I would build it just like my 05 6.0 f-250 4x4. I would not change anything!

 

A clean, simple work truck- Leave the bells for the SUV crowd, on this truck- you would only buy one if you actually NEEDED a truck.

1) Stiffly sprung: It would ride rough unless loaded. That’s right- instead of the smooth-riding SUVs that sag 4 inches when you load them, I would return to a time when trucks were trucks and you only drove one if you needed one. So, stiff springs- if you want a smooth riding empty truck, buy a 1/2 ton.

2) Coil front springs ok: I like the turning radius of our new truck.

3) Extra rear overloads: When moving 21,000 of hay, we often overload the rear end climbing out of fields and cross ditches. Extra overload capacity would be nice.

4) Dana 60 front: Current front axle is great - best offered on the US market.

5) Dana 80 rear would be nice- some problems with 00 DRW rear ends. Problems seem to have been addressed in 05-06.

6) Current frame is nice but I would like it to be painted like the Dodge box section frame rather than just greased. I know, paint costs money. Keep the C-section frame though.

7) Hanger inside fuel doors for fuel caps: Too easy to contaminate fuel with dirty caps.

8) International engine: Diesel-engine-built-by-Ford post above was very well thought out. But I do not believe that Ford could build a better diesel from scratch than the others already build with years of experience. And Ford really does not build many of their own new tech components. I like the serviceability and longevity of an inline 6. But the Cummins is a disposable engine. How about cylinder liners, valve guides and water pump jacket- in short, a well-built and expensive version of the cheap Cummins B series engine. Something more like a Deere inline with International innovation and the Cat HEUI injection system.

9) Less power- I know, sounds crazy. But diesels used to be rated at 100% duty cycles. Then, with the advent of the Dura Max and the 03 Cummins, we got these high boost monsters that make amazing power, but cannot do so for extended periods - not as long as the motors they replace. For work, I would prefer the older 7.3 International or the 02 24 valve Cummins over the new engines. Sure, fast engines are fun- but I need a solid truck- leave the sport trucks for recreators and guys who think they need an F-350 to pull their Jet Ski trailer. I'd offer an engine that was rated at 100% duty cycle like the Cummins ag B series or the pre- 6.0 International. There were a lot fewer problems with the older low boost engines than we see with the 6.0 and the 600+ Cummins.

Maybe offer 2 lines. A truck for people who depend upon them for work and a truck for recreation. The two groups place very different demands upon a truck and have different priorities.


10) Heavier doors. Tired of doors so light that one cow with an itch turns the door inside out.

11) We have had good luck with the ZF 6speed. The ultimate transmission would work like an Agricultural powershift- Just toggle the gear and hydraulic clutches take care of the rest. Audi is working on such a transmission for automotive use. Imagine it working like a Deere power shift, only in a truck.

12) Lift the tie-rod up above the axle or place behind the axle to protect from rocks, stumps etc. new axle is better- but tie rod still vulnerable.

13) Heavier materials in the cab: Our trucks wear fast from boots and gear.

14) DIF locks!!! Reliable ones.

15) Factory gooseneck / hide a ball.

16) Form the hood around the mechanicals rather than the other way around. This would give us more room for good air filters and room to work on the engine rather than lifting the cab. The coolant reservoir and other items would not be package a according to styling dictates and CMT videos.

17) Factory EGT gauges.

18) Factory hour meters (our newest cab-chassis has a factory meter)

19) Return to kingpins in front and away from ball joints (really tired of replacing ball joints)

20) Zerts on all driveline U joints.

21) Eliminate the silly plastic bed caps- they just get in the way of real bed rails.

22) More protection for the radiator / intercooler from the airborne objects. The vent holes in the grill are too big on XL trucks.

That’s what I have for starters.

