I like the fact Ford keeps the body style the same! Nothing worse than buying the last model year of a style, your vehicle is already "old". By keeping the style the same, they don't look too old too fast.

 

It's just my opnion, but i think that the ford's look sort of cheap- the dash is cheap, seats are cheap, grills look cheap, it just looks cheap all around. I know that they aren't built cheaply, but the new chevy's do look not quite as cheap, especally when done as a conversion van.
By the way, there is very little chance or getting a big block into any engine compartment of this size, and so of course you won't see something like the 8.1L in a van like this. Although Ford did fit the 6.0L into it, even if it has been detuned because of a lack of airflow. Chevy and GMC don't have the duramax.

 

I hate power windows.

I live in the Arizona SW desert. Power windows just do not last long out here. Dust, grit, sand will eventually "kill" all of them. Mechanics love to fix them.

Give me old style crank windows any day and glad my old 82 van has them.

 

Agree with you there... When comparing the two, I always wonder where all the money went, design-wise... Did wind-tunnel testing really cost that much in '90?

 

A-fording-men!

Munrow

 

I don't know where you live, but all I see here in Oregon are Fords. Besides, the Chevys IMO are *****UGLY***** . Chevys might have a good engine... but you can't get to it to work on it .

 

I work at the plant in Lorain where final assembly of the van takes place. We've been hearing the 2007 model was 'supposed' to get the redesign. Ford is in the process of closing this facility and moving production to the plant in Avon Lake, Ohio. There's been less talk of the redesign now since Ford came out and told us of the closing of our plant. We change over to the 2006 in April which is several months earlier than normal. Not sure how much it's costing to retool part of the Avon plant to recieve the Lorain production, but that 'could' push back it's freshening. It needs it. Granted it's still a very good seller, but we're closing in on the 14th year of this model since the 2006 is a carryover of what you see now. The biggest news for the '06 is the big 15 passenger models get a new anti-rollover system on them.

 

What does this anti-rollover system consist of? Just curious. I came across the CorrecTrack product as a result of this site and am considering it. It's expensive at $350, so would like to hear about the Ford application before making the plunge.
Thanks

 

Both Chevy and Ford are introducing electronic stability control technology. For Chevy it was supposed to be in the 2005, for Ford the 2006. It consists of sensors that detect the lateral roll and compression of the shocks and then stiffens them up in milliseconds. This helps to prevent the roll of the body in an emergency situation.

The correct track spacer moves the rear wheels out about 1". I had looked into this product also but the "data" of what is does was based solely on subjectiveness. The test driver video says "It seems so much more stable." I would have liked to have seen a video demostration of before and after the installation. A $269 product that is also reported to reduce rolls is the Roadmaster Active Suspension. I installed one of these last year. At least they had videos of before and after handling.

The NTHSA has some videos of the Chevy with and without the ESC activated. The link is http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/proble...erAdvisory.htm and it's in the middle. Note how even the Chevy's can go up on two wheels and roll without the ESC. I find the E-350 video quite impressive and food for thought. Now check out this link and see if a dual wheel modification is worth the money: http://easylink.playstream.com/aslansarmy/e350.wvx

 

All this hub-bub originally was on Ford/Chev/Dodge 1 ton, 15 passenger vans. Once loaded to capacity the center of gravity was raised much higher. They all had pretty similar suspension designs, so what happened was pretty much the same. They were all subject to snap rolling if certain conditions were met. There's SO many more Fords than others, so they had more accidents. But percentage wise ? I haven't seen any specs. At 9 or less passengers the likelihood of rolling was 300% less, in all makes.

BTW, the citizens dot org group says NO-ONE should have dual rear wheels installed by any accessory company. The rear track is an inch narrower than the front, that's 1/2" per wheel. Does the spacer kit have to be so complex ? Wheel spacers have been around for years, at $30 each-ish. The wheel studs on the E-350 are plenty long to space 1/2" without new studs and a $350 kit. But maybe it needs more than an inch, I dunno. Profiting from fear is bad ju-ju, how many accessory companies are telling us we'll die in our E-350's if we don't buy their product(s) ? How many law firms are earning 'billable hours' from all this brau-haha ? Ken

 

Vans are put in a 15 to 20 year cycle as far as redisign and in this case it takes more than just the truck trend to get a sheetmetal and underpining redo. There also has to be a change in the market trend. And in fords case there has not realy been a need in the past 10 years. As long as the nubers are up and they are not seeing a drop in demand you would have to send them a ton of letters to even start them thinking.

 

E350,

Honestly right now I'm not sure of what the factory installed setup consists of that the '06 will get. We've only ran a few trials and since the bulk of this system will be installed in the chassis department (I work in trim) I haven't seen anything. We install some electrical for it, but that's it. It'll likely be what Adventure posted, but I can't be any more specific. Sorry.

 

I think that the 3 things that should be put into a new design, other than freshining the looks are:

1. Stability control- addressing this I know, but it really should be standard. Maybe add dual rear wheels, for extra stability?

2. 4X4!!!

3. Side curtain and rollover airbags.

 

I want a straight front axle with good old kingpins. I do so many of the ball joints its to the point its like doing a brake job. It is only an extra 20 minutes a side to do. The old kingpins held up great compared to the balljoints.
And I like to see better fan switches that will take the current the blower motor uses. The fan switches keep buring up. Slightly larger wiring for the blower would also be nice. I totaly pitched one switch and put it a heavy duty toggle switch.
Yes 4x4 option would be nice but I won't cry about it. We have 350clubwagons(with 5.4 gasers) and 450cutaway buses.(mostly with 7.3 diesels and one each with 6.0diesel and v10)

About the chevy vans. We have one 2001 with a 350gaser, by the miles the brakes hold up longer than the fords do. I do not have any numbers to back this other than I do not see it as often in the shop. And the back end with the lights yes it does look bad and other driver do see it, so GM might have something there. The side doors on it seem to be cheaper built than the Fords. And I do like the the ride better and I do not have to replace ball joints on it. But right now they do not offer a good diesel engine in it like Ford does. Ford gets their sales with commercial buyer looking for the diesel.

 

The roll-over systems are stability systems, cutting engine power, applying specific brakes and some suspension upgrades although the suspension isn't part of the anti-roll system per se. It's tied in with the anti-lock brake system and the engine management system. Nothing will prevent a rollover totally except outriggers and having a brain in your head. Knowing what your rig is capable of loaded and unloaded is a responsibility the driver assumes when he/she turns the ignition key. No van in the world ever rolled over without a driver. Granted, the design needs work, it isn't as safe as it could be and for that I think the manufacturers should be a little more accountable. But will I hold my breath for them to step up ? Or will I process this info and adapt my driving style and possibly look into changing some hardware on my rig to make it safer ? Ken