Red Horse

Teamster Grrrl Thx for your post-interesting stats- hope you are right.

Well KSC, here is a question for you. I, like a lot of people, are skeptical about Ford's decision to use the 6.7 Power Stroke as the sole diesel option for the new 750. Keep in mind this thing can have a 37,000 lb GVW plate and a 55,000 pd GCW rating!. I'm sure Ford is banking on their 250,000 mile warranty as proof of their confidence in this motor's ability but if I was a fleet manager, I would not be jumping at the chance to prove they are right. So what option would they have for a 6 cylinder? - always Cummins. But thinking outside thebox, I know FPT has a sales office in Michigan. And as Ford is using the FPT engines in the Cargo, how viable would that be-for both companies. I can't imagine it would be that difficult to certify these motors for the US and as FPT is now spun off from FCA (true?) we should not have to worry about Sergio trying to block the deal should Ram decide at this point they want to expand into class 6/7. Your thoughts?

Wishful thinking guys- The new world Ranger is a great vehicle-as is its Everest SUV counterpart. My bet is we won't see either This quote says it all IMO: Ford’s truck group marketing manager, Doug Scott, told USA Today last year that Ford was considering bringing a smaller pickup back to the U.S. but that its price and size would need to be different enough from the F-150 to make it worthwhile. "We're looking at it,” Scott told the paper. “We think we could sell a compact truck that's more like the size of the old Ranger, that gets six or eight more miles per gallon [than a full-size truck], is $5,000 or $6,000 less, and that we could build in the U.S. to avoid the tariff on imported trucks.” the F-150 is a cash cow and they won't trade a 150 sale for a lesser cost Ranger. If they build anything it will NOT be a BOF truck but rather some cheesebox based on a Transit connect or some other econo box I'm afraid. Take goodcare of your old Rangers boys!

Interesting to see what the powertrain is. I believe I read the BAE entry was powered by the Ford 6.7. Can't believe they would use something as complex as that in such a vehicle.

Barry Help! What is this crap that is always on my message board..."Banner". I can't get rid of it!

Actually the new order guides list a GCW at 55,000 lbs. It also lists a 26,000 lb REAR axle rating. couple that with the 14,000 front that is listed and assuming the correct rubber/spring ratings you end up with a GVW of 40,000lbs! The max GVW however is listed at 37,000 lbs. That is class 8 territory. Talk about putting it on the line! the 6.7 Power Stroke and the 6 speed Torqueshift as used in say a "one ton" are going into a 37,000 lb truck! Granted they are supposedly significantly different in the HD versions but still ......I guess the 250,000 mile powertrain warranty is supposed to be testimony to their confidence. I certainly understand the desire to use the inhouse powertrain, but I hope in time we see the Cummins, Allison, Fuller options back in the option book.

KSC- thx for putting this together. Something for us guys who miss Ford's presence on the heavy truck scene.

Congratulations to Don. A guy always willing to help and one who never made anyone feel his question was "too dumb". As 41 Chev said,hopefully Don was involved in the interview process.

I believe you are correct-same Holden roots. You have to wonder if GM learned anything when they went broke almost 10 years ago.

So what do you do when you wreck your SS/Police pkg next year and the Holden is out of production?? I am correct right? Holden is a dead duck next year as GM pulls out of Aussie production.

Wow- where has this been hiding??

I believe they do both-some are built by others, while I believe others are 100% Cat. I know for a fact some of the real small machines (mini's) are Wacker-Neusum (sp?). Not sure about others. You are probably right on Hitachi as for sure some Deeres are built by Hitachi.

Agree on hearing KSC's view. Also agree with your last statement..."what a mess". And how about this statement..."“And it will be a lot easier for us to continue to fully integrate our trucks with our construction machinery if we take full control of the manufacturing process. It also better places us to serve our customers’ needs in a quicker and more satisfactory manner.”..Marketing 101 bullshit at its finest! Let's see, they are building it in a plant that "assembles" excavators built in Japan! Lot of commonality of manufacturing there right? And while I too like the idea of American labor, how can you argue with the synergisms of using the less than utilized resources of Navistar's Escobedo Mexico Plant. They lost the Ford 650/750 volume, this should have fit Navistar like a glove. I always say, you could paint a pile of dog poop "Cat Yellow" and guys would stand around and say.."isn't that the nicest pile of dog p[oop you have ever seen?" Plain and simple it seems to me that Cat thinks they are going to capitalize on that brand loyalty factor to carry the day for them as they get into the HD truck business. Even though I think it is safe to say after 3 years of trying to crack the market, the only thing it seems to me they have created is a bad taste for the Cat truck brand. And as far as the loyalty factor, do they think it is going to be easy to break the loyalty factor the industry has for Mack? KW? Pete? F'liner? and yes International-ok Navistar? Those boys will not roll over and play dead. Bottom line, discarding the marketing BS I can't really see any real strong business case for this being a success. IMO, three years from now we will be reading...."after much consideration, Cat has decided to exit the on highway truck business in order to focus its energies on its core business".

Amen. What possible defense can they mount? "Well we did it based on odds of our less popular cab option being involved in such a crash". Whoever participated in this decision will not have a good performance review this year. I wonder what those mods cost in the manufacturing process. GM will be all over this like a wet blanket as they continue their "steel is stronger campaign"-while at the same time rushing to get their aluminum truck ready for market!

All of which supports Cat's position that ..."You CAN make a silk purse out of a sow's ear"!

Answered my own question- googled them and I can now say the logo is familiar. Young company, younger management team and current tractor age is under 2 years according to their website.

Celadon?? No 42?? 9000 tractors?? Ok- I give up-under what name(s) do they do business as?

that is good considering you were a teenager driving it!

As a kid growing up in Conn I remember a mail contractor had some tractors-Detroits for sure but I think they had the conventional Stude'bkr grill of the day-no exposed shutters.

Amen. I started a thread today on Blueovalnews about perhaps the wisdom of a plain jane truck-given fact news of the day is a 70,000 buck F-150. Basically every response was .."no way". Of course-what came over me! And aI do understaznd the importance of a high average transaction price- I'm a Ford stockholder. But I can't help but feel, there is a market for sure for such a vehicle. As long s there is incremental plant capacity this has to make sense-not everyone wants or can afford a Denali, King Ranch blah blah.

thx for response

I'm confused...Bumper will have a car fire/trash/dumpster fire line on it (100 feet of inch and three quarter)..where is the hose stored? Speaking of car fires, I have suggested a 19,000 lb GVW F-550 might be a good addition to our local department given number of car fires/MV accidents they respond to..(We are on an interstate exit) Was told by locals.."nah-not enough to handle a car fire" Having learned in my career what you can do with a 20 lb. Ansul (B-C) and for sure understanding a B-C is not going to put out a tire fire, what do you guys think about the smaller, quicker less costly mini pumpers???

I do believe the issue is they have been building a lot of trucks that are fully optioned in their quest for the highest possible transaction price. Just could be they are at the point that they have satisfied a lot of the demand for such vehicles and the time has come to get a bit more aggressive with the rest of the market-not everyone wants or needs a 50 grand pick up.

"Statistics 101" A course in how to lie with numbers. Interesting that 3 vehicles that are no longer built are on the "top seller" list. And 2012 Prostar is top of the sleeper list? Hmnn- I wonder if it has anything to do with how many have been dumped on the market?

Was not aware of that- So should be a reasonable conclusion that the system Navistar attempted to make work, was developed with EPA funding-or better yet complicity?? This should not be too difficult to defend- and is another example of government run wild with no consequences for their actions.