stated in another post, there was to be a medium duty version of the HM80 and James Hebe was very interested in it. When Ford decided at the last minute to retain the medium duty F series, they sourced a very limited option Cummins B diesel only F-700 from their Cuautitlan assembly plant. Freightliner eventually built their own version of an HN80 medium duty, the Acterra. An HN80 cab on an FL70 chassis, the Acterra was probably fairly close to what Ford's truck would have been.

Wow, not only can you get a franchise to sell the thing, but you can get one to build them too!