Ford Debuts Gasoline-Powered F-650 Medium Duty Work Truck

Ford Debuts Gasoline-Powered F-650 Medium Duty Work Truck

Although Ford discontinued the 6.8-liter V-10 gas engine as an option for its 2011 Super Duty pickups, the company debuted the first application of the 6.8 engine for its 2012 F-650 medium-duty chassis truck at the NTEA Work Truck Show in Indianapolis.

Today's Ford F-650 commercial truck is offered with a Cummins inline-six diesel engine, a variation of the same six-cylinder oil burner offered in Ram HD pickups and chassis cabs. But like other diesel engines, prices for the oil burner have gone up as emissions regulations for diesels have gotten tougher. In Classes 4 to 7, prices have jumped 36 percent on average, according to Todd Kaufman, Ford's F-Series chassis cab marketing manager.

Diesel fuel also carries a premium at the pump over gasoline.

"With diesel prices outstripping gasoline by more than 10 cents a gallon in many parts of the country, the timing is perfect for a gasoline powertrain in a medium-duty truck," Kaufman said.

The powerful 6.8 is rated at a diesel-like 362 horsepower and 457 pounds-feet of torque. Instead of being paired with Ford's legacy 5R110 five-speed automatic transmission, the 6.8 will be mated with the all-new 6R140 six-speed gearbox with double overdrive gears and available power takeoff.

Ford-f650-560-2

The gas powertrain is expected to cost about $8,000 less than a comparable diesel. Today's starting price for the F-650 with the Cummins diesel is $57,180.

Though diesel engines are generally up to 30 percent more fuel efficient than gasoline engines, Ford hopes with just the right powertrain calibrations to close that gap to as low as 10 percent with the 6.8-liter/6R140 combo, according to Kaufman.

A compressed-natural-gas option will also be available for the 6.8.

The Class 7 Ford F-650 with the 6.8 V-10 will have a gross vehicle weight rating of 30,000 pounds and a gross combined weight rating of 33,000 pounds.

Ford will start taking orders for the F-650 gasser by the third quarter of 2011. It will be available in two chassis configurations: Pro-Loader with 19.5-inch wheels or dock height with 22-inch wheels.

The F-650 and F-750 will also receive an all-new interior shared with the Ford F-Series Super Duty pickups.

The F-650 6.8 will be available to order this October, with production scheduled to start in the first quarter of 2012.

Comments

@ Frank - good point.
I like the Cummins engine but I hear a lot of negative stories about weak front ends, tie rod problems etc. and as always weak or problematic transmissions. DieHard Ram guys will say the Tranny issue is a thing of the past but those stories still surface with new trucks.

The only thing that makes me nervous about the new Fords is the 6.7 diesel. It hasn't been in the real world long enough to make me comfortable about considering one. The rest of the truck is rock solid and proven.

GMC trucks - well you know my opinion on the politics of that brand. I don't have an issue with IFS. My brother has had several HD gassers as work trucks. The drive train is reliable but the body looks like crap really quickly, he hates the interior and it looks crappy real fast as well. I've driven in several of his trucks and I agree - the interior is below par. In less than 2 years his Chev looks like a 10 year old Dodge the mill yard guys drive = beat up. He also has problems with the low frame. He's had colleagues get stuck because of debris catching park brake cables and locking the wheels up. He hasn't seen it happen with Ford or Ram trucks.

Fortunately for me - I don't need a HD. I'd have a hard time picking a diesel p/u.
A Gasser HD would be straight foreward.
Power Wagon if I needed some offroad capacity and Ford if I planned on doing my own offroad mods or offroading wasn't a big priority.

"He also has problems with the low frame. He's had colleagues get stuck because of debris catching park brake cables and locking the wheels up. He hasn't seen it happen with Ford or Ram trucks." - Lou


Damn! I would hate for that too happen. I would be pissed after buying a $30,000+ truck.

Wow!

@ Frank - talk about being pissed off!
You are 4 hours out of town down some isolated bush road crawling through a deep mud hole and a branch snags the park brake cable and locks the rear wheels.
You ain't goin' no where.
It is really hard on the truck trying to yank it out with the wheels locked up.
It is not as if you can crawl under the truck to see what is wrong (unless you can scuba dive in mud).
I'm not sure if Chev changed the routing of their park brake cable. On some models you could see the cable running on the outside of the frame rail.
I don't like the position of the DEF tank on the new Chev's either. They hang low on the frame on the right side of the truck. Does not instill confidence for a work truck or bush truck.

