Being the owner of a 2002 E150, I was kind of perplexed when in 2007 the 150 became an 8 lug "E250 lite". My thought was that the 150 was gaining so much weight that the payload was decreasing below an acceptable amount using the P rated tires. Going to an 8500 lb GVW also eliminated the EPA gas mileage requirements for light trucks.

Well, last night I was at a jam session with one of my guitar player buds and had driven my E150 which he took note of. He is a retired Ford engineer but one of his last projects was the "new" E150 platform for 2007 which he noted was now a heavy 8 lug box. I asked why they eliminated the 5 lug vans, and he told me that Ford put all of the Econolines over the 8500 GVW limit because the CRASH TEST requirements are less stringent for 8500 lbs and up. Bingo. Amazing what kind of info I can find out from random folks around Detroit, where I've spent my life.

So if Ford were to want to re-introduce a "half ton" van like the old 150, they'd probably have to redo the entire chassis/body setup to meet crash specs. It's this kind of prospect that makes the big Transit yet another sensible step for Ford. It would definitely not be worth engineering a brand new Econoline at this point. Looking at the placement of the driver and front passenger seats in the current E vans, they are close to the doors because of the engine box, and fitting side and side curtain air bags would probably not be possible.

George

 

At the time "My thought was that the 150 was gaining" a bad reputation for front brakes & FORD saw they could kill 2 birds with 1 stone, by upgrading & unifying front brake/wheel parts.

Nobody was prevented from replacing "P rated tires" w/LT tires.

Things have changed since "one of (your) guitar player buds" was involved w/the "E150 platform for 2007". Raises issues speculating about FORD's "prospects" based on "retired" standards.

Working FORD engineers involved in the "project" of bringing Transit to the U.S. must use appropriate standards. Govt definitions of Light Truck have changed & different parameters are used. The old NHTSA/DOT "8500 lb GVW" threshold has apparently been replaced by 10,000 GVWR for "the CRASH TEST requirements". The old CAFE/EPA "8500 lb GVW" threshold has apparently been replaced by size classes based on "footprint". MPG requirements are now determined using a wheelbase & track width formula.

Read that automakers have agreed to 2016 CAFE standards requiring 35.5 MPG. That's 39 MPG for cars & 30 MPG for light trucks. This is the reality FORD engineers face as they prepare to launch Transit in the U.S.

I applaud making light trucks safer & engineers have been talking about unit body "CRASH TEST" advantages for decades.

Will be interesting to see how size classes based on "footprint" may change the vehicle design. Are we going to end up driving long narrow vehicles w/enormous front & rear overhang? Or bloated Winne on Roller Skate looking things? You'd think they'd use overall dimensions?

Deja vu all over again? In arm's reach have a 1930 photo of 'Sunbeam Silver Bullet' on Daytona Bch. The speed machine looks like an ~30' long cigar tube on wheels.