E350 vs. E450
markko
We've going to remount a Road Rescue Supermedic (158" wheelbase) onto a
new chassis. We get a choice between a Ford E350 and E450 chassis. We
don't carry any rescue equipment and don't need the extra GVW. My
choice is to go with an E350 again because it has ABS; the E450
doesn't. What do you know?
Mark
Robert Ball
markko <mar...@win.bright.net> wrote in article
<34CD77...@win.bright.net>...
We switched (in 97) to the E450. The idea was that it would last longer
than the E350. Here's what I know (BTW we are also running RR
Supermedics...with some slight custom mods. We also don't run rescue).
Only time will tell if the 450s will last longer (management want's 200K
miles). The potential problem is this. It has the same drivetrain as the
350. Since we're now about 5000 pounds light, the thing is somewhat of a
rattletrap (not as bad as the F350s these replaced, but worse than the
E350s). Risk is that as a rattle trap, it will shake itself loose,
increasing necessary maintenance.
Second, I'm "average" height (5'8" or so). An E450 with just medical (no
rescue) looks like it belongs on the drag strip (i.e. seriously jacked up).
Loading height is at mid-upper chest. Park on a driveway/hill and it can be
armpit/neck high...now load a 300 pound pt. in there!
The 450s have the 4 wheel disk brakes, but I think I prefer the ABS on the
350s. Since we don't have the huge load, the extra disk brakes are not of
much use.
Finally, the 350s are (were anyway) cheaper.
Bob
--
Robert Ball, EMT-P: My Account=My opinions Only.
Paramedic Hennepin Co. EMS, Minneapolis, MN.
Contributing Editor, Journal of Emergency Medical Services
J. Jay Simons
We have both and while a lot depends on the weight of your box the E450
rides a lot rougher than the E350. I think it would be definitely worth
getting the ABS..
Carey Gregory
markko wrote:
>
> We've going to remount a Road Rescue Supermedic (158" wheelbase) onto a
> new chassis. We get a choice between a Ford E350 and E450 chassis. We
> don't carry any rescue equipment and don't need the extra GVW. My
> choice is to go with an E350 again because it has ABS; the E450
> doesn't. What do you know?
Virtually any Type III is overweight on an E350 chassis once loaded and
occupied even if you don't carry rescue tools. Have you actually added up the
load you're carrying? I'll bet if you do you'll find you're either overweight
or right at the limit for the 350 chassis.
The benefits of ABS are, IMO, outweighed by the poor handling of a
weight-stressed 350 chassis, and the disk brakes of the 450.
Go with the 450.
--
Carey Gregory
David W. Pfister
Our latest rig ('97) was an E450 with a Horton box 158" wheelbase, we just
put an order in for a P&L box on another E450..
We're VERY happy with the E450 chassis. We were having major problems with
the E350 chassis as far as weight was concerned, and we went to the
International 4700 as an interim solution for our rigs, which added a fair
amount to the total cost.
Our rigs are pretty heavy -- we carry some light firefighting/rescue
equipment (2 Scotts, some tools, split-down stokes basket, rope rescue
kit/etc), but nothing crazy like generators or the tool.
Our E350s have dropped transmissions, gone through more alternators than I
care to count, and in general have been a major headache for our engineering
staff. The E450 has been relatively trouble free after almost a year and a
half of service.
I don't miss the ABS one bit to be honest. I think the 450 rides MUCH
better, stops much better, accelerates much better, and generally handles
much better.
dave
markko wrote in message <34CD77...@win.bright.net>...
>We've going to remount a Road Rescue Supermedic (158" wheelbase) onto a
>new chassis. We get a choice between a Ford E350 and E450 chassis. We
>don't carry any rescue equipment and don't need the extra GVW. My
>choice is to go with an E350 again because it has ABS; the E450
>doesn't. What do you know?
>
>Mark
rgu...@juno.com
I have to agree 100% with Carey. With just standard (non-rescue) ems
equipment, EMTs and patients I bet you almost every Ford E350 type III
ambulance on the road can be overloaded past the GVWR. Many corps in my
area run the Road Rescue Supermedic on the E-SuperDuty chassis and
everyone (myself and everyone that I have talked) is very pleased with
ride quality. There is only a slight increase in loading height. I
can't even believe that Road Rescue is willing to put an 11,500 gvwr on
their supermedic!
What is the difference in price?