Lou:
Yeah, but the Chevy was 0.2 seconds faster in the quarter mile in the HD shootout!

@ Jason - that might matter to some people.
I see an even split between Ford and Ram when it comes to HD bush/work trucks.
I'd estimate 45% Ford, 45% Ram and 10% Chev/GM.
If you are talking about bling trucks with lift kits - I'd say mostly Chevy, with Ram a distant 2nd, and Ford 3rd.

0.2 seconds faster in the 1/4 mile or faster down the paved highway with a load.
What does that mean?
You'll be the first one to the mud hole that takes you out of service.

@Lou,

Don't fee the troll. We are having a nice discussion.


This is the reason I don't buy a GM truck.

No HD truck is good in the mud we have where I live. Too heavy, including the v10. More than once I got a call to pull my Dad and his F-250 v10 out. Of course I didn't give him a hard time about that. :) We still have that truck, couldn't sell it because of that v10, while used diesels in the area sold for twice what he was asking. Anyone want a used F-250 Crew v10 Lariat? He only drove in the mud those two times he got stuck, promise!

@ Frank -
Didn't think I was feeding any trolls.
Speed on the road may matter to some guys.
A guy towing down the highway or needs to hit a freeway on ramp as fast as possible might like the Chev based on the results of a few tests.
Guys who want a rugged body, interior or chassis that won't look beat to death after a year, or don't want to worry about snagging park brake cables, or puncturing a low slung DEF tank, or hanging up on rocks or logs because of low slung frames will look at a Ford or Ram. All of the guys I know love the ground clearance of the Ford and Ram HDs.
Big companies usually buy what the lowest bidder provides. There are guys who say different, but not from my experience.
Small contractors who drive the trucks themselves and live in them on a daily basis - I see Fords and Ram the most. If my brother had a choice as to the trucks he'd drive - they'd be a Ram or Ford.Definately not a Chev. He likes the Ram gassers better but admittedly hasn't driven a Ford HD with 6.2 yet.
Guys like him are where I benchmark the quality of a truck. He puts 60,000 miles on a truck in 2 - 3 years mostly on gravel roads.
Tests like what you see on this site are good for general feel, power and manners. They also give you a snap shot of how each truck compares.
The winner of a HD shootout might not survive a year in the environment my brother works in.
It is always hard to pick a new truck because there are so many things to look at.
(My opologies if this post looks like a rant - not my intention).

@ UncleBud - for play I agree.
For loggers having to carry heavy parts, tools, fuel tanks - a 1/2 ton won't cut it.
My brother's company bought a fleet of 1/2 tons with a few guys getting 3/4 ton trucks. The 3/4 tons out live the 1/2 tons on day to day driving down dirt roads even if the 3/4 tons are running loaded and the 1/2 tons empty.
They were trying to save money buying 1/2 tons. The road and bridge maintenance and construction guys have found it to be a nightmare. My brother refused to drive a 1/2 ton and because he often needs to pack a crew of guys got a 3/4 ton crew cab.
He calls it his "bitch" truck because all of his collegues bitch about the fact that he managed to wrangle a 3/4 ton crewcab out of the bean counters.
Even the forestry guys doing cut block layout and timber cruising have been complaining big time.
Each region or area have differences as to what works the best. My opinion is based on what I see in Northern Canada.

"The winner of a HD shootout might not survive a year in the environment my brother works in." - Lou

Truer words have never been spoken, but true words leave hearts broken!

Truth is only for the wise, lovers ought to stick to lies

Hay Frank, if you think the that a straight axle is the way to go for a heavy duty truck than buy the truck of your choice. Now, opinions are just like a..holes, everyone has one and I don't share your opinion on what a heavy duty truck can or can't have to be a heavy duty truck.

I love GM's independent front suspension which offers a superior ride. GM kept the IFS but made many changes to improve strength and durability. So, if you like it buy something else. But leave people who like the IFS alone.

GM won two shootouts in a row you can quote me on that. Ford and Dodge came in sloppy seconds.

at the end of the day, the cummins is still a Dodge, aka Cheap with bad frames and bad transmissions. I am glad to the Ford product.

I bet this is really going to get Teddy fired up.

Frank, you got beat by the Duramax and the IFS suspension. How do like those apples Lou?

If you don't like it, grab your purse and go home, Frank.

@Lou, funny you mention it, we are in the timber business as well, but it is very different here in the southeast US. Agree wholeheartedly that half-tons can't hang in this business, but a 3/4 ton truck is terrible off-road, work or play. Actually we don't play in them at all. For the price of admission, if you don't take are of it, it won't take care of you.

@bob, we have 2 F-350's, 3 F-250's, (180,000 to 320,000 miles, only a few replaced radiators on the newer ones) one GMC half-ton (2009 model, 110,000 miles now no problems, and a 2003 chevy 3/4 ton Duramax that had to have a new engine at 130,000 and now we are having to replace it altogether. Engine issues, transfer case issues, etc. We are going to try another chevy simply because the price was so good and Mike Levine says they're better but we will see how it holds up.

@Lou,
Variety is the spice of life in Australia/NZThese are Log Haulers from New Zealand, I could not find photos of the general work vehicles. it is amazing the variety you get here. We still have Seddon/Atkinsons Cummins powered being used a quarry delivery trucks.
A Foden English Truck
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/rod_simmonds/2005/sep26/forest-freighters-foden-mtm.jpg
A Mercedes
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/borlase_2544_mb_pt_nelson.jpg
A 430hp Mitsubishi
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/tuapeka_mitsi.jpg
Western Star
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/2007/09-06/htp-dsc_1483m.jpg
600hp Freightliner Argosy
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/2005/may01/file-4a.jpg
A "MacK" wearing a Renault body
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/mwtqantum1.jpg
COE Kenworth
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/mktk140e_3.jpg
Australian Model built and designed in Australia, Kenworth
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/dynes_kw_t401_8.jpg
US Kenworth
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/a_forbes_t800b.jpg
Finally an ERF
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/robert_dick/mwt51_1.jpg

@ Uncle bud - you logging in swampy/boggy ground? You loosing rads due to punctures? or they getting plugged up?
it always is cool to chat with guys who actually work their trucks.

@ Lou and everyone else Petrol(gas) powered rigs died out a long time ago here. Mitsubishi Fuso's "F650" produces a 578lbs ft of torque, but they do not sell and Daimler is replacing the engines under the" Detroit Diesel" nameplate, basically rebadged Mercedes diesels.

@ Robert Ryan - always a pleasure. Cool pictures. In my region I've seen everything from multi axle conventional logging trucks hauling tree length offroad loads with trucks running 10 foot bunks in front to "short" loggers for short logs . On the west coast and Queen Charlotte Islands they often run old Hayes or Pacific off highway trucks with 50 ton or greater capacities. Those trucks are monsters.
Queen Charlotte Islands off highway truck
http://www.sciencephoto.com/images/download_wm_image.html/E760148-Truck_carries_felled_logs-SPL.jpg?id=697600148
Tridem Kenworth
http://www.kenworth.com/newspics/Pineview2.jpg
Short logger
http://www.ruraltech.org/pubs/reports/2008/log_trucks/images/fig_1_6.jpg

@ Robert Ryan - In NA regualtions are killing diesel engines but in the rest of the world diesel engines are flurishing. Too bad for us.

@Lou,

Yea, too bad for us. I will keep my Gasser with a proven SFA.

Thanks!

@GM Bob,

GM can win all the shootouts, I will Congratulate them.

I wouldn't touch a GM truck with a 100 ft. pole.

@ Robert Ryan
I forgot to mention that in the headache racks of the west coast off road trucks is a water tank that carries water to spray water on the brakes to cool them down coming down from the high lead logging shows. 50 - 70 tons of logs is incredible to see on one truck.

My dad started out as a faller then went into running arch trucks.
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/hank_rabe/2006/jul03/07.jpg
Cats would drag the logs out of the cut block. The arch trucks would then foreward the logs to an iced over river or loaded onto trains. There used to be small saw mills all over the place. The skid cats and arch trucks were eventually replaced by rubber tired skidders, roads were better built and logging trucks became the most common way of transporting logs to saw mill. There aren't any small mills left.

GM Bob - quote "Frank, you got beat by the Duramax and the IFS suspension. How do like those apples Lou?"

