Spectre,
Isn't CrazyJeeper's truck the generation of F-150 that fared very poorly in a crash?
EDIT: Found it!
Yup, but he has the three-door and not the 'folds up like an accordion' four door extended cab. The three door cabs (only has a rear door on the passenger side) don't have that problem. The four door extended cab they made was just a bad idea.
Yeah, haven't really considered the 8th gen. But they are not that much cheaper, maybe better to spend a bit more and get a more modern truck?
The things that required a tall roof cap is motorcycles (race-bikes), and pallets of wine.
Awesome, thanks!
It is not that big, I think the length is the only issue in Europe, specially for parking, but that is ok, I'll just take two spaces..
I am torn between extended and crew cab, but I think I'll go for the 250 instead of the 350 since its more than sufficient.
Would cruise control be to much to as for in a 9th gen. truck?
Almost all 7th gen and later F-trucks will have cruise, except for some of the stripped down cheapie fleet models initially purchased and operated by local governments and utilities.
Your typical 9th gen *will* have power steering, power brakes, radio, air conditioning/heater and an underslung full-size spare. Most non-fleet ones (and indeed many fleet ones) will have an automatic, cruise, power windows, power locks, sliding rear cab window and cloth seats. There were many options available - USDM heavy duty pickup trucks have enormous laundry lists of options.
8th gens are cheaper, but the engine quality and longevity were worse. And you really don't want to try to find parts for a 460 gasser or the old 6.9 diesel over there. Heck, it's not always fun over here!
As for the topper, sounds like you will need one of the ones intended for hauling taller cargo in a protected fashion, often used by autoglass installers. I will go find out where the local firm got theirs.
Also, none of the heavy F-trucks do nearly as poorly in a crash as the light F-truck Blind linked to, so don't worry about that. Instead, they tend to plow right through whatever they hit. Including sturdy buildings.
So all of Europe is doomed to die because they all run emergency vehicles that are too slow? Right.
https://pic.armedcats.net/n/na/narf/2010/09/30/rtw-drk-pforzheim1.jpg
I've seen those go quickly. Whether they had a patient on board, no idea - but that barely changes the overall weight.
BTW, the one pictured above does 154 according to
the people driving it.
As previously discussed, Euro ambulances are basically empty boxes with little equipment inside, intended to rush the victim to the nearest hospital (usually only a few kilometers away). US ambulances carry 7000-10000lbs or more of gear and are designed as mobile casualty wards/emergency rooms/life support modules capable of operating beyond immediate hospital support or transporting a patient several dozen or more miles to the nearest hospital. The last time I saw a major-city US ambulance as poorly equipped as the Euro ones I've seen on my various trips, it was a documentary film from the early 1980s.
Point is, load up a Sprinter and its top speed drops considerably.
Really load up a Sprinter, and you're looking at something that's borderline unsafe to drive on a highway.
See this user's post.
Higher weight = lower speed. Thank you, friction.
