Ford's new van. Replacing the Econolines

L

lotsofmiles

Father of the Van
Dec 4, 2008
3,097
0
0
Michigan
They're getting back into diesel vans in the US

ooooo, vans :yumyum:


Been seeing this van on i94 in Michigan. Was able to get a few pics. Then saw him parked and stopped to look and talk to him.

Driver said it is getting up to a combined 38 mpgs. Diesel with dpf and def. This one
has about 19000 miles on it. They were still tuning the regens and def usage on it. He also said it "gets up and goes" with a poop eating grin.


IMAG0503.jpg



IMAG0501.jpg



IMAG0499.jpg



IMAG0509.jpg


he didnt know (or wouldnt tell me) engine size, or pricing.

Another member here that works for Ford said the gvwr of this one is either 9200 or 10320 lbs
 
coker6303

coker6303

Keep Calm and Chive On!!
Aug 6, 2009
2,484
0
36
40
Houston, TX
I'm going to go ahead and say I'll take the plunge as soon as someone releases a 1/2ton diesel truck. and I'll flip out if it can get over 30mpg!

but this story sounds a little fishy...
 
coker6303

coker6303

Keep Calm and Chive On!!
Aug 6, 2009
2,484
0
36
40
Houston, TX
I did find this:

The turbo-diesel engine Ford is talking about is most likely the DuraTorq common-rail direct-injection 3.2-liter inline-five offered in the new global Ford Ranger. Although no specific details were released, that engine would make the most sense, and it would be a great way to get a proven small-diesel into the U.S. market. In the Ranger, power ratings are about 200 horsepower and 350 pounds-feet of torque, certainly more than adequate for a work-duty cargo or passenger van of this size.

but the pics online are quite a bit different that what's posted above.
 
JustinD

JustinD

Plow Truck
Nov 21, 2008
2,067
0
36
42
Tiverton Rhode Island
I had 2 Freightliner Sprinters, one was a high roof 03, and the other was a standard roof 04. Both got good mileage but they are the most uncomfortable ride, the rear suspension was a mono-leaf spring?? :confused: Supposed to be rated for 8600lbs? We had tons of issues with them, transmissions, security system, and rear shocks were the issues we mostly had to address. Great on fuel but other than that it sucked. We recently upgraded to a Ford E-350 with a 5.4 not my choice but I have to say its a nice truck, especially compared to those junk Freightliners!!! Hope those Fords are built stronger?
 
L

lotsofmiles

Father of the Van
Dec 4, 2008
3,097
0
0
Michigan
I asked him twice about the 38. He said it was at the fill ups, hand calculated. So idk. When I drove a sprinter for FedEx i could only get mid 20s on the eway, and it was elec limited to 64 mph
 
JustinD

JustinD

Plow Truck
Nov 21, 2008
2,067
0
36
42
Tiverton Rhode Island
Yeah I would say I got 22-24mpg with it empty most of the time. Mine was limited to 87mph I think it was a factory setting? Both 03+04 vans were the same.
 
MACKIN

MACKIN

Smell My Finger...
Aug 14, 2006
3,948
1
0
Connecticut
Mike L. said:
Way too much wind resistance to get that kind of mileage. I don't believe it.
Click to expand...

I agree guy is full of it or cant do math or has his figures all off . Thirty - eight MPG in that van is near impossible IMO unless he only drives down hill.
 
L

lotsofmiles

Father of the Van
Dec 4, 2008
3,097
0
0
Michigan
not me

and IDK, I'm thinking BoxFish car design here. Looks like youre driving a brick wall but really super low drag
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom