Because having a larger cab than the old SD is a bad thing? After driving cramped SD (some regular) cabs for the last 15 years, I'm happy they did this.

 

I would have liked to have seen the cabs a little w i d e r, with more shoulder to shoulder room.


Sitting thigh to thigh with another sweaty guy is not my idea of a comfortable commute after a long day's work on the job site, and many business, both small and large alike, are cramming their crews 6 guys to a four door and 3 guys to a two door.


Looks like we'll have to wait another 20 years for that to happen though, because this cab is here to stay for a long time. The E Series van cab, introduced in 1992, is STILL getting stamped some 23 years later for the current cutaway chassis. The previous common cab F-Series, from F-150-850, kept its sheet metal from A pillar to D pillar unchanged for 17 years. Barring some bone crushing increase in statistically compared fatalities that would otherwise be survivable, this is our Ford cab for the next two decades, like it or not.

 

Not necessarily. Sharing the cab with the F150 is a good thing, as the F150 gets updated more regularly. Sharing cabs will allow Ford to update them both together and keep them both up to date. I think it's a good thing.

 

I wholeheartedly agree that a "muscle car rake" is a good thing, and never understood some people's fascination with so called "leveling kits." A higher, or even a level front end on an empty truck undermines three important practical advantages of having the rake...

1. The lower front end contributes to better fuel economy.

Everyone has seen the front air dams migrate from the race track and the salt flats to the sports cars and hyper miler hybrids, and now, even the trucks of our highways and byways. But adding to the effect of the front air dam, the lower front end and slightly higher rear end can create venturi effect, where the air that does get under the vehicle first has to "squeeze" through a constriction first, before find a less constricted area... which changes the pressure ratio of the air past that constriction, for positive effect in reducing vehicle drag.


2. The lower front end contributes to more comfort.


Most truck owners know that the rear leaf suspension is progressively variable, with only the longer more compliant leaves engaged when unloaded, while the heavier rated supportive leaves (or center sections of tapered leaves) and secondary (or tertiary) overload springs only engaging when a load is applied. As long as people accept the "look" of the rake, then I imagine that suspension desingers can continue to make the truck more comfortable by extending the amplitude of the jounce to rebound distance, giving spring stack calibrators more room to work with creating a supple ride that can also get down to business and carry the load when applied. For folks who worry that the rear bed walls are too high for their 5th wheel trailers, try not to judge until that pin weight is applied. The truck often settles fairly far down and deep once the weight consumes all the travel of the first stage of spring and starts compressing the supplemental stages.


3. The lower front end contributes to operational safety.


Everyone has seen the overloaded truck with headlights pointed up to the sky, and the front tires bouncing off the ground with little to no steering traction. Not much more need be said about that, except to say that rake we see in an UNLOADED truck often means that the truck will be just right when loaded to 75% of its GVWR capacity.

 

From a business perspective, I'd rather prefer that Ford NOT change the cabs to their work trucks based on the whims of whatever design look is popular that year. What is there to keep "up to date"? A door is a door. A window is a window. They need to open and shut, and not break.


Having a prolonged design cycle allows up-fitter businesses to get a return on their investment when they make parts to specifically fit a truck body in an integrated fashion. From special doors for the handicapped, to platform rigging, to armor plating, to airport service vehicles, to fire apparatus, to ENG vehicles, to customized RV beds following factory lines, it takes an investment to make some things fit nice and tidy.


Harrison Ford Trucks in Australia recently spent almost a half million dollars making a right hand drive mold for the now out going Super Duty, so that they could give the guys down under a glove box, which they didn't have with the old Super Duty trucks made in Brazil back when Ford was officially selling Super Duties down there. And then a couple years later, poof, new design.


Stop moving the cheese, I'd say.


That's what went wrong in the years leading up 1997. During the late 80's and early 90's, when Ford resurrected the blue oval to be at the forefront of all branding (notice no blue ovals on the 70's pickups), some designer head took the oval concept as far as it could possibly go. Witness the Taurus. Not a single straight line in the last "jelly bean" iteration of that car. This flavor of the day rounding spread across all car platforms, and landed at the F150, which the commercial truck community out and out rejected.


In the mid 90's, Ford literally called a meeting of industry professionals, including those in the upfitting business, had them sign NDAs, and unveiled several body designs for the heavier duty commercial truck, one or more of which looked just like the then forthcoming jellybean F150. It was new. It was modern. It was rejected by the industry professionals.


A small business owner (as opposed to leasing) of a fleet of trucks sees the value in having a significant number of years of consistency with body part interchange, especially with functional parts like cab closures, windows, windscreens, seats, etc. Leave the design of the day to be expressed in personal cars.


Notice the 2017 F-650 and F-750 cabs still have the current Super Duty cab. I doubt any fleet operator is complaining about that.

 

I have a 1999.5 F350 7.3 with a BTS tranny....I will be hopefully upgrading next year to the 2017...figured last one last me this long with no problems except water pump, tranny and go go pedal...next one will be my last I'm close to 50..... I like all the new stuff on the 2017...i'm ready to get a new truck for my toy hauler but want to wait till the 2017...my truck still looks like new, runs great, never let me down...but after 16 years, will be 17 next year...ready for my last new one.

 

I personally would rather have the roomier 2015 Aluminum cab on my 13 F650, than the cab it came with.

 

I think the superduty is wider then a f150. So how does a superduty share the same cab? Yeah more leg room but what about shoulder room?

 

I agree the super duty cab has been the same since 99 till current super duty. The f150 has changed the bodies a few times since. 98-03,04-08,09-14. And 2015 newest one.

 

Because the F150 has been widened twice (04 & 15) leading up to the launch of the new SD. F150 & SD cabs are exactly the same width externally now. 79.9".
See:2016 Ford F-150 Full Size Pickup Truck | Exterior Specifications | Ford.com
And: 2016 Ford Super Duty | View Exterior Specifications | Ford.com

 

Being 5'9" tall, the current superduty cab is just fine for me, if the width will be the same inside as my superduty,(like was posted above) i dont see a problem with cab sharing.

 

Is the steering wheel smaller? Looks like it. I hope so, current one is too fn big.

 

I like the new Super Duty pretty much all around, but I don't care for the new mirrors, especially the beveled corner, the vertical badge seems it would be harder to read.
What I really don't like is the solid front bumper on the XL models, no cut-outs for the fog lights, this makes it look like a really cheap plastic toy.
Some mixed feelings about the dually fenders, kinda feel like the squareness should have came all the way out and do away with the round flare.

JMO


SD Dually

 

If this design lasts 16 years like the last one, that's not a lot of movement. I'm 100% on board with trying to keep frame hard points the same from the cab back for as long as possible, but the overall redesign was at the correct time in the life-cycle, and if they don't mess with it for 10+ years that's another well timed cycle.

 

A lot of positive thoughts here. Interesting. I am not a fan. I think it looks confuses. It looks like 150 and 250 reproduced. I think the cut away options look good. The boxed frame seems good, will rust on the inside though. The old C frames were easier to care for in rusty areas. I love the Al. I was hoping they'd do that. Didn't cut as much weight as I was hoping though.
I think this is proof the HD truck market is expanding beyond businesses.
My main hope is that the power stroke guys did some work. Cummins is now at 900 ft lb (sounds absurd!) If ford can bump it up some more that's be great, but I've heard the added hp helps it beat out the old Cummins.