Red Horse

U-haul 650's have been very visible here in NE.

Kevin, Carolina also had a lot of Fords. I was at KTP on a day when a large number of Carolinas were in production. What surprised me that day was the fact that they were all not going through as one large batch. Would have thought that would have been standard procedure.

Janes-regarding Maxidynes comment on eastern fleets agree -St J for sure-but I think they were hi-hoods.Also maybe Hemingway???

I think the R's were 700's. The U models with either 8V-71s or V-903's-not saying roadway had any 903's but I think the U's with V-8's all had that higher cab and a spacer section on the front fender- How about it KSC?

Paul-great pix-assuming this was in your archives of "rarities" . As for your comment...GM never used to be afraid to fling new ideas into production..I was going to comment along those lines when this IFS issue was a topic. I've always thought if Ford, Mopar, Mack, IH etc spent the money to develop new products, and then bailed out on them as quick as GM did, they would have been done-or in worse financial shape then they all occasionally were. I'm thinking like the IFS heavy truck, the Pontiac transaxle, the Toro-Flow, 8,2 etc.. Then again Ford probably dropped more on the Edsel than GM did on all of its short lived ventures combined! Bottom line, GM for sure had the financial resources in the old days. The old phrase.."paralysis through analysis" was probably practiced less at GM than it was at the other companies.

How about it JB-you guys in the dealer world get any inkling that there could be a new cab for Avon Lake given fact their production currently revolves around THREE cabs- --steel Super Duty for 650/750, aluminum Super duty for 450/550 chassis, and the ancient Econoline for the cut aways. Talk about inefficiency from a manufacturing viewpoint-or so it seems to me.

Well then you can relate to what I'm talking about. I have memories of meeting this truck on a pit road and the minute the driver was on the brakes you would see that nose drop down to the degree you would never see a conventional I-beam/leaf spring front drop like that unless something was broken. Interesting that here we are 58 years later after GM tried that out and the conventional I beam/leaf spring set up still rules although air bags are starting to make some inroads. But unless its on a custom fire truck chassis, still no true IFS designs to speak of...or so it seams to me.

Kevin-I think "One Ford" went out the window when Mulally left.. My only thought is this fwd platform has a lighter GVW than the RWD's we get here. In any case when you look at the continued downsizing in engine sizes, have to believe its only a matter of time before this gets here. Where is the 3.2 built?

I wonder how this compares with frames on RWD US versions

Then in 1960 GM came out with the brilliant IFS front end for heavy trucks. Long torsion bars that went back to frame I believe under cab. Local sand and gravel outfit had one- single axle with like a 6-8 yd body. Unforunately while a decent ride, I believe they had a bad habit of twisting frame rails. I think by 62, it was gone. In any case that 59 i a beauty.

Well I have to say I agree with Maxidyne's comment on "electrification". Then again maybe we should make a distinction between "electrification" and "autonomous" vehicles. No doubt there will be a battle between electrified vs IC vehicles-assuming the cost of electricity is accurately captured, but its the self driving cars that makes me scratch my head. I thought Americans loved their vehicles?..Loved to drive? Apparently Silicon Valley has convinced people at the top that we are done with all that. Then again, considering most new drivers don't know what a 3 pedal vehicle is, and probably can't change a tire. perhaps Silicon Valley knows what's best for us. Thank God we have furniture man at the helm😎

Shows what 23 years of good care does-good lookin' "95"

For sure-no bullshit guy who had no trouble calling a spade a spade. A different kind of guy from the majority of the ones we have seen at the top. And kind of like whoever is at the top at Ford, he always had to contend with a family that was behind the scenes-at least that is the perception I have. How about it Kevin or anyone else with a good handle on just what Fiat is all about these days??

Hippy-congrats-where did you finally find the signs? Looking good!

How about that- Horns on the roof! Apparently some old school guys who don't care about the .0006 mpg loss because of aero dynamics!

"Cat-Navistar". Again everytime I think of it I say-"marriage made in Hell! Both companies created all kinds of bad press with engine issues- and they get together??? Shocker Kevin that the Cat site still mentions the on highway trucks. The one time the name "Cat" didn't work with the loyalists.

Maxi-I'm with you but I think this X12 is too big to stuff into a 750. I do believe its a 12 L designed to compete with 15L engines. What is crazy IMO is the fact that Ford is now using the old Super Duty steel cab for just 650 and 750. No clue as to where those cabs are stamped but they end up at the Ohio plant, along with the aluminum cab that is assembled on the 450-550 chassis that are also built there. All of this suggests to me-I hope- that there will ultimately be a new purpose built cab for 450-750 and select components will also be used to replace the E series cut aways that are still built at Ohio. MAYBE WE WILL SEE SOMETHING THAT WILL COME OUT WHEN THE NEW 7L+ V-8 gas engine comes out as that will be a home run for Ford as there is a big need for a low cost gasoline class 6/7 conventional. And while they are at it maybe time for a tandem as well. there are plenty of applications that need the GVW rating but just don't run the annual mileage to justify the diesel premium.

Isn't the downside of LNG very heavy tanks cutting into payload? (Even heavier than CNG systems)?? As for the cab itself, one of the better looking Euro cabovers IMO.

amen- was it a case of a narrow spec that precluded US firms from competing? If its any consolation, I'm sick of reading on the packaging of a tool I've purchased....." Engineered in US to (fill in the blank) specifications. Made in China". At least these things might have a plate that says-..Engineered in EU (Italy), made in US.!

Well then I stand corrected-it was the "answer" to the Maxidyne-so it was a CT.

I believe the Cummins was known as the PT 270. We needed a quick wreck replacement and found a White 4564 with Velvet Ride, that motor and a Roadranger RT -906. 3 holes, then pull the valve!. Only one I ever saw.

Jim-further trivia-correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the two speed control was not on gear shift but rather was dash mounted to discourage drivers from trying to split gears like a true 5 and 2.

good catch!

so is this the Navistar version? If so looks like they are sticking with old Terrastar cab and only commonality is chassis/power trains???

Surprising. The big driver toward front discharge here? IMO the customer. Once contractors have their first delivery with a front discharge, they don't want a rear discharge unless pour is a "big dump" into a concrete pump or a big form job, much less labor time to place concrete.