Bob - If you have been following this discussion I don't see too many HD Chevies in logging unless they are "lowest bid" fleet trucks.
Like I said before - being the fastest on the quarter mile or fastest up the paved highway just means you'll be the first one to the mud hole that kills your truck.
I'd rather buy the truck that will take me to the mud hole, then take me through the mud hole, and at the end of the day - take me home.

@Lou, mostly upland pine here, Loblolly primarily, about 25% or so of the ground we manage is bottomland hardwood. Good soil here and long growing seasons mean bottom ground is better suited for ag than timber production. We still have small mills here still, but only for hardwoods. They are disappearing though.

Regarding the tires, BFG All-Terrain KO's seem be far superior and maybe even worth the price. We take one of our two old Tacomas or a 4wheeler into the bad spots. But for the gumbo, as we call it, only Maxxis Buckshots will do. Buckshots are the farmer's tire of choice, and the farmer's work trucks run nylons. But when you put 75,000/year on a truck, mudders get incredibly obnoxious on the highway.

Is that picture your Old Man? Very cool.

@Bob, too bad GM didn't have the foresight to allow for bigger tires in their wheel well than the standard 265's. You'd think they know better, right, since they are experts in the work truck arena?

@ Uncle bud - No, it's not my dad, but I have many similar pictures of him and his B model Mack trucks. Most of the logging around here is White Spruce, Lodgepole Pine, and Douglas Fir . There are some cedar stands to the east of me but mostly softwood. There is some farming but mostly cattle ranchs and hay crops. The growing season is too short for anything else. Most guys run heavy ply tires to survive the pounding on gravel roads. The tires you mentioned would get cut to pieces in a season. It is not unusual for guys to rack up 60,000 miles in a few years. I had the sales manager at the local Ford dealership say that the average life of a pickup under our conditions is 38 months.

@Lou, they still run some Hayes in South Africa, now used with Scania to move very large loads. Also combined with the french Fortrans, modified or specific build "diesel locomotives on wheels" to move 600+ ton loads. The Hayes, Scania are the rear pusher trucks.

Wow. Maybe our gravel is softer, good old Mississippi clay gravel. I'm sure tract size is a factor as well. Average tract size here is about 500 acres, which means more highway miles for us. Our largest tract we manage is just north of 8000 acres. Our trucks hit the 300K mark in 5 years or less. Take a look at the BFG AT KO's though. We are buying the 10 ply/load range E version, 285/70/17 (which absurdly won't fit on a Chevy) and 285/65/18. We are pulling 30+5 goosenecks at max and getting 60K or so miles out of a set. We have to balance between highway/trailering and off-road traction, and these are the best bar none, even at $300/pop. They are that much better. The Buckshot mudders I mention are what the farmers use and rarely see the blacktop, but man do they pull.

If 3 years is all you get out of a truck, I hope you are getting better prices for you wood than we are.

All you guys have an advantage too. Our load limit is 80,000 lbs, 82,000 for ag and timber. Another brilliant US policy.

Maybe this means Ford might bring back the 6.8L V10 as an option on the F-250, F-350, and F-450?

I wish that Dodge kept the 8.0L V10 around a couple more years in the heavy duties. I would have loved to have been able to get my 2005 Dodge Ram 2500 Power Wagon with the V10 instead of the 5.7L HEMI V8! It would be nice to have all of the low-end torque (V10) instead of all of the high-end horsepower (V8).

@ unclebud - most guys don't keep pickups longer than 3 years because of resale and the fact that they start to get expensive to repair. Tax deduction wise many guys stick with 3 years because that is the quickest they can write off a truck.
Most work trucks spend their lives on gravel roads. My brother currently is responsible for camp, road and bridge maintenance on 1/2 the area his company has timber harvesting rights which is about 500,000 acres. He has racked up 60,000 miles in 1 1/2 years mostly on gravel roads. His company policy is 3 years or 60,000 miles which ever comes first. His company even waves the rights to warranty to save money on purchasing.
I know many guys who keep their trucks longer.
A popular tire here is the Toyo M55. Seems to hold up well to taveling at 40 - 50 mph with a load down a gravel road.
We can haul much heavier on highway - it all depends on how many tires you are willing to put under your logging truck. Tri-drive trucks are becoming a common site. I'm no longer involved in logging but I believe you can have a max GVW of 139,700 lb on an 8 axle truck and trailer.
Spring time we see "road bans" on what one can haul. Some roads - they won't even let you carry anything once spring breakup occurs.