 

pretty comprehensive list there mshultz...! i have to add my wholehearted agreement with your comment on ball joints..! how can you possibly build a real 1 ton truck, sell it with a diesel motor, sell it for well over 40 thousand dollars, and ship it from the factory with ungreaseable ball joints that don't even last for 12 months of even non comercial use...? i don't get it... ford may think they are saving money on parts and generating more sales of parts, but what they are actually doing is deminishing the reputation of their product and ensuring that any reasonably intelligent PSD owner will insist that original equipment ball joints are NOT used to replace the junk that came from the factory...

 

mschultz :

I definately agree about having a less HP 100% duty cycle engine.
I havent yet seen anybody pull anything that i woudnt have done with my old 1990 7.3. (only a little slower) I'm sure they could make a non-turbo 7.3 with 200 hp and 450 FT/lbs torque with todays engineering, my old one was 170 hp and 380 FT/lbs i think.
Another benifet is that i know they say that turbo's get better fuel mileage, but my old 7.3 got as high as 28mpg, the cummins dodges got 32 sometimes, and nowadays, I havent seen anybody get over 22 mpg with any diesel.

If they built a new 7.3ish motor, with no turbo, direct injection, higher compression, and etc, i bet that would be one hell of a motor.(200hp, 450FT/lbs?!!!) 100% duty cycle for sure!!!


Ford shouldnt forget that people dont always want the cheapest product. I think that if they offered a naturally aspired diesel(as mentioned above) as one option at a price comparable to the 6.0, and than offered a second engine, a souped up powerhouse model with the turbo, and high HP ratings with no sacrifice for quality or price.
I have a feeling there would be a market for both options.

People dont always use trucks for pulling, Theres businesses out there that buy ford PSD's for fleet vehicles and first thing they do is down-tune the power.

With todays engineering, i'm 100% sure they could make a 7.3-non turbo that could hold you in your seat pretty good.

I for one, would buy one.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for "flimsy" materials, i'm sure ford is already experimenting with carbon fiber body panels, and for the frame, it should be "parkerized" and then painted with rock guard.


I also have an idea, although i am no mechanic, but it would sure make sense in my mind to have a temperature operated set of vanes right in front of the rad instead of thermostats, If your driving in canada winters, the shock of -30 cold fluid can't be a good way to cool really hot parts, dont care what they say.

It would also be nice (mabye not possible) to have the engine compartment more close off to the road, and have a vent on the hood to let the hot air out (Keeping ice off of windshield!!! )


Just my ideas, what do you think?

 

You and I Parkland must be on the same page. I have a 91 Ranger with the 2.3 and I was just thinking about how it would be a good idea to have the vanes on the front- especially in the winter. It takes 20 minutes of driving to get er warm when its 10 degrees out unless I have cardboard in front of the rad. But the problem there is, Ohio weather is unpredictable. It could be 40 the next day with the cardboard still in front of the rad, and the ol Ranger is runnin a little warmer that she should! I'm thinkin about designing a set of vanes. It might end up being "Red Green" Style, but with enough duct tape, its possible!

 

i've seen school buses, large generator sets, and a couple 5 tons with vanes. I'm sure
that they dont use them now because they take up room, and probably cost more than a thermostat. they say that the metal is strong enough to handle severe temp shock, but imagine how much easier it would be without it.

Also, i wouldnt mind having a manual override so you could open 'er wide open as your almost home to cool off your engine so it doesnt get shut off hot.

 

also, handyman,

what do you think about a closed bottom of the engine compartment, and some cool looking vents on the hood and side panels?

 

PS my friend lost his ranger to a cardboard rad cover, doesnt take much time to blow

 

I cut out a 6 inch by 6 inch square in the cardboard, so that the whole rad isn't covered up. It doesn't overheat at all, doesn't even run warmer, but it gets up to temp quicker.

I think the manually controlled vanes is as far as I would take it. If it was 10 degress year round, I could see doing it. Since it gets up to 90 here in Ohio in the summer, it wouldn't be worth the risk of gettin my truck too hot.