sorry to read this but we all knew this was coming.

I just built my next ford van, the Tourneo 8 Seat Limited, price was $36.5K, low roof loaded. From the limited pictures on the ford europe site, looks pretty nice.

The big diesel is 153hp/284trq. Wonder what the US will get? I need to tow 6K or better.

I got a great '03 Chateau, with ton's of equipment, clean and low miles, I bought a year and half ago. With a bunch of extra's I installed I've got maybe $10K into it. So hopefully by 2020 I can find a clean used Tourneo 8 Seat Limited for $10K??

 

I do understand life goes on, Nissan just came up with a van, Ford had to streamline platforms worldwide, etc. etc. but count me a skeptic -- I do not trust a Euro, thin box, weak engine, driven in narrow streets of Europe, delivering flowers and chocolate, I don't trust it to come and carry black iron through the streets of New York.

Econoline's value is twofold -- a) a real workhorse, and b)- reliability under duress. I have also driven Iveco in Europe, which is like the Mercedes van, large volume, bicycle-size tires. That van is designed for artisanal service, and maximized for $ 9/gallon fuel. Load them up with 3000 lbs and see how MPG drops like a stone.

I think I have told the board here, in many job-sites here in NY, where there are more Econolines than people -- many job supers do not allow even GM vans come inside. Can't afford the delays when they break down. Mercedes boxes are not even thought about. They're good vans though for flower or dry-cleaning deliveries.

 

If I am reading the UK spec's right the towing capacity is just over 5000lbs. Bit low for my use, my travel trailer is 6000lbs dry!

 

As I think more about the uni-body concerns it occurs to me if Ford is investing 1.1 Billion in a new plant for USA versions of the Transit there just have to be considerations of it either being a body-on-frame or have that available for the RWD offerings. As PT suggests he's already over capacity towing wise IF the Euro verion is to be imported or be the template for the USA versions. Call me foolishly optimistic but Ford isn't investing such major capital into a plant to do nothing more than what they're already doing elsewhere.

The Transit's body especially any underbody structures that form the uni-body portion could be quickly re-engineered to accommodate a frame as large as the E350 or even larger such as the E450 and such.

I do hope Ford addresses the issues of body rust that seems epidemic to the Sprinter's---I've seen far too many of them locally in Columbus, Ohio that look to be absolutely ate up with rust. If my still-sound 2000 E250 is any indication Ford can and does build a great body that resists rust even with almost no maintenance or special effort. It seems the '92 and later year models solved many of the problems I've noticed on so many '91 and older models.

 

My comments are strictly for the American market. That being said, taking a light-duty van (Ford Transit) and trying to make it a medium- and heavy-duty van for US, is like Toyota or Honda taking a car and building it up to become the Pickup. No wonder Toyota and Honda are small players in the P/U truck market and Ford and Chebby kick their ****. They just can't do the job. It's like a replacing a pro linebacker with a scrawny dude, so that you would save on the food!!!

@JWA: I think the same as you -- Ford ought to know -- but being wrong wouldn't be the first time for a car company.

 

Chevy G-vans and Dodge Tradesmans were unibody and seemed up to the task. Like the Sprinters, they were offered as a cab and chassis. As far as power goes, if you have enough gears you can move a lot with very little as long as you have the time. But I'm sure Ford will offer plenty of modern HP in the form of its Ecoboost engines.

Someone asked about future resale value of E vans, I think there will always be a market for clean Econolines. Just like there is a market for clean 3rd generation vans with 460's right now. But they won't appreciate in value. To some people poor MPG is no worse than paying interest or depreciation.

 

Toyota has become the world's largest auto maker. In my lifetime I've witnessed a Land Cruiser & HiLux invasion. My neighbor's Tundra is definitely not "a scrawny dude". Since Honda came to the table, its slice of "the P/U truck market" has been growing while FORD's is shrinking. IMO many of the best vehicles ever made came from "small players". You've no doubt seen intro of new Japanese van?

This, published in 2011, represents 3 year study. It suggests Toyota not only does "do the job" but does "the job" w/comparatively few complaints:

"Toyota trucks from the 2008 model year rank highest in the latest J.D. Power and Associates vehicle dependability study.

In the “Midsize Pickup” category, the 2008 Toyota Tacoma was ranked most dependable, followed by the Honda Ridgeline. No other models in this segment performed above the segment average.

The 2008 Toyota Tundra was the award recipient in the “Large Truck” category. The Dodge Ram 1500 and Ford F-150 were honorable mentions."

IMO Toyota & Honda seems to have been doing a fairly good job at kicking FORD's "****" in the segments they compete in.

Agree w/SilverE350 on "As far as power goes, if you have enough gears you can move a lot with very little as long as you have the time" something Sprinters prove every day. However the advantage of small efficient motors is more pronounced when you move very little. Especially larger volumes w/lower weights. Comparing payload volumes Econoline looks like the "scrawny guy".

While I'd hoped FORD might develop a small efficient 4 cylinder turbo diesel 30 MPG Econoline, it appears others hope FORD develops a Gas Guzzling V10 Transit. Time will tell if FORD builds a Super Duty Transit heavy hauler for U.S. FORD did trademark T-550, pretty much a No Brainer swapping in a bigger motor & beefy up chassis. Even Shade Tree mechanics can "do the job". Seems like convergent evolution. Recall introduction of Toyota's V8.

Note: FORD UK website says Transit is built in FWD, RWD & AWD versions.

Also note: The difference between 15 MPG & 25 MPG over 200,000 miles, at today's gas price, is nearly $20,000.

 

How about a Transit Country 4x4? I could really get into one of those.

 

Have you compared FORD's published specs?

FORD US lists 2011 E-Series van's "payload" as ranging from "3190 lb - 4050 lb" in sales lit.

FORD UK lists Transit models "payload" as ranging from "1560 kg - 2238 kg" on their website.

Converts to 3432 lb-4924 lb. Calculated differently?

Have grown accustomed to seeing the FORD Transit in Europe & it never gave me the impression of being "a scrawny dude" but quite obviously does substantially "save on the food".

Ford Transit - The Official Home of the Ford Transit - Ford UK

 

The Transit is one of the ugliest vehicles I have ever seen. More and more I am becoming less and less a fan of Ford products.

 

As a vintage enthusiast, I'm quick to judge as the E-series trucks are eerily old in their design. Conventional drivetrain layout, body-on-frame, the body styling is really old if you think about it (think 40's bread truck), and even a 2011 e350 can use at least half the parts from an '80 f-100. It's also fantastically simple in its construction, just like trucks used to be- pitman arm steering, TTB suspension, etc. It's built like a TRUCK and can take abuse that only Americans can dish out. The modular architecture (body on frame, RWD layout) lends itself well to repair after major damage- **** HAPPENS, Econolines can take it.

The Transit sounds like, design-wise, it's best described as a CAR with a very high roofline. Sorry but anything with FWD or unibody is fruity.

Anyway, I'm trying to READ about the Transit before passing judgement. I'm inclined to trust Ford's call.

As a fleet mechanic, I can't say enough good things about longitudinal engine layout and parts interchangability. So my questions are, will the RWD version still have a transverse engine (I'm assuming the FWD does)? And will the new van use any parts, and I mean little ones like pigtails, sensors, and lightbulbs; that are common to American commercial trucks?

 

Did some reading. Quick thoughts:

Stick shift is cool. I can't imagine that'll be available in the US market, as Americans are scared of clutch pedals. But I'm keeping my hopes up. My only complaint about the E-series was the auto trannys- auto sucks.

The van doesn't look as fruity as its smaller cousin, the Connect. But it's definitely easier to picture it delivering chocolates in Italy, than careening through Newark streets full of plumbing tools or engine blocks (thanks to henry10s for the visual)

I think it might have a transverse engine. If it does then I hate it for good reason.

Unibody construction will be a bitch if anyone ever gets in an accident in one of these. If you've ever seen what New York City does to vans you'd understand the necessity for a seperate body and frame.

Aside from all this, I love Allan Mulally. I understand the logic behind having everything be a "global" model, and I support the globalization of Ford design. Universal design is what I love more than anything about Ford. With that said, I still don't understand why I'm having this euro-van forced on me. Couldn't they just kill the fruity little Transit and make the rest of the world use E-series trucks?

And if Benz vans are so great (that's what the Transit is like IMO), then why did the E-series outsell them so consistently?

 

@Club Wagon: your defense of the Transit is pathetic. C'mon man, it's a double slider. Did you miss that????

 

FORD UK seems to show only a 6 speed manual tranny in Transit. Hallelujah! I like. Can't imagine FORD US never caught on that plenty of American van owners still want a manual tranny. I would've preferred an Econoline w/decent manual OD tranny. Last FORD van with "Stick shift" was ~'88 & apparently a stinkeroo.

"I still don't understand why" a generation of American Econoline fans had "auto trannys- auto sucks....forced on" them? With any luck FORD US will develop/introduce a Global 'Full Monty' Transit. Retaining existing FWD, RWD, AWD layouts & adding auto tranny option & bigger motor/stouter rear subframe version for Super Duty towing.

Note that the "Jumbo" 4924 lb payload Transit comes w/dual rear wheels.

Also note a FWD Transit has a very usefully lower floor. I like. More traction, more space & more MPG.

IMO if you were to see most of the new UK Transit versions next to one of our typical FedEx "Benz vans" it would go a long way to dispell your opinion 'that's what it is like'. Transit has 3 wheel bases & 3 roof heights. For awhile Sprinters were all 5 speed automatics & were all RWD. Did they change?

The FORD Focus consistently outsells Mustang. The FORD Pinto also sold well, but wasn't "so great".

 

No contributor need try a "defense of the Transit" as it exists. Let alone as it might be developed as a replacement, after "Ford offically kills E-series". Information FORD has published about Transit & E-Series speaks for itself. The FORD Transit already proved itself in Europe.

Never saw FORD specs mention "a scrawny dude" or how to "save on the food" or refer to "a double slider". Did I "miss that" stuff when I saw FORD "payload" specs? Afraid you might have "pro linebacker(s)" mixed up w/FORD Trucks.

However, did find FORD UK website somewhat "pathetic" especially b/c of a "pathetic" internet. Download failed that would presumably reveal A to the "transverse engine" Q. Still don't know if FWD, RWD & AWD are all "transverse engine"?

Also didn't see Transit Seating Capacities! Surprised at not seeing the People Mover/Window Van version? Clicked on Send Brochure & it timed out. Will ask cousin in UK to send.

Don't try to blame me for "defense of the" Toyota & Honda pickups you offended either. Merely cited J. D. Powers studies/conclusions to provide alternative opinions.