@ unclebud - the granola crunchers don't let us log soft ground in the summer. Winter only. They even have rules in place now that if there is too much silt run off from logging roads that they can shut down logging. We have to build silt traps to catch muck from getting into streams. Any trickle of water is treated like a fish bearing stream because if you have any doubts the company will have to pay for a stream survey. It's cheeper to pretend there is fish in it and stay well away or build bridges to fish bearing specifications. It is a big pain in the ass.

Been there Lou. Had one run in too many with the Water Quality folks and the EPA. Gets expensive quickly.

Do you guys deal in pulpwood at all or strictly sawtimber? What's your average rotation age on sawlogs? We are 25-30 years here for pine. Just curious.

@ uncle bud - I'd say it depends on stand quality. Some of the pine that is logged is big enough to squeeze a single 2x4 out of it. We see logs for poles, and log cabin construction, studs, saw logs, peeler logs for plywood, and pulp stock. There are some stands around that are big enough for large solid beams. The Mountain Pine Beetle epidemic is kicking the crap out of marketable pine. There has been a huge emphasis on bug kill salvage.
I'd say a stand rotation would be in the range of 80 - 120 years. It varies widely.
West and south/west of me is more arrid, north is more borreal spruce, East is more wet with big spruce and even further East is some big cedar stands and spruce. We have a huge diversity of timber stands, soil types and grow cycles.
i hope that wasn't too vague an answer. LOL

What a different world you guys live in! I was in Wyoming, Colorado and Utah last summer. I couldn't begin to guess at the number of acres that beetle has destroyed. All the locals say it's the worst in the history of the world. Me, I'm guessing it's a natural cycle. After all, civilization and record-keeping only began in the area 100 years ago, so I can't see where anyone could say what happened, say, 100 million years ago? The granola crunchers, as you call them, don't get much. They say that beetle is destroying the habitat for wildlife? Wrong. It's helping all the critters by allowing sunlight to the floor. And the pine re-gen is impressive everywhere I went. Regardless, there's going to be one hell of a fire in the next few years.

We are just getting out of salvage mode here as well from back to back ice storms. Salvage is tough when everybody is on quota. I think there's light at the end of the tunnel though.

Have a good one.

@ unclebud - the bitter irony of the beetle epidemic is that one of the biggest initial outbreaks was in Tweedsmiur Park. Experts said that selective logging should be done immediately to mitigate a massive outbreak.
The "greens" crapped themselves and put pressure on the government not to log parts of the park. I guess the beetles didn't read a map or edict saying they weren't allowed to cross park boundaries.
If left alone forest fires would of taken care of the outbreak. The greens want nature to take care of itself but they are too dumb to realize that we human beings intervene everyday.
I got in an arguement with some "greens" about west coast rain forest logging. They were up in arms because "eco-corporations" whould show pictures of a beautiful rain forest then show pictures of a fresh cut block. The donations would pour in. I told them that it is not a "fragile ecosystem".
There were roads that I used to drive down with a buddy during hunting season. These were roads made from blast rock and 50 - 70 ton off highway trucks would drive on. You would think nothing would grow on these roads. 5 years later the vegetation was so thick you couldn't even walk down the road.
The irony also was that in the very dry southern Interior Pine trees grew sparingly and it was a fragile ecosystem. There even was a rattlesnake that was on an endangered list and never once did you see protesters.
I told the "greens" I bet that if that rattlesnake had the face of a seal pup - you idiots would be protesting your brains out.
Like my brother used to say "does a bear crap in the woods?.... No.... they crap in the cut block like everyone else."

I dont understand people on here saying the V10 isnt powerful enough for a truck like this. I have seen 460s and 454s powering older 2-tons trucks like this before and teh V10 is more powerful than either of those

So the beetle outbreak could have been mitigated? That's depressing to me. Our latest tree hugger frenzy in this part of the world is reported sighting of the previously determined 'extinct' Ivory Billed Woodpecker, rumored to once again be flourishing in the great expanses of the White and Mississippi River bottomland. There is also a Pileated Woodpecker that looks quite similar to the Ivory Bill, and the Pileated is more than likely what they saw. Anyway, logging operations were halted indefinitely as naturalists and birders in hip boots spent month long stretches at a time wading around with the Cottonmouths with binoculars around their necks in 95 degree mosquito laden heat, for nothing. That bird is long gone. And if I happen to be wrong, and I have the rare pleasure of laying my own eyes on old Ivory Bill himself one day, I'm gonna shoot the sonofabitch.

