fordmantpw Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 We will agree to disagree. an more affordable medsized or ful sized pick up would have an effect on the market, some people will choose price over capability. Hasn't the Nissan Titan normally been lower-priced than the F150? How has that worked out for them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 We will agree to disagree. an more affordable medsized or ful sized pick up would have an effect on the market, some people will choose price over capability. There have been more affordable trucks on the market for over 50 years now: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 And the whole idea behind the T100 was "a more affordable medium sized truck" http://www.cars.com/toyota/t100/1993/expert-reviews?review=1&reviewId=28235 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 For the first sixteen years the chicken tax was in place ('64 to '80), it could be dodged by shipping over a truck separate from the bed. Compliance cost no more than a few minutes with an impact wrench. And the compact truck market at that time was nowhere near as vibrant and competitive as it was in the 90s, long after the Feds had closed that loophole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Starting price: (Regular cab, 4X2, base package) Ram: $26,105 Silverado:$27,365 Tundra: $29,610 Titan (does not offer regular cab):$29,640 F-150: $25,800 Top of the line: (crew cab, 4X4, top trim level) Ram: $53,930 Silverado: $52,735 Tundra: $44,435 Titan: $44,955 F-150: $54,775 So the F-150 is the cheapest and the most expensive... You gave the price before destination on the F-150, but not for the other trucks. The Ram starts at $25,410 (before transportation) The Silverado starts at $26,170 (before transportation) I didnt even bother to look at the Tundra or Titan because nobody buys them anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Possibly. But recall that the Econoline in the early years of the chicken tax was largely similar to the Transit, suggesting that at least in the early going those products would have been no more competitive on this side of the Atlantic than they were on the other. If you are implying that early Transit was vastly better than Daimler or VW vans in Europe, I think that is debatable. But regardless, aside from UK, Ford never fully dominated the van market in Europe - VW and Daimler were always strong competitors. VW and Daimler were precluded from competing in the US van market in those early days because of chicken tax. They had products (some competitive, some less so) from other markets that they could have leverage for sale in the US van market. This was unlike the fullsize pickup truck market, which they were completely locked out, chicken tax or not. Whether or not their products would have evolved similarly like Ford's entry (Econoline) in response to US market needs is anyone's guess but the point is that they would have been here in the absence of chicken tax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 If you are implying that early Transit was vastly better than Daimler or VW vans in Europe, I think that is debatable. But regardless, aside from UK, Ford never fully dominated the van market in Europe - VW and Daimler were always strong competitors. He didn't imply anything of the kind. Simply that Ecoline and Transit were no better than each other and neither had an advantage over the other. So, adding Transit to USA in early years wouldn't have improved fortunes here nor would adding Ecoline to Europe do anything to improve sales there. VW and Daimler were precluded from competing in the US van market in those early days because of chicken tax. They had products (some competitive, some less so) from other markets that they could have leverage for sale in the US van market. This was unlike the fullsize pickup truck market, which they were completely locked out, chicken tax or not. Whether or not their products would have evolved similarly like Ford's entry (Econoline) in response to US market needs is anyone's guess but the point is that they would have been here in the absence of chicken tax. Nothing stopping those companies from building a Van plant in the USA, they chose not to because there was no money in it for them. To this day, those euro makers still can't get volume product traction in North America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) i find it amazing that Transit starts at around $29K, is it the most popular new van jn the USA? a remarkable effort in the face of internet experts and their dire warnings of disaster. Edited May 14, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 I've been seeing quite a bit of fullsize Transits around here on I95. Those bad boys are huge! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) If you are implying that early Transit was vastly better than Daimler or VW vans in Europe, I think that is debatable. But regardless, aside from UK, Ford never fully dominated the van market in Europe - VW and Daimler were always strong competitors. VW and Daimler were precluded from competing in the US van market in those early days because of chicken tax. They had products (some competitive, some less so) from other markets that they could have leverage for sale in the US van market. This was unlike the fullsize pickup truck market, which they were completely locked out, chicken tax or not. Whether or not their products would have evolved similarly like Ford's entry (Econoline) in response to US market needs is anyone's guess but the point is that they would have been here in the absence of chicken tax. I don't know that the Daimler products would have been here. The VW products certainly would have, as they were the primary target of the Chicken Tax; and I don't see the VW products moving on in capacity in the 70s the way the Econolines did. I mean, even without the chicken tax, in '75 the Econoline moved the bar pretty far beyond what VW was doing (cf the Vanagon model launched in '80 in the US), and I doubt that they would've adapted any model for the peculiarities of this market because, after all, they're VW. They come from the country that invented the automobile, the Otto cycle and the Diesel cycle. What could they possibly learn from Americans? I mean, I guess the best proxy for what would have happened with the commercial van market might be what did happen with the window van market (which was exempt from the tax). Edited May 14, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 (edited) I mean, I guess the best proxy for what would have happened with the commercial van market might be what did happen with the window van market (which was exempt from the tax). Good point... so seeing how Toyota and Honda are the kingpin of passenger vans today instead of Ford or GM, I'd still stand by my wild ass guess that there would be more meaningful competition in commercial vans for Ford had there not been Chicken Tax. The point is that the segment would have evolved with more players participating and changing their product strategy with it. But obviously, Ford had other structure advantages that still probably would have enabled it to be a major player in commercial vans, regardless. Unlike say... Chrysler, which also had the benefit of Chicken Tax but was always an also-run or non-factor in commercial vans. Edited May 14, 2015 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Well, maybe? I don't know if the lack of a chicken tax would've spurred the development of a commercial small van market, but you'd think that Lee Iacocca, of all people, would've sniffed out that opportunity with his minivans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Well, maybe? I don't know if the lack of a chicken tax would've spurred the development of a commercial small van market, but you'd think that Lee Iacocca, of all people, would've sniffed out that opportunity with his minivans? I think the more realistic version is that if there were no chicken tax (theoretically resulting in increased van competition), Ford (and GM for that matter) simply would've been forced to invest in newer/improved vans earlier on rather than letting the Econoline sit as it did for so long until it was finally replaced with Transit and TC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 (edited) I think the more realistic version is that if there were no chicken tax (theoretically resulting in increased van competition), Ford (and GM for that matter) simply would've been forced to invest in newer/improved vans earlier on rather than letting the Econoline sit as it did for so long until it was finally replaced with Transit and TC. Ford still had over 40% of the commercial van market in the US before Transit was introduced. So while the vehicle may have been past its use by date, sales were still pretty good... Brilliant move to use Transit for lighter E Series replacement while retaining E-Series super Duty cutaway. Now all we need is maybe a 6.7 diesel to complement those E Series CA sales. Edited May 15, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 Ford still had over 40% of the commercial van market in the US before Transit was introduced. So while the vehicle may have been past its use by date, sales were still pretty good... Brilliant move to use Transit for lighter E Series replacement while retaining E-Series super Duty cutaway. Now all we need is maybe a 6.7 diesel to complement those E Series CA sales. Oh, I know that. My point was that if there had been more competitors in the market (in our scenario, because of the lack of the chicken tax), Ford may have been forced to upgrade/improve/replace the Econoline sooner rather than later/when they did because of that increased competition. Whether that would've been true or not, we'll never know, but it's interesting to think about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 Possibly---but here's the question: Would the more competent recent entries from Daimler/VW have had lower TCO than the E-Series? Adoption