These are just my opinions, but you can see my corps SuperDuty
Supermedic(s) in the garage section of http://www.gvaa.org
In article <34CD77...@win.bright.net>,
mar...@win.bright.net wrote:
>
> We've going to remount a Road Rescue Supermedic (158" wheelbase) onto a
> new chassis. We get a choice between a Ford E350 and E450 chassis. We
> don't carry any rescue equipment and don't need the extra GVW. My
> choice is to go with an E350 again because it has ABS; the E450
> doesn't. What do you know?
>
> Mark
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
rgu...@juno.com
FYI, I believe that the official term from Ford is "SuperDuty" and not
"450". Ford is trying to disassociate the new 14,050 gvwr E series from
the 15,000 gvwr F series which never made a good riding ambulance.
David Gilmore
While I have no experience with the new E450 chassis, I do run with
agencies that use E350, F350 and F450s. Some of our 450 had air ride which
was very rough riding, I thought that it would be much better than it
turned out to be. However, BF Goodrich has the velvet ride suspension, we
have that on a couple of our newer trucks and there is a world of
difference riding in them. I like being a vehicle that is not max out in
its capacity, there is no safety margin. I would go for the 450s with the
BF Goodrich suspension.
David
EMT-P
Robert Ball
Carey Gregory <cgre...@gw-tech.com> wrote in article
<34CDF42F...@gw-tech.com>...
>
> Virtually any Type III is overweight on an E350 chassis once loaded and
> occupied even if you don't carry rescue tools. Have you actually added
up the
> load you're carrying? I'll bet if you do you'll find you're either
overweight
> or right at the limit for the 350 chassis.
>
> The benefits of ABS are, IMO, outweighed by the poor handling of a
> weight-stressed 350 chassis, and the disk brakes of the 450.
>
> Go with the 450.
>
> --
> Carey Gregory
Carey,
Sorry, I've got to disagree with you on this one. We have both the E350 and
E450 with a Road Rescue SuperMedic Box (158" chassis). Granted, we spec.
them to save weight (and money), by eliminating stuff we don't need or use.
Our 350s still have about an 800-900 pound payload after they're fully
loaded with equipment (again, no rescue gear though). Yes, we're probably
pushing the limit if we have a full arrest (both of us, 2 firefighters, and
the patient), but that's the exception rather than the rule.
rgu...@juno.com
Oops, myself and other area corps are running the RR "UltraMedics", not
"SuperMedics". The ultramedic is 6 inches longer and 2 inches higher and
before the introduction of the Ford E-SuperDuty, RR would not build the
Ultra on an E-series.
In article <885929394...@dejanews.com>,
rgu...@juno.com wrote:
>
> Many corps in my
> area run the Road Rescue Supermedic on the E-SuperDuty chassis
>
> These are just my opinions, but you can see my corps SuperDuty
> Supermedic(s) in the garage section of http://www.gvaa.org
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
Carey Gregory
Robert Ball wrote:
>
> Sorry, I've got to disagree with you on this one. We have both the E350 and
> E450 with a Road Rescue SuperMedic Box (158" chassis). Granted, we spec.
> them to save weight (and money), by eliminating stuff we don't need or use.
> Our 350s still have about an 800-900 pound payload after they're fully
> loaded with equipment (again, no rescue gear though). Yes, we're probably
> pushing the limit if we have a full arrest (both of us, 2 firefighters, and
> the patient), but that's the exception rather than the rule.
The trouble is you're right up against the chassis' limits. It increases wear
and makes it handle poorly. I think the added payload of the 450 will make a
big difference in handling and lifespan of the chassis.
--
Carey Gregory
rgu...@juno.com
Throw in an extra family member, a marginal braking system, the
possibility of crashing an ambulance, and a slick lawyer. "That my
friend spells trouble with a capital T".
>In article <01bd2be9$25f17f40$8c42...@none.winternet.com>,
> "Robert Ball" <rb...@winternet.com> wrote:
>
> Our 350s still have about an 800-900 pound payload after they're fully
> loaded with equipment (again, no rescue gear though). Yes, we're probably
> pushing the limit if we have a full arrest (both of us, 2 firefighters, and
> the patient), but that's the exception rather than the rule.
>
> Robert Ball, EMT-P: My Account=My opinions Only.
> Paramedic Hennepin Co. EMS, Minneapolis, MN.