@uncleBud - the 3 S's . Shoot. Shovel. Shut up.LOL

Nice..same oil burner that is found in the Dodge.

I love the "creative" writing "you" automotive journalists have. Do some research my friend insteda of talking out of your @ss and trying to get a luagh.

@Chris: Maybe you should re-read what's written. I wrote that it's a "variation of the same six-cylinder oil burner offered in Ram HD pickups."

They aren't part-for-part identical engines -- which is why it says *variation*.

Both the Ford F-650/F-750 and Ram HD pickups use the Cummins 6.7 ISB architecture, customized for their applications.

http://www.cummins-sp.com/engines/automotive/isb_engine.htm

Before you post a rude remark like you did, do some research. Thanks for the laugh.

Mike Levine-

You tell him/them! Keep up the great work!!!

Smart move for FORD. Diesel engines are at constant E.P.A strict regulations and have a premium cost over a comparable GAS ENGINE. With today's diesels you have to work with SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION (SCR), DIESEL PARTICULATE FILTER (DPF), DIESEL EXHAUST FLIUD (DEF) ENGINE REGENERATION (REGENS) not to mention the ever rising cost of DIESEL FUEL and DIESEL ENGINE reparirs.

So having FORD making this move (V10 GAS ENGINE) that at base cost will save over $8,000 to $9,000 compared to the DIESEL option, this by itself out-shines any MPG advantage of the diesel engine.

Would like to see that 7.0 V8 rumor becoming true. I sure think this V10 needed a little ECO-BOOST help with a compound turbocharger set-up..


Go FORD!!!

DIESELS get praised because their higher HORSEPOWER, TORQUE and MPG figures. But as it is for today, DIESELS are more complicated and more costly to OPERATE.

DIESEL fuel is 15 cent's over the price of PREMIUM GASOLINE here (PUERTO RICO) and I bet we aren't even getting ULTRA LOW SULPHUR DIESEL here, wich may play HAVOC on today's modern E.P.A REGULATED DIESELS.

Closing that MPG gap to only 10% under a DIESEL'S MPG will get even lower than that if cost of FUEL and OPERATION is combined, so any "savings" the guy with the DIESEL option has will be short-lived when he has to buy DIESEL EXHAUST FLUID for the proper operation of the DIESEL'S SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION emissions gizmo. Not to mention DIESEL FUEL spent at DIESEL PARTICULATE FILTER REGENERATION (REGEN) So the DIESEL may not have any advantage at all over this V10 GAS ENGINE. Lets see how this develops.

By the way thousands of older FORD V8 GASOLINE POWERED TRUCKS still working today. How sweet our '77 FORD F700 (391 V8) still works were the DIESELS of the same era (70's) by mayority are GONE and DEAD....

GM 8.1 LITER V8 GAS ENGINE will not be available anymore??? FORD needs to get this 6.8 LITER V10 be able to run on PROPANE and COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS also.
BLUE BIRD BUS CORPORATION will no longer have the GM 8.1 V8 (converted to operate on PROPANE) so it will be great if FORD becomes BLUE BIRD'S PROPANE ENGINE supplier.
FORD might consider getting back to the SCHOOL BUS CHASSIS market by helping BLUE BIRD BUS CORPORATION with a FORD F750 chassis with a 6.8 V10 PROPANE ENGINE for a TYPE C SCHOOL BUS like the BLUE BIRD VISION.

I just hope that this new model of Ford is efficient in gasoline consumption. Well, it's a great thing for Ford to stay up with new styles of their luxurious vehicles!


A great idea Ford, The 6.8 liter V10 is $10,000 less to purchase than the lowest power Cummins diesel. The cost of diesel fuel is now approx 20 cents a liter more than gasoline.

4 wheels enterprises specializes in light duty trucks , dump trucks , flat bed trucks and used trucks.

4 wheels enterprises specializes in light duty trucks , dump trucks , flat bed trucks and used trucks.

4 wheels enterprises specializes in light duty trucks , dump trucks , flat bed trucks and used trucks.



The comments to this entry are closed.