new ford chassis coming???

Went to Barrett-Jackson Auction in Scottsdale, AZ yesterday. Lots of cars and trucks. One item that caught my eye was a Transit Van.

It had a label on it stating it was a Prototype.
This would be a class B. But I can see it as a replacement for the Sprinter based Class C's.

coolmom42 wrote:

RobertRyan wrote:
New Petrol engines much more harmful than older engines
Petrol EFI engines 1000 times more harmful

Original post keeps on being blocked by Pop Ups
Petrol engines cause more pollution than dirty diesels

You're obviously not familiar with US regulations on particulate emissions from gasoline powered engines.

Very familiar, European and U.S. petrol engines do not have a trap like the newest diesels. Particulates from petrol engines are similar, it differs with diesels different emphasis. Euro regulations heavier on CO2 and particulates. U.S. regs heavier on Nitrides. You can import a US car into Australia and sell it commercially. not so a U.S. Diesel Pickup. Import quotas limit them to 100 per importer as they are non compliant
The coming 3.2 litre diesel in the new US Transit, can be upgraded to Euro V and is used in the Global Ranger. We have Euro 5 . Unfortuntely it cannot be upgraded to Euro 6 in Europe. As a result the engine has been dropped from the Transit range in the UK, it's biggest market in Europe

RobertRyan wrote:
New Petrol engines much more harmful than older engines
Petrol EFI engines 1000 times more harmful

Original post keeps on being blocked by Pop Ups
Petrol engines cause more pollution than dirty diesels

You're obviously not familiar with US regulations on particulate emissions from gasoline powered engines.

New Petrol engines much more harmful than older engines
Petrol EFI engines 1000 times more harmful

Original post keeps on being blocked by Pop Ups
Petrol engines cause more pollution than dirty diesels

France planning to eliminate diesel engines in cars.

Read here.

Dazuki wrote:
Our local area is crawling with AMR Sprinters.

It sounds like it varies a lot a across the U.S.

rjstractor wrote:

RobertRyan wrote:
Examples of ambulances used before diesels replaced the whole lot

We get it, but we're really not concerned with what you guys do in Australia. FWIW, by the early '90s nearly all US ambulances were diesel as well. In 1993 we went from a 460 V8 gas rig to an F350 with the IDI 7.3 diesel. The 460 rig was like a race car compared with the 7.3 but it was a pig on gas. Now with Ford dropping the diesel in the E series we're starting to see more gas powered rigs. Engine technology in both gas and diesel is miles ahead of 20 years agoThe 460 rig was like a race car compared with the 7.3 but it was a pig on gas. Now with Ford dropping the diesel in the E series we're starting to see more gas powered rigs. Engine technology in both gas and diesel is miles ahead of 20 years ago. Having been around diesels my whole 25 year career, I'm glad that with the new emission systems I no longer have to smell that nasty diesel exhaust.

They still are very heavy on Petrol, so does the dropping of fuel prices make them worthwhile?. No nasty diesel exhaust with current diesels, here.

carringb wrote:

RobertRyan wrote:

They certainly are

Can you provide us with a single reason why, besides the aforementioned infrastructure issue?

Fact is, diesels and their new emissions packages simply are not reliable under the driving cycles experienced by EMS vehicles. AMR is the largest Ambulance fleet in the US, with 4200 rigs which do about 3-millions calls each year. Guess what? They only V10s now. The marginal improvement in fuel economy from a diesel is offset by 20% more expensive fuel, questionable reliability, and increased repair expenses.

Our local area is crawling with AMR Sprinters.

RobertRyan wrote:
Examples of ambulances used before diesels replaced the whole lot

We get it, but we're really not concerned with what you guys do in Australia. FWIW, by the early '90s nearly all US ambulances were diesel as well. In 1993 we went from a 460 V8 gas rig to an F350 with the IDI 7.3 diesel. The 460 rig was like a race car compared with the 7.3 but it was a pig on gas. Now with Ford dropping the diesel in the E series we're starting to see more gas powered rigs. Engine technology in both gas and diesel is miles ahead of 20 years ago. Having been around diesels my whole 25 year career, I'm glad that with the new emission systems I no longer have to smell that nasty diesel exhaust.

pnichols wrote:

rjstractor wrote:
haven't looked into it, but apparently Ford now offers the ambulance prep package with the V10.

Off topic, but .... exactly what is contained in Ford's E-series van ambulance package?

I've often wondered if it wouldn't be a good idea to order a new Class C to be built based on an E450 V10 chassis with the ambulance package. Would I be gaining some chassis or systems ruggedness or reliability advantages to help make for a better on-pavement and off-pavement drycamping rig?

With the ambulance prep package you would be better able to use the engine as your power source for electricity and air conditioning. The RV industry leans toward separate gensets to power add-on A/C.

You would likely still need some of the options in the RV prep package, like the frame pucks, but most of what is in that package just serves to make the cab nicer.

In the diesel days, the ambulance package included a second alternator. For the gas engines, Ford offers instead two larger alternators rated for heavier duty cycles, available in any E-series with 5.4 or 6.8 engines.

Passenger vans get the rear air conditioning, cargo vans and cutaways can get the take-off for rear air as an option. It is used not just for ambulances, as builders of smaller transit buses also sometimes use the engine-driven A/C system rather than installing add-on air conditioning and power sources for that.