> Contributing Editor, Journal of Emergency Medical Services
>
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
rgu...@juno.com
In article <34CF6576...@gw-tech.com>,
Carey Gregory <cgre...@gw-tech.com> wrote:
>
> The trouble is you're right up against the chassis' limits. It increases wear
> and makes it handle poorly. I think the added payload of the 450 will make a
> big difference in handling and lifespan of the chassis.
>
> --
> Carey Gregory
I have to respectfully disagree with Carey on the lifespan issue. Since
the same E350 engine, transmission, and turbocharger are lugging around
more weight in the SuperDuty, wouldn't they fail sooner? I guess only
time will tell on this issue.
Don't get my wrong, I still think the E-SuperDuty is the way to go.
Bob G.
Carey Gregory
rgu...@juno.com wrote:
>
> I have to respectfully disagree with Carey on the lifespan issue. Since
> the same E350 engine, transmission, and turbocharger are lugging around
> more weight in the SuperDuty, wouldn't they fail sooner? I guess only
> time will tell on this issue.
I was referring to the chassis lifespan. At any rate, the chassis on an
ambulance usually dies before the drivetrain does.
--
Carey Gregory
Shamen
rgu...@juno.com wrote:
>FYI, I believe that the official term from Ford is "SuperDuty" and not
>"450". Ford is trying to disassociate the new 14,050 gvwr E series from
>the 15,000 gvwr F series which never made a good riding ambulance.
What happened to the F-Series anyway?
David M. Ostertag
ost...@mail.auburn.edu
Gary Saffer
r>> The trouble is you're right up against the chassis' limits. It
r>increases wear
r>> and makes it handle poorly. I think the added payload of the 450
r>will make a
r>> big difference in handling and lifespan of the chassis.
r>I have to respectfully disagree with Carey on the lifespan issue.
r>Since the same E350 engine, transmission, and turbocharger are lugging
r>around more weight in the SuperDuty, wouldn't they fail sooner? I
r>guess only time will tell on this issue.
Personally, I don't know why anyone would want an E chassis at all. The
F chassis is a better bet. The crew have better protection in the case
of a crash for on thing, Additionally, the mechanics that I know say
that the E chassis are tough to work on when it comes time for engine
service.
BTW, I have heard that Ford is going to introduce a F-550 chassis.
Gary
* CMPQwk 1.42 129 *He who dies with the most toys is dead.
Gary Saffer
S>What happened to the F-Series anyway?
The F series trucks are undergoing a complete redesign. The first of the
trucks out were the F-150 light duty pickups. They aren't suitable for
ambulance use, but seem like nice pick up trucks. The F-250, still too
light for our purposes, should be out soon, if it's not already.
However, Ford is going to introduce new F-350, F-450, and even F-550
series trucks. The F-450 is called the F-Super Duty, but personally I
find F-450 a better moniker. I've seen some photos of some of the new
trucks in magazines and they don't look at all like their smaller
brothers.
Gary
* CMPQwk 1.42 129 *I am Pentium of Borg...division is Futile...you will be Approximated
Robert H. Keltz
David M. Ostertag wrote:
>What happened to the F-Series anyway?
They've been redesigned(new body style) and beefed-up(higher GVW). Job 1 was
scheduled to begin on Jan. 5. The ambulance manufacturers will probably start
receiving them soon. BTW, they have a different body style than the F150.
Here's a blurb from a news article.
The 1999 Super Duty F-Series is built on a longer chassis than the F150 and
has a larger engine and cabin. The F150 is Ford's full-size light truck
("light" is an industry term for vehicles that weigh less than 8,500
pounds when carrying as much as they are designed to haul).
The trucks in the Super Duty F-series are aimed at straddling the niche
between light and medium-duty commercial trucks.
Trucks in the new series are designated as the F250 (8,800 pounds), the F350
(9,900 to 12,500 pounds), the F450 (15,000 pounds) and the F550 (17,500 to
19,000 pounds). They will replace the F250HD, F350 and F-Super Duty models.
Engine choices are the new 5.4-liter Triton V8, the 6.8-liter Triton V10 or
the 7.3-liter diesel.
---------------
Robert H. Keltz
http://members.aol.com/RHKeltz/index.html
Jonathan Garner
In a message dated 98-02-01 20:11:35 EST, you write:
<< Personally, I don't know why anyone would want an E chassis at all. The
F chassis is a better bet. The crew have better protection in the case
of a crash for on thing, Additionally, the mechanics that I know say
that the E chassis are tough to work on when it comes time for engine
service.
BTW, I have heard that Ford is going to introduce a F-550 chassis.
Gary >>
Gary,
I'm not sure about the F-550, but after working in both E and F models, I
would have to say that the E chasis is much better. The ride with a unitized
body is much better that with the independent F chasis. Not to mention the
best feature of all, turning radius!!! It takes a 4 acre field to turn an F
chasis rig around in!!!
The safety issue is agreed upon, however...not much in front of you on the E
chasis. As for motor work, when have you ever heard of a mechanic who didn't
complain about the work that they do, while charging 50.00/hour??
Thanks for the bandwidth.
Jonathan Garner, BS, EMTP
Raleigh, NC
Shamen
I wrote
>S>What happened to the F-Series anyway?
Then gary....@channel1.com (Gary Saffer) wrote:
>The F series trucks are undergoing a complete redesign. The first of the
>trucks out were the F-150 light duty pickups. They aren't suitable for
>ambulance use, but seem like nice pick up trucks. The F-250, still too
>light for our purposes, should be out soon, if it's not already.
>However, Ford is going to introduce new F-350, F-450, and even F-550
>series trucks. The F-450 is called the F-Super Duty, but personally I
>find F-450 a better moniker. I've seen some photos of some of the new
>trucks in magazines and they don't look at all like their smaller
>brothers.
>
>Gary
Interesting. Do you know of any place where i can find these pictures?
David M. Ostertag
ost...@mail.auburn.edu
Gary Saffer
S>but personally I >find F-450 a better moniker. I've seen some photos
S>of some of the new >trucks in magazines and they don't look at all
S>like their smaller >brothers.
S>>
S>>Gary
S>Interesting. Do you know of any place where i can find these pictures?
I saw the picture of the big F series truck in a magazine at the
newsstand. I would think that a lot of truck magazines will have
pictures over the next few months. BTW, I understand that Ford sold
their heavy truck line to someone so that they could concentrate on
light and medium duty models, where the market is better.
Gary
* CMPQwk 1.42 129 *It's not death, just think of it as evolution in action.
Gary Saffer
H>Trucks in the new series are designated as the F250 (8,800 pounds),
RH>the F350 (9,900 to 12,500 pounds), the F450 (15,000 pounds) and the
RH>F550 (17,500 to 19,000 pounds). They will replace the F250HD, F350
RH>and F-Super Duty models.
In talking to our fleet technician who writes the specs for the chassis
part of the ambulances, it looks like the F-550 could pose some problems
for ambulance manufacturers. The problem is that the height of the rear
frame rails is higher than on the F-Super Duty. This will require
installing some brand of air suspension with a "kneeling" feature.
For this year we are sticking with C 3500-HD chassis with Goodrich
Velvet Ride suspensions.
Gary
* CMPQwk 1.42 129 *Vegetarians eat vegetables-Beware of humanitarians
Gary Saffer
Jonathan Garner wrote:
JG>I'm not sure about the F-550, but after working in both E and F
JG>models, I would have to say that the E chasis is much better. The
JG>ride with a unitized body is much better that with the independent F
JG>chasis. Not to mention the best feature of all, turning radius!!!
JG>It takes a 4 acre field to turn an F chasis rig around in!!!
One thing that everyone that uses and E chassis has complained about is
the seating space in the front of the trucks. I don't know about the E's
riding better. As for turning, the one thing that the Fords out perform
the Chevy's in is turning radius.
JG>The safety issue is agreed upon, however...not much in front of you
JG>on the E chasis. As for motor work, when have you ever heard of a
JG>mechanic who didn't complain about the work that they do, while
JG>charging 50.00/hour??
Our mechanics work for the city, so they don't get to charge, but they
do get to complain. In the late '70s we had a bunch of Type III Fords.
They replaced some Type III Chevy's that we had, that were real pigs.
Anyway, a crew was responding to a call, hit a patch of ice and slid
into a tree. The impact was so severe, it pushed the engine back between
the seats and bent the frame into a sort of "L" shape. How the crew
survived, I don't know. After that, along with the Fleet Managers
complaints about trying to service the trucks, we never bought another E
chassis.
Gary
* CMPQwk 1.42 129 *Originality is the art of concealing your source.
Shamen
Finally saw a picture of a new F-350 today. Very nice looking. The
Magazine had no mention of the 450 or 550 models though.
David M. Ostertag
ost...@mail.auburn.edu
Fuller, Dean
Nice looking if you like the Dodge look.
Dean W. Fuller, Federal Way Fire Department, WA
APCO Fire-Rescue Committee Member