Jump to content

Talk:Ford E-Series

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gen 1

[edit]

For whatever reason there was no mention of the 1965-67 Econoline Super Vans.These were built on the same chassis as the other Gen 1 Econoline vans but had a plug inserted into the body between the rear end of the body and the rear door assembly and a lengthened floor to match. I no longer remember the exact difference (I used to own one) but it was at least 12 inches long and maybe as much as 24 inches long. It was only available with the new for 1965 240 cubic inch (3.9L) six cylinder engine. I don't think the 300 cubic inch (4.9L) version of this engine was around back then. If it was, it may have been an option above the 240 on Super Vans. Michou 13 (talk) 20:52, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gen 4

[edit]

Added 302 in³ Windsor V8 and 351 in³ Windsor V8 to the info. box. I bought a new '96 with choice of the Windsor 302 or 351 (last year offered) Noles1984 21:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gen 2 & 3 Photos?

[edit]

Who wants to add some photos of the second and third generation Ford Econolines? DanTD 14:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

safety record

[edit]

Apparently vans like the Ford Club Wagon have been banned from being used as school transports in various localities. Do you think this should be mentioned? 85.227.226.235 (talk) 21:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Versions

[edit]

The E-Series is getting two new versions.The first one is a crane version this crane can lift 20,000 pounds and the second one is jack hammer version. This version will have a jack hammer at the end of the van chasis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Techsmoke94 (talk • contribs) 01:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other door options

[edit]

The first generation was available with double swinging doors on both sides. I think that was exclusive to Ford and no other American full-size van has had it. IIRC not even Ford offered that door option on the later generation Econolines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bizzybody (talk • contribs) 00:53, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first generation Dodge van was available with double swinging doors on both sides. You can see one in the film The Anderson Tapes, where Sean Connery and his gang intend to use it as their getaway vehicle. They back it into a Mayfower moving van, so that the double swinging doors on the left side of the Dodge are aligned with the right side loading door of the moving van. They load the stolen goods into the Dodge through the aligned doors.Wjwtk (talk) 17:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The current generation of the Chevrolet/GMC van is available with double swinging doors on both sides.Ftfrk61 (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, first generation Ford Vans did have double-swinging doors on both sides, but that was not exclusive at all. ----DanTD (talk) 23:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

4th or 5th Generation?

[edit]

Is the E Series in the fourth or fifth generation; this page seems to suggest 4 generations (including the current one), but the light truck timeline shows the 08-current as a seperate generation WasAPasserBy (talk) 04:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's in its fourth generation, the 2008 was little more than a new grille. I'll fix the timeline. --Sable232 (talk) 18:34, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison with European vans

[edit]

Okay Wikipedia, please show that you aren't European bigots. It's very important to let others know that the American vans, and European vans have significant power differences. All the information to back up my statements, I have cited. If it's grammatically incorrect, please send a message to my I.P. (Even though I've seen much worse on other Wikipedia articles). Can a person tell the truth about the clear advantages of American vehicles these days? P.S. you probably thought the performance comparisons were extremely biased on my part, but I am just basing my statements on what Edmunds (one of the most legitimate vehicle review sites) reviewed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.202.112 (talk) 20:29, 15 August 2010