of the Sprinter by the RV market suggests that the better form factor would've found customers, but general dismissal of the product in all of its myriad forms (as a Dodge, as a Freightliner and as a Mercedes--and do they even still sell it with a Freightliner badge?) suggests that it wasn't a value proposition for large fleets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 (edited) Possibly---but here's the question: Would the more competent recent entries from Daimler/VW have had lower TCO than the E-Series? Adoption of the Sprinter by the RV market suggests that the better form factor would've found customers, but general dismissal of the product in all of its myriad forms (as a Dodge, as a Freightliner and as a Mercedes--and do they even still sell it with a Freightliner badge?) suggests that it wasn't a value proposition for large fleets. Well, Sprinter exists in the US because one very large fleet customer (FedEx) told Daimler it would take as many as Daimler was willing to import... For fleets that were mainly diesel medium duty (e.g. FedEx), Sprinter was a very cost efficient van to move down in size into light duty arena. FedEx quickly replaced all of its gasoline E-series in North America with diesel Sprinter. But that was limited to a single form factor - LWB cargo van with medium roof height. Sprinter failed to catch on as a cab chassis and that's where the E-class continues to dominate. Edited May 15, 2015 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 Well, Sprinter exists in the US because one very large fleet customer (FedEx) told Daimler it would take as many as Daimler was willing to import... For fleets that were mainly diesel medium duty (e.g. FedEx), Sprinter was a very cost efficient van to move down in size into light duty arena. FedEx quickly replaced all of its gasoline E-series in North America with diesel Sprinter. But that was limited to a single form factor - LWB cargo van with medium roof height. Sprinter failed to catch on as a cab chassis and that's where the E-class continues to dominate. And now, Ford has the very thing that FedEx and other diesel van fleets would switch to when vehicles become due for replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 (edited) I may be late to reply to OP, regarding prices, but welcome to the 1990's! F's are not just cheap, bare bones, farmer/work tools anymore. Edited May 18, 2015 by 630land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSchicago Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Starting price: (Regular cab, 4X2, base package) Ram: $26,105 Silverado:$27,365 Tundra: $29,610 Titan (does not offer regular cab):$29,640 F-150: $25,800 Top of the line: (crew cab, 4X4, top trim level) Ram: $53,930 Silverado: $52,735 Tundra: $44,435 Titan: $44,955 F-150: $54,775 So the F-150 is the cheapest and the most expensive... True, but this does not account for actual sales prices. GM & Dodge are way cheaper to buy. Ford is squeezing every dollar out each of the F150 sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSchicago Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I shopped the 15 F150's, I can't justify the price difference from my 13. My STX RCSB 5.0 all options with only 10K and mint, to a new XLT Crew with a few more options (NO RCSB 5.0's built yet) was a $20,000 difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I shopped the 15 F150's, I can't justify the price difference from my 13. My STX RCSB 5.0 all options with only 10K and mint, to a new XLT Crew with a few more options (NO RCSB 5.0's built yet) was a $20,000 difference. Somehow I find that hard to believe. What were those "few more options?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) $41k MSRP for an XLT super crew 4x4 w/5.0L $32k MSRP for a 2013 STX 4x4 w/5.0L So you've got $8k difference in MSRP right off the bat. Toss $1k into the hopper for 'extra options' on the 2015, so that's $9k in difference right there. Chalk up the extra $11k to depreciation (a not unsupportable 33% of MSRP through the first 2-1/2 years). Now regarding increases in MSRP over two years: The XLT RCSB is now $34510 in 4x4/V6 trim. In 2013, it was $32880. That's an increase of $1,630 or 5% over a two year period. That's hardly outrageous. Part of the issue here is that Ford discontinued the STX trim. The other part is that discounts are always harder to come by early in a model run. Edited May 20, 2015 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Also, apparently his STX is as loaded as it can get. That put it at about $43k new (based on 2014 build and price). But I couldn't find a way to get a 2015 XLT to $63k... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) Also, apparently his STX is as loaded as it can get. That put it at about $43k new (based on 2014 build and price). But I couldn't find a way to get a 2015 XLT to $63k... Why would you when Ford makes a Platinum...(Another "Lincoln" hiding in plain sight?) Edited May 20, 2015 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.