Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jettertrucks

mack medium duty trucks

Recommended Posts

Let's say that I wanted to launch a new Class 6 or Class 7. I myself would choose Class 6 over Class 7, or Class 6 accompanied by a sister Class 7 version (e.g. F-650/F-750), because the non-CDL Class 6 segment is where the volume is, and I can only make money via decent volumes (economy of scale).

Now let's reflect on the past.....Mid-Liner. The bulk of sales were non-CDL MS200P rigids (air-over hydraulic brakes) and MS250P rigids (full air brakes).

Fast forward to the present with, for example Ford. The F-650 outsells the F-750, what Bob, nearly 10 to 1?

And will Volvo offer a gasoline engine option in this Class 7? Reasonable question. After all, North American customers are asking for a gas option. Even Fuso is offering a GM (6.0L) gasoline engine. Ford's new purpose-designed 7.3L truck engine is here, and the Silverado/Navistar CV is about to land a gasoline engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kscarbel you are right. I still say Ford should build a real medium duty truck cab (larger, higher and tilt hood) for F-550-650. Class 5-6 are becoming more the same size truck. A F-450 is what a F-350 was 20 years ago. A heavy class 7 truck and a true baby 8 truck are more alike now. A F-750 is not a good class 7 truck today. Ford should build a Cargo C-550-650 (7.3 and 6.7), it would sell, they have the dealers to do it. Mack if they are going to get a medium duty truck it would seem that a true baby 8 and heavy class 7 conventional truck is what they need and could sell. The RVI range D would be a small market here I think. But in Europe a Range D is in that size truck class. I wonder if  the future for Mack will be in the day cab municipal, vocational straight truck and day cab tractor market only. They would need lighter frame and 7-9L engine to do some of this. This what I think  and why Volvo will never sell Mack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TS7 said:

Kscarbel you are right. I still say Ford should build a real medium duty truck cab (larger, higher and tilt hood) for F-550-650. Class 5-6 are becoming more the same size truck. A F-450 is what a F-350 was 20 years ago. A heavy class 7 truck and a true baby 8 truck are more alike now. A F-750 is not a good class 7 truck today. Ford should build a Cargo C-550-650 (7.3 and 6.7), it would sell, they have the dealers to do it. Mack if they are going to get a medium duty truck it would seem that a true baby 8 and heavy class 7 conventional truck is what they need and could sell. The RVI range D would be a small market here I think. But in Europe a Range D is in that size truck class. I wonder if  the future for Mack will be in the day cab municipal, vocational straight truck and day cab tractor market only. They would need lighter frame and 7-9L engine to do some of this. This what I think  and why Volvo will never sell Mack.

Bob and I agree 150% with you, that Ford should create a purpose-designed medium truck cab. The cost of designing such a cab, today with the use of software, is ridiculously inexpensive.

Realistically......light, medium and heavy each have their own unique cab requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm betting it won't be equipped with hydraulic brakes. I'm not sure of this, its just a gut feeling. I'm thinking they are going to stick to class 7 only. 

Although popular in the 80s, the late 90s saw the faze out of the 200 midliner series as there was no advantage to customer or maintanance having front hydraulic brakes and rear air brakes. 

There is a class 6 and down market, I just think Mack is too high up in the cost per unit market to play in that very competitive class field of smaller trucks.

I think this truck will be more geared to city delivery/LTL fleets where the idea of the CM baby 8 left off. I know the CM was a flop and the market tanked at the same time.  It's a truck to fill the large un attended med/light duty gap in the Mack lineup since the late 90s.  Wonder of it will be available as a tractor?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin, couple days ago you noted that China has loosened their overall length requirements, allowing the use of an American style short conventional with a short sleeper there. Korea and Vietnam have done similar, in fact International has been dumping a lot of their "MaxForce" trade ins there. Europe will be allowing a half meter more length to improve aerodynamics. I suspect that the current small market for conventionals has scared Ford and others away from tooling up a new heavy conventional... If the market for conventionals expands to Asia and Europe, that makes a new conventional cab heavy truck a viable investment for Ford and others. The downside is that the Chinese will expect to build it there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Korea will remain a COE market, and I expect Vietnam to as well.

The Chinese government wants to offer another choice, and one reason is government-owned (SOE) Dongfeng Liuzhou (in southern Guangxi Province) has been an ongoing proponent of conventional cab design while the Dongfeng* EQ140 and Jiefang CA141 were discontinued. With the change in regulations, compensating for a conventional's longer wheelbase, a 6x4 conventional can now gross 49 metric tons alike a 6x4 COE.

* Dongfeng Liuzhou and Dongfeng in Hubei Province are two competing truckmakers. Volvo has a thus far unsuccessful JV with the latter.

.

Photo 2.jpg

Photo 3.jpg

Photo 4.jpg

Photo 4a.jpg

Photo 5.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kscarbel2 said:

Bob and I agree 150% with you, that Ford should create a purpose-designed medium truck cab. The cost of designing such a cab, today with the use of software, is ridiculously inexpensive.

Realistically......light, medium and heavy each have their own unique cab requirements.

Kevin-we shall see if Ford has any surprises next week at the Work Truck Show in addition to the new 7.3 V-8.  Surprised they let that cat out of the bag a couple of weeks ago.  Good to read your comments about cost of designing a new cab.  I can't believe they (Ford) continue to build 3 cabs at the  Avon Lake plant that builds 650, 750 as well as 450 and 550 chassis cabs.  the 450/550 get the aluminum SD cab while the 650/750 get the steel cab and the E series cut aways still get their old Econoline cab.  Talk about an opportunity for savings!  Or so it would seem to this dummy.

Oh and for sure class 6 at least in the case of Ford is the hot market-you are right-10-1 over class 7.  I did look at totals for 2018 and class 6 was 71,525 units while class 7 was 63,927. 

 And with the new class 6 GM/International JV just starting to hit the dealer lots, Mack thinks they can in essence spend for a new assembly operation and be cost effective?  9 players in class 6 now and 6 in class 7.   

Crowded market as is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KS: If it is  not very expensive for Ford to produce a new medium duty cab then it shouldn't be to much money for Volvo to make an extended hood Pinnacle to take a big bore engine. Now we know that the Mack medium duty is late to the party when is this mystery model scheduled for an appearance. Not to soon I guess as they only have two engineers assigned working out of a storage trailer. :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the hell? China going back to inner tubes?!

1285470846_Photo5.thumb.jpg.9285b4143688f146a8615c6b22b8503a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...