When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Anybody who bothers to do any research will learn the naysayers are wrong. Why would Ford print operators manual for a truck the naysayers claim does not exist?
I will clear up your Arguement here and now It is a 1962 not a 1961 as i stated initially it is an H series it was a box truck/moving van originally it is now equipped with a jerr-dan rollback wrecker bed and yes it does have a 220 cummins in it that runs great. Kinda threw me b/c im used to cummins engines either red or tan this one is green like a detroit diesel. anyway whether or not its listed in some book it physically exists! Unfortunately i waited around too long and it sold before i was able to pick it up so now i have bought a 74 c700 with a 391hd an allison trans (from a newer c600) and air brake axles also from a newer c-series and even aluminum alcoa wheels all for $2300.00 rust free
I'm 67 years old, been in this hobby since 1956, have owned 337 vehicles, 84 of them FoMoCo products. Purchased 8 new Ford Trucks, 4 new Ford Cars. Was a Ford partsman for 35 years.
When I see FoMoCo proof that they offered a diesel in 1961, then I'll believe it. All three of my 1957/63 Ford truck parts catalogs, printed in 1965, 1968 and 1970 do not list a diesel until 1962.
Quoting from a book about Ford Trucks, written by James Wagner, who is not connected with FoMoCo, doesn't cut it...IMO.
When the factual evidence becomes overwhelming, you have a habit of disappearing from the thread. Why is this? History is obviously on my side with over 1/2 dozen pieces of evidence,plus this new photo. You provided nothing except for whats not in your parts books.
Your standards for what others should accept as the "truth" are low.
"Official Ford Truck documents"--I already explained why I thought what you posted isn't "proof" the trucks existed. You apparently can't understand the points I tried to make.
How do you know ND made "incorrect 'parts book' claims"? Do you have the parts books?
You did not provide "overwhelming factual evidence". You provided printed materials and advertising art.
You are convinced you are correct in this case, and so be it. You can answer your own questions, and I'm sure you'll always get the answer you're looking for.
You can call it what you want, I call it standing up for correct history and not getting bullied by people just passing gas. It was never even close to being a pissing contest, they came with empty bladders.
Your standards for what others should accept as the "truth" are low.
"Official Ford Truck documents"--I already explained why I thought what you posted isn't "proof" the trucks existed. You apparently can't understand the points I tried to make.
How do you know ND made "incorrect 'parts book' claims"? Do you have the parts books?
You did not provide "overwhelming factual evidence". You provided printed materials and advertising art.
You are convinced you are correct in this case, and so be it. You can answer your own questions, and I'm sure you'll always get the answer you're looking for.
Right, my reputation is on the line. I'm follower of reality and facts, not egos and hot air. History will prove I was right then and right now. You chose to go down the path of defending the undefendable. How does your reputation look now?