Wikipedia is not a buyers guide. Just because car A is different than car B doesn't mean we need to have explain why here. Why is it so important to let other people know this? Anyone looking to buy a van is going to be looking at reputable review sites and test driving the vehicles themselves. The fact that you feel it is so important to make it known that European vans are slow makes your POV obvious. Why not compare them in size? Maneuverability? Popularity in their respective markets? Why not compare the E-Series to the GM vans? I'm removing the section because it's inconsistent with what a high-quality article would have. --Sable232 (talk) 00:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Of course Wikipedia isn’t a buyer’s guide. I wasn’t even aiming my statements at a future commercial van buyer at all. A Wikipedia reader rather. It is important to let readers know of the differences in power (and fuel economy) between European and American vans, because it tells a great deal of what the American standard of commercial vans, versus the European style. Europeans tend to equip their commercial vans with a smaller-displacement Inilne-4, and V-6 engine similar to what is in an economy car. This correlates to significantly better fuel economy than vans made from American manufacturers. Americans tend to equip their commercial vans with higher-displacement V-8 engines. Reason being is so the vehicles have faster off the line, and highway performance. This tells the reader about the the production strategy of Ford when producing the E-Series, which is what the whole page is about. This why I "feel so inclined" to provide information regarding this issue. This isn't a bigoted statement, nor is it intended as a buyer’s guide. What are you going to say next? Wikipedia isn’t for people to know about vehicle production techniques? See where you’re going here? Anything I state that may appear to be making another part of globe look bad (even though I’m not, I’m merely stating significant information), you would say that Wikipedia isn’t for that specific thing. If you want to add more to the topic of comparisons with European vans, be my guest. I was listing power differences from information I’ve researched. "Why not compare the E-Series to GM vans"? Well because the section was about, and titled "Comparison with European vans”, and the reason for making the section I’ve already stated. My statements are inconsistent with what was cited? All the performance statements that I made were from the Edmunds review. The quote: "extremely sluggish" for example, was a direct quote from Edmunds. I’ve seen other content on Wikipedia pages that I don’t even realize why it’s even let on there. Frankly I had a legitimate section (though the title could be more germane) on power differences between European vans, and American vans, and it was removed. I’ve seen a lot of bias in my time, and what’s happening here with the removal of my section I wrote: seems like it. Hey it’s just my own opinion, unlike your own statement which makes a wrongfull assumption that I wrote the section based on a point of view. I’ll edit the section that I wrote (and posted twice), so that I remove anything cited from Edmunds.com (which you don't seem to like very much). The section will have a different title that will resemble only what will be written inside the section. Content that is listed will be clearly from sources I will cite. UPDATED: I will try to post the section by the third week of August. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FeralLynX (talk • contribs) 05:46, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This article is only about the Ford E-series. It is not the right place to compare vans in general. You are welcome to discuss the difference between American and European vans in, say, Van or Minivan, but drawing your own conclusion, even with sources, is synthesis. See Wikipedia:No original research#Synthesis of published material that advances a position. While there are a few model comparisons in car articles, please try to avoid making them, as it violates WP:NPOV, and to reiterate, Wikipedia is not a consumer guide. --Vossanova o< 17:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What you are saying Vassanova, is hypocritical for Wikipedia's sake. Hypocritical considering the European "Mercedes Sprinter" Wikipedia page has a direct comparison with "traditional American vans" as it calls them, and has an incredible bias on the Sprinter part. The worst thing about is: none of the comparisons are cited, and I know from experience that they are just plain bogus. What I wrote was not "drawing my own conclusion". Owe please. You need to read the entire section I wrote above. ALL of the terms which I've stated, were used by Edmunds, and like I said. I know it's not a buyers/consumer guide. Jesus Christ you guys have thick skulls. You didn't even bother to read what I wrote did you. One can conclude that I am trying to put a pro-American bias on the page, simply because I told the advantages of the E-Series van. If one was to write with a pro-European bias, ("Mercedes Sprinter" Wikipedia page), even with information that wasn't cited (same Wikipedia page), even information which is completely false (same page again), and even information with grammatical mistakes leading for one to assume that it was a European who's native language is not English (guess what page); the information is left alone, and even praised. I renovated the *Mercedes Sprinter* Wikipedia page so often that the utter nonsense in which former, undoubtedly European-biased editors wrote (keep in mind the comparisons were all (and probably still are) not cited). Still, a lot of the information remains. Originally, I kept the nonsense which was already there and added my own CITED information in order to get rid of (to an extent) the European bias. In the end, everything I wrote was removed. Since you didn't seem to read the former post on this Ford E-350 discussion, I'll tell you again in a nutshell:
The Comparison tells the reader of the manufacturing strategy of Ford when making the E-350. The E-350 was given a V-8 with a higher performance powertrain for a significantly greater towing capacity, and road and highway performance. The Sprinter was built with a smaller V-6 engine which delivers significantly better fuel economy. This trend follows the commercial van manufacturing techniques with vans manufactured from European companies, and those from American ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FeralLynX (talk • contribs) 21:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello FeralLynx, welcome to Wikipedia and all that good stuff. I agree with all previous that any newspaper or magazine contributions should be kept out of wikipedia articles. To me, the fact that the Ford has a large V8 and the Sprinter does not is enough for anyone with any sense to comprehend the differences in power. I would argue that the E-350 was given a large V8 was actually just because that's the way it happened to be constructed, back in the stone age, and that's how it's still built. In any case, the Econoline will soon be replaced by a version of the European Ford Transit (rather similar to the Sprinter). Again, trends in van manufacturing would be better discussed on the Van page than here. Btw, I'm glad you've gotten an account, that makes communication much easier.
 ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 13:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I never used a newspaper or magazine as a source for my section. The Ford Transit replacement for the E-Series is in no way a sure thing. It was a proposal, not a plan. There has been much protest against it, and think of how many times manufacturers say they're going to do one thing, and do another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.202.112 (talk) 18:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replacement

[edit]

ford is not going to replace the e-series with the t series, the t-series will be added to the commercial fleet lineup for widened options in that segment. i have added that to the section but it got deleted again.

please see http://www.leftlanenews.com/ford-reverses-course-cancels-e-series-van-after-all.html for confirmation. if someone could change it accordingly now, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.87.58.127 (talk) 11:53, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifications

[edit]

Anyone have a couple of answers to these questions:

  1. When was the short-wheel model discontinued? 1984 For Club Wagon, 1990 For Econoline Van (I have the brochures)
  2. When was the extended-length version introduced? (from info I have, it was a mid-1977 release)
  3. What was under the hood of the second-generation models? (that's one reason why I put the tag there) You couldn't reach much, cooling system, and the power brake master cylinder sat sideways and used a bell-crank system, and the battery. The engine came out the side door during overhaul on those...


Thank you. --SteveCof00 (talk) 09:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC) Your Welcome BIGTAZ351W (talk) 17:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

The lede describes "Econoline" as "formerly", but this name is clearly still in use; see page 12 of Ford's 2011 annual report:

Also new in the world of trucks for Ford will be the North American Transit van, which will replace the venerable Econoline wagon and van in North America in 2013.

121a0012 (talk) 05:14, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

E-550 Super Duty

[edit]

Does anyone have any background on this model? From what it looks like, this was produced for 2003 only. --SteveCof00 09:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

2015+ Production

[edit]

I have added information about production of the E-Series being produced past 2014 in chassis cab and cutaway variants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.26.112 (talk) 21:19, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gen 1 Club Wagons

[edit]

The Club Wagon was actually part of the First Generation lineup of Econoline vans, as shown in this 1964 Brochure. I have corrected the commons categories accordingly, which left only two images in the second generation Club Wagon category, although I'm suspicious about two rusted out vans being Club Wagons. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 14:08, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Ford E-Series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:40, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ford E-Series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:19, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

[edit]

I see the page was just moved from Ford E-Series to Ford E Series, without any discussion or consensus. The reasoning was that the name should not have the hyphen as a standalone noun, i.e. without "van" or such afterward. However, Ford brands it as the "E-Series" (see [1]) so I don't see why that should change based on context. @Dicklyon:, do you have additional sources showing it as "E Series"? Also, there's the matter of Ford F-Series as well. --15:15, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Similarly it was moved the other way recently. Anyway, ordinary English punctuation seems most appropriate, with E series being the noun, and the adjective form hyphenated as in E-series van. Most uses in sources are the adjective form, and people get used to the hyphen and use it for the noun form for the series as well, but that's really a grammatical disaster, so for the readers' sake it's best avoided. But I expect Ford fans will want to do what they did with the F series, so maybe it's a lost cause. Dicklyon (talk) 15:27, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, it doesn't matter if it's grammatically correct or not; it's Ford's model branding (and it would be the same for any other make). It should be consistent whether it precedes van/cutaway or not. --Vossanova o< 22:07, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I personally do not like it when "Series" is capitalized, but I suppose it's up to Ford themselves. I wonder what we do when capitalization and hyphenation changes over the decades? Luckily, Ford seems to have been pretty consistent.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:21, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I see the page has been moved back, but for the sake of bolstering consensus, I agree with the "E-Series" title; it should reflect the way the manufacturer brands it. --Sable232 (talk) 01:26, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Ford E300 into Ford E Series

[edit]

Ford E300 is likely a variant model; orphaned article with almost no notability in its current status SteveCof00 (talk) 12:04, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per nom.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:21, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect but do not merge. Ford E300 should never have made it out of draftspace. The only cited source is dead (and for scarcely-worthwhile information anyway), and the prose is barely comprehensible. It seems to imply that Ford built a factory cube van (as opposed to a cab-chassis that another company would fit a body to), and I don't know if that was the case. Regardless, nothing is sourced and I don't believe there is any salvageable content. --Sable232 (talk) 01:30, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in agreement that the E300 page is a glorified draft and it looks like its sources are dying out. My primary interest arose from that this was a factory-produced model line; Chevrolet van and Dodge Ram van have similar article content (as GM and Dodge also produced cube vans from the factory during the 1970s). If added here, things will have to be redone from scratch (1975 Ford Vans brochure looks to be a good resource, although it is the oldest that I can find so far); along with finding reliable references, this needs to be presented without information overload. --SteveCof00 (talk) 10:09, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SteveCof00 Mr.choppers It has been redirected to E-series.

Proposed merge of Ford VN platform into Ford E-Series

[edit]

VN58/VN127 Introduced in 1974, Ford introduced the third-generation Econoline, the first produced with a full-length frame. For 1992, the fourth-generation Econoline/Club Wagon/E-Series was introduced, marking a substantial revision to the chassis architecture and a completely new body. For 1997, Ford replaced the entire gasoline powertrain range, shifting from overhead-valve engines to overhead-cam engines. Following the introduction of the V363N Ford Transit, the VN E-Series ended production as a cargo/passenger van after the 2014 model year. From the 2015 model year onward, the E-Series has remained in production as a cutaway-cab chassis (no bodywork aft of the front doors) and as a stripped chassis (with no bodywork). This is the final chassis that uses the Ford "Twin I-Beam" front suspension architecture. Vehicles using this platform include:

  • Ford Econoline/Club Wagon/E-Series—full size vans (VN58, about 1989; VN127 1995)
  • Ford Carousel-cancelled mid-size van based on SWB Econoline (planned for 1975-1976)

Coming from the deletion decision, this is 95% of the E-series content that needs to be migrated from that page to here. For the most part, online, it is very tricky to find the VN58/VN127 code names (outside of sites that are direct copypastes of the Wikipedia content, the only online content I have found is some obscure content related to emissions testing). So yes, I would say the VN58/VN127 model codes do exist (it's more that whoever made the page 17 years ago didn't make it up so much as didn't back up...but this was WP so long ago). This link here (https://pdfcoffee.com/automotive-platforms-pdf-free.html) has a VN127 model code for the E-Series (this was published in 2016, so the VN58 code is likely obsolete). Other than finding the model code details (for the infobox, perhaps?), most of this information is already duplicated. -SteveCof00 (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2022

[edit]

Third Generation 1975-1991

Change Engine "Navistar" to "IDI"

Ford build IDI Diesel Engines until 1994, then changed to Navistar 2003:D1:7F32:5236:8803:9421:D319:178F (talk) 12:05, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done While I'm not sure what's meant by Ford building the IDI engines, the infobox entries did link to the incorrect article, so I fixed that. --Sable232 (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2023

[edit]

Transmission (automatic) from 1992 - 1997 only came with E4OD [4 speed OD] In 1998 they used both E4OD and 4R100 similar 4 speed OD From 1999 to 2003 they only used the 4R100 4 speed OD 2003 6.0L diesel engine had the new 5R110W “TorqShift” 5 speed OD transmission while the gas engines continued with the 4 speed OD transmission 2004 gas engines used the 4R70W and 4R75W 4 speed OD transmission and then from 2006 they transitioned to the 5R110W “TorqShift” 5 speed OD transmission Untimely Mess (talk) 08:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:01, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2023

[edit]

Please update the "1992–present Ford Econoline/Club Wagon/E-Series powertrain details" section to mention that the Ford 6R140 transmission is used on 2016 E-350 with the 6.8L V10 and all E-350 Vans for 2017+

As per

  1. https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/products/commercial/chassis-cab/2017-ford-fseries-super-duty-chassis-cab.html
  2. https://media.ford.com/content/dam/fordmedia/North%20America/US/product/2018/eseries-cutaway-chassis/18-E-Series-Cutaway.pdf
  3. https://www.encinitasford.com/models/ford-models/2017/ford/e-series_cutaway/
  4. https://www.eastgatefordpartscanada.ca/oem-parts/ford-automatic-transmission-assembly-hc3z7000b?c=Zz1hdXRvbWF0aWMtdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uJnM9YXV0b21hdGljLXRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiZsPTE4Jm49QXNzZW1ibGllcyBQYWdlJmE9Zm9yZCZvPWUtMzUwLXN1cGVyLWR1dHkmeT0yMDE3JnQ9YmFzZSZlPTYtOGwtdjEwLWNuZw%3D%3D
  5. https://www.eastgatefordpartscanada.ca/oem-parts/ford-automatic-transmission-assembly-hc3z7000a?c=Zz1hdXRvbWF0aWMtdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uJnM9YXV0b21hdGljLXRyYW5zbWlzc2lvbiZsPTE3Jm49QXNzZW1ibGllcyBQYWdlJmE9Zm9yZCZvPWUtMzUwLXN1cGVyLWR1dHkmeT0yMDE3JnQ9YmFzZSZlPTYtOGwtdjEwLWNuZw%3D%3D
    6. ChrisHanlonCA (talk) 06:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cherrell410 (talk) 21:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The powertrains need to be updates, as 2018-19 models with the 6.8L V10 and the Boss 6.2L V8 used the 6R140 transmission instead of the 5 speed. This would go in the 2015-2020 section as well as the powertrain details table for the 1992-present e series models SiliconMagician (talk) 16:05, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ford_E-Series&oldid=